| Membership list
Private bridge between Vatican-Paneuropean and Anglo-American intelligence
Hotel Negresco in Nice, France. Once a meeting place of the Cercle.
||“I had first learned about it in October 1967 when Carlo Pesenti, the owner of a number of important Italian corporations, took me aside at a Chase investment forum in Paris and invited me to join his group… The discussions were conducted in French, and usually I was the sole American present… Members of the Pesenti Group were all committed to European political and economic integration… My Chase associates, who feared my membership could be construed as “consorting with reactionaries,” eventually prevailed upon me to withdraw.”
- 2002, David Rockefeller, ‘Memoirs’, p. 412-413.
“Formed in the Fifties… One of the most influential, secretive, and, it goes without saying, exclusive political
|clubs in the West… One member contacted by this newspaper said he could not talk about it “even off, off the record”. Another simply put the phone down… The source of its funding is a mystery…”
- June 29, 1997, The Independent, ‘Aitken dropped by the Right’s secret club’, one of the very few mainstream reports on Le Cercle.
“Coudenhove said: “You know, it is awfully difficult to make Europe with the English, but without them, it is impossible”. That is very true.”
- Otto von Habsburg, key founder of Le Cercle, head of the Paneuropa Union and one of the most central players in the underground Vatican-Paneuropa network.
Le Cercle is a secretive, privately-funded and transnational discussion group which regularly meets in different parts of the world. It is attended by a mixture of politicians, ambassadors, bankers, shady businessmen, oil experts, editors, publishers, military officers and intelligence agents, which may or may not have retired from their official functions. The participants come from western or western-oriented countries. Many important members tend to be affiliated with the aristocratic circles in London or obscure elements within the Vatican, and accusations of links to fascism and Synarchism are anything but uncommon in this milieu. The greatest enemy of the Cercle has been the Soviet Union and members have been crusading against communist subversion for many decades. During this process, Cercle members unfortunately have accused almost every nationalist and socialist government, every labour union, every terrorist, and every serious investigator of western intelligence of being in bed with the KGB.
In addition, the Cercle is also strongly focused on European integration, going back to the efforts of its early members to bring about Franco-German rapprochement. The significant presence of Paneuropa-affiliated Opus Dei members and Knights of Malta, together with statements of the Vatican and Otto von Habsburg, clearly indicate there’s an agenda in the background to some day bring about a new Holy Roman Empire with its borders stretching from the Atlantic to the Black Sea and from the Baltic Sea to North Africa. Interestingly, the latest generation of British Cercle members, whose predecessors were keen on joining the European Union, now do everything in their power to keep Britain out of the emerging European superstate, having lost faith they can become a significant force within Europe. Their American associates, however, would like for them to continue the effort of breaking into the Franco-German alliance and possibly to establish a new Anglo-German alliance.
It seems like a cold war is raging in Europe. One that doesn’t directly involve the Soviets.
Click picture to get a list of dates, locations, and sources
Le Cercle used be known as the Pinay Circle, or Cercle Pinay by its original French founders. Although the group was named after a French statesman who was prime minister from March to December 1952, the real organizer of this group was a person named Jean Violet, a close associate of Pinay since 1951 (1).
Jean Violet has a murky past to say the least. In French and later English literature, Violet is named as a pre-WWII member of the Comite Secret pour l’Action Revolutionnaire (CSAR), a secretive fascist group which, like Freemasonry, had its own initiation rites (2). Some authors have suggested that CSAR, popularly known at the time as the Cagoule, or “hooded ones”, was one of the most important branches of the legendary Synarchist Movement of Empire and worked to undermine the French Republic in preparation for the coming Nazi invasion (3). Whatever truth can be found in this claim, it is known that Jean Violet was arrested after the war for having collaborated with the enemy. He was released however “on orders from above” (4), went to work as a lawyer in Paris, and decided to become a member of Opus Dei (or, possibly, he became a member first, which resulted in his release). In 1951, Violet came into contact with Antoine Pinay, a Catholic also said to have been in bed with Opus Dei, who asked him to solve a problem with a Geneva-based firm that had been sieged by the Nazis during WWII. As the story goes, Pinay was so impressed with the way Violet handled his assignment that he recommended him to French intelligence, the SDECE (5). Also, Violet soon managed to hook up with Opus Dei luminaries as Alfredo Sanchez Bella and Otto von Habsburg (6), who had founded the European Centre of Documentation and Information (CEDI) in 1949 (7). Habsburg was chairman for life of CEDI and later also of the Paneuropa Union. Sanchez Bella was the Spanish ambassador to Rome under Franco in the 1960s while his brother was head of Opus Dei in Spain (8). Violet also became an associate of Father Yves-Marc Dubois, a senior member of Vatican intelligence and possibly its head (9).
CEDI was one of the first in a long line of hard-right, often aristocratic institutions part of the Vatican-Paneuropa network. One of these institutions, founded by Antoine Pinay and Jean Violet, became Cercle Pinay, and besides that it was set up “somewhere in the 1950s” (10), the exact date remains unknown. The claim that Cercle Pinay was put together in 1969 (11) is wrong and has probably been a mix-up with the Belgian Cercle des Nations, which was founded that year by a secretary general of CEDI (12). Violet was one of the few French members of this Cercle des Nations (13) that was part of the same Opusian Vatican-Paneuropa network. The crowd of Cercle des Nations has featured in a number of Belgian conspiracies and some were involved with the “Dutroux network” that allegedly didn’t exist. Bit more about that later.
Like many others, Pinay and Violet understood that the basis for a stable united Europe would be a Franco-German reconciliation. Therefore they recruited in their Cercle the most important individuals that were working towards this aim.
From Germany they invited the long time chancellor and foreign minister Konrad Adenauer, and two of his closest associates, Franz Joseph Bach, who ran Adenauer’s office; and Franz Joseph Strauss, the controversial hard-right political figure from Bavaria who was a defense minister in Adenauer’s second cabinet.
Early Cercle members representing the Paneuropa Union, the European Coal and Steel Community, France, Germany and Italy. Andreotti was not a founding member; the others were.
Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet, in addition to Pinay, were recruited from France. Schuman had been French prime minister from 1947 to 1948 and French foreign minister from 1948 to 1953. Jean Monnet, as Planning Commissioner of the National Economic Council from 1945 to 1952, and appointed by De Gaulle, carried out essential work for the reconstruction of the French economy. He was connected to the highest financial and political circles in North America, the UK, and western Europe, and was one of the major players in the push for an integrated Europe in the aftermath of WWII. As founding vice-chairman of the Committee for European Economic Co-operation (CEEC), which oversaw the Marshall Plan aid, he was the most influential player in this organization. This short description doesn’t even begin to describe the life of this extraordinary Frenchman, so lets take a more in depth look at him.
Pinay and especially Violet were the official founders of Le Cercle, with Habsburg, vice president of the Paneuropa Union under Coudenhove-Kalergi, acting as Violet’s patron. These men initially brought together Schuman, Monnet, Adenauer and a number of other individuals. All of these men, except Monnet, were either members or sympathizers of Opus Dei. The financial empire of Pesenti, who has no known direct ties to Opus Dei, was funded by the Vatican Bank and he turned out to be Banco Ambrosiano’s largest minority shareholder when it collapsed in 1982. Monnet, as the only one among these names, was connected to leading bankers in London and New York, and used to be secretary general of the League of Nations. N.b. Pesenti might not have been a founding member, but used to be a top level player in the 1960s, chairing meetings and inviting David Rockefeller. He later also financed some of the work of Violet and Crozier.
“Europe’s founder” Jean Monnet
Right before and after WWI Monnet hooked up with leading figures in the Anglo-American establishment. One of the first was Lord Kindersley, who during his life was a partner in Lazard Brothers, a chairman of the Hudson’s Bay Company, and a director of the Bank of England. Kindersley’s son is known to have become a Pilgrims Society executive (14).
Another very important person was Arthur Salter, whom he first met in 1914 (15). Salter and Monnet would become involved in setting up the Inter-Allied Maritime Transport Council, the Supreme Economic Council at Versailles, and the League of Nations. In 1931, Salter wrote ‘The United States of Europe’, which favored a federal Europe within the framework of the League of Nations. Probably not by coincidence, Monnet’s post-WWII proposal for a political structure of a united Europe was almost exactly the same. Three years after writing ‘The United States of Europe’, Salter became a professor at Oxford and a fellow of All Souls College, Oxford, named by Quigley as the center of the Round Table Group. In fact, Quigley identified Salter as a member of the Milner Group (16), and it is known that Salter shared a few boards with Lord Astor, a prominent Pilgrims Society family, and the Viscount Cecil of Chelwood of that time, a member of the family that is said to have coordinated the Round Table group (and appears in both Le Cercle and the Pilgrims). Salter also became a member of the Privy Council in 1941.
Others Monnet became a close associate of were Sir Eric Drummond, the 16th Earl of Perth, who was a member of a very aristocratic family in Britain; John Foster Dulles; Douglas Dillon; a Lazard Brothers’ banker whose sister-in-law was Lady Nancy Astor; and John J. McCloy. He also was a long time business associate of Elisha Walker (American International Corporation; Kuhn, Loeb & Co.; CFR), with whom he clandestinely tried to take over A. P. Giannini’s Transamerica Corporation and its Bank of America network. It failed after a lawsuit in which Giannini vowed to fight the “Wall Street domination” on the board of his company. In February 1932, Walker and Monnet were ousted as chair and vice chair respectively (17).
He then went into business with the leaders of the Chinese Green Gang Triad, Tse-Ven Soong and Chiang Kai-shek. He took his assistant, David Drummond (the future 17th Lord Perth; from a catholic Hungarian family which emigrated to Scotland in the 11th century; two members of this family were among the eight original founders of the Order of the Thistle; raised by the Duke and Duchess of Norfolk, a very old catholic aristocratic family; later Privy Councillor; later chair of the Ditchley Foundation for 3 years; later representative of the Queen to the Vatican; became a member of the extremely elite Roxburghe Club, together with members of the Cecil, Cavendish, Howard (Dukes of Norfolk), Mellon, Rothschild, and Oppenheimer families), the son of Monnet’s superior at the League of Nations, to China where he lived until 1936.
In 1935, when Monnet was still in Shanghai, he became a business partner of George Murnane in Monnet, Murnane & Co. Murnane was connected to the Wallenbergs in Sweden, the Bosch family in Germany, the Solvays and Boëls in Belgium, and John Foster Dulles, André Meyer, and the Rockefellers in the United States. He was considered among the most connected persons of his time (18). John Dulles of Sullivan & Cromwell provided the financial backing for the partnership. After Monnet got back to the United States, he was briefly investigated for tax evasion. Then, in 1938, Monnet, Murnane & Co. was briefly investigated by the FBI, who suspected it of having laundered Nazi money (19). Nothing came of this investigation, but the Nazi-cooperation of some of Monnet’s close friends, like Douglas Dillon and John Dulles, or Murnane’s earlier firm, Lee, Higginson & Co., is well documented (20).
When WWII broke out, Monnet was one of the most important individuals in contact with both the French resistance and the Churchill government. While in London at the time that France was overrun, Monnet proposed to General Charles de Gaulle, the leader of the French government in exile, the creation of a Franco-British Union; a plan to completely unite France and Britain. The Churchill government accepted, even a desperate de Gaulle accepted, but eventually the (supposedly Synarchist) opposition in France, headed by Marshall Petain, killed the plan. They saw it as an attempt of Britain to wrestle control over France. Petain subsequently became the leader of Vichy France.
After the war, Monnet was appointed by de Gaulle to reorganize the French economy. But Monnet also began to reorganize the whole of Europe.
Together with an equally mysterious Joseph Retinger (connected to both MI6 and the Vatican; founder of Bilderberg), who was raised by European nobility (21), Monnet organized the May 1948 Congress of Europe, which met under the auspices of the United Europe Movement in The Hague. Chairman was Winston Churchill, whose son-in-law, Duncan Sandys, worked closely with Joseph Retinger and CIA heads Allen Dulles and Bill Donovan. Later Cercle members as Robert Schuman and Konrad Adenauer were in attendance, just as Alcide de Gasperi and Paul Henri Spaak. The CIA would become the primary source of funding for the United European Movement in the following decades (22).
In 1949, with the support of Adenauer, Robert Schuman proposed the so called “Schuman Plan”, which became the basis for the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). It was established in 1952 and is usually seen as the birth of the European Union. In reality, Monnet, who became the first chairman of the ECSC’s High Authority, had entirely written the “Schuman Plan”. And interestingly, even this might only partially be true, as Monnet’s structure for Europe turned out to be a slightly adapted version of Arthur Salter’s 1931 paper ‘The United States of Europe’, which originally advocated a federal Europe within the framework of the League of Nations (23). Both men worked high up in the League of Nations and had a close relationship to the leading Anglo-American families, as has already been discussed.
One year later, on 24 October 1950, the French prime minister René Pleven introduced his “Pleven Plan”. As happened earlier with Schuman, who didn’t support this latest proposal, this document too had been written entirely by Jean Monnet (although he might have discussed it with his friend Arthur Salter). It proposed the creation of the European Defence Community (EDC): a Paneuropean defense force. Eventually this proposal was defeated by the Gaullist nationalists in France, and Europe’s defense forces remained part of the newly-established NATO, which was (and is) mostly international, instead of supranational.
After the failure of his European Defence Community (EDC), Monnet doubled his efforts and founded the very low-profile Action Committee for the United States of Europe (ACUSE). It brought together leading international members of governments and labour unions, mainly to discuss European economic integration. ACUSE, together with the US State Department, lobbied and pressured a great deal behind the scenes in the run up to the 1957 Treaty of Rome, which created the actual European Economic Community (EEC; “Economic” was dropped in ’91). All of Monnet’s most important associates in this process were members of the Pilgrims Society: David K.E. Bruce, the Dulles brothers, John J. McCloy, George Ball, C. Douglas Dillon, and president Eisenhower. Cercle member Konrad Adenauer was among the signers of the treaty, just as Paul Henri Spaak. Also, the founding vice president of the ACUSE was Max Kohnstamm, who became the initial 1973 European chairman of the Rockefeller-founded Trilateral Commission. Kohnstamm used to be private secretary to Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands. Antoine Pinay was another important member of ACUSE, the organization that Time Magazine dubbed a “European shadow government” in 1969 (24).
In 1961, Monnet managed to replace the OEEC, initially established to oversee the Marshall Plan, with the broader Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (25). The OECD since then has been one of the most influential institutions promoting globalization and free trade, today working in partnership with the World Bank, the IMF, and the World Trade Organization. Mainland European governors of the Atlantic Institute of International Affairs, which also was founded in 1961, have had a relatively strong presence in these institutions, especially in the OECD. Pilgrims Society members have been dominant in the other institutions while the Vatican-connected Paneuropa members have always played a minor role in the institutions above and tend to criticize the Anglo-American Liberal establishment.
Around the same time Monnet replaced the OEEC with the OECD, he met with Edward Heath (As Lord Privy Seal 1960-1963 responsible for the initial talks to bring Britain into the European Common Market; head Conservative party 1965-1975; Conservative prime minister UK 1970-1974; very committed to the EU; a close Sun Myung Moon associate) at the house of his good friend David Drummond, the 17th Lord Perth (26), a member of an old aristocratic family with very good connections to both the Vatican and the highest levels in British society, including the Rothschilds, Oppenheimers, Mellons, Cecils, and Howards (27). Lord Perth was a chairman of the Ditchley Foundation and his father was the initial secretary-general of the League of Nations while Monnet was his deputy. Heath became a member of Monnet’s Action Committee and in 1973 he signed Britain into the European Economic Community. This only became possible after De Gaulle had ceased to be president of France.
Monnet was an early supporter of de Gaulle, as he was of the opinion that this legendary general was the only person who might be able to reunite the French people after WWII. However, in later years some friction developed between these two men. De Gaulle was a nationalist who supported a strong intergovernmental Europe, preferably with France being the major influence. Monnet, on the other hand, was a no holds barred supranationalist.
Jean Monnet clearly was among the most influential and secretive of the Cercle members that pushed for a united Europe. However, according to Brian Crozier, a former chairman of Le Cercle, Jean Violet himself also played an important behind the scenes role several years after the European Economic Community (EEC) had been founded:
“By far the dominant theme in de Gaulle’s foreign policy (as Violet interpreted it) was Franco-German reconciliation. A genius at (non-violent) operations of influence, Violet played an historically key role between 1957 and 1961 in bringing about this rapprochement, which is the real core of the European Community. He had developed a close friendship with Antoine Pinay, who had served as French Premier in 1951 under the unstable Fourth Republic. At a lower level, a complementary role was played by his SDECE colleague Antoine Bonnemaison. Violet was the go-between in secret meetings between Pinay and the West German Chancellor, Konrad Adenauer, and his coalition partner Franz Josef Strauss. These paved the way for Charles de Gaulle’s own encounters with Adenauer, which culminated in the Franco-German Treaty of January 1963. [Treaty of Elysée]” (28)
The Treaty of Elysée is a relatively unknown agreement (for the average person) between France and Germany in which both countries agreed to consult with each other on important foreign policy and economic issues, ahead of time of general EEC meetings. It is the core of the often-discussed Franco-German alliance, which has had great influence on the European project ever since. Some say, too much.
The Elysée agreement was made at the time that de Gaulle first vetoed the accession of Britain into the European Economic Community (EEC). The decision was quietly backed by Adenauer. De Gaulle argued that Britain’s economy was based on trade with its Commonwealth and did not have a large agricultural economy, like France and most other countries in mainland Europe. This, together with Britain’s historical “special relationship” with the United States, convinced de Gaulle that Britain would never be fully committed to the interests of Europe (29). Of course, it’s far from unreasonable to think that de Gaulle’s primary reason was that he saw Britain and its ally the United States as a threat to France’s influence within the European Union. A few years later de Gaulle also withdrew from NATO, expelled all Allied forces from France, and tried to get on good terms with the Soviet Union. In addition to the enemies he had made when he withdrew from Algeria, he now also angered people like Brian Crozier and his French intelligence associate Colonel Antoine Bonnemaison. Bonnemaison ran a Cercle-like operation (let’s shorten it to Le Centre), of which Crozier had become a member (30). Members of the Centre had already labeled de Gaulle “the enemy” in 1965, and were looking for ways to evict him from office(31). Within four years they got what they wanted, although it’s not known if they had any active involvement in ousting de Gaulle, besides spying on him. But they certainly had the connections to do that.
It would still be several years before the Opusian Jean Violet and Anglo-Saxon Brian Crozier would meet and join hands. Ironically, at this time, when Crozier was involved in spying on de Gaulle, Violet was carrying out de Gaulle’s defense and foreign policy objectives, and possibly was the French president’s most important intelligence agent. Even when Crozier was head of Le Cercle from 1980 to 1985, he did not know Jean Violet’s full background:
“It was not until the spring of 1993 that I learned the details of Jean Violet’s real secret service role when General de Gaulle was in power. A background document was given to me by one of Violet’s ex-colleagues. Ironically, a few years before Gabriel Decazes and I started spying on de Gaulle, Violet was masterminding a Service Spécial to promote the General’s objectives in defence and foreign policy.
The document began with a paragraph of wistful praise for Britain’s remarkable achievements in intelligence and clandestine action. But France, too, offered a precedent: Louis XV had set up a special service known to the few who were aware of it as the Secret du Roi. This service reported directly to the King, bypassing the Foreign Ministry of the day.
Only two people were aware of de Gaulle’s latter-day model: General Grossin, the then head of the SDECE, and a certain ‘Monsieur X’. It required no great deductive powers to assume that Monsieur X had to be Maître Violet, but Jean refused to comment when I asked him. My other source, however, confirmed my supposition. No wonder, in retrospect, that Violet’s shadowy role and apparently bottomless purse stirred resentful envy among his colleagues and poisoned Alexandre de Marenches’s mind against Violet, whom he had never met.” (32)
Violet saw Franco-German rapprochement as de Gaulle’s most important foreign policy objective, but judging by his association with people who wanted Britain in the European Union as a “third pillar” it is doubtful he supported all of de Gaulle’s later decisions. In 1980, Violet picked Crozier as his follow-up to the presidency/chairmanship of Le Cercle (33). Crozier had been recruited by the Frenchman nine years earlier, and introduced by a person who had been a close assistant to Cercle member Jean Monnet (who struggled for a long time to get Britain into the EEC).
“On 1 March 1971, a long interview I had given to Joseph Fromm appeared in US News and World Report. The theme was terrorist and Communist intentions. On reading this interview, a Frenchman named Maitre Jean Violet came to see me in my Piccadilly office, with an introduction from Francois Duchene, my former Economist colleague and Director of the International Institute for Strategic Studies…. Violet impressed me with the clarity and precision of his arguments – Gallic logic at its best – and with the breath of his intellectual grasp of world problems.” (34)
Duchene had met Monnet in exactly the same way as Crozier met Violet. In 1950, Duchene wrote a series of articles for the Manchester Guardian which came to the attention of Jean Monnet. In response, Monnet invited Duchene to become one of his assistants in building a united Europe. Duchene followed Monnet when the latter became head of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). He then followed Monnet to Paris and became an editor of the Economist. In 1958, Duchene became a director of Monnet’s Action Committee for the United States of Europe (ACUSE), which struggled to get Britain in the EEC under the dictations of the Treaty of Rome. He remained on the board until 1963. During this time, he suffered a nervous breakdown for some unknown reason. In 1963, he went on to become leader writer for the Economist and from 1967 to 1969 he was a Ford Foundation fellow (a huge US intelligence-connected foundation). From 1969 to 1974 he was a director of the prestigious International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), a think tank on international affairs with directors linked to intelligence and the high financial circles. In 1974 or 1975, Duchene became the European deputy chairman of the Trilateral Commission, working under Max Kohnstamm, Monnet’s partner at the Action Committee (35).
So, as can be concluded from the above text, during Duchene’s time as a director of the IISS, he approached Brian Crozier on behalf of Jean Violet, and very likely on behalf of the Cercle in general, as Crozier mentioned that his involvement with the Cercle started that same year (36). Interestingly, Duchene not only introduced Violet as a person who worked for French intelligence, but also as a person who “represented a powerful consortium of French business interests.” (37)
It seems there’s no end to the interests Cercle-founder Jean Violet represented during his lifetime: the fascist CSAR group, Opus Dei, Paneuropa, the French government, French business, French intelligence, and even German intelligence, as former Nazi General Reinhard Gehlen recruited him at one point for his involvement with Le Cercle (38). Whereas Jean Violet is tightly locked into the Paneuropa-Vatican network, his associates Jean Monnet, Francois Duchene, Brian Crozier and several other (Duchene is not confirmed as a Cercle member) British Cercle members seem to be more connected to the Anglo-American interests.
|Crozier’s anti-communist propaganda network
In the 1950s and early 1960s Crozier worked as a journalist and editor for the Sunday Times, the Economist, and the BBC. During this time he made his first intelligence contacts
Brian Crozier: “[Reagan] shared my view that Nel- son was more intelligent than his banker brother, David. He was critical of the role of David Rocke- feller’s Chase Manhattan Bank in easing technology transfers to the Soviet Union. Reagan also men- tioned, with mild distaste, the role of the Trilateral Commission in sponsoring Jimmy Carter.” (Free Agent, p. 182)
||and used them for scoops. When John Hay “Jock” Whitney was ambassador to Great Britain from 1957 to 1961, Crozier was invited to his inner circle (39). Whitney was a Rockefeller associate, a friend of the British royal family, a CIA associate, and a Pilgrims Society vice president until the day he died (40). A few years later, Crozier went to work for the IRD, doing studies (some prefer to call it “disseminate propaganda”) on KGB subversion. He also started to work with the CIA, MI6, and the intelligence agencies of France, Germany, Holland, Belgium, Morocco, Iran, Argentina, Chile, and Taiwan. The CIA’s Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF) also approached him to reconstruct and commercialize their organization. Crozier, however, turned down this offer as he was too busy with his other undertakings. He later did a study for the CCF, investigating its South American network. Some time after that study, in 1965-1966, he reconstructed the CCFs Forum Service, turning it into Forum World Features (FWF). John Hay Whitney was the one who took over the financial burden of FWF from the CIA when it was commercialized. Another billionaire CIA associate, Richard Mellon Scaife, later took over funding of FWF from Whitney. Scaife also funded Crozier’s Institute for the Study of Conflict (ISC), which he
|founded in 1970, and showed up at gatherings of the Foreign Affairs Research Institute, an anti-communist and anti-terrorist propaganda group headed by several British Cercle members, including Crozier (41). In his book ‘Free Agent’ Crozier summarized the purpose of his ISC:
“Throughout my period as Director, the Institute for the Study of Conflict was involved in exposing the fallacies of ‘détente’ and warning the West of the dangers inherent a policy of illusion.” (42)
Crozier and associates rejected Kissinger’s Détente, aimed at reducing tensions between the superpowers, because, this group claimed, the Soviets continued to infiltrate and significantly influence Western Labour and Green parties, trade unions, media, and intelligence agencies. Also, they were of the opinion that the initial post-WWII policy of Containment (the Truman doctrine) was flawed. Instead, they argued that the West not only should resist a further communist encroachment, but also that it had to liberate countries that had fallen under the control of the Soviet empire. Every piece of territory that the Soviets conquered had to be taken back.
A noble and intelligent idea you would think. Unfortunately, many people who headed this lobby from behind the scenes just happen to be so far to the right they could actually be labeled as fascists. And in between these left and right wing extremists you had the Rockefeller clique, seemingly with their own agenda, encouraging technology to be sold to the Soviets (43). Even Crozier and some of his associates criticized that, probably never entertaining the idea that these people might know a thing or two they didn’t (44).
In his book Crozier claims that the people who exposed his Forum World Services, The 61, and his Cercle were mostly manipulated or working for the KGB. He also presents information in such a way that will lead you to conclude that people like Mohammed Mossadeq and Harold Wilson were KGB paws, and that Pope John Paul I & II were both targeted by the KGB for assassination (only John Paul I died of that, allegedly). The KGB is basically behind everything. Crozier even repeated a 1978 claim by Time Magazine that the most effective KGB propaganda was that of discrediting the CIA (45). He also likes to state that “neo-colonialism” was a term invented by the Soviets, etc. Many of his accusations are based on statements from anonymous intelligence officers. At times, although he normally focuses on his own connections, he has used or referred to such reliable sources as the CIA sponsored Encounter magazine, the CIA sponsored Reader’s Digest, his own CIA sponsored ISC think tank, the CIA sponsored journalist Claire Sterling, or to the CIA connected Zionist extremist Michael Ledeen.
It is important to consider that Crozier perfectly fits the profile of someone like Colin Wallace, the British intelligence agent who was handed all kinds of forged material to be put into circulation (46). And just recently, a Belgian associate of Jean Violet, Crozier’s closest colleague for years, was caught forging KGB documents that had to prove a vast left wing conspiracy against this person (47). Crozier’s good friend Richard Perle (48), and some of the other people he is associated with, would also know a thing or two about cooking or inventing evidence to sway public opinion. Crozier himself has been very influential in the late 1970s and early 1980s in setting up the war on terrorism. His friend Perle would take it to the next level after 9/11. More about that later, as Crozier’s bio is a lot longer.
We briefly discussed the history of some of the key players in Le Cercle: Jean Violet and Antoine Pinay, the official founders; and their patron, Otto von Habsburg; how Violet and Pinay recruited individuals like Jean Monnet, Konrad Adenauer and Robert Schuman, and influenced the early history of the European Union. We also discussed how an agent of both Monnet and Violet recruited a well-connected member of British and American intelligence, Brian Crozier, and made him head of their Cercle in 1980. We also discussed the anti-communist and pro-Europe activities of its key members.
However, more key people were involved with Le Cercle over the years. Take Carlo Pesenti from Italy and Sir Peter Tennant from England. Pesenti was a close associate of the Vatican’s financial circles; Tennant an important trade promoter for the City of London. They acted as chairmen of Cercle sessions when it was under the presidency of Jean Violet(49). Another important person was Franz-Josef Bach, who used to run Konrad Adenauer’s political office. Bach co-organized Cercle meetings from at least 1980 to at least 1991 (50). A quick summary follows of who these people were. Look in the membership list attached to this article for more details, including the source of each individual name.
||Scion of what was one of the wealthiest families of Italy until the 1970s, together with the Agnellis and Pirellis. Financier of some of the enterprises of Jean Violet and Brian Crozier; possibly also of Le Cercle. Chaired some of the meetings of Le Cercle and invited David Rockefeller. Head of Italcementi/Italmobiliare, one of the few key firms in cooperation with the IOR, or Vatican Bank. Boards of some of the companies it owned were loaded with aristocrats and SMOM members. Italmobiliare was the largest minority shareholder of Banco Ambrosiano at the time of its collapse in 1982. Pesenti was investigated for his role in the collapse but died during the court proceedings.
|Sir Peter Tennant
||Recruited into the SOE (WWII rival of MI6) by its founder, Colonel Sir Charles Hambro (head of Hambro, a Pilgrims Society bank; close friend of Churchill and the Wallenbergs; his son went to live with the Wallenberg family during WWII; head of the SOE 1942-1943; Sir Hambro’s deputy in the SOE, Henry “Harry” Sporborg, also of Hambro Bank, ended up in the small inner circle committee of Crozier’s Shield) as one of its first members. Helped Sefton Delmer (the Lord Beaverbrook agent who used to be in contact with Hitler’s inner circle) with material for his propaganda broadcasts to the German armed forces. Deputy commandant of the British sector in Berlin 1950-1952. Went on to become a long time major trade representative for the City of London and had a lot of involvement in the negotiations leading up to the 1957 Treaty of Rome. Joined Barclays Bank in the City of London as a director and industrial advisor in 1972. Chaired some meetings of Le Cercle. Co-organized a fundraising in 1976 with a bunch of Pilgrims Society members and leading officers to save Canterbury Cathedral. Joined the board of the International Energy Bank in 1981, which financed worldwide oil and gas explorations, starting with the United States and Europe. Helped to establish the right-wing political pressure group Policy Research Associates.
||Ran Konrad Adenauer’s office, who was chancellor of the Federal Republic of West Germany from 1949 to 1963. German ambassador to Iran. Conservative member of the Bundestag from 1969 to 1972. Went to work for the Swiss-based Economic and Development Corporation (EDC), an unacknowledged lobbying group for Northrop. Named as a shareholder of EDC and acknowledged that he had“advised them [EDC] about political things – the stability of a country, whether it was going to be an industrial country or not, whether it was going to be stable or not… I go to the country, see the country and make a report.” (51) Senator Church of the Church Committee said about the Northrop arrangement: “an intelligence network like a government would employ to get inside information, to pull the strings… the records itself show that Northrop has been doing it.” (52) Commercial and financial advisor to the Siemens Corporation.
Other important members of Le Cercle were-are Lord Julian Amery, his protege Jonathan Aitken and Lord Norman Lamont, all three members of the Privy Council. In 1985, Amery was picked by Brian Crozier as his follow up as president of Le Cercle (53). Aitken was Amery’s protege and is known to have chaired at least some meetings in the early 1990s(54). Lord Lamont, the Rothschild employee, has repeatedly been named chairman of Le Cercle since 1996 (55). Here are some additional details on these people:
||Son of Leopold Amery (1873-1955), who was close associate of Lord Milner and the Rothschilds. Leopold was a British imperialist heavily involved in the creation of Israel. He also was a great supporter of Coudenhove-Kalergi’s Paneuropa Union, which was initially funded by the Warburgs and Rothschilds (56), and was later headed by Otto von Habsburg. Leopold had two sons: John and Julian. John went to work for French, Spanish, German, and Italian fascists, and was eventually hanged for it. Julian was Churchill’s personal representative to Chiang Kai-shek in 1945. Reportedly a life-long MI6 operative, although it isn’t really known what he has been doing in this function. In 1950, he became a Conservative member of parliament and served in the cabinets of Harold Macmillan and Edward Heath. Married Harold Macmillan’s daughter in 1950. Involved in the founding of the CIA’s Congress for Cultural Freedom in 1950. Representative to the Council of Europe 1950-1956. Representative to the Round Table Conference on Malta in 1955. Involved with the Rhodesia and Nyasaland Club in the 1950s and 1960s, together with the Oppenheimers. Became a member of the Privy Council in 1960. Member of the very aristocratic Other Club since 1960, over the years together with the Duke of Devonshire (Cavendish), the Cecils, Lord Rothschild, Lord Rees-Mogg, Prince Charles, Pilgrims Society president Lord Carrington, Pilgrims Society member Lord Richardson of Duntisbourne, and a whole string of ex-prime ministers. With his friends David Stirling and Billy McLean, and help from the Cercle-affiliated royal houses of Jordan and Saudi Arabia, he set up a private SAS war in Yemen in the early 1960s in an effort to get Nasser out. One of the most prominent supporters of the illegal pro-white dictatorship in Rhodesia during the 1970s. In 1975, he claimed that it seemed more and more that the British trade unions were infiltrated by the KGB. Said to have been at a meeting on November 15,1982 with Prince Johannes von Thurn und Taxis and several known Cercle members about an expansion of Jewish settlements on the West Bank (57). Chairman of the London chapter of the Global Economic Action Institute, a free-market organization that was exposed in 1986 as being funded by the Moonie cult. Julian not only was an avid empire-builder, just like his father, but also in favour of Britain joining the European Common Market. He was also a supporter of a strong nuclear deterrent against the Soviets. Picked by Crozier as the new president of Le Cercle in 1985. Consultant to the extremely corrupt BCCI in the 1980s. Mentor to Jonathan Aitken, the next president of Le Cercle. Good friend of the very powerful and dynastic Cecil family, which also was very prominent in the initial Round Table clique.
||Great nephew of Hitler-intimate Lord Beaverbrook, whose son ended up in the 1001 Club. Served as a war correspondent, and reportedly an MI6 agent, during the 1960s in the Middle-East, Vietnam, and Africa. Became a politician and member of parliament. During the 1980s, Aitken was a director of BMARC, a company that exported weapons to intermediary countries, who sold these weapons again to the intended countries (like Iraq). CEO of TV-Am and chairman of Aitken Hume Plc, a banking and investment group. In 1992, he was appointed Defense Minister. During this time, he stood in close contact with co-Cercle member and MI6 head of Middle-East affairs Geoffrey Tantum. Chairman of Le Cercle. Accused of having lobbied for three arms contractors: GEC, Marconi and VSEL, in an effort to sell many millions worth of arms to Saudi-Arabia. Through multiple offshore companies in Switzerland and Panama, submarines, howitzers, medium-range laser guided bombs, Black Hawks, and EH101 helicopters were sold and shipped. After his trial and brief time in jail, Aitken is one of the few people who had to resign from the Privy Council. Seemingly funded by British intelligence during tough times. Has become an extremely religious evangelist who even went on a few Jesuit retreats. Claims that since Britain has failed to become the dominant power in the European Union, Britain should withdraw its membership in the EU.
||Very influential British politician who was the campaign manager for John Major. Worked at Rothschilds from 1968 to 1979. Became an important politician and leading eurosceptic under Thatcher, who also led the Treaty of Maastricht negotiations for Britain. Handled Russia’s negotiations with institutions as the IMF and World Bank on behalf of Gorbachev and Yeltsin. Again director of N.M. Rothschild and Sons Ltd 1993-1995, personally appointed by Sir Evelyn de Rothschild against the advice of the other board members. Appointed chairman of Le Cercle in 1996 after Aitken had to step down. Member of the Privy Council. Director of Scottish Re and many other insurance, banking, and chemical corporations. Advisor to the Monsanto Corporation. Chairman of the obscure Oil Club. Member of the Neoconservative Benador Associates, together with Arnaud de Borchgrave, Alexander Haig, and James Woolsey. Director of General Mediterranean Holding of the controversial former Saddam associate and arms dealer Nadhmi Auchi, who also is a member of Le Cercle. Sought the release of Pinochet. Has visited Bilderberg. As chairman of the British Iranian Chamber of Commerce, he’s been promoting increased trade with Iran while the US is about to attack this country for allegedly trying to create nuclear weapons. As head of the Bruges Group he is a leader in the eurosceptic movement in Britain.
