The Power Of The British Commonwealth Over The World
By Joan Veon - Executive Director
The Women's International Media Group, Inc
Introduction
The following report on "The Power of the British Commonwealth Over the
World" began when I was at the WTO meeting in Cancun in September 2003. There,
several African countries held a press briefing in which they said that they
would starve if America and other rich countries did not open their cotton and
agricultural markets to them. I asked several questions about their vast
natural resources (gold and strategic minerals) and if they had any monies left
over after their World Bank loans were paid. They refused to answer. Afterward
I spoke to each one and asked the following questions and received the same
response. Since they were Commonwealth members, I asked if they could go to
Britain for help. They could not. So I then asked why they don't withdraw from
the Commonwealth if there is no help. With great alarm, they told me they could
not withdraw from this voluntary association. When I returned home, I called
the British Information Office to see if they could tell me if the countries
which Britain de-colonized in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s received a vote at the UN
at the time of separation. The lady told me she would have to research my very
good question. She called the next day to tell me that every time a country was
granted independence from Britain, they were given a vote at the UN.
BINGO!
I have always questioned how Britain would regain control of America when
they were defeated by Andrew Jackson at the Battle of New Orleans in 1812. Are
we so naive to think that they would not try some other way to "capture the
world"? In the past ten years, as I have covered the UN, I have been amazed at
the number of suggestions and key reports that come from the British which
influence UN policy. So, just how much power does Britain have in the world
today?
The first book that I wrote is 'Prince Charles the Sustainable Prince' which
has to do with the role of the British Royal Family as the power behind the
United Nations. This book asserts that the British ARE the power behind the
United Nations. This opinion has not changed since I wrote Prince Charles. The
prince is a key, behind-the-scenes mover and shaker and is responsible for the
radical environmental agenda that perverts Genesis 1, 2, and 3 and puts the
earth above man and not man above the earth as God intended. When I wrote
Prince Charles, I was not aware of the information you are now going to
read.
A Brief History of Britain
The following is taken from the Internet site, "britania," and is from
'England, A Narrative History' by Peter N. Williams. What I have tried to do is
to show the aggressiveness of this little island nation and its role in the
world today. Some of the sub-titles are my interpretation of the material
reprinted.
Early History
The Celtic culture in Early Britain developed about 1000 BC and came from
Gaul, driven from their homelands by the Romans who invaded in 55BC under
Julius Caesar. In 43 AD an expedition was ordered against Britain by Emperor
Claudius who sent an army of 40,000 men. The Romans established their bases in
what is known as Kent and subdued much of Britain in less than 40 years. They
remained for nearly 400 years. After the Romans left, England entered a dark
period. By 314 an organized Christian Church seems to have been established in
most of Britain. By 410 Britain had become self-governing in three parts. In
597 St. Augustine was sent to convert the pagan English by Pope Gregory.
Ethelbert had married Bertha, daughter of the Merovingian King and was
practicing Christianity. The first Anglo-Saxon kingdom in Britain was an
Anglo-Celtic kingdom. In 726, Aethelbold called himself "King of Britain" while
his son Offa called himself "king of all the English." For several hundred
years, various kings in various part of Britain tried to gain control. In 896,
Alfred occupied London. He was born in 849 and became King of Wessex in 871.
Due to his battles with the Danes, he succeeded in becoming the first king of
England. Throughout the 8th century, the Danes, Norwegians, Scandinavians, and
British fought as to who would have power and control. The Normans invaded
England in order to secure the throne for William of Normandy who was crowned
King of England at Westminster on Christmas Day, 1066. With him, came feudalism
and a new aristocracy. By 1086, other than small-estate holders, there were in
the whole of the land only two Englishmen holding estates of any dimension.
William insisted that landowners who had land from the king produce a set quota
of mounted knights which produced a new ruling class in England. In this
system, those at the bottom suffered most, losing all their rights as free men
and coming to be regarded as mere property, assets belonging to the manor.
Feudalistic Sustainable Development
Further restrictions and hardship came from William's New Forest laws and
his vast extension of new royal forests in which all hunting rights belonged to
the king. The peasantry was deprived of a valuable food source in times of bad
harvests. In 1080, the "Domesday Book" was begun and was an attempt to provide
the king with every penny to which he was legally entitled. It worked only too
well, reckoning the wealth of England, "Down to the last pig." William sent his
men into every village and had them find out how many hides there were, what
land and cattle the king should have in the country, and what dues he ought to
have in twelve months from the town or village [JV: Does this sound like
sustainable development and the UN Biological Diversity Treaty?].
From the rule of the Plantagenet's to Richard the Lionhearted and the
Crusades to King John who was forced to sign the "Great Magna Carta" in
Runnymede on June 15, 1215, to Edward I, Longshanks to Henry VIII and to Queen
Elizabeth I, the British kings and queens were concerned with holding on to the
power of the monarchy.
As a result of the defeat of the Spanish Armada by Elizabeth I and her long
reign, England saw remarkable economic growth and a time of calm from her
chaotic past. Industry and trade prospered under the guidance of men like
Secretary Cecil, later Lord Burghley. [JV: It should be noted that Lord
Burghley perfected torture techniques and the secret police.] During her reign,
many of the Dutch bankers and capitalists from Antwerp flocked to London to
find a new and more secure international money and credit market. That year
Thomas Gresham opened the Royal Exchange in London to make it the financial
capital of the world. Cecil encouraged the fishing industry, the source of
England's navy and backbone of its sea power. English sailors began their
mastery of the world's oceans. Though little more than pirates, these seamen
laid the foundations of their nation's naval superiority which was to last for
centuries. John Cabot discovered Newfoundland in 1497, Martin Frobisher
established trade with Moscow in 1555 to trade with Russia. Sir Francis Drake
searched the world for treasures.
Key British Economic and Trade Concepts In 1694, the Bank of England was
formed by a private stock company which raised their own funds and issued their
own money to be lent to the government "in perpetuity." This started the
concept of "central banking." Then a group of merchants and sea captains at
Lloyd's Coffee House in 1688 formed marine insurance which would underwrite
enormous expenditures in overseas ventures and shipping. On May 26, 1698,
Parliament came up with the idea of granting monopolies in trade by an act of
Parliament. This act created the East India Company. This company, with the
newly formed Bank of England showed only too well the growing power of the
British traders and financiers over the state government (emphasis added). [JV:
This is very key for they still rule the world today.]
As a result of the East India Trading Company, the trading classes were able
to control parliament. It became one of the ever-increasing problems for the
country's government: the interference of trade with legislation and
administration was to become an inevitable part of the future.
In 1496, John and Sebastian Cabot discovered Newfoundland and Nova Scotia.
England's own era of exploration, initiated by the Cabots, was expanded by the
journeys of Hugh Willoughby to seek a Northeast Passage to China and the spice
trade. He reached Moscow by way of the White Sea and Archangel in 1553. As a
result, the Muscovy Company was founded by Richard Chancellor to trade with
Russia in 1555. Then John Hawkins, who began his career high-jacking Portuguese
and Spanish ships in 1562, led to England's entering the Slave Trade. David
Ingram explored from the Gulf of Mexico to Canada and reported finding vines
with grapes as large as a man's thumb. English mariner Francis Drake undertook
his daring voyage of 1572 to capture the Spanish treasure fleet returning from
Peru, a feat surpassed by his even greater haul one year later.
