Vermilion Voice
March 28, 2024, 07:49:26 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to the Vermilion Voice
 
  Home Help Search Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Login Register  

The emergence of the Anglo-American alliance

Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: The emergence of the Anglo-American alliance  (Read 93 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
DejaVu
Hero Member
*****
Gender: Female
Posts: 2023



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Fifth year Anniversary Search Level 5
« on: July 06, 2008, 01:52:08 pm »

* The emergence of the Anglo-American alliance

Source: http://www.cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?id=744&lists=newslog

London's banking elite accomplished much by its World War I

project.  Germany was eliminated as a major competitor, and

Britain gained a dominant position in the Middle East, making

her strategy of oil-based dominance viable. But London had paid

a high price for these gains: Britain, along with the rest of

Europe, ended up in deep debt to the House of Morgan, and

America rather than Germany had become Britain's chief rival

for global supremacy - in both oil and finance. There followed

a relatively brief period of fraternal rivalry between America

and Britain.

 

    The ink on the Versailles treat had barely dried when the

    powerful American oil interests of the Rockefeller Standard

    Oil company realized they had been skillfully cut out of the

    spoils of war by their British alliance partners. The newly

    carved Middle East boundaries, as well as the markets of

    postwar Europe, were dominated by British government interests

    through Britain's covert ownership of Royal Dutch Shell and

    the AngloPersian Oil Company (Engdahl, 58).

 

Britain had positioned herself well, but there was no way she

could maintain for long her timehonored position of global

supremacy. America, in particular Wall Street elites, had

gained too much out of the war, from the debts that were owed,

and from the economic development enabled by Europe's immense

wartime purchases. America's financial and business elites had

tasted global power, and they were no longer going to play

second fiddle to anyone. Britain's elite fraternity

accommodated itself to this new situation by pursuing a dual

strategy: in the short term London competed vigorously with

America, and for the long term British elites planted the

seeds of a strategic collaborative arrangement between the two

powers.

 

During the course of the Versailles talks, a new institution

of Anglo-American coordination in strategic affairs was formed.

Lionel Curtis, longtime member of the secretive Round Table or

'new empire' circle of Balfour, Milner and others, proposed

organizing a Royal Institute of International Affairs.

 

    …The same circle at Versailles also decided to establish an

    American branch of the London Institute, to be named the New

    York Council on Foreign Relations, so as to obscure its close

    British ties. The New York Council was initially composed

    almost entirely of the Morgan men, financed by Morgan money     (Engdahl 55).

 

The Council on Foreign Relations, as it eventually was named,

was to become the primary vehicle of U.S. elite planning, with

close ties to London. In the interim, however, America found

itself locked in a bitter battle with Britain over oil fields

and the control of markets. Despite its tremendous advantages

of scale and financial resources, the U.S. found itself

outmaneuvered on front after front, including even the

petroleum resources of Latin America, where Britain managed to

get hold of two-thirds of the developed oil fields.

 

    But in 1922, an unexpected shock forced a process which led

    some years later to a 'truce' in the Anglo-American conflict of

    the postVersailles period. A threatening new combination

    coming out of the East forced Washington and London to forge a

    condominium of global power, in which has formed the strategic

    center of that power to the present day (Engdahl 64).

 

The 'shock' was a surprise agreement between Germany and the

Soviet Union - the Rapallo Treaty - by which the Soviets

agreed to forgive their war reparation claims, and Germany in

turn agreed to sell industrial technology to the Soviets. This

was very disturbing to Britain because it threatened to enable

Germany get back on her feet, manage her reparations payments,

and obtain oil directly from the Soviets.

 

Britain immediately began working behind the scenes with her

allies to thwart the German recovery plan. Within two days the

allies formally objected to the treaty, and after some two

months, the architect of the treaty, German Foreign Minister

Walther Rathenau, was conveniently assassinated under

suspicious circumstances. Six months after that, with secret

British encouragement, France occupied the Ruhr and brought

German industrial activity to a halt. Germany was left in

financial shambles, suffering under severe hyperinflation.

Rapallo had been thoroughly defeated, and Britain's role had

been carefully concealed.

 

From this point forward we begin to see the clear formation of

the Anglo-American strategic alliance, which still operates

today.