There is some confusion these days about who is president and-or chairman of Le Cercle. When Pinay was president of the group the chairmanship of the individual meetings was shared out among people like Pesenti, Tennant, and Crozier. The presidency was later handed over to Jean Violet, Brian Crozier, and Julian Amery. However, since then their successors have been referred to as chairmen of Le Cercle. Following is a list of heads of Le Cercle, compiled by comparing a number of different sources.
||1950s – 1970s
||1970s – 1980
||1980 – 1985
||1985 – 1990s
||(Likely until 1991, when Amery retired from public office)
||1990s – 1996
|Lord Norman Lamont
||1996 – today
At some point a more exclusive coordinating group, or “executive committee”, was formed within the wider Cercle, initially referred to as the Pinay Group. Few details are available about this group, besides the fact that it worked out possible action on political issues that were current at the time. Both Crozier (58) and Langemann (59) acknowledged this, and David Rockefeller’s reference to a “Pesenti Group” (60) likely was a reference to this inner circle. The Group might have been the same as the “Pinay Committee” that appeared in documents of the Institute for the Study of Conflict (ISC), leaked in 1975 to Time Out Magazine (the first known public references to the Cercle). The Pinay Committee commissioned Crozier’s institute to produce several reports, which were then spread to right wing officials on both sides of the Atlantic. Unfortunately, the 1500 ISC documents that were leaked have mostly gone missing (61).
Several years after the ISC leak, German intelligence officer Hans Langemann provided more details on this coordinating group. Langemann was head of Bavarian State Security in the 1970s and early 1980s. One of his colleagues was Hans von Machtenberg (a pseudonym) who attended meetings of Le Cercle. Von Machtenberg agreed to pass on full briefings to Langemann about the Cercle meetings in exchange for information gathered by Langemann from his own intelligence contacts. Seemingly after questioning the motives of the Cercle, Langemann wrote down and recorded what he knew about it and eventually sold it to Kronket Magazine in the early 1980s. Der Spiegel soon picked up on the story of Kronket and exposed the role of their political enemy it, Franz Josef Strauss. The 1980 and 1982 articles of Der Spiegel were based on internal memos of Hans Langemann, seemingly informing persons within the German government about the clandestine efforts of the Cercle to get Franz Josef Strauss elected Chancellor. According to Der Spiegel, Langemann had written the following text on November 8, 1979 (translated) (62):
Protected source contributions to state security. Personal for the state minister only.
“The militant conservative London publicist, Brian Crozier, Director of the famous Institute for the Study of Conflict up to September 1979, has been working with his diverse circle of friends in international politics to build an anonymous action group, a ‘transnational security organization, and to widen its field of operations. Crozier worked with the CIA for years. One has to assume, therefore, that they are fully aware of his activities. He has extensive connections with members, or more accurately, former members, of the most important western security and intelligence services…”
What the group can do:
- provision of contributions by certain well-known journalists in Britain, the US and other countries
- access to television
- creation of a lobby in influential circles directly or indirectly through middlemen whether they are informed of this or not
- organization of public demonstrations in particular areas on themes to be decided and selected
- the involvement of the main intelligence and security agencies both as information sources and as recipients for information in these institutions
- undercover financial transactions for political aims.
What the group can do if financing is available.
Conduct international campaigns aiming to discredit hostile personalities or events.
Creation of a (private) intelligence service specialising according to a selective point of view.
The establishment of offices under suitable cover each run by a co-ordinator from the central office. Current plans cover London, Washington, Paris, Munich and Madrid.
As one can imagine, the secrecy surrounding Le Cercle is not that much of a mystery, as most people would disapprove of a secret group consisting of persons tied to questionable corporate, political and religious interests, that is involved in political manipulation. More from Langemann (63):
Amongst other points in the (Crozier) planning paper are:
Specific Aims within this framework are to affect a change of government in
the United Kingdom – accomplished.
In West Germany to defend freedom of trade and movement and oppose all forms of subversion including terrorism ..
“On 5 and 6/1 1980 members of the Circle met in Zurich to discuss executive measures…”
The main things discussed were:
- (a) international promotion of the Minister President (Strauss) in international publications
- (b) influencing of the situation in Rhodesia and South Africa following a European Conservative guideline and
- (c) the establishment of a powerful directional radio station aiming at the Islamic region and including the border populations of the Soviet Union.
“As far as can be judged by outsiders Crozier has initiated with his group the project ‘Victory for Strauss’ using the tactics applied in Great Britain, of major themes such as the communist, extremist subversion of government parties and trade unions, KGB manipulation of terrorism and damage to internal security.”
Langemann presents a list of conspiracies which we know more about these days. Let’s take a more in depth look into each of them and see who was involved specifically.
THE CHANGE OF GOVERNMENT in the United Kingdom refers to the election of Margaret Thatcher in 1979 in which Crozier’s Shield, a covert advisory committee, played a crucial role (64). The initial idea for Shield came from MI6 agent Sir Stephen Haskings, a friend of Crozier who had formerly been a SAS soldier and SOE officer. Crozier put together Thatcher’s election campaign by adopting Jean Violet’s Psychological Action program, a technique to find quick, short answers to three basic questions: What do people want? What do they fear? And what do they feel strongly about? Shield also completely convinced Thatcher about the severe threat of domestic communist subversion. After Crozier and Haskings handed her their paper ‘The diabolical nature of the Communist conspiracy’, Thatcher’s reaction was, “I’ve read every word and I’m shattered. What should we do?” (65). Harry Sporborg and Cercle member Nicholas Elliot were the other two members of inner circle of Shield. Sporborg worked at Hambros Bank and used to be a deputy head of the SOE during WWII. Elliot was a former MI6 agent who specialized in sabotage and unconventional warfare. He also had been a director of Lonrho.
Shield was hardly a new phenomenon, and its success can actually be seen as the culmination of twenty years of manipulation by the British far-right to get a prime minister elected they truly desired. This far-right group, which was, and is, closely affiliated with the British establishment, had already been meddling a great deal in Britain’s domestic politics since the election of Harold Wilson as prime minister in 1964. Although the aristocrats, centered around the royal court, have never embraced Labour, the serious economic recession of the late 1960s and early 1970s caused so much concern that many individuals within these circles actually began planning a coup. It started with a dirty tricks campaign against Wilson, mainly orchestrated by rogue elements within MI5 and MI6 and with overseas support of CIA head James Jesus Angleton. During his two terms in office, and especially during his second term from 1974 to 1976, Wilson was smeared with accusations that he was a homosexual, a supporter of the IRA, and that he was a KGB agent. Private armies and action groups were set up to take over essential services in case the country broke down. In March 1976, Wilson unexpectedly decided to step down. Publicly he claimed that he was physically and mentally exhausted, but also that this is what he had always planned to do at age 60. Privately he explained that “business groups and other anti-democratic agencies”, and also pointing to a rogue element in MI5, had made it absolutely impossible for him to run the country (66). Wilson’s secretary, Baroness Marcia Falkender, supported his statements.
“MI5 were making a mockery out of us. Those people ought to be exposed for what they really are… but you can’t identify them. We could be sitting in a room and you might be MI5 and I wouldn’t know. Or I might have have been all these years and you wouldn’t know.” (67)
The group that was working to oust Wilson was the same group that got Thatcher elected. Lord Julian Amery, one time head of Le Cercle, was a good friend to both David Stirling and General Walter Walker, respectively the third and fourth person from the left. Crozier, another Cercle head, was involved in spreading KGB rumors about Wilson and later wrote Thatcher’s election strategy. Interestingly, two men in the anti-Wilson plot were assassinated in 1979; Airey Neave (5th from left) in March and Earl Mountbatten (2nd from left) in August.
Among the people named that have been involved in the plot to get rid of Wilson were SAS founder David Stirling, Sir James Goldsmith (known Cercle associate), the 7th Earl of Lucan, Sir Val Duncan (chair of Rio Tinto Zinc; 1001 Club; Edmund de Rothschild associate), Cecil Harmsworth King (nephew Lord Northcliffe; MI5 agent; Bank of England), George Kennedy Young (ex-deputy director MI6; helped to overthrow Mossadeq; Monday Club; Kleinwort Benson; set up Tory Action; set up civilian armed resistance cells), Airey Neave (MI6/MI5 insider; set up Tory Action; set up civilian armed resistance cells), Army General Sir Walter Walker (set up private armies and Civil Assistance/Unison), Major Alexander Greenwood (set up private armies), the 4th Earl of Cromartie (WWII commander), Lord Mountbatten of Burma (uncle of Prince Philip; would have headed the provisional junta), and the Queen Mother. Angleton, a Knight of Malta, provided assistance from across the Atlantic (68).
Besides Brian Crozier, who was aware of the planned coup and actively supported it with his anti-communist lectures to military officers (69), a few other Cercle members have also played a supplementary role in the coup against Wilson and Labour in general. The president of Le Cercle after Crozier, Julian Amery, was a good friend of General Walter Walker and wrote the foreword of Walker’s book ‘The Next Domino’. Amery also was a member and later patron of the Conservative Monday Club, a center of anti-Labour activity. Additionally, Cercle member Anthony Cavendish was a member of the Unison Committee for Action, one of the anti-Labour action groups set up by George Kennedy Young and General Walter Walker (70). Cavendish also worked with James Goldsmith and was on good terms with Julian Amery. Cercle member Robert Moss was a protege of Brian Crozier and helped him internationally to spread the word of communist subversion. In 1975, Moss and Crozier, together with Viscount De L’Isle (Knight of the Garter; Privy Council) and others, were co-founders of the National Association for Freedom (NAFF), an anti-Labour and anti-Wilson pressure group that acted as a follow-up of GB 75 and the later Civil Assistance/Unison. Quite a number of NAFF members would find their way to prominent political positions under Thatcher (71).
Even after Wilson was ousted in 1976, many right-wing individuals were still not content with the new Labour prime minister James Callaghan. Only after three more years of underground politicking they were able to maneuver the hard-right Conservative Thatcher into office.
|THE PROMOTION OF STRAUSS is a reference to articles written by Brian Crozier, his associate James Goldsmith, and others to improve the image of Franz Josef Strauss
|within and outside Germany. They denounced all the accusations against Strauss as KGB propaganda, again with testimonies from defectors of Czech intelligence, like they used in their campaign against Wilson (72). Although Strauss never made the Chancellorship, he was a well known German politician, and in terms of political convictions somewhere to the right of Margaret Thatcher. His home base was the hard-right Roman Catholic Christian Social Union of Bavaria (CSU), together with his co- Cercle friends Otto von Habsburg, Count Hans Huyn, and Alois Mertes.
Strauss, feeling Napoleon.
|He went to the Bohemian Grove in 1962 and gave a speech there (73). After a long career, riddled with numerous scandals, he died in 1988 while on a hunting trip with Prince Johannes von Thurn und Taxis. More scandals followed after his death, some involving his son.
|These Cercle friends of Strauss are interesting people. Otto von Habsburg, who claimed his political views on Europe were very close to those of Strauss (74), is head of the Paneuropa Union (the second head since its founding in 1922), where he followed up the well known
Cercle founder Otto Habsburg. The twelve stars on the European flag literally are a reference to the Virgin Mary and her halo of twelve stars. Until recently, that claim could also be found in an introduction article on the Paneuropa website.
||Count Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi. Anno 2006, Otto is an advisor to the Coundenhove-Kalergi Foundation, together with Count Hans Huyn, Jakob Coudenhove-Kalergi (nephew of Richard, the founder of the Paneuropa Union), Prince Carlo della Torre e Tasso (Italian branch of the Thurn und Taxis family), and Max Turnauer (ambassador of the Order of Malta in Liechtenstein). Nikolaus von Liechtenstein, the younger brother of Hans-Adam II, is an executive member of the the Coundenhove-Kalergi Foundation (75). The Paneuropa Union has a vast network of underground political organizations all over Europe, which include or included the European Centre of Documentation and Information, Mouvement d’Action pour l’Union de l’Europe, the Académie Européenne de Sciences Politiques, Ordre du Rouvre, the Institut Européen pour la Developpement, Cercle des Nations (renamed to Cercle de Lorraine and a much broader membership these days), and the Mont Pelerin Society. The amount of ties to the Vatican
|within these institutions, and in particular to Opus Dei and the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, is absolutely staggering. Otto von Habsburg is closely associated with both organizations, not to mention his own Order of the Golden Fleece.
|Count Huyn is a German aristocrat, and like Otto von Habsburg and Richard Coudenhove- Kalergi, descended from a prominent Austro-Hungarian family. His wife is a descendant of
|Archduchess Maria Theresia of Austria (1717-1780), the first and only female head of the Habsburg dynasty. Huyn was a foreign policy advisor to his friend Franz-Josef Strauss from 1971 to 1976. In 1976, Huyn became a long time member of the Bundestag himself and would serve on many government committees. He would also write quite a number of books on Soviet strategy and occasionally speak out in favor of the placement of nuclear weapons in Germany or participation in the Star Wars program, without any regards for public opinion. Crozier
Count Hans Huyn
|acknowledges in his book that Count Huyn was one of three primary intelligence sources in Germany for his 61 intelligence group (more about that later). Huyn might have a long Cercle history behind him, because he was involved in overseeing the 1963 Treaty of Elisée in which Cercle founder Jean Violet played such a crucial role. As a devout Catholic, Huyn used to head the German department of the Catholic organization Aid to the Church in Need.
THE STORY OF RHODESIA and South Africa being manipulated by British Conservative politics will often produce the same names as those involved in ousting Harold Wilson.
In the late 19th century, the country later known as Southern Rhodesia was taken over through military force by the British South Africa Company (BSAC), founded by Cecil Rhodes (from which the name “Rhodesia” is derived). BSAC was mirrored on the British East-India Company. In 1953, after calls for independence, Southern Rhodesia became part of the Central African Federation (CAF), which also included Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland. In 1965, one year after the CAF had been dissolved and Northern Rhodesia had become the independent Zambia, the White minority government in Southern Rhodesia unilaterally declared itself independent from Britain. This way they hoped to stop any further reforms that would result in black majority rule. Initially, the White minority government did recognize the Queen of England although she would (and could) never accept the title “Queen of Rhodesia”.
Two of the biggest supporters of the White minority government at the time were Cercle members Julian Amery and Lord Robert Cecil, today the 7th Marquess of Salisbury (76). From 1961 to 1981, Robert Cecil’s father and grandfather presided over the Conservative Monday Club, a center of post-WWII imperialism (and other major supporters of the White minority government). Julian Amery was a member of the club. The 7th Marquess of Salisbury was a good friend of Julian Amery and their families have been involved with each other since the early 20th century. Although Julian’s father was a very important individual, working closely with the Rothschilds in building up the state of Israel, the Amery family pales in comparison with the historical influence of the Cecil family. There are only one or two dynastic families that might compete in terms of influence they had on British affairs since the 16th century. In fact, under Queen Elizabeth I (1533-1603), the Cecils are credited with having created the first known large scale spy network in Britain and Europe. It’s possible however that they received some inspiration from Venice at the time.
Another important supporter of the racist illegal government in Rhodesia was Lonrho, a giant Pan-African raw materials corporation headed by reported Cercle-associate Tiny Rowland. Cercle member and MI6 agent Nicholas Elliot was a director of the company in the 1970s, although there seems to have been some friction with the Rowland camp (77). Ian Smith, head of the racist government in Rhodesia, had once helped Rowland to start up his mining business in Africa (78). After that Rowland had grown to become one of the most controversial figures ever to walk around on that continent. He has been accused of bribing numerous officials and working with British intelligence in supporting certain favorable regimes, one of them being UNITA in Angola (79). Together with an equally controversial Adnan Khashoggi, he was involved in selling top-quality military equipment to Libya and supplying it with mercenaries to build up its own special forces capability (80). Rowland used to be a member of John Aspinall’s Clermont gambling club in the 1960s, together with Lord Lucan, and the earlier mentioned Sir James Goldsmith and SAS founder David Stirling (81). This group wanted to get rid of Wilson the day he set foot in the prime minister’s office. They also loathed James Callaghan, the Labour follow-up of Wilson. Rowland, Lucan, and Aspinall were fascists (82). Sir James Goldsmith, the close associate of Brian Crozier, and David Stirling, a close private warfare buddy of Julian Amery (83) whose (Stirling’s) niece married the 7th Marquess of Salisbury, were running the mercenary firm KAS Enterprises. Officially, KAS was hired to protect elephants and rhinos in southern Africa from poachers. But soon accusations arose that the firm was fighting the anti-apartheid movement, reportedly leaving 1,5 million dead. Most details about Operation Lock, as it was called, have been suppressed (84).
Conrad Gerber is another Cercle member with a connection to this region. He worked as an economist in the white minority government of Rhodesia in the 1970s, where he was involved in circumventing international sanctions to purchase oil for his country. He did this with controversial partners as John Deuss and Ted Shackley, the latter becoming one of his closest friends. So close, that Gerber was even present at Shackley’s deathbed (85). According to drug lord Khun Sa, Shackley was in charge of Golden Triangle opium exports to the United States from 1965 to 1975 (86). Research into the Nugan Hand Bank and its follow-up Bishop, Baldwin, Rewald, Dillingham and Wong (BBRDW) seems to confirm that (87). Besides that, Shackley is credited with having operated a “Secret Team” of assassins, drug traffickers, and arms salesman, which consisted of General John Singlaub, Thomas Clines, Carl Jenkins, David Morales, Raphael Quintero, Felix Rodriguez, Edwin Wilson, Richard Armitage and likely a few others. After sanctions were lifted against Rhodesia in 1980, Gerber set up the very successful Petro-Logistics, which acts as a private intelligence group aimed at penetrating OPEC’s oil secrets. The International Energy Agency (IEA) considers Petro-Logistics one of its most important sources, if not the most important source, when making oil production and reserves forecasts (88).
Present: Anthony and Andrew Cavendish, Paul Channon, Sir Erik Bennett, General Schwarzkopf, and others
LANGEMANN’S LAST POINT, aiming directional radio stations at Islamic regions bordering the Soviet Union, has become a very familiar subject these days. The Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in December 1979, so the Cercle having these discussions less than a month after is something that could have been expected. Several members of the Cercle played a prominent role in the Afghan war.
In 1998, Zbigniew Brzezinski, National Security advisor to Carter, claimed that he and Carter actually had provoked the Afghan war by clandestinely supporting the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul, six months before the invasion of the Soviet Union (89). Ever since Putin came into office, Brzezinski and his son Mark restarted their war with Russia. Brzezinski is known to have visited Le Cercle at some point.
In 1986 CIA director William Casey, a member of Le Cercle and a Knight of Malta, began organizing a large scale anti-Soviet resistance operation in Afghanistan, which would last until the end of the war in 1988-1989 (90). His Saudi counterpart, Prince Turki Al-Faisal, another member of Le Cercle, financed a large portion of this operation (91). The BCCI has been named as a main conduit for all these undercover transactions. It was set up by Agha Hasan Abedi, whose membership in the 1001 Club indicates he was accepted by the British aristocracy (92). The by now well known Cercle president Julian Amery was an advisor to the BCCI in the 1980s (93).
In the early 1970s the CIA was heavily criticized for its role in the Vietnam War and Watergate. Reporters and investigating committees began looking into the agency and soon plenty of stories emerged about domestic spying, infiltration of the media, subversion of foreign governments, assassinating foreign leaders, and large scale experiments with mind control. Some revelations were highlighted more prominently than others. Additional doubts were cast on the CIA ‘s role in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. In the midst of all these reports, measures were taken to reduce the autonomy of the CIA. The ban on domestic spying was re-enforced while Congress and the Senate received far more influence over the appointment of CIA officials and the distribution of the CIA’s budget. They requested numerous briefings and decided which clandestine operations were or weren’t allowed. The CIA was not allowed anymore to subvert any foreign government or assassinate any leader it felt like. Authorization from Congress became mandatory. Furthermore, it was also largely prohibited from working with questionable characters to gather intelligence or aid in their coups.
Why people became sceptical of the CIA. A few newspaper clippings from 1973 to 1979.
This didn’t fall well with many intelligence chiefs and associates like Brian Crozier. They claimed the CIA’s (human) intelligence gathering and intervention capabilities had been destroyed almost completely; and even more so after Admiral Stansfield Turner in 1977 started to force half of the CIA’s anti-Soviet staff into retirement. Crozier and his Cercle-associates went looking for a solution and came up with the idea to establish a transnational secret intelligence agency of their own. For security reasons this group initially didn’t have a name, but within a few months it became known to insiders as The 61 (or more correct, 6I). Its purpose, according to Crozier:
“… a Private Sector Operational Intelligence agency, beholden to no government, but at the disposal of allied or friendly governments… Our main concerns would be:
- To provide reliable intelligence in areas which governments were barred from investigating, either through legislation (as in the US) or because political circumstances made such inquiries difficult or potentially embarrassing.
- To conduct secret counter-subversion operations in any country in which such actions were deemed feasible.
It was agreed that no outsiders should be made aware of the existence of this organization, except if, in the judgement of one of us, the person was deemed a suitable candidate for recruitment.” (94)
It is often claimed that the privatization of intelligence was the result of increased Congressional oversight, which is true to a large degree. However, private intelligence organizations like Le Cercle, Antoine Bonnemaison’s Centre, and probably quite a number of other organizations already existed before the CIA oversight crisis began. The Stay Behind networks and the combined Navy-CIA Task Force 157 also had (virtually) no Congressional oversight.
Members of The 61, in existence from 1977 to 1988, came from England, France, Germany, Czechoslovakia, South Africa, the United States, and likely some other countries. It forged links with Prince Turki of Saudi Arabia and the Shah of Iran. At least on some occasions, The 61 provided intelligence to the Pope. According to Crozier, there only was some “minor overlapping” between the Cercle and The 61. This seems to be misleading, as many of the key individuals of Le Cercle were part of The 61, including Brian Crozier, Jean Violet, Georges Albertini, Count Huyn, and General Stilwell. Others in the know were Nicholas Elliot, Robert Moss, William Wilson, General Fraser, and probably quite a number of others (95). Crozier told us more about the meeting that established The 61:
“The question was whether something could be done in the private sector – not only in Britain, but in the United States and other countries of the Western Alliance. A few of us had been exchanging views, and decided that action was indeed possible. I took the initiative by convening a very small and very secret meeting in London. We met in the luxurious executive suite of a leading City of London bank on the morning of Sunday 13 February 1977. Our host, a leading figure in the bank, took the chair. Three of us were British, four were American, with one German. Ill health prevented a French associate from attending; Jean Violet was with us in spirit.
Apart from the banker and myself, the other Briton was Nicholas Elliott. The German was a very active member of the Bundestag, whose career had started in diplomacy. He had a very wide understanding of Soviet strategy, on which he wrote several first rate books.
The Americans included two able and diligent Congressional staffers, and the Viennese-born representative of a big Belgian company. Also there was the remarkable General Vernon (‘Dick’) Walters, recently retired as Deputy Director of Central Intelligence…” (96)
The first questions many people will ask is which bank Crozier is talking about and who that chairman was. Crozier doesn’t give these answers, but there seem to be only a few possibilities. One candidate is Cercle member Sir Peter Tennant of Barclays (one of the more aristocratic banks with historically many members of the Pilgrims Society, the 1001 Club, and the Order of St. John on its board), which would make all three of the British participants leading members of Le Cercle. Tennant’s name appears sixty pages further in Crozier’s book as one of the chairmen of Cercle sessions, but he gives zero details about the rest of this person’s life. However, in 1977 Tennant was a director and industrial advisor to Barclays Bank, which used to be located in the City of London, near the Bank of England. He had been a long time trade representative of the City of London, the small historical financial district in central London.
However, there’s another possibility, which might be more likely. At the start of World War II, Tennant had been recruited into Special Operations Executive (SOE) by Colonel Sir Charles Hambro, who would become head of the SOE in 1942. Sir Charles Hambro was chairman of Hambros Bank (another very aristocratic bank, represented in the Pilgrims Society and the 1001 Club) and a very good friend of both Winston Churchill and the Wallenberg family. Interestingly, Sir Hambro’s deputy in the SOE, Henry “Harry” Sporborg, ended up in the small inner circle committee of Crozier’s Shield. And according to Crozier, the Shield Committee, including himself, Sir Harry, and Nicholas Elliot met “in the boardroom of a City bank” (97) in mid 1978. There are some great parallels here with the meeting to establish The 61 only a year earlier. Elliot and Crozier were also present at that meeting, which also took place in a City bank. Is it possible that Sir Harry was a“leading figure” in a City bank? It turns out that’s actually a very tough question.
Sir Harry was a long time director of Hambros Bank until about 1973, but certainly remained closely involved with Hambros until at least 1977 by heading one of its subsidiaries. His son Christopher had also come to Hambros in 1962 and was a director in the 1970s and beyond. There’s been some talk that Sir Harry was a post-WWII MI6 agent. He has also been named a founding trustee of the Sue Ryder Foundation in the 1950s, together with MI6 agent Airey Neave, the earlier discussed anti-communist crusader who, like Shield, was closely involved in bringing Thatcher to power. Hambros, however, is located at Tower Hill, officially just outside the City. And together with lacking details of Sir Harry’s involvement with Hambros in 1978, this is what makes identifying the chairman of the 61 meeting, and the bank it was held in, impossible at this moment. But maybe it would be more accurate anyway to say that Shield and The 61 were founded by veterans of the SOE, MI6 and the CIA.
Most of the other participants that helped to establish The 61 remain anonymous, although one can speculate about some of the names. The German delegate almost certainly is the aristocratic Cercle member Count Hans Huyn, who is known to have become an important member of The 61 (98). His background fits perfectly and has been discussed earlier. More information about this person can be found in the membership list attached to this article.
Fortunately, Crozier gives us the name of General Vernon Walters, who seems to have represented the US intelligence faction that was very upset with the changes in CIA oversight. Walters was a bit of a mystery man. Although one of the most important behind- the-scenes players in the post-WWII world, not a whole lot of research has been done on him.
|With very little official education, Walters had become fluent in English, German, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, Russian, and Chinese. He went to work for Army Intelligence
Walters, co founder of The 61, and later Cercle participant Richard Nixon, 1958. Noriega would be one of Walter’s house guests in the 1970s. Bush Sr. and Cercle member W. Casey would also invite Noriega.
||in 1941 and like Cercle member Kissinger, he became a protege of Fritz Kraemer in the post-war period. After the war he served for a while as an aide to Pilgrims Society member Averell Harriman, who, for example, co-founded the Psychological Strategy Board. In 1951 Walters became involved in setting up and running NATO’s SHAPE headquarters in Paris. He was an aide and interpreter to Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Nixon, and provided Henry Kissinger’s security in secret diplomatic
|missions. He was deputy director of the CIA from 1972 to 1976 under Richard Helms and George Bush. Walters left the CIA to become a private consultant until 1982 when he joined the Reagan administration as Ambassador at Large. He was sent all over the world. From 1989 to 1991 he was the US Ambassador to the UN. After that, at the time the Berlin wall came down, he was Ambassador to West-Germany. Walters has attended many Pan American conferences.
|But there is more to General Walters. Like many leading members of Le Cercle, he was close to the Vatican interests. He was educated by the Jesuits at Stonyhurst College in
|England and later became a member of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta (99), giving him instant access to the Vatican at all times. His participation in setting up The 61 seems to substantiate reports about his involvement in countering communist subversion in Europe and other parts of the globe, not the least in Italy (100). It has also been reported that South African intelligence named Walters as a key plotter in the JFK assassination (101). Although not widely published, Walters was a military attaché in Rome in 1963 where he worked with CIA station chief William K. Harvey in countering the massive communist and socialist influences in that country (which brought him into conflict with Kennedy; Harvey had his own, but related grudges against Kennedy, and especially his brother Robert) (102). The Gladio network Walters and Harvey controlled was crucial in this effort. Quite a bit of evidence has surfaced to show that Harvey, his protege Ted Shackley, and their pro-Vietnam, anti-Castro CIA gang, which included David Atlee Philips, together with mafia partners Johnny Roselli, Sam Giancana, Charles Nicoletti, Carlos Marcello, Santo Trafficanto, and Jimmy Hoffa were some of the key plotters and executers in the JFK assassination (103). The problems in Europe with the communists and socialists, and especially in Rome at the time, will probably explain the (alleged) role of Permindex members in the JFK assassination some day. Ironically, if the truth ever came out on the assassination, together with the explanation that Kennedy not only allowed the communists to remain in power in Cuba, but also
James Files, former hitman working for the Chicago mafia under Charles Nicolette. Both of these men allegedly were shooters in the JFK assassination. Files:“When it comes to government and underhanded work, the mob, they’re kindergarten. They’re kindergarten. I might upset a lot of people in the family saying that, but they’re kindergarten when it comes to working with the government; they are the goldfish in the shark pond.”
|endorsed the “communosocialist” takeover of Italy and soon other parts of Europe, quite a number of people might actually sympathize with the plotters, at least to a certain degree. That is, until the full interaction between government and the mafia becomes known.
Besides having been a co-founder of Crozier’s 61, Walters also was a good friend of French intelligence chief Alexandre de Marenches (104), who by 1976 had set up a secret private intelligence network of his own, the Safari Club. The Safari Club’s network included the Shah of Iran, Saddam Hussein of Iraq, Anwar Sadat of Egypt, Ashraf Marwan of Egyptian intelligence, and Kamal Adham of Saudi intelligence (105). Count de Marenches was the biggest rival of Jean Violet within the SDECE, but because he was part of the same hard-right intelligence network he counted many of the same friends and associates, including Franz-Josef Strauss (106), William Casey (107), and Baron de Bonvoisin (108). All of these individuals have been named as members of Opus Dei or the Knights of Malta.
More on the American Cercle members
In the late 1980s Iran-Contra whistleblower Gene Wheaton expanded on what General Walters and his associates had been doing since the the 1960s. Wheaton had been a former police officer, military criminal investigator, and security contractor. He also used to be a counter-terrorism consultant for the Rockwell Corporation, the Saudi Royal Family, and the Shah of Iran, among other things. All this was before he was brought into the “inner circle”, which turned out to consist of people he didn’t want anything to do with. In 2002 Wheaton recalled:
“In the late 70s, in fact, after Gerry Ford lost the election in ’76 to Jimmy Carter, and then these guys became exposed by Stansfield Turner and crowd for whatever reason … there were different factions involved in all this stuff, and power plays … Ted Shackley and Vernon Walters and Frank Carlucci and Ving West and a group of these guys used to have park-bench meetings in the late 70s in McClean, Virginia so nobody could overhear their conversations. They basically said, “With our expertise at placing dictators in power,” I’m almost quoting verbatim one of their comments, “why don’t we treat the United States like the world’s biggest banana republic and take it over?” And the first thing they had to do was to get their man in the White House, and that was George Bush…” (109)
We’ve already seen that Shackley and especially Walters had become associated with Cercle activities around this same time. Carlucci also, who stands accused of involvement in the 1975 “anti-communosocialist” coup in Portugal of General Antonio de Spinola. He reportedly acted as an intermediary between Henry Kissinger and de Spinola, both members of Le Cercle, and gave the go-ahead for de Spinola’s March 1975 coup (which ultimately failed) (110). Although usually very much understated, Spinola was a wealthy aristocratic fascist connected to the most powerful business monopolies in Portugal and its colonies. Through the CIA he worked with the Portuguese Stay Behind units, set up by fascist terrorists, and had begun implementing a regional strategy of tension (111).
When Crozier visited the CIA and the White House he met with some of the people that were part of the rogue group described above by Wheaton. In the Carter administration, of which he obviously was extremely critical, he was received by national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski and secretary of defense James Schlesinger. In the Reagan administration he met with General Walters, Robert McFarlane, Richard Pipes, Richard V. Allen, Kenneth deGraffenreid, William Casey, and Oliver North. He regularly met with Sven Kraemer, the son of Fritz Kraemer, and really liked Admiral John Poindexter, who recently became notorious for heading DARPA’s Total Information Awareness Office (the organization with the charming logo of a pyramid and eye watching over the world) (112). Furthermore, Crozier has worked with Cercle member Donald Jameson (113), a top CIA specialist on the Soviet Union who set up the neocon Jamestown Foundation that handled Soviet Bloc intelligence defectors. Donald, who in his earlier career had crossed paths with Col. Philip Corso (114) and the remote viewing projects (115), became a business associate of Ted Shackley (116), probably around the time he became involved with one of Crozier’s research projects. Crozier also counted Cercle member General Richard Stilwell among his personal friends (117).
Oliver North and Richard Stilwell have been named as insiders to the CIA drug trade to fund covert operations. Crozier’s Cercle associates William Colby and William Casey were others (118). During the time Crozier visited these Reagan officials (except Colby), Stilwell was part of the secretive Special Operations Planning and Advisory Group (SOPAG), which included among its 11 members Air Force Generals Richard Secord and Leroy Manor (119), both named as insiders of CIA drug trade (120). Stilwell’s group had full access to Top Secret materials and quietly advised secretary of defense Caspar Weinberger (soon a Pilgrims Society executive) and assistant secretary of defense Richard Armitage, who was named as a partner of Ted Shackley in CIA drugs from the Golden Triangle (121). SOPAG was the Pentagon’s top group in worldwide counterinsurgency and special operations.
In his biography Crozier was “sorry to say” that North did not take him into his confidence about Casey’s Iran Contra scheme (122). Of course, as the mainstream media, Crozier only refers to the hostage and arms aspects of the affair. The many accusations that Contras were paying for their guns with disproportionate amounts of cocaine, which were shipped to the United States, is conveniently left out. But one is left to wonder if Crozier really was that naive, judging by an almost hilarious article he wrote in January of 1990.
“Estevez revealed that Cuba had built up a multi-million-dollar drug trafficking network, with thousands of agents in the United States. He said Fidel Castro was personally involved in drug trafficking, with the aim of promoting violent crime, addiction and corruption in North America, while simultaneously financing terrorism in Latin America: a perfect definition of “narco-terrorism”… Escobar was living in Cuba with the full assistance of Fidel Castro. Another fugitive, the American financier Robert Vesco [1001 Club], was believed to be Escobar’s number two… On February 10, 1988, Blandon [Medellin cartel baron] testified before a Senate sub-committee that Castro and Noriega were working together to promote “drug-financed guerrilla movements throughout Latin America”…” (123)
What Crozier did here, right after the Iran Contra investigations, is to take the largely unreported accusations against his US associates and blame them solely on communist Cuba. It is entirely possible that Crozier’s accusations are true, but the few million dollars of Castro pales in comparison with the hundreds of billions we’re talking about in CIA (and other agencies) drug money. In fact, in the court papers Crozier is using to blame Castro, there also are plenty of testimonies about Noriega being CIA during the 1970s and 1980s, and that he had several meetings with George Bush, Cercle member William Casey, and other CIA directors (124). Noriega, a product of the School of the Americas, actually was the middle-man between Escobar’s Medellin Cartel and the CIA. Later affidavits from people involved in these operations tell the same story, and an awful lot of them had to pay with their lives for their courage to come forward. The death and general persecution rate among these whistleblowers has been truly astonishing. So, Crozier’s press reports not only seems to be one sided, at times they act as pure disinformation.
