The Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, and Bilderberg Group

The New World Order Triumvirate

Following is an excerpt from Alex Newman’s excellent book “Deep State: The Invisible Government Behind the Scenes”, published in 2020 and written while Trump was still in the White House, which provides a brief, informative, background on each organization.

Council on Foreign Relations

Council on Foreign Relations What Professor Quigley revealed in Tragedy and Hope was huge. “There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the Communists act,” Quigley wrote in his book. “In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so.”

The leading Round Table Groups he identifies include the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in the United States and its sister organization in Britain known as the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA, sometimes referred to as Chatham House). The CFR was founded in 1921 by establishment mega-bankers and globalist ideologists anxious to get America ensnared in foreign entanglements after the U.S. Senate declined to join the League of Nations. In America, it is among the most powerful organizations representing the public face of the Deep State behind the Deep State.

To get some sense of how influential the outfit is, consider the words of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, whose husband and daughter are members, in a 2009 speech at the CFR’s new office in Washington. “I am delighted to be here in these new headquarters,” she said. “I have been often to, I guess, the mother ship in New York City, but it’s good to have an outpost of the Council right here down the street from the State Department. 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.”

In other words, the unelected CFR establishment sets policy, and the visible government implements it. The same applies to the establishment wing of the Republican Party, which is also dominated by CFR operatives. Knowing how toxic the CFR label has become politically among conservatives, though, a leading CFR “Republican” actually boasted of his dishonesty in concealing his membership from the public. George W. Bush’s Vice President Dick Cheney, for example, was filmed on video bragging: “I’ve been a member [of the CFR] for a long time, and was actually a director for some period of time. I never mentioned that when I was campaigning for re-election back home in Wyoming.” He cackled, and the audience laughed.

But he is hardly alone. Members include virtually the entire establishment. Among others: vast swaths of the Republican and Democratic parties’ establishments; countless current and former members of Congress and senior bureaucrats; “journalists,” columnists, editors, anchors, commentators, and media execs; CEOs, chairmen, and presidents of mega-banks; multiple Cabinet secretaries in every administration going back generations; current Supreme Court justices; former presidents and vice presidents; Federal Reserve bosses; celebrities; mega-church pastors; military brass; ambassadors, diplomats, and bureaucrats at international organizations; tax-exempt foundation chiefs and executives; leaders and professors at key universities across the country; “intelligence community” bosses who do much of the Deep State’s dirty work; and many more. Even some pseudo-conservative “leaders,” mostly neocons, are involved in the CFR. (The CFR’s membership roster appears in the Appendix of this book.)

The CFR also has a “corporate membership” that includes the world’s largest bailed-out mega-banks, Big Oil, Big Pharma, crony capitalists, the military-industrial complex, and publishing houses, along with much of the establishment media. Among the mega-banks and financial giants: Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, American Express, Citigroup, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, Soros Fund Management, Bank of New York Mellon Corporation, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, Crédit Agricole, Rothschild North America, Inc., and more. Military-industrial complex: DynCorp, Booz Allen Hamilton Inc., Raytheon Company, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and more. Big Oil: ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron, BP, Hess, and more. Media: News Corp (Fox News, Wall Street Journal, New York Post, National Geographic, and more), Time Warner (CNN, HBO), The Economist, Bloomberg, and more.

Within the CFR, which has around 5,000 members at any given time, there is a core of figures who play a key role in guiding the organization. The late U.S. Admiral Chester Ward, a CFR member for almost 20 years before defecting and blowing the whistle, wrote in his book Kissinger on the Couch that within the CFR there exists a “much smaller group but more powerful ... made up of Wall Street international bankers and their key agents.” Primarily, he continued, the members of this smaller group “want the world banking monopoly from whatever power ends up in control of the global government.” This CFR leadership faction, he added, “is headed by the Rockefeller brothers.”