In 1580, Drake arrived back in Plymouth having circumnavigated the globe in
the Pelican, renamed the Golden Hind after the gallant ship had passed through
the Straits of Magellan. Drake was knighted by the Queen after capturing the
richest prize ever taken at sea. In 1584, Sir Walter Raleigh established a
colony in Roanoke, Virginia. One year later, Chesapeake Bay was discovered by
Ralph Lane and Davis Strait by John Davis.
In 1585, the first oriental spice to be grown in the New World, Jamaican
ginger, arrived in Europe. In 1586, Sir Richard Cavendish became the third man
to circumnavigate the globe when the ship the Desire reached England after a
voyage of over two years. When the Portuguese closed its spice market in Lisbon
to Dutch and English traders, the Dutch East India Company was created to
obtain spices directly from the Orient. In 1600, the Honorable East India
Company was chartered to make annual voyages to the Indies and to challenge
Dutch control of the spice trade.
After James I made peace with Spain in 1604, he re-directed England's
efforts at colonizing North America and the Plymouth and London companies sent
ships and colonists. Jamestown, Virginia was founded in 1607. That same year,
Henry Hudson sought a route to China and sailed around the Eastern Short of
Greenland. In 1610, Hudson's ship Discovery reached the strait later to be
known as Hudson Bay, Canada. In 1620, the Mayflower arrived off Cape Cod with
100 Pilgrims. In 1628, John Endicott arrived as the first Governor of the
Massachusetts Bay Colony. In 1632, Maryland received its charger by a grant
from King Charles to Cecil Calvert. In 1655, Admiral Penn captured Jamaica from
the Spanish. In 1654, New Amsterdam was renamed New York after its capture from
the Dutch. A year later, the New Jersey Colony was founded by English
colonists. The 1674 Treaty of Westminster returned New York and Delaware to
England. In 1681, Pennsylvania had its beginning in the land grant given to
William Penn. In 1698, William Dampier sailed on his Pacific expedition to
explore the West Coast of Australia.
In 1648, South Africa came to attention of Europeans when a Dutch ship broke
up and the survivors urged authorities to establish a settlement for
provisioning their East India fleets. In 1652, a small group of Dutch settlers
founded Cape Town. In 1815, Britain gained its long-desired "half-way house" on
the sea route to India when the Dutch ceded the Cape of Good Hope. The British
arrived in 1820. When diamonds were discovered in the Orange Free State, the
Boer War began. Then gold was discovered in the Transvaal in 1886. Cecil Rhodes
who founded the De Beers Mining Corporation in 1880 was determined that the
riches being discovered in South Africa were not going to the Boer farmers.
Rhodes dreamed of extending British rule in Africa. Using his great wealth,
amassed in the diamond and gold fields, Rhodes with other imperialists
established British colonies to the north of the Boer territories. Both
Northern and Southern Rhodesia were granted charters by London. Eventually the
Boer republics were annexed to the British crown in 1900.
The South Sea company founded in 1711 had acquired a monopoly in the
lucrative Spanish slave trade and other trading ventures in South America.
At the Treaty of Paris in 1763, Britain gained Canada, Nova Scotia, Cape
Breton, the right to navigate the Mississippi, the West Indian Islands of
Grenada, St. Vincent, Dominica and Tobago in the West Indies; Florida (from
Spain); Senegal in Africa and the preservation in India of the East India
Company's monopoly, and in Europe, Minorca.
In India, Robert Clive defeated pro-French forces at Arcot in 1751 thus
helping his East India Company monopolize appoints, finances, land and power.
The British victory led to the withdrawal of the French East India Company.
Then Clive defeated the local Nabob at Plassey to become virtual ruler of
Bengal and opened up much of the country to further exploitation and control by
the East India Company. India was regarded as the "jewel in the crown" of the
British Empire; over two thirds of the vast sub-continent was ruled by the East
India Company. Its finances and its troops were used to protect British
interests, even overthrowing native Indian princes.
In 1769, Captain Cook discovered a country that consisted of two main
islands, it was called New Zealand. In 1770, he explored the eastern coast of
what was then called "New Holland." He took possession of the island continent
in the name of George III. Britain had found a new empire, Australia to
resettle criminals and to accommodate early settlers to help with the
overpopulation in Britain which the agricultural and industrial revolutions had
contributed to. In 1822, an article by James Mill on "colonization" in the
"Encyclopedia Britannica" offered emigration as a remedy for
over-population.
Between 1768 and 1781, Captain Cook made three exploratory voyages to the
West Coast of Canada. Because the Chinese were interested in receiving fur in
exchange for the tea, silks and porcelain which was in demand in Europe, the
British went further west. In 1788, a group of English traders settled on
Vancouver Island. Spain still claimed the whole West Coast of America up to
Alaska but after a confrontation at Vancouver between the two countries,
England presented an ultimatum to the Spanish whose lack of allies and an
effective navy forced them to accept its terms. The Spanish recognition of
British trading and fishing rights in the area opened the way for the
establishment of British Columbia and the creation of a British North America.
In 1867, the British North America Act united Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick
and Nova Scotia in the Dominion of Canada.
When Admiral Nelson defeated a combined French and Spanish fleet near
Gibraltar in 1805, the long struggle between Britain and France for world
supremacy ended. English soldiers were involved in a war with China over
British export of opium from India in exchange for silks and tea. When China
forbade the opium trade and fired on a British warship, they were bombarded by
a Royal Navy squadron. The Opium War ended with the Treaty of Nanking in 1842
that opened up five "Treaty Ports" for trade and gave Hong Kong to Britain.
Britain's rise to a world power meant that she found interest everywhere.
Not only was she now head of the self-governing colonies such as Australia,
Canada, New Zealand, but also the vast Empire of India and a veritable host of
dependent territories all over the world's oceans. Most of these had been
acquired somehow to protect the merchants and traders of England. On the
following page, you will find a chart of British interference and domination in
the affairs of the world.
Observations of Commonwealth Countries While I could make numerous
observations about the various countries that comprise the Commonwealth
countries, I would like to offer the following:
1. There is an interesting mix between extremely wealthy countries such as
Australia, Canada, Brunei, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and UAE versus the Highly
Indebted Poor Countries-HIPC such as Bangladesh, Mozambique, Uganda and the
Sudan.
Many of the HIPC have vast mineral resources which are used to pay for World
Bank loans instead of building infrastructure. Please refer to Prince Charles
the Sustainable Prince. For example:
Ghana - Rich in gold, bauxite, manganese, diamonds
Guyana - Rich in bauxite, manganese, gold, diamonds Mauritania - Iron and
copper ore Senegal - Petroleum refining Sierra Leone - Diamonds, chrome,
bauxite and iron ore Uganda - Copper and cobalt Tanzania - Rich in gold,
diamonds and coal Zambia - Rich in copper.