Some known US Cercle participants. Colby was Opus Dei; Casey and Feulner Knights of Malta. Brzezinski worked closely with the Knights in Americares, and like Kissinger, is close to the Rockefeller interests.
Speaking of disinformation (or cooking information), one of Crozier’s best friends since the 1980s is Richard Perle (125), who is largely responsible for selling the public the 2003 invasion of Iraq. To accomplish this he even promoted the alleged meeting between Mohammed Atta and Iraqi agents as a “well-documented” fact, which absolutely wasn’t the case. If confirmed, which is probably never going to happen, that would be the only link between the 9/11 hijackers and Saddam Hussein. Ironically, this questionable intelligence report was received (and later disputed) through Czech intelligence, earlier used by the anti-Wilson and pro-Strauss crowd in the 1970s and early 1980s. Neoconservatives as William Safire, James Woolsey and William Kristol also used the Czech intelligence report to promote a war against Iraq (126).
Since about the time that Crozier became a leading member in the mid to late 1970s, Le Cercle seems to have forged closer links with the more hard-right elements in the US government (127). Besides the Reagan and Nixon administrations, Cercle members were involved with institutions as the Jamestown Foundation, the Heritage Foundation, the United States Global Strategy Council, the Committee on Present Danger, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), the Committee on Present Danger, the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, Americares, and the Israeli-US Jonathan Institute. All these groups were interwoven with the World Anti-Communist League and religious organizations as the Knights of Malta and the Moonies.
Seemingly one of the closest associates of mainly the British Cercle members was CIA officer Ray Cline (OSS 1943-1946 and worked in the Far-East with Paul Helliwell and Gen. Singlaub; good friend of Chiang Kai-shek’s son; set up the Asian People’s Anti-Communist League (APACL) in Taiwan and South Korea in 1955-1956; CIA station chief in Taiwan 1958-1962; deputy director CIA 1962-1966; CIA station chief in Bonn 1966-1969 where he oversaw the local Gladio forces; confirmed the authenticity of FM 30-31A & B, instruction manuals of the DIA which included false flag terrorist actions that were to be blamed on the USSR; director Department of State’s Bureau Intelligence and Research 1969-1973; director world power studies at Georgetown’s CSIS 1973-1986; co-founder of the WACL with Gen. Singlaub; representative of CAUSA, founded by Moonie Col. Bo Hi Pak). Cline is never mentioned in Crozier’s biography even though both were involved in two very important organizations: the Jonathan Institute and the Foreign Affairs Research Institute (FARI), of which, interestingly, Crozier also forgets to mention his involvement. He also does not discuss the United States Global Strategy Council (USGSC), which was founded in the same period and headed by Ray Cline for most of its existence. The USGSC counted Cercle members General Richard Stilwell (128) and William Colby among the earliest members and there’s probably more overlap (129). Let’s take a look at these three institutions.
The Washington-based U.S. Global Strategy Council (USGSC) existed from 1981 to about 1995 and was a think tank focused on setting coherent long range strategic goals for the United States. Clearly a bastion of America’s permanent government, it mainly focused on worldwide anti-communist subversion. It also pushed for the development of non-lethal weaponry (130) and the costly Stars Wars program. Star Wars was later accused of having served as a bogus front operation through which vast amounts of funds were diverted (131)into a variety of black programs. Interestingly, electromagnetic and psychotronic weapons are the top suspects these black programs allegedly dealt with (132).
The USGSC was part of the whole hawkish (or “total war”) neoconservative movement that came to the forefront with Reagan and remained prominent with Bush, Sr. It temporarily left the White House with the election of Clinton and then came back in full force with the Bush, Jr. administration in 2000. The whole idea of a global war on terror, including the use of pre-emptive strikes, goes back to ideas that were proposed by this neocon group in the late 1970s and early 1980s. George Shultz is the most crucial player from the American side, which obviously is the most important. However, he had allies in other parts of the world, including leading Israeli politicians from both Likud and Labour, fascist terrorists from France, and also Cercle president Brian Crozier and his clique in Britain. They came together at two conferences about international terrorism sponsored by the Jonathan Institute, an Israeli think tank named after the brother of Netanyahu. It was a Mossad front, according to former SAS/MI5 agent Colin Wallace (133).
The first meeting was in June 1979. Crozier and his Cercle sidekick Robert Moss were two of the speakers at this conference of which the purpose was to blame all international terrorism on the USSR. Richard Pipes, the later associate of Crozier at the White House, also spoke at the conference. Ray Cline and George H.W. Bush of the CIA were there, just as retired General George J. Keegan who had recently stepped down as head of Air Force Intelligence. OAS terrorist Jacques Soustelle attended, together with Benjamin Netanyahu, Jack Kemp, and a whole range of international journalists who promoted the view that the USSR was behind worldwide terrorism (134).
The second Jonathan Institute’s conference on terrorism, held in 1984, was even more influential as Reagan was now in power. Netanyahu, George Shultz, and Douglas Feith were said to have organized this second conference (135). Feith worked under Crozier’s friend Richard Perle at the time. The policies set then, re-emerged stronger than ever almost 20 years later, after 9/11. George Shultz (Bechtel executive; secretary of state at the time; Bohemian Grove camp Mandalay; National Security Planning Group; chair advisory council J.P. Morgan Chase; ran Reagan’s election campaign; largely put together the George Bush Jr. administration), one of the biggest movers and shakers in the neoconservative movement, gave the opening speech in which he claimed that “pre- emptive actions by Western democracies may be necessary to counter the Soviet Union and other nations that… have banded together in an international “league of terror.”“ (136) Caspar Weinberger (also from Bechtel; Defense Secretary at that time; National Security Planning Group; later Pilgrims Executive; member Bohemian Grove camp Mandalay), Jeane Kirkpatrick (co-chair USGSC), and Yitzhak Rabin (Labour prime minister) also spoke at the conference backing the claim that terrorism had spun out of control and that the Soviet Union was the cause of that. The only thing that was disagreed upon was if this movement supporting a global war on both terror and the USSR should be incorporated within the United Nations or not (137). Jacques Soustelle had become a board member of the Jonathan Institute by then (138), together with Shimon Peres (Labour prime minister) and Menachem Begin (Likud prime minister) (139). Crozier’s close associate Lord Alun Chalfont (minister in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office 1964-1970; Privy Council since 1964; Pilgrims Society executive since 1979; Conservative Monday Club; pro-apartheid; director pro-junta British-Chilean Council; council member of FARI with Cercle members/presidents Brian Crozier, Julian Amery, and Robert Moss, just as the aristocrat Sir Frederic M. Bennett; chair Institute for the Study of Terrorism, a clone of Crozier’s anti-communist Institute for the Study of Conflict; member Committee for a Free Britain, which spent more than Pounds 200,000 on press advertisements attacking Labour during the 1987 election; member Committee for a Free World, an American neo-conservative group; member Media Monitoring Unit, which attempted to “expose” left-wing bias in television news and current affairs programmes; consultant to private security firm Zeus Security Consultants (did high level government contract work), owned by Major Peter Hamilton, a close friend of Stephan Kock, the MI5, MI6, SAS agent who allegedly once headed a government assassination team, Group 13; director at the security firm Securipol; close friend of the extremely influential neoconservative John Lehman, apparently a top player in the military-industrial complex; chairman second neoconservative Jonathan conference; deputy chairman of the Independent Broadcasting Authority), together with intelligence connected religious extremists as Michael Ledeen and Arnaud de Borchgrave, were among the contributors to papers read at the conference (140).
One Circle to link them all. Bit cheesy? Ow well, don’t forget the Jonathan Institute or the Foreign Affairs Research Institute.
Chalfont had already been working with Cercle presidents Brian Crozier and Julian Amery(advisor to the BCCI in the 1980s) in their Foreign Affairs Research Institute (FARI), together with Sir Frederic M. Bennett (owned a Rolls-Royce and four homes, one of them in the Cayman Islands; director Kleinwort Benson Europe (his mother was a Kleinwort); long time Lloyds underwriter; influential member of Parliament from the 1950s to the 1980s; member Monday Club; always warning people about the KGB threat and supported every regime that opposed the USSR; chair FARI in 1978; vice-president of the European-Atlantic Group; leading official in the private group Council of Europe in the late 1970s and 1980s; honorary director of the BCCI in Hong Kong until 1986; Member of the Privy Council since 1985; ridiculed his party (Conservatives) for their Euroscepticism after his retirement in 1987; supported Pinochet; Freeman of the City of London; visited Bilderberg) and Cercle member Robert Moss (141). Like Chalfont, Crozier and Moss were involved with the Jonathan Institute. FARI was set up in 1976 with funds coming from the pro-apartheid government in South-Africa (142) and reportedly also from Lockheed (143). Reports that it was linked to the CIA are rather obvious today (144). FARI gathered several anti-communist authors which spread their stories in the international press. Members spoke about terrorism being out of control while implying this was all organized from Moscow in an effort to destabilize the West. Many of the examples they mention in reality were the result of CIA, MI6, and Gladio special operations, most notably those in Italy. Some other acts of terrorism seem to have had little to do with the Soviet Union and instead were probably the result of extremist nationalism or freedom fighters. These alternative possibilities were however carefully ignored.
Conferences of FARI were attended by Crozier’s money man Richard Mellon Scaife and Cercle members William Casey and Edwin Feulner (roommate of neocon warhawk and military-industrial complex insider John F. Lehman; president Heritage Foundation; Knight of Malta; trustee Mont Pelerin Society; IMF & World Bank insider; chairman Institute for European Defense and Strategic Studies in London; Bohemian Grove). Ray Cline of the CIA and the Jonathan Institute has been in attendance, just as General Daniel O. Graham of the CIA and DIA (145). Like Stilwell, both Graham and Cline were involved with the US Global Strategy Council. Cline was among the founders of the USGSC and chairman of the institute from 1986 to 1994.
The members of the USGSC (initially 70 or so) had close ties to the Military Industrial complex, including highest level (often retired) representatives of the Navy, the Air Force, the Army, the intelligence agencies, shady defense corporations as SAIC, private business groups, and unusual religious interests as the Moonies and Knights of Malta. Over the years, known members have included Cercle member William Colby (CIA director 1973-1976; deep insider of many black programs, including CIA drug trafficking; Opus Dei), Henry Luce III (of Time Magazine; president of the Pilgrims of the United States since 1997; grandfather bought and held on to the JFK Zapruder film), Clare Booth Luce (Dame of Malta), Ray Cline, Admiral Bobby Ray Inman(director ONI; director DIA; director NSA; deputy director CIA; director Wackenhut; director SAIC; Trilateral Commission; chairman of the “JPL Oversight Committee”, which is not supposed to exist), Michael Alan Daniels (Special assistant for political science research at the Office of Naval Research 1969-1971; president USGSC 1986-1994; section vice president SAIC since 1986; chairman of SAIC’s Network Solutions since 1995), General Brent Scowcroft (chair Presidential Commission on the MX Peacekeeper ICBM; co-founder and vice-chairman of Kissinger Associates from 1982 to 1989; American Ditchley Foundation; Atlantic Institute; CFR; Trilateral Commission; visited Bilderberg), General Daniel O. Graham (deputy director CIA under Colby 1973-1974; director DIA 1974-1976; one of the most important pushers of the Star Wars program; founding chair of High Frontier, Inc.; member advisory board CAUSA and member of the Moon-linked American Freedom Coalition), Edward Teller (seen as the father of the Hydrogen Bomb; hardliner and suspected of involvement in many black projects; major pusher of Star Wars; member Council for National Policy and the Committee on the Present Danger), Arnaud De Borchgrave (intelligence-connected hard-right journalist; good friend of Sun Myung Moon), Lynn Francis Bouchey (organizer of CAUSA operations in Central and South America), General E. David Woellner (chairman of the Sixth CAUSA-USA Foundation Conference and a defender of the Moon Cult), Lev Eugene Dobriansky (president of the Moonie-sponsored Global Economic Action Institute from 1987 to 1992. Head of the British branch of Global Economic was Cercle president Julian Amery; chair Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation 1994-2003, in which Cercle participants Edwin Feulner and Zbigniew Brzezinski were involved, just as Cercle president Brian Crozier), Jeane Kirkpatrick (co-chair USGSC; member President’s Foreign Intelligence and Advisory Board and Defense Policy Review Board; member Council for National Policy and the Committee on the Present Danger; chair of Moon’s Nicaraguan Freedom Fund; member National Advisory Council of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, which has close leadership links to the Moonies and Le Cercle), General Maxwell Taylor (former chair Joint Chiefs; IDA), General Albert Wedemeyer (chief of staff to Lord Mountbatten in South-East Asia in 1944; chief of staff to Chiang Kai-shek, head of the KMT and later founder of Taiwan who was in bed with one of the major Chinese Triads), General Robert Schweitzer (served under Alexander Haig at NATO; served under Haig, Kissinger and Richard Allen at the NSC; chair Inter-American Defense Board 1982-1987; national strategy program director USGSC since 1987; friend of General Singlaub; publicly supported Oliver North after Iran Contra), Christopher Morris (chair and vice-president of M2 Technologies, which focuses on non-lethal weapons; research director at the USGSC, working directly under Cline, and later heading the council’s Non-Lethality Policy Review Group; member of the 1995 CFR’s Task Force on Non-Lethal Technologies, of which Dov Zakheim and Jason scholar Richard Garwin also were members), and Janet Morris (president & CEO of of M2 Technologies; also member of the 1995 CFR’s Task Force on Non-Lethal Technologies; research director on non-lethal technologies at the USGSC 1993-1994; consultant at Los Alamos and close associate of Col. John Alexander).
General Stilwell, the Cercle member involved with the USGSC, deserves some more attention. It has already been discussed that he was a member of The 61 and the Special Operations Planning and Advisory Group (SOPAG), and seemingly an insider to the CIA drug trade in the 1980s. His involvement with CIA drugs might well go back to WWII and the early 1950s when he was involved in South-East Asia, including Burma, as a commander of Army forces and later regional CIA/OPC chief (146). More about Stilwell’s history before he turned 65 can be read in his biography in the Cercle membership list. We’ll focus on the last six years of his life, some time after he had been introduced to Le Cercle and The 61.
After Stilwell left the Defense Department in 1985, he set up Stilwell Associates, a private consulting firm that specialized in national security affairs. It had the CIA and the Defense Department among its clients (147). Because of this outside independent role Stilwell was able to claim in September 1987 he “was traveling at the request of no one” when Philippine authorities were worried about his presence in their country (148). Several months earlier his friend and SOPAG colleague General Jack Singlaub had also been peeking around on his own, allegedly searching for “sunken treasure” (149). In November 1986, Ray Cline and General Robert Schweitzer, like Stilwell both of the US Global Strategy Council, had also paid a visit to the Philippines. When the visit of Cline and Schweitzer was reported in the press, Cline stated that they were not official U.S. representatives and that they did not discuss the trip with the White House. But for some reason they did talk to former Marcos’ defense minister, Juan Ponce Enrile, allegedly to persuade him not to mount a coup against the new sitting president Cory Aquino (150). However, in August 1987 Enrile was arrested (and later released) with alleged CIA agent Colonel Gringo Honasan for attempting to overthrow Aquino. Accusations of CIA involvement were widespread and were the result of decades long US support for Marcos.
Presidents like LBJ, Nixon, Reagan, and Bush (vice-president at the time) have strongly supported Marcos’ severe dictatorship. The main reason was his strong anti-communist stance while allowing the US to operate Clark Air Base and Subic Bay Naval Base on the island. In the early 1980s, as Marcos became older and his grip on the nation waned something typical happened. Reagan withdrew US support for his friend Marcos and key officials in Marcos’ regime, mainly defense minister Enrile and police force head General Fidel Ramos, switched sides to the growing opposition. Marcos was driven out and evacuated by the United States to Hawaii. Cory Aquino came to power, but immediately it were individuals like Ramos and Enrile who were forcing, even threatening, Aquino to embrace the (partially new) ruling business and political oligarchy (151). A month after the failed August 1987 coup, Stilwell added that “unless Aquino acted decisively on military and political fronts – and embraced the right-of-center leaders in the private and public sector – there could be “a political breakdown” resulting in a coalition government with the communists within the next two years.” (152) Philippine government officials were openly speculating that the “CIA guys in town” were part of a rogue group, “maneuvering outside the normal channels of operations”, which played a role in the August 28 coup by the military. It was also openly alleged that the U.S. valued its Navy and Air Force bases in the country more than the freedom of the Philippine people(153).
Whatever role the US exactly played during the 1980s in the Philippines, what was going on here were private intelligence and likely direct intervention operations. Like The 61 charter said: “a Private Sector Operational Intelligence agency, beholden to no government, but at the disposal of allied or friendly governments.” (154) The same group that was involved in creating and running The 61 was involved here in the Philippines, not to mention in all other parts of the world. The British had been doing these things since at least 1963 when a group consisting of Julian Amery (Cercle), David Stirling, George Kennedy Young, unknown Mossad agents, Billy McLean (Cercle), the House of Al-Faisal (Cercle) and Hussein bin Talal of Jordan (Cercle) were running a largely private war in the Yemens. (155)As for the US, these private operations exploded in the 1970s and got another boost right after 9/11. In both cases, the same anti-communist, radical Zionist, neoconservative group was involved in expanding these operations.
Around the time Stilwell left government service and set up Stilwell Associates he joined the Advisory Board of Americares, a large relief organization with heavy duty links to the pharmaceutical industry, the intelligence community, right wing politicians, and the religious fringe. Americares used the Knights of Malta to distribute supplies and to more easily move across international borders. In 1991, the year Stilwell would pass away, J. Peter Grace(Knights of Malta leader; CNP; 1001 Club; Pilgrims Society; AIFLD; W.R. Grace & Co.; Citibank), a long time colleague of Stilwell, was chairman of the advisory board while Zbigniew Brzezinski, a Cercle participant like Stilwell, was its honorary chair. The Moonie-connected Knight of Malta William E. Simon was another member of the advisory board. Robert C. Macauley is the founder and head of Americares, not to mention a childhood friend of George H.W. Bush, the son of a Knight of Malta. Although Macauley is not a Catholic, he did have pictures of President Reagan, Pope John Paul II and Mother Teresa on his office walls (156).
In the early 1970s, Macauley had joined hands with Bruce Ritter, a Catholic priest who took care of runaway children in New York. Both were invited for an audience with the Pope in 1982, who gave the newly-established Americares the opportunity to give aid to Poland (157). This was purely a geopolitical move as the Vatican, for several years, had been funding a Catholic underground in Poland, and now that an economic crisis had broken out, Americares was chosen to bolster the image of both the Vatican and Reagan’s Catholic Conservatives even more. At the same time, the Vatican began supporting Solidarnosc (Solidarity), a large group of dissident workers, with funds and a printing press. Roberto Calvi’s Banco Ambrosiano was among the banks that had bankrolled these operations and the Vatican was coordinating their actions with officials from the Reagan administration, including General Alexander Haig, General Walters, and William Casey, all three members of the Knights of Malta (158). Reagan’s representative to the Vatican, Le Cercle and The 61, William Wilson, who also was a Knight of Malta, was another one (159). Georges Albertini of the Cercle, a major French fascist with a series of Synarchist links, provided crucial intelligence gathered by The 61 on Poland to the Pope during this time (160).
Unfortunately for Macauley, in 1990, he was forced to break his association with the Catholic priest after this person was accused of sexual misconduct with some of the male runaways he was sheltering (161); a very common accusation in the Catholic Republican Paneuropa circles that is being dealt with in this article.
Some more Cercle members. King Hussein of Jordan used to receive millions from the CIA. Sultan Qaboos from Oman overthrew his father in 1970 (which was a good thing) with help from “British advisors” and privatized the oil economy. He is rumored to be gay by almost his entire population, which is quite a sin in an Islamic country. Both Hussein and Qaboos were advised by Cercle member Air Marshal Sir Erik Bennett. Turki from Saudi-Arabia is reported to have met his old protege Osama Bin Laden as late as July 2001, together with the CIA, and resigned 10 days before 9/11 as head of Saudi intelligence. Auchi was part of Saddam Hussein’s inner circle and is standing here next to Prince Andrew at the Anglo-Arab Organization. Actually, it isn’t known if former Nazi spy chief General Reinhard Gehlen attended Cercle meetings, only that he was very interested in the Cercle and that he recruited its founder, Jean Violet, as an intelligence agent. Details can be found in the membership list, which features very detailed biographies often with a number of newspaper excerpts.
The Vatican-Paneuropa network
Even though its members have been involved in intrigues around the world, the Cercle’s main purpose has always been to discuss issues and possible action relating to European integration. The vision of the original French and German founders, as representatives of the Paneuropa movement, seems to have been a strong Catholic-dominated Europe, led by a Franco-German axis. Historically, you’ll find a close cooperation between the Vatican-Paneuropa network (from which the Cercle emerged) and the right wing Christian Democratic parties in countries as Germany, Italy, France, and Belgium. It went the same way in Spain, although a democratic system did not exist there until after the death of Franco.
IN GERMANY the main players were CSU members Otto von Habsburg, Franz Joseph Strauss, Count Hans Huyn, and several of their aristocratic friends like the Thurn und Taxis and Thyssen-Bornemisza families. Their connections to Opus Dei and the Knights of Malta have already been discussed. Let’s also not forget Paneuropa member Konrad Adenauer, the long time Chancellor of Germany who signed the 1957 Treaty of Rome for Germany. Adenauer, a co-founder of the Christian Democrat Union (CDU) – the national party of the Bavarian CSU – received the Magistral Grand Cross from the Knights of Malta and the Charlemagne award from the Paneuropa Union. Franz Josef Bach, the personal assistant of Adenauer, is likely to have played an important behind the scenes role as a long time organizer of Cercle meetings. Adenauer was a founding member of Le Cercle.
IN ITALY the Opusian Cercle member Giulio Andreotti was one of the main behind the scenes players from the late 1950s to the early 1990s. He started his career under Paneuropa supporter Alcide de Gasperi, one of the early builders of Europe and likely someone who was recruited into the Cercle. Statements from Roberto Calvi that Andreotti was the real head of the P2, with Francesco Cosentino and Umberto Ortolani just beneath him, are entirely possible (162). Although Licio Gelli, nicknamed “Italy’s puppet master” for heading the P2, was a member of the Knights of Malta, like Andreotti and Ortolani, Gelli did not have the background to have been any kind of top man. Gelli’s foreign puppet masters were Cercle member Henry Kissinger from the White House, NATO official Alexander Haig, and rogue CIA official Ted Shackley. Frank Gigliotti, a ranking US Mason and former OSS agent, was another one of Gelli’s immediate instructors (163). Andreotti has numerous accusations against him that he worked with the mafia (and the CIA) to keep his Christian Democrat Party in power. There’s also an accusation that he personally ordered an assassination to keep some personal secrets from leaking out. Andreotti was the first to acknowledge the existence of a European Stay-Behind army, named Gladio in case of Italy.
As for Italy’s nobility, the earlier-mentioned Prince Carlo della Torre e Tasso is a board member of the Coudenhove-Kalergi Foundation and Prince Carlo de Bourbon, the Duke of Calabria, is head of the Vatican-recognized Italian branch of the the Sacred Military Constantinian Order of St George. It’s a Catholic chivalric order, but has recently also invited a small number of non-Catholics, including Cercle chairman Lord Norman Lamont(Privy Council; Rothschild; chair Oil Club) and Cercle member Anthony Cavendish (MI6; not of the Dukes of Devonshire). The controversial Cercle member Nadhmi Auchi (did illegal arms transfers for Saddam) has been awarded by the order. The Catholic Duke of Norfolk (together with the Cecils the most influential family in the history of Britain; British liaisons to the Vatican for centuries; Roxburghe Club member with the Cecils, Cavendishes, Rothschilds, Oppenheimers, and formerly Paul Mellon) and Lord Guthrie (SAS commander; Gold Stick to the Queen; Pilgrims Society; Knights of Malta; Rothschild) can also be found among the British members of the Sacred Military Constantinian Order (164). The controversial Duke of Savoy is another important family in Italy, but has not been tied directly to Paneuropa or Le Cercle.
CERCLE MEMBERS FROM BELGIUM have yet to be identified, but the group they must have come from is rather limited. Take former defense and prime minister Paul Vanden Boeynants and his sidekick Baron Benoît de Bonvoisin, whose father had been a director at Société Générale (still the major pillar of the Belgian economy and the Vatican-linked aristocracy) and an initial Bilderberg participant. Both were reportedly members of Opus Dei. Vanden Boeynants and Benoît de Bonvoisin were two of the founders of Cercle des Nations in 1969, an aristocratic Belgian club with Jean Violet as one of the few foreign members. Cercle des Nations was another hard-right offshoot of Paneuropa activities and had about 80 members when it first opened. Vanden Boeynants is also said to have been involved with Violet’s Académie Européenne des Sciences Politiques while the headquarters of the Paneuropean Institut Europeen de Developpement was located in Baron de Bonvoisin’s castle (165). Co-founder and vice-chairman of this institute was Paul Vankerkhoven, a side-kick of Otto van Habsburg who founded the Belgian branch of the World Anti-Communist League. Vankerkhoven was a co-founder of CEPIC in 1972, a secretive hard-right inner group of the Social Christian Party (PSC) of vanden Boeynants and Baron de Bonvoisin. To keep things short, this group, which includes the Belgian royal family of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha and many high nobility figures, has at times tried to undermine Belgium’s democratic process. One of these attempts was in the early 1970s. Another one in the early 1980s.
There’s more going on in Belgium. According to victim-witnesses since the early 1980s, and especially testimonies made in the aftermath of the Dutroux affair, this group (see PEHI’s ‘Beyond the Dutroux affair‘ for details) is involved in different pedophile rings. Some of these rings are set up to compromise politicians and businessmen; others seem to be just for “fun” and include child hunts at different domains and some very disturbing forms of mental and physical torture. Reports of involvement of Opus Dei and Knights of Malta figures are quite common. One report that might be relevant here involves a former PSC treasurer of the youth division, Jacques Thoma. He claimed that at some point he was invited to mass orgies by his superior (a CEPIC member and an associate of both Nihoul and suspected Gang of Nijvel members), which were explained to him as an Opus Dei initiation test, to which these people were trying to direct him. Later on, he was drugged and taken to a meeting where everyone was dressed in black robes and masks. The purpose of this meeting was “to be initiated into higher circles”. A young girl had been sacrificed and participants drank her blood. Other girls from eastern Europe were also present. He tried to leave, but was drugged again. The next morning he woke up in his car. Still heavily traumatized ten years later, he did not dare to give an official testimony, because he had been intimidated (166).
Another case from Belgium involving the Vatican-Paneuropa network: Paul vanden Boeynants and Prince Albert (now King) was among the names mentioned in the Pinon Affair that began in 1979 (167). It involved parties at which minors were sexually abused. In June 1981 the editor of Pour Magazine was brought into contact with one of the participants in these parties and started an investigation. Within days he receives a telephone call from an attorney in Brussels who advises him to stop his investigation, because “panic has broken out in a certain political milieu”. Ten days later the headquarters of Pour are destroyed by a fire (168).
Two individuals have been named as the person that threatened the editor. One is Jacques G. Jonet, formerly a political secretary of Otto von Habsburg and a leading figure in a whole string of Paneuropa-associated groups, including the Habsburg-founded Centre of Documentation and Information and Cercle des Nations. He co-founded several of these institutions and is reported to have been a close associate of Baron de Bonvoisin (169). A quick background check anno 2006 turns up that Jonet is the representative of the Belgian Order of Malta, while his wife is a member of its administrative council (170) (together with a few interesting family names). Both were present at the wedding of Prince Philip (son of King Albert II and Princess Paola Ruffo di Calabria) and Mathilde d’Udekem d’Acoz (Dame of Malta) in 1999 (171). It also turns out that Jonet is still involved with the Wilton Park conferences, together with the Grand Chancellor of the Order of Malta (172).
The other possibility at the time was Vincent vanden Bossche, a lawyer of numerous hard-right individuals who was part of the same milieu as Jonet. Like Jonet, he was a member of Cercle des Nations and Ordre du Rouvre, although his credentials are less impressive (173). It is entirely possible that both men were involved in trying to stop the editor of Pour from publishing the results of his investigation.
Keep in mind that in the first case mentioned (the alleged Opus Dei initiation) we were talking about secretive parallel cells within existing organizations, like those that had been created by this same group in Belgium’s gendarmerie, and reportedly also in the military, political parties, and at one or more universities. Even though these reports of extreme child “abuse” initially seem farfetched, they come from more than half a dozen (known) witnesses. They also bear a remarkable similarity to the Franklin and Craig Spence cases, which revolved around the highest level Republican circles in the US. For a quick oversight of these cases you might want to take a look at the biography of Cercle member and Knight of Malta William Casey, who had an awfully close relationship with Larry King and Craig J. Spence. A separate article will appear on this Belgian group and its similarities to other cases.
SPAIN WAS headed by Franco until 1975, which was only partially approved by the reactionary Vatican-Paneuropa network. On the one hand, Franco was a good Catholic boy, treating the non-Catholics in his country as sub-human. On the other hand, because of Franco’s totalitarian tendencies Spain remained isolated from the European integration process. That has been a major reason for the pressure on Franco to make reforms, allowing for a more democratic and pro-European Spain to emerge after his death (174). It is said that Franco initially contacted the head of the Paneuropa movement, Otto von Habsburg, to become his follow-up, as the Habsburgs had ruled the country in the past for nearly 200 years. After a long discussion Otto declined, instead suggesting that Prince Juan Carlos should become Franco’s successor (175). And so it happened. Franco, Habsburg, and Carlos have all been named as members of the Knights of Malta. They also supported Opus Dei.
There’s only one known Cercle member from Spain at the moment, Federico Silva Munoz. In 1967, Munoz, as Franco’s Minister of the Interior, had blocked a bill that would have recognized the existence of Spain’s small non-Catholic community. Most Opus Dei figures in government voted in favor of the bill, as part of the overall reform process (176). In October 1969, there was an almost complete overhaul of Franco’s cabinet with only four members of the old cabinet remaining. One of the four cabinet members that was allowed to stay was Munoz (177), although he resigned five months later, allegedly because of a difference of opinion with the now dominant Opus Dei clique, headed by Franco’s eminence grise Admiral Carrero Blanco and several others (178). Munoz remained a member of the Spanish Congress and became head of Campsa, the oil concern which had a monopoly on oil distribution in Spain (179). The struggle between the Falangists and Opusians continued in the years following, with the latter losing a lot of influence after Admiral Blanco had been assassinated in December 1973, allegedly by the ETA. This was the view of the newspapers at the time; not something later put forward by alternative researchers.
Franco passed away in 1975 and King Juan Carlos became the new head of government. After Carlos dismissed the fascist prime minister Carlos Arias Navarro in 1976, Munoz was among the few who were recommended by Carlos’ highest advisory body, the Council of the Realm, to be made prime minister of Spain (180). However, Carlos picked the right wing, but far less reactionary, Adolfo Suarez, who reportedly was a member of Opus Dei(181). Munoz, in the mean time, had become head of the hard-right Unión de Centro Democrático (UCD) and in October 1976 he incorporated this party into the newly-created Alianza Popular (AP). The AP was a federation of several parties, which were all fascist or borderline fascist. It opted for a “more gradual” change to democracy than Suarez and his allies had planned for. Some co-founders with Munoz were former Franco ministers Gonzalo Fernandez de la Mora, Lopez Rodo (influential minister in the 1960s and early 1970s, who is said to have engineered the Opus Dei takeover of the Spanish government), and Manuel Fraga Iribarne(182). When the new constitution was approved in 1978, turning Spain into a parliamentary democracy, most members of the AP, as totalitarian as they were, decided to accept the constitution. Not Munoz and Fernandez de la Mora, who withdrew from the AP to continue with their Unión de Centro Democrático party, renaming it in January 1979 to Derecha Democrática Española (DDE). That same month they established a coalition with Fuerza Nueva of Blas Pinar and other ultrafascists; probably the most reactionary and dangerous political faction in Spain at the time (183). Munoz spoke out a few times against the new Spanish constitution in the months and years following (184), but soon disappeared in political obscurity. At some point he did become involved with Le Cercle, and that shows.
|In 1983, Gonzalo Fernandez de la Mora, Munoz’s political partner and good friend since they first met at a gathering of the Asociación Católica Nacional de Propagandistas in the
||1940s (185), founded the fascist magazine Razon Espanola (Spanish Reason) and became its president. Munoz would regularly write articles for the magazine. Razon Espanola was founded on October 1, 1983 as an outgrowth of the Balmes Foundation, in turn established a few months earlier by a grant of the German Hanns Seidel Foundation(186), which has already been mentioned before. It is the political trust attached to the Christian Social Union of such Opus Dei and Cercle luminaries as Otto von Habsburg and Franz Josef Strauss. There have been accusations that the Foundation has supported the Contras in Latin America and Mobutu
|(a 1001 Club member like Herbert Batliner, King Juan Carlos and Prince Johannes von Thurn und Taxis) in Zaire(187). In case of Razon Espanola, it funded the magazine over a number of years until it was able to operate on its own. As you can read above, Fernandez and Munoz were friends of Strauss and when the BBC highlighted this in a panorama on Strauss in 1980, Brian Crozier, outgoing chairman of Le Cercle (which no reader of The Times knew) felt compelled to defend his associates (188). However, Crozier himself was a great supporter of the Franco regime and like Munoz, Fernandez de la Mora, or Blas Pinar, he deemed Spain’s new constitution unworkable (189). In short, all these people are fascists, even though they always deny that.
In 1989, Cercle investigator David Teacher claimed that Munoz was a “senior Opus Dei member” (190). Judging by most of his career, Munoz was not in the camp that, at least in Spain, has traditionally been identified with Opus Dei. However, this religious group transcends political parties and Munoz’s later involvement with Le Cercle, Strauss and the Hanns Seidel Foundation certainly made him a close associate of what has often been termed “God’s Octopus”.
THE PANEUROPA UNION and the Vatican never had to complain about France. Whether a president was Gaullist or socialist, at the very least they favored a strong Europe as a political and military counterweight to the United States; and even though Great Britain was accepted into the European Union, it was never able to wedge itself into the dominant Franco-German alliance. This mainly had to do with the French. All French presidents were staunch Roman Catholics, some even connected to Opus Dei, like Robert Schuman, Antoine Pinay, and Valery Giscard d’Estaing, with probably a few others we don’t know it about.
