in any locality have progressed to the point of accepting government by
imported experts as a substitute for government by elected local
citizens.

In other words, through the Area Development activities of the Committee
for Economic Development, the invisible government of America--the
Council on Foreign Relations--has a hand in the powerful drive for
Metropolitan Government. Metropolitan Government, as conceived by
socialist planners, would destroy the whole fabric of government and
social organization in the United States.

Metropolitan Government would eliminate the individual states as
meaningful political entities, would divide the nation into metropolitan
regions sprawling across state lines, and would place the management of
these regional governments in the hands of appointed experts answerable
not to local citizens but to the supreme political power in Washington.
(For detailed discussion, see _The Dan Smoot Report_, April 13 and 20,
1959, "Metropolitan Government--Part One," and "Metropolitan
Government--Part Two.")

Through the Area Development activities of the Committee for Economic
Development, the Council on Foreign Relations has supported the Urban
Renewal program.

Urban Renewal with federal tax money was authorized in the National
Housing Act of 1949, and enlarged in scope by amendments to the Housing
Acts of 1954, 1956, and 1957; but it did not become a vigorously
promoted nationwide program until late 1957, after the Council on
Foreign Relations (through the CED) started pushing it.

Urban Renewal is a federally financed program of city planning which
requires city governments to seize homes and other private property from
some citizens and re-sell them, at below cost, to real estate promoters
and other private citizens for developments that the city planners
consider desirable.

Under the ancient, but awesome, right of eminent domain, city
governments do not have the power to take private real estate from one
citizen for the profit of another citizen. But in November, 1954, the
Supreme Court in an urban renewal case, said that Congress and state
legislature can do anything they like to the private property of private
citizens as long as they claim they are doing it for public good.

Federal urban renewal has opened rich veins of public money for graft,
corruption, and political vote buying; and it is destroying private
property rights under the pretext that clearing slums will eliminate the
causes of crime. Moreover, urban renewal authorizes the seizure not just
of slum property, but of all private property in a whole section of a
city, for resale to private interests which promise to build something
that governmental planners will like.

Federal urban renewal--since the Council on Foreign Relation's CED
started supporting it--has become a national movement with frightful
implications and dangers. (For detailed discussion of urban renewal, see
_The Dan Smoot Report_, September 29, 1958, and October 6, 1958.)

In its 1957 Annual Report, the Committee for Economic Development gave
details on its educational work in public schools and colleges. This
work was, at that time, carried on primarily by the CED's
Business-Education Committee, and by two subsidiary operations which
that Committee created: the College-Community Research Centers and the
Joint Council on Economic Education. From the 1957 Annual Report of the
Committee for Economic Development:

     "CED's efforts to promote and improve economic education in the
     schools are of special appeal to those who are concerned ... both
     with education and the progress of the free enterprise system. The
     Business-Education program and the numerous College-Community
     Research Centers it has sponsored, together with the use of CED
     publications as teaching materials, represent an important
     contribution to economic education on the college level.

     "In the primary and secondary schools, the introduction of
     economics into teaching programs is moving forward steadily, thanks
     largely to the Joint Council on Economic Education which CED helped
     to establish and continues to support....

     "The Business-Education Committee continued in 1957 its work with
     the College-Community Research Centers and with the Joint Council
     on Economic Education.

     "The Joint Council's program to improve the teaching of economics
     in the public schools is now operating in 39 states, and the 25
     college-community research centers active last year brought to more
     than 3000 the number of business and academic men who have worked
     together on economic research projects of local and regional
     importance....

     "In its work, the committee [Business-Education Committee] is
     finding especially valuable the experience gained through the
     operation of the College-Community Research Centers. These centers
     are financed partly by CED, partly by the Fund for Adult Education
     [a Ford Foundation operation] and partly by locally-raised
     funds....

     "The Joint Council [on Economic Education] is making excellent
     progress in training teachers and incorporating economics education
     in all grade levels of public school systems. In addition to its
     national service programs, the Council has developed strong local
     or state councils which not only help guide its work but last year
     raised more than $500,000 to finance local projects.

     "CED helped to establish and works closely with this independent
     organization [Joint Council on Economic Education] which is now
     conducting four major types of activities.

     "1. _Summer Workshops for Teachers._ These working sessions,
     sponsored by colleges and universities, provide three weeks
     training in economics and develop ways to incorporate economics
     into the school curriculum. Over 19,000 persons have participated
     since the program began.

     "2. _Cooperating School Program._ Twenty school systems are working
     with the Joint Council [on Economic Education] to demonstrate how
     economics can be incorporated into the present curriculum....

     "3. _College Program._ Few students majoring in education now take
     economics courses; therefore, 20 leading institutions are working
     with the Joint Council [on Economic Education] to develop better
     training in economics for prospective teachers....

     "4. _High School-Community Projects._ The Joint Council [on
     Economic Education] is helping to conduct demonstration programs
     which show how students can use community resources to improve
     their economics education. For example, the Whittier, California
     school system conducted a six-week program to help high school
     seniors understand the kind of economy in which they would live and
     work. They joined in research studies on regional economic problems
     being carried on by the Southern California College-Community
     research center...."

The Committee for Economic Development claims that its educational work
in economics is dedicated to progress of free enterprise; and many of
its programs in schools and colleges are educational; but its subtle and
relentless emphasis is on the governmental interventionism that is the
essence of New-Dealism, Fair-Dealism, Modern-Republicanism, and
New-Frontierism--the governmental interventionism prescribed long ago as
the way to socialize the economy of America in preparation for
integrating this nation into a worldwide socialist system.

Paul Hoffman's CED has come a long way since 1942. In 1957, the CED's
College-Community Research Centers had "Projects in Progress" in 33
institutions of higher learning:

     Bates College, Boston College, Boston University, Bowdoin College,
     Brown University, Colby College, Dartmouth College, Emory
     University, Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration,
     Iowa State College, Lewis & Clark College, McGill University,
     Northeastern University, Northwestern University, Occidental
     College, Pomona College, Reed College, Rutgers University, Southern
     Methodist University, Tulane University, University of Alabama,
     University of Arkansas, University of Iowa, University of Maine,
     University of Michigan, University of Minnesota, University of
     North Carolina, University of Oklahoma, University of Pennsylvania,
     University of Washington, University of Wisconsin, Utica College of
     Syracuse University, and Washington University.

In 1957, the following institutions of higher learning were
participating in the CED's Joint Council on Economic Education "College
Program" to develop training in economics for prospective teachers:

     Brigham Young University, George Peabody College for Teachers,
     Indiana University, Montclair State Teachers College, New York
     University, Ohio State University, Oklahoma A & M College,
     Pennsylvania State University, Purdue University, Syracuse
     University, Teachers College of Columbia University, University of
     Colorado, University of Connecticut, University of Illinois,
     University of Iowa, University of Minnesota, University of Southern
     California, University of Tennessee, University of Texas,
     University of Washington.

In 1957, the following 20 school systems were working in the CED's Joint
Council on Economic Education "Cooperating School Program," to
demonstrate how economics can be incorporated in the school curriculum,
beginning in the first grade:

     Akron, Ohio; Albion, Illinois; Chattanooga, Tennessee; Colton,
     California; Dayton, Ohio; Fort Dodge, Iowa; Hartford, Connecticut;
     Kalamazoo, Michigan; Lexington, Alabama; Minneapolis, Minnesota;
     New York City, New York; Portland, Oregon; Providence, Rhode
     Island; Ridgewood, New Jersey; Seattle, Washington; Syracuse, New
     York; University City, Missouri; Webster Groves, Missouri; West
     Hartford, Connecticut; Whittier, California.

As indicated, the Business-Education Committee of the CED is the select
group which supervises this vast "educational" effort reaching into
public schools, colleges, and communities throughout the nation:

     _James L. Allen_, Senior Partner of Booz, Allen & Hamilton; _Jervis
     J. Babb_, Chairman of the Board of Lever Brothers, Company; _Sarah
     G. Blanding_, President of Vassar College; _W. Harold Brenton_,
     President of Brenton Brothers, Inc.; _James F. Brownlee_, former
     government official who is Chairman of the Board of the Minute Maid
     Corporation, and a director of many other large corporations, such
     as American Sugar Refining Co., Bank of Manhattan, Gillette Safety
     Razor, R. H. Macy Co., Pillsbury Mills, American Express; _Everett
     Needham Case_, President of Colgate University; _James B. Conant_,
     former President of Harvard and Ambassador to Germany; _John T.
     Connor_, President of Merck & Co.; _John S. Dickey_, President of
     Dartmouth College; _John M. Fox_, President of Minute Maid
     Corporation; _Paul S. Gerot_, President of Pillsbury Mills;
     _Stanley Marcus_, President of Neiman-Marcus; _W. A. Patterson_,
     President of United Air Lines; _Morris B. Pendleton_, President of
     Pendleton Tool Industries; _Walter Rothschild_, Chairman of the
     Board of Abraham & Straus; _Thomas J. Watson, Jr._, President of
     International Business Machines Corporation; _J. Cameron Thomson_,
     Chairman of the Board of Northwest Bancorporation.

Note that three of these CED Business-Education Committee
members--Conant, Dickey, and Marcus--are influential members of the
Council on Foreign Relations and have many connections with the big
foundations financing the great CFR interlock.

In addition to the educational work which it discusses in its 1957
Annual Report, the Committee for Economic Development utilizes many
other means to inject its (and the CFR's) economic philosophies into
community thought-streams throughout the nation.

Here, for example, are passages from a news story in _The Dallas Morning
News_, June 30, 1953:

     "Dallas businessmen and Southern Methodist University officials
     Monday [June 29] launched a $25,000 business research project
     financed through agencies of the Ford Foundation.

     "Stanley Marcus of Dallas, a national trustee of Ford Foundation's
     Committee for Economic Development, said the project would go on
     two or three years under foundation funds. After that ... the City
     might foot the bill....

     "The SMU project--along with several others like it throughout the
     nation--is designed to foster study in regional and local business
     problems, Marcus commented.

     "Here's how the Dallas project will work:

     "A business executive committee, composed of some of Dallas' top
     businessmen, will be selected. These men then will select a group
     of younger executives for a business executive research committee.
     This will be the working group, Marcus explained....

     "At SMU, several of the schools' chief officials will act as a
     senior faculty committee.... Acting as co-ordinator for the project
     will be Warren A. Law ... who soon will get his doctorate in
     economics from Harvard University."

The "experimental" stage of this Business Executives Research Committee
lasted five years in Dallas. During that time, the researchers filed two
major reports: an innocuous one in 1955 concerning traffic and transit
problems in Dallas; and a most significant one in 1956, strongly urging
metropolitan government for Dallas County, patterned after the metro
system in Toronto, Canada.

In October, 1958, Dr. Donald K. David, then Chairman of the Committee
for Economic Development and Vice Chairman of the Ford Foundation (and
also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations) went to Dallas to
speak to the Citizens Council, an organization composed of leading
Dallas business executives, whose president that year was Stanley
Marcus.

Dr. David told the business men that they should give greater support
and leadership to the government's foreign aid program; and, of course,
he urged vast expansion of foreign aid, particularly to "underdeveloped
nations."

That was the signal and the build-up. The next month--November,
1958--the experimental Business Executives Research Committee, which the
CED had formed in 1953 and which had already completed its mission with
its report and recommendation on metropolitan government for Dallas, was
converted into "The Dallas CED Associates."

Here is a news story about that event, taken from the November 11, 1958,
_Dallas Morning News_:

     "A Dallas Committee for Economic Development--the first of its kind
     in the nation--has been founded at Southern Methodist University.
     It will give voice to Southwestern opinions--and knowledge--on
     economic, matters or international importance. Keystone will be an
     economic research center to be established soon at SMU.

     "A steering group composed of Dallas and Southwestern business,
     industrial and educational leaders laid the groundwork for both
     committee and center in a weekend meeting at SMU."

The "steering group" included George McGhee and Neil Mallon.

Mr. McGhee (presently Assistant Secretary of State for Policy Planning)
is, and has been for many years, a member of the Council on Foreign
Relations.

Neil Mallon, then Chairman of the Board of Dresser Industries and a
former official of the Foreign Policy Association, founded the Dallas
Council on World Affairs in 1951. Dresser Industries is one of the big
corporations which contribute money to the Council on Foreign Relations.

In the group with Mr. McGhee and Mr. Mallon were five SMU officials, a
Dallas banker, a real estate man, and Stanley Marcus, the head man in
the "steering group" which set up the Dallas Associates of the Committee
for Economic Development.

The first literary product of the Dallas Associates of the CED--at
least, the first to come to my attention--is a most expensive-looking
14-page printed booklet entitled "The Role of Private Enterprise in the
Economic Development of Underdeveloped Nations." The title page reveals
that this pamphlet is a policy statement of The Dallas Associates of
CED. It is little more than a rewrite of the speech which Dr. Donald K.
David had made to the Dallas Citizens Council in November, 1958, urging
business to give support and leadership to the government's foreign aid
programs.

Chapter 5

BUSINESS ADVISORY COUNCIL

Whereas the Foreign Policy Association-World Affairs Center is primarily
interested in fostering the _foreign_ policy desired by the CFR, and the
Committee for Economic Development is primarily interested in
formulating economic and other policies which, through governmental
controls, will lead us into total socialism--another, smaller (but, in
some ways, more powerful) organization has (or, until mid-1961, had) the
primary responsibility of infiltrating government: of selecting men whom
the CFR wants in particular jobs, and of formulating, inside the
agencies of government, policies which the CFR wants. This small but
mighty organization was the Business Advisory Council.