Of course, not everyone involved in the CFR supports the globalist Deep State agenda. But according to Ward, most do. The former judge advocate general for the Navy explained, among other concerns, the danger of the CFR, the nature of its agenda, and the ideology of most of its members. He also exposed their power over policy and their methods. “Once the ruling members of CFR have decided that the U.S. Government should adopt a particular policy, the very substantial research facilities of CFR are put to work to develop arguments, intellectual and emotional, to support the new policy, and to confound and discredit, intellectually and politically, any opposition,” he explained.

“The most articulate theoreticians and ideologists prepare related articles, aided by the research, to sell the new policy and to make it appear inevitable and irresistible. By following the evolution of this propaganda in the most prestigious scholarly journal in the world, [CFR mouthpiece] Foreign Affairs, anyone can determine years in advance what the future defense and foreign policies of the United States will be,” he added. “If a certain proposition is repeated often enough in that journal, then the U.S. Administration in power — be it Republican or Democratic — begins to act as if that proposition or assumption were an established fact.” The ultimate goal of the CFR, Ward warned, is global government.

The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations is promoting the disarmament of U.S. sovereignty and national independence, and submergence into an all-powerful one-world government,” warned the widely respected U.S. admiral. “This lust to surrender the sovereignty and independence of the United States is pervasive throughout most of the membership.”

Ward also previewed why the CFR’s members would be so violently hostile to Trump’s campaign promises. “In the entire CFR lexicon, there is no term of revulsion carrying a meaning so deep as ‘America First,’” he said. Trump, of course, campaigned on an America First platform to stop globalism. The subversive agenda to betray the American people and subvert their independence, Constitution, and self-government has been made clear even in the CFR’s own propaganda organs such as Foreign Affairs.

In April 1974, for example, Richard Gardner, former deputy assistant secretary of state, explained how the agenda for world government would be pursued. “In short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down,” he wrote. “An end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.”

Deception and a slow subversion process, then, are the tools of the CFR. The magazine also regularly promotes regional government, illegal war, and other extreme positions.

The Trilateral Commission

The Trilateral Commission Another outfit like the CFR, only more “elite” and more international, is the Trilateral Commission, founded in 1973 by the late globalist and self-described conspirator for a one-world order David Rockefeller. The late Rockefeller, of course, also played a leading role in the CFR, becoming a member in 1941 and serving as chairman of the board from 1970 until 1985, and an honorary chairman until his death in 2017 at age 101. As with so many Deep State tentacles, the Rockefellers — and especially David — have been crucial to the Trilateral Commission.

Indeed, David Rockefeller was appointed the first chairman. Aside from Rockefeller, who in his memoirs boasted of “conspiring” with a “secret cabal” against the best interests of America to form a “one world” order, the other key figure behind the Trilateral Commission was Zbigniew Brzezinski, who at the time was at Columbia University’s Russian Studies department. Eventually, he became an advisor to Rockefeller, the North America director of the Trilateral Commission, and the national security advisor to President Jimmy Carter. He also was a key player in arming the jihadist “mujahideen” holy warriors in Afghanistan, whose descendants the U.S. military is currently battling.

Decades ago, Brzezinski’s writings greatly impressed Rockefeller — so much so that Rockefeller decided to take Brzezinski under his wing. Among Brzezinski’s ideas that caught Rockefeller’s attention were those outlined in his 1970 book Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era. In the book, Brzezinski argued, in essence, that America was “obsolete,” and that a new world order needed to be created to take the place of the previous U.S.-dominated system. Rockefeller, apparently, agreed.

While Brzezinski’s book acknowledged some of the problems in the Soviet Union, it also showered praise on Marxism. “Marxism represents a further vital and creative stage in the maturing of man’s universal vision,” he wrote. “Marxism is simultaneously a victory of the external, active man over the inner, passive man and a victory of reason over belief: it stresses man’s capacity to shape his material destiny — finite and defined as man’s only reality — and it postulates the absolute capacity of man to truly understand his reality as a point of departure for his active endeavors to shape it. To a greater extent than any previous mode of political thinking, Marxism puts a premium on the systematic and rigorous examination of material reality and on guides to action derived from that examination.”