2. By the number of countries that the British invaded, ruled and plundered,
you can see that "the sun never sets on the British Empire."
3. Israel was a British Mandate and then was made a country by vote at the
United Nations.
4. The financial and economic power of some of the Commonwealth Countries
and those invaded by the British is as follows:
- Australia - rich in coal, gold, meat, wool, machinery, iron ore, bauxite,
natural gas, uranium and petroleum.
- Brunei - Rich in oil and gas with 79 million barrels of oil exported in
2001. It also has forests, fish, rubber and pepper.
- Kuwait - Has 10% of the world's oil reserves at 98 billion barrels.
- India - Has textiles, chemicals, steel, transportation equipment, cement
and petroleum.
- Nigeria - The most populous country with proven oil reserves of 27
billion barrels and natural gas reserves of 4 trillion cubic feet along with
coal, peanuts and palm oil.
- Malaysia - Rubber, palm oil and electronics. Oman -Has oil and natural
gas with some copper, gold, manganese, and goal.
- Qatar - Has 5% of the world's oil reserves of 14.6B barrels and proven
natural gas of 17.9% trillion cubic feet.
- Singapore - Electronics, chemicals, transportation equipment, one of the
world's largest petroleum refining centers and an important ship-building
center.
- South Africa - The world's largest producer of platinum, gold and
chromium.
- UAE - Has 10% of the world's oil reserves estimated at 98.1 billion
barrels and natural gas at 5.8 trillion cubic feet as well as largest
producer of dates and fresh fruits, has a national shipping fleet of more
than 4,000 vessels, produces aluminum, chemicals, paper and
pharmaceuticals.
- Zimbabwe - Coal, gold, copper, nickel, tin, clay, steel, wood, cement and
chemicals.
While we are at it, let us make mention that most of the off-shore trading
and banking is conducted in the Cayman Islands which is part of the UK. They
have 40,000 companies as of 1998 with 600 banks and trusts. AT that time,
banking exceeded $500B.
Definition of Commonwealth
The English word, "Commonwealth", dates from the 15th century and indicates
one of the following: a nation, state or political unit, a state founded on law
by agreement of the people for the common good, a republic, and/or a federated
union of constituent states. The Commonwealth of England was the official title
of the political unit that replaced the kingdoms of Scotland and England under
the rule of Oliver Cromwell.
The states of Kentucky, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Virginia are all
"commonwealths" which emphasizes they have "government based on the common
consent of the people" (Source: Wikipedia.Org.)
The Commonwealth
According to an Internet
encyclopedia, Wikipedia.org, "The Commonwealth of Nations is a voluntary
association of independent sovereign states, mostly formed by the United
Kingdom and its former colonies." Countries that "acknowledge the British
monarch as head of state are known as Commonwealth Realms" while all members
recognize Queen Elizabeth II as Head of the Commonwealth.
The Commonwealth is the successor of the British Empire and has its origins
in the Imperial Conferences of the 1920s. The Commonwealth was established as
an association of free and equal states, and membership was based on common
allegiance to the British Crown.
The old British Empire, we are told, was dismantled after World War II
beginning with India and the activities of Mohandas Gandhi. A number of the
countries that have been de-colonized are republics. Because several left the
Commonwealth, they established the London Declaration which provided for
members to accept the British monarch as Head of the Commonwealth regardless of
their domestic constitutional arrangements, and are now considered by many to
be the start of the modern Commonwealth.
The population of the Commonwealth is about 1.8 billion people which
comprise about 30% of the world's population. India is the most populous member
with a billion people while Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Nigeria have more than
100 million people. The land of Commonwealth nations equals about 1/4 of the
world's land area. Membership is open to countries that accept the
association's basic aims.
In recent years, the Commonwealth has suspended Fiji (2000-2001), Pakistan
from 1999-2004, Nigeria from 1995 ñ 1999, Zimbabwe was suspended in 2002
and left the Commonwealth in 2003.
Organization and Objectives
Queen Elizabeth II is the nominal Head of the Commonwealth. Since 1965 there
has been a London-based Secretariat. The current Commonwealth Secretary-General
is the former New Zealand Foreign Minister Don McKinnon.
The objectives of the Commonwealth were set down in The Harare Declaration
of 1991. While it is not a long declaration, part of it is reprinted only to
show that there really is no real reason for the UK to have the Commonwealth
except to control the UN through the Commonwealth. Its goals are exactly those
of the UN. The Declaration states in part,
The Heads of Government of the countries of the Commonwealth reaffirm their
confidence In the Commonwealth as a voluntary association of sovereign
independent states, each Responsible for its own policies, consulting and
co-operating in the interests of their peoples and in the promotion of
international understanding and world peace.
The Commonwealth way is to seek consensus through consultation and the
sharing of experience. It is uniquely placed to serve as a model and as a
catalyst for new forms of friendship and co-operation to all in the spirit of
the Charter of the United Nations.
We believe that international peace and order, global economic development
and the rule of International law are essential to the security and prosperity
of mankind.
Internationally, the world is no longer locked in the iron grip of the Cold
War. Totalitarianism Is giving way to democracy and justice in many parts of
the world.
Many Commonwealth countries are poor and face acute problems, including
excessive population growth, crushing poverty, debt burdens and environmental
degradation.
Only sound and sustainable development can offer these millions the prospect
of betterment. Achieving this will require a flow of public and private
resources from the developed to the developing world, and domestic and
international regimes conducive to the realization of these goals:
environmental degradation, migration and refugees, communicable diseases and
drug production and trafficking.
Having reaffirmed the principles to which the Commonwealth is committed, we
pledge the Commonwealth and our countries to work with renewed vigor,
concentrating especially In the following areas: the protection and promotion
of the fundamental political values of the Commonwealth.
How Voluntary is the Commonwealth?
You would think that if a country was de-colonized that Britain would have a
"hands-off" policy. That is not the case. Every Commonwealth country that
acknowledges the queen as head of state has a representative of the queen who
is called a "Governor-General." The Governor-General retains all the reserve
powers that the Queen exercises in the UK which includes opening and closing
parliament and abolishing parliament. Furthermore, the Governor-General
appoints the prime minister and cabinet from the part with the most support
from the House of Commons. In Canada, for example, the ten provinces all have a
representative of the Queen! When Parliament is opened, both the prime minister
and the Governor-General give a speech. The Governor-General delivers "The
Speech from the Throne."
Commonwealth Votes at the UN
When the UN was formed in 1945, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom
had three votes. As the UK de-colonized countries, they were made voting
members of the United Nations. Then between 1946-1959 when the United Kingdom
de-colonized a number of countries, their votes increased by four: Ghana,
Malaysia, Pakistan and Sir Lanka. During 1960-1969, twenty more countries were
de-colonized: Barbados, Botswana, Cameroon, Cyprus, Gambia, Guyana, Jamaica,
Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Nigeria, Sierra Leone,
Singapore, Swaziland, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda and Zambia. During 1970-79,
ten more countries de-colonized: Bahamas, Bangladesh, Dominica, Fiji, Grenada,
Mozambique, Papau New Guinea, Samoa, and Solomon Islands. During 1980-89, seven
more countries de-colonized: Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Brunei Darussalam,
Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Vanuatu, and Zimbabwe.