Daniel C. Roper, F. D. Roosevelt's Secretary of Commerce, formed the
Business Advisory Council on June 26, 1933. Roper set it up as a panel
of big businessmen to act as unofficial advisers to President Roosevelt.
He was disappointed in it, however. The biggest businessmen in America
did, indeed, join; but they did not support the total New Deal as Roper
had expected they would when he made them "advisers."

Roper, however, was a figurehead. The brains behind the formation of the
Business Advisory Council were in the head of Sidney J. Weinberg, Senior
Partner of the New York investment house of Goldman, Sachs & Co.--and
also on the boards of directors of about thirty of the biggest
corporations in America. Weinberg helped organize the BAC. He recruited
most of its key members. He was content to let America's big businessmen
ripen for a while in the sunshine of the New Deal's "new" philosophy of
government, before expecting them to give that philosophy full support.

Secretary of Commerce Daniel C. Roper pouted and ignored the Business
Advisory Council when he discovered that the big businessmen, enrolled
as governmental "advisors," tried to advise things that governmental
leaders did not like. But Sidney Weinberg was shrewd, and had a
definite, long-range plan for the Business Advisory Council. He held the
BAC together as a kind of social club, keeping the big business men
under constant exposure to the "new" economic philosophies of the New
Deal, waiting for the propitious moment to enlist America's leading
capitalists on the side of the socialist revolutionaries, determined to
destroy capitalism and create a one-world socialist society.

The right time came in 1939, when World War II started in Europe and
Roosevelt developed his incurable ambition to get in that war and become
President of the World. Plans for America's frenzied spending on
national defense began in 1939. With mammoth government contracts in the
offing, Weinberg had no trouble converting the Business Advisory Council
of leading businessmen into an agency for helping governmental leaders
plan the policies for war and for the post-war period.

In September, 1960, _Harper's Magazine_ published an article by Hobart
Rowen, entitled "America's Most Powerful Private Club," with a
sub-title, "How a semi-social organization of the very biggest
businessmen--discreetly shielded from public scrutiny--is 'advising' the
government on its top policy decisions." Here are passages from the
article:

     "The Business Advisory Council meets regularly with government
     officials six times a year.... On two of these six occasions ...
     the BAC convenes its sessions at plush resorts, and with a
     half-dozen or more important Washington officials and their wives
     as its guests, it indulges in a three-day 'work and play'
     meeting....

     "The guest list is always impressive: on occasion, there have been
     more Cabinet officers at a ... BAC meeting than were left in the
     Capital....

     "These meetings cost the BAC anywhere from $6,000 to $12,000 or
     more, paid out of the dues of members ... which have been judged
     tax-deductible by the Internal Revenue Service....

     "After the 1952 election, the BAC was having its fall 'work and
     play' meeting at the Cloister, just off the Georgia coast and a
     short distance from Augusta, where Ike was alternating golf with
     planning his first-term Cabinet. [Sidney] Weinberg and [General
     Lucius D.] Clay [members of the BAC executive committee] ...
     hustled ... to Augusta, conferred with Ike [a 'close, intimate,
     personal friend' of both men]....

     "The result was historic: Ike tapped three of the BAC leaders ...
     for his Cabinet. They were Charles E. Wilson of General Motors as
     Defense Secretary; [George M.] Humphrey, then boss of the M. A.
     Hanna Co., as Treasury Secretary; and Robert T. Stevens of the J.
     P. Stevens & Co., as Army Secretary....

     "Afterwards, [Secretary] Humphrey himself dipped into the BAC pool
     for Marion Folsom of Eastman Kodak as Under Secretary of the
     Treasury [later Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare]....

     "Membership in the Council gives a select few the chance to bring
     their views to bear on key government people, in a most pleasant,
     convivial, and private atmosphere....

     "The BAC, powerful in its composition and with an inside track, is
     thus a special force. An intimation of its influence can be gleaned
     from its role in the McCarthy case.... BAC helped push Senator Joe
     McCarthy over the brink in 1954, by supplying a bit of backbone to
     the Eisenhower Administration at the right time. McCarthy's chief
     target in the Army-McCarthy hearings was the aforementioned Robert
     T. Stevens--a big wheel in the BAC who had become Secretary of the
     Army. The BAC didn't pay much--if any--attention to Joe McCarthy as
     a social menace until he started to pick on Bob Stevens. Then, they
     burned up.

     "During the May 1954 meeting at the Homestead [expensive resort
     hotel in Hot Springs, Virginia, where the BAC often holds its 'work
     and play' sessions with high government officials and their wives],
     Stevens flew down from Washington for a weekend reprieve from his
     televised torture. A special delegation of BAC officials made it a
     point to journey from the hotel to the mountaintop airport to greet
     Stevens. He was escorted into the lobby like a conquering hero.
     Then, publicly, one member of the BAC after another roasted the
     Eisenhower Administration for its McCarthy-appeasement policy. The
     BAC's attitude gave the Administration some courage, and shortly
     thereafter former Senator Ralph Flanders (a Republican and BAC
     member) introduced a Senate resolution calling for censure."

Active membership in the Business Advisory Council is limited to about
70. After a few years as an "active," a member can become a "graduate,"
still retaining his full voting and membership privileges.

I have obtained the names of 120 "active" and "graduate" members of the
BAC, listed below. Those who are members of the Council on Foreign
Relations are identified by "CFR" after their names.

     Winthrop W. Aldrich (CFR)

     William M. Allen (President of Boeing Airplane Company; member
     Board of Directors of Pacific National Bank of Seattle)

     S. C. Allyn (CFR)

     Robert B. Anderson

     Clarence Avildsen (Chairman, Avildsen Tools & Machines, Inc.)

     William M. Batten (President, J. C. Penney Company)

     S. D. Bechtel (CFR)

     S. Clark Beise (President, Bank of America; member Board of
     Directors, National Trust and Savings Association, San Francisco)

     Roger M. Blough (CFR)

     Harold Boeschenstein (President, Owens-Corning Fiberglas
     Corporation; Chairman of the Board, Fiberglas Canada, Ltd.; member
     of the Board of Directors of National Distillers Products
     Corporation, International Paper Company, Toledo Trust Company,
     Dow, Jones & Co.)

     Fred Bohen (President of Meredith Publishing Company--_Better Homes
     and Gardens, Better Farming_; member of Board of Directors of
     Meredith Radio & Television Stations, Iowa, Northwest
     Bancorporation, Central Life Assurance Society, Allis-Chalmers
     Manufacturing Co., Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., Iowa-Des Moines
     National Bank)

     Ernest R. Breech (Executive Vice President, Ford Motor, Company;
     member of Board of Directors of Transcontinental & Western Air,
     Inc., Pan-American Airways; President of Western Air Express)

     George R. Brown (Chairman of the Board, Texas Eastern Transmission
     Corp.; Executive Vice President, Brown & Root, Inc. of Houston;
     President of Board of Trustees, Rice University)

     Carter L. Burgess (CFR)

     Paul C. Cabot (President of State Street Investment Corp.; partner
     in State Street Research & Management Co.; member of the Board of
     Directors of J. P. Morgan & Co., Continental Can Co., Inc.,
     National Dairy Products Corp., Tampa Electric Co., The B. F.
     Goodrich Co.; Treasurer of Harvard University)

     James V. Carmichael (President, Scripto, Inc.; member of Board of
     Directors of Lockheed Aircraft Corp., Trust Company of Georgia,
     Atlanta Transit Co., The Southern Co.)

     Walker L. Cisler (CFR)

     General Lucius D. Clay (CFR)

     Will L. Clayton (CFR)

     John L. Collyer (CFR)

     Ralph J. Cordiner (Chairman of the Board and President of General
     Electric Co.)

     John E. Corette (President of Montana Power Co.)

     John Cowles (CFR)

     C. R. Cox (CFR)

     Harlow H. Curtice (retired President of General Motors Corp.;
     Chairman of the Board of Directors of Genesee Merchants Bank &
     Trust Co.; member of the Board of Directors of the National Bank of
     Detroit)

     Charles E. Daniel (head of Daniel Construction Co., member of Board
     of Directors of First National Bank of Greenville, South Carolina,
     La France Industries, J. P. Stevens Co., Inc., Textron, Inc.;
     Trustee of Clemson College)

     Donald K. David (CFR)

     Paul M. Davies (President and Chairman of the Board of Food
     Machinery & Chemical Corp.; member of Board of Directors of
     American Trust Company of California, National Distillers Products
     Corp., Caterpillar Tractor Co.; Professor at Stanford University;
     Director of Stanford Research Institute, San Jose State College,
     Pacific School of Religion; Trustee of Committee for Economic
     Development)

     Frank R. Denton (Vice Chairman and Director of Mellon National Bank
     and Trust Company, Pittsburgh; member of the Board of Directors of
     Swindell-Dressler Corp., Westinghouse Electric Co., Jones &
     Laughlin Steel Corporation, Pullman, Inc., National Union Fire
     Insurance Co., Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp., M. W. Kellogg Co., Pullman
     Standard Car Manufacturing Co., Trailmobile, Inc., National Union
     Indemnity Co.; Trustee of Pennsylvania State University, Kansas
     University Endowment Association)

     Charles D. Dickey (Vice President, member of the Board of
     Directors, and Chairman of the Executive Committee of Morgan
     Guaranty Trust Co.; member of the Board of Directors of General
     Electric Co., Beaver Coal, Kennekott Copper Corp., Braden Copper
     Co., Merck & Co., Inc., Panhandle Eastern Pipeline Co., New York
     Life Insurance Co., Church Life Insurance Corp., Church Fire
     Insurance Corp.)

     Frederick G. Donner (CFR)

     William Y. Elliott (CFR)

     Ralph E. Flanders (CFR)

     Marion B. Folsom (CFR)

     Henry Ford II (President of Ford Motor Co.; Chairman of the Board
     of American Heritage Foundation)

     William C. Foster (CFR)

     G. Keith Funston (President of New York Stock Exchange; member of
     the Board of Directors of Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.; Trustee
     of Trinity College of Connecticut, Virginia Theological Seminary,
     Samuel H. Kress Foundation)

     Frederick V. Geier (CFR)

     Elisha Gray II (President and Director of Whirlpool Corp.)

     Crawford H. Greenewalt (President and Director of E. I. du Pont de
     Nemours Company, Christiana Securities Company; member of the
     Board of Directors of Massachusetts Institute of Technology;
     Trustee of the Carnegie Institute, Washington)

     General Alfred M. Gruenther (CFR)

     Joseph B. Hall (President of Kroger Company, Manufacturers and
     Merchants Indemnity Co., Selective Insurance Co.; member of the
     Board of Directors of Robert A. Cline, Inc., AVCO Manufacturing
     Corp., Cincinnati and Suburban Bell Telephone Co., General Stores
     Corp.; member of the Board of the Federal Reserve Bank of
     Cleveland)

     W. Averill Harriman (CPR)

     William A. Hewitt (President and member of the Board of Directors
     of Deere & Company)

     Milton P. Higgins (CFR)

     Paul G. Hoffman (CFR)

     Eugene Holman (CFR)

     John Holmes (President, member of the Board of Directors, and
     retired Chairman of Swift & Company; member of the Board of
     Directors of Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust Company,
     General Electric Corporation)

     Herbert Hoover, Jr. (CFR)

     Preston Hotchkis (Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors and
     Treasurer of Founders' Insurance Company; Executive Vice President
     and member of the Board of Directors of Fred H. Bixby Ranch
     Company; member of the Board of Directors of Metropolitan Coach
     Lines, Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co., Pacific Telephone &
     Telegraph Co., Blue Diamond Corp.)

     Amory Houghton (CFR)

     Theodore V. Houser (retired Chairman of the Board of Sears, Roebuck
     & Co.; member of the Board of Directors of Sears, Roebuck & Co.,
     Bell and Howell Co., Quaker Oats Co., Massachusetts Institute of
     Technology; Trustee of Northwestern University, Williams College)

     A. W. Hughes (Chairman of the Board of Directors, J. C. Penney Co.)

     Gilbert W. Humphrey (President of M. A. Hanna Company, Hanna Mining
     Company; Chairman of the Board of Hausand Steam Ship Company;
     member of the Board of Directors of Industrial Rayon Corp., General
     Electric Corp., National City Bank of Cleveland, Texaco, Inc.;
     Trustee of Committee for Economic Development)

     Eric A. Johnston (CFR)

     Alfred W. Jones (Chairman of the Board of Sea Island Company,
     Talbott Corp.; member of the Board of Directors of Seaboard
     Construction Co., Brunswick Paper & Pulp Co., The Mead Corp.,
     Thompson Industries, Inc., First National Bank of Atlanta, Georgia
     Power Co., Florida-Georgia TV Co.)

     Devereux C. Josephs (CFR)

     Ernest Kanzler (retired Chairman of the Board of Universal C.I.T.
     Credit Corp,; member of the Board of Directors of C.I.T. Financial
     Corp., Bendix Aviation Corp.)

     Frederick Kappel (President and Director of American Telephone &
     Telegraph Company; retired President of Western Electric Co.;
     member of the Board of Directors of Chase Manhattan Bank,
     Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.)