Following his attack on obsolete America and his praise for Marxism, Brzezinski, a member of the CFR before his death, went on to advocate the creation of “a council for global cooperation” bringing together “the United States, Japan, and Western Europe.” This body, he wrote, would “be concerned with political strategy” and “bringing together the political leaders of states sharing certain common aspirations and problems of modernity.” But in the end of the book, Brzezinski revealed the real purpose of his proposed council: another critical step on the road to a global government that brings together the communist and non-communist nations into one unified regime.

“To sum up: Though the objective of shaping a community of the developed nations is less ambitious than the goal of world government, it is more attainable,” he wrote. “It is more ambitious than the concept of an Atlantic community but historically more relevant to the new spatial revolution. Though cognizant of present divisions between communist and non-communist nations, it attempts to create a new framework for international affairs not by exploiting these divisions but rather by striving to preserve and create openings for eventual reconciliation. Finally, it recognizes that the world’s developed nations have a certain affinity, and that only by nurturing a greater sense of communality among them can an effective response to the increasing threat of global fragmentation — which itself intensifies the growing world-wide impatience with human inequality — be mounted.”

Rockefeller apparently agreed, spawning the Trilateral Commission. Much less has been written about the Trilateral Commission than, say, the CFR, but its influence is nevertheless enormous. And even well-respected conservatives have long recognized the threat this outfit poses to liberty and America. In his 1979 memoir With No Apologies, Senator Barry Goldwater exposed its agenda. “In my view the Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power — political, monetary, intellectual, and ecclesiastical,” he wrote.

“What the Trilaterals truly intend is the creation of a worldwide economic power superior to the political governments of the nation-states involved.... As managers and creators of the system they will rule the future.” Around that time, a major exposé of the Trilateral Commission was written by Stanford historian Antony Sutton and researcher Patrick Wood, entitled Trilaterals Over Washington. In a statement to The New American, Wood highlighted the significance of the organization.

“The Trilateral Commission was international, founded to create a ‘New International Economic Order,’” explained Wood, editor of Technocracy.news and a nationally known speaker. “Their members have been the architects and drivers of all modern globalization, including that which comes through the United Nations as Sustainable Development and Green Economy. Although the Trilateral Commission is international in scope, in the U.S. they are more than just being part of the so-called Deep State, they ARE the Deep State!”

Aside from the pursuit of globalism by bringing together key influential figures from Europe, Japan, and North America, a crucial element of the Trilateral Commission was and remains the “New International Economic Order” (NIEO) described by Wood. At first, the idea confused observers. Eventually, though, Wood concluded that the NIEO — an idea regularly promoted by the UN, even using the same term — was a re-branding of the older movement for “technocracy.”

In fact, Brzezinski’s 1970 book Between Two Ages, which purports to deal with “America’s Role in the Technetronic Era,” makes that clear. In essence, a global technocracy would involve rule not by elected representatives, but by technocrats. Freedom would be a thing of the past. And it appears to be coming into view. Far from concealing his agenda, Brzezinski continually boasted about it when surrounded by his comrades.

For instance, in 1995, speaking at the “State of the World Forum” convened by former Soviet dictator Mikhail Gorbachev and backed by the Rockefellers and other establishment forces in the West, the luminary behind the Trilateral Commission proudly touted the vision for a one-world regime. “We do not have a New World Order.... We cannot leap into world government in one quick step,” he explained. “In brief, the precondition for eventual globalization — genuine globalization — is progressive regionalization, because thereby we move toward larger, more stable, more cooperative units.”

And indeed, the crucial Deep State organization has played a key role in accelerating that process in Europe via the European Union (EU), in North America using NAFTA, and in the Pacific region using a wide array of transnational regimes.

The Bilderberg Meetings

In addition to the CFR and the Trilateral Commission, there is yet another shadowy outfit with Rockefeller and other establishment globalists at its core: Bilderberg. Founded in 1954 by former Nazi SS member Prince Bernhard, the annual meetings and the network behind them started at the Hotel de Bilderberg in the Netherlands, ostensibly as a “forum for informal discussions, designed to foster dialogue.”