The last country to de-colonize was Namibia.
In addition, associated states, external territories and dependencies
include: Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Channel
Islands, Falkland Islands, Isle of Man, Montserrat, Pitcairn Islands, St.
Helena, and Turks and Caicos Islands. Those that come as a result of being part
of Australia or New Zealand include: Christmas Island, Cocos Island, Cook
Islands, Niue, Norfolk Island, and Tokelau.
Canada and the Free Trade Areas of the Americas Our neighbor to the north
and our largest trading partner, Canada, is the largest member of the
Commonwealth in this hemisphere. Canada is America's largest trading
partnerósurpassing our trade with Japan. On a daily basis the volume is
over $1B or about $400B a year. Twenty-three percent of American exports are
sent to Canada and more than 80% of Canada's exports come to us. Canada is the
largest export market for 39 of the 50 states. We import 80% of Canada's wood,
paper and pulp and 17% of their oil and 18% of their natural gas. Furthermore,
we not only share energy grids all across the northern borders but New England
obtains most of their power from Quebec.
From a military standpoint, over the past 46 years, America has been
inextricably linked to Canada through our joint military efforts through the
North American Aerospace Defense Command-NORAD. On September 11, it was a
Canadian general who was holding the chair at NORAD that gave the order to
initiate our defenses. As a result of September 11, more than 200 commercial
planes were diverted to airports across our country from coast to coast. Since
then both countries have implemented measures to strengthen military
cooperation as well as law enforcement and intelligence agencies. In December
2002, they established the Bi-national Planning Group to develop joint plans
for maritime and land defense, and for military support to civil authorities in
times of emergency. In Canada, President Bush expressed hope that our two
countries would move forward on a ballistic missile defense system.
In November, 2004 President Bush told Canada's Prime Minister Paul Martin at
a meeting on "Common Security, Common Prosperity, A new Partnership in North
America, "It's good to be home." He went on to declare, "Both the U.S. and
Canada participate together in more multinational institutions than perhaps any
two nations on earthófrom NATO to the OAS to APEC in the Pacific." He
went several steps forward when he pledged,
My country is determined to work as far as possible within the framework of
international organizations and we're hoping that other nations will work with
us to make those institutions more relevant and more effective in meeting the
unique threats of our time.
With all this "interconnectedness," I would like to seriously question our
involvement with, not only Canada, but the Free Trade Areas of the
Americas-FTAA which is a trading zone for all the countries in our hemisphere.
Begun in 1994, the various cabinet level secretaries of the 34 countries have
been meeting throughout the year since then to integrate our laws. In a the
Western Hemisphere, Canada, Antigua, the Bahamas, Belize, Dominica, Grenada,
Guyana, Jamaica, St. Lucia, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Vincent and the
Grenadines, and Trinidad and Tobago are members of the British Commonwealth. We
are outvoted by 13 votes to our one vote in our own hemisphere! Let's take a
look at the voting power of the Commonwealth in the world today.
THE VOTING POWER OF THE COMMONWEALTH IN THE WORLD TODAY
Starting with the founding of the International Monetary Fund and the World
Bank in 1944, an economic international infrastructure was established which
was followed by a political international infrastructure above the
nation-states. Over the last 61 years, this infrastructure has been developed
to include trade, law, the military and now intelligence as a result of the
September 11 terrorist attacks on America. Interestingly enough, the
Commonwealth of Nations operates in each of these organizations. Not once has
an American President said, "Chose either the UN or the Commonwealth." On the
following page, you will see the power of the Commonwealth. We are outvoted
with our one vote at every turn.
Let me just make mention that on a regional basis, the U.S. and the world
are also outvoted: Free Trade Areas of the Americas by 13 votes, two votes in
the European Union, and seven votes at the Asian Pacific Economic
Cooperation!
Furthermore, whenever a committee is formed at the UN, they rotate
"presidency". For example, if there are 4 Commonwealth countries that are part
of a committee of 15, that means Britain is president 25% of the time. This is
occurring throughout ALL of the hundreds of committees, agencies,
organizations, etc. throughout the WHOLE of the UN system.
IN CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I believe the purpose behind the construction of the
international level is to transfer complete and absolute power to Britain.
I can now see why Prince Charles was working behind the scenes. For him to
be center-stage along with the power of the Commonwealth would look like they
are in the process of using Francis Drake's pirating methods to grab the world!
You can now see how The British have the majority of votes in the global
organizations of the world through the Commonwealth and not one major power has
questioned the ability of the Commonwealth to operate in tandem with the other
global organizations!
And while we are on the subject of being outvoted, let us turn to the EU for
a moment. When it came together the whole purpose was to create a "United
States of Europe." Now that the travel and trade barriers are down between the
European states which now total 25, and they have adopted a common currency
which is giving the dollar a run for her money, and they have a common
parliament in Strasbourg, how come, they still have 25 votes at the UN instead
of ONE? America has 50 states and we only get ONE vote! There, the Commonwealth
has two votes: Malta and the UK. Globally Queen Elizabeth II has out-maneuvered
more than what her namesake did when she defeated the Spanish Armada!
PageTOP ^
Disclaimer
Global Banking: the Bank for International Settlements
By Patrick Wood | newswithviews.com
Preface
When David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski founded the Trilateral Commission
in 1973, the intent was to create a "New International Economic Order" (NIEO). To
this end, they brought together 300 elite corporate, political and academic
leaders from North America, Japan and Europe.
Few people believed us when we wrote about their nefarious plans back then.
Now, we look back and clearly see that they did what they said they were going to
do... globalism is upon us like an 8.6 magnitude earthquake.
The question is, "How did they do it?" Keep in mind, they had no public
mandate from any country in the world. They didn't have the raw political muscle,
especially in democratic countries where voting is allowed. They didn't have
global dictatorial powers.
Indeed, how did they do it?
The answer is the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), self-described as
the "central bank for central bankers", that controls the vast global banking
system with the precision of a Swiss watch.
This report offers a concise summation of BIS history, structure and current
activities.
It is not surprising that the BIS, its offices, employees,
directors and members share an incredible immunity from virtually all
regulation, scrutiny and accountability.
Introduction
The famous currency expert Dr. Franz Pick once stated, "The destiny of the
currency is, and always will be, the destiny of a nation."
With the advent of rampant globalization, this concept can certainly be given
a global context as well: "The destiny of currencies are, and always will be, the
destiny of the world."
Even though the BIS is the oldest international banking operation in the
world, it is a low profile organization, shunning all publicity and notoriety. As
a result, there is very little critical analysis written about this important
financial organization. Further, much of what has been written about it is
tainted by its own self-effacing literature.
The BIS can be compared to a stealth bomber. It flies high and fast, is
undetected, has a small crew and carries a huge payload. By contrast, however,
the bomber answers to a chain of command and must be refueled by outside sources.