     John R. Kimberly (CFR)

     E. H. Lane (Chairman of the Board of Lane Company, Inc.)

     Joseph L. Lanier (Chairman of the Board of Wellington Sears
     Company; President of West Point Manufacturing Company of Georgia;
     member of the Board of Directors of Cabin Crafts, Inc., First
     National Bank of Atlanta, Rivington Carpets, Ltd. of Britain)

     Barry L. Leithead (President and Director of Cluett, Peabody and
     Company, Inc.; Chairman of Cluett, Peabody and Company of Canada,
     Ltd.; member of the Board of Directors of B. F. Goodrich Company)

     Augustus C. Long (Chairman of the Board of Texaco, Inc.; member of
     the Board of Directors of Freeport Sulphur Co., Equitable Life
     Assurance Society of the United States, Federal Reserve Bank of New
     York)

     Donold B. Lourie (President and Director of Quaker Oats Company;
     member of the Board of Directors of Northern Trust Co.,
     International Paper Co., Pure Oil Co.; Trustee of Princeton
     University)

     George H. Love (Chairman of the Board of Pittsburgh-Consolidation
     Coal Company, M. A. Hanna Company; member of the Board of Directors
     of Union Carbide & Carbon Corp., Mellon National Bank & Trust
     Company of Pittsburgh, Pullman Co., General Electric Co., National
     Steel Corp., Hanna Mining Co.; Trustee of Princeton University,
     University of Pittsburgh)

     James Spencer Love (Chairman of the Board of Burlington Mills
     Corp.; Chairman and President of Burlington Industries, Inc.;
     Trustee of University of North Carolina, Davidson College)

     George P. MacNichol, Jr. (President and Director of
     Libbey-Owens-Ford Glass Company; member of the Board of Directors
     of Wyandotte Chemical Co., Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland)

     Roswell F. Magill (member of Cravath, Swaine & Moore, Lawyers;
     Trustee of Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York, Macy
     Foundation, Guggenheim Foundation)

     Deane W. Malott (President, Cornell University; member of the Board
     of Directors of Pitney-Bowes, Inc., B. F. Goodrich Co., General
     Mills, Inc., Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.; former Vice President
     of Hawaiian Pineapple Co.; Professor of Business at Harvard,
     Chancellor of University of Kansas)

     James W. McAfee (President of Union Electric Company of Missouri,
     Edison Electric Institute; member of the Board of Directors of St.
     Louis Union Trust Co., American Central Insurance Co., North
     American Co.)

     S. Maurice McAshan (President, Anderson, Clayton & Company)

     Thomas B. McCabe (CFR)

     John L. McCaffrey (retired Chairman of International Harvester Co.;
     member of the Board of Directors of Harris Trust & Savings Bank of
     Chicago, American Telephone & Telegraph Co., Corn Products Co.,
     Midwest Stock Exchange; Trustee of the University of Chicago,
     University of Notre Dame, Eisenhower Exchange Fellowships, Inc.)

     Leonard F. McCollum (CFR)

     Charles P. McCormick (Chairman of the Board and retired President
     of McCormick & Co., Inc.; member of the Board of Directors of
     Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co., Equitable Trust Co. of
     Baltimore, Advertising Council; Chairman of the Board of Regents,
     University of Maryland)

     Neil H. McElroy (Chairman of the Board, Procter & Gamble Co.;
     Secretary of Defense 1957-1961)

     Earl M. McGowin (Vice President of W. T. Smith Lumber Co.; member
     of the Board of Directors of The Southern Company of New York,
     Alabama Power Co.)

     James H. McGraw, Jr. (CFR)

     Paul B. McKee (Chairman of Pacific Power & Light Co.)

     John P. McWilliams (retired President and Chairman of the Board of
     Youngstown Steel Door Co.; member of the Board of Directors of
     National City Bank of Cleveland, Eaton Manufacturing Co., Goodyear
     Tire & Rubber Co., Union Carbide & Carbon Corp.)

     George G. Montgomery (Chairman of Kern County Land Co.; member of
     the Board of Directors of American Trust Co., Bankers Trust Co.,
     Castle & Cook, Ltd., General Electric Co., Matson Navigation Co.,
     Matson Assurance Co., Oceanic Steam Ship Co., Pacific Lumber Co.)

     Charles G. Mortimer (Chairman and retired President of General
     Foods Corp.; member of the Board of Directors of National City Bank
     of New York, Union Theological Seminary)

     William B. Murphy (President of Campbell Soup Co.; member of the
     Board of Directors of Merck & Co.)

     Aksel Nielsen (President of Title Guaranty Co., Mortgage
     Investments Co.; member of the Board of Directors of C. A. Norgren
     Co., United American Life Insurance Co., Landon Abstract Co.,
     Empire Savings & Loan Association, United Airlines)

     Thomas F. Patton (President and Director of Republic Steel Corp.,
     Union Drawn Steel Co.; member of the Board of Directors of Air-Vue
     Products Corp., Maria Luisa Ore Co., Berger Manufacturing Company
     of Massachusetts, Iron Ore Company of Canada, Liberia Mining Co.,
     Ltd., Liberian Navigation Corp., Union Commerce Bank, Tankore
     Corp., Standard Oil Company of Ohio; Trustee of Ohio State
     University)

     Charles H. Percy (President and Director of Bell & Howell Co.;
     member of the Board of Directors of Chase Manhattan Bank, Harris
     Trust & Savings Bank, Burroughs Corp., Fund for Adult Education of
     the Ford Foundation; Trustee, University of Chicago)

     Theodore S. Petersen (President and Director of Standard Oil of
     California; member of the Board of Directors of Pacific Mutual
     Insurance Co.; Trustee of Committee on Economic Development;
     consulting Professor, Stanford University)

     Gwilym A. Price (Chairman and President of Westinghouse Electric
     Corp.; member of the Board of Directors of Mellon National Bank &
     Trust Company of Pittsburgh, Eastman-Kodak Co., Carnegie Corp.,
     National Union Fire Insurance Co., Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea
     Co.; Trustee of Allegheny College, The Hanover Bank, Carnegie
     Institute, Carnegie Institute of Technology; Chairman of the Board
     of Trustees, University of Pittsburgh; Chairman of Crusade for
     Freedom)

     Edgar Monsanto Queeny (Chairman of the Board, Monsanto Chemical
     Co.; member of the Board of Directors of American Airlines, Union
     Electric Co. of Missouri, Chemstrand Corp., Sicedison S.P.A. of
     Italy, World Rehabilitation Fund; Trustee Herbert Hoover
     Foundation)

     Clarence B. Randall (Chairman of the Board, Inland Steel Co.;
     member of the Board of Directors, Bell & Howell Co.; Trustee,
     University of Chicago)

     Philip D. Reed (CFR)

     Richard S. Reynolds, Jr. (President of Reynolds Metals Co.;
     Chairman of the Board of Robertshaw-Fulton Controls Co.; member of
     the Board of Directors of Manufacturers Trust Co., British
     Aluminum, Ltd., U. S. Foil Co., Central National Bank of Richmond)

     Winfield W. Riefler (CFR)

     William E. Robinson (Chairman of the Coca-Cola Co.; member of the
     Board of Directors of Manufacturers Trust Co.; Coca-Cola Export
     Co., Libbey-Owens-Ford Glass Co., Trustee of New York University;
     former Director and Publisher of _New York Herald-Tribune_)

     Donald J. Russell (President and Director of Southern Pacific Co.;
     Texas and New Orleans Railroad Co.; Chairman of the Board of St.
     Louis-Southwestern Railroad; Director of Stanford Research
     Institute; Trustee of Stanford University)

     Stuart T. Saunders (President of Norfolk and Western Railway;
     Director of First and Merchants National Bank of Richmond)

     Blackwell Smith (CPR)

     C. R. Smith (President, American Airlines)

     Lloyd B. Smith (President, A. O. Smith Corp.; Chairman, A. O. Smith
     of Texas)

     John W. Snyder (Executive Vice President, Overland Corp.; Secretary
     of Treasury of the United States 1946-1953)

     Joseph P. Spang, Jr. (retired President and Chairman of Gillette
     Co.; member of the Board of Directors of Gillette Co., Sheraton
     Corp. of America, First National Bank of Boston, U. S. Steel Corp.,
     International Packers, Ltd.)

     A. E. Staley, Jr. (Chairman of A. E. Staley Manufacturing Co.;
     Trustee, Millikin University)

     Frank Stanton (President, Columbia Broadcasting System; Chairman of
     Center for Advanced Study in Behavioral Sciences; Trustee of Rand
     Corp.; member of the Board of Directors of New York Life Insurance
     Co.)

     Robert T. Stevens (President and former Chairman of the Board, J.
     P. Stevens & Co.; member of the Board of Directors of General
     Electric Co., Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.; Trustee of Mutual Life
     Insurance Co. of New York; Secretary of the Army 1953-1955)

     Hardwick Stires (partner, Scudder, Stevens & Clark Investment
     Counsels)

     Lewis L. Strauss (CFR)

     H. Gardiner Symonds (Chairman and President of Tennessee Gas and
     Transmission Company of Houston; Vice Chairman of Petro-Texas
     Chemical Corp.; Chairman of Bay Petroleum Corp.,
     Tennessee-Venezuela South America, Chaco Petroleum of South
     America, Tennessee de Ecuador, South America, Tennessee-Argentina,
     Midwest Gas Transmission Co.; member of the Board of Directors of
     General Telephone & Electronics Corp., Carrier Corp., Food
     Machinery & Chemical Corp., National Bank of Commerce of Houston,
     Southern Pacific Co., Advertising Council; Trustee of Committee for
     Economic Development; member of the Business School, Stanford
     University)

     A. Thomas Taylor (Chairman of International Packers, Ltd.; Vice
     President and Director of Swift & Company; member of the Board of
     Directors of Wedron Silica Co.)

     Reese H. Taylor (Chairman of Union Oil Company of California;
     member of the Board of Directors of Federal Reserve Bank of San
     Francisco, Westinghouse Electric Corp., Collier Carbon & Chemical
     Corp., Manufacturers Trust Company; Trustee, University of Southern
     California, Cornell University Council)

     Charles Allen Thomas (President and member of the Board of
     Directors of Monsanto Chemical Co.; member of the Board of
     Directors of Chemstrand Corp., First National Bank of St. Louis,
     St. Louis Union Trust Co.; Trustee of Carnegie Corp.; member of the
     Corporation of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

     Juan T. Trippe (CFR)

     Solon B. Turman (President and Director of Lykes Brothers Steam
     Ship Co., Inc.; Vice Chairman of Lykes Brothers, Inc.; Chairman of
     Gulf and South American Steam Ship Co.)

     John C. Virden (Chairman and Director of Eaton Manufacturing Co.;
     member of the Board of Directors of Cleveland Electric Illuminating
     Co., Youngstown Steel Door Co., Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.,
     Interlake Iron Corp., Diamond Alkali Co.)

     J. Carlton Ward, Jr. (President of Vitro Corp., American Heavy
     Minerals Corp.; member of the Board of Directors of U. S. Manganese
     Co.; Trustee, Cornell University)

     Sidney J. Weinberg (partner in Goldman, Sachs & Co.; member of the
     Board of Directors of Cluett, Peabody & Co., Inc., Continental Can
     Co., Inc., General Cigar Co., General Electric Co., General Foods
     Corp., B. F. Goodrich Co., Ford Motor Co., McKesson & Robbins,
     Inc., National Dairy Products Corp., Champion Paper & Fibre Co.,
     Van Raalte Co., Inc.; former Governor of New York Stock Exchange)

     Walter H. Wheeler, Jr. (CFR)

     John Hay Whitney (CFR)

     Langbourne M. Williams (CFR)

     Thomas J. Watson, Jr. (CFR)

Of these 120 BAC members, 41 are members of the Council on Foreign
Relations. Most of those who are not CFR members have affiliations with
foundations or other organizations that are interlocked with the CFR.

Sidney Weinberg, for example (father of the BAC), is not listed (in any
Council on Foreign Relations Annual Report in my files) as a member of
the CFR; but he is a member of the board of many corporations which
support the CFR; and has many close connections with CFR leaders through
foundations and other CFR subsidiary agencies.

All Secretaries of Commerce since 1933 have served as ex-officio General
Chairman of the BAC.

On July 10, 1961, Roger M. Blough announced that the Business Advisory
Council had changed its name to Business Council; had severed its
connection with the Commerce Department; and would in the future give
its consultative services to any governmental agency that asked for
them. The BAC had been under intense criticism for the expensive
entertainment it had been giving to governmental officials it advised.

Chapter 6

ADVERTISING COUNCIL

The Advertising Council, 25 West 45th Street, New York 36, N. Y. (with
offices at 203 North Wabash Avenue, Chicago; 1200 18th Street, N. W.,
Washington; 425 Bush Street, San Francisco) serves as a public relations
operation to promote selected projects supported by the Council on
Foreign Relations and its interlocking affiliates.

The Advertising Council was created in 1942 (then called War Advertising
Council) as a tax-exempt, non-governmental agency to promote wartime
programs of government: rationing, salvage, the selling of war bonds,
and so on.