Generally there are between 120 and 150 attendees, most of whom come from Europe and North America, representing every tentacle of establishment power. More than a few analysts have referred to Bilderberg as the “shadow” global government. And there is some truth to the charge. But in reality the true “Deep State behind the Deep State” is more complex than that. Until recent years, the network, which hosts annual meetings organized by a steering committee, was virtually unknown to the American public, despite the regular attendance of many of the world’s most influential people and their useful idiots — including top “journalists.”

Among the attendees is a collection of powerful figures from Big Government, Big Green, Big Media, Big Oil, Big Espionage, Big Banks, Big War, Big Internet, Big Foundations, Big Communism, Big Data, and most of the other important “Bigs.” Virtually all of the attendees share at least one common element though: a fanatical devotion to globalism and secrecy. In public, Bilderberg summit organizers work to downplay the confab as a mere off-the-record discussion forum. A press release from Bilderberg released ahead of the 2017 summit, for example, claims the purpose is merely to stimulate “dialogue” between “Europe and North America.” “There is no desired outcome, no minutes are taken and no report is written. Furthermore, no resolutions are proposed, no votes are taken, and no policy statements are issued,” claims the statement posted on Bilderberg’s official website.

Numerous attendees, though, have suggested and even openly admitted in public statements over the years that much more than a mere “private talk” is in fact going on at the controversial summit. In fact, multiple attendees have admitted in public comments that policy is indeed discussed — and even set — behind Bilderberg’s closed doors and its legions of mostly tax-funded security. For example, in 2010, former NATO boss and two-time Bilderberg attendee Willy Claes explained in a radio interview that reports of speeches given at the summit are, in fact, compiled. “The participants are then obviously considered to use this report in setting their policies in the environments in which they affect,” Claes added. Analysts said the remark was essentially an admission that Bilderberg attendees are secretly plotting your future behind closed doors — and they are.

Claes was hardly the only one to spill the beans. The year before Claes’ stunning public admission, then-Bilderberg chairman Etienne Davignon — a former European Union commissar and current Belgian minister of state — told the online publication EUobserver that the network and the annual meetings “helped create” the controversial euro currency imposed on formerly sovereign European nations. Much evidence also suggests that the summits played a major role in foisting the EU superstate on the peoples of Europe against their will — a process that continues despite the lack of even a semblance of public support.

Speaking to the BBC in 2005, Davignon also admitted that at the summit, “automatically around the table you have internationalists.” Internationalist is just another term for globalist. This writer had an opportunity to go to Copenhagen, Denmark, in 2014 to cover the Bilderberg summit taking place there for The New American magazine. And outside the confab, which as usual took place at a fancy hotel, Diederik Samsom, a Bilderberg attendee and the leader of the Socialist International-aligned Dutch Labor Party, admitted on camera that he was attending the summit in his official capacity as parliamentary leader.

Asked if he was there in an informal capacity, as Bilderberg claimed, Samsom responded: “Well, I’m formal, because being a politician, you’re 24/7, so there’s no way of exiting my role.” By contrast, the Bilderberg website says, “Participants take part in the conference as individuals in their own right.” The comments by the Dutch lawmaker and “sustainability” zealot, however, suggest otherwise. It was hardly the first time that a Bilderberg attendee had contradicted, in public, the official narrative sold to the masses. In fact, more than 20 years ago, radical left-wing Bilderberg attendee Will Hutton — a former British newspaper editor, a pro-EU extremist, and a vehement opponent of American conservatism — also hinted at the influence of the gathering and its role in global policymaking.

“[Bilderberg] is one of the key meetings of the year,” he wrote in 1998. “The consensus established is the backdrop against which policy is made worldwide.” The admission could not get much clearer than that. And yet, officially at least, the Bilderberg network continues to claim that the meetings are simply forums for discussion. As if the fruit were not clear enough, the policy vision of Bilderberg bosses has also been publicly articulated by attendees.

Basically, what unites the seemingly disparate globalists appears to be mainly their fanatical devotion to globalism — the transfer of political power and self-government away from nation-states and the peoples who make up those nations to unaccountable supranational regimes controlled by Bilderberg attendees and other Deep State swamp creatures. While there are occasionally “conservatives” and even the odd “libertarian” who attend, all are globalists. Indeed, based on their public statements, at least, it appears that for more than six decades virtually every attendee at Bilderberg has been an enemy of national independence and a proponent of globalism and the ongoing global effort to undermine national sovereignty.