The BIS, as we shall see, is not accountable to any public authority and operates
with complete autonomy and self-sufficiency.
Leading up to Founding
As we will see, the BIS was founded in 1930 during a very troubled time in
history. Some knowledge of that history is critical to understanding why the BIS
was created, and for whose benefit.
There are three figures that play prominently in the founding of the BIS:
Charles G. Dawes, Owen D. Young and Hjalmar Schacht of Germany.
Charles G. Dawes was director of the U.S. Bureau of the Budget in 1921, and
served on the Allied Reparations Commission starting in 1923. His latter work on
"stabilizing Germany's economy" earned him the Nobel Peace Prize in 1925. After
being elected Vice President under President Calvin Coolidge from 1925-1929, and
appointed Ambassador to England in 1931, he resumed his personal banking career
in 1932 as chairman of the board of the City National Bank and Trust in Chicago,
where he remained until his death in 1951.
Owen D Young was an American industrialist. He founded RCA (Radio Corporation
of America) in1919 and was its chairman until 1933. He also served as the
chairman of General Electric from 1922 until 1939. In 1932, Young sought the
democratic presidential nomination, but lost to Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
More on Hjalmar Schacht later.
In the aftermath of World War I and the impending collapse of the German
economy and political structure, a plan was needed to rescue and restore Germany,
which would also insulate other economies in Europe from being affected
adversely.
The Versailles Treaty of 1919 (which officially ended WWI) had imposed a very
heavy reparations burden on Germany, which required a repayment schedule of 132
billion gold marks per year. Most historians agree that the economic upheaval
caused in Germany by the Versailles Treaty eventually led to Adolph Hitler's rise
to power.
In 1924 the Allies appointed a committee of international bankers, led by
Charles G. Dawes (and accompanied by J.P. Morgan agent, Owen Young), to develop a
plan to get reparations payments back on track. Historian Carroll Quigley noted
that the Dawes Plan was "largely a J.P. Morgan production"[1] The plan called for
$800 million in foreign loans to be arranged for Germany in order to rebuild its
economy.
In 1924, Dawes was chairman of the Allied Committee of Experts, hence, the
"Dawes Plan." He was replaced as chairman by Owen Young in 1929, with direct
support by J.P. Morgan. The "Young Plan" of 1928 put more teeth into the Dawes
Plan, which many viewed as a strategy to subvert virtually all German assets to
back a huge mortgage held by the United States bankers.
Neither Dawes nor Young represented anything more than banking interests.
After all, WWI was fought by governments using borrowed money made possible by
the international banking community. The banks had a vested interest in having
those loans repaid!
In 1924, the president of Reichsbank (Germany's central bank at that time) was
Hjalmar Schacht. He had already had a prominent role in creating the Dawes Plan,
along with German industrialist Fritz Thyssen and other prominent German bankers
and industrialists.
The Young Plan was so odious to the Germans that many credit it as a
precondition to Hitler's rise to power. Fritz Thyssen, a leading Nazi
Industrialist, stated
"I turned to the National socialist party only after I became convinced that
the fight against the Young Plan was unavoidable if complete collapse of
Germany was to be prevented." [2]
Some historians too quickly credit Owen Young as the idea-man for the Bank for
International Settlements. It was actually Hjalmar Schacht who first proposed the
idea[3], which was then carried forward by the same group of international
bankers who brought us the Dawes and Young Plans.
It is not necessary to jump to conclusions as to the intent of these elite
bankers, so we will instead defer to the insight of renowned Georgetown
historian, Carroll Quigley:
"The Power of financial capitalism had another far reaching plan, nothing less
than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to
dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a
whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalistic fashion by the central
banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in
frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank
for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and
controlled by the world's central banks, which were themselves private
corporations. Each central bank, in the hands of men like Montagu Norman of
the Bank of England, Benjamin Strong of the New York Federal Reserve Bank,
Charles Rist of the Bank of France, and Hjalmar Schacht of the Reichsbank,
sought to dominate its government by its ability to control treasury loans, to
manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in
the country, and to influence co-operative politicians by subsequent rewards in
the business world."[4] [Bold emphasis added]
So here we have a brief sketch of what led up to the founding of the BIS. Now
we can examine the nuts and bolts of how the BIS was actually put together.
The Hague Agreement of 1930
The formation of the BIS was agreed upon by its constituent central banks in the
so-called Hague Agreement on January 20, 1930, and was in operation shortly
thereafter. According to the Agreement,
The duly authorised representatives of the Governments of Germany, of Belgium,
of France, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, of
Italy and of Japan of the one part; And the duly authorised representatives of
the Government of the Swiss Confederation of the other part Assembled at the
Hague Conference in the month of January, 1930, have agreed on the
following:
Article 1. Switzerland undertakes to grant to the Bank for International
Settlements, without delay, the following Constituent Charter having force of
law: not to abrogate this Charter, not to amend or add to it, and not to
sanction amendments to the Statutes of the Bank referred to in Paragraph 4 of
the Charter otherwise than in agreement with the other signatory
Governments.[5]
As we will see, German reparation payments (or lack thereof) had little to do
with the founding of the BIS, although this is the weak explanation given since
its founding. Of course, Germany would make a single payment to the BIS, which in
turn would deposit the funds into the respective central bank accounts of the
nations to whom payments were due. (It would be the subject of another paper to
show the shallowness of this operation: Money and gold were shuffled around, but
the net amount that Germany actually paid was very small.)
The original founding documents of the BIS have little to say about Germany,
however, and we can look directly to the BIS itself to see its original
purpose:
“The objects of the Bank are: to promote the co-operation of central
banks and to provide additional facilities for international operations; and to
act as trustees or agent in regard to international financial settlements
entrusted to it under agreements with the parties concerned.” [6]
Virtually every in-print reference to the BIS, including their own documents,
consistently refer to it as "the central banker's central bank."
So, the BIS was established by an international charter and was headquartered
in Basle, Switzerland.
BIS Ownership
According to James C. Baker, pro-BIS author of The Bank for International
Settlements: Evolution and Evaluation, "The BIS was formed with funding by the
central banks of six nations, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the
United Kingdom. In addition, three private international banks from the United
States also assisted in financing the establishment of the BIS."[7]
Each nation's central bank subscribed to 16,000 shares. The U.S. central bank,
the Federal Reserve, did not join the BIS, but the three U.S. banks that
participated got 16,000 shares each. Thus, U.S. representation at the BIS was
three times that of any other nation. Who were these private banks? Not
surprisingly, they were J.P. Morgan & Company, First National Bank of New
York and First National Bank of Chicago.
On January 8, 2001, an Extraordinary General Meeting of the BIS approved a
proposal that restricted ownership of BIS shares to central banks. Some 13.7% of
all shares were in private hands at that time, and the repurchase was
accomplished with a cash outlay of $724,956,050. The price of $10,000 per share
was over twice the book value of $4,850.