The Advertising Council's specific job was to effect close cooperation
between governmental agencies and business firms using the media of mass
communication. A governmental agency would bring a particular project
(rationing, for example) to the Advertising Council, for help in
"selling" the project to the public. The Council would enlist the aid of
some advertising agency. The agency (giving its services for nothing, as
a contribution to the war effort) would prepare signs, newspaper mats,
advertising layouts, broadcasting kits and what not. The Advertising
Council might then enlist the free services of a public relations firm
to get this material into newspapers and magazines; get it inserted in
the regular ads of business firms; get it broadcast, free, as
public-service spot announcements by radio networks; get it inserted
into regular commercials on radio broadcasts; get slogans and art work
stamped on the envelopes and business forms of corporations.

The Advertising Council rendered a valuable service to advertisers,
broadcasting organizations, and publishers. Everyone wanted to support
projects that would help the war effort. The Advertising Council did the
important job of screening--of presenting projects which were legitimate
and urgent.

Even the advertising agencies and public relations firms, which
contributed free services, profited from the arrangement. They earned
experience and prestige as agencies which had prepared nationally
successful campaigns.

The Advertising Council continued after the war to perform this same
service--selecting, for free promotion, projects that are "importantly
in the public interest." Indeed, the service is more valued in peace
time than in war by many advertisers and broadcasting officials who are
badgered to support countless causes and campaigns, most of which sound
good but some of which may be objectionable. Investigating to screen the
good from the bad is a major job. The Advertising Council does this job.
The Council is respected by industry, by the public, and by government.
It is safe to promote a project which the Advertising Council claims to
be "importantly in the public interest."

Thus, officials of the Advertising Council have become czars in a most
important field. They arbitrarily decide what is, and what is not, in
the public interest. When the Advertising Council "accepts" a project,
the most proficient experts in the world--leading Madison Avenue
people--go to work, without charge, to create (and saturate the media of
mass communication with) the skillful propaganda that "sells" the
project to the public.

Officials of the Advertising Council are aware of their power as
moulders of public opinion. Theodore S. Repplier, head of the
Advertising Council, was quoted in a June, 1961, issue of _Saturday
Review_, as saying:

     "There are Washington officials hired to collect figures on about
     every known occupation, to worry about the oil and miners under the
     ground, the rain in the sky, the wildlife in the woods, and the
     fish in the streams--but it is nobody's job to worry about
     America's state of mind, or whether Americans misread a situation
     in a way that could be tragic.

     "This is a dangerous vacuum. But it is also a vacuum which explains
     to a considerable degree the important position the Advertising
     Council holds in American life today."

Note, particularly, that the Advertising Council is responsible to no
one. If a business firm should decide on its own to include some "public
service" project in its advertising, and the project evoked public
indignation, the business firm would lose customers. The Advertising
Council has no customers to please. Yet, the Advertising Council is a
private agency, beyond the reach of voter and taxpayer indignation
which, theoretically, can exercise some control over public agencies.

Who are these autocrats who have become so powerful that they can
condition, if not control, public opinion? They are the members of the
Public Policy Committee of the Advertising Council. Here were the 19
members of the Advertising Council's Committee, on June 23, 1958:

     _Sarah Gibson Blanding_, President of Vassar College; _Ralph J.
     Bunche_, United Nations Under Secretary; _Benjamin J.
     Buttenwieser_, partner in Kuhn, Loeb & Co.; _Olive Clapper,_
     publicist; _Evans Clark_, member of the _New York Times_ editorial
     board; _Helen Hall_, Director of Henry Street Settlement; _Paul G.
     Hoffman_, Chairman of this Public Policy Committee; _Charles S.
     Jones_, President of Richfield Oil Corporation; _Lawrence A.
     Kimpton_, Chancellor of University of Chicago; _A. E. Lyon_,
     Executive Secretary of the Railway Labor Executives Association;
     _John J. McCloy_, Chairman of the Chase Manhattan Bank; _Eugene
     Meyer_, Chairman of the _Washington Post & Times-Herald_; _William
     I. Myers_, Dean of Agriculture at Cornell University; _Elmo Roper_,
     public opinion analyst; _Howard A. Rusk_, New York University
     Bellevue Medical Center; _Boris Shishkin_, Assistant to the
     President of AFL-CIO; _George N. Shuster_, President of Hunter
     College; _Thomas J. Watson, Jr._, President of International
     Business Machines Corporation; _Henry M. Wriston_, Executive
     Director of the American Assembly.

Of these 19, 8 are members of the Council on Foreign Relations--Bunche,
Buttenwieser, Hoffman, McCloy, Roper, Shishkin, Shuster, Wriston. The
remaining 11 are mostly "second level" affiliates of the CFR, or under
the thumb of CFR members in the business world.

Some Advertising Council projects really are "in the public interest."
The "Stop Accidents" campaign and the "Smokey Bear" campaign to prevent
forest fires are among several which probably have done much good.

There has never been an Advertising Council project which insinuated
anything to remind anyone of the basic American political idea written
into our organic documents of government--the idea that men are endowed
by God with inalienable rights; that the greatest threat to those rights
is the government under which men live; and that government, while
necessary to secure the God-given blessings of liberty, must be
carefully limited in power by an inviolable Constitution. But there have
been many Advertising Council projects which were vehicles for the
propaganda of international socialism.

The Advertising Council has promoted Law Day, which is an annual
occasion for inundating America with "World Peace Through World Law"
propaganda, designed to prepare the people for giving the World Court
jurisdiction over American affairs, as a major step toward world
government (see _The Dan Smoot Report_, September 14, 1959, "The World
Court").

The Advertising Council has promoted the "mental health" project, which,
superficially, appears to be an admirable effort to make the public
aware of the truth that we have more mentally ill people than we have
facilities for--but whose underlying, and dubious, purpose is to promote
the passage, in all states, of "mental health" laws fabricated by
international socialists in the World Health Organization and in the U.
S. Public Health Service. These laws, to "facilitate access to hospital
care" for mentally ill people, provide no new facilities, prescribe no
better treatment, nor do anything else to relieve the suffering of sick
people.

The new "mental health" laws, which the Advertising Council is helping
to persuade people in all states to accept, eliminate the constitutional
safeguards of a person accused of being mentally ill, thus making it
easier for bureaucrats, political enemies and selfish relatives to
commit him and get him out of the way.

The Advertising Council has touted ACTION--American Council to Improve
Our Neighborhoods, Box 462, Radio City Station, New York 20, N. Y.--an
organization for urban renewal. Of the 66 persons on the ACTION Board of
Directors, a controlling majority are:

     known members of the Council on Foreign Relations--such as Philip
     L. Graham and Stanley Marcus;

     known members of important CFR affiliates--such as, Sidney Weinberg
     of the Business Advisory Council;

     union bosses like Harry C. Bates, Ben Fischer, Joseph D. Keenan,
     Jacob S. Potofsky, Walter Reuther;

     bureaucrats in charge of various "Housing Authorities," including
     Dr. Robert Weaver, Kennedy's present Housing Administrator whose
     appointment was challenged in the Senate because of Dr. Weaver's
     alleged communist front record;

     "liberal" politicians dedicated to the total socialist
     revolution--such as, Joseph S. Clark, Jr., U. S. Senator from
     Pennsylvania;

     officials of construction and real estate firms which can make
     mammoth profits on urban renewal projects and who are also
     "liberal" in their support of all governmental controls and
     subsidies, the tools for converting capitalism into socialism--such
     as, William Zeckendorf;

     representatives of organizations also "liberal" in the sense
     indicated above--such as, Philip M. Klutznick of B'nai B'rith, and
     Mrs. Kathryn H. Stone of the League of Women Voters.

The Advertising Council supports United Nations propaganda.

The 1959 annual report of the United States Committee for the United
Nations pays special tribute to the "radio-TV campaign, conducted
through the cooperation of the Advertising Council and the National
Association of Broadcasters." Here are some passages, from this tribute,
which show how the Advertising Council gets one-world socialist
propaganda into millions of American homes:

     "Perry Como read the UN spot personally to his audience of
     33,000,000."

     "Jack Paar ... [showed] a filmed visit to the UN by his daughter,
     Randy ... following a splendid statement [by Paar]. This 7-minute
     segment of the show reached a minimum of 30,000,000 viewers."

     "The campaign received tremendous recognition also on Meet the
     Press, the Today Show, I Love Lucy, the Desilu Playhouse, and the
     Jack Benny Show, among many others."

     "Broadcast kits went out to every radio and television station in
     the country."

A recent accomplishment of the Advertising Council was its saturation
bombing (1961) of the American public with propaganda in support of
Kennedy's Youth Peace Corps.

Chapter 7

UNITED NATIONS AND WORLD GOVERNMENT PROPAGANDA

All American advocates of _supra_-national government, or world
government, claim their principal motive is to achieve world peace. Yet,
these are generally the same Americans whose eager interventionism
helped push America into the two world wars of this century.

The propaganda for involving America in the bloodshed and hatreds of
Europe--in World War I and World War II--was the same as that now being
used to push us into world government. In World War I, we rushed our
soldiers across the wide seas to die in the cause of making the world
safe for democracy--of eliminating evil in the world so that there would
not be any more war! This was precisely what the world-government
interventionists wanted us to do. The so-called American isolationists
were _not_ pacifists who recommended refusal to take up arms in defense
of their own country: most of them were patriots who would have been
among the foremost to fight in defense of America. Being intelligent
citizens of a peaceful and civilized nation, they wanted to keep it that
way.

The world-government interventionists used the extraordinary arguments
of a man who, though living in an orderly and law-abiding neighborhood,
says that he must go carousing around in adjoining communities and get
involved in every street fight and barroom brawl he can find in order to
avoid violence! Such a man not only becomes a party to lawless violence
which he claims to deplore, but also creates hatreds and resentments
which will ultimately bring to the sane citizens of his own peaceful
neighborhood the evils which they had managed to keep out.

This is what Woodrow Wilson's intervention in World War I did to the
United States. It sacrificed the lives of 250,000 American men--not to
mention the hundreds of thousands crippled and otherwise wrecked by war.
But this sacrifice of American youth did not make the world safe for
anything. It helped make the world a breeding place for communism,
fascism, naziism, and other varieties of socialism; and it planted the
seeds for a second world war more destructive than the first.

But the world-government interventionists--when their bloody crusade
proved worse than a tragic failure--did not admit error. They tried to
place all the blame on the isolationists who had tried to keep us from
making the ghastly mistake.

If we had stayed out of World War I, the European powers would have
arrived, as they have been doing for thousands of years, at some kind of
negotiated peace which would have saved not only hundreds of thousands
of American lives, but millions of European lives as well. By entering
World War I, we merely converted it into total war, prolonged it, and
made it more savage.

The destruction and slaughter of World War I created power vacuums and
imbalances and economic chaos, which inevitably led to World War II.

Again, the world-government advocates, who claimed to want peace,
insisted that we go to war. They also intensified their efforts to
entangle America, irretrievably, in political and economic union with
European nations so that there would never again be any _possibility_ of
the United States staying out of the endless wars and turmoil of the old
world.

It is, perhaps, fruitless to question the motives of people leading the
campaign to push America into world government. All organizations which
have been active in this movement--World Fellowship, Inc., Federal
Union, Inc., Atlantic Union Committee, United World Federalists, and so
on--have had a sprinkling of communist-fronters among their directors
and members. But they have also had the official support of many
prominent and respected Americans: Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, John
Kennedy, Richard Nixon, Estes Kefauver, John Sparkman, Adlai Stevenson,
Dean Acheson, John Foster Dulles, Christian Herter, cabinet officers;
senators and congressmen; Supreme Court justices; prominent churchmen,
businessmen, financiers, entertainers, judges, union officials;
newspaper and magazine editors; famous columnists and radio-television
commentators.

Although the cry of "peace" is the perennial clarion call of all
world-government advocates, many of them have, in recent years, added
the claim that their recommendations (for converting America into a
province of world government) are means of "fighting communism." Indeed,
some of the most vigorous advocates of one-worldism have wide
reputations as anti-communists--Walter Judd, a Republican Congressman
from Minnesota, for example. Even Clarence Streit (leader of the
now-defunct Federal Union, Inc., and father of that organization's very
active and influential tax-exempt successor, Atlantic Union Committee)
has ugly things to say about communism.

The fact is that every step the United States takes toward political and
economic entanglements with the rest of the world is a step toward
realization of _the_ end objective of communism: creating a one-world
socialist political and economic system in which we will be one of the
subjugated provinces.

Because of the wealth we have created as a free and independent nation,
we would be the most heavily taxed province in any conceivable
supra-national government--whether in a "limited, federal union of the
western democracies," which is what the Atlantic Union Committee people
say they want; or in a total one-world system, which is what _all_
advocates of international union really have as their final goal.

Because of our population, however, we would have minority
representation in any supra-national government now being planned.

Americans would be subjected to laws enacted by an international
parliament in which we would have little influence; taxing us,
regulating our economic activities, controlling our schools, and
dictating our social and cultural relations with each other and with the
rest of the world.

America was founded, populated, and developed by people seeking escape
from oppressive governments in Europe. Now our own leaders ask us to
give up the freedom and independence which our forebears won for us with
blood and toil and valorous devotion to high ideals, to become subjects
in a governmental system that would inevitably be more tyrannical than
any which our forefathers rebelled against or any that presently exist.
If the world government included the despotic and oligarchic and
militaristic, and feudalistic and primitive systems of Asia, the Middle
East, Africa, and Latin America, it would necessarily become the
bloodiest and most oppressive tyranny the world has ever known.