The French have been the primary motor behind the European Union. Paneuropa member Robert Schuman, through Monnet, laid the foundation for the European Union with the 1949 European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). In the 1950s, Antoine Pinay founded Le Cercle with the Opusian Jean Violet and Otto von Habsburg. They immediately invited Konrad Adenauer, Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet. Monnet, although mainly connected to Anglo-American banking and political interests, was the Frenchman who organized the 1948 Congress of Europe with Joseph Retinger, came up with the idea of the ECSC, played an important role in the 1957 Treaty of Rome, and later set up his influential action committee.
The decade after the ECSC, Bilderberg, Le Cercle and the European Economic Community (EEC) had been created, Violet and Pinay arranged for the Franco-German alliance between de Gaulle and Adenauer. This was in January 1963 and just in time for a possible acceptance of Britain into the EEC. De Gaulle, however, vetoed Britain’s entry anyway, which guaranteed Franco-German dominance of the EEC for the years to come.
Coudenhove and Habsburg adored de Gaulle not only for giving France a strong military and even its own nuclear arsenal, but also for his leadership role in furthering European integration (191). In 1969, however, after de Gaulle had steered Europe too much in an anti-NATO, anti-Anglo-American, and domestically too Conservative course, he had built up so much opposition against himself that he was forced (or forced himself) to resign. His more moderate right hand man, Georges Pompidou, a person in close contact with the Cercle and a long time employee of the Rothschild Bank, took over.
Pompidou’s éminence grise became nazi-collaborator Georges Albertini, who worked at Banque Worms, coincidentally said to have been a major Synarchie front. Albertini worked with Jean Violet and Brian Crozier in both The 61 and the Cercle. He also briefed the Pope on several occasions. In 1973, at the recommendation of Georges Pompidou, Otto von Habsburg became the new president of the Paneuropa Union, as Coudenhove-Kalergi had died the year before (192). Pompidou himself suddenly died in 1974 and the interim president became Alain Poher, a member of Le Cercle who was president of the French Senate from 1968 to 1992. He had earlier served as acting president when Charles de Gaulle died, but lost the election to Pompidou. This time Poher lost the election to Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, a Knight of Malta and good friend of Jean Violet, who became the next president of France until 1981. Giscard, his father Edmond, together with associates as Prince Jean de Broglie, Robert Leclerc and members of Le Cercle are said to have introduced Opus Dei to France(193). More on Giscard in a minute.
Things changed in 1981, when the socialist Mitterrand became president of France. One family who couldn’t appreciate the new socialist policies were the Rothschilds, who saw their family bank nationalized. They had to shift attention to New Court, their securities firm in New York at Rockefeller Center with stakes in corporations as TRW and Hughes Aircraft (194). But even though Mitterrand was a socialist, he also was a an ardent Catholic who favored European integration. Also, Georges Albertini already anticipated the victory of the socialists and brought Mitterrand’s closest friend and confidant, Francois de Grossouvre, into the Cercle six months before the elections. When Mitterrand was elected in 1981, he appointed de Grossouvre as coordinator of security and intelligence (195). Four years later de Grossouvre and Admiral Pierre Lacoste, two leading officers in the French stay-behind networks (196), were among a small group that decided to sink the Rainbow Warrior in reaction to the protests of Greenpeace against French nuclear testing at Mururoa(197).
Mitterrand, known to have been greatly interested in Machiavelli, stayed a long time in office. Only in 1995 the more Liberal Jacques Chirac took over. Besides being the usual opportunist, Chirac has become a great supporter of European integration and of the failed 2005 European constitution. Before the voting process for the new constitution began, Chirac brought up the old issue of Britain’s loyalty to the European Union, saying that if its citizens voted against, it would be clear that Britain felt more strongly about cooperation with the Commonwealth and the US. He then promoted the idea that any country who voted against the constitution could better leave the European Union (198). In April 2005, Chirac went on TV and openly stated that a no to the European Constitution “would halt the European project in its tracks, and pave the way to an unregulated, uncontrolled free-market world, dominated by the United States.” (199)
Even after these strong statements, the person who oversaw the writing of the European constitution blamed Chirac for France’s rejection of it. This person was Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, a long time political rival of Chirac, and claimed it was a mistake of Chirac to hand out the third part of the European Constitution to the French people for reviewing, because part III had already been ratified in previous treaties. Giscard literally begged Chirac not to do this (200). However, since the people of France had to revote on this section as part of the overall constitution, Chirac decided to include it in the mailings, possibly to avoid any accusations of conspiracy that would undermine his chances in the 2007 elections. This third part, which dealt with the major EU policies – the internal market, the economic and monetary union, employment, social policies, consumer protection, environment, agriculture, energy, research, etc. – was severely criticized by the French people, who always leaned to socialism and communism quite severely (which in no small part had to do with France’s Vichy and neocolonial past). Back in 1957, at the time of the Treaty of Rome when a lot of these very liberal policies were agreed upon, the socialists had nothing to bring in, as the CIA, MI6, the SDECE and French Gladio units made sure that leftist elements, however strong they were, did not get any executive positions in government. The same thing happened in other countries.
As a good Opusian and Malteser Knight, Valéry Giscard d’Estaing already proposed a solution to the problem of getting the European constitution ratified.
“Let’s be clear about this: the rejection of the Constitutional Treaty in France was a mistake, which will have to be corrected… the Constitutional Treaty will have to be given its second chance. When? When France has completed her great electoral debate, with the presidential and parliamentary elections which are due to be held 14 months’ time, in spring 2007. How? By refocusing the debate on the only genuinely constitutional parts, that is to say, the first part, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights demanded by the European Left, neither of which have given rise to much protest. Then the third part could follow a parliamentary route, which is far better suited to its legal nature.” (201)
Giscard enjoys the full support of his friend Otto von Habsburg, who agrees that the constitution should be reintroduced, albeit the more “comprehensible” early version of Giscard (202). Discussions about this have already been underway between Chirac and Merkel (of the CDU in Germany). Chirac is a Catholic, but seems to be less influenced by his fate than some of the politicians surrounding him. For example, Giscard and Habsburg strongly oppose any possibility of Turkish membership in the European Union, probably because that will interfere with their vision of a new Holy Roman Empire [update: in late November 2006, Pope Ratzinger all of a sudden saw no objections to Turkey joining the EU. It would be really interesting to know the reason behind this sudden and complete 180 degrees reversal. However, one thing seems to be certain: the reactionary Ultramontanists aren't getting what they want]. Chirac on the other hand is open to the idea that Turkey would eventually be allowed to join. Merkel agrees on this issue with Otto and Giscard, but is not part of their Opusian Bavarian clique. Edmund Stoiber, a protege of Strauss, tried to compete with her for the German chancellorship in 2005.
Franco-German vs. US-supported Anglo-German alliance
Besides individual politicians there’s a very distinct group out there that supports the idea of Turkey becoming a full member of the European Union. That is the neoconservative crowd that rose to power in the early 1980s, was involved with the Jonathan Institute conferences and is now supporting the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). The Henry Jackson Society (HJS), founded in 2005, is an extension of PNAC, and includes some of the European partners of what is supposed to become the “New American Century”. The Henry Jacksons work towards what they call “global liberal democracy”and favor an Anglo-German alliance for Europe, especially after the failed constitution in June 2005 (203). The society’s principles are:
- Liberal democracy should be spread across the world
- The US and the EU – under British leadership – must shape the world more actively
- Maintenance of a strong military with global expeditionary reach
Both William Kristol and Robert Kagan, founders of PNAC, are patrons of the Henry Jackson Society. Bruce Jackson is also a patron, and is the third of five directors of PNAC involved with the HJS. Jackson was a Military Intelligence officer who went to work for Lehman Brothers and Lockheed. He now is president of the non-profit US Committee on NATO. Some other patrons of the society are Richard Perle, General Jack Sheehan, James Woolsey, Hubertus Hoffmann, and Vytautas Landsbergis. Richard Perle, the good friend of Brian Crozier, has become known as the ultimate warmongerer. Marine Corps General Jack Sheehan, a former NATO intelligence chief who now works for Bechtel (like Shultz and Weinberger going back to the Jonathan Institute), has been accused of doing a lot of dirty tricks and black ops for his superiors in Washington and New York (204). Perle used to be chairman of the Defense Policy Board, the advisory body to the Pentagon. Sheehan is still a member. James Woolsey, the former CIA director under Clinton, is another member of the Defense Policy Board. Hubertus Hoffmann, from Germany, is a founder of the large World Security Network Foundation in New York and the General Capital Group in Germany. Like Alexander Haig, Henry Kissinger, Vernon Walters and Donald Rumsfeld, Hoffmann is a protege of Fritz Kraemer. The anti-communist Vytautas Landsbergis is a political leader from Lithuania.
The HJS itself has been named after Senator Henry Jackson, a Democrat who visited the first Jonathan Conference on international terrorism in 1979, together with Crozier, Moss, Chalfont, Pipes, Kemp, Cline, Bush Sr., Netanyahu, and others. He favored a hardline policy against the USSR and supported the war in Vietnam. Because Jackson constantly advocated increased military spending on weapons systems and at the same time received funding from Boeing, he became known as the “Senator from Boeing”. Jackson has been a great supporter of the radical Zionist movement.
Henry Jackson was one of the early neoconservatives, a movement that transcends the historic division between the democrats and republicans, especially after the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) was founded in 1985. Henry Jackson’s proteges Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz are an examples of that, just as Richard Perle favoring DLC democrat Joseph Lieberman for the 2008 US presidency. James Woolsey is another example of a neoconservative democrat, just at Senator Moynihan (worked for Pilgrim Averell Harriman in the 1950s, the person who helped to organize the Psychological Strategy Board; important United Nations official in the 1970s; important DLC operative; chairman of a 1997 Commission that shed some light on the inner workings of the Black and Deep Black Programs; friend of the Rothschild family), a person who attended the 1984 conference of the Jonathan Institute. Neoconservatives are hawks who put big business and geopolitical interests above anything else. Individual freedom means nothing and is seen as an ineffective.
Today’s neoconservatives are linked to people like Julian Amery and Brian Crozier through organizations as the Jonathan Institute, Foreign Affairs Research Institute, Institute for the Study of Conflict, Le Cercle, Forum World Features, Encounter and the Congress for Cultural Freedom. The last three institutions are known to have been funded by the CIA. As already discussed, Richard Mellon Scaife played an important role in taking over funding of some of these institutions. In case of the Institute for the Study of Conflict, the CIA arranged a meeting between Scaife and Crozier when the latter was looking for funding. Since the 1990s, Scaife’s foundations have been funding other news media and think tanks, all of them quite notorious. Some of the most important have been Strategic Investment, the Project for the New American Century and Newsmax. Someone like the neoconservative William Kristol provides another CIA link to the Project for the New American Century, of which he was a primary founder. William’s father, Irving Kristol, co-founded Encounter magazine for the CIA, and his successor, Melvin Lasky, was a friend and political associate of Brian Crozier. Irving later also founded the National Interest (and Public Interest), a neocon foreign policy magazine with such notorious radical Zionists on the advisory board as Morton Abramowitz, Dov Zakheim, Conrad Black (1001 Club; another media tycoon) and Henry Kissinger. Former CIA head James Schlesinger has been chairman of the advisory council while Richard Pipes, Crozier’s associate during the 1980s, was also involved with the magazine. These days Irving’s son William is a political commentator for Fox News.
From left to right: Irving Kristol and his son William, Rupert Murdoch, Richard Mellon Scaife and business partner Lord Rees-Mogg, Brian Crozier and his friend Richard Perle, and CCF co-founder and Cercle president Julian Amery. According to Crozier, Murdoch’s newspapers were under attack in 1980s by “militant trade unions”. Seems Murdoch never forgave them.
These media outlets have in common that they are selling a fascist domestic and foreign policy agenda by spreading propaganda and clear cut disinformation. The problem is that it’s neither fully CIA nor private. With all these radical Zionists and General Jack Sheehan as a patron of the Henry Jackson Society, it becomes tempting to refer to them in the terms Catherine Griggs, wife of Col. George Griggs, used: the Brotherhood, the Firm or the Joint.
This group also has not shied away from reporting on conspiracies and presenting themselves as the religious patriots fighting the “New World Order” and the United Nations. Examples of this kind of disinformation are carefully presented stories that suggest the “radical left” is the mastermind behind conspiracies as Waco, Oklahoma, CIA drugs, high technology sales to China, the murder of Clinton’s associates and the murder of William Colby. “Alternative” news publications like Newsmax and Strategic Investment have been involved in spreading this kind of disinformation. Both magazines have counted heavy involvement of Richard Mellon Scaife and Lord William Rees-Mogg. Cercle member William Colby said something very interesting to his friend Senator John DeCamp about these individuals.
“At the time of his death, Bill [Colby] was working with Britain’s Lord William Rees-Mogg… [Rees-Mogg] used to write that in the coming age of society, an elite of 5% of the total population would rule over the other 95% as virtual slaves. But Rees-Mogg is not just nasty– he represents great power… On several occasions, when I saw Bill or spoke with him during the last year of his life, I’d ask him whether I should subscribe to his newsletter [Strategic Investment], or, whether he’d just give me a few copies to look over. He always told me not to waste my money. “Ask me about any situation your interested in, and I’ll give you as thorough a briefing as I possibly can. But don’t believe a word you read in that newsletter I’m writing for.” Strange… Maybe his involvement with Rees-Mogg was more complicated than I ever speculated… And I recall another incident… Together with Rees-Mogg, the most savage press hound attacking Clinton was one Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, a Briton… [he] once called me, urgently demanding a meeting. I had never heard of him before, and so I asked Bill if he had ever heard of this fellow… Bill answered, rather ominously, as I now look back, “His name is Ambrose Evans-Pritchard. And,” he said, “be very careful.”” (205)
Rees-Mogg, as a member of the exclusive Other Club since 1973, is a close associate of the leading aristocratic families in Britain, including the Duke of Devonshire (Cavendish), Lord Carrington (Pilgrims president), Lord Rothschild and Prince Charles. Here they dine together with such individuals as Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Sir Edward Heath, and Sir Denis Thatcher (husband of). Lord Richardson of Duntisbourne (J. Henry Schroder; Bank of England; Morgan Stanley; BIS; Chemical Bank; Chase Manhattan; Rolls Royce; Ditchley; Group of Thirty; presided over G-10 meetings; Privy Council; Order of the Garter; Pilgrims Society) and Winston Spencer-Churchill(grandson of the famous PM; son of Pamela Harriman; had an extra-marital affair with the former wife of famous arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi; MP; involved in some projects with Cercle members) are other members of the Other Club, just as Cercle participants Baron Kelvedon, Lord Julian Amery and the 7th Marquess of Salisbury (206). The Rothschilds, Cecils, Drummonds (remember Monnet?), Dukes of Norfolk, Dukes of Devonshire, together with Harry Oppenheimer and Paul Mellon, could also be found in the same room with Rees-Mogg when the even more exclusive Roxburghe Club met (207). The Rees-Mogg and Evans-Pritchard connection with Richard Mellon Scaife and American Zionists in discrediting the American left seems to be an example of a “joint” operation.
Apparently there are at least two major power centers on the planet at this moment, with one relying primarily on economic and military dominance, and the other relying mainly on religious authority. The former is the radical Anglo-American-Israel alliance; the second the just as radical Vatican-Paneuropa network, which is dominated by Knights of Malta and a small coterie of Opus Dei associates. There are arguments for cooperation between these networks, especially in their fight against communism, socialism and nationalism. However, there does seem to be some disagreement on how the world should be organized. The Franco-German vs. the proposed neocon Anglo-German axis is just one indication of that. Otto von Habsburg’s remark that “the Pentagon is now a Jewish institution as all key positions are occupied by Jews” (208) is another, and it’s interesting that he has not been attacked over it by the normally over-alert Zionist clique. Some other examples have already been named in this article, but in general it’s easy to spot the the tendency of the Vatican-Paneuropeans to denounce the neoliberal policies of the Anglo-Americans.
The neocon vs. Vatican-Paneuropa network. Le Cercle has historically been associated with the radical Vatican-Paneuropa group; Bilderberg more with the network drawn in red. However, many Bilderberg participants were not as hawkish as today’s Zionist neocons. Through the Gladio networks and economic support, the US has always been very influential in Europe. The Vatican’s peak influence in Washington was during the Reagan years and has always been strong in South America. In Britain there are very aristocratic Catholic families as the Dukes of Norfolk and the Earls of Perth who have been liaisons to the Vatican for centuries, as opposed to leading families as the Dukes of Devonshire (leading Whigs/liberals for centuries) and Marquesses of Salisbury (prominent defenders of the Church of England). Most of these families, even today, are religious with a capital R. Interestingly, the four families mentioned are all involved with the small Roxburghe book club for generation after generation, so they probably get along reasonably well. In fact, they should, as they’ve become pretty close relatives over the past five or six centuries during which they been struggling for power in Great Britain.
The dilemma of the British Tories (Conservatives)
As for Le Cercle, it has already been discussed that leadership went from the Vatican-Paneuropa network to members connected to the Anglo-American establishment. The Britons visiting Le Cercle can be divided in two groups: those who want Britain to join the European Union, like Brian Crozier; and the more recent heads as Jonathan Aitken and Lord Lamont, who have been crucial in the campaign to halt further British integration into the European Union. Lamont remains one of the leaders of the British eurosceptic movement with his Bruges Group. Most of the recent British visitors of Le Cercle, all Conservatives, also want to keep Britain out of the European Union. Aitken gave an explanation in September 2005:
“People have realised that the dream of a federal Europe with Britain at the centre of it has been a dream that has failed. I and a few others could see that it would fail and it has.” (209)
Although likely a sincere statement, it’s hard to take anything serious that Aitken says. He’s a great nephew of the Hitler-intimate Lord Beaverbrook, whose son was a member of the questionable 1001 Club. He’s also a MI6 agent involved in massive amounts of illegal arms sales, and even recruited his own 13 year old daughter to lie for him in court. Then, after his conviction and subsequent release, he still received a salary of about $15,000 a month from an unknown source. Out of jail it also turned out that Aitken had become even more religious and that he seemed to have switched from being an Anglican to a Roman Catholic. Uttering creepy sentences as “I am a man of unclean lips” he even went to do a personal Ignatian retreat to entrench the spiritual exercises of the Society of Jesus in his subconsciousness (210). And this is a man who ran what the Independent called “one of the most influential, secretive, and… exclusive political clubs in the West” (211) and was described by Alan Clark as someone “who knows absolutely everybody in the world”(212).
After the European constitution was rejected by France and the Netherlands in May and June 2005 respectively, Lord Lamont, the present chairman of Le Cercle, wrote:
“The Europe of Delors [fervent Catholic socialist; received Charlemagne award], Mitterand [fervent Catholic socialist; received Charlemagne award] and Kohl [Christian Democrat; fervent Catholic; received Charlemagne award; illegally supported by funds from the Vatican] is dead. No means no. Europe’s self-serving political elite will make a profound mistake and create an awakening of bitterness if they try to sidestep France’s historic vote. Europe is a dysfunctional mess. Europe needs to go back to square one. Blair and the British Government in their role as the Presidency of the EU should renegotiate the existing treaties to create a looser free trade Europe of 25 countries.” (213)
Although another very questionable person, Lamont is a serious eurosceptic and brings up many good points on his Bruges Group website. It’s however one of Lamont’s former bosses, until the year before he became head of Le Cercle, who draws most of the questions to him pertaining Britain’s policy towards the European Union. Before becoming a very influential politician, Lamont worked at N.M. Rothschild & Sons and Rothschild Asset Management. In 1993, he briefly returned to N.M. Rothschild & Sons. At the time, Sir Evelyn de Rothschild personally appointed Lamont to his board, going against the advise of other board members. As the whole board was composed of staunch eurosceptics, outside observers began to wonder if this was going to hurt the family bank’s business in mainland Europe (214). However, almost ten years later, in 2002, it turned out that Sir Evelyn set up and was actually funding the most influential pro-EU think tank in existence:
“Peter Mandelson, the former secretary of state for Northern Ireland, has found a new backer for his political ambitions in the shape of Sir Evelyn de Rothschild, the multi-millionaire banker… the two have become firm friends… So it is perhaps no surprise that de Rothschild has emerged as the mystery funder of Policy Network, a “super think tank” that boasts some of No 10′s senior policy advisers on its board and is chaired by none other than Mandelson. The sum donated to date is said to be £250,000. The name of the donor is missing from the think tank’s accounts, but its directors have been privately concerned that they will look secretive if they continue to hide his identity… In June this year the de Rothschilds were among the organisers of a “progressive” leaders’ conference run by Policy Network at Brocket Hall in Hertfordshire, which attracted Clinton and the prime minister. In the evening, the gathering moved to Ascott House, de Rothschild’s home in Buckinghamshire, for a seated banquet for 100. The board of Policy Network — set up by a group of young Blairites in 2000 — reads like a Who’s Who of Labour’s inner circle.” (215)
Maybe Sir Evelyn changed his mind. Unfortunately, he doesn’t like to give interviews (216) so it is likely to remain anybody’s guess. In general, members of the Rothschild family swing both to the left and right and there’s really no telling what goes on in their heads. And not only through Lamont are they close to Le Cercle; through the earlier mentioned Other Club and Roxburghe Club the Rothschilds were/are in close contact with leading Cercle members Lord Julian Amery, Paul Channon (Baron Kelvedon; his daughter died from a heroin overdose in the mansion of Count Gottfried von Bismarck; very close friend of the Duke of Kent) and the Cecils. If there are other links they are unknown.
To finish up this section, the big question in England today seems to be what should be done with the European Union. Surrender it to the Franco-German alliance? Or continue the effort to join the Franco-German alliance, and possibly even to replace it with an Anglo-German one? In the long run, both strategies are risky. If Britain stays in the European Union it better gets some control over where all these radical Catholics are taking the continent. And if Britain withdraws from the European Union that decision might some day come to haunt them, as they have usually been the first target of a unified Europe. This is why Britain often adopted a policy to back the weakest power on the continent.
Religious extremism and concluding summary
It is the Vatican, together with a large chunk of its Catholic “black” nobility – most notably the Habsburgs – that has been dreaming of recreating the Holy Roman Empire. In an attempt to make that happen, after World War II, Count Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi and Otto von Habsburg (re)created their Paneuropa network across Europe in which many Opus Dei members and the more aristocratic Knights of Malta became involved. To accomplish their mission of rebuilding the old Holy Roman Empire, Opus Dei needed to get people of influence in their camp. That’s why they have always focused on recruiting politicians, bankers and other men of influence (217). However, if we look at the Belgian model, described earlier, it seems there are separate cells within these extremist institutes in which some of the more powerful members are lured. If they bite, there will be no turning back. Unfortunately, investigations into these parallel groups are always sabotaged and shut down, usually by people involved in them.
Le Cercle, founded in the 1950s, started out as a branch of this extremely conservative Vatican-Paneuropa network, and possibly as a counterweight to the liberal Anglo-American-oriented Bilderberg group. However, the Vatican always had support from influential persons in the United States, most notably leading figures in the CIA. With funds and leadership from these US officials, it helped to set up and maintain the Stay Behind networks, whose job to suppress internal “communosocialist” influences was at least as important as their stay behind function in case of a communist invasion. Le Cercle worked in synergy with the Stay Behind networks, bringing the hard-right, often CIA-supported elements within the national European governments closer together.
It remains a bit of a mystery who came up with the money to set up Le Cercle. It has been reported that the CIA funded most of the European movement in the decades after WWII through a network involving the Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation, the American Committee on United Europe (ACUE), and other fronts, switching at times their support for British policies to those of France (218). Details on CIA involvement in funding Le Cercle are missing, although Alan Clark did report in the early 1990s that the Agency was involved(219). This shouldn’t come as a surprise with all the reported Knights of Malta in the top levels of the CIA over the years: Donovan, Dulles, Angleton, McCone, Casey and Walters (acted as Casey’s representative at some point). The father of George H.W. Bush, another CIA head, has also been named a Knight of Malta while William Colby has been called a member of Opus Dei. Colby and Casey at some point began attending meeting of Le Cercle.
The presence of these reactionary Catholic organizations is quite common in Le Cercle. Membership in many cases is still not undisputed public knowledge, but accusations among the seventy or so known Cercle members are numerous. The following Cercle participants have been named as Opus Dei members. For details look in the individual biographies in the Cercle membership list.
- Otto von Habsburg
- Jean Violet
- Antoine Pinay
- Giulio Andreotti
- Monsignor Alberto Giovanetti
- William Colby
- Alois Mertes
- Franz Josef Strauss
- Federico Silva Munoz
In addition, Cercle member Robert Schuman is known to have been a close sympathizer of Opus Dei, although no one seems to be sure if he was a member.
Among the associates of Cercle members, there also are numerous accusations of Opus Dei involvement. Violet’s Belgian associates like Paul Vanden Boeynants and Baron de Bonvoisin are an example. Otto von Habsburg’s Paneuropa network is filled with them, not the least of them the Giscard d’Estaing family who wrote the original EU Constitution. Jacques Santer, a former long time prime minister of Luxembourg and president of the European Commissioner, is known to have been very friendly to Opus Dei. Santer sat on the board of Nadhmi Auchi’s General Mediterranean Holdings.
Others have also noticed the connection between Opus Dei and Le Cercle. Robert Hutchinson saw Le Cercle as an auxiliary organization of the Opus Dei-Paneuropa network. David Rockefeller, in his memoirs, hinted to the influence of Opus Dei in Le Cercle, or as he called it, the “Pesenti Group”, and indirectly painted Otto von Habsburg and Jean Violet as allies of Opus Dei (220). A particularly interesting comment from David Rockefeller is that he, as one the founders of Bilderberg and one of the best connected globalists in the world, supposedly was only told about the existence of Le Cercle in 1967, and only at the exact moment that he was recruited (221).
What is really amusing is that Brian Crozier is quoted in Wikipedia’s article on Opus Dei, stating that Opus Dei “is not, as its enemies either think or want others to think, a political party; nor is it a political pressure group…” This is just one of the numerous examples in which Crozier is technically correct, but is still trying to get people to draw the wrong conclusions (also notice the word “enemies”). Crozier is a really “reliable” source when you consider that he, a British intelligence agent, propagandist and Franco sympathizer, was deemed reliable enough to take over Le Cercle from its Opusian founders. But then again, nobody ever heard of Le Cercle.
Following now are the known Knights of Malta that can be found among the ranks of Le Cercle. Again, for details look in the individual biographies in the Cercle membership listattached to this article.
- Giulio Andreotti
- Edwin Feulner
- William Casey
- William Wilson
- Otto von Habsburg (honorary “professed”)
- Konrad Adenauer (honorary)
- Reinhard Gehlen (honorary)
- Antoine Pinay (honorary)
- Alain Poher (honorary)
Also, through J. Peter Grace and Americares, Cercle members General Stilwell and Zbigniew Brzezinski certainly were as close to the Knights of Malta as you can get without actually becoming a member. Many associates of the Cercle were also Knights of Malta. Examples are Licio Gelli, official head of the P2; Count Alexandre de Marenches, a rival of Jean Violet who set up the Safari Club with CIA knights; and Prince Valerio Borghese, who led the aborted 1970 coup in Italy on behalf of the CIA. Borghese’s closest associates were James Jesus Angleton and former Nazi General Otto Skorzeny, both also Knights of Malta.
Other Cercle members like Carlo Pesenti, Monsignor Brunello and Count Hans Huyn haven’t been named as members of Opus Dei or the Knights of Malta, but were so close to the Vatican’s reactionary establishment that it’s likely that some day they’ll also turn out to have belonged to one of these two groups. And if not, there are quite a number of other candidates in the Cercle ranks.
There also are three non-Catholic British Cercle participants that have become members of the Sacred Military Constantinian Order of Saint George, a Catholic templar order headed by Prince Carlo de Bourbon, the Duke of Calabria. Like Opus Dei and the Knights of Malta, any possible deeper purpose of this order is not public knowledge.
|Former Cercle president Jonathan Aitken seems to be the only person in Le Cercle involved with the Jesuits, which are generally seen as less reactionary than Opus Dei and the Knights of Malta. Additionally, a number of Cercle members have been involved with
Religions in Europe. Yellow is Islam, green is Russian Orthodox, Red is Roman Catholic and blue is Protestant/other. Especially in the blue countries many people are not religious anymore for several generations; they usually consider themselves atheist or are open to a variety of spiritual ideas, mainly dealing with life after death and paranormal abilities. So called “New Age” (Pagan) religions are virtually non-existent.
||institutions with strong links to the Moonie cult. Among them are the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, which counted the involvement of Brian Crozier, Edwin Feulner and Zbigniew Brzezinski; and the Global Economic Action Institute, of which the London branch was chaired by Julian Amery, head of Le Cercle at the time the story came out.
The picture that emerges here is one of religious fanaticism. At least 20 percent of the known members of Le Cercle belong to Opus Dei and-or the Knights of Malta, including most of the founders. And even those that do not belong to these organizations can be freakishly religious, like Colonel Billy McLean or the afore mentioned Jonathan Aitken. In the end, these people,
|even though they are more composed and better educated than the average fundamentalist Muslim, might well be just as hard to reason with.
But religious extremism isn’t the only thing that sketches the life of the average Cercle member. Taken together, Le Cercle is characterized by:
- an anti-democratic mindset
- illegal or covert arms sales
- undercover financial support
- money laundering
- drug trade
- organizing anti-communist, anti-socialist, and anti-nationalist coups
- organizing private intelligence and other covert action groups
- spreading of propaganda and disinformation
- a struggle for European unification
The usual excuse for projects like this is that these individuals are fighting the “bad guys” and therefore the end justifies the means. This is actually true in many cases, but what’s really interesting though is that the persons involved in these projects tend to moral degenerates themselves and in the end you can’t help but wonder if their own propaganda and covert operations contribute in keeping this worldwide circle of violence alive. It’s a mistake to think people like this have built the democracy we live in today. They are actually restrained by it. Democracy has been built through a combination of scientific achievements and subsequent uprisings of people who thought they should benefit from these improvements. Over a period of time a reading and writing middle class was built. However, science and technology have reached a level now where it becomes increasingly important for the average citizen to become aware of, not what’s going in the elected government, but what’s going on in the halls of the permanent government.
In case of Le Cercle, many leading members still seem to have the mentality of a historical person like King Ferdinand II, the Holy Roman Emperor who ordered the Spanish Inquisition and was largely responsible for the Thirty Years’ War. Ironically, this war ended with the Peace of Westphalia, responsible for the rise of the modern nation state, the end of the Holy Roman Empire and a severe decline in the influence of Otto von Habsburgs’ ancestors. If individuals like this get their way with Europe, life could some day become very depressing. And if you’re wondering if these people really are that dangerous, let’s recap one example mentioned earlier in this article.
“The most talked-about subject in Spain last week was something that did not happen: the failure of the Cabinet to pass a bill that would at last grant a measure of religious freedom to Spain’s tiny non-Catholic minority… For years, Spain’s non-Catholics have almost been non-people, barred from participating in the mainstream of Spanish life. They were, in fact, not even officially recognized as having been born, married or buried… Interior Minister Camilo Alonso Vega, 77, who as Spain’s top cop maintains that the Spanish are “the most unruly people in Europe”, argued that religious freedom would only stir up trouble… On a more philosophical level, Public Works Minister Federico Silva Munoz, 43, contended that granting religious liberty to minority sects would shatter Spain’s spiritual unity. The ministers connected with the military supported the views of Vega and Munoz…” (222)
Munoz, together with his good friend Fernandez de la Mora, was a Catholic extremists and the most die hard Francoist (fascist). At some point Munoz was invited to the Cercle. Soon thereafter his friend Fernandez de la Mora sets up the fascist propaganda rag Razon Espanola with financial support of the Bavarian, Opusian, Paneuropa clique consisting of Franz Josef Strauss, Otto von Habsburg, Count Hans Huyn (whose wife is a Habsburg descendant) and others. A few years earlier, The Times had reported on Strauss’ friendship with Munoz and Fernandez de la Mora, and Crozier immediately jumped in to defend his associates, claiming he had great respect for these individuals and that they were anything but fascist. Never mind that Crozier was an admirer of Franco and that a good number of his Cercle associates have worked with fascists during and after WWII, or were supporters of the Shah of Iran (including himself), Pinochet, Mobutu and the apartheid regimes in southern Africa.
So just remember, these are dangerous people and they are far too influential for us not to know about their activities.
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p.191: “The inspirer and long-serving organiser of the Pinay Cercle was Jean Violet…”
||1994, R.T. Naylor (Professor of Economics at McGill University), ‘Hot Money and the Politics of Debt’, p. 258: “Violet’s political formation came in the 1930s in Le Comite Secret pour l’Action Revolutionnaire (CSAR). A far-right political cult modeled on a Freemasonic movement, complete with Masonic-style rites and rituals…, CSAR was sort of a predessor of Licio Gelli’s P-2. It was intensely secretive in all but its admiration of Franco and Mussolini, and after the war some of its members were accused of being Nazi collaborators.”Source cited by Naylor is 1984, Pierre Pean, ‘V: Enquete sur l ‘affaire des ‘avions renifleurs”, p. 90. French author Philippe Bourdrel did a lot of work on CSAR.
||November 16, 1946, The Nation, ‘The People’s Front’: “The French Synarchists founded several other secret organizations, of which the most important was the “Cagoule” (C. S. A. R.”Comité secret d’action revolutionnaire), an extreme rightist military outfit whose members held commanding positions in the army. Pétain and his adviser, Loustaneau-Lacau, joined the C. S. A. R.”
As I can’t go through all the French and Spanish sources to write a separate article, I’ll just dump some historical information on the political aspect of the Synarchist Movement of Empire in this endnote.
*) September 9, 2005, comment of Pierre Beaudry of Executive Intelligence Review on the first version of the article on Le Cercle: “You have not mentioned anything about the Synarchy International in connection with Jean Violet and Antoine Pinay [never heard of it at the time]… the CSAR that Jean Violet came out of was, in reality, the revolutionary arm of the Synarchy International… Also, it was the top synarchist banker, Francois Bloch-Lainé, of the Lazard Frères, of the Banque de Paris et des Pays Bas, and Banque Worms, who deployed Antoine Pinay to become Finance Minister in the government of de Gaulle, in 1958.” I later ran into Hippolyte Worms (supposedly one of the original Synarchist SME members) via Cercle member Georges Albertini, an intelligence associate of Jean Violet. I also came across Jean Violet’s good friend Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, whose father worked closely with Francois Bloch-Lainé. I think it’s interesting that my work usually parallels that of EIR, although they usually draw conclusions I cannot support without far more evidence. EIR sees an organization like Le Cercle as the “right hand” of the Synarchy International. I’m not convinced of that, although I don’t discount it either. I’m also not convinced of the fact that Synarchism is studied these days in high society, although it is certain that the Martinist and Synarchist Order still exists today in countries as Spain and France, and that they have recruited at least some important members. One of the things that struck me, as pretty much the last quick background check before ending this article, is the following text from LaRouche (2003, ‘A short definition of Synarchism’):“According to another EIR article, the occult order behind Synarchism, known as Martinism, has an outer veneer of Catholicism, and a rotten core: Martinism, a mocking perversion of Catholicism…” This is one of those instances in which you don’t know if EIR has based their claims on documentation, witnesses or personal opinion, but this would have been my guess after seeing the strong correlation between the Vatican (Opus Dei; SMOM) – Paneuropa network, supposedly former Synarchist members, and the fact that Synarchism existed/exists in the strongest Catholic milieu possible.