It is not certain what the repurchase accomplished. The BIS claimed that it
was to correct a conflict of interest between private shareholders and BIS goals,
but it offered no specifics. It was not a voting issue, however, because private
owners were not allowed to vote their shares.[8]
Sovereignty and Secrecy
It is not surprising that the BIS, its offices, employees, directors and members
share an incredible immunity from virtually all regulation, scrutiny and
accountability.
In 1931, central bankers and their constituents were fed up with government
meddling in world financial affairs. Politicians were viewed mostly with
contempt, unless it was one of their own who was the politician. Thus, the BIS
offered them a once-and-for-all opportunity to set up the "apex" the way they
really wanted it -- private. They demanded these conditions and got what they
demanded.
A quick summary of their immunity, explained further below, includes
- diplomatic immunity for persons and what they carry with them (i.e.,
diplomatic pouches)
- no taxation on any transactions, including salaries paid to
employees
- embassy-type immunity for all buildings and/or offices operated by the
BIS
- no oversight or knowledge of operations by any government authority
- freedom from immigration restrictions
- freedom to encrypt any and all communications of any sort
- freedom from any legal jurisdiction[9]
Further, members of the BIS board of directors (for instance, Alan Greenspan)
are individually granted special benefits:
- “immunity from arrest or imprisonment and immunity from seizure of
their personal baggage, save in flagrant cases of criminal
offence;”
- “inviolability of all papers and documents;”
- “immunity from jurisdiction, even after their mission has been
accomplished, for acts carried out in the discharge of their duties,
including words spoken and writings;”
- “exemption for themselves, their spouses and children from any
immigration restrictions, from any formalities concerning the registration of
aliens and from any obligations relating to national service in Switzerland
;”
- “the right to use codes in official communications or to receive or
send documents or correspondence by means of couriers or diplomatic
bags.”[10]
Lastly, all remaining officials and employees of the BIS have the following
immunities:
- “immunity from jurisdiction for acts accomplished in the discharge
of their duties, including words spoken and writings, even after such
persons have ceased to be Officials of the Bank;”[bold emphasis
added]
- “exemption from all Federal, cantonal and communal taxes on
salaries, fees and allowances paid to them by the Bank…”
- exempt from Swiss national obligations, freedom for spouses and family
members from immigration restrictions, transfer assets and properties –
including internationally – with the same degree of benefit as
Officials of other international organizations.[11]
Of course, a corporate charter can say anything it wants to say and still be
subject to outside authorities. Nevertheless, these were the immunities practiced
and enjoyed from 1930 onward. On February 10, 1987, a more formal acknowledgement
called the "Headquarters Agreement" was executed between the BIS and the Swiss
Federal Council and basically clarified and reiterated what we already knew:
Article 2
Inviolability
- The buildings or parts of buildings and surrounding land which,
whoever may be the owner thereof, are used for the purposes of the Bank shall
be inviolable. No agent of the Swiss public authorities may enter therein
without the express consent of the Bank. Only the President, the General
Manager of the Bank, or their duly authorised representative shall be
competent to waive such inviolability.
- The archives of the Bank and, in general, all documents and any data
media belonging to the Bank or in its possession, shall be inviolable at all
times and in all places.
- The Bank shall exercise supervision of and police power over its
premises.
Article 4
Immunity from jurisdiction and execution
- The Bank shall enjoy immunity from criminal and administrative
jurisdiction, save to the extent that such immunity is formally waived in
individual cases by the President, the General Manager of the Bank, or their
duly authorised representative.
- The assets of the Bank may be subject to measures of compulsory execution
for enforcing monetary claims. On the other hand, all deposits entrusted
to the Bank, all claims against the Bank and the shares issued by the Bank
shall, without the prior agreement of the Bank, be immune from seizure or
other measures of compulsory execution and sequestration, particularly of
attachment within the meaning of Swiss law. [12][bold emphasis
added]
As you can see, the BIS, its directors and employees (past and present) can do
virtually anything and everything they want, with complete secrecy, immunity and
with no one looking over their shoulders. It was truly a banker's dream come
true, and it paved the international freeway for the rampant financial globalism
that we see manifest today. Don't miss the stunning conclusion!
Footnotes: 1, Quigley, Tragedy & Hope, (MacMillan, 1966),
p.308
2, Edgar B Nixon, ec., Franklin D. Roosevelt and Foreign Affairs, Volume
III (Cambridge: Balknap Press, 1969) p. 456
3, Sutton, Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler, (GSC & Associates,
2002) p. 26
4, Quigley, op cit, p. 324
5, BIS web site, Extracts from the Hague Convention,
www.bis.org/about/conv-ex.htm
6, BIS, Statutes of the Bank for International Settlements Article 3 [as
if January 1930, text as amended on March 10,2003], Basic Texts (Basle, August
2003), p. 7-8
7, Baker, The Bank for International Settlements: Evolution and
Evaluation, (Quorum, 2002), p. 20
8, ibid., p. 16
9, BIS, Protocol Regarding the Immunities of the Bank for International
Settlements, Basic Texts, (Basle, August 2003), p. 33
10, ibid, Article 12, p.43.
11, ibid, p. 44
12, BIS, Extracts from the Headquarters Agreement,
www.bis.org/about/hq-ex.htm
Global Banking: the Bank for International Settlements - Part 2 of 2
Article 21 of the original BIS statutes define day-to-day operations:
- buying and selling of gold coin or bullion for its own account or for the
account of central banks;
- holding gold for its own account under reserve in central banks;
- accepting the supervision of gold for the account of central banks;
- making advances to or borrowing from central banks against gold, bills of
exchange, and other short-term obligations of prime liquidity or other
approved securities;
- discounting, rediscounting, purchasing, or selling with or without its
endorsement bills of exchange, checks, and other short-term obligations of
prime liquidity;
- buying and selling foreign exchange for its own account or for the
account of central banks;
- buying and selling negotiable securities other than shares for its own
account or for the account of central banks;
- discounting for central banks bills taken from their portfolio and
rediscounting with central banks bills taken from its own portfolio;
- opening and maintaining current or deposit accounts with central
banks;
- accepting deposits from central banks on current or deposit
account;
- accepting deposits in connection with trustee agreements that may be made
between the BIS and governments in connection with international
settlements.;
- accepting such other deposits that, as in the opinion of the Board of the
BIS, come within the scope of the BIS’ functions. [1]
The BIS also may
- act as agent or correspondent for any central bank
- arrange with any central bank for the latter to act as its agent or
correspondent;
- enter into agreements to act as trustee or agent in connection with
international settlements, provided that such agreements will not encroach on
the obligations of the BIS toward any third parties. [2]
Why is "agency" an important issue? Because any member of the network can
obscure transactions from onlookers. For instance, if Brown Brothers, Harriman
wanted to transfer money to a company in Nazi Germany during WWII (which was not
"politically correct" at that time), they would first transfer the funds to the
BIS thus putting the transaction under the cloak of secrecy and immunity that is
enjoyed by the BIS but not by Brown Brothers, Harriman. (Such laundering of Wall
Street money was painstakingly noted in Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler, by
Antony C. Sutton.)