Nowadays, when two or more nations amalgamate their economic, political,
and social systems they necessarily take the lowest common denominator
of freedom rather than the highest. In fact, they must take something
lower than the lowest: the union government will be more restrictive
than the government of any of the nations which formed the union.

This will be true of _any_ _supra_-national government that the United
States might get into: the union will not extend American freedom to
other nations; it will extend to all nations in the union the most
restrictive controls of the most oppressive government which enters the
union, and make even those controls worse than they were before the
union was formed--because the American principle of federalism has been
discarded by the "liberals" who manage our national affairs; and
American federalism is the only political principle ever to exist in the
history of the world that can make individual human freedom possible in
a federation of states.

Hard core American communists know (and some admit) that any move toward
American membership in any kind of supra-national government is a move
toward the Soviet objective of a one-world socialist dictatorship; but
all other American advocates of international union claim their schemes
are intended to repeat and extend the marvelous achievement of 13
American states which, by forming a political union, created a free and
powerful nation.

All United States advocates of any kind of world government point to the
founding of America: 13 sovereign states, each one proud and
nationalistic, all with special interests that were divergent from or in
conflict with the interests of the others; yet, they managed to
surrender enough sovereignty to join a federal union which gave the
united strength of all, while retaining the individuality and freedom of
each.

The 13 American states, in forming a federal union, did not take the
lowest common denominator of freedom; they took the highest, and
elevated that.

The American principle of federalism (indeed, the whole American
constitutional system) grew out of the philosophical doctrine (or,
rather, statement of faith) which Jefferson wrote into the Declaration
of Independence:

     "_...all men are ... endowed by their Creator with certain
     inalienable rights..._"

Men get their rights from God, not from government. Government, a
man-made creature, has nothing except what it takes from God-created
men. Government can give the people nothing that it has not first taken
away from them. Hence, if man is to remain free, he must have a
government which will play a very limited and negative role in his
private affairs.

The United States is the only nation, ever, whose institutions and
organic law were founded on this principle. The United Nations'
Declaration of Human Rights; the Constitution of the Soviet Union; and
the written and unwritten constitutions of every other nation in the
world are all built on a political principle exactly opposite in meaning
to the basic principle of Americanism. That is, the Constitution of the
Soviet Union, and of every UN agency, and of all other nations, specify
a large number of rights and privileges which citizens should have, if
possible, and which _government_ will grant them _if_ government can,
and _if_ government thinks proper.

Contrast this with the American Constitution and Bill of Rights which do
not contain one statement or inference that the federal government has
any responsibility, or power, to grant the people rights, privileges, or
benefits of any kind. The total emphasis in these American documents is
on telling the federal government _what it cannot do_ to and for the
people--on ordering the federal government to stay out of the private
affairs of citizens and to leave their God-given rights alone.

This negative, restricted role of the federal government, and this
assumption that God and not government is the source of man's rights
and privileges, are clearly stated in the Preamble to our Constitution.
The Preamble says that this Constitution is being _ordained_ and
established, not to _grant_ liberties to the people, but to _secure_ the
liberties which the people already had (before the government was ever
formed) as _blessings_.

The essence of the American constitutional system, which made freedom in
a federal union possible, is clearly stated in the first sentence of the
first Article of our Constitution and in the last Article (the Tenth
Amendment) of our Bill of Rights.

The first Article of our Constitution begins with the phrase, "All
legislative Powers _herein_ granted...." That obviously meant the
federal government had no powers which were not granted to it by the
Constitution. The Tenth Amendment restates the same thing with emphasis:

     "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution,
     nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States
     respectively, or to the people."

Clearly and emphatically, our Constitution says that the federal
government cannot legally do anything which is not authorized by a
specific grant of power in the Constitution.

This is the one constitutional concept that made the American
governmental system different from all others; it is the one which left
our people so free and unmolested by their own government that they
converted the backward, American continent into the land of freedom, the
most fruitful and powerful nation in history.

And this was the constitutional proviso which created the American
principle of federalism. The Constitution made no grant, or even
inferred a grant, of power to the federal government for meddling, to
any extent, or for any purpose whatever, in the private cultural,
economic, social, educational, religious, or political affairs of
individual citizens--or in the legitimate governmental activities of
the individual states which became members of the federal union. Hence,
states could join the federal union without sacrificing the freedom of
their citizens.

Modern "liberalism" which has been continuously in control of the
federal government (and of most opinion-forming institutions and media
throughout our society) since Franklin D. Roosevelt's first
inauguration, March 4, 1933, has, by ignoring constitutional restraints,
changed our _Federal_ government with _limited_ powers into a _Central_
government with _limitless_ power over the individual states and their
people.

Modern "liberalism" has abandoned American constitutional government and
replaced it with democratic centralism, which, in _fundamental theory,
is identical_ with the democratic centralism of the Soviet Union, and of
every other major nation existing today.

It was possible to enlarge the size of the old American federal union
without diminishing freedom for the people. When you enlarge the land
area and population controlled by democratic centralism you must
necessarily diminish freedom for the people, because the problems of
centralized government increase with the size of population and area
which it controls.

Look at what has happened to America since our _federal_ government was
converted into a centralized absolutism. The central government in
Washington arrogated to itself the unconstitutional power and
responsibility of regulating the relationships between private employers
and their employees, enacting laws which established "collective
bargaining" as "national policy," and which, to that end, gave
international unions a virtual monopoly over large segments of the labor
market.

It follows that a minor labor dispute between two unions on the
waterfront of New York is no longer a concern only of the people and
police in that neighborhood. A handful of union members who have no
grievance whatever against their employers but who are in a
jurisdictional struggle with another union, can shut down the greatest
railroad systems in the world, throw thousands out of work, and paralyze
vital transportation for business firms and millions of citizens all
over the nation.

Harry Bridges on the West Coast can order a political demonstration
having nothing to do with "labor" matters, and paralyze the economy of
half the nation.

Imagine what it will be like if we join a world government. Then a dock
strike in London will cripple, not just the British Isles but the whole
world.

Now, the central government in Washington sends troops into local
communities to enforce, at bayonet point, the illegal edicts of a
Washington judicial oligarchy concerning the operation of local schools.
If we join world government, the edict and the troops will come
(depending on what nations are in the international union, of course)
from India and Japan and the Congo.

There was a time when Americans, learning of suffering and want in a
distant land, could respond to their Christian promptings and native
kindliness by making voluntary contributions for relief to their fellow
human beings abroad. Our central government's foreign aid programs have
already taken much of that freedom away from American citizens--taxing
them so heavily for what government wants to give away, that private
citizens can't spend their own money the way they would like to.

What will it be like if we join a world government that embraces the
real have-not nations of the earth? The impoverished subcontinent of
India, because of population, would have more representatives in the
international parliament than we would have. They, with the support of
representatives from Latin America and Africa, could easily vote to lay
a tax on "surplus" incomes for the benefit of all illiterate and hungry
people everywhere; and outvoted Americans would be the only people in
the world with incomes high enough to meet the international definition
of "surplus."

We read with horror of Soviet slaughter in Hungary when the Soviets
suppress a local rebellion against their partial world-government. What
kind of horror would we feel after we join a world government and see
troops from Europe and Africa and the Middle East machinegunning people
on the streets of United States cities in order to suppress a rebellion
of young Americans who somehow heard about the magnificent
constitutional system and glorious freedom their fathers used to have
and who are trying to make a public demonstration of protest against the
international tyranny being imposed upon them?

A genuine world government might eliminate the armed conflict (between
nations) which we now call war; but it would cause an endless series of
bloody uprisings and bloody suppressions, and would cause more human
misery than total war itself.

In 1936, the Communist International formally presented its three-stage
plan for achieving world government--_Stage 1:_ socialize the economies
of all nations, particularly the Western "capitalistic democracies"
(most particularly, the United States); _Stage 2:_ bring about federal
unions of various groupings of these socialized nations; _Stage 3:_
amalgamate all of the federal unions into one world-wide union of
socialist states. The following passage is from the official program of
the 1936 Communist International:

     "...dictatorship can be established only by a victory of
     socialism in different countries or groups of countries, after
     which the proletariat republics would unite on federal lines with
     those already in existence, and this system of federal unions would
     expand ... at length forming the World Union of Socialist Soviet
     Republics."

In 1939 (three years after this communist program was outlined) Clarence
K. Streit (a Rhodes scholar who was foreign correspondent for _The New
York Times_, covering League of Nations activities from 1929-1939) wrote
_Union Now_, a book advocating a gradual approach through regional
unions to final world union--an approach identical with that of the
communists, except that Streit did not say his scheme was intended to
achieve world dictatorship, and did not characterize the end result of
his scheme as a "World Union of Socialist Soviet Republics."

In 1940, Clarence K. Streit (together with Percival F. Brundage, later a
Director of the Budget for Eisenhower; and Melvin Ryder, publisher of
the _Army Times_) formed Federal Union, Inc., to work for the goals
outlined in Streit's book, _Union Now_, published the year before.

In 1941, Streit published another book: _Union Now With Britain_. He
claims that the union he advocated would be a step toward "formation of
free world government." But the arguments of his book make it very clear
that in joining a union with other nations, the United States would not
bring to the union old American constitutional concepts of
free-enterprise and individual freedom under limited government, but
would rather amalgamate with the socialistic-communistic systems that
exist in the other nations which became members of the union.

The following passages are from page 192 of Streit's _Union Now With
Britain_:

     "Democrats cannot ... quarrel with Soviet Russia or any other
     nation because of its economic collectivism, for democracy itself
     introduced the idea of collective machinery into politics. It is a
     profound mistake to identify democracy and Union necessarily or
     entirely with either capitalist or socialist society, with either
     the method of individual or collective enterprise. There is room
     for both of these methods in democracy....

     "Democracy not only allows mankind to choose freely between
     capitalism and collectivism, but it includes marxist governments,
     parties and press...."

When the year 1941 ended, America was in World War II; and all American
advocates of world-peace-through-world-law-and-world-government
jubilantly struck while the iron was hot--using the hysteria and
confusion of the early days of our involvement in the great catastrophe
as a means of pushing us into one or another of the schemes for union
with other nations.

Clarence Streit states it this way, in his most recent book (_Freedom's
Frontier Atlantic Union Now_, 1961):

     "Japan Pearl Harbored us into the war we had sought to avoid by
     disunion.... Now, we Americans had the white heat of war to help
     leaders form the nuclear Atlantic Union."

On January 5, 1942 (when we had been at war less than a month), Clarence
Streit's Federal Union, Inc., bought advertising space in major
newspapers for a petition urging Congress to adopt a joint resolution
favoring immediate union of the United States with several specified
foreign nations. Such people as Harold L. Ickes (Roosevelt cabinet
officer), Owen J. Roberts (Supreme Court Justice), and John Foster
Dulles (later Eisenhower's Secretary of State) signed this newspaper ad
petitioning Congress to drag America into world government. In fact,
these notables (especially John Foster Dulles) had actually written the
Joint Resolution which Federal Union wanted Congress to adopt.

The world government resolution (urged upon Congress in January, 1942)
provided among other things that in the federal union of nations to be
formed, the "union" government would have the right: (1) to impose a
common citizenship; (2) to tax citizens directly; (3) to make and
enforce all laws; (4) to coin and borrow money; (5) to have a monopoly
on all armed forces; and (6) to _admit new members_.

The following is from a Federal Union, Inc., ad published in _The
Washington Evening Star_, January 5, 1942, urging upon the people and
Congress of America an immediate plunge into world government:

     "....Resolved:

     "That the President of the United States submit to Congress a
     program for forming a powerful union of free peoples to win the
     war, the peace, the future;

     "That this program unite our people, on the broad lines of our
     Constitution, with the people of Canada, the United Kingdom, Eire,
     Australia, New Zealand, and the Union of South Africa, together
     with such other free peoples, both in the Old World and the New as
     may be found ready and able to unite on this federal basis....

     "We gain from the fact that all the Soviet republics are already
     united in one government, as are also all the Chinese-speaking
     people, once so divided. Surely, we and they must agree that union
     now of the democracies wherever possible is equally to the general
     advantage....

     "Let us begin now a world United States....

     "The surest way to shorten and to win this war is also the surest
     way to guarantee to ourselves, and our friends and foes, that this
     war will end in a union of the free. The surest way to do all this
     is for us to start that union now."

World Fellowship, Inc., was also busy putting pressure on Congress in
January, 1942. World Fellowship, Inc., is one of the oldest world
government organizations. It was founded in 1918 as the "League of
Neighbors."

In 1924, the League of Neighbors united with the Union of East and West
(which had been founded in India). In 1933, this combined organization
reorganized and changed its name to World Fellowship of Faiths. In late
1941, it changed its name again and incorporated--and has operated since
that time as World Fellowship, Inc.

Dr. Willard Uphaus, a notorious communist-fronter, has been Executive
Director of World Fellowship, Inc., since February, 1953. Here is a
Joint Resolution which World Fellowship, Inc., urged Congress to adopt
on or before January 30, 1942--as a _birthday present_ to President
Franklin D. Roosevelt.