 

    In October 1923, the U.S. secretary of state, Charles Evan

    Hughes, former chief council to Rockefeller's Standard Oil,

    recommended a new scheme to President Calvin Coolidge to

    continue the reparations pyramid of debt collection which had

    been shaken since the April 1922 Rapallo shock. Hughes won the

    appointment of a banker tied to the J.P. Morgan group, General

    Charles C. Dawes… (Engdahl 72-73)

        The Dawes Plan was the first major indication of the growing

    Anglo-American agreement to consolidate and join forces in the

    postVersailles period. London had wisely reckoned it better to

    let the American's take center stage, while preserving its

    powerful influence on American policy.

        The Dawes Plan was the Anglo-American banking community's

    reassertion of full fiscal and financial control over Germany

    (Engdahl 73)

 

The next major step in the development of the alliance

occurred in 1927, when the 'Seven Sisters' oil cartel was

formed.

 

    Their secret pact was formalized as the 'As Is' agreement of

    1928, or the Achnacarry agreement. British and American oil

    majors agreed to accept the existing market divisions and

    shares, to set a secret world cartel price, and to end the

    destructive competition and price wars of the previous decade.

    The respective governments merely ratified this private accord

    the same year in what became the Red Line agreement. Since

    this time, with minor interruption, the Anglo-American grip

    over the world's oil reserves has been hegemonic. Threats to

    break that grip have been met with ruthless responses, as we

    shall later see (Engdahl 74-75).

 

 

 

* Wall Street & The City: covert masters of the universe

 

As we've been reviewing the birth of the Anglo-American

alliance, the supreme power of finance, and the strategy of

oil-based dominance, I've so far been presenting you with

considerable detail. I think this has been necessary in order

to make the story clear, and because in these developments we

can already see the basic patterns that continue to

characterize this alliance to this very day: the constant use

of secrecy and deception, the utter ruthlessness of these

people who plan world wars and economic collapses for their

own enrichment, and the effectiveness with which they achieve

their major objectives.

 

In this section we'll be moving more quickly, briefly

reviewing some the major historical events since 1927, and

identifying, behind those events, the hidden hand and purpose

of this elite alliance. With each summary, I'll indicate my

sources.

 

Let's begin with Mussolini. In November 1925 his fascist

government worked out an agreement with the U.S. and Britain

to repay Italy's war debts. One week later J.P. Morgan & Co.,

Italy's financial agents in America, loaned Italy $100

million, stabilizing Mussolini's regime. The fascist model

provided the necessary 'discipline' to ensure repayments

(Engdahl 77).

 

But apart from Italy, the post-Versailles reparation program

was an unstable pyramid of debt, based ultimately on Germany's

ability to pay. One option would have been to encourage German

recovery under its existing government, with Anglo-American

control over the German economy by virtue of the Dawes Plan.

This option was, apparently, considered by the banking elite

to be less desirable than the fascist option.

 

They decided to bring down the whole houseofcards financial

system, and rebuild it based on a fascist Germany. At the

request of the Bank of England, the Federal Reserve raised

interest rates, precipitating the stock market crash of 1929.

The London and New York banks were then able to arrange the

collapse of the German economy, and begin their 'Hitler

Project' - with support from the highest levels in the British

and American governments. Besides offering the same

'disciplinary repayment' advantage that fascist Italy

provided, along with lucrative investment opportunities, the

British and Americans sought to play Germany and the Soviet

Union off against one another, in typical balanceofpowers

fashion  (Engdahl 78-84).

 

Germany's war effort, both before and after America and

Germany were officially at war, was a collaboration between

German and American industrialists and bankers (Higham).

 

    Both Dulles brothers were partners in Sullivan and Cromwell

    which handled the legal affairs of American IG (the U.S.

    subsidiary of IG Farben). The Dulles brothers were also deeply

    involved in a number of U.S. and German firms and banks or

    their subsidiaries that contributed to the Nazi buildup and in

    U.S. firms which later traded with the enemy during World War

    II (such firms as the Chase Bank, Ford, ITT, General Aniline

    and Film, and Standard Oil) (Fresia 108).

 

    President Franklin Roosevelt knew that these corporations were

    trading with the enemy, there was little he could do.