*) November 9, 1946, The Nation, ‘The People’s Front’: “Synarchism [is] not to be confused with the organization that has spread over Mexico and found its roots in local political rivalries and clerical-agrarian reaction. Synarchism as a worldwide conspiracy is attempting to take over the functions of the fascists in those countries where the latter cannot operate openly or to ally itself with existing fascist groups. Michael Sordet, in a remarkably documented article, The Secret League of Monopoly Capitalism, published in the scholarly Swiss review, Schweiner Annalen (No. 2, 1946- 47), gives us a full description of the synarchist movement in Europe. He describes the synarchists as “the representatives of international high finance,” who not only helped to bring fascism to power in Germany and to provoke the war, from which they reaped enormous profits, but who contributed to the defeat of France and the rise of Petain and his traitorous clique… Le Mouvement Synarchique d’Empire (M. S. E.) was founded in Paris in 1922… Its original promoters numbered seven, three of whom have since been identified as Baron Leo de Nervo, with connections in some fifty financial and heavy-industry enterprises… Maxime Renaudin, a financier known to represent international Catholic interests, and Jean Coutrot, a close friend of Marshal Petain. The M. S. E. is rigidly aristocratic in structure: members are recruited in powerful big-business circles and are expected to enrol new adherents from among their friends. Every precaution is taken to insure secrecy: if a person seems desirable because of his position, he is subjected without his knowledge to careful investigation that may last for several years before he is asked to join. The probe covers the most intimate details of his life-family relationships, love affairs, hobbies, opinions expressed in conversation, emotional stability, and so on. The candidate has no contact with the organization until the day he is invited to sign up; at that moment he makes the acquaintance of a single member, the person who solicits his application. Then he receives a copy of the “Pacte synarchiste revolutionnaire,” a hundred-page booklet, bound with a sealed gold band which bears two identifying numbershis own and that of his sponsor. About the organizational set-up and the policy-making bodies, he is told nothing. Frenchmen in general learned of the existence of the M. S. E. in the summer of 1941 when Jean Coutrot died under mysterious circumstances which were never cIeared up. A collaborationist newspaper, l’Appel, which carded the announcement of his death, revealed at the same time that most of the ministers and generals in the Vichy entourage belonged to this secret society. Coutrot had told an intimate friend that the directing body of the M. S. E. consisted of four people, but he mentioned no names. What are the contents of the “Pacte synarchiste revolutionnaire,” so vigilantly controlled? The most important section provides for the division of the world into five great federations imperiales, or societe mineures des nations. Metropolitan Britain and its colonies and dominions make up one. The federation of pan-American nations comprises the United States and the other countries of the Western continent with the exception of Canada. The pan-Eurasian federation consists of the Soviet Union, including all its Asiatic republics but excluding Finland and the Baltic states. The pan-European- African federation takes in Western Europe, including Finland, the Scandinavian and Baltic countries, and the African continent excluding the British colonies. China and Japan head the pan-Asiatic federation.”
*) November 16, 1946, The Nation, ‘The People’s Front’: “Despite the highly secret character of the M. S. E., the following men have been identified as members: Paul Baudoin [named as a major Opus Dei player], director of the Banque d’Indo-Chine and a friend of Mussolini, who with the help of the attractive Heltne de Portes became right-hand adviser to Premier Paul Reynaud in the last months before France’s capitulation; Jacques Gudrard, a banker who held the post of Ambassador to Lisbon under the Vichy regime; Jacques Barnaud of the Banque Worms, a great favorite with Goring, who was responsible for handlng over to the Germans the major French chemical industries headed by the Francolor trust; Jacques Benoit- Mechin, author of a book on the Reichswehr, who was rewarded for his services to the German army by being named a director of the Banque Worms after the 1940 armistice; Pierre Pucheu, Vichy Minister of the Interior and organizer of the Franco-German steel cartel. Today the M. S. E. is attempting to restore those intimate ties between French and German industrialists which it had so painstakingly built up before the war… In his article in the Schweizer Anmalen, Sordet hints that the main base of operations of the Synarchists is shifting from Europe to the United States, and he names Admiral Leahy, Robert Murphy, and du Pont de Nemours not as members but as individuals they hope to use to make contact with influential Catholic and industrial groups here.”
*) 1969, William L. Shirer, ‘The Collapse of the Third Republic’, p. 218-219:“Later Coutrot would be generally credited with being the man behind a technocratic movement called Synarchie, which to this day, despite many studies of it, remains – at least to this writer, who has pondered most of them – somewhat of a mystery… That some Synarchists organized as far back as 1922 a secret society with revolutionary aims has been established. It was called “Le Mouvement Synarchique d’Empire,” or MSE, and its secret “Pact,” containing “Thirteen Fundamental Points and 598 Propositions” for the Synarchist revolution, was discovered by the Vichy police in 1941 and published after the war… so far as one can make out from reading the lengthy document the movement would set up a sort of super monopoly capitalism, with competition abolished and endless plans drawn up for production and distribution, the whole – as well as the government – to be run by knowledgeable technocrats… That at one time the MSE was linked to the terrorist Cagoule [CSAR] also seems clear… this secret society of technocrats never got close to staging a revolution.”
||1997, Robert Hutchinson, ‘Their Kingdom Come – Inside the Secret World of Opus Dei’, p. 155: “Rumours of Nazi collaboration led to Violet’s arrest following the war, but he was quickly released ‘on orders from above’. Source cited by Naylor is 1984, Pierre Pean, ‘V: Enquete sur l ‘affaire des ‘avions renifleurs”, p. 41.
||October 1989, #18, Lobster Magazine, ‘Pinay 2: Jean Violet’: “In 1951 he was approached by Antoine Pinay, who was a cabinet minister at that point. On behalf of some Swiss lawyer Pinay sought to clear up the matter of a Geneva-based firm that had seen its factory in Germany seized by the Nazis during the war. Violet resolved the problem and Pinay was so satisfied he recommend him to the new French intelligence organization, SDECE.” The author of the article took this information from French authors Roger Faligot and Pascal Krop. Information in part confirmed by: Brian Crozier, Free Agent, p. 191-192: “The inspirer and long-serving organiser of the Pinay Cercle was Jean Violet, who for many years had been retained by the SDECE as Special Advocate… He [Violet] had developed a close friendship with Antoine Pinay, who had served as French Premier in 1951 under the unstable Fourth Republic.”
||1997, Robert Hutchinson, ‘Their Kingdom Come’, p. 155: “He joined Antoine Pinay’s entourage in 1955. By this time Violet had become close to several Opusian personalities, among them Alfredo Sanchez Bella and Otto von Habsburg.” Corroborating information: December 2001, Skepsis.nl, Sniffer Planes – Grandiose Pseudo-Scientific Swindle (translation from Dutch to English): “The Count [de Villegas] was a member of the Brussels-based Académie Européenne de Sciences Politiques, a kind of branch of the ultraconservative Paneuropa Union established by Otto von Habsburg, but of which Violet was the driving force, and where you could find Father Dubois and Bernard Marcken.” Brian Crozier confirms Violet’s role in Académie Européenne de Sciences Politiques, but never mentioned it was part of the Paneuropa network. Both authors seem to have taken this information from Pierre Pean, ‘V: Enquete sur l ‘affaire des ‘avions renifleurs” (1984). Furthermore, in his biography David Rockefeller presents Otto von Habsburg, Jean Violet, and Monsignor Alberto Giovanetti of Opus Dei as the reactionary triumvirate within Le Cercle in the late 1960s. Therefore claims that Violet joined Opus Dei, met up with Otto von Habsburg and Sanchez Bella, and acted as one of their agents in organizations like Le Cercle, Académie Européenne, and Cercle des Nations is more than likely.
||1997, Robert Hutchinson, ‘Their Kingdom Come’, p. 153: “In 1949, the year after the Communist takeover of Czechoslovakia, he [Alfredo Sanchez Bella] co-founded with Archduke Otto von Habsburg the European Centre of Documentation and Information (CEDI), whose objective was to construct around the Spanish Borbóns a federation of European states united in Christianity and anti-Communism. This sounded very much like a modern resurrection of the Holy Roman Empire over which Charles V had reigned.”
Also: 1990, Hugo Gijssels, ‘De Bende & Co.’, p. 174 (translated from Dutch to English): “CEDI was established in 1949 and is headed by Otto von Habsburg, who is chairman for life.”
||November 4, 1969, Greeley Daily Tribune, ‘Economic, Social Advancement Aims of New Franco Cabinet’: “[Alfredo] Sanchez Bella, aside from his own talents as a diplomat, is the brother of Florencio Sanchez Bella, leader of the Opus Dei in Spain.”
||1997, Robert Hutchinson, ‘Their Kingdom Come’, p. 155: “In his journeys, Violet came to know Father Yves-Marc Dubois, a French Dominican who was in charge of international relations for his Order. But Dubois represented more than the foreign policy interests of the black friars of Faubourg Saint Honoré. He was described as a ‘member of the Vatican’s intelligence network, if not its head’… When in Paris, he [Dubois] stayed in the Dominican chapter house at 222 rue Faubourg Saint Honoré, in the Eighth Arrondissement, within walking distance of Jean Violet’s apartment at 46 rue de Provence, in the Ninth Arrondissement.” Original source: 1984, Pierre Pean, ‘V: Enquete sur l ‘affaire des ‘avions renifleurs”, p. 49
||* June 29, 1997, The Independent, ‘Aitken dropped by the Right’s secret club’:“Formed in the Fifties, Cercle was intended to cement Franco-German relations, as a buffer to Soviet aggression during the Cold War.”
* Sunday Observer on April 6, 2003: “Founded in the 1950s by France’s Antoine Pinay and German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer Le Cercle…”
* June 18, 2004, Chancellery of HRH Crown Prince Alexander II of Yugoslavia, Reception in honor of the “Le Cercle” conference: “Le Cercle was founded in the 1950′s by the former French Prime Minister Antoine Pinay, and Konrad Adenauer…”
* September 5, 2004, Sunday Times, ‘Le Cercle of the elite’: “The club, which has close links to the intelligence services, was founded in the 1950s by former French prime minister Antoine Pinay and former German chancellor Konrad Adenauer.”
* Also, David Rockefeller in his memoirs claimed he was recruited in 1967 and that Kissinger had been attending earlier meetings of the Cercle. Therefore the Pinay Circle could not have been organized in 1969.
||April 1986, Issue 11, ‘Appendix 2: the Pinay Circle’: “The Pinay Circle was set up in 1969 around the former Prime Minister of France, Antoine Pinay. Pinay was very old and seems to have been little more than a figurehead. Its chief fundraiser and leading light is the former lawyer, Jean Violet.”
||1990, Hugo Gijssels, ‘De Bende & Co.’, p. 174 (translated from Dutch to English):“Paul Vankerkhoven, renowned member of the Ordre du Rouvre, establishes in 1969 the ‘Ligue Internationale de la Liberté (LIL), the Belgian branch of the ‘World Anti-Communist League’ (WACL). That same year he establishes in Brussels the select but controversial Cercle des Nations… possibly more important is his membership of the notorious extreme-right ‘Centre Européen de Documentation et Information’ (CEDI) of which Vankerkhoven is secretary-general.”
||1990, Hugo Gijssels, ‘De Bende & Co.’, p. 177
||The (2nd) Baron Kindersley appears on a January 1973 officers list of The Pilgrims of Great Britain. His name disappeared in 1976, the year that he died. Appointment to the Pilgrims board usually is for life.
||2003, Christopher Booker & Richard North, ‘The Great Deception, The secret history of the European Union’, p. 43: “… Monnet met up again with Arthur Salter. Their first encounter had been in London in 1914…” Christopher Booker, an author of several books, has written for the Sunday Telegraph since 1990 and was a founding director of Private Eye. Dr. Richard North has been a research director for the (eurosceptic) Europe of Democracies and Diversities group in the European Parliament. This book contains quite a bit of information on the life of Monnet.
||1981, Carroll Quigley, ‘The Anglo-American Establishment’ (digital version, which is not complete): “In 1936, at least eleven out of twenty-six members of the council were of the Milner Group. These included Lord Astor (chairman), L. Curtis, G.M. Gathorne-Hardy, Lord Hailey, H.D. Henderson, Stephen King-Hall, Mrs. Alfred Lyttelton, Sir Neill Malcolm, Lord Meston, Sir Arthur Salter, J.W. Wheeler-Bennett, E.L. Woodward, and Sir Alfred Zimmern.” A reasonably detailed history on Arthur Salter has been compiled in Monnet’s Cercle biography.
||January 21, 1930, New York Times, ‘E. Walker as head of Transamerica’: “Mr. Giannini will resign his present office and become chairman of the advisory committee of the corporation at the annual meeting of Feb. 8. Mr. Walker, after becoming chairman of the board, will remain chairman of the executive committee. He will resign the presidency of the Bancamerica-Blair Corporation. Jean Monnet of Bancamerica-Blair, will become vice-chairman of the Transamerica board.”
December 10, 1931, New York Times, : “A. P. Glannini announced tonight that he personally would head a “fight to the finish” to oust Elisha Walker, chairman of the Transamerica Corporation, and “Wall Street domination” from the corporation which he founded. He made the statement after he had read a letter from Mr. Walker and James A. Bacigalupi to Transamerica’s stockholders. He called the letter “an attack on my personal honesty and integrity”… He said the letter had been timed “to catch me unaware” as it was not released for publication until after he had left San Francisco tonight for Ventura and Santa Barbara, where he planned to carry on the battle for proxies on behalf of Associated Stockholders.”
Giannini won his Transamerica fight in February 1932, which is when Walker had to resign as chairman. Monnet seems to have been fired at the same time. Monnet was also fired as a director of the Transamerica-controlled Bancamerica-Blair Corporation in March 1932.
||2003, Charles D. Ellis, James R. Vertin, ‘Wall Street People: True Stories of the Great Barons of Finance’, Volume 2, p. 28-30 (biography of Andre Meyer): “He brought with him, as Meyer knew he would, a network of contacts that was the envy of almost every investment banker in America. He was a director of Allied Chemical & Dye and American Steel Foundries, and was the main American adviser for Belgium’s great industrial dynasties, the Solvays and the Boëls. What’s more, he was the key investment banker for many of America’s leading glass companies. His prestige was such that wherever he went, this business followed… Murnane, in fact, was the only other individual at Lazard, other than Pierre David-Weill, whom Meyer could or would accept as a peer. He needed George Murnane, a lot more than Murnane needed him.”
Additional information in Monnet’s Cercle biography.
||2003, Christopher Booker & Richard North, ‘The Great Deception, The secret history of the European Union’, p. 21: “Following his lucrative spell in China, Monnet’s career as a merchant banker had continued to be murky. On his return to America he had been investigated for tax evasion. In 1938 his company company had even come under suspicion by the FBI for having laundered Nazi money, although this inquiry was called off without any charges being laid.”
||1976, Antony C. Sutton, ‘Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler’
||2005, Pierre Beaudry of Executive Intelligence Review, Synarchy Movement of Empire (Draft), The Mennevee documents on the Synarchy, Book IV: “Joseph H. Retinger was born in Krakow in 1888 into a Polish family of Austrian descent. His family included no less than 9 University Professors and a Nobel Prize winner. Educated in a very strict Catholic observance, Retinger wanted to become a priest at the age of 17, but instead, he decided to become a Polish Secret Agent working for a so-called “Polish Independence.”… At the age of four, Joseph’s father died and a friend of the family, Count Andrei Zamoyski, a very high level Polish aristocrat, took the child under his tutelage, and brought him to Paris where he lived as a French citizen. Count Zamoyski had married Caroline de Bourbon, princess of the Two Sicilies, whose Spanish ascendancy is also related to the French Bourbon family… .” Most of his contacts in Paris, London, and Munich, during the 1909-1911 period, were aristocrats and oligarchs: the Marquis Boni de Castellane, Lord Charles Beresford, the Count de Castries (of Dien Bien Phu fame), Marshal Lyautey (famous for his Action Francaise failed coup of 1934), the Duchess of Ruthland, etc. were the people he worked for. In 1911, he was brought to London to study at the London School of Economics, where he was recruited as a British intelligence agent…” Retinger’s work has mainly been in line with the Anglo-American interests, but at one point he did propose a plan to merge Austria, Hungary (like the old Austro-Hungarian empire) and Poland as a tripartite monarchy under the guidance of the Jesuit Order. He also was a Roman Catholic with good connections to the Jesuit Order. Just an all round strange guy.
||2003, Christopher Booker & Richard North, ‘The Great Deception, The secret history of the European Union’, p. 43: “Shortly after The Hague Congress, two of the most active campaigners for integration, Josef Retinger and Churchill’s son-in-law Duncan Sandys, went to America to lobby for support for their campaign for European unity. Here they met two key figures, William J. ‘Wild Bill’ Donovan, founder in 1947 of the CIA [head OSS, SMOM], and his colleague Allen Dulles, later to become head of the CIA under President Eisenhower [OSS chief, SMOM]…A new organization was set up, the American Committee on United Europe (ACUE). From this time on, as academic research has established, the ACUE was used as a conduit to provide covert CIA funds, augmented by contributions from private foundations such as the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Institute, to promote the State Department’s obsession with a united Europe, in what one historian has called a’liberal conspiracy’. Over the next few years, ACUE funding was secretly channelled to a range of individuals and organisations working for European integration, from politicians such as Paul-Henri Spaak and trade unions to such influential British magazines as Lord Layton’s The Economist and the intellectual monthly Encounter. However, the major beneficiary of ACUE funding was the European Movement. Between 1949 and 1960, it was kept afloat almost entirely on $4 million of CIA money, these contributions amounting to between half and two-thirds of the Movement’s income. ACUE funds were also used for a range of other purposes in Europe, including the financing of anti-Communist parties. In 1948, for instance, the CIA paid $10 million to support the Italian electoral campaign of Alcide de Gasperi a staunch supporter of European integration. This substantial contribution was intended to help avert an Italian civil war in which the Communists might prevail.” Information on the American Committee on United Europe (ACUE) was taken from the 2001 book ‘The Hidden Hand’ from Richard J Aldrich, a professor of politics at Nottingham University who had acquired a load of newly declassified files. June 24, 2001, The Mail on Sunday, ‘CIA supported pro-Euro group’: “AMERICA’S Central Intelligence Agency secretly funded the European integration movement and undermined British opposition, it can be revealed. Newly declassified files show the American secret service put at least $4 million – the equivalent of $28 million today – into the movement in the post-war period when it was on the verge of collapse. At the same time, it also provided secret backing for a programme to undermine staunch resistance to the plan in Britain from Labour and Conservative Governments. With the Anglo-American ‘special relationship’, the United States has often been seen as the antidote to European federalism. But it had a different agenda during the Cold War, when the CIA wanted a rapid approach to Western European integration as part of a strategy to combat the threat of Soviet expansion. By 1953, a top secret CIA report judged the acceleration of European unity to be one of its most successful covert operations. Details of the massive American interference in the creation of modern Europe are revealed in a new book, The Hidden Hand: Britain, America And Cold War Secret Intelligence, written by Richard J Aldrich, professor of politics at Nottingham University, and published by John Murray. In Washington, the European Movement was seen as the brainchild of Winston Churchill, who in 1943 offered his vision of a United Europe. But by 1950 Churchill and his son-in-law, Cabinet Minister Duncan Sandys, were believed to be ‘dragging their feet’. When Sandys tried to disband the European Movement, the American Committee on United Europe (ACUE), led by Allen Dulles, later head of the CIA, forced him to stand down as its president. French politicians took over the lead role and, with ACUE help, set up a secretariat in Brussels with the goals of a free trade area using a single currency. The ACUE believed that: ‘Britain will be forced sooner or later, and in a greater or lesser degree, to come along.’”
||2003, Christopher Booker & Richard North, ‘The Great Deception, The secret history of the European Union’, p. 58.
||July 25, 1969, Time Magazine, ‘Seeking Unity–Slowly’: “They were all there, those aging statesmen who years ago committed their dreams to the ideal of European unity. Jean Monnet, 80, “the father of the Common Market,” last week convened a session of his nonofficial Action Committee for a United States of Europe in Brussels. Former Common Market President Walter Hallstein was there, along with veteran French Politicians Antoine Pinay and Maurice Faure and dozens of other ranking European statesmen. Together, they constitute a sort of European shadow government. They had come to Brussels in an attempt to spur Common Market bureaucrats and the respective ministers of the Six (Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, The Netherlands and West Germany) to start immediate negotiations to admit Britain to the economic community.”
||2003, Christopher Booker & Richard North, ‘The Great Deception, The secret history of the European Union’, p. 89-91.
||November 29, 2002, the Telegraph, ‘The Earl of Perth’ (obituary): “John David Drummond was born on May 13 1907 into a family of Hungarian origin which, according to tradition, is descended from a Drummond who arrived in Scotland from Hungary during the 11th century… [his father] served as private secretary to the Prime Minister Herbert Asquith and attended the Paris peace conference in 1919, before heading the League of Nations until 1933 [with Monnet under him]; his final post was as Ambassador in Rome… [David] went up to Trinity College, Cambridge, before joining J Henry Schroder, the merchant bank. For a time he worked with Monnet, then a financial adviser to the Chinese government… Perth was a keen Europhile. Deeply conscious of his father’s role on the international stage as the first secretary-general of the League of Nations, he arranged a meeting in his flat during the early 1960s between Edward Heath, the minister responsible for the EEC negotiations, and Jean Monnet, the “father” of European union… He was a keen promoter of Anglo-American relations, taking holidays in Florida and for three years chairing the Ditchley Foundation… director of the Royal Bank of Scotland… sworn of the Privy Council in 1957. As a prominent Roman Catholic, he represented Britain at the last and most solemn of nine Requiem Masses for Pope Pius XII in Rome in 1958. He went again in 1963 to represent the Queen at the Requiem for Pope John XXIII. He was for some years the Catholic vice-president of the Council of Christians and Jews.”
||Known through his membership in the Roxburghe Club, ironically a book club. Membership list taken from: 1999, Donald Young and Quentin Keynes, ‘The search for the source of the Nile – Correspondence between captain Richard Burton, Captain John Speke and others, from Burton’s unpublished East African Letter Book’ (“Dedicated and presented to the president and members of the Roxburghe Club”). Can be found at http://www.cypherpress.com/books/burton/burton.pdf. Membership has been quite secretive and very few references to the important members have existed, until this booklet was uploaded that is. The important families tend to be in the club for generation after generation. Some of these families also meet each other at the Other Club (July 29, 1997, The Times, Secret members of the Other Club).
* As for Paul Mellon, the late Pilgrims Society member: February 3, 1999, The Times, Paul Mellon obituary: “Mellon was widely honoured by academic and sporting institutions, including Oxford, Cambridge, the Jockey Club and the Royal Veterinary College. As one of the great book collectors of the world, he was a member of both the Grolier Society and the Roxburghe Club.”
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p.192
||The Bruges Group, ‘Franco-German Friendship and the Destination of Federalism’. In this lengthy article, largely about de Gaulle’s policies towards Britain, de Gaulle is quoted as having said: “England is, in fact, insular. She is maritime, she is linked to her exchanges, her markets, her supply lines to the most distant countries. She pursues essentially industrial and commercial activities and only slightly agricultural ones. She has, in all her doings, very marked, very original habits and traditions. In short, England’s nature, England’s structure, England’s very situation differs profoundly from those of the continentals.”
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p. 29-33. The full name of “Le Centre” initially was Centre d’Observation du Mouvement des Idées. It brought together members of German, Dutch and French intelligence, together with a select number (30-40) of anti-communist scholars, businessmen and-or journalists. The Dutch intelligence officers were founders and leading officers in the Dutch Stay Behind network (Gladio) and the most important German General attending the “colloques” answered directly to General Reinhard Gehlen, the former Nazi spy master. SDECE agent Antoine Bonnemaison, founder of “Le Centre”, met Brian Crozier on a plane in 1958. Crozier noticed that Bonnemaison was reading an “unusually warm” thank you letter from General Raoul Salan for his talks about psychological warfare to French troops in Algeria. A few years later Salan would be one the primary founders of the terrorist organization OAS that tried to assassinate de Gaulle and destabilize the cease fire in Algeria. Le Centre was founded in 1955 and ran until 1963, after which it was killed by de Gaulle. Bonnemaison then revived the group as Centre d’Observation du Mouvement des Idées. Funds now came from private French industrial enterprises as Péchiney and Air Liquide. After this privatization the membership became almost exclusively French, with Crozier usually as the only foreign participant.
||Ibid., p. 77
||Ibid., p. 191-192
||Ibid., p. 193
||Ibid., p. 97
||July 22, 2005, The Guardian, François Duchêne obituary
The information about the Trilateral Commission came from the membership lists.
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p. 191: “In fact, neither Marenches nor Dickie Franks ever attended a Pinay Cercle meeting during the years I was involved with it: between 1971 and 1985.”
||Ibid., p. 97
||November 1988, Issue 17, David Teacher for Lobster Magazine, ‘The Pinay Circle and Destabilisation in Europe’ (quoting from the 1980 Hans Langemann papers):“Gehlen, who was always interested in the undertaking [of the Pinay Circle], its figures, its personalities and its results, succeeded in recruiting Violet as a special agent and granted him 6000 DM a month for many years. He also claimed that this sum had been agreed with the former head of the SDECE, General Jacquier because Violet is also receiving the same sum from the SDECE.” Teacher translated this from publications in Der Spiegel, No. 37, 1982, ‘Victory for Strauss’.
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p. 62: “… in the late 1950s during my Economist years, … I had been among the priviliged few journalists invited to his [Jock Whitney's] small lunches at the Connaught Hotel, and the more formal receptions at his residence in Regent’s Park.”
||John Hay Whitney’s name appears as a vice president on the officers list of The Pilgrims of the United States until January 1982. He would die a few months later.
||This whole bio is described in Crozier’s book Free Agent, including his involvement with Richard Mellon Scaife. Only the Foreign Affairs Research Institute (FARI) isn’t mentioned.
||Ibid., p. 96
||1986, Antony Sutton, ‘The Best Enemy Money Can Buy’. For examples and a partial timeline click here.
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p. 182: “[Reagan] also got to know Nelson Rockefeller when the latter was Governor of New York State, and shared my view that Nelson was more intelligent than his banker brother, David. He was critical of the role of David Rockefeller’s Chase Manhattan Bank in easing technology transfers to the Soviet Union. Reagan also mentioned , with mild distaste, the role of the Trilateral Commission (in which David Rockefeller, Brzezinski and, incidentally, Edward Heath and Willy Brandt were involved) in sponsoring Jimmy Carter as a potential presidential candidate.”
* The following report was written by computer expert Dominic Paul Baron, and was prepared for the London-based Foreign Affairs Research Institute of Crozier, Amery, and other Cercle members. August 15, 1978, Chronicle Telegram, ‘U.S. vulnerable in computer war’: “The United States, moreover, has been far too eager to supply the Soviet Union with sophisticated computer technology and training, Baron believes. “Computer companies in the West fall over each other in their enthusiasm to compete for the favors of the Soviet buying agencies,”, writes Baron. “The western businessman’s sheer naivete in dealing with the astute Soviet negotiators is quite depressing.””
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p. 134: February 5, 1978, Time: “A Soviet KGB agent told a Time correspondent in Cairo last week: ‘Of all the operations that the Soviet Union and the US have conducted against each other, none have benefitted the KGB as much as the campaign to discredit the CIA. In our wildest scenarios, we could never have anticipated such a plus for our side. It’s the kind of gift all espionage men dream about. Today our boys have it a lot easier, and we didn’t have to lift a finger. You did all our work for us.’” A quote that couldn’t have come at a more convenient time for the CIA as opinion of the CIA was at an all time low at this point.
||October 10, 1996, The Daily Mail, ‘MoD ‘scapegoat’ is cleared of karate killing’:“The manslaughter conviction of a SAS-trained former Army information officer who claims he was the victim of a dirty tricks campaign by the security services was quashed by the Court of Appeal yesterday. In a damning judgment, the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Bingham [Pilgrims Society], cleared 53-year-old Colin Wallace of the killing of antiques dealer Jonathan Lewis, who was found drowned in a river near his home in Arundel, West Sussex, in 1980… Outside court yesterday, Mr Wallace claimed the prosecution had been `disgraceful and totally dishonest’ and that the police had suppressed evidence showing that Mr Lewis was killed by criminal members of the antiques trade in Brighton… The decision was the latest victory for the former Ministry of Defence official who claims that he may have been framed for the manslaughter, that he was thrown out of the Army for refusing to join an MI5 plot to topple Harold Wilson’s government and whose warnings about child abuse at the infamous Kincora home in Belfast were ignored to protect an intelligence mole. Despite years of cover-up and government stonewalling, his allegations have one by one been vindicated… He also claimed to have worked in Northern Ireland on what he termed a ‘psychological operation’, which effectively involved inventing stories and planting them with journalists.”
||March 6, 2003, De Standaard (prominent Belgian newspaper), ‘Baron de Bonvoisin again to court’: “Yesterday, the Black Baron Benoit de Bonvoisin, with three of his compagnions, has been referred to the Brussels penal judge in the affair of forged KGB documents. Together with de Bonvoisin, his brother Pierre, Eric Van de Weghe and Christian Amory have to stand trial.”
http://www.standaard.be/Artikel/Detail.aspx?artikelid=dst06032003_035. Turns out I can’t access the full article anymore now that I wanted to translate it. Can’t buy it either from the Netherlands without taking a full subscription. Amory, like Baron de Bonvoisin, featured prominently in the Gang of Nijvel affair, a program to destabilize the Belgium state.
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p. 243: “… the ‘Coalition of Peace to Strength’. Among them were personal friends of mine, including the late General Richard Stilwell and Richard Perle…”
||Ibid., p. 193: “In Pinay’s day, the old man himself presided over the meetings, but the chairmanship of each session was shared out among others, including Pesenti, Sir Peter Tennant, and myself.”
||Franz-Josef Bach’s leading role in the Cercle from at least 1980 to 1991 can be concluded from the following two sources:
1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p. 193: “In 1980, Violet, who had serious health problems, asked me to take over the Pinay Cercle. In practice, I mostly shared the burden with a leading German member of the Cercle, Franz-Josef Bach…”
1993, Alan Clark, ‘Diaries’, p. 369 (About Clark’s 1991 experience with the Cercle): “The Cercle, an Atlanticist Society of right-wing dignitaries, largely compered by Julian Amery and Herr Franz-joseph Bach…”
||June 10, 1975, New York Times, ‘Northrop Apologizes on Saudi Bribes; Senator Church Urges Sales Reforms’
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p. 193: “In 1980, Violet, who had serious health problems, asked me to take over the Pinay Cercle.“
||June 29, 1997, the Independent, ‘Aitken dropped by the Right’s secret club’: “For the past few years Mr Aitken has been chairman of Le Cercle…” Alan Clark’s 1991 description of Aitken seems to indicate Aitken was being groomed to take over the Cercle.
||Lamont’s biography at Benador Associates, for example: “Among his numerous international activities, he has since 1996 been Chairman of Le Cercle…” The info on Le Cercle in his biography on this site seems to have expanded since the last time I checked it. Maybe the webmaster updated it after I mailed him, asking if he had more info. No response, as usual with Le Cercle.
||Louis de Rothschild and Max Warburg sponsored Coudenhove’s initial Paneuropa idea. 1984, prof. Kees van der Pijl, ‘The Making of an Atlantic Ruling Class’. His original sources:
A) 1925, Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, ‘Praktischer Idealismus’
B) 1958, Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, ‘Eine Idee erobert Europa. Meine Lebenserinnerungen’
||March 1986, EIR, Special Report, ‘Moscow’s Secret Weapon: Ariel Sharon and the Israeli Mafia’: “A third meeting scheduled for Nov.15, 1982 was to include Sharon, Kissinger, Lord Harlech (David Ormsby-Gore), Prince Johannes von Thurn und Taxis, former Secretary of State Alexander Haig, Lord Carrington, British Member of Parliament Julian Amery, Ernst Kux of Neue Zeurcher Zeitung, Robert Moss, Sir Edmund Peck, Armin Gutowski of the Hamburg West Germany World Economic Archives, and former British intelligence Mideast station chief Nicholas Elliot, then a senior MI-6 official. The Nov.15 meeting discussed the implementation of the New Venice project, through specific investments to be made in Israel, which was to significantly include massive investments in the West Bank. An EIR exposé of the meetings in early 1983, and opposition to the Begin government’s West Bank and related policies by President Reagan, forced a delay in implementation of the policies. “ Have no idea what the original source is.
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p. 193: “Within the wider Cercle, a smaller gathering called the Pinay Group met on occasion to discuss possible action.”
||November 1988, Issue 17, Lobster Magazine, ‘Brian Crozier, the Pinay Circle and James Goldsmith’ (quoting and translating from the Langemann papers): “One recent development is the establishment within the Circle of a command staff or of an inner circle which then works out particularly suitable means for action on current political questions.”
||2002, David Rockefeller, ‘Memoirs’, p. 412-413: “Bilderberg overlapped for a time with my membership in a relatively obscure but potentially even more controversial body known as the Pesenti Group. I had first learned about it in October 1967 when Carlo Pesenti… took me aside…”
||November 1988, Issue 17, Lobster Magazine, ‘Brian Crozier, the Pinay Circle and James Goldsmith’ (quote is from a 1972 ISC report): “Mr Crozier said that M. Violet, who had commissioned the report on behalf of the Pinay Committee, had come to London with M. Pinay during that week… Pinay had given Mr Crozier documents relating to their next project. M. Pinay had presented a copy of European Security and the Soviet Problem to President Nixon and Dr Kissinger in America. Earlier that week he had had a three hour session with President Pompidou, during which time he had presented him with a copy of the publication in French. Maitre Violet had also presented copies to a number of German politicians, mainly Christian Democrats, who are having the report translated into German. And he had shown a copy to the Spanish Minister and to the Pope. NSIC in New York had bought 500 of the ISC’s initial print order, and another 500 had been bought by the American Bar Association. “ Lobster tracked down some of the leaked documents of the Institute for the Study of Conflict, reported on earlier by Time Out. In the same article Lobster acknowledges that most of the documents were gone by the time they got to them.
||Crozier details the whole story in his book ‘Free Agent’
||January 11, 2005, Daily Telegraph, Stephen Hastings’ obituary: “Hastings’s background in MI6 gave him a certain mystique, and he was often embroiled in controversy concerning Communist infiltration. In 1977 he raised a storm of protest by alleging that five prominent trades union officials were agents for Communist countries. This information was culled from tape recordings made by the Czech former spy and defector Joseph Frolik. The following year, before Mrs Thatcher came into office, Hastings and Brian Crozier wrote her a paper setting out “the diabolical nature of the Communist conspiracy” against Britain. Mrs Thatcher was appalled: “Stephen,” she said, “I’ve read every word and I’m shattered. What should we do?…””
||2005, BBC, ‘The plot against Harold Wilson’ (documentary)
||Names given of those preparing or promoting a coup on Harold Wilson.
*) February 22, 2002, The Independent, ‘The Airey Neave File’ (often taking names from old Searchlight Magazine material from earlier times): Airey Neave; George Kennedy Young; Chapman Pincher; General Sir Anthony Farrar-Hockley, General Sir Walter Walker; David Stirling.