     "Now, therefore, be it

     "Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
     States of America, in Congress assembled, That the Congress of the
     United States of America does hereby solemnly declare that all
     peoples of the earth should now be united in a commonwealth of
     nations to be known as the United Nations of the World, and to that
     end it hereby gives to the President of the United States of
     America all the needed authority and powers of every kind and
     description, without limitations of any kind that are necessary in
     his sole and absolute discretion to set up and create the
     Federation of the World, a world peace government under the title
     of the 'United Nations of the World,' including its constitution
     and personnel and all other matters needed or appertaining thereto
     to the end that all nations of the world may by voluntary action
     become a part thereof under the same terms and conditions.

     "There is hereby authorised to be appropriated, out of any money in
     the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of 100 million
     dollars or so much thereof as may be necessary, to be expended by
     the President in his sole and absolute discretion, to effectuate
     the purposes of this joint resolution, and in addition, the sum of
     1 billion dollars for the immediate use of the United Nations of
     the World under its constitution as set up and created by the
     President of the United States of America as provided in this joint
     resolution...."

Congress rejected the world-government resolutions urged upon it in 1942
by Federal Union, Inc., and by World Fellowship, Inc.

But the formation of the United Nations in 1945 was a tremendous step in
the direction these two organizations were travelling. The "world peace"
aspects of the United Nations were emphasized to enlist support of the
American public. Few Americans noticed that the UN Charter really
creates a worldwide social, cultural, economic, educational, and
political alliance--and commits each member nation to a program of total
socialism for itself and to the support of total socialism for all other
nations.

The United Nations is, to be sure, a weaker alliance than world
government advocates want; but the UN was the starting point and
framework for world government.

The massive UN propaganda during the first few years after the formation
of the UN (1945) was so effective in brainwashing the American people,
that the United World Federalists, beginning with the State Assembly of
California, managed to get 27 state legislatures to pass resolutions
demanding that Congress call a Constitutional Convention for the purpose
of amending our Constitution in order to "expedite and insure"
participation of the United States in a world government. When the
American people found out what was going on, all of these "resolutions"
were repealed--most of them before the end of 1950.

But 1949 was a great year for American world government advocates.

On April 4, 1949, Dean Acheson's "brainchild," the North Atlantic
Treaty, was ratified by the United States. President Truman signed the
proclamation putting NATO in force on August 24, 1949. Most Americans
were happy with this organization. It was supposedly a military alliance
to protect the free world against communism. But few Americans bothered
to read the brief, 14-article treaty. If they had, Article 2 would have
sounded rather strange and out of place in a military alliance. Here is
Article 2 of the NATO Treaty:

     "The parties will contribute toward the future development of
     peaceful and friendly international relations by strengthening
     their free institutions, by bringing about a better understanding
     of the principles upon which these institutions are founded, and by
     promoting conditions of stability and _well being_. They will seek
     to eliminate conflict in their international economic policies and
     will encourage economic collaboration between any or all of them."

Here in this "military" treaty, which re-affirms the participants'
"faith in the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United
Nations," is the legal basis for a union, an Atlantic Union, a
_supra_-national government, all under the United Nations.

Immediately upon the formation of NATO, Clarence K. Streit created (in
1949) the Atlantic Union Committee, Inc. Strait's old Federal Union was
permitted to become virtually defunct (although it technically still
exists, as publisher of Streit's books, and so on). Streit got federal
tax exemption for the Atlantic Union Committee by writing into its
charter a proviso that the organisation would not "attempt to influence
legislation by propaganda or otherwise."

Yet, the charter of AUC states its purposes as follows:

     "To promote support for congressional action requesting the
     President of the United States to invite the other democracies
     which sponsored the North Atlantic Treaty to name delegates,
     representing their principal political parties, to meet with
     delegates of the United States in a federal convention to explore
     how far their peoples, and the peoples of such other democracies as
     the convention may invite to send delegates, can apply among them,
     within the framework of the United Nations, the principles of free
     federal union."

An Atlantic Union Committee Resolution, providing for the calling of an
international convention to "explore" steps toward a limited world
government, was actually introduced in the Congress in 1949--with the
support of a frightful number of "liberals" then in the Congress.

The Resolution did not come to a vote in the 81st Congress (1949-1950).
Estes Kefauver (Democrat, Tennessee) gravitated to the leadership in
pushing for the Resolution in subsequent Congresses; and he had the
support of the top leadership of both parties, Republican and Democrat,
north and south--including people like Richard Nixon, William Fulbright,
Lister Hill, Hubert Humphrey, Mike Mansfield, Kenneth Keating, Jacob
Javits, Christian Herter, and so on.

From 1949 to 1959, the Atlantic Union Resolution was introduced in each
Congress--except the one Republican-controlled Congress (83rd--1953).

In 1959, Atlantic Union advocates, having got nowhere in ten years of
trying to push their Resolution through Congress, changed tactics. In
1959, Streit's Atlantic Union Committee published a pamphlet entitled,
_Our One Best Hope--For Us--For The United Nations--For All Mankind_,
recommending an "action" program to "strengthen the UN." This "action"
program asks the U.S. Congress to pass a Resolution calling for an
international convention which would accomplish certain "fundamental
objectives," to wit:

     "That only reasonably experienced democracies be asked to
     participate; and that the number asked to participate should be
     small enough to enhance the chance for early agreement, yet large
     enough to create, if united, a preponderance of power on the side
     of freedom.

     "That the delegates be officially appointed but that they be
     uninstructed by their governments so that they shall be free to act
     in accordance with their own individual consciences.

     "That, whatever the phraseology, it should not be such as to
     preclude any proposal which, in the wisdom of the convention, is
     the most practical step.

     "That the findings of the delegates could be only recommendations,
     later to be accepted or rejected by their legislatures and their
     fellow citizens."

The NATO Citizens Commission Law of 1960 fully carries out the purposes
and intent of the new Atlantic Union strategy fabricated in 1959 to
replace the old Resolution which had failed for ten years.

The roll-call vote on this law (published in the February 27, 1961,
issue of _The Dan Smoot Report_) shows what a powerful array of United
States Congressmen and Senators are for this step toward world
government.

The debates in House and Senate (Senate: _Congressional Record_, June
15, 1960, pp. 11724 _ff_; House: _Congressional Record_, August 24,
1960, pp. 16261 _ff_) show something even more significant.

While denying that the NATO Citizens Commission Law had any relation to
the old Atlantic Union Resolution which Congress had refused for ten
years to consider, "liberals" in both Senate and House used language
right out of the Atlantic Union Committee pamphlet of 1959 (_Our Best
Hope ..._) to "prove" that this NATO Citizens Commission proposal was
not dangerous: They argued, for example, that Commission members would
be free to act in accordance with their own individual consciences; that
the meetings of the Commission would be purely exploratory, and that
Commission findings would be "only recommendations," not binding on the
U.S. government.

Congressional "liberals" supporting the NATO Citizens Commission also
tried to establish the respectability of the Commission by arguing that
it was merely being created to explore means of implementing Article 2
of the NATO Treaty. Are these "liberal" congressmen and senators so
ignorant that they do not know the whole Atlantic Union movement is
built under the canopy of "implementing Article 2 of this NATO Treaty?"
Or, are they too stupid to understand this? Or, are they so dishonest
that they distort the facts, thinking that the public is too confused or
ignorant to discover the truth?

Although the liberals in Congress loudly denied that the NATO Citizens
Commission Law of 1960 had anything to do with Atlantic Union, Clarence
Streit knew better--or was more honest. As soon as the law was passed,
Streit began a hasty revision of his old _Union Now_. Early in 1961,
Harper & Brothers published the revision, under the title _Freedom's
Frontier Atlantic Union Now_.

In this new book, Streit expresses jubilation about the NATO Citizens
Commission Law; and, on the second page of the first chapter, he says:

     "One change in the picture, which has seemed too slight or too
     recent to be noted yet by the general public, seems to me so
     significant as to give in itself reason enough for new faith in
     freedom's future, and for this new effort to advance it. On
     September 7, 1960, President Eisenhower signed an act of Congress
     authorizing a United States Citizens Commission on NATO to
     organize and participate in a Convention of Citizens of North
     Atlantic Democracies with a view to exploring fully and
     recommending concretely how to unite their peoples better."

_The Atlantic Union News_ (published by the Atlantic Union Committee,
Inc.) in the September, 1960, issue presents an exultant article under
the headline "AUC Victorious: Resolution Signed by President Becomes
Public Law 86-719."

The article says:

     "Members of the Atlantic Union Committee could certainly be
     forgiven if by now they had decided that the Resolution for an
     Atlantic Exploratory Convention would never pass both Houses of
     Congress. However, it has just done so. It was signed into law by
     the President September 7, 1960. The incredible size of this
     victory is hard, even for us in Washington, to comprehend...."

Who actually runs Clarence Streit's Atlantic Union Committee which
finally succeeded in ordering the Congress and the President of the
United States to take this sinister step toward world government? The
Council on Foreign Relations! The three top officials of the Atlantic
Union Committee are members of the CFR: Elmo Roper, President; William
L. Clayton, Vice President; and Lithgow Osborne, Secretary.

As of December, 1960, there were 871 members of the Atlantic Union
Committee. Of these, 107 were also members of the Council on Foreign
Relations. The December, 1960, membership list of the AUC is in Appendix
II of this volume. Each Council on Foreign Relations member is
designated on that list with CFR in parentheses after his name.

The NATO Citizens Commission Law of 1960 provided that the Speaker of
the House and the Vice President should select 20 persons to serve on
the Commission. In March, 1961, Sam Rayburn and Lyndon Johnson appointed
the following persons as members of the Commission:

     Donald G. Agger; Will L. Clayton; Charles William Engelhard, Jr.;
     George J. Feldman; Morris Forgash; Christian A. Herter; Dr. Francis
     S. Hutchins; Eric Johnston; William F. Knowland; Hugh Moore; Ralph
     D. Pittman, Ben Regan; David Rockefeller; Elmo B. Roper (Jr.); Mrs.
     Edith S. Sampson; Adolph W. Schmidt; Oliver C. Schroeder; Burr S.
     Swezey, Sr.; Alex Warden; and Douglas Wynn.

Of the 20 members of the NATO Citizens Commission, 7 are members of the
Council on Foreign Relations: Clayton, Herter, Johnston, Moore,
Rockefeller, Roper, Schmidt. Roper is President and Clayton is Vice
President of the Atlantic Union Committee. The others are generally
second-level affiliates of the CFR.

The United World Federalists does not have as much power and influence
as Clarence Streit's Atlantic Union, but is clearly the second most
influential organization working for world government.

The specific objective of the United World Federalists is rapid
transformation (through expansion of the jurisdiction of the World
Court, establishment of an international "police force," and so on) of
the United Nations into an all-powerful world government.

The aim of the UWF organization, as expressed in its own literature (the
most revealing piece of which is a pamphlet called _Beliefs, Purposes
and Policies_) is:

     "To create a world federal government with authority to enact,
     interpret, and enforce world law adequate to maintain peace."

The world federal government would be,

     "based upon the following principles and include the following
     powers....

     "Membership open to all nations without the right of secession....
     World law should be enforceable directly upon individuals.... The
     world government should have direct taxing power independent of
     national taxation."

The UWF scheme provides for a world police force and the prohibition of
"possession by any nation of armaments and forces beyond an approved
level required for internal policing."

The UWF proposes to work toward its world government scheme,

     "By making use of the amendment process of the United Nations to
     transform it into such a world federal government;

     "By participating in world constituent assemblies, whether of
     private individuals, parliamentary or other groups seeking to
     produce draft constitutions for consideration and possible adoption
     by the United Nations or by national governments...."

Norman Cousins and James P. Warburg (both prominent Council on Foreign
Relations members) formed the United World Federalists in February,
1947, at Ashville, North Carolina, by amalgamating three small
organizations (World Federalists, Student Federalists, and Americans
United For World Government).

Cousins is still honorary president of UWF. Walter Reuther (a
"second-level" affiliate of the CFR), Cousins, and Warburg actually run
the UWF at the top. Other Council on Foreign Relations members who are
officials in the UWF include Harry A. Bullis, Arthur H. Bunker, Cass
Canfield, Mark F. Ethridge, Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., Harold K.
Guinzburg, Isador Lubin, Cord Meyer, Jr., Lewis Mumford, Harry Scherman,
Raymond Gram Swing, Paul C. Smith, Walter Wanger, James D. Zellerbach.

The Institute for International Order, 11 West 42nd Street, New York 36,
New York, is another organization working for world government. It was
founded on November 17, 1948, at Washington, D.C., as the Association
for Education in World Government. On May 17, 1952, it changed its name
to Institute for International Government. On May 7, 1954, it changed
names again, to the present Institute for International Order.

The purpose of this organization has remained constant, through all the
name changing, since it was originally founded in 1948: to strengthen
the United Nations into a genuine world government. And it is a part of
the interlocking apparatus which constitutes our invisible government.

The Institute for International Order gets 75% of its income from
foundations which members of the Council on Foreign Relations control;
and the following CFR members are officers of the Institute: Earl D.
Osborn (President), Henry B. Cabot (Vice President), Edward W. Barrett,
Paul G. Hoffman, and Irving Salomon.

In 1948, the State Department created the U.S. Committee for the UN
(mentioned in Chapter VIII, in connection with the Advertising Council)
as a semi-official organization to propagandize for the UN in the United
States, with emphasis on promoting "UN Day" each year.