    "Roosevelt was blackmailed," states Higham. "You can't run a

    war without Chase Bank, or Standard Oil of New Jersey, or ITT"

    (Fresia 109).

 

By carefully coordinating its assistance to both Germany and

the Soviets, U.S. elites were able to maximize those nations'

mutual devastation. After entering the war officially, America

had the additional lever of military action against the Axis,

so as to further manipulate the progress of the war, in

collaboration with British forces. America emerged from the

war with its industry intact, with 40% of the world's wealth

and industrial capacity, a monopoly on nuclear weapons, and

control of the seven seas. Never before had one nation held

such a degree of hegemony over world affairs.

 

    If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia and

    if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany and that way let

    them kill as many as possible, although I don't want to see

    Hitler victorious under any circumstances.

    - Harry S. Truman, New York Times, June 24, 1941

 

The balance of power had quite clearly shifted from London to

New York by this time, but the Anglo-American alliance

continued, with an even firmer grip on global oil supplies.

Winston Churchill declared the existence of the "Iron

Curtain," and the Cold War was launched in order to inhibit

the noncapitalist powers from interfering in, or benefiting

from, the Anglo-American postwar blueprint of economic growth

and popular prosperity.

 

Our "fresh look" at the previous century has brought us full

circle back to the point where it began: the era of the

postwar blueprint. My purpose in this review has been to show

how the largely covert Anglo-American alliance - of banking,

intelligence, and oil interests - has come to dominate the

world. While in the Matrix banks stay mostly out of the

limelight as regards geopolitical affairs, in reality the top

banks in New York and London are the prime movers in this

alliance, and hence the prime movers in world affairs

generally.

 

    The ten largest bank holding companies in the United States

    [today] are firmly in the hands of certain banking houses, all

    of which have branches in London. They are J.P. Morgan

    Company, Brown Brothers Harriman, Warburg, Kuhn Loeb and J.

    Henry Schroder. All of them maintain close relationships with

    the House of Rothschild, principally through the Rothschild

    control of international money markets through its

    manipulation of the price of gold. Each day, the world price

    of gold is set in the London office of N.M. Rothschild and

    Company (Mullins 47-48).

 

In Matrix reality nations go to war for noble causes. When we

peel away the first layer of the Matrix, we find that nations

go to war as part of a geopolitical struggle over dominance

and empire. When we peel away the next layer,  we find that

for the past century even competitive imperialism has not been

the full story: geopolitics itself turns out to be a rigged

game, with nations being manipulated from behind the scenes by

an elite financial clique for its own private benefit.

 

 

 

 

 

* Abandoning Bretton Woods: the petrodollar scam

 

The abandonment of the postwar economic blueprint, signaled by

the end of the gold standard in 1971, can be seen as a replay

of the decision by London's banking elite, a century before,

to disinvest in the British economy, beginning the decline of

Britain's economy and industry from their imperial position of

global dominance. Once again the reason was the same: there

was more to be gained in international markets - from

investments and by financial manipulations - than there was in

further domestic investment. And once again, disinvestment led

to the economic and industrial decline of what had once been

the world's greatest industrial power, in this case the USA.

 

There is however a fundamental difference between these two

parallel scenarios. Britain had never attained quite the same

level of global military hegemony that America did, with its

postwar Pax Americana regime. Britain may have ruled the

waves, but it was relatively weak in land warfare. It could

only maintain its strong geopolitical position by playing a

shrewd balanceofpowers game - within the traditional context

of competitive imperialism. When Britain declined

industrially, its ability to win at this game depended on its

use of covert intrigue and financial manipulations, and

eventually on its strategy of oil-based dominance.

 

America - with its Pax Americana regime and its Bretton Woods

scheme - had actually transformed the global game itself,

establishing what I have called a system of 'collaborative

imperialism,' as part of a 'postwar blueprint.' While Britain

chose effective strategies within a given game, the U.S. had

actually set up a whole new game.

 

Similarly, as Wall Street decided to abandon the economic

aspects of the postwar blueprint, it was once again setting up

a whole new game, another blueprint for some new kind of world

economic order. Not only was it now seeking its rewards in

global markets, as did The City a century before, but it was

setting out to change the nature of those global markets to

its own  advantage.