*) January 9, 2005, The Observer, ‘Desperate Lucan dreamt of fascist coup’: 7th Earl of Lucan; Sir James Goldsmith.
*) 2005, BBC, ‘The plot against Harold Wilson’ (documentary): Lord Mountbatten of Burma; Earl of Cromartie; Cecil Harmsworth King; Queen Mother; General Sir Walter Walker; Edward Heath; Brian Crozier; Major Alexander Greenwood; Chapman Pincher; Lord Alun Chalfont; James Jesus Angleton.
*) March 13, 2006, The Daily Mail, ‘A very British coup’: Sir Val Duncan; Brian Crozier; General Sir Walter Walker; Colonel David Stirling; Lord Mountbatten of Burma; Queen Mother; Earl of Cromartie; Major Alexander Greenwood; Chapman Pincher; Cecil Harmsworth King.
||March 13, 2006, The Daily Mail, ‘A very British coup’: “Brian Crozier, the security expert who had made a study of communist insurgency in Britain and would later advise Margaret Thatcher, was twice invited to address officers at the Royal Military Academy, Sandhurst. ‘I took it upon myself to make them understand the problems of communism and that they might, at some time, have to intervene to destroy this danger,’ he says. ‘There was absolute silence as I explained how the trades unions were very heavily penetrated by communists and their sympathisers and were exerting a dangerous influence on the Labour Party, which largely depended on them. They wanted to hear every word I said.’ After his speech, he received a number of private phone calls from very senior serving officers. ‘I have never named them and I never will,’ declares Crozier. ‘They were standing ready to act if necessary. There were no “buts” about it. If things had gone on as they were, they would have moved.’”
||Winter 1998, Issue 34, Lobster Magazine, ‘Back to the future: the 1970s reconsidered’
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p. 118: “I was one of the founder members [of the National Association for Freedom], with Lord De L’Isle as President, Michael Ivans of Aims of Industry, and Robert Moss, who became the first editor of the Association’s journal, the Free Nation (later renamed to Freedom Today).” Crozier also mention the involvement of Winston Churchill, son of the famous prime minister. April 1986, Issue 11, Lobster Magazine, ‘The National Association for Freedom’: “Nugent’s analysis fails most seriously in completely ignoring the military/intelligence input into NAFF. At various times NAFF attracted to its Council Robert Moss and Brian Crozier with links to CIA and MI6 via Forum World Features and ISC; Stephen Hastings MP (B), ex-MI6; Sir Gerald Templer (who was NAFF chair at one time and, as we showed above, played a role in the formation of Civil Assistance) (74); Sir Robert Thompson (B) who worked with Templer during the Malayan insurgency and who might claim to be Britain’s leading counter-insurgency expert; Joseph Josten, Director of the Free Czech Intelligence News Agency (presumably funded by MI6) which played a role in the anti-Labour Party operations (see below); and W. E. Luke (B) and Hugh Astor (B) both with war-time experience in MI5.”
||November 1988, Issue 17, Lobster Magazine, ‘Brian Crozier, the Pinay Circle and James Goldsmith’. In his book ‘Free Agent’ Crozier gives his version of the affair.
||Have a list of Bohemian Grove Lakeside talks from the 1940s to the 1970s. Forgot the source.
||July 2005, The Trumphet, ‘From the Editor: German Election Crisis—and a New Charlemagne’ (quotes from other articles)
||Website of the Coudenhove-Kalergi-Stiftung
||*) September 5, 1996, The Independent, Amery’s obituary: “He threw himself with zest into the role of a backbencher, intervening, in that great, rumbling voice of his, on a wide variety of subjects but, increasingly, in support of the rebel Rhodesian government headed by Ian Smith, thus showing he was his Imperialist father’s son to the core… When Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister in 1979 his first major foreign challenge was the conference of Commonwealth Prime Ministers in Lusaka in the autumn, where the main topic was to be Rhodesia (the government of which was now headed by Bishop Abel Muzorewa, with Smith in close attendance). Rhodesia was the main subject in the adjournment debate of 25 July, the last occasion for discussion of the matter before the summer recess. The Prime Minister took great care over her speech, seeking to placate both those who wanted to bring Muzorewa and Smith down, and the many on the Conservative back benches who sympathised with them. She succeeded, with one exception. Amery alone in the debate divined instantly that she had decided to abandon the Muzorewa-Smith government and, in a bitter and powerful speech, he castigated her for so doing. It was to no avail.”
*) March 30, 1997, The Independent, ‘Courtiers down the centuries; Profile Robert Cranborne’: “In 1978 domestic calm was shattered when Lord Cranborne’s brother Richard was killed by guerrillas while filming in Rhodesia. The family were strong supporters of the white settlers – the name of the country’s capital, Salisbury (after the 3rd Marquess), giving away the connection. Robert went to Africa to try to find out how his brother died. His brother’s death seems only to have reinforced his public support for the whites. During the 1980s he helped organise a secret meeting between Ian Smith and Tory MPs, and backed sporting links with apartheid South Africa.”
||Simon Regan, ‘Who Killed Diana?’: “Ironically, Sir James Goldsmith, was also an associate member of “Le Cercle” Goldsmith had been very much involved with Circle activities in Africa, and so had Tiny Rowland. It was very much in Rowland’s interests to keep left-wing governments out of Africa where the base of his fortune was made. Mainly in diamond mines which used, almost exclusively, slave labour.” This undoubtedly means there’s no evidence of Rowland’s Cercle membership. It appears, by the way, that Nicholas Elliott wasn’t really in the same camp as Rowland and Edward Du Cann. Elliott was among the Lonrho directors that wanted to get rid of Rowland in 1973. Also, Du Cann severely criticises Elliott in his biography.
||May 27, 1993, The Times, ‘Talking of Tiny; Television’: “Rowland emigrated to Rhodesia and went into mining with the help of his MP, one Ian Smith (the very same). Before you could say fool’s gold Rowland had formed the London and Rhodesia Mining Company (Lonrho).”
||August 1984, Issue 5, Lobster Magazine, ‘The Angolan hostages episode, and more’: “It is said that Dr. Savimbi [founder and leader of UNITA] was recruited by British intelligence 1964-66.(Covert Action No 4 April/May 1979). Even stronger are his links to Lonrho. Its boss, ‘Tiny’ Rowland, has visited Savimbi at the residence in Rabat, lent by the King of Morocco to Unita’s President; and Lonrho executives have visited Unita’s headquarters at Jamba. As long ago as 1974 Rowland provided Savimbi with a Hawker Siddley 125 and two pilots. He also set up a small company, Armitage Industrial Holdings, from the Slater/Walker group, to transport arms and supplies to Unita. (British Intelligence and Covert Action p193). When Savimbi visited Britain in 1980, Lonrho paid for expensive receptions hosted by Tory MP Edward Du Cann, a Lonrho director, at which Savimbi met Tory MPs.”
||August 16, 1992, Sunday Times, ‘Gadaffi to buy ‘SAS package’ from Khashoggi’:“Colonel Gadaffi, the Libyan leader, is recruiting disaffected former members of South Africa’s special forces to train his commandos… Gadaffi is also seeking to buy large amounts of top-quality military equipment, including a sophisticated radar air defence system, American M-40 anti-tank weapons, and NBC combat suits designed to protect troops against the effects of nuclear, biological or chemical attack. According to documents obtained by The Sunday Times, the secret deal of special forces training and equipment for Libya has been negotiated by Adnan Khashoggi, the Saudi arms dealer recently involved in a controversial partnership between Gadaffi and Tiny Rowland… the relationship has blossomed, with both Khashoggi and Rowland promising Libya political influence in the West…”
||1999, Adam Curtis, ‘The Mayfair Set’ (broadcasted by BBC2). Documentary mentioned that David Stirling, Jim Slater, James Goldsmith, Tiny Rowland, and Lord Lucan were all members of the John Aspinall’s Clairmont gambling club. The documentary received the BAFTA Award for Best Factual Series or Strand in 2000.
||*) January 9, 2005, The Observer, ‘Desperate Lucan dreamt of fascist coup’:“when he [Lucan] left Hatchards, the book under his arm was a Thirties translation of Hitler’s political testament, Mein Kampf … The Countess of Lucan confirmed this weekend that Lucan was an extremist in his politics: ‘He did have very right-wing views, some might describe them as fascist. I didn’t know he was indulging in extremist reading matter in 1972, although I knew he listened to recordings of Hitler’s speeches at Nuremburg Rallies… he [Lucan] and his associates, who included casino owner and party host John Aspinall, and the tycoon Sir James Goldsmith, were increasingly convinced Britain had fallen victim to a socialist conspiracy. Daily Express journalist Charles Benson, one of Lucan’s friends, said: ‘He was very right wing and never watered it down in front of liberals. He would talk about hanging and flogging and niggers to get a reaction.’ One biographer, Patrick Marnham, said: ‘Seen from the Clermont Club [Lucan's favourite gambling haunt], the country was starting to resemble the less stable years of the Weimar Republic. Sir James Goldsmith began to develop his theory of “the Communist infiltration of the Western media”. Over the smoked salmon and lamb cutlets, the talk turned to the pros and cons of a British military coup.’”
*) July 27, 1998, The Financial Times, ‘The talented but ultimately unacceptable face of capitalism’: “Mr Rowland, born Roland Walter Fuhrhop, of a German father and Anglo-Dutch mother in India in 1917, was a natural outsider and maverick. Educated first in Germany, then briefly in England, he was detained on the Isle of Man during the war, where he was suspected of Nazi sympathies.”
*) According to Wikipedia, John Aspinall once claimed that Britain was in need of “a Franco-ite counter-revolution”.
*) Also: March 13, 2006, Daily Mail, ‘A very British Coup’: “As for Colonel David Stirling,… he too believed the situation in Britain had become so serious that a military coup had to be an option. According to his friend, Major Alexander Greenwood, Stirling also offered a more informal way of handling the trades union agitators – provoking them into a confrontation. ‘He thought: “Let’s attack the leaders, let’s get them run over by a bus – then they’ll start thinking,” ‘ says Major Greenwood, who had become a stockbroker after his Army career.”
||1999, Adam Curtis, ‘The Mayfair Set’: “David Stirling was a close friend of Julian Amery’s and together they were determined to find a way to stop Nasser… Stirling and Amery had diner with the foreign secretary, Alec Douglas Hume, at the White’s Club in St. James’s. They proposed a plan: a group of SAS men would mount an operation to fight the Egyptians, but they would do it privately.”
||*) January 31, 1997, The Guardian, ‘SAS linked to rogue force in South Africa’:“The SAS has been linked to violence by a ‘third force’ that threatened to undermine South Africa’s transition to majority rule, in a report considered so explosive it was suppressed by Nelson Mandela… It confirms the involvement of commando units in random violence, the use of poison – supplied by the Seventh Medical Division – by hit squads, and the supply of arms and training to the Zulu-dominated Inkatha movement… The truth commission document says evidence was given to Gen Steyn that destabilisation of the government and neighbouring countries was planned ‘to enable the military to step in credibly to create order’. Preparations for this allegedly involved stockpiling arms in countries which included Kenya, Zambia, Mauritius and Portugal, to create ‘springboards’ for possible military action. It said there was ‘a suggestion that there was close contact with the British SAS’… As reported by the Guardian, a group of SAS officers working for a private security firm in Britain [KAS] were hired by wealthy conservationists in the late 1980s to come to South Africa to fight elephant and rhinoceros poachers. They became involved with local intelligence agencies and reportedly took part in paramilitary training. The British security firm, Kas Enterprises, was owned by Sir David Stirling, the founder of the SAS, and taken over after his death by Sir James Goldsmith. The security firm’s SAS mission to South Africa was headed by Ian Crooke, who led the SAS…”
*) September 24, 1999, Kleintje Muurkrant, ‘”People have been murdered under the cover of nature protection” – Attorney severely criticises the World Wide Fund for Nature’ (translated from Dutch to English): “It looks like the WWF to a large degree is responsible for several projects, especially in South Africa, where in two fases respectively one and a half million people and subsequently ten thousand people were killed. In the first phase it was about the battle in the frontline states against the ANC [the major anti-apartheid movement], especially against the military wing. The war has been waged under the cover of nature protection and while protecting nature these people have lobbied the legislator to adopt a “shoot to kill” policy, whereby it became legal to shoot poachers in the field before arresting them. Afterwards you have to say that among the victims were quite a lot of ANC members… After 1990 the struggle shifted to the territory of South Africa [instead of the whole of southern Africa]. During that time these people trained a number of elite black units in the wildlife parks [of the WWF], like the anti-cattle thieves brigade and the crowbar-unit that turn out to responsible for the murder of several ten thousand inhabitants of the townships. This was part of the plan to create a civil war between the Bantus and the Zulus, that is to say that the ANC had to be set up against Inkatha [of Inkatha Freedom Party, the second largest anti-apartheid movement which mainly represented the Zulus] and that operation has been conducted with the intention of destabilizing southern Africa. I have seen that these projects were completely financed by the World Wide Fund for Nature. Of course a certain Prince [Bernhard] has been involved in that, who has walked around there with a suitcase full of money, but the question remains how much this man knew about the projects.”
*) Executive Intelligence Review has published some information about the 1001 Club and Anglo-Dutch policies in southern Africa.
||September 3, 2003, Energy Bulletin, ‘Petro-Logistics is very well connected in the gulf and the Black Sea’: “Mr Gerber freely admits that he first learned about the oil business in the 1970′s when he was helping his country, then known as Rhodesia and now called Zimbabwe, to circumvent international sanctions and procure illegal oil… Mr Gerber worked as an economist in the government of Rhodesia… Among his business associates and friends, Mr Gerber counted Theodore G. Shackley… Mr Shackley engaged in some oil trading after he retired from the CIA in 1979. Mr Gerber said he was at Mr Shackley’s bedside just before he died last year. His client base, initially built around an oil trader who worked with Mr Shackley, eventually expanded to include official agencies, major oil companies — both private and government-owned — and other traders.” John Deuss was the “oil trader who worked with Mr Shackley”.
||1991, Bo Gritz (ISA and Delta Force commander), ‘Called to Serve’, p. 370. Khun Sa’s interpreter, in the presence of all Khun Sa’s top men, names Ted Shackley, Santos Trafficante (mafia boss), Richard Armitage, Daniel Arnold (CIA station chief in Thailand), and Jerry Daniels (CIA agent) as his former partners in the dope trade. This is recorded on video and audio tape.
Additional: March 1, 1988, The Fayetteville Observer, ‘Gritz to publicize POW offer’: “Gritz said Khun Sa is reputed to have 40,000 men, women and children under arms and will get out of the drug trade if the U.S. will aid his insurgency efforts. Gritz first met Khun Sa in Laos in December 1986. Gritz says he was sent there to find POWs by a man who works for the National Security Council. Gritz returned with video-taped conversations with Khun Sa, who said Amercian officials were involved in drug trafficking during the Vietnam War to finance unofficial wars against the communists in neutral Laos. Among those Khun Sa implicated, according to published reports, was Richard Armitage, currently assistant secretary of defense whose previous mission in Southeast Asia was to find American prisoners of war. U.S. officials told Gritz they didn’t want to hear about drugs and suggested he forget the incident, Gritz claims. He said he was told if he persisted, he would serve 15 years as a felon for using a falsified passport. “I’ve used false passports many times, every time in pursuit of U.S. POWs,” Gritz said, adding that U.S. officials knew about the practice. “Only James Bond goes overseas and uses his real name,” Gritz said.”
||August 17, 1983, Wall Street Journal, ‘Bank’s Links to Ex-CIA Men Detailed’:“The Australian government report, prepared and released to Parliament in March by the Commonwealth-New South Wales Joint Task Force on Drug Trafficking, cites Mr. Shackley as one of the leading characters whose “background is relevant to a proper understanding of the activities of the Nugan Hand group and people associated with that group… The report refers to contacts between Mr. Shackley and Michael Hand, the currently missing former CIA operator who founded , owned and managed the Nugan Hand banking group. Mr. Hand’s partner, Australian Frank Nugan, died of a gunshot wound in January, 1980, later ruled a suicide, and Nugan Hand failed a few months later. Investigations following Mr. Nugan’s death and the failure of the bank revealed widespread dealings by Nugan-Hand with international heroin syndicates, and evidence of massive fraud against U.S. and foreign citizens. Many retired high-ranking Pentagon and CIA officials were executives of or consultants to Nugan-Hand… Among the high-level Pentagon and CIA officials associated with Nugan Hand were former CIA director William Colby [Le Cercle], who was its attorney… ” More details can be found in Jonathan Kwitny’s ‘The Crimes of Patriots’. After Nugan Hand’s cover was blown and the operation abandoned, the CIA redirected many of the Nugan Hand operations to another Pacific financial institution based in Hawaii, named Bishop, Baldwin, Rewald, Dillingham and Wong (BBRDW). By the end of 1980, BBRDW started setting up offices in Hong Kong, Taiwan, Indonesia, Singapore, and Australia, all former Nugan Hand locations, staffing the offices with some of the same personnel. Investigator Rodney Stich (2006, ‘Those Ugly Americans’, p. 343) went looking for the files of the BBRDW and found an envelope with names of important persons who had an account at the BBRDW under an alias. These included Richard Armitage (of Gritz’s videotape), William Casey (Le Cercle) and two accounts of George Bush Sr. (who refused Khun Sa’s offer to stop the massive heroin trade in return for basic economic and diplomatic support).
||June 28, 2005, Wall Street Journal, ‘A Cartel and Its Snake oil – The Saudis claim to have huge oil reserves. Do they really?’: “As a result, the world’s most reliable source for OPEC production is a little company called Petrologistics, located over a grocery store in Geneva. Conrad Gerber, the principal, claims to have spies in every OPEC port. For all we know, Mr. Gerber is making up his numbers, but everyone — including the Paris-based International Energy Agency — takes him seriously, since OPEC produces nothing better.” Review about the 2005 book of Matthew Simmons, ‘Twilight in the Desert: The Coming Saudi Oil Shock and the World Economy’.
||January 15-21, 1998, Le Nouvel Observateur, Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski:“According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention… That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire… Nonsense! [that Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace] It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn’t a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.”
||September 23, 2001, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, ‘How a holy war against the Soviets turned on the US’: “In 1986, Director of Central Intelligence William Casey stepped up the war against the Soviet Union by taking three significant, but at that time highly secret, measures. He persuaded the U.S. Congress to provide the Afghan fighters known as Mujaheddin, “holy warriors” in Arabic, with American-made Stinger anti-aircraft missiles to shoot down Soviet planes and to send U.S. advisers to train the guerrillas. Until then, no U.S.-made weapons or personnel had been used directly in the war effort. U.S.-financed weapons provided to the Afghans until then had been generally of Warsaw Pact manufacture, to provide deniability of U.S. support for the Mujaheddin. The CIA, Britain’s MI6 intelligence service and Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI) also agreed on a provocative plan to launch guerrilla attacks into the then Soviet Republics of Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, the soft Muslim underbelly of the Soviet state from where Soviet troops in Afghanistan received their supplies… Casey was delighted with the news, and on his next secret trip to Pakistan crossed the border into Afghanistan with the late Pakistani President Zia al-Haq to meet the Mujaheddin groups… Third, Casey committed CIA support to a long-standing ISI initiative to recruit radical Muslims from around the world to come to Pakistan and fight alongside the Afghan Mujaheddin. The ISI had promoted this idea since 1982, and by now all the other players had their reasons for supporting it.”
||September 1, 1991, Washington Post, ‘Pakistan’s illicit economies affect BCCI bank…’: “According to diplomatic sources, Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Turki bin Faisal — working with Pakistan’s main intelligence agency — distributed over $1 billion in cash to Afghan guerrillas during the late 1980s… The financial transactions were handled principally between Saudi intelligence and Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI), the main liaison between the United States, Saudi Arabia and the Afghan guerrillas, the sources said… As for drug trafficking, the sources acknowledged that Pakistan’s ISI routinely condoned heroin manufacture and sales by some Afghan guerrilla groups. But they said there were also occasions when ISI cooperated with U.S. government efforts to eradicate poppy fields in Afghanistan.”
||*) February 22, 1992, The Seattle Times: “Former CIA Director William Casey met secretly over several years with the Pakistani head of the illicit Bank of Credit and Commerce International, a television report to be aired this weekend alleges. A CIA spokesman denied the allegation, which is included in a 90-minute NBC News report on BCCI to be broadcast tomorrow morning… The NBC report, quoting unnamed BCCI sources, alleges Casey had secret meetings with Abedi every few months from 1984 through 1986 in a $2,000-per-night presidential suite at the Madison Hotel in Washington. The two men discussed the Iran-contra arms-for-hostages transactions and CIA arms shipments to the rebels in Afghanistan, the report says.” More information on Abedi can be found in the 1001 Club membership list of PEHI.
*) December 13, 2003, The Guardian, ‘Smart money’ (a combined review of Loretta Napoleoni’s ‘Modern Jihad: Tracing the Dollars Behind the Terror Networks’ and Jeffrey Robinson’s ‘The Sink: Terror, Crime and Dirty Money in the Offshore World’): “William Casey, Reagan’s CIA chief, used Pakistan and its BCCI bank as fronts to train Afghan rebels against the Soviets. Covert operations required a “black network” within the bank and its state equivalent, the notorious ISI. The bank financed and brokered covert arms deals, complete with full laundry service. The short and logical step from there was a BCCI/ISI/CIA move into drug smuggling to feed the needy, and leaky, money pipeline to the Mujahedin. The Pakistan-Afghan connection became the biggest single supplier of heroin to the US, meeting 60% of demand, with annual profits a stratospheric $100-$200 billion.”
||August 7, 1991, Washington Post, ‘BCCI Adept at Courting the Powerful and Rich’: “In Britain, two senior Conservative members of Parliament and one former member listed themselves as consultants to BCCI — part of what has been described as a global network of highly placed advisers. They are Sir Julian Ridsdale, a former defense minister; Julian Amery; and former Parliament member Sir Frederic Bennett, an honorary director of BCCI in Hong Kong until 1986 who received $10,000 a year from BCCI, according to the Sunday Observer. Amery declined to tell the Observer how much he received and could not be reached for comment here, but he has said he advised the bank on international affairs.” Bennett was an important aristocrat whose biography can be found in the membership list of Le Cercle attached to this article (in Amery’s). Bennett is an unconfirmed member of Le Cercle, but was heavily involved in the adventures of Brian Crozier and Julian Amery..
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p. 135-136
||Ibid., info about The 61 is spread over the whole book.
||Ibid., p. 135
||Ibid., p. 142
||Ibid., p. 189-190: “In addition to our own  network, we gained access to a number of existing networks, both private and official. In Germany, we had three prime sources. One was the ex-diplomat turned politician, Count Hans Huyn, a close friend of the Bavarian leader, Franz Josef Strauss, and a leading authority on Soviet policy.”
||1997, Robert Hutchinson, Their Kingdom Come, p. 359: “Casey’s first reaction was to fly to Rome and consult the Pope. He and two other members of Reagan’s inner team, Alexander Haig and Vernon Walters, were Knights of the Sovereign Order of Malta, which gave them instant and confidential access to the papal apartments.”
||2005, Daniele Ganser, ‘Nato’s Secret Armies’, p. 70-71: “Vernon Walters advised them, a notorious CIA Cold Warrior ‘who has been involved directly or indirectly in the overthrow of more governments than any other official of the US government’. Walters declared that if Kennedy allowed the PSI [Partito Socialisto Italiano] to win the elections the US should invade the country… Kennedy had allowed Italy to shift to the left. As the Socialists were given cabinet posts the Italian Communists, due to their performance at the polls, also demanded to be rewarded with posts in the cabinet and in May 1963 the large union of the construction workers demonstrated in Rome. The CIA was alarmed and members of the secret Gladio army disguised as police and civilians smashed the demonstration leaving more than 200 demonstrators injured.  But for Italy the worst was yet to come. In November 1963, US President Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas, under mysterious circumstances. And five months later the CIA with the SIFAR, the Gladio secret army and the paramilitary police carried out a right-wing coup d’etat which forced the Italian Socialists to leave their cabinet posts they had held only for such a short period. Code-named ‘Piano Solo’ the coup was directed by General Giovanni De Lorenzo whom Defence Minister Giulio Andreotti [Le Cercle] of the DCI [hard-right Democrazia Christiana Italiana] had transferred from chief of SIFAR to chief of the Italian paramilitary police, the Carabinieri. In close cooperation with CIA secret warfare expert Vernon Walters, William Harvey, chief of the CIA station in Rome, and Renzo Rocca, Director of the Gladio units within the military secret service SID, De Lorenzo escalated the secret war.”
||June 1992, Issue 23, Lobster Magazine, ‘Heritage of Stone; JFK and JFK’:“Nearly ten years ago former BOSS [South African intelligence] agent Gordon Winter replied to a letter from Steve Dorril about BOSS’s view of the assassination with the answer that BOSS files had attributed it to ‘a General named Walters’. In 1963 Vernon Walters was Military Attaché in Rome. (It may be a coincidence that in Walters’ autobiography there is nothing at all on what he was doing in 1963.) Also in Rome in 1963 as CIA station chief was William Harvey, who, it is widely reported, hated the Kennedys.”
||February 15, 2002, Palm Beach Daily News, ‘War hero, statesman to be buried at Arlington’: “When Eisenhower later became president, he selected Gen. Walters to serve as his staff assistant. During the Kennedy administration, he served as a military attache to Brazil and later, Italy.” I noticed the same problem as Dorril. Not only in Walter’s autobiography, but also in his Who’s Who there are one or more gaps in his biography in the early 1960s. Also, hardly anywhere in the newspapers his involvement in Rome is mentioned.
||This is more or less the conclusion that can be drawn from the work of Wim Dankbaar. In 2006, a three-hour documentary was broadcasted on Dutch prime time television based on Dankbaar’s research (good thing I put aside my prejudices and just watched it). The investigation for the documentary was headed by Peter R. de Vries, Holland’s most famous crime reporter. Normally de Vries investigates well known public cases, usually in cooperation with the police. In short, the three hour documentary laid down almost the whole JFK conspiracy and verified the possibility of James Files’ basic claims. The documentary was incredibly impressive, contrasting next day’s news reports which were hopelessly superficial. One or two weeks after the broadcast of the initial documentary, de Vries did a short follow up and proved the (prominent) critics wrong that Files couldn’t have used a Remington Firebolt and couldn’t have left a teeth mark in the casing of the bullet. De Vries found an owner of a Remington Firebolt, inquired about the guns accuracy, fired it, and left his teeth mark in the casing. Very impressive reporting… and yet it is so simple to do for the mainstream media. One of the documentary’s conclusions was that Kennedy’s body could be dug up to see if the bullet contained mercury, as was claimed by Files and hinted to by at least one forensic expert looking at the photos. Dankbaar was referred to Files by FBI agent Zack Shelton. Although Files could well remain a controversial figure, it is known that he has worked for the CIA and as a hitman for Charles Nicolette.
Claims that the JFK assassination was the work of a joint mafia-CIA operation are almost universal, the reason for the assassination being that Kennedy was far too soft on communism in countries as Italy and for refusing to give crucial air support in the Bay of Pigs invasion. In 1975 the Church Committee was established to investigate the wide range of abuses reported about the CIA. George De Mohrenschildt (best friend of Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas) and Charles Nicolette were murdered on March 29, 1975. Sam Giancana was assassinated on June 19, 1975. Jimmy Hoffa disappeared in July 1975. Johnny Roselli was murdered in September 1976.
||2002 (third edition), John Cooley, ‘Unholy Wars’, p. 17: “… de Marenches, a big, bluff man who his close American friend, General Vernon A. Walters, a Cold Warrior and CIA official called a “real French Kissinger,”…”
Additionally: November 23, 1992, Washington Times, ‘Anti-Everybody’: “Vernon Walters… could be found overseas last week being inducted into the Al-Mamlaka al-Maghribiya’s Royal Academy. That’s Kingdom of Morocco, for short… Gen. Walters, a resident of Virginia, was sponsored for the honor by Alexandre de Marenches… Gen. Walters is a personal friend of Morocco’s King Hassan II.” At least one meeting of Le Cercle has been held in Morocco.
||2002 (third edition), John Cooley, ‘Unholy Wars’, p. 15
||November 1988, Issue 17, David Teacher for Lobster Magazine, ‘The Pinay Circle and Destabilisation in Europe’: “Strauss was a close friend of Alexandre de Marenches and was a frequent visitor to the SDECE’s headquarters during Marenches’ time.”
||2002 (third edition), John Cooley, ‘Unholy Wars’, p. 106: “Before he left, de Marenches warned Reagan that the rank-and-file staff of the CIA, where a mutual friend, William Casey, would soon be taking over as chief, was not to be trusted.”
||Website of Baron de Bonvoisin: “Largely because of B. de B, Raes was forced to resign in 1990… B. de Bonvoisin was highly regarded by the head of the French secret services, Alexandre de Marenches, but the latter had no esteem for Albert Raes… [bashes Albert Raes a bit more]… he [Raes] tried to associate B. de B with the extreme right, a trick often used by the Soviet secret services.”” On the same page: “Professor Lode Van Outrive concluded that: ” Several times the Americans tried to convince Raes to concentrate first and foremost on the Eastern block countries whereas he seemed more interested in targeting extreme right wing movements. This clearly bothered the Americans who got him to resign.””
Bonvoisin has been caught faking KGB files that were ment to prove a vast left conspiracy against him.
||January 2002, interview by Matt Ehlingfor for Declassified Radio (which doesn’t exist anymore). http://sf.indymedia.org/print.php?id=113300
||*) April 23, 1975, Winnipeg Free Press, ‘Mini-Cold War Weakens Portugal, NATO Ties’: “Carlucci’s image has been tarred with allegations that he is a top CIA operative assigned to destabilize Portugal and reverse the Socialist thrust of the revolution…”
*) 1977, Phil Mailer, ‘Portugal, the Impossible Revolution’, chapter 8: “For three days the left and workers’ group exercised total power. An article about Spinola in the Parisian paper Temoignage Chretien (March 6) had said that US ambassador Frank Carlucci (who had CIA connections) had given the go-ahead for a right-wing take-over in Portugal. Otelo’s [head moderate MFA] remark on March 11 that ‘Carlucci had better have plans to leave the country or face the con-sequences’ was seen as related to the failed coup. Kissinger, according to a Sunday Times (London) report, had sanctioned the use of the CIA.”
*) December 22, 1977, The Charleston Gazette, ‘Envoy May Be Named CIA Deputy Director’: “The Carter administration plans to appoint Ambassador Frank C. Carlucci, currently the United States envoy to Portugal, as Deputy Director of Central Intelligence…”
||For detailed information on Spinola look in the membership list, where a number of original sources are quoted.
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p. 184-185
||Ibid. p. 230-231: “I had put together an impressive team of helpers in America [in tracking down and interrogating two Cuban defectors]. Robert Moss was one of them… Others who helped were… Donald Jameson; who for many years had been the CIA’s top specialist on the Soviet Union. Apart from his fluent Russian, he also spoke Spanish and had a special interest in Latin America.” This was about 1985.
||March 7, 1997, The Augusta Chronicle, ‘Defector caught up in dispute – Former intelligence officer denies US prisoners of war taken in Korean wars’: “At least two former U.S. intelligence officers say Mr. Rastvorov told them in separate conversations after his defection that he knew U.S. troops captured in the 1950-53 Korean War had been taken to Siberia and exploited by Soviet intelligence. One of those conversations is summarized in a long-secret White House memo that was declassified last spring… Publicity about the memo prompted the Pentagon to contact Mr. [Yuri] Rastvorov to see how much he knew. At a private meeting last Oct. 10, Mr. Rastvorov denied having any knowledge about U.S. POWs in Siberia. Further, he said that the statements in the White House memo were not his, and that he did not recall that any of the debriefings he underwent with U.S. officials in the 1950s dealt with POWs… Philip Corso, an intelligence officer in Korea during the war and later a National Security Council staff member in the Eisenhower White House, is equally emphatic that Mr. Rastvorov told him in a Jan. 28, 1955, debriefing that Americans had been taken to Siberia as part of a covert Soviet intelligence operation… Separate from Mr. Corso’s assertions, Donald Jameson, a retired CIA officer, has said he recalls Mr. Rastvorov telling him in the 1950s that U.S. POWs had been taken to the Soviet Union and that Mr. Rastvorov had estimated it was 10 to 15 aviators. Mr. Jameson helped handle the Rastvorov debriefing after his defection.”
||January 25, 2003, The Gold Coast Bulletin, ‘Focus’: “The experiment was only one episode in a remarkable research program run by the Defence Intelligence Agency and CIA from 1972 until 1996. The project, known variously as Grill Flame, Sun Streak, and finally Star Gate, explored a variety of parapsychological phenomena but especially one known as ‘remote viewing’, the process by which someone in, say, Maryland visualises an office in the Kremlin and describes it both in words and drawings… The outlines of Star Gate have been sketched before, but new details of the project have come to light in 73,000 pages of previously classified records released by the CIA last November and made available just this month. (An additional 20,800 pages are undergoing review, and 17,700 pages were deemed too sensitive to release.)… In 1972, the CIA gave the institute $50,000 to study remote viewing. Russell Targ, who joined the project in 1972… Two years later, the institute received the geographical co-ordinates of a “Soviet site of ongoing operational significance.” The target was Semipalatinsk, in what is now Kazakhstan. A remote viewer provided a layout of a cluster of buildings and drew a puzzling, ‘damned big crane’. He identified the underground facility as storage for Soviet missiles. Satellite photos verified the viewer’s report, according to Donald Jameson, then a senior CIA Soviet specialist, who called the event a ‘turning point’. One group within the agency refused to look at the Semipalatinsk data, objecting to the unscientific methodology. Another group called the process ‘demonic’. When the CIA cut the program in 1975, the funds shifted first to the Air Force and then, in 1980, to the Defence Intelligence Agency. Between 1979 and 1994 Fort Meade’s viewing site conducted roughly 250 projects involving thousands of missions.” (With all these (in this case Catholic) religious extremists in the top tiers of the CIA it’s no wonder these projects were seen as “demonic”.)
||*) December 14, 2002, New York Times, ‘Theodore Shackley, Enigmatic C.I.A. Official, Dies at 75′: “In 1979, Mr. Shackley retired from the C.I.A. and founded Research Associates International Ltd., a Bethesda consulting firm specializing in analyzing risks and protecting executives”.
*) 2002, Chief Executive Publishing (more detailed date and a headline were not given; scanned from some book or document, judging by one or two common OCR errors): “In 1986, deals with the Soviets were lucrative, wrote Donald F.B. Jameson, a former member of the CIA and vice president of Research Associates International, a risk assessment firm in Arlington, Va. “The Soviets pay above-market prices and pay promptly. Negotiating can be trying, even for the big boys,” he wrote in Chief Executive in a spring article titled, ‘Trading with the Soviets’…”But if you have what they want and are persistent, you may well end up with a good deal, and after having done one deal, others usually follow. Trading with the Soviets is a race that goes to the strong,” Jameson said.”