The Council on Foreign Relations dominates the U.S. Committee for the
UN. Such persons as Stanley C. Allyn, Ralph Bunche, Gardner Cowles, H.
J. Heinz, II, Eric Johnston, Milton Katz, Stanley Marcus, Hugh Moore,
John Nason, Earl D. Osborn, Jack I. Straus, and Walter Wheeler, Jr.--all
Council on Foreign Relations members--are members of the U.S. Committee
for the United Nations.

Walter Wheeler, Jr., (last name in the list above) is President of
Pitney-Bowes, maker of postage meter machines. In 1961, Mr. Wheeler
tried to stop all Pitney-Bowes customers from using, on their meter
machines, the American patriotic slogan, "This is a republic, not a
democracy: let's keep it that way." Mr. Wheeler said this slogan was
controversial. But Mr. Wheeler supported a campaign to get the slogan of
international socialism, _UN We Believe_, used on Pitney-Bowes postage
meter machines--probably the most controversial slogan ever to appear in
American advertising, as we shall see presently.

The American Association for the United Nations--AAUN--is another
tax-exempt, "semi-private" organization set up (not directly by the CFR,
but by the State Department which the Council runs) as a propaganda
agency for the UN. It serves as an outlet for UN pamphlets and, with
chapters in most key cities throughout the United States, as an
organizer of meetings, lecture-series, and other programs which
propagandize about the ineffable goodness and greatness of the United
Nations as the maker and keeper of world peace.

The Council on Foreign Relations dominates the AAUN. Some of the leading
CFR members who run the AAUN are: Ralph J. Bunche, Cass Canfield,
Benjamin V. Cohen, John Cowles, Clark M. Eichelberger, Ernest A. Gross,
Paul G. Hoffman, Palmer Hoyt, Herbert Lehman, Oscar de Lima, Irving
Salomon, James T. Shotwell, Sumner Welles, Quincy Wright.

In 1958, the United States Committee for the UN created an Industry
Participation Division for the specific purpose of getting the UN emblem
and _UN We Believe_ slogan displayed on the commercial vehicles,
stationery, business forms, office buildings, flag poles, and
advertising layouts of American business firms. The first major firm to
plunge conspicuously into this pro-UN propaganda drive was United Air
Lines.

W. A. Patterson, President of United, is an official of the Committee
For Economic Development, a major Council on Foreign Relations
propaganda affiliate, and has served on the Business-Education Committee
of the CED. Mr. Patterson had the _UN We Believe_ emblem painted in a
conspicuous place on every plane in the United Air Lines fleet. There
was a massive protest from Americans who know that the UN is part of the
great scheme to destroy America as a free and independent republic. Mr.
Patterson had the UN emblems removed from his planes.

In 1961, the American Association for the United Nations and the U. S.
Committee for the UN (both enjoying federal tax exemption, as
"educational" in the "public interest") created another tax-exempt
organization to plaster the UN emblem all over the American landscape.

The new organization is called UN We Believe. Here is an article from
the May-June, 1961, issue of _Weldwood News_, a house organ of United
States Plywood Corporation (New York 36, New York):

     "A. W. (Al) Teichmeier, USP director of merchandising, is the
     Company's closest physical link to the United Nations--he's
     President of UN We Believe.

     "UN We Believe, under joint auspices of the American Association
     for the UN and the U. S. Committee for the UN, is a non-profit,
     year-round program geared to convince industry, organizations and
     individuals how important public support can mean in preserving
     world peace.

     "USP uses the seal ... (UN emblem and _UN We Believe_ slogan) on
     its postage meters for all New York mailings. Among some other
     active companies in the program are CIT, General Telephone, Texaco,
     American Sugar Refining, P. Lorillard Co., and KLM Dutch Airlines."

Plywood companies (small ones, producing hardwood plywood, if not big
ones like USP) have been grievously hurt by the trade and foreign-aid
policies which the UN, international-socialist crowd is responsible for.

Lenin is said to have remarked that when it comes time for communists to
hang all capitalists, the capitalists will bid against each other for
contracts to sell the rope.

The article from _Weldwood News_, quoted above, was quoted in the July
17, 1961, issue of _The Dan Smoot Report_. The companies mentioned
received some mail, criticizing them for supporting UN We Believe. The
Texaco Company denied that it had ever been active in UN We Believe and
said that the editor of _Weldwood News_ had apologized for the error in
publishing the reference to Texaco and had expressed regret for "the
embarrassment caused" Texaco.

While denying support for UN We Believe, however, Mr. Augustus C. Long,
Chairman of the Board of Texaco (and a member of the Business Advisory
Council) gave unqualified endorsement of the Council on Foreign
Relations. In a letter dated August 17, 1961, Mr. Long said:

     "The Council on Foreign Relations is one of the most effective
     organizations in this country devoted to spreading information on
     international problems. The officers and directors of the Council
     are men of reputation and stature. We believe that the Council
     through its study groups makes an outstanding contribution to
     public information concerning foreign policy issues."

Chapter 8

FOREIGN AID

One day in the spring of 1961, a New York lawyer received a long
distance telephone call. Concerning this call, the _New York Times_
reported:

     "'This is President Kennedy,' the telephone voice said.

     "'The hell you say,' retorted the lawyer. 'I guess that makes me
     the Prime Minister of England, but what can I do for you?'

     "'Nobody's pulling your leg,' the telephone voice said. 'This is
     President Kennedy all right. I want to talk to you about coming
     down here to Washington to help me with this long-term foreign aid
     legislation.'"

One week later, the New York lawyer took an apartment in Washington and,
as a member of President Kennedy's "Task Force" on foreign aid, started
writing the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961. The lawyer is Theodore
Tannenwald, Jr., a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, who wrote
many of the foreign aid bills which President Harry Truman presented to
Congress and who, during the first Eisenhower term, was assistant
director of the Mutual Security Program.

After Mr. Tannenwald and his task force had finished writing the 1961
foreign aid bill, President Kennedy appointed Tannenwald coordinator in
charge of "presenting" the bill to committees of the House and Senate.
Three cabinet officers and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
took their orders from Mr. Tannenwald, who was, according to the _New
York Times_, "the Administration's composer, orchestrator and conductor
of the most important legislative symphony of the Congressional
session."

With admiration, the _Times_ said:

     "Mr. Tannenwald has been a kind of special White House ambassador
     to Capitol Hill. While the legislative committees struggled with
     the controversial proposal to by-pass the appropriating process and
     give the President authority to borrow $8,800,000,000 (8 billion,
     800 million) for development lending in the next five years, he was
     the man in the ante-room empowered to answer questions in the name
     of the President."

In July, 1961, President Kennedy completed Mr. Tannenwald's foreign aid
"orchestra." On July 10, in ceremonies at the White House, the President
formally announced creation of the newest foreign-aid propaganda
organization, the Citizens Committee for International Development, with
Warren Lee Pierson as chairman. Here is the membership of the Citizens
Committee for International Development:

     _Eugenie Anderson_ (member of the Atlantic Union Committee);
     _William Benton_ (Chairman of the Board of _Encyclopaedia
     Britannica_; member of the Atlantic Union Committee); _Everett N.
     Case_ (President of Colgate University); _O. Roy Chalk_ (President
     of the District of Columbia Transit Company); _Malcolm S. Forbes_
     (Editor and Publisher of _Forbes Magazine_); _Eleanor Clark
     French_; _Albert M. Greenfield_ (Honorary Chairman of the Board of
     Bankers Security Corporation, Philadelphia); _General Alfred M.
     Gruenther_ (President of the American National Red Cross; member of
     the Atlantic Union Committee); _Murray D. Lincoln_ (Chairman of
     Nationwide Insurance Company); _Sol M. Linowitz_ (Chairman of Zerox
     Corporation); _George Meany_ (President of AFL-CIO); _William S.
     Paley_ (Chairman of the Board, Columbia Broadcasting System);
     _Warren Lee Pierson_ (Chairman of the Board, Trans-World Airways);
     _Ross Pritchard_ (Professor of Political Science, Southwestern
     University, Memphis); _Thomas S. Nichols_ (Chairman of the Board
     of Olin Mathieson Chemical Corporation; member of the Atlantic
     Union Committee); _Mrs. Mary G. Roebling_ (President Of Trenton
     Trust Company); _David Sarnoff_ (Chairman of Radio Corporation of
     America); _Walter Sterling Surrey_ (legal consultant, Economic
     Cooperation Administration); _Thomas J. Watson, Jr._, (President of
     International Business Machines Corporation); _Walter H. Wheeler,
     Jr._, (President of Pitney-Bowes); _James D. Zellerbach_ (President
     and Director of Crown-Zellerbach Corporation; Chairman of
     Fibreboard Products, Inc.; member of the Atlantic Union Committee
     and United World Federalists); _Ezra Zilkha_ (head of Zilkha &
     Sons).

Of these 22 people, 12 (including the Chairman) are members of the
Council on Foreign Relations: Benton, Case, Gruenther, Paley, Pierson,
Pritchard, Nichols, Sarnoff, Surrey, Watson, Wheeler, and Zellerbach.

Heads of the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations attended the White House
luncheon when the Committee was formed. Vice President Johnson,
Secretary of State Dean Rusk, and Attorney General Robert Kennedy were
also present. The President urged each and all to get foundations,
business firms, civic organizations, and the people generally, to put
pressure on Congress in support of the 1961 foreign aid bill.

Within a week after the July 10, White House luncheon meeting (which
launched the CFR's foreign aid committee), the President and his
high-level aides were talking about a grave crisis in Berlin and about
foreign aid as _the_ essential means of "meeting" that crisis.

On July 25, when congressional debates over the foreign aid bill were in
a critical stage, President Kennedy spoke to the nation on radio and
television, solemnly warning the people that the Berlin situation was
dangerous.

Immediate, additional support for the foreign aid bill came from the
country's liberal and leftwing forces, who united in a passionate
plea--urging the American people to support the President "in this grave
hour."

On August 27, an Associated Press release announced that House Leader
John W. McCormack (Democrat, Massachusetts), was attempting to enlist
the cooperation of 2,400 city mayors in support of a long-range foreign
aid bill to meet the President's demands.

McCormack sent the city officials a statement of his views with a cover
letter suggesting that the matter be brought to "the attention of
citizens of your community through publication in your local newspaper,"
and, further, urging their "personal endorsement of this bipartisan
program through the medium of your local press...."

State Department officials scheduled speaking tours throughout the land,
and CFR affiliated organizations (like the Councils on World Affairs)
started the build-up to provide audiences--all in the interest of
"briefing" the American people on the necessity and beauties of foreign
aid.

Anyone with sense had to wonder how the giving of American tax money to
communist governments in Europe and to socialist governments all over
the earth could help us resist communism in Berlin. But with the top
leaders in our society (from the President downward to officials in the
National Council of Churches) telling us that the survival of our nation
depended on the President's getting all the foreign aid "authorization"
he wanted--most Americans remained silent, feeling that such
consequential and complicated matters should be left in the hands of our
chosen leaders.

By the end of August, the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 had been passed
by both houses of Congress; and the Berlin crisis moved from front page
lead articles in the nation's newspapers to less important columns.

Thus, in 1961, as always, the foreign aid bill was a special project of
our invisible government, the Council on Foreign Relations. And, in
1961, as always, the great, tax-supported propaganda machine used a fear
psychology to bludgeon the people into silence and the Congress into
obedience.

President Kennedy signed the Act as Public Law 87-195 on September 4,
1961.

Public Law 87-195 authorized $10,253,500,000 (10 billion, 253 million,
500 thousand) in foreign aid: $3,066,500,000 appropriated for the 1962
fiscal year, and $7,187,000,000 Treasury borrowing authorized for the
next five years. The law does require the President to obtain annual
appropriations for the Treasury borrowing, but permits him to make
commitments to lend the money to foreign countries, _before_ he obtains
appropriations from Congress.

It was widely reported in the press that Congress had denied the
President the long-term borrowing authority he had requested; but the
President himself was satisfied. He knew that by promising loans to
foreign governments (that is, "committing" the funds in advance of
congressional appropriation) he would thus force Congress (in the
interest of showing "national unity" and of not "repudiating" our
President) to appropriate whatever he promised.

On August 29, the President said:

     "The compromise ... is wholly satisfactory. It gives the United
     States Government authority to make commitments for long-term
     development programs with reasonable assurance that these
     commitments will be met."

Former Vice President Richard M. Nixon (a member of the CFR) was happy
about the 1961 foreign aid bill. On August 29, Nixon, on the ABC radio
network, said that he favored such "long-range foreign aid planning,
financed through multi-year authorizations and annual appropriations."

Nelson A. Rockefeller, Republican Governor of New York, announced that
he too favored "long-range foreign aid planning, financed through
multi-year authorizations and annual appropriations"--exactly like
Nixon.

Former President Eisenhower was also happy. He, too, said he favored
this sort of thing.

Senator J. William Fulbright (Democrat, Arkansas) was almost jubilant:
he said Congress for the next five years would be under "strong
obligation" to put up the money for whatever the President promises to
foreign governments.

All in all, it is improbable that Congress ever passed another bill more
destructive of American constitutional principles; more harmful to our
nation politically, economically, morally, and militarily; and more
helpful to communism-socialism all over the earth--than the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, which was, from beginning to end, a product of
the Council on Foreign Relations.