Many have admitted the agenda in public. In 2001, for instance, former British chancellor of the exchequer and Bilderberg bigwig Denis Healey told the left-wing U.K. Guardian, one of the few papers that has provided extensive Bilderberg coverage, that it was a little “exaggerated, but not wholly unfair” to say that the outfit’s overall goal was to impose a global government on humanity.

“Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn’t go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless,” he claimed, as if the globalists were simply destroying nationhood for the benefit of humanity. “So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing.” By “community,” globalists really mean government — after all, the European Union was a “community” before the full-blown superstate was openly announced. Aside from guiding policy, a great deal of anecdotal evidence suggests, Bilderberg plays a major role in selecting the policymakers in charge of foisting their schemes on an unsuspecting public.

In 1991, for example, a virtually unknown governor from Arkansas attended. Shortly after that, he became President Bill Clinton. Obama, too, went to Bilderberg before becoming president. Multiple members of virtually every U.S. executive branch Cabinet for generations have also attended, including several of President Trump’s top officials, such as Defense Secretary James Mattis, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, and Energy Secretary Rick Perry.

It is not just American politicians and bureaucrats whose careers seem to get a major boost from attending the summits, either. Tony Blair, for example, attended Bilderberg as a virtually unknown opposition member of Parliament. He then became prime minister shortly afterward. Numerous other British prime ministers, including David Cameron, have also attended. Other countries in Europe have faced similar occurrences, such as Bilderberg bigwig and Goldman Sachs operative Mario Monti being installed as the unelected prime minister of Italy in 2011, shortly after attending Bilderberg meetings. More than a few analysts have suggested that Bilderberg leaders were “vetting” puppet politicians to determine whether they would be a good fit.

At the European Union level — where voters and the peoples of Europe have virtually no say in governance — the same phenomenon has been observed. In 2005, even the state-funded BBC highlighted it. “All the recent presidents of the European Commission attended Bilderberg meetings before they were appointed,” the broadcaster reported. EU overlords, of course, are not elected by the people. In 2009, meanwhile, former Belgian Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy — a virtual nobody unknown throughout the bloc — was mysteriously installed as EU “president” just days after attending the confab.

In a bizarre speech that sparked criticism, ridicule, and alarm worldwide, he promptly announced that “global governance” was advancing. Prevalence The Deep State behind the Deep State has a lot of overlap in terms of membership and leadership. Beyond the Bilderberg, CFR, Trilateral, and such establishment organs are other secretive and semi-secret organizations, such as the World Affairs Council, the Aspen Institute, Le Cercle, the Brookings Institution, the Club of Rome, the Atlantic Council, the World Economic Forum, and even the relatively new “World Government Summit” that in 2017 erected the Arch of Baal at its confab in the United Arab Emirates.

Each of these plays an important role in the Deep State’s architecture. The Deep State behind the Deep State also includes an array of secret societies, including Skull and Bones, the Bohemian Grove, and others. There are also key individual leaders of the Deep State behind the Deep State, including the Rockefeller, Soros, and Rothschild families. Aside from the organizations they control, and in tandem with their influence exercised through government power, these figures also rely heavily on the tax-exempt foundations, where they shelter their loot from taxes while funding efforts to advance their agenda. And beyond all those that are known are, undoubtedly, others that are not even known publicly.

Unfortunately, Trump has many operatives for the real Deep State serving at the highest levels of his administration. More than a few of his Cabinet secretaries, for example, are current or former members of the CFR, the Trilateral Commission, and more. As previously mentioned, some are also attendees of Bilderberg, with several senior Trump officials attending the 2017 Bilderberg meeting in Virginia. But, it is also becoming obvious that the Deep State behind the Deep State does not trust Trump at best — and actively despises him at worst. That is a good sign, though it is no guarantee that anything will change.

—

The Liberator