*) Additional: July 23, 1998, Michael Ruppert, ‘The POWs, CIA and Drugs’: “A former CIA officer told me in 1995 that Ollie North was leasing office space for his 1995 Senate run from Shackley’s company, Research Associates International, in Rosslyn, Virginia.”
||1993, Brian Crozier, Free Agent, p. 243: “… the ‘Coalition of Peace to Strength’. Among them were personal friends of mine, including the late General Richard Stilwell and Richard Perle…”
||*) July 23, 1998, Michael Ruppert, ‘The POWs, CIA and Drugs’: “The ISA, which ran Gritz’s mission, was created by Army General Richard Stilwell. It has been repeatedly linked to drug smuggling by sources including the daughter of Col. Albert Carone who served as Oliver North’s bagman and bill-payer during the eighties. Records left behind after Carone’s death in 1990 and eyewitness statements clearly indicate that Carone handled both drugs and drug money for CIA, North and the NSC. Carone’s personal phone book contains the home addresses and telephone numbers of William Casey [Le Cercle; Wackenhut legal counsel; CIA; SMOM; Bohemian Grove camp Mandalay], Gambino crime boss Pauly Castellano and Stilwell [Le Cercle].” (Ruppert has written a full report about the Albert Carone affair. Carone was a Knight of Malta and highest level insider to the Genovese crime family)
*) Colby was a director and attorney to the Nugan Hand Bank, which laundered large amounts of drug profits. August 17, 1983, Wall Street Journal, ‘Bank’s Links to Ex-CIA Men Detailed’: Among the high-level Pentagon and CIA officials associated with Nugan Hand were former CIA director William Colby, who was its attorney… “
*) Additional: Michael Ruppert is probably the most central person in CIA drug investigations, having written about virtually all of the others writers and interviewed most of the witnesses. These witnesses include: Cele Castillo, Mike Levine, Dee Ferdinand, David Sabow, Brad Ayers, Tosh Plumley, Bo Abbott, Daniel Sheehan, Gene Wheaton, John Mattes, Jack Terrell, Winfred Richardson, Michelle Cooper, Bill Tyree, Dois G. “Chip” Tatum, Col. Edward Cutolo, Col. Bo Gritz, Al Martin, David MacMichael and Ralph McGehee.
||December 5, 1986, Philadelphia Inquirer, ‘Secord lost position over disclosure form’: “Secord was removed from an unpaid position on the Special Operations Planning and Advisory Group, an 11-member panel dominated by retired senior generals who advise the secretary of defense and his top military and civilian officials on special and covert operations policy… Current members of the group, all retired from active duty, include:… Air Force Lt. Gen. Leroy Manor… They advise the secretary of defense, Caspar W. Weinberger; the assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs, Richard L. Armitage, and the commander of the Joint Special Operations Agency, Air Force Maj. Gen. Thomas Kelly.” More detailed quote in General Stilwell’s bio in the membership list.
||*) Secord was operational head of the covert private arms network set up by Casey and North in 1984. He was involved with Shackley in Nugan Hand. September 11, 1988, Washington Post, ‘The ultimate conspiracy theory’: “Serving first as the CIA’s East Asia operations chief and later as assistant deputy director of clandestine operations, Shackley (with his trusty aide Clines) supposedly stole tons of U.S. weapons from South Vietnam and stashed them in Thailand. Later, Sheehan claims, Shackley, Clines, Secord and a member of the “shooter team” named Rafael “Chi-Chi” Quintero siphoned off millions of dollars in Southeast Asia opium profits and laundered them through the mysterious Nugan Hand bank of Australia.”
*) August 17, 1983, Wall Street Journal, ‘Bank’s Links to Ex-CIA Men Detailed’:“Among the high-level retired Pentagon and CIA officials associated with Nugan Hand were former CIA director William Colby, who was its attorney; three-star Gen. LeRoy J. Manor, former chief of staff for the pacific, who headed its Philippine operation…”
*) Additional: September 21, 1980, Boston Globe, letter from a reader to the editor: “I fail to understand why an article such as “Heroin, banking and the CIA” would be relegated to page 42 (Sept. 7). The incredible details in Alan Berger’s well-written article are front-page material. The implications, for example, in the connection between Gen. Ray Manors involvement with the defunct Nugan Hand International banking front and his responsibility as a CIA member to analyze the Iranian hostage incident are frightening, to say the least.”
||1991, Bo Gritz (ISA and Delta Force commander), ‘Called to Serve’, p. 370. See reference 85 for more info.
||1993, Brian Crozier, Free Agent, p. 185
||January 28, 1990, Sunday Times, ‘How the Colombian cocaine chain leads to Fidel Castro’
||*) January 28, 1990, Washington Post, ‘The Case Against Noriega’: “On Monday, November 14, 1983, Noriega’s entourage took off for Washington… all expenses paid by the U.S. government. Almost two whole days, however, were set aside for the institutions that already had long-standing working relations with Noriega. At CIA headquarters in Langley, Noriega was swept off for a meeting with CIA Director William Casey. Back in Panama, Noriega would later boast about his four-hour lunch with Casey…”
*) August 23, 1991, The Miami Herald, ‘Noriega: CIA, DEA OKd Deals’:“Manuel Noriega says he had good reasons for allowing drugs and guns to slip through Panama: The last seven CIA directors, including George Bush, asked him to help with the guns, while four directors of the Drug Enforcement Administration sought his help on the drugs… The weapons shipments were destined for Nicaragua and Honduras, the papers said. Besides Bush, the CIA directors who asked Noriega to allow them to travel through Panama included Richard Helms, William Colby, James Schlesinger, Stansfield Turner, William Casey and William Webster… The DEA directors who purportedly asked Noriega to allow drugs to pass through his country included Terrance Burk, Francis Mullen, Jack Lawn and John Ingersoll… Diane Cossin, a spokeswoman for the U.S. attorney’s office, said the prosecution will present evidence that links Noriega’s BCCI money and drugs.”
||1993, Brian Crozier, Free Agent, p. 243: “Among them were personal friends of mine, including the late General Richard Stilwell and Richard Perle…”
||*) November 22, 2001, San Antonio Express-News, ‘Ex-CIA chief picks Baghdad as next U.S. target Case builds against Iraq’: “Woolsey and Richard Perle, a defense official in the Reagan administration, say the destruction of Saddam’s government is the next logical step for the United States’ anti-terror campaign. The rationale for toppling Saddam, their argument goes, stretches back several years and isn’t linked to a specific incident… Mohammed Atta, who was believed to be the ringleader behind the Sept. 11 suicide hijackings, met with Iraqi intelligence officials in Prague, Czech Republic, several months before the strikes.”
*) May 13, 2002, Seattle Times, ‘Steam rises over meeting that may not have occurred’: “Five months before the Sept. 11 attacks, a man who may have been Mohammed Atta met in the Czech capital of Prague with a man who may have been an Iraqi intelligence agent. Or maybe he didn’t. If that sounds uncertain, so is the shadowy battle going on in Washington, D.C., and Prague over whether the meeting took place and what happened if it did… Government ministers in Prague reported the meeting soon after the terrorist attacks. U.S. officials seized on the report. But intelligence officials in Prague then began leaking stories that the meeting did not happen after all. The Czech government seems confused: The Foreign Ministry denies the meeting happened; the Interior Ministry insists it did. In the past two weeks, U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, have said that they, too, now doubt the meeting took place. The Bush administration refuses to comment on the record. White House officials are said to be furious at the leaked denials. Hawks rail against what they see as a covert campaign by doves, especially in the State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency, to derail an attack on Iraq. “The evidence (for the meeting) is overwhelming, as convincing now as it was then,” said Richard Perle, chairman of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board. “People who are raising questions now are just slinking about, not doing so openly. Why? They have their own policy agenda, which is to limit the president’s options.”… In December, New York Times columnist William Safire called it an “undisputed fact” and said it took place at a hotel. Four months later, he reported that it was a “fact” but said the meeting was at the airport. Reports to the contrary were a “disinformation campaign,” Safire said. In an article titled “The U.S. Must Strike at Saddam Hussein,” Perle called the meeting “well-documented.” Former CIA Director James Woolsey used it to buttress a call for an attack on Iraq, as did Weekly Standard Editor William Kristol in a similar article.”
*) September 8, 2002, Agence France Presse, ‘Mohammed Atta met Saddam prior to September 11: US official’: “Mohammed Atta consulted Saddam Hussein prior to leading the suicide attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11, according to Richard Perle, an advisor to the US defense secretary. “Mohammed Atta met Saddam Hussein in Baghdad prior to September 11. We have proof of that, and we are sure he wasn’t just there for a holiday,” Perle told Italy‘s business daily “Il Sole 24 Ore”. “The meeting is one of the motives for an American attack on Iraq,” added Perle, who is chairman of the Defense Policy Board and consultant to US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, a leading advocate of an attack on Iraq. “The main objective of the American administration is to avoid weapons of mass destruction falling into the wrong hands,” said Perle.”
||According to David Rockefeller, who was invited to the Cercle in the late 1960s, only he and Kissinger would generally attend from the United States. Both of these men had some issues with Cercle members.
||June 1993, Lobster Magazine, Issue 25, Dr. Armen Victorian, ‘Non-lethality: John B. Alexander, the Pentagon’s Penguin’: “The United States Global Strategy Council is an independent think tank, incorporated in 1981. It focuses on long-range strategic issues. The founding members were Clare Boothe Luce, General Maxwell Taylor, General Albert Wedemeyer, Dr. Ray Cline (Co-chair), Jeane Kirkpatrick (Co-chair), Morris Leibman, Henry Luce III, J. William Middendorf II, Admiral Thomas H. Moorer USN (retd), General Richard Stilwell (retd.), Dr Michael A. Daniles (President), Dr. Dalton A. West (Executive Vice President). Its Research Directors were Dr. Yonah Alexander, Dr Roger Fontaine, Robert L. Katula and Janet Morris.”
||May 26, 1983, Daily Oklahoman, ‘Edwards Made Council Chief’: “Rep. Mickey Edwards, Oklahoma City Republican, on Wednesday was named chairman of the United States Global Strategy Council. In an inaugural address, he said the organization must form “”a comprehensive global strategy” and then “”sell it” to the public. The conservatively oriented organization was formed about five months ago. It’s purpose: “”To create an improved climate for sophisticated global strategic thinking by initiating strategy research, by publicizing the importance and potentials of global strategy and by proposing alternative strategic options on current and future global problems to policymakers, legislators and the public.” The 74-member council includes William E. Colby, former CIA director; Arnaud De Borchgrave, author and columnist; Lt. Gen. Daniel O. Graham, director of High Frontier and former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency; retired Adm. Bobby Inman, former deputy director of the CIA; retired Lt. Gen Brent Scowcroft, who headed the Presidential Commission on the MX; Dr. Edward Teller, nuclear physicist; and Clare Booth Luce, author, former congresswoman and former ambassador to Italy. Edwards told the group that U.S. goals are “”often foggy” and that the nation sometimes helps its enemies.”
||February 17, 1994, Christian Science Monitor, ‘Nonlethal Weapons Offer a Faustian Bargain’: “Over the past few years, a new kind of nonviolent-weapons research has quietly gained a foothold in the Pentagon and at the laboratories that have long designed this nation’s most destructive arms… Disabling effects are achieved through such temporary expedients as anti-traction agents, calmatives, stun guns, and supercaustics. More long-lasting changes result from using laser weapons, high-powered microwaves, and nonnuclear EMP… Among nonlethality’s most ardent proponents is Ray Cline, a former CIA deputy director who after his retirement established a United States Global Strategy Council to promote a “national nonlethality initiative” and other policies to advance American interests in an uncertain new global order. Co-chaired by conservative luminaries like former United Nations ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick and an array of former generals, admirals, and defense secretaries, the council formed a nonlethality policy review group in 1990 that bent the ears of Vice President Dan Quayle, Chief of Staff John Sununu, and National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft, persuading the Bush administration to establish a Nonlethality Task Force under the secretary of defense.”
||*) March 13, 1992, The Plain Dealer, ‘Scientist says Star Wars is huge waste’:“[describing Star Wars:] Nine years and $25 billion later, all we have is a still-expanding, high-risk, space-age national security pork barrel for contractors and top government managers… Star Wars was born in deception and raised in cynicism. In “Teller’s War,” William J. Broad, a reporter for the New York Times, details the false data reported on the X-ray laser, the first purported breakthrough in antimissile research… The point of SDI has been to keep the research and development money flowing… Multiple contractors are assigned to do the same work – and then to do it again and again. As a rule, the studies are not read. They get stored at different locations outside the Pentagon until room is needed for new ones. Then they are sometimes destroyed without the notice required by law… For example, my research was frustrated because about 3,000 documents were illegally destroyed in Huntsville, Ala., because of a lack of storage space… Approximately 200 studies from five major contractors showed that Star Wars, at a net cost of more than $1.37 trillion, would let through from 2% to 10% of enemy missiles at least. Other contractors estimated that an antimissile project that cost from $539 billion to $737 billion would deflect only 65% to 70% of enemy missiles… Star Wars officials mask how funds are spent, often shifting money from one program to another in what was informally known as a system of “IOUs” and “taxes.” SDIO regularly gave projects only 50% to 80% of the funds they had been allocated. When the program managers would ask for the balance, they were often told the money had been spent elsewhere. As far as Congress knew, the Pentagon had allocated the money as directed. Hundreds of millions have been secretly diverted this way. I was present once when Dr. Edward Teller of the University of California Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory said he needed $20 million for more studies of an already completed experiment on the X-ray laser. The SDI director, Lt. Gen. James Abrahamson, responded to the effect: “You’ve got it. I’ll give you an IOU. Just go ahead.”… The free-electron laser passed initial laboratory tests in late 1983 with flying colors, only to be cut back and eventually mothballed in 1991 because it threatened a competing higher cost alternative being developed at the Livermore laboratory. SDI administrators have bypassed low-cost tests involving actual ballistic missiles because they would have reduced the need for more paper studies. This occurred with the free-electron laser in 1983, as well as with the Mid-infrared Chemical Laser, and the Sealight Beam Director in 1990.” The author of this article was Aldric Saucier, who was persecuted for publicly criticizing Star Wars. Many US newspapers attacked the Pentagon and the White House in 1992 for persecuting this scientist although few described in any detail the diversion of funds.
*) March 2, 1992, New York Times, ‘Scientist Said to Assert Fraud in ‘Star Wars”: “Defense Secretary Dick Cheney has been ordered by a special council to investigate assertions made by a Pentagon scientist that officials of the “Star Wars” anti-missile defense program had violated the law and engaged in “gross waste of funds,” The Washington Post reported in Monday’s issue… The Post said the Office of Special Council had issued the directive on Friday after having found a “substantial likelyhood” that Mr. Saucier’s accusations were well-founded. It added that the directive had also conferred “whistle-blower” states on Mr. Saucier, who was dismissed last month from his job with the Star Wars project [after complaining too loud].” Aldric Saucier does not seem to have been alone in his criticism on Stars Wars.
*) October 31, 1986, Chicago Sun-Times, ‘No way to test SDI, experts in survey say’: “A majority of the nation’s scientific elite in fields basic to strategic defense research doubt that President Reagan’s proposed “star wars” system can be tested enough to guarantee it will thwart a full-scale nuclear attack, a survey showed yesterday. The survey, released by Sen. William Proxmire (D-Wis.), an opponent of the Strategic Defense Initiative, was conducted by a Cornell University research unit among the 663 members of the National Academy of Science with expertise in such fields as physics, chemistry, mathematics and engineering. The survey received results from 451 NAS members, or about 71 percent of those contacted. Of those responding, 78 percent said prospects were either extremely poor or poor that a survivable and cost-effective SDI system could be built within the next 25 years. Four percent said the odds of success were better than even. Eighty-seven percent said they considered it improbable or highly improbable that an integrated SDI system could be tested sufficiently to provide confidence it would work as intended the first time it had to defend against a full-scale attack. The survey also found that 60 percent said the annual SDI budget should be $1.5 billion or less, while 7 percent thought it should be greater than the $3.5 billion approved by Congress this year. Reagan had sought $5.3 billion in the current fiscal year.”
*) Augustus 18, 1993, New York Times, ‘Lies and Rigged ‘Star Wars’ Test Fooled the Kremlin, and Congress’: “Four former Reagan administration officials said officials in the “Star Wars” project deceived Congress and the Soviet Union. One deception was a rigged test in June 1984, when an interceptor missile like this one, launched in the Pacific, hit a target missile launched from California… “We put a beacon with a certain frequency on the target vehicle. On the missile we had a receiver.”” Other cases of this kind of deception have been reported. Some were even carried out in the early 1990s, after the Soviet Union was gone.
||1995, Alex Constantine, ‘Psychic Dictatorship in the U.S.A.’, chapter two: Blue Smoke & Lasers. This chapter has been used in part as a guide for the above references. In the chapter Constantive goes a bit more into the evidence that Star Wars was a front for the development of some of these EM weapons.
||April 1987, Issue 13, Lobster Magazine, Book review of the Jonathan Institute’s ‘Terrorism: how the West can win’: “This book is mostly junk, mere propaganda. I had it with me to read on the train when I visited Colin Wallace. I showed him the list of contributors and mentioned the Jonathan Institute. “Oh, a Mossad front, you mean”, he said, and put it down. A Mossad front? I don’t know. But misinformation at worst, wilfully partial at best, this sort of crude propaganda can only do the Israeli state harm in the long run.”
||*) May 6, 1980, The Gleaner, ‘Soviets and terrorism’: “The Jonathan Institute of Jerusalem, Israel, has published a pamphlet on “International Terrorism: The Soviet Connection”. The pamphlet consists of a number of presentations made at the Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism held July 2-5 last year… The first contributor, professor Richard Pipes of Harvard, … stated “The Soviet Union has enjoyed great success with terror and profited from it in many ways… We must expose its support of terrorism as widely as possible, and make the public aware of Soviet complicity… Brian Crozier, Director of the Institute for the Study of Conflict in London [and still chairman of Le Cercle], discussed the direct support that the Soviet Union has given to terrorist movements… Mr Crozier declared that the Soviets have provided training for terrorists within the USSR. He goes on to note the use of proxies by the Soviets Libya for example benefited from one of the biggest arms deals in history, an estimated $12 billion worth of arms were sold here by the Soviets in 1976… The other contributors, Ray S. Cline,… Robert Moss [le Cercle],… Jack Kemp, Major General George J. Keegan, and Senator Henry Jackson also look closely at Soviet involvement in terrorism.”
*) June 23, 1984, Washington Post, ‘His brother’s keeper’: “This weekend at the Four Seasons Hotel, the Jonathan Institute, which is named after Netanyahu’s slain brother, will begin its second conference on International Terrorism. Netanyahu helped organize the private, Israeli-based institute whose public board includes people like Shimon Peres and Menachem Begin. George Bush and the late Sen. Henry Jackson spoke at the institute’s first conference on terrorism in 1979, on the third anniversary of Jonathan Netanyahu’s death.”
*) 1991, Webster Griffin Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin, ‘George Bush – The unauthorized biography’: “Then there was the GOP delegation, which was led by George Bush. Here were Bush activist Ray Cline, Major General George Keegan, a stalwart supporter of Team B, and Professor Richard Pipes of Harvard, the leader of Team B. Here were Senator John Danforth of Missouri and Brian Crozier, a “terrorism expert.” Pseudo-intellectual columnist George Will (“Will the Shill”) was also on hand, as was Rome-based journalist Claire Sterling… International participation was also notable: Annie Kriegel and Jacques Soustelle of France, Lord Alun Chalfont, Paul Johnson, and Robert Moss of the United Kingdom, and many leading Israelis. The keynote statement was made by Prime Minister Begin…”
*) August 21, 1986, The Times, ‘Review of ‘Terrorism – How the West can win’:“[The Jonathan Institute's] first conference in 1979 gathered 50 distinguished speakers”
||February 24, 2006 issue, Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), ‘ Netanyahu’s Fascist Record: All Roads Lead to Shultz’: “As the story goes, Netanyahu left Shultz’s office and set up a meeting with his friend Doug Feith to discuss how to organize the conference. (Feith would be one of the authors of the “Clean Break” document that was written for Netanyahu more than a decade later, when he would become Prime Minister of Israel.) The Washington conference, held on June 24-27, 1984, was a mega-event. Some 36 experts on terrorism spoke during the four-day conference, including the self-described universal fascist Michael Ledeen, and many others from the U.S. neo-con stable who would later play an essential role in spreading the intelligence lies that were used for the invasion of Iraq.”
||June 25, 1984, Boston Globe, ‘Shultz says West must move to counter world terrorism’: “Secretary of State George P. Shultz said last night that pre- emptive actions by Western democracies may be necessary to counter the Soviet Union and other nations that he claimed have banded together in an international “league of terror.””
||June 26, 1984, Philadelphia Daily News, ‘Seeing Red – U.N. aide links Kremlin to terror’: “Weinberger was asked about a proposal by former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin to create a new international organization to fight terrorists. “We’ve got a U.N. organization that might well be called upon to deal with matters of this kind,” Weinberger replied.”
||April 15, 2005 issue, Dean Andromidas for Executive Intelligence Review, ‘How Wolfowitz and the Neo-Cons Sabotaged First ‘Oasis Plan”: “Along with George Shultz, Soustelle became a board member of Netanyahu’s Jonathan Institute for the Study of Terrorism.” (According to Tarpley and Chaitkin, Soustelle had attended the first Jonathan Institute conference)
||June 23, 1984, Washington Post, ‘His brother’s keeper’: “Netanyahu helped organize the private, Israeli-based [Jonathan] institute whose public board includes people like Shimon Peres and Menachem Begin.”
||April 1987, Issue 13, Lobster Magazine, Book review of ‘Terrorism: how the West can win’: “This is a collection of papers read at the 1984 Jonathan Institute conference on terrorism held in Israel, and because these were originally papers there is no documentation: what we have is 230 pages of assertions. The contributors range from current “experts” on terrorism – Paul Johnson, Michael Ledeen, Claire Sterling, Lord Chalfont, Arnaud de Borchgrave – to a group of US government officials including Kirkpatrick, Schultz, Meese and Webster of the FBI.”
||February 1984, Issue 3, Lobster Magazine, ‘American Friends: the Anti-CND Groups’: “In 1981 FARI published an absurd booklet by their chairman Sir Frederick Bennett MP claiming Russian money was being used by CND.”
September 1986, Issue 12, Lobster Magazine, ‘The British Right – scratching the surface – Digression 2′: “When Gable wrote his memo FARI was being funded by the South African government (although it is possible that Gable was unaware of this), and its Council included four men who have appeared in Searchlight: Julian Amery (connection with the Italian fascist party, MSI, in March 1979), Lord Chalfont (connections with Chile, August 1979), and Robert Moss and Brian Crozier (all over issue 18, 1975).”
||March 20, 2004, Daily Telegraph, Obituary of Geoffrey Stewart-Smith: “In 1974 he had sought to distance his Foreign Affairs Circle from the World Anti-Communist League because of the WACL’s strong anti-Semitic element, saying: “We wouldn’t touch them with a barge pole.” However, he later admitted that another of his organisations, the Foreign Affairs Research Institute, had been mainly funded by the apartheid government in South Africa. The admission came in 1987 when Stewart-Smith appeared at the London Bankruptcy Court, disclosing debts of pounds 150,388 and no assets.”
||April 1986, Issue 11, Lobster Magazine, ‘Wilson, MI5 and the Rise of Thatcher – Covert Operations in British Politics 1974-1978 – Appendix 3′: “FARI was also reported to be receiving money from the US company Lockheed (Counterspy November 1981)”
||Ibid.: “FARI was said to have “strong CIA links” by Gerry Gable in a memo leaked to the New Statesman.”
||*) Ibid.: “Nevertheless FARI has grown and grown. In 1980 it began organising an annual ‘balance of power’ conference in Britain, attracting some of the top level figures on the new right: Feulner of the Heritage Foundation, Ray Cline of NSIC, Frank Barnet of NSIC and the Committee for the Present Danger, General Daniel Graham ex-’Team B’, DIA etc.”
*) http://www.ajweberman.com/monica.htm: “In June 1978, FARI co-sponsored a conference in Brighton, England with the CIA-connected Institute for the Study of Conflict. Among those who attended was Richard Mellon Scaife. Also attending the conference was William Casey, who would later be appointed head of the CIA by Ronald Reagan.” The information on this page seems to be very good.
||December 27, 1991, Milwaukee Journal, Obituary of Richard Stilwell: “From 1949 to 1952, served as chief of Far East Division of the CIA and later took command of a regiment in Korea.”
||Ibid.: “At his death, [Stilwell] was president of Stilwell Associates, a consulting firm in Arlington, Va., with the Defense Department and the CIA among his clients.”
||September 16, 1987, Philadelphia Inquirer, ‘U.S. backing for Philippine junta alleged’: “Last month, another American visitor to the islands raised further suspicions of U.S. covert involvement. That visitor was Richard G. Stilwell… Stilwell visited the Philippines for 10 days in August, leaving the country shortly before the Honasan uprising.”
||Ibid.: “Singlaub came to the Philippines in November and early this year on visits that he described as purely private, a search for sunken treasure. But when the visits were disclosed in the Philippines, Singlaub immediately left Manila amid reports that his real purpose may have been linked to covert operations.” Large excepts in Stilwell’s biography.
||December 7, 1986, Washington Post, ’2 Americans advised Enrile against attempting coup’: “A former CIA official and a retired general traveled to the Philippines last month and counseled then-defense minister Juan Ponce Enrile against leading a coup attempt against President Corazon Aquino. Former Central Intelligence Agency deputy director Ray Cline, now a research professor at Georgetown University and head of the U.S. Global Strategy Council, confirmed yesterday that he and retired general Robert Schweitzer made the trip. But Cline denied a report by U.S. News & World Report magazine that he made the trip “secretly” with the “knowledge and encouragement” of the White House. Cline said that he and Schweitzer met with Enrile and other officials, but he said he was not an official U.S. representative and did not discuss the trip with the White House. Enrile served as deposed President Ferdinand Marcos’ defense minister and was kept in the post by Aquino after he helped lead the coup that overthrew Marcos last February. She forced Enrile to resign last month after persistent speculation on a coup attempt.”
||Detroit Free Press (MI) December 8, 1986, ‘Shake-up occurred after military memo faulted Aquino’: “President Corazon Aquino’s reorganization of the government last month took place after military leaders gave her an 11-page memorandum that criticized “inactivity and/or inadequacies” of her administration and demanded military and civil reforms. The top-secret document, a copy of which was made available to Knight-Ridder Newspapers, was described by one senior military official who requested anonymity as a way to “gently coerce” Aquino. “We are telling her what to do,” said another military figure who also requested anonymity, “and there is an implied threat all through it about what will happen if she doesn’t.” The document was signed by Gen. Fidel Ramos, the armed forces chief of staff, and all six service commanders, and endorsed by then-Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile, dismissed from the cabinet after he was linked to a coup plot last month… “Ramos wrote about 60 or 70 percent of that document,” said one military official who participated in several of the top- level meetings that led to the creation of the memorandum. “But he was so tense by that time that I think he didn’t really know which way was up.” The official spoke on condition of anonymity.”
||September 16, 1987, Philadelphia Inquirer, ‘U.S. backing for Philippine junta alleged’
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p. 135-136
||*) Mostly documented in 1999, Adam Curtis, ‘The Mayfair Set’ (broadcasted on BBC2). This documentary does not discuss the role of George Kennedy Young, Billy McLean and the Mossad.
*) May 1990, Issue 19, Lobster, ‘The final testimony of George Kennedy Young – Introduction’ (written by Young himself): “However Nasser did get his uppance. Young had already left MI6 for merchant banking when Mossad approached him to find an Englishman acceptable to the Saudis to run a guerrilla war against the left-wing Yemeni regime and its Egyptian backers. ‘I can find you a Scotsman’, replied Young, and over a lunch in the City introduced Colonel Neil (‘Billy’) Maclean to Brigadier Dan Hiram, the Israeli Defence Attache. The Israelis promised to supply weapons, funds and instructors who could pass themselves off as Arabs, and the Saudis eagerly grasped the idea. Maclean’s irregulars restored the Imam’s rule and Nasser pulled out his troops whose morale had been badly shaken by the Yemeni practice of sending back captured troops with their lips cut cut off in a ghastly grin.”
More details in the 1001 Club article on PEHI.
||August 11, 1991, Hartford Courant, ‘Americares’ success hailed, criticized charity uses clout and connections…’. Large excerpts can be found in the biography of General Stilwell in the PEHI membership list accompanying this article.
||1997, Robert Hutchinson, Their Kingdom Come, p. 355-359
||1993, Brian Crozier, Free Agent, p.186: “After the first election victory but before taking office, Reagan had appointed another of his Californian friends, William A. Wilson, to liaise both with the Pinay Cercle (see Ch. XV) and with The 61.” Wilson was personal representative of President Reagan to the Vatican 1981-1984 and United States Ambassador to the Vatican 1984-1986. For details on Wilson’s membership in the Knights of Malta see the membership list.
||Ibid., p. 197: “Von Machtenberg had telephoned both reports to me, and I immediately passed them on to the appropriate authorities. They were relayed to 10 Downing Street, the White House, and the Elysée. Albertini, who had alerted the latter, also, with my encouragement, passed the intelligence on to the Vatican (always a factor in any crisis affecting Catholic Poland, birthplace of Pope John Paul II).”
||August 11, 1991, Hartford Courant, ‘Americares’ success hailed, criticized charity uses clout and connections…’: “The alliance between Macauley and Ritter led to an audience with Pope John Paul II in Rome in 1982. (Ritter left Covenant House in February 1990 after accusations of sexual misconduct with some male runaways he was helping). The meeting with the pope gave life to AmeriCares. Although Macauley started AmeriCares in 1979, the organization did not go on its first relief mission until 1982, when the pope asked Macauley to send aid to his native Poland.” More information in Stilwell’s biography.
||1997, Robert Hutchinson, ‘Their Kingdom Come – Inside the Secret World of Opus Dei’, p. 263-264: “P2 was formed in the late 1960s, allegedly at the behest of Giordano Gamberini, a Grand Master of the Grand Orient of Italy and friend of Gulio Andreotti. But he was much closer to Francesco Cosentino, who also was well introduced in Vatican circles. Either Andreotti or Cosentino, or perhaps both, were said to have suggested the creation of a small cell of trusted right-wing personalities in key national sectors, but especially banking, intelligence and the press, to guard against what they perceived as ‘the creeping communist threat’. The person Gamberini chose to develop the P2 Lodge was a small-time textile magnate from the Tuscan town of Arezzo, midway between Florence and Perugia, who after two as a Freemason had risen to the Italian equivalent of Master Mason. His name, of course, was Licio Gelli. But the P2′s top man, according to Calvi, was none other than Andreotti, followed in line of command by Cosentino and Ortolani[Umberto Ortolani; secret chamberlain of the Papal Household; member of the inner council of the Knights of Malta; said to be a member of Cardinal Giacomo Lercano; met with Licio Gelli, Roberto Calvi, and others in Rome in December 1969]. Andreotti always denied Calvi’s allegation. But the fact remains that Calvi feared Andreotti more than Gelli or Ortolani. As for Cosentino, he died soon after the P2 hearings began.”
||2005, Daniele Ganser, ‘Nato’s Secret Armies’, p. 74: “Frank Gigliotti [one-time assistant to a hypnotist; Presbyterian clergyman; worked with teenaged boys, for whom he organized a social club named the Guiseppe Mazzini Club; recruited by the OSS; active in Italy] of the US Masonic Lodge personally recruited Gelli and instructed him to set up an anti-Communist parallel government in Italy in close cooperation with the CIA station in Rome. ‘It was Ted Shackley, director of all covert operations of the CIA in Italy in the 1970s’, an internal report of the Italian anti-terrorism unit confirmed, ‘who presented the chief of the Masonic Lodge to Alexander Haig’. According to the document, Nixon’s Military adviser General Haig [later Pilgrims Society executive], who had commanded US troops in vietnam and thereafter from 1974 to 1979 served as NATO’s SACEUR, and Nixon’s National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger [Le Cercle] ‘authorized Gelli in the fall of 1969 to recruit 400 high ranking Italian and NATO officers into his lodge’. (60)… the secretive anti-Communist P2 members list confiscated [in 1981] counted at least 962 members, with total leadership estimated at 2,500… 52 were high-ranking officers of the Carabinieri paramilitary police, 50 were high-ranking officers of the Italian Army, 37 were high-ranking officers of the Finance Police, 29 were high-ranking officers of the Italian Navy, 11 were Presidents of the police, 70 were influential and wealthy industrialists, 10 were Presidents of banks, 3 were acting Ministers, 2 were former Ministers, 1 was President of a political party, 38 were members of parliament and 14 were high-ranking judges. Others on lower levels of the social hierarchy were mayors, Directors of hospitals, lawyers, notaries and journalists.”
||http://www.constantinian.org.uk/. You can’t link directly to the relevant pages of this site. The names mentioned in this article can be found in the history of the organization and are spread throughout reports of the order’s activities.
||1990, Hugo Gijssels, De Bende & Co., p. 174 (translated from Dutch to English):“Finally, Paul Vankerkhoven is also co-founder and vice chairman of ‘l’Institut Européen de Développement’, of which the seat is located in the castle of baron de Bonvoisin.”
||A combination of two sources describing the same police documents.
*) 1999, Annemie Bulté, Douglas De Coninck, & Marie-Jeanne Van Heeswyck, ‘The X-Dossiers – What Belgium was not supposed to know about the Dutroux case’, p. 345-346 (only available in Dutch and French and generally hard to get at the moment). This book does not give specific names (anywhere in the book) and does not mention Opus Dei.
*) The French summary of the Dutroux X-Files made by investigative reporter Jean Nicolas who at some point gained access to the Dutroux and King Albert dossiers, consisting of more than 20.000 pages and many tape recordings of witnesses. Specific file numbers: pv. 250 (Z156) of January 8, 1997 and pv. 466 (Z156) of January 16, 1997. These file numbers match those given by the investigative reporters of the book ‘The X-Dossiers’ who worked for mainstream newspapers as De Morgen. The French summary also gives a few more details, including Thoma’s statement that he was told this was part of an Opus Dei initiation. The hints about one or two of the perpetrators given in the book ‘The X-Dossiers’ match those named the French document.
||2001, Jean Nicolas and Frédéric Lavachery, ‘Dossier Pédophilie – Le scandale de l’affaire Dutroux’, p. 193. The authors have included an uncensored transcript of a meeting between Christine Doret, Jean-Claude Garot and André Pinon that was taped without the knowledge of participant/witness Doret. Other authors have reported on this tape, but censored the names. The descriptions of the persons involved match with the names given in other publications. 1990, Hugo Gijssels, De Bende & Co., p. 135 adds about Boeynants “In a May 1988 interview with Vrij Nederland [Free Holland] Congressman [now Senator] Hugo Coveliers [of Belgium] declares without any sign of doubt that Vanden Boeynants is mentioned in the Pinon dossier as one of the participants in the sex-parties. Vanden Boeynants, who has a habit of bombarding the press with demands for explanations and legal threats, lets these serious accusations blow over without response. He does not react in any way.”
||1990, Hugo Gijssels, De Bende & Co., p. 129-130
||*) http://www.orderofmalta.org/eur_paese.asp?idlingua=5&paese=2:“DELEGATION DE L’ORDRE AUPRES DU GOUVERNEMENT: BELGIQUE Domaine du Fuji, 21 – B 1970 Wezembeek – Oppem Tél: +322.731.30.60 – Fax: +322.782.16.00 E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org”
*) Jonet was recently raised to peerage.