Our foreign aid does grievous harm to the American people by burdening
them with excessive taxation, thus making it difficult for them to
expand their own economy. This gives government pretext for intervening
with more taxation and controls for domestic subsidies.

Furthermore, the money that government takes away from us for foreign
aid is used to subsidize our political enemies and economic competitors
abroad. Note, for example, the large quantities of agricultural goods
which we give every year to communist satellite nations, thus enabling
communist governments to control the hungry people of those nations.
Note that while we are giving away our agricultural surpluses to
communist and socialist nations, we, under the 1961 foreign aid bill (as
under previous ones), are subsidizing agricultural production in the
underdeveloped countries.

The 1961 foreign aid bill prohibited direct aid to Cuba, but authorized
contributions to United Nations agencies, which were giving aid to Cuba.

At a time when the American economy was suffering from the flight of
American industry to foreign lands, the 1961 foreign aid bill offered
subsidies and investment guarantees to American firms moving abroad.

Our foreign aid enriches and strengthens political leaders and ruling
oligarchies (which are often corrupt) in underdeveloped lands; and it
does infinite harm to the people of those lands, when it inflates their
economy and foists upon them an artificially-produced industrialism
which they are not prepared to sustain or even understand.

The basic argument for foreign aid is that by helping the underdeveloped
nations develop, we will keep them from falling under the dictatorship
of communism. The argument is false and unsound, historically,
politically, economically, and morally.

The communists have never subjugated a nation by winning the loyalties
of the oppressed and downtrodden. The communists first win the support
of liberal-intellectuals, and then use them to subvert and pervert all
established mores and ideals and social and political arrangements.

Our foreign aid does not finance freedom in foreign lands; it finances
socialism; and a world socialist system is what communists are trying to
establish. As early as 1921, Joseph Stalin said that the advanced
western nations must give economic aid to other nations in order to
socialize their economies and prepare them for integration in the
communist's world socialist system.

Socializing the economies of all nations so that all can be merged into
a one-world system was the objective of Colonel Edward M. House, who
founded the Council on Foreign Relations, and has been the objective of
the Council, and of all its associated organizations, from the
beginning.

Chapter 9

MORE OF THE INTERLOCK

It is impossible in this volume to discuss all organizations interlocked
with the Council on Foreign Relations. In previous chapters, I have
discussed some of the most powerful agencies in the interlock. In this
chapter, I present brief discussions of a few organizations which make
significant contributions to the over-all program of the Council.

INSTITUTE FOR AMERICAN STRATEGY

There are some men in the Council on Foreign Relations who condemn the
_consequences_ of the CFR's policies--but who never mention the CFR as
responsible for those policies, and who never really suggest any change
in the policies.

Frank R. Barnett is such a man. Mr. Barnett, a member of the Council on
Foreign Relations, is research director for the Richardson Foundation
and also program director for the Institute for American Strategy, which
is largely financed by the Richardson Foundation. The Institute for
American Strategy holds two-day regional "Strategy Seminars" in cities
throughout the United States. Participants in the seminars are carefully
selected civic and community leaders. The announced official purpose of
the seminars is:

     "...to inform influential private American citizens of the danger
     which confronts the United States in the realm of world politics.
     They have been conceived as a means for arousing an informed and
     articulate patriotism which can provide the basis for the
     sustained and intensive effort which alone can counter the skillful
     propaganda and ruthless conquest so successfully practiced by the
     Soviet Union and her allies and satellites."

Mr. Barnett is generally one of the featured speakers at these seminars.
He speaks effectively, arousing his audience to an awareness of the
Soviets as an ugly menace to freedom and decency in the world. He makes
his audience squirm with anxiety about how America is losing the cold
war on all fronts, and makes them burn with desire to reverse this
trend. But when it comes to suggesting what can be done about the
terrible situation, Mr. Barnett seems only to recommend that more and
more people listen to more and more speakers like him in order to become
angrier at the Soviets and more disturbed about American losses--so that
we can continue the same policies we have, but do a better job with
them.

Mr. Barnett never criticizes the basic internationalist policy of
entwining the affairs of America with those of other nations, because
Mr. Barnett, like all other internationalists, takes it for granted that
America can no longer defend herself, without "allies," whom we must buy
with foreign aid. He does imply that our present network of permanent,
entangling alliances is not working well; but he never hints that we
should abandon this disastrous policy and return to the traditional
American policy of benign neutrality and no-permanent-involvement, which
offers the only possible hope for our peace and security. Rather, Mr.
Barnett would just like us to conduct our internationalist policy in
such a way as to avoid the disaster which our internationalist policy is
building for us.

Mr. Barnett's recommendations on how to fight communism on the domestic
front also trail off, generally, into contradictions and confusion. For
example, in his speech to the "Strategy Seminar" arranged by the
Institute for American Strategy and sponsored by the Fulton County
Medical Society in Atlanta, Georgia, June, 1961, Mr. Barnett urged all
citizens to inform themselves about the communist threat and become
educated on its aims so that they will be capable of combatting
communist propaganda. But, Mr. Barnett said, citizens are "silly" who
concern themselves with trying to find communists and fellow-travelers
in the PTA!

In a speech to reserve officers at the War College in July, 1961, Mr.
Barnett denounced "crackpots" who hunt "pinkos" in local colleges. He
said the theory that internal subversion is the chief danger to the
United States is fallacious--and is harmful, because it has great
popular appeal. Belief in this theory, Mr. Barnett said, makes people
mistakenly feel that they "don't have to think about ... strengthening
NATO, or improving foreign aid management, or volunteering for the Peace
Corps, or anything else that might require sacrifice."

Mr. Barnett, who speaks persuasively as an expert on fighting communism,
apparently does not know that the real work of the communist conspiracy
is not performed by the shabby people who staff the official apparatus
of the communist party, but is done by well-intentioned people (in the
PTA and similar organizations) who have been brainwashed with communist
ideas. Communists (whom Mr. Barnett hates and fears) did not do the
tremendous job of causing the United States to abandon her traditional
policies of freedom and independence for the internationalist policies
which are dragging us into one-world socialism. The most distinguished
and respected Americans of our time, in the Council on Foreign Relations
(of which Mr. Barnett is a member) did this job.

It is interesting to note that the principal book offered for sale and
recommended for reading at Mr. Barnett's, "Strategy Seminars" is
_American Strategy For The Nuclear Age_. The first chapter in the book,
entitled "Basic Aims of United States Foreign Policy," is a reprint of a
Council on Foreign Relations report, compiled by a CFR meeting in 1959,
attended by such well-known internationalist "liberals" as Frank
Altschul, Hamilton Fish Armstrong, Adolf A. Berle, Jr., Robert Blum,
Robert R. Bowie, John Cowles, Arthur H. Dean, Thomas K. Finletter,
William C. Foster, W. Averell Harriman, Philip C. Jessup, Joseph E.
Johnson, Henry R. Luce, I. I. Rabi, Herman B. Wells, Henry M. Wriston.

COMMISSION ON NATIONAL GOALS

On December 6, 1960, President Eisenhower presented, to President-elect
Kennedy, a report by the President's Commission on National Goals, a
group of "distinguished" Americans whom President Eisenhower had
appointed 11 months before to find out what America's national purpose
should be.

The national purpose of this nation _should be_ exactly what it was
during the first 125 years of our national life: to stand as proof that
free men can govern themselves; to blaze a trail toward freedom, a trail
which all people, if they wish, can follow or guide themselves by,
without any meddling from us.

Hydrogen bombs and airplanes and intercontinental ballistic missiles do
not change basic principles. The principles on which our nation was
founded are eternal, as valid now as in the 18th century.

Indeed, modern developments in science should make us cling to those
principles. If foreign enemies can now destroy our nation by pressing a
button, it seems obvious that our total defense effort should be devoted
to protecting our nation against such an attack: it is suicidal for us
to waste any of our defense effort on "economic improvement" and
military assistance for other nations.

All of this being obvious, it is also obvious that the President's
Commission on National Goals was not really trying to discover our
"national purpose." "National Purpose" was the label for a propaganda
effort intended to help perpetuate governmental policies, which are
dragging America into international socialism, regardless of who
succeeded Eisenhower as President.

The Report is actually a rehash of major provisions in the 1960 Democrat
and Republican party platforms. More than that, it is, in several
fundamental and specific ways, identical with the 1960 published program
of the communist party. (For a full discussion of the President's
Commission on National Goals, see _The Dan Smoot Report_, "Our National
Purpose," December 12, 1960.)

Who were the "distinguished" Americans whom Eisenhower appointed to draw
this blueprint of America's National Purpose? They were:

     Erwin D. Canham, Editor-in-Chief of the _Christian Science
     Monitor_; James B. Conant, former President of Harvard; Colgate W.
     Darden, Jr., former President of the University of Virginia and
     former Governor of Virginia; Crawford H. Greenewalt, President of
     E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Inc.; General Alfred M. Gruenther,
     President of the American Red Cross; Learned Hand, retired judge of
     the U.S. Court of Appeals; Clark Kerr, President of the University
     of California; James R. Killian, Jr., Chairman of the Massachusetts
     Institute of Technology; George Meany, President of the AFL-CIO;
     Frank Pace, Jr., former member of Truman's cabinet; Henry M.
     Wriston, President of American Assembly and President Emeritus of
     Brown University.

Of the 11, 7 are members of the Council on Foreign Relations--Canham,
Conant, Gruenther, Hand, Killian, Pace, Wriston. All of the others are
lower-level affiliates of the CFR.

NATIONAL PLANNING ASSOCIATION

The National Planning Association was established in 1934 "to bring
together leaders from agriculture, business, labor, and the professions
to pool their experience and foresight in developing workable plans for
the nation's future...."

The quotation is from an NPA booklet, which also says:

     "Every year since the NPA was organized in 1934, its reports have
     strongly influenced our national economy, U.S. economic policy, and
     business decisions."

Here are members of the Council on Foreign Relations listed as officials
of the National Planning Association: Frank Altschul, Laird Bell,
Courtney C. Brown, Eric Johnston, Donald R. Murphy, Elmo Roper,
Beardsley Ruml, Hans Christian Sonne, Lauren Soth, Wayne Chatfield
Taylor, John Hay Whitney.

The following officials of National Planning Association are generally
second-level affiliates of the CFR--or are, at any rate, worth noting:
Arnold Zander, International President of American Federation of State,
County and Municipal Employees; Solomon Barkin, Director of Research for
the Textile Workers Union of America; L. S. Buckmaster, General
President, United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum & Plastic Workers of America;
James B. Carey, Secretary-Treasurer of CIO; Albert J. Hayes,
International President of International Association of Machinists; and
Walter P. Reuther.

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION

In 1920, the American Civil Liberties Union was founded by Felix
Frankfurter, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, William Z.
Foster, then head of the U.S. Communist Party; Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, a
top communist party official; Dr. Harry F. Ward, of Union Theological
Seminary, a notorious communist-fronter; and Roger Baldwin.

Patrick M. Malin, a member of the CFR, has been director of the American
Civil Liberties Union since 1952. Other CFR members who are known to be
officials in the American Civil Liberties Union are: William Butler,
Richard S. Childs, Norman Cousins, Palmer Hoyt, Jr., J. Robert
Oppenheimer, Elmo Roper, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.

NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF CHRISTIANS AND JEWS

The late Charles Evans Hughes (a member of the CFR) and the late S.
Parkes Cadman (former President of the Federal--now National--Council of
Churches) founded the National Conference of Christians and Jews in
1928.

In June, 1950 (at the suggestion of Paul Hoffman) the National
Conference of Christians and Jews founded World Brotherhood at UNESCO
House in Paris, France. The officers of World Brotherhood were: Konrad
Adenauer, William Benton, Arthur H. Compton, Paul Henri-Spaak, Paul G.
Hoffman, Herbert H. Lehman, John J. McCloy, George Meany, Madame Pandit,
Paul Reynaud, Eleanor Roosevelt, Adlai Stevenson.

In August, 1958, World Brotherhood held a seminar in Bern, Switzerland.
All of the officers listed above attended and prepared "working papers."
Here is a summary of conclusions reached at this World Brotherhood
meeting, as condensed from an article by Arthur Krock, in _The New York
Times_, November 21, 1958:

     _We must recognize that the communist countries are here to stay
     and cannot be wished away by propaganda. All is not bad in
     communist countries. Western nations could learn from communist
     experiments. We should study ways to make changes in both
     systems--communist and western--in order to bring them nearer
     together. We should try to eliminate the stereo-type attitudes
     about, and suspicion of, communism. We must assume that the
     communist side is not worse than, but merely different from, our
     side._

In May, 1960, World Brotherhood held a conference on "World Tensions" at
Chicago University. Lester B. Pearson (socialist-internationalist from
Canada) presided at the conference; and the following members of the
Council on Foreign Relations served as officials: William Benton, Ralph
Bunche, Marquis Childs, Harlan Cleveland, Norman Cousins, Ernest A.
Gross, Paul G. Hoffman, and Adlai Stevenson.

The National Conference of Christians and Jews-World Brotherhood 1960
meeting on "World Tensions," at Chicago University, concluded that the
communists are interested in more trade but not interested in political
subversion, and recommended:

(1) a three-billion-dollar-a-year increase in U. S. foreign aid to
"poor" countries; (2) repeal of the Connally Reservation; (3) closer
relations between the U. S. and communist countries.