There are a few things that the BIS cannot do. For instance, it does not
accept deposits from, or provide financial services to, private individuals or
corporate entities. It is also not permitted to make advances to governments or
open current accounts in their name. [3] These restrictions are easily understood
when one considers that each central bank has an exclusive franchise to loan
money to their respective government. For instance, the U.S. Federal Reserve does
not loan money to the government of Canada. In like manner, central banks do not
loan money directly to the private or corporate clients of their member
banks.
How Decisions are Made
The board of directors consist of the heads of certain member central banks.
Currently, these are:
Nout H E M Wellink, Amsterdam (Chairman of the Board of Directors)
Hans Tietmeyer, Frankfurt am Main (Vice-Chairman)
Axel Weber, Frankfurt am Main
Vincenzo Desario, Rome
Antonio Fazio, Rome
David Dodge, Ottawa Toshihiko Fukui,
Tokyo Timothy F Geithner, New York
Alan Greenspan, Washington
Lord George, London
Hervé Hannoun, Paris
Christian Noyer, Paris
Lars Heikensten, Stockholm
Mervyn King, London
Guy Quaden, Brussels
Jean-Pierre Roth, Zürich
Alfons Vicomte Verplaetse, Brussels [4]
Of these, five members ( Canada, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden and
Switzerland) are currently elected by the shareholders. The majority of directors
are "ex officio," meaning they are permanent and are automatically a part of any
sub-committee.
The combined board meets at least six times per year, in secret, and is
briefed by BIS management on financial operations of the bank. Global monetary
policy is discussed and set at these meetings.
It was reported in 1983 that there is an inner club of the half dozen central
bankers who are more or less in the same monetary boat: Germany, U.S.,
Switzerland, Italy, Japan and England. [5] The existence of an inner club is
neither surprising nor substantive: the whole BIS operation is 100% secret
anyway. It is not likely that members of the inner club have significantly
different beliefs or agendas apart from the BIS as a whole.
How the BIS works with the IMF and the World Bank
The interoperation between the three entities is understandably confusing to
most people, so a little clarification will help.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) interacts with governments whereas the
BIS interacts only with other central banks. The IMF loans money to national
governments, and often these countries are in some kind of fiscal or monetary
crisis. Furthermore, the IMF raises money by receiving "quota" contributions from
its 184 member countries. Even though the member countries may borrow money to
make their quota contributions, it is, in reality, all tax-payer money. [6]
The World Bank also lends money and has 184 member countries. Within the World
Bank are two separate entities, the International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA). The IBRD
focuses on middle income and credit-worthy poor countries, while the IDA focuses
on the poorest of nations. In funding itself, the World Bank borrows money by
direct lending from banks and by floating bond issues, and then loans this money
through IBRD and IDA to troubled countries. [7]
The BIS, as central bank to the other central banks, facilitates the movement
of money. They are well-known for issuing "bridge loans" to central banks in
countries where IMF or World Bank money is pledged but has not yet been
delivered. These bridge loans are then repaid by the respective governments when
they receive the funds that had been promised by the IMF or World Bank. [8]
The IMF is the BIS' "ace in the hole" when monetary crisis hits. The 1998
Brazil currency crisis was caused by that country's inability to pay inordinate
accumulated interest on loans made over a protracted period of time. These loans
were extended by banks like Citigroup, J.P. Morgan Chase and FleetBoston, and
they stood to lose a huge amount of money.
The IMF, along with the World Bank and the U.S., bailed out Brazil with a
$41.5 billion package that saved Brazil, its currency and, not incidentally,
certain private banks.
Congressman Bernard Sanders (I-VT), ranking member of the International
Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee, blew the whistle on this money laundry
operation. Sander's entire congressional press release is worth reading:
IMF Bailout for Brazil is Windfall to Banks, Disaster for US Taxpayers Says
Sanders
BURLINGTON, VERMONT - August 15 - Congressman Bernard Sanders (I-VT), the
Ranking Member of the International Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee,
today called for an immediate Congressional investigation of the recent $30
billion International Monetary Fund (IMF) bailout of Brazil.
Sanders, who is strongly opposed to the bailout and considers it corporate
welfare, wants Congress to find out why U.S. taxpayers are being asked to
provide billions of dollars to Brazil and how much of this money will be
funneled to U.S. banks such as Citigroup, FleetBoston and J.P. Morgan
Chase. These banks have about $25.6 billion in outstanding loans to
Brazilian borrowers. U.S. taxpayers currently fund the IMF through a $37
billion line of credit.
Sanders said, "At a time when we have a $6 trillion national debt, a growing
federal deficit, and an increasing number of unmet social needs for our
veterans, seniors, and children, it is unacceptable that billions of U.S.
taxpayer dollars are being sent to the IMF to bailout Brazil."
"This money is not going to significantly help the poor people of that
country. The real winners in this situation are the large, profitable U.S.
banks such as Citigroup that have made billions of dollars in risky investments
in Brazil and now want to make sure their investments are repaid. This
bailout represents an egregious form of corporate welfare that must be put to
an end. Interestingly, these banks have made substantial campaign contributions
to both political parties," the Congressman added.
Sanders noted that the neo-liberal policies of the IMF developed in the
1980's pushing countries towards unfettered free trade, privatization, and
slashing social safety nets has been a disaster for Latin America and has
contributed to increased global poverty throughout the world. At the same time
that Latin America countries such as Brazil and Argentina followed these
neo-liberal dictates imposed by the IMF, from 1980-2000, per capita income in
Latin America grew at only one-tenth the rate of the previous two decades.
Sanders continued, "The policies of the IMF over the past 20 years
advocating unfettered free trade, privatizing industry, deregulation and
slashing government investments in health, education, and pensions has been a
complete failure for low income and middle class families in the developing
world and in the United States . Clearly, these policies have only helped
corporations in their constant search for the cheapest labor and weakest
environmental regulations. Congress must work on a new global policy that
protects workers, increases living standards and improves the environment."
One can surmise that a financial circle exists where the World Bank helps
nations get into debt, then when these countries can't pay their massive loans,
the IMF bails them out with taxpayer money -- and in the middle stands the BIS,
collecting fees as the money travels back and forth like the ocean tide, while
assuring everyone that all is well.
BIS dumps gold-backed Swiss Francs for SDR's
On March 10, 2003, the BIS abandoned the Swiss gold franc as the bank's unit
of account since 1930, and replaced it with the SDR.
SDR stands for Special Drawing Rights and is a unit of currency originally
created by the IMF. According to Baker,
"The SDR is an international reserve asset, created by the IMF in 1969 to
supplement the existing official reserves of member countries. SDR's are
allocated to member countries in proportion to their IMF quotas. The SDR also
serves as the unit of account of the IMF and some other international
organizations. Its value is based on a basket of key international currencies."
[9]
This "basket" currently consists of the euro, Japanese yen, pound sterling and
the U.S. dollar.
The BIS abandonment of the 1930 gold Swiss franc removed all restraint from
the creation of paper money in the world. In other words, gold backs no national
currency, leaving the central banks a wide-open field to create money as they
alone see fit. Remember, that almost all the central banks in the world are
privately-held entities, with an exclusive franchise to arrange loans for their
respective host countries.