“Représentations diplomatiques de l’Ordre et autres organisations : Belgique Représentant (1 janvier 2002) Le Baron Jonet Domaine de Fuji, 21 – B-1970 Wezembeek-Oppem Tél.: +32.2.731.30.60 Fax: +32.2.782.16.00 E-mail : email@example.com”
*) Jonet’s wife: http://www.ordredemaltebelgium.org/belg_org_admin.html:
“CONSEIL D’ADMINISTRATION DE L’ASSOCIATION BELGE DE L’ORDRE DE MALTE
Administrateurs membres du Comité de Direction
Le Prince Baudoin de Merode, Président
Le Baron de Barsy, Coadjuteur
Le Baron Arnoud Papeians de Morchoven, Chancelier
La Baronne Jonet, Hospitalier
Le Comte Jean-Pierre de Beauffort, Trésorier.
Le Comte de Borchgrave d’Altena Merghelynck… “
||1990, Hugo Gijssels, De Bende & Co., p. 129-130
||Some examples of Opus Dei’s influence on the Franco dictatorship from the 1957 to the 1970:
*) February 9, 1960, The Times, ‘Spanish Newspaper Ownership – Acquisitions by Opus Dei’: “The acquisition of substantial holdings in Madrid and provincial newspapers is among the recent moves of Opus Dei, a Roman Catholic secular society which is becoming a force to watch in Spanish political life… Since General Franco’s Cabinet reshuffle in February 1957, members of Opus Dei have penetrated into a number of key positions in the government and seats of learning.”
*) July 30, 1969, Star News, ‘Spanish Catholic Lay Group May Hold Key to Future’: “Now that 76-year-old chief of state Francisco Franco has named Prince Juan Carlos to succeed him, one of the most stabilizing forces in the transition to a post-Franco era will be a little-known and less understood organization called Opus Dei… Though the extent of their influence is not fully known, informed sources estimate that three or four major banking chains, vast real estate holdings and several key industries are in their hands. In addition, Opus Dei people are said to control two Madrid daily newspapers, a considerable share of the provincial press, a national press agency and a broadcasting station. Opus Dei’s University of Navarro the only private university in Spain, turns out some of the country’s most skilled journalists… Much of .the credit for Spain’s rapid economic advance during the last decade goes to Opus Dei members. At present, five or six of Franco’s cabinet members are generally regarded as being in the Opus Dei camp, thereby constituting the largest minority in the cabinet. The number of lower-ranking government officials with strong Opus Dei leanings is believed to run into the hundreds.”
*) August 26, 1969, The Times, ”Resign’ call in Spain’: “All the key economic ministries [in Spain] are controlled by Opus Dei members, or sympathizers.”
*) October 30, 1969, The Times, ‘Riot as Franco alters Cabinet’: “The Spanish government officially announced the names of General Franco’s new Cabinet tonight, and confirmed earlier speculation that members of the powerful Roman Catholic lay organization Opus Dei will dominate Spain’s future… Only four of the 18 Cabinet posts are unaffected… One of the most significant changes in the appointment of Senor Gregorio Lopez Bravo [Opus Dei], the former Minister of Industry, to be Minister of Foreign Affairs… Senor Lopez Bravo is widely credited in the Spanish capital with being pro-British, pro-European and pro-American. He will therefore carry the hopes of many Spaniards for a solution to problems such as the Gibraltar dispute, entry into the European Common Market and the question of continued American use of military bases in Spain. Senor Lopez Bravo has visited Britain twice in recent months and is and is well regarded there in British business circles… There is no doubt in Madrid that most of the new non-military ministers are members of Opus Dei… At the very least it is a victory of the 48-year-old [pro-Europe] Senor Loreano Lopez Rodo, a member of Opus Dei and hitherto Minister without Portfolio, who not only retains his authority to supervise various ministries, but is also reported to have gained the post Secretary to the Presidency, equivalent in authority to that of Vice-President.” Alfredo Sanchez Bello, brother of the head of Opus Dei in Spain, became Minister of Information and Tourism. Federico Silva Munoz was one of the four ministers who remained in office.
*) April 15, 1970, Winnipeg Free Press, ‘Franco Tips Power To Opus Dei’:“When Franco named his new government last October he broke precedent by giving the bulk of the power to a single group, the Roman Catholic lay organization Opus Dei. Public information officials of Opus Dei acknowledge that at least three members of their movement hold key spots in the cabinet… Other sources say at least 10 of the 19 cabinet ministers have close ties to Opus Dei… Opus Dei, for example, was influential in Franco’s decision to name Prince Juan Carlos as his successor [through Otto von Habsburg]. But even while it was working for his selection, Opus Dei took the precaution of planting its men in the entourages of the other two pretenders to the throne; Juan Carlos’ father, Don Juan, the Count of Barcelona; and Prince Hugo de Bourbon Parma. Prince Juan Carlos has had an Opus Dei priest as his confessor and by official account has studied under Opus Dei professors. Most of his advisers are reported to be Opus men.”
*) October 30, 1970, The Times, ‘After Franco – the question that is still unanswerable; Hugh Thomas writes that Opus Dei, the ‘New Templars’, control Spain’: “The arrival in power of the first members of Opus Dei was soon followed by Spain’s application for association with the Common Market… But the last government reshuffle, in October 1969, coincided with a new hardening of the regime in many respects – for example, press censorship.”
||German Wikipedia article on Otto von Habsburg
||February 24, 1967, Time Magazine, ‘Struggle for Freedom’: “The most talked-about subject in Spain last week was something that did not happen: the failure of the Cabinet to pass a bill that would at last grant a measure of religious freedom to Spain’s tiny non-Catholic minority… For years, Spain’s non-Catholics have almost been non-people, barred from participating in the mainstream of Spanish life. They were, in fact, not even officially recognized as having been born, married or buried—since Spain acknowledged those milestones only when they were sanctioned by the Catholic clergy… Castiella, who has championed the bill for ten years, nevertheless pressed on with his familiar argument: granting religious freedom was not only the right thing to do morally but also the right thing for Spain if it wants to become a respected member of the world community. Several of the ministers who are identified with the Opus Dei laymen’s organization supported him. But the opposition quickly closed ranks. Interior Minister Camilo Alonso Vega, 77, who as Spain’s top cop maintains that the Spanish are “the most unruly people in Europe”, argued that religious freedom would only stir up trouble, just as the earlier measures granting workers and students more freedom resulted in the present rash of strikes and student riots. On a more philosophical level, Public Works Minister Federico Silva Munoz, 43, contended that granting religious liberty to minority sects would shatter Spain’s spiritual unity. The ministers connected with the military supported the views of Vega and Munoz…”
||October 30, 1969, The Times, ‘Riot as Franco Alters Cabinet’: “The Spanish Government officially announced the names of General Franco’s new Cabinet tonight, and confirmed earlier speculation that members of the powerful Roman Catholic lay organization Opus Dei will dominate Spain’s future… Only four of the 18 Cabinet posts are unaffected… The new Cabinet is as follows… Public Works. – Federico Silva Munoz (unchanged).”
||April 11, 1970, The Times, ‘Resignation of Spanish Minister’: “One of General Franco’s “technocrat” ministers resigned today, possibly as the result of a deep ideological split in the government, reliable sources said. Senor Federico Silva Munoz, aged 46, Minister of Public Works since June, 1965, was said to have given his resignation to the General this morning… The present Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Senor Gonzalo Fernandez de la Mora, was said to have been chosen as the new Minister of Public Works. Like most of the present Cabinet, and unlike his predecessor, he is known to be a sympathizer with, if not a member of, the powerful Roman Catholic lay organization Opus Dei… [Munoz] is also thought, as a technocrat without any strong political orientation, to have been opposed to the reactionary political attitude of of Vice-President Carrerro Blanco and some other ministries.” Interesting, Munoz was among the most reactionary politicians of the post-Franco government.
||October 11, 1976, The Times, ‘Suarez regime challenged from the right as new party is launched by Franco era politicians’: “;Senor Silva Munoz, now head of Campsa, the oil concern;”
||July 4, 1976, The Modesto Bee, ‘King Juan Carlos names new premier of Spain’:“A third name submitted to the monarch by the Council of the Realm, his top advisory body, was that of Federico Silva Munoz, 52, a Christian Democrat and former public works minister.”
||Winter 1986, Issue 25, Covert Action Information, ‘Knights of Darkness – The Sovereign Military Order of Malta’: “Recognition of the importance of Opus Dei at the highest levels of SMOM had already been established in the summer of 1976 when King Juan-Carlos, himself a Knight of Malta, chose Adolfo Suarez, a member of Opus Dei, as new chief of government following the death of Franco. (Point de Vue, January 14, 1983; Paris.)”
||October 11, 1976, The Times, ‘Suarez regime challenged from the right as new party is launched by Franco era politicians’. Munoz, Fernandez de la Mora, Fraga, and Rodo are mentioned as founders of Allianza Popular, together with two other anonymous ex-Franco ministers.
||January 10, 1979, El Pais, ‘Silva Muñoz unites with the ultraright to be presented at the elections’ (translated from Spanish):“Federico Silva, Gonzalo Fernández de la Mora, Raimundo Fernández Cuesta, Blas Piñar, José Antonio Girón and other political leaders have formed a coalition named Union of the Right [that] involves all political forces to the right of the coalition Fraga-Areilza-Osorio, in other words, the Derecha Democrática Española and the gathering of national forces [a reference to Pinar's New Force, which had the aim of "gathering the national forces"].” This is a rough translation (as my Spanish is very rusty) from “… Girón y otros dirigentes políticos han formado una coalición unitaria que se llamará Unión de Derechas y que agrupa a todas las fuerzas políticas situadas a la derecha de la coalición Fraga-Areilza-Osorio, es decir, la Derecha Democrática Española y las llamadas fuerzas nacionales.”
||December 1, 1979, El Pais, ‘The Constitution is a permanent factor of distortion, according to Federico Silva’ (translated from Spanish): “The Constitution that was passed and that we accepted, even though we don’t agree with most aspects of it, will continue be a permanent factor of distortion on the national life and of the life of the right[-wingers] in particular, says Federico Silva Munoz, promoter of Derecha Democrática Española, in a declaration to the European Press Agency. Their [political] group will celebrate their first national congress on the 8th and 9th of this month.”
||September-October 1997, Issue 85, Razón Española (translated from Spanish): “I met Federico in the 1940s at a conference of the National Catholic Association of Propagandist to which he belonged, and from then on we were united in great friendship.” http://www.galeon.com/razonespanola/re85-sil.htm
||Ibid (translated from Spanish): “The Balmes Foundation was founded in 1983, supported by grants made by the German Hans Seidel Foundation. Its [Balmes Foundation] main purpose was to establish the magazine Razon Espanola on October 1, 1983. Without that initial German impulse, maintained in a decreasing way, our publication, which didn’t have even minimal support of the Spanish Administration, would have been impossible. The name of Federico Silva is indissolubly linked to this magazine, in which he collaborated as an objective and neutral columnist over several years.”
||Can’t get access any time soon to the sources the articles below refer to, so these will have to do for now:
*) November 1987, Issue 14, Lobster Magazine, ‘US involvement in the Fiji coup d’etat’: “Another foreign influence in Fijian politics has been the Hans Seidel Foundation, the foreign arm of Franz-Josef Strauss’ Christian Social Union, which has an impressive building in Suva. HSF functions as a West German version of NED/PDU, works closely with the Heritage Foundation, and in Fiji has been involved in aid projects, television programming, and assistance to the Alliance Party. The foundation is regarded with considerable suspicion in Fiji. It is credited with spending millions of dollars on a Fijian grassroots cultural revival which has been thin cover for fostering the Taukei movement.”
*) 1989, Issue 18, Lobster Magazine, ”: “. “The Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung, the political trust attached to Strauss’ Christian Social Union party, is an important group in international parapolitical manipulation. Active in Latin America for the Contras,(3) supporting Mobuto in Zaire, involved in the Fiji coup in 1987, it was caught diverting state development aid from Germany into right-wing party coffers in Ecuador in the same year.”
*) January 1991, International Affairs (RIIA magazine), ‘Foreign Political Aid: The German Political Foundations and Their US Counterparts’: “The Seidel Foundation supported the personal links established between the CSU leader, Franz Josef Strauss, and such African politicians as President Mobutu of Zaire and President Eyadema of Togo.”
*) 1995, Catholics for a Free Choice, ‘Opus Dei: The Pope’s Right Arm in Europe’:“The Hanns-Seidel Foundation, based in Germany, is accredited with and receives funding from the European Union. The foundation is linked with the CSU (the Bavarian Christian Democrat) party of the late Fritz Pirkl, who was in the European Parliament and served on the boards of directors of Hanns-Seidel and the Rhine-Danube Foundation. Together with Limmat, Hanns-Seidel has funded Opus Dei’s extensive operations in the Philippines, including the Centre for Research and Communication. The centre’s “self-declared task is to form the future economic and political elite of the country,” writes Opus Dei critic Peter Hertel. “Under President Corazon Aquino, Opus members have put a decisive stamp on the country’s Constitution.”“
||May 30, 1980, The Times, ‘A Strauss Profile’, reply from Brian Crozier.
||November 2, 1982, Brian Crozier in The Times, ‘Is democracy such a good thing?’:“We all have our intellectual assumptions, and the prevailing assumption in the West is that party democracy is necessarily good and dictatorship necessarily bad… The cause of relief was that the fragile flower of Spanish democracy was being saved – the important thing being the salvation of party democracy, not whether party democracy is necessarily good for Spain or will necessarily solve Spain’s problems, which is at least open to doubt if hard facts mean anything. Since Franco died in 1975, inflation and unemployment have soared in Spain. So have terrorism and non-political crime. Moreover, the politicians have saddled their country with an unworkable constitution…”
||November 1988, Issue 17, David Teacher for Lobster Magazine, ‘The Pinay Circle and Destabilisation in Europe’
||February 5-6, 2004, European Navigator/Jean Monnet Foundation for Europe, Otto von Habsburg in an interview with European Navigator replies to the question what he thinks were the key players in European integration (translated from French): “Charles de Gaulle in the first place. Certainly one of the big visionaries of Europe… There are a lot of difficulties with the French, but we cannot make it without them. They are an essential element to us and without De Gaulle… France would have collapsed completely.”
||Paneuropa Jugend Bayern, 80 Jahre Paneuropa (translated from German):
“At the 1973 general meeting in Straßburg [Austria], Otto von Habsburg was finally elected as international president [of the Paneuropa Union] at the suggestion of French president and excited Paneuropean Georges Pompidou after he [Otto] had occupied the office temporarily for a year.”
||*) August 1984, Issue 5, Jonathan Marshall for Lobster Magazine, ‘Brief Notes On The Political Importance Of Secret Societies’: “[Opus Dei] was said to have influenced Robert Schumann, Antoine Pinay and Paul Baudoin, former President of the Banque de L’Indochine and Vichy Foreign Minister. Above all, however, Opus Dei made inroads through Baudoin’s protege Edmond Giscard, who shared a variety of colonial enterprises with the BIC group. Edmond, father of Valery, was President of the Banque des Interets Francais (BIF), of which minority control rested with Opus Dei’s Banco Popular Espanol. Another Opus Dei connection was forged through the treasurer of Valery Giscard d’Estaing’s Independent Republican Party, the Prince Jean de Broglie. De Broglie was President of a Luxembourg firm, Sodetex S.A., an affiliate of the Spanish textile firm Matesa, which was at the centre of an enormous Opus Dei-linked financial scandal that rocked the Spanish government in the late 1960s. There is evidence that the Opus Dei-Matesa network siphoned off money for the campaign of Giscard…”
*) Additional: 1994, R.T. Naylor (Professor of Economics at McGill University), Hot Money and the Politics of Debt, p. 267: “Pinay was installed by Bobby Leclerc in 1969 as president of the Compagnie de Guarantie des Investissements Industriels et Financiers in Geneva, which used Pinay’s name to attract French funds. Leclerc also had good relations with… Valéry Giscard d’Estaing. Not least important of Leclerc’s activities was his role, with Prince Jean de Broglie, cofounder of Giscard’s Independent Republican party, in the administration of Sodatex, the Luxembourg-based holding company through which the principals of the notorious MATESA were looting Spanish government subsidy money in the 1960s… After the MATESA scandal broke,… came charges that Sodatex was the center of a huge arms- and drug-dealing operation across the French-Luxembourg border. All this assured that, when de Broglie was gunned down in a Paris street in 1976, the subsequent exposure of links to Sodatex set off a run on Bobby Leclerc’s bank.” Original source of Naylor is: 1982, Jesus Ynfante, ‘Une Crime sous Giscard’.
||December 14, 1981, Time Magazine, ‘The Rothschilds are roving’: “Banque Rothschild is being nationalized by the socialist government of French President François Mitterrand, along with the country’s other major banks and holding companies… Unaffected by the nationalization are the nonbank personal holdings of Baron Guy and Cousins Baron Alain and Baron Elie, including New Court Securities, a U.S. investment firm based in New York City, which will now receive more of the family’s attention and money. And beginning Jan. 1, 1982, New Court will change its name to a more golden sounding sobriquet: Rothschild Inc. Founded with $2 million in 1967, New Court today manages a portfolio worth more than $1 billion, including funds from such corporate clients as General Foods, TRW and Hughes Aircraft… That bullishness on America’s prospects is shared by Co-Chairman Guy, who has been commuting monthly since last June between Paris and New Court’s offices in New York City’s Rockefeller Center. Guy will not move permanently to the U.S., and Cousin Elie’s son Nathaniel, 34, a graduate of the Harvard Business School, is a prime candidate to direct U.S. operations eventually. Says Guy: “My great-grandfather sent one of his sons, my grandfather Alphonse, to America in 1848. After returning to France, Alphonse pleaded with his father that the U.S. was the coming country and that there should be a House of Rothschild there. It’s an enormous pity that my grandfather’s advice was not heeded. As far as I’m concerned, we should have had a Rothschild bank in the U.S. since the middle of the 19th century. Our involvement in America now is really 100 years late in arriving.””
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p. 217-218: “At the Cercle meeting in Washington in December 1980, Georges Albertini had brought along a quiet Frenchman named Francois de Grossouvre. This was an impressive example of his foresight. De Grossouvre, a physician, was the closest friend and confidant of the Socialist leader and presidential candidate Francois Mitterrand. For many years, Grossouvre had carried out special missions for Mitterrand. By nature and training, he was self-effacing. He played no part in our debates, but listened carefully, taking notes. Five months later, Francois Mitterrand narrowly defeated Valéry Giscard d’Estaing in France’s presidential elections. One of his first actions was to appoint de Grossouvre as his coordinator of security and intelligence. Shortly after, having obtained his direct line from Albertini, I went to see him in his modest office in the Elysée Palace.”
||2005, Daniele Ganser, ‘NATO’s Secret Armies’, p. 101: “[The SDECE's] name changed to Direction Generale de la Securite Exterieure (DGSE) and Admiral Pierre Lacoste became its new Director. Lacoste continued to run the secret Gladio army of the DGSE in close cooperation with NATO…” Ganser, p. 90:“Maybe the most famous member of the French secret anti-Communist Rose des Vents [French Stay Behind/Gladio] army was Francois Grossouvre who in 1981 became the adviser of Socialist President Francois Mitterand for secret operations.”
||October 6, 1985, New York Times, ‘Greenpeace ship reaches test site’: “The Greenpeace flagship has arrived off the coast of the French nuclear test site in the South Pacific, where it joined another protest ship from the organization… The Greenpeace replaced the Rainbow Warrior, which was blown up on July 10 by French agents in New Zealand’s Auckland harbor… Meanwhile, the largest opposition newspaper in Paris, Le Figaro, reported Friday that Mr. Mitterrand must have known of plans to sink the Rainbow Warrior, which was preparing to lead the Mururoa protest. Mr. Mitterrand’s Socialist Government acknowledged secret service responsibility for the sinking last month. Defense Minister Charles Hernu and Adm. Pierre Lacoste, the head of the secret service, resigned because of the scandal. Le Figaro, without citing its sources, said the decision to mine the Rainbow Warrior was made in June in a meeting at the Elysee Palace attended by Mr. Hernu, Admiral Lacoste and the presidential adviser, Francois de Grossouvre. It was ”not believable” that Mr. de Grossouvre failed to inform Mr. Mitterrand of the sabotage plans, Le Figaro contended.”
||July 14, 2004, Bloomberg News, ‘France’s Chirac Pledges Referendum on EU Constitution’: “At the EU leaders summit in June when the constitution was agreed, Chirac said he views the U.K. referendum as a final test of whether Britain’s allegiances are to Europe, the U.S. or its former empire. He also floated the idea in April of forcing any country that rejects the constitution to leave the EU.” http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=
||April 15, 2005, BBC, ‘Chirac makes case for EU treaty’: “President Jacques Chirac has taken part in a live TV debate in France to try to persuade its people to vote in favour of the proposed EU constitution… Mr Chirac warned a No vote against the new constitution – designed to streamline institutions to make decision-making easier in an enlarged union of 25 countries – would be a disaster for Europe… It would halt the European project in its tracks, and pave the way to an unregulated, uncontrolled free-market world, dominated by the United States. He said it would be in the interest of Anglo-Saxon countries or the US to stop “European construction” and that France would be weakened if it voted No.” http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4442823.stm
||June 16, 2005, BBC, ‘EU: What kind of club?’: “It is startling for example that Valery Giscard d’Estaing, the grandee who chaired the convention that wrote the constitution, now says it was mistake to send a copy of the 448-page document to every French home. He told the New York Times that he had begged President Chirac not to do this. “It is not possible for anyone to understand the full text,” he pronounced.”
||February 28, 2006, speech at the London School of Economics entitled ‘The Political Future of Europe’ http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/LSEPublicLecturesAndEvents/
||2005, Ausgabe 2-3, Eurojournal pro management, p. 14, committee member Otto von Habsburg: “The original wording of the Constitution draft by Giscard d’Estaing was quite short and comprehensible. So why did it fail to convince the voters? This is plain: a campaign launched with the help of a book thick with legal terminology which, the bureaucrats hoped, voters would read and comprehend. Much money was spent, but nothing was gained. A Commission full of aged politicians to work on the draft which spoilt it just as “too many cooks spoil the broth”. Giscard d’Estaing knew what would happen with his initial draft, and later photographs show the expression of a man in desperation who knew that should this revamped version fail, then he would be responsible anyway… No attempt was made to reach out to future generations as did the late pope John Paul II or as Pope Benedict XVI now does; two old men who somehow managed and manage to enthuse the masses. It is therefore no wonder that the battle was lost; the idea however still lives on, but we need new politicians to bring the idea home to voters.”
||The following documents are accessible through the Henry Jackson website.
*) September 29, 2005, Marko Attila Hoare for the Henry Jackson Society, ‘Turkey, the EU and the Armenian Genocide’: “Turkey is at a delicate stage in the transition to democracy, which it is the duty of democratic Europe to assist. Yet this may require some commensurate reform of consciousness on the part of Western Europe. Turkey needs the EU to help it reform its consciousness; but for the same reason, the EU needs Turkey.”
*) June 10, 2005, Hendrik Puschmann for the Henry Jackson Society, ‘Five Reasons Why Europe Needs Anglo-German Leadership’: “The defeat of the Constitutional Treaty in France has caused great damage to French leadership potential in Europe, which arguably has been at the heart of the European project from the outset… now that France has effectively propelled herself out of the driving seat, this will have to change if the European Union is to be safeguarded against the danger of disintegration. We believe that the only way to do so is to replace the Franco-German axis, the quasi-proverbial ‘motor’ of European integration that broke down on 29th May, with an Anglo-German one… Germany would have to abandon her focus on Franco-German cooperation, enshrined as a de facto doctrine since the foundation of the Federal Republic. Britain would have to undergo much greater transformation even. She would have to commit once and for all to a strong Europe, and that means a final devotion to the pooling of sovereignty… an Anglo-French alliance would suffer from both countries’ strongly developed international ambitions and military potential. By comparison, a London-Berlin axis looks like a natural symbiosis. Britain clearly would be senior partner, much as France was of old, but the weights would not be quite so crassly off balance… Post-war Germany has historically been an Atlanticist nation, standing firmly by the side of the United States and the United Kingdom. Recent anti-American moves by the Berlin government, most prominently the denial of even token support for Operation IRAQI FREEDOM (or TELIC) and the subsequent transformation of Iraq, were primarily motivated by domestic factors, that is, Chancellor Gerhard Schröder (unlike Tony Blair) playing to public opinion in order to secure his re-election.”
||According to Catherine Griggs in her 6+ hour videotaped interview of about 1998.
||Sen. John DeCamp, ‘The Franklin Cover-Up,’ second edition, p.387-388 (Feb. 2006 edition)
||July 29, 1997, The Times, ‘Secret members of the Other Club’. Gave a list of members as of January 1994. Apparently there are about 90 members in total.
||See reference 27.
||November 20, 2002, Der Standard, ‘Das Pentagon ist heute eine jüdische Institution’
http://derstandard.at/?url=/?id=1136970. The English Wikipedia article on Otto von Habsburg has taken over the quote.
||September 2, 2005, ePolitics interview with Jonathan Aitken.
||June 12, 1999, The Tablet, ‘Jonathan Aitken says Sorry’: “Earlier he had given an assistant editor of The Tablet access to a revealing text in which he bares his soul. “I am a man of unclean lips.” The speaker is Jonathan Aitken, and he is referring quite explicitly to his perjury, for which he was sentenced on Tuesday to eighteen months in prison… The trouble with Jonathan Aitken is that the public will never take him seriously again. He held a press conference to launch his libel action against the Guardian and Granada television with these words, “I will cut out the cancer of bent and twisted journalism with the simple sword of truth”, only to be impaled upon his own sword. The Guardian were able to uncover evidence to prove that he had lied over the question of who had paid his hotel bill in Paris. It might seem a small matter, but on it hung allegations of taking secret commission for multi-million-pound arms dealings, over which Aitken had lied not only to the press but also apparently to his own Government. The deceit even involved the corruption of Aitken’s own daughter, 13 at the time of the hotel incident, whom he had persuaded to sign a false statement saying she was in Paris. Corruption of the young, and self-enrichment from arms dealings, are commonly put high on the list of mortal sins. How do you emerge from a reputation as a mega-liar?… he has been a church-goer for years. It is a surprise, however, to hear that he has done the Alpha course, not once but three times, graduating from a humble student to a helper who pours coffee. Even more astonishing, he has done Ignatian retreats. His first experience was in the Westminster retreats in daily life, for MPs and others working at Westminster, and in due course he went away to the Coach House in Inverness to make an individually directed eight-day retreat with the Jesuit Gerry W. Hughes… stripped as a bankrupt of his Rolex watch, still able to draw from an unspecified source living expenses of 11,400 [pounds] a month.”
||June 29, 1997, The Independent, ‘Aitken dropped by the Right’s secret club’
||1993, Alan Clark, ‘Diaries’, p. 369 (About Clark’s 1991 experience with Le Cercle): “There is a distinguished attendance list, and Jonathan Aitken, who knows absolutely everybody in the world has, amusingly and indiscreetly, guided me through it.”
||2005, Lamont’s comment on the rejected European Constitution for the Bruges Group. http://www.brugesgroup.com/mediacentre/releases.live?article=8757
||July 2, 1995, Sunday Times, ‘Rothschild rues its blues under the bed’: “Last week it started to look as if Rothschild was planning to make a bid to become the government itself when John Redwood, a former Rothschild fund manager, launched his campaign to become the Tory party leader with Norman Lamont, a Rothschild director, at his side. But Rothschild’s position as the hotbed of Tory Euro-sceptic activity is understandably raising some eyebrows both within the bank and outside… And whatever the political views of some in the bank, to project a Europhobic image while trying to win business from all over Europe is a far-from-brilliant marketing concept. Lamont’s appointment, more than any other of the political refugees to appear on the Rothschild board, was made despite the opposition of senior Rothschild corporate financiers. Sir Evelyn, however, is renowned for making these sort of appointments without reference to anyone. “
||September 22, 2002, Sunday Times, ‘Rothschild bankrolls Mandelson think tank’
||September 1, 2001, Karina Robinson for The Banker, ‘A hard nut to crack’:“Karina Robinson talks to NM Rothschild’s chairman Sir Evelyn de Rothschild and finds a man reluctant to give much away… The next hour (actually, the next 40 irritating minutes since I did not last the hour) was spent being told that everything is “going well,” “doing well” and “with our name we can get in anywhere”… the meeting was set up by the bank’s public relations firm. It seems an odd strategy to push forward someone who appears disinterested in communicating.” Journalist Karina Robinson gave Sir Evelyn de Rothschild the award of being the ‘most condescending’ person she interviewed in recent times.
||April 24, 2006, Bloomberg News, ‘Opus Dei, Vilified in ‘Da Vinci Code,’ Runs Global MBA Schools’: “Opus Dei is seeking more high-powered members by funding pizza parties and seminars on embryonic research, physician- assisted suicide and evolution near U.S. Ivy League campuses. And it’s targeting lawyers and bankers through monthly meetings at St. Mary Moorfields church in the City of London financial district… Some members, such as Eduardo Guilisasti, chief executive officer of Santiago-based Vina Concha y Toro SA, Latin America’s biggest winery, advance the effort by giving their entire paycheck to help run Opus Dei’s more than 100 technical and management schools from Spain to Mexico, to Vietnam, Guilisasti says… In the basement of a six-story concrete building on the outskirts of Rome, young men and women in suits scurry around a simulated office, fetching documents from laser printers and hashing out business presentations. The fake corporate environment has a name: Junior Consulting. Along with the Centro ELIS trade school upstairs, it’s the brainchild of Opus Dei… Cisco…; Vodafone Group…; Nokia… all sponsor courses at Centro ELIS… Centro ELIS has received about 800,000 euros ($990,000) in Italian government funds to spawn at least 16 similar schools in China, Ecuador, Uruguay, Vietnam and other countries, says Pierluigi Bartolomei, director of Centro ELIS’s technical school… Opus Dei also keeps a low profile at its IESE Business School. The school, which has campuses in Madrid and Barcelona, is a branch of the University of Navarra. Escriva founded the Pamplona, Spain-based university in 1952. Some executives say they had no idea they were associated with Opus Dei’s activities. “I know nothing about the Opus Dei connection,”says Peter Sutherland [Pilgrims Society], chairman of both Goldman Sachs International and BP Plc, Europe’s biggest oil company, who is a member of IESE’s international advisory board… Like Centro ELIS, IESE is cultivating corporate connections. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP… Nissan Motor Co… Alcatel SA… and Banco Santander Central Hispano SA, Spain’s biggest bank, also provide funding, according to IESE’s Web site. Citigroup Inc., the world’s biggest financial services company, and Morgan Stanley, the third-biggest U.S. securities firm by market value, are listed as “supporting companies.” The school says such support helps develop research programs, train faculty and finance scholarships and construction. Citigroup has sponsored student activities and backed events in IESE’s MBA program, says Eric Weber, IESE’s associate dean for executive education and an Opus Dei supernumerary.”There are many other articles like, but few named indicidual businesses.
||See reference 22.
||1993, Alan Clark, ‘Diaries’, p. 373 (About Clark’s 1991 experience with Le Cercle): “This entire outing is a right-wing think (or rather thought) tank, funded by the CIA, which churns Cold War concepts around.”
||2002, David Rockefeller, ‘Memoirs’, p. 412-413: “Members of the Pesenti Group were all committed to European political and economic integration, but a few – Archduke Otto of Austria, the head of the house of Hapsburg and claimant to all the lands of the Austro-Hungarian empire; Monsignor Alberto Giovanetti of the Vatican and a prominent member of Opus Dei, the conservative Catholic organization; and Jean-Paul León Violet, a conservative French intellectuel – were preoccupied by the Soviet threat and the inexolerable rise to power of the Communist parties of France and Italy.”
||Ibid.: “Bilderberg overlapped for a time with my membership in a relatively obscure but potentially even more controversial body known as the Pesenti Group. I had first learned about it in October 1967 when Carlo Pesenti… took me aside…”
||February 24, 1967, Time Magazine, ‘Struggle for Freedom’
Cercle references in books (click for relevant excerpts)
||1990, Xan Fielding, ‘One Man in His Time – The life of Lieutenant-Colonel NLD (‘Billy’) McLean, DSO’
||1993, Alan Clark, ‘Diaries’, p. 369-374
||1993, Brian Crozier, ‘Free Agent’, p. 99; p. 186; p. 190-194; p. 217-218; and p. 241
||1997, Robert Hutchinson, ‘Their Kingdom Come – Inside the Secret World of Opus Dei’, p. 153-158
||2002, David Rockefeller, ‘Memoirs’, pages 412-413
Cercle references in newspaper or magazine articles (Lobster Mag. articles not reproduced)
||June 29, 1997, The Independent, ‘Aitken dropped by the Right’s secret club’
This is basically the news story that got the word out about Le Cercle in a mainstream British newspaper, more than 40 years after it was established. This article disappeared in the Independent’s archives without any discussion in the public (internet) domain.
||July 10, 1997, An Phoblacht/Republican News
||May 2001, Punch Magazine, ‘Spooks in the House’ (thanks to Lobster Magazine)
||April 6, 2003, The Observer, ‘So, Norman, any regrets this time?’
||June 18, 2004, Chancellery of HRH Crown Prince Alexander II of Yugoslavia, Reception in honor of the “Le Cercle” conference
||September 5, 2004, Sunday Times, ‘Le Cercle of the elite’
||June 21, 2005, Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia – London / Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ‘Ambassador talks to major foreign policy-security group’
A question to the Embassy for additional information was ignored.
||Known historical Cercle meetings (these days it meets one a year in Washington and once a year at an overseas location)
||Known historical Cercle participants
Special thanks to the four Davids
||I watched one of his DVDs maybe two years back and heard him mention Le Cercle and the Safari Club. So, obsessed as I am with names and places, I added them to my existing list of other low profile and clandestine groups. Several months later I found out the importance of these organizations and together with that, came across Lobster for the first time. So, without Icke this article might never have been created in the first place. I would like to state though I don’t really agree with Icke’s overall story and consider many of his sources extremely unreliable
||For all his early work on Le Cercle that was published in Lobster. In 1991, Lobster announced that David would soon publish a book on Le Cercle in France, soon to be followed by a book in English. Unfortunately, that was the last we heard from David, a translator at the EU in Brussels. The names he mentioned in Lobster have been crucial in putting together this article.
||For his article ‘Circle of Power’ and for one of his emails going around the net in which he mentioned that author Robert Hutchinson (briefly) adressed Le Cercle in his book ‘Their Kingdom Come’.
||For giving unlimited and free access to a variety of databases. David’s databases were crucial in making this article as extensive as it is now.
And finally, let’s not forget an email from April 19, 2006 with the advise to look at David Rockefeller’s biography. This kickstarted a second, and far more detailed, look into Le Cercle.
Author: Joël van der Reijden
Written: November 18, 2006
Update: July 29, 2007
Original report of PEHI on Le Cercle: July 26, 2005 (replaced by the current one)