Hillary Clinton Admits the CFR Directs the U.S. Government’s Policies
(JBS) Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is not yet a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. After her July 15 speech at the CFR’s branch office in the nation’s capital, she may never be offered membership. Why? Because she frankly and unequivocally stated what CFR bigwigs have never wanted known.
Mrs. Clinton confirmed that critics of the CFR are correct, that the organization directs the U.S. government’s policies and steers our country in ways that are harmful to its survival as an independent nation. Her remarks point to CFR members, those who have long been working against the best interests of the American people.
Introduced for her speech by Council President Richard N. Haass, Hillary began by thanking him for his kind words and expressing delight at being able to be at the relatively new CFR outpost “down the street from the State Department.” She noted that she had often been inside the “mother ship in New York City,” meaning the CFR’s main headquarters at Park Avenue and 68th Street. But after issuing these innocuous pleasantries, she told her very friendly audience:
We get a lot of advice from the Council, so this will mean I won’t have as far to go to be told what we should be doing and how we should think about the future.
The nation’s Secretary of State has blown the CFR’s cover! For decades, its officials and key members have protested that the organization is a mere think tank that never takes a position on any subject. But here we have our nation’s chief foreign policy official admitting that the CFR will tell her what to do and how to think. And the State Department even published her amazing admissions on its web site. Why her remarks are so amazing deserves an explanation.
The CFR emerged in the aftermath of U.S. Senate’s rejection of our nation’s membership in the League of Nations. Officially in business as of 1921, the organization’s Foreign Affairs journal immediately called for the creation of a world government and an end to U.S. sovereignty. The group’s primary founder was President Woodrow Wilson’s top aide, Edward Mandell House, the author of a book in which he admitted he was working for “Socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx.”
Marx, along with all the communists who revere him, also sought world government.
Entire books have been written to expose the CFR, the most reliable being The Shadows of Power by James Perloff. If Mr. Perloff had the benefit of Hillary Clinton’s stunning admission, he certainly would have included it in his widely distributed work. But he nevertheless did an excellent job in showing that, through its strategically placed members, the CFR is a very powerful and extremely dangerous organization. Much evidence to back up that assertion can be assembled. We provide only a few examples of what should be termed indications of treasonous intent.
In 1974, former State Department official Richard N. Gardner wrote in Foreign Affairs that the desired goal of world government could not be attained in a single leap. So he recommended performing “an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece.” He said this could be accomplished via the IMF, the World Bank, a Law of the Sea treaty, disarmament programs, a United Nations military force, and more. His urging, he contended, “can produce some remarkable concessions of sovereignty that could not be achieved on an across-the-board basis.” It is worth noting that no member of the CFR resigned after these flagrantly un-American ideas appeared in their publication.
It was even earlier that Georgetown University Professor Carroll Quigley revealed his awareness of the existence of a “secret society” to rule the world in his 1966 book Tragedy and Hope. He calmly and delightedly mentioned that the U.S. branch of this grand undertaking was “the Council on Foreign Relations.” While accepting the Democratic Party’s nomination for president in 1992, Georgetown alumnus Bill Clinton acknowledged that his mentor had been the very same Carroll Quigley. Mr. Clinton has long held membership in the CFR, as did presidential predecessors Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, and Bush (the elder) while they served, and Ford and Carter who affiliated with the CFR soon after leaving the White House.
A great deal more can be offered to confirm the subversive and un-American posture of this powerful organization. For instance, its leader for several decades was David Rockefeller. In 2002, his autobiography entitled Memoirs became available. Referring to the enormous influence he and his family have exercised over our nation’s affairs, he wrote:
Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as “internationalists” and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.
Guilty of what? Guilty of conspiring with others to build a one world government, the goal of the CFR. If successful, Rockefeller and others who share his aim would cancel the Declaration of Independence and tear up the U.S. Constitution.
And finally in this very short listing of indictments of the organization, we turn to CFR President Richard N. Haass, the man who welcomed Mrs. Clinton to the CFR’s office in DC. In February 2006, the Taipei Times reported that he is no less a pupil of Edward Mandell House and no less an advocate of world government than any of his predecessors. In part, he stated:
For 350 years, sovereignty – the notion that states are the central actors on the world stage and that governments are essentially free to do what they want within their own territory but not within the territory of other states – has provided the organizing principle of international relations. The time has come to rethink that notion.
The CFR lists only 4,338 members. But these individuals sit atop the worlds of business, mass media, academia, military, foundations and government. They are, as Washington Post writer Richard Harwood once noted, America’s “Ruling Class.” But they aren’t supposed to admit that they have the power to direct U.S. policy. Now, however, Secretary of State Clinton has stated in very clear terms that what critics of the CFR have always maintained is correct. The CFR, she admits, tells her what to do and what to think. In following its lead, she is not alone.
Americans who wonder why our nation’s policies are so self-defeating, even un-American, must begin to understand that the Council on Foreign Relations is their main author. Repudiation of this organization, its members, and those who willingly accept direction from it (such as Mrs. Clinton) is not just a good idea; it’s a matter of national survival.