Regional and Global Currencies: SDR's, Euros and Ameros
There is no doubt that the BIS is moving the world toward regional currencies
and ultimately, a global currency. The global currency could well be an evolution
of the SDR, and may explain why the BIS recently adopted the SDR as its primary
reserve currency.
The Brandt Equation, 21st Century Blueprint for the New Global Economy notes,
for instance, that
Since the SDR is the world's only means of meeting international payments that
has been authorized through international contract, "The SDR therefore
represents a clear first step towards a stable and permanent international
currency" [10] [bold emphasis added]
As to regional currencies, the BIS has already been hugely successful in
launching the euro in Europe. Armed with new technical and social know-how, the
BIS' next logical step is to focus on America and Asia.
For instance, according to BIS Papers No. 17, Regional currency areas and the
use of foreign currencies,
"Canada, Mexico and the United States are members of the trade group NAFTA.
Given the high proportion of Canada and Mexico’s trade with the United
States, a NAFTA dollar or “Amero” has been proposed by some
Canadian academics such as Grubel (1999). See also Beine and Coulombe (2002)
and Robson and Laidler (2002)." [11]
Assuming that NAFTA permanently identifies Canada, the U.S. and Mexico as one
trading block, then North America will look like the European Union and the Amero
will function like the Euro. All of the work put into the SDR would be perfectly
preserved by simply substituting the Amero for the U.S. dollar when they choose
to bring the Amero to ascendancy over the dollar.
For those American readers who do not grasp the significance of the adoption
of the euro by European Union countries, consider how one American globalist
describes it.
C. Fred Bergsten is a prominent and core Trilateral Commission member and head
of the Institute for International Economics. On January 3, 1999, Bergsten wrote
in the Washington Post
"The adoption of a common currency is by far the boldest chapter of European
integration. Money traditionally has been an integral element of national
sovereignty ...and the decision by Germany and France to give up their mark and
franc ...represents the most dramatic voluntary surrender of sovereignty in
recorded history. The European Central Bank that will manage the euro is a
truly supranational institution". [12] [bold emphasis added]
Bergsten will have to rephrase this when the U.S. gives up the dollar for the
amero -- that will become the most dramatic voluntary surrender of sovereignty in
recorded history!
"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the
political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the
Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over
American political and economic institutions. 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." - David Rockefeller Memoirs, 2002
Conclusions
Our credo is "Follow the money, follow the power." This report has endeavored
to follow the money. We find that:
- The BIS is central bank to all major central banks in the world
- It is privately owned by central banks themselves, most of whom are also
private
- It was founded under questionable circumstances by questionable
people
- It is accountable to no one, especially government bodies
- It operates in complete secrecy and is inviolable
- Movement of money is obscured and hidden when routed through the BIS
- The BIS is targeting regional currency blocks and ultimately, a global
currency
- It has been hugely successful at building the New International Economic
Order, along with its attendant initiatives on global governance.
As to "follow the power," another paper will more fully explore the influence
of power that the BIS exerts over other banks, nations and governments. For your
own consideration in the meantime, Proverbs 22:7 provides a useful compass: "The
rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender".
NOTE: Carl Teichrib, World Research Library Senior Fellow, contributed to this
report.
Footnotes:
1, Baker, op
cit, p. 26-27
2, ibid, p. 27
3, BIS, The BIS in
profile, Bank for International Settlements flyer, June, 2005
4, BIS, Board of
Directors, www.bis.org/about/board.htm
5, Epstein, Ruling the
World of Money, Harper's Magazine, 1983
6, IMF web site,
http://www.imf.org
7, World Bank web site.
8, Baker, op cit, p.
141-142
9, IMF web site
10, The Brandt
Equation: 21 st Century Blueprint for the New Global Economy. The Brandt Proposals – A
Report Card: Money and Finances.
11, BIS, Regional
currency areas and the use of foreign currencies, BIS Papers No. 17, September,
2003
12, Washington Post,
The Euro Could Be Good for Trans-Atlantic Relations, C. Fred Bergsten, January 3,
199
© 2005 Patrick Wood - All Rights Reserved
Patrick M. Wood is editor of The August Review, which builds on his original
research with the late Dr. Antony C. Sutton, who was formerly a Senior Fellow at
the Hoover Institution for War, Peace and Revolution at Stanford University.
Their 1977-1982 newsletter, Trilateral Observer, was the original authoritative
critique on the New International Economic Order spearheaded by members of the
Trilateral Commission.
Their highly regarded two-volume book, Trilaterals Over Washington, became a
standard reference on global elitism. Wood's ongoing work is to build a knowledge
center that provides a comprehensive and scholarly source of information on
globalism in all its related forms: political, economic and religious.
Article from: http://www.newswithviews.com/Wood/patrick4.htm
BIS Calls For Global Currency
Nazi bankrollers want elimination of national sovereignty for world cashless
control grid
by Paul Joseph Watson/
Prison Planet.com | February 21 2006
The scandal-ridden and highly secretive Bank For International Settlements,
considered to be the world's top central banking policy, has released a policy
paper that calls for the end of national currencies in favor of a global model of
currency formats.
The BIS is a branch of the of the Bretton-Woods International Financial
architecture and closely allied with the Bilderberg Group. It is controlled by an
inner elite that represents all the world's major central banking institutions.
John Maynard Keynes, perhaps the most influential economist of all time, wanted
it closed down as it was used to launder money for the
Nazis in World War II.
Buried in a
London Telegraph report on UK inflation rates is the admission that the BIS,
"has also suggested ditching many national currencies in favour of a small number
of formal currency blocks based on the dollar, euro and renminbi or yen."
Centralized control of currency is a keystone pillar in the construction of
global government.
The eventual goal is a cashless
society credit system based on a worldwide citizen ID. Those designated as
subversives or security threats will have their credit entitlement reduced and
restrictions will be placed on when and what they can buy or sell. A world tax
will be levied on all purchases.
In the meantime new denominations of paper money will be tracked and traced.
Euro notes come with RFID tags
as standard and the same feature is being
incorporated into newly designed US dollar notes.
Last month the United Nations made
a promise to save the world from all its ills in return for complete
elimination of national sovereignty and financial markets and their replacement
by a proxy world government.
The so-called 'conservative Bush administration have done everything in their
power to destroy the last vestiges of American sovereignty, including increasing
deficit spending beyond the level of all previous 42 administrations put
together, signing legislation anathema to the Constitution, promoting global
government and anti-American trade deals like CAFTA and the FTAA, and attempting
to 'solve' the illegal immigration problem by enacting blanket amnesty.
PageTOP ^
Disclaimer
There are two Crowns operant in England, one being Queen
Elizabeth II. Although extremely wealthy, the Queen functions largely in a
ceremonial capacity and serves to deflect attention away from the other Crown,
who issues her marching orders through their control of the English Parliament.
This other Crown is comprised of a committee of 12 banks headed by the Bank of
England (House of Rothschild). They rule the world from the 677-acre,
independent sovereign state known as The City of London, or simply 'The
City.'