 

The postwar economic blueprint had been based on global

economic growth and development, Western industrialization,

financial stability, and relatively full Western employment.

New York and London banks sought their rewards by investing in

this immense global growth boom, and they favored stability

and low inflation so as not to dilute the value their eventual

returns from their investments. As it turns out, the

abandonment of this economic blueprint was to be total: every

single one of its foundations was to be cut away.

 

August 15, 1971 stands as a pivotal date in this transition:

that is when the Bretton Woods accords were officially

repudiated, as regards the dollar gold standard, and that is

when we begin to see the emergence of a new blueprint for the

global economy. But in fact, the process of disinvestment in

the U.S. domestic economy had begun much earlier, in the wake

of the recession of 1957. The U.S. industrial base was aging

by 1957, and in need of major investment and modernization.

This was not an attractive proposition to the big New York

banks, who saw much more promising opportunities in foreign

investments, as did the London banks a century before.

 

As dollars began to flow out of the U.S., into credithungry

markets in Europe and around the world, the U.S. economy slid

into further decline, and its industry became increasingly

uncompetitive, while the recipient nations of the outward

investments were able to modernize their own industrial

infrastructures. Profits from these foreign investments were

not returned to the U.S., but were reinvested again in foreign

markets. This growing pool of expatriated U.S. capital was the

beginning of what came to be know as the 'Eurodollar market'

(Engdahl 109-113).

 

Whereas normal investments in the U.S. economy were not

considered desirable by the elite banking community,

investment in a buildup in the highprofit military sector

could offer significant returns. Banking and defense industry

forces combined to encourage intervention in Vietnam.

 

A young President Kennedy went along with this advice, as with

much of the advice he got from influential circles. But as he

became more confident in his leadership role as President, he

increasingly began to follow his own vision of the national

interest - which not surprisingly diverged with the interests

of banking elites. Among other transgressions against the

interests of this behindthescenes elite power center, Kennedy

had decided, just a few days before his highly controversial

assassination, to withdraw from Vietnam. Johnson, on assuming

office as President only several days later, promptly reversed

that decision (Engdahl 116-117).

 

John Judge, a lifelong Washington D.C. resident, and a serious

researcher into covert operations, relates an anecdote told to

him by his mother - who at the time of Johnson's assuming

office was a secretary to the Joint Chief's of Staff. Kennedy

was assassinated on a Thursday, and Judge's mother was called

in to do some typing the following Sunday, three days later.

The memo she was asked to type declared that military planners

should plan on the basis of a war that would last ten years

and cost 50,000 American lives. She thought there must be some

error in the figures, and called a member of the Joint Chiefs

to confirm. He replied, in essence, that she should shut up

and type. Ten years and 50,000 lives turned out to be a very

accurate prediction of the actual outcome of the Vietnam

project.

 

    The Vietnam war strategy was deliberately designed by Defense

    Secretary Robert McNamara, National Security Advisor McGeorge

    Bundy, with Pentagon planners and key advisers around Lyndon

    Johnson, to be a 'nowin war' from the outset, in order to

    ensure a prolonged buildup of this defense component of the

    economy (Engdahl 114-115).

 

This strategy of militarization and conflict offered a

lucrative investment opportunity for Wall Street capital, but

the Vietnam War could only be pursued by means of deficit

spending on the part of the U.S. government - a situation

reminiscent of Britain's predicament during World War 1. While

Britain solved its funding problem with credit from the House

of Morgan, the U.S. solved its Vietnam funding problems simply

by printing money, in the form of Treasury bond issues. By the

terms of Bretton Woods, these printed dollars became real:

they could be exchanged at a fixed rate with any other major

currency. No one doubted America's ability to stand behind its

bonds, so these printedmoney bonds became a profitable place

to park excess dollars. In this way Europe financed America's

deficits during the Vietnam War (Engdahl 115).

 

While the Bretton Woods accords gave America this advantage -

it could literally print money and force the rest of the world

to share the inflationary effects - the accords also brought

an accompanying disadvantage: dollars could be exchanged for

gold from the U.S. Treasury at the rate of $35 per ounce.

Given the decline in the American economy, this exchange rate

had become entirely unrealistic, significantly overvaluing the

dollar in real economic terms. As a consequence, the U.S.

experienced a dangerous drain not only of Eurodollar capital,

but also of gold stocks. By 1971 decisive action was called

for - the American economy, and the whole global financial

system, was approaching melt down.

 

There was an obvious and simple solution available for this

crisis, a solution that could have been expected to restore

financial stability: revaluing the dollar more realistically

with respect to gold. This solution, however desirable it

would have been for the American and global economies, was not

acceptable to elite banking interests. They wanted to retain

the power that an overvalued dollar had given them. As a

stopgap, while they made arrangements for a new financial

blueprint, they decided to abandon the fixed exchange rate

system, in order to stem the drain of U.S. gold reserves. This

is the context in which they advised Nixon, through their

agents in his administration, to take the dollar off the gold

standard (Engdahl 127-129).

 

The new blueprint, for a new kind of global economy, was to be

based on the timehonored strategy of oil-based dominance, but

applied more drastically than ever before. The new scenario

was presented by State Department economist Walter Levy, at a

secret Bilderberger meeting in May 1973 in Saltsjobaden,

Sweden. The meeting was attended by David Rockefeller (head of

Chase Manhattan Bank), Robert O. Anderson (head of ARCO),

Zbigniew Brzezinski, Henry Kissinger, and others with close

ties to oil and banking interests. The scenario addressed the

question: "What if OPEC oil revenues were to increase by

400%?"

 

Besides offering windfall profits to the Anglo-American oil

cartel, the scenario was also very appealing to the bankers.

Since oil was priced in dollars, a sharp increase would lead

to a demand for dollars, creating once again a strong-dollar

regime, and ensuring the continued financial dominance of the

Anglo-American banking elites. In addition, such an increase

would greatly curtail industrial growth globally, shifting the

balance of power even more towards the dollar and

Anglo-American interests. Here was the core of a new financial

blueprint, and it showed real promise. As so often before

(e.g., World War 1, World War 2, Vietnam), an engineered war

was to provide the vehicle for implementation of this elite

agenda.

 

Nixon's national security advisor, Henry Kissinger, with his

secret, high-level diplomatic contacts in Israel and the Arab

states, was in a perfect position to stir up the necessary

trouble. By misrepresenting each side to the other, and

blocking intelligence reports from reaching normal U.S.

diplomatic channels, he was able to ensure the outbreak of

war, and a predictable Arab oil embargo - since the U.S. would

be forced to come to Israel's aid. The Yom Kippur war began on

October 6, 1973, some five months after the pivotal

Bilderberger meeting. By January 1974, three months later, the

400% rise in petroleum prices was a fait accompli (Engdahl

130-138).

 

Thus began the petrodollar era. Instead of being overvalued by

virtue of a fixed exchange rate and an unrealistic gold

valuation, dollars were now overvalued because they were

needed to pay for high-priced oil. Once again dollars could be

printed, and the rest of the world would be forced to finance

American deficits. This petrodollar wealth would then find its

way to London's unregulated Eurodollar market, where it could

be invested in global markets, taking full advantage of the

speculative opportunities created by fluctuating currency

exchange rates.

 

The whole Bilderberger scheme had been a brilliant coup, and

the Arab states took the blame for it all, just as Germany

earlier was forced to take the blame for World War 1. Bretton

Woods stability had now been replaced by petrodollar

volatility, and the postwar blueprint of growth and prosperity

had been sabotaged by an engineered oil shock. The stage was

now set to establish an entirely new blueprint for the global

economy, based on a radical 'free trade' agenda. Not only

would this agenda transform the nature of the global economy,

it would also undermine the principle of national sovereignty

itself - a principle that had been the foundation of world

affairs ever since the Treaty of Westphalia was signed in

1648.

 

--

http://cyberjournal.org

 

"Apocalypse Now and the Brave New World"

    http://www.cyberjournal.org/cj/rkm/Apocalypse_and_NWO.html

 

List archives:

    http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=newslog

 

Subscribe to low-traffic list:

     cj-subscribe-at-cyberjournal.org
Report Spam   Logged

The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity, but the one that removes awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside. --Allan Bloom

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter



Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy