One world order



Download 140.52 Kb.
Date conversion20.11.2017
Size140.52 Kb.
1   2   3   4   5


Along with Anti-Semitism Lite, the DAC cognoscenti freely imbibed the harder stuff. A far right book entitled Iron Curtain Over America, which was published in 1951 by John Beaty, served as an ideological linchpin for the DAC. An English professor and former head of Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Beaty had been an Army Intelligence (G-2) officer in Washington from1941 to 1947. Del Valle knew Beaty and, after Beaty’s death, his widow Josephine spent many years as the DAC’s Vice President.

Beaty argued in Iron Curtain that Communist Russia was really under the domination of the Khazars, a group originally from the South of Russia that had converted to Judaism in the early Middle Ages. According to Beaty, the Khazars had now taken control of both Russia and America. In his book Religion and the Racist Right, Michael Barkun summarizes Beatty’s argument this way:
The reforms of Czar Alexander II, misguided in Beaty’s view, gave the “Judaized Khazars” the ability to infiltrate and corrupt Russia as a whole. They did so with four aims in mind: the development of communism, the fomenting of revolution, the growth of Zionism, and the transfer of their numbers to America. Hence, he argued, they were able not only to seize control of Russia but to provide their conspiracy with an American base as a minority “obsessed with its own objectives which are not those of Western Christian civilization.”32

Beaty further claimed that the Khazars – after more or less taking control over the Democratic Party – tricked America into war with Germany to kill off as many Aryans as possible. The Khazars were simultaneously the masters of Soviet Russia because “Stalin, Kagonovich, Beria, Molotov, and Litvinoff all have Jewish blood or are married to Jewesses.”33

Iron Curtain went through an astonishing seventeen printings in the 1950s. Del Valle publicly endorsed it and helped Beaty distribute copies to select military officers. Other leading retired military men like General George Stratemeyer – himself a member of the Military Affairs Committee of the Charles Pichel-led Knights of Malta – publicly praised Beaty’s opus. When asked by the Jewish Anti-Defamation League (ADL) to repudiate Iron Curtain, Stratemeyer refused to do so and instead publicly attacked the ADL.34
Del Valle’s conviction that Russia was under Jewish control led him to a major clash with Common Sense, a hard right magazine famous for its obsession with Jewish power. A major patron of Common Sense, del Valle served as president of the journal’s parent body, the Christian Educational Fund.35 In its 6/5/1967 issue – around the time of the Six Day War – Common Sense broke with orthodoxy and ran a story suggesting that Joseph Stalin has actually saved Russia from a Trotsky-led Jewish takeover; an opinion not entirely unknown inside the far right. Del Valle, however, was so outraged by the article that he broke his long-standing ties to the journal.36

Del Valle also had no qualms about citing from The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. In an April 12, 1961 speech before the United States Daughters of 1812, he repeatedly invoked The Protocols to prove the existence of an “Invisible Government” that was now hard at work plotting to reduce America to a province or set of provinces in a future World Government centered around the UN. Del Valle also used The Protocols to buttress his claim that “Communism and Socialism” were first introduced to Russia by the Invisible Government to destroy that nation.37

Part Three: The DAC and the Paramilitary Right
In 1960 the DAC achieved new prominence inside the far right after Brig. General Merritt B. Curtis USMC (Ret.), the Secretary and General Counsel for the DAC, was chosen as the presidential candidate of the Constitution Party, a third party effort set up to compete in that year’s presidential election.38 The DAC’s role in the Constitution Party seems to have served another purpose as well since there is evidence that the DAC attempted to organize “militia type” networks under the guise of electorial politics. Del Valle’s papers show that the former general played a role in the creation of a shadowy paramilitary network that divided up sections of the United States into four “zones.”39 In a 7/23/1963 letter to Brig. General W.L. Lee, USAF (Ret.), del Valle said that it was agreed to organize everything “under cover of voter organization [for the Constitution Party – KC], which is not inconsistent with our being an effective state militia as well.” Del Valle explained his approach to organizing resistance in the “USSA (United Slave States of America)” this way:
My struggle is two-fold: 1. Strictly legal, constitutional, political efforts to restore constitutional government, and 2. alerting all White Christian Americans to the nature of the enemy within and urging that they use Article II of the Bill of Rights to arm and organize for the defense of their homes, families, community, state and country.40

From the 1950s on, del Valle was a featured speaker at countless far right gatherings that included representatives from the KKK, Christian Identity, the Minutemen, the Sons of Confederate Veterans and innumerable other far right splinter groups. He also developed his own information network to keep him abreast of developments inside the radical right.41

In an 8/12/1966 letter to the American rightist Mary Davidson, del Valle suggested that the solution to America’s problems was clear: “the only way to cut the Gordian knot is by a military coup d’etat.” Throughout the early 1960s, in fact, the fear of a coup d’etat from either the right or left was surprisingly commonplace.
On November 24, 1961, the prominent American syndicated newspaper columnist Drew Pearson published a story in the Washington Post about the increasing turn to the far right by high-ranking U.S. military men. Pearson singled out Major General Edwin Walker, head of the 24th Infantry Division in Germany, for politicizing his troops with rightwing propaganda.42 Pearson highlighted a letter to one of Walker’s military supporters, Arch Roberts, from the French rightist Hillaire du Berrier, who compared the Kennedy Administration’s crackdown on Walker to de Gaulle’s attack on the rebel French generals who led the O.A.S. The article also cited del Valle who, Pearson said, comes close “to urging armed insurrection” when he made statements calling for the “organization of a powerful armed resistance force to defeat the aims of the Usurpers and bring about a return to constitutional government.”

The fear that American generals were thinking along O.A.S. lines helped inspire a series of liberal cultural icons from the early 1960s like Seven Days in May and Doctor Strangelove.43 Nor can there be any doubt that far right groups like Robert De Pugh’s Minutemen did in fact fantasize about fighting a guerrilla war against the establishment. Two books, The John Franklin Letters (by an anonymous author) and Get Ye Up into the High Mountains by the Reverend Dallas Roquemore, capture the mentality of many of these far right would-be Che Guevaras. The John Franklin Letters was premised on the idea that after the U.S. has been betrayed into the hands of UN bureaucrats, a civil war ensues that is led by a paramilitary group called the “Rangers.”44 According to The John Franklin Letters:

The beginning of the end comes in 1963, when the World Health Organization sends in a Yugoslav inspector, under powers granted by the President of the United States, to search any house he chooses. The Yugoslav discovers in the house of a good American a file of anti-Communist magazines, seizes them as deleterious to the mental health of the community, and is shot by the American, who escapes into the woods. But the infiltration continues. By 1970, the United States has become part of the World Authority dominated by the Soviet-Asian-African bloc, and this Authority suspends the country’s right to govern itself because of the “historic psychological genocide” against the Negro race. United Nations administrators, mostly Red Chinese, are sent in to rule. Harlem, triumphant, arises and loots the liquor stores. The city proletariat, its sense of decency destroyed by public housing, begins to raid the suburbs. In short order, twenty million Americans are “done away with,” while the people are subjected to torture by blowtorch and rock-n’-roll, the latter on television.
Meanwhile the good American begins to fight back. As far back as 1967, John Franklin and his friends had been stockpiling rifles. And now they act. Franklin describes in gory detail a total of fourteen patriotic murders: two by fire, one by hammer, one by strangling, two by bow and arrow, one by defenestration, one by drowning and the rest. These brave actions are sufficient to turn the tide – despite the atomic bomb, a huge invasion army, and absolute terror. By 1976, the people all over the world go into the streets, and everywhere Communism falls.45

Roquemore’s Get Ye Up Into the High Mountain served as a training manual both for guerrilla warfare and survivalism and included advice on how to properly mutilate the dead body of the Communist enemy. Like The John Franklin Letters, Roquemore’s book is also premised on a U.S. civil war breaking out sometime around 1970. Although distributed by the far right Liberty Lobby, Get Ye was produced by an extreme rightist organization called The Soldiers of the Cross led by Kenneth Goff. Goff reported that Roquemore, a Baptist Minister, had also worked “with our cadet groups for several years and had developed a corps of young people who can exist in the mountains under the most hazardous conditions.”46

While liberals fretted that the American military top brass was about to launch a rightwing coup d’etat, the notion that the “Eastern Establishment” elite was conspiring to sell the nation out to the UN became an idée fixe inside the far right. Campaigning in the 1962 California Republican primary for governor, Richard Nixon found himself being bombarded with a pamphlet “with the United Nations insignia on the cover, Department of State Publication 7277.” The pamphlet was presented as proof “that the government was about to sign over America’s armed forces to a Soviet Colonel.” In reality it was a typical UN document outlining the idea of the creation of a UN Peace Force sometime in the distant future to help prepare for a world free from atomic weapons. As the current UN assistant general secretary was a Soviet colonel, however, the far right was convinced that the document really revealed a UN plot to disarm America and hand it over to the Russkies.47
A March 1963 Task Force story on a planned U.S. military maneuver codenamed “Operation Water Moccasin” helped launch another panic wave. According to the Army, Water Moccasin was a planned exercise in counter-insurgency involving 2,000 to 3,000 troops – along with “foreign military participation” – that was scheduled to take place over some 2,500 acres in the backwoods of Georgia. Task Force insisted that Water Moccasin was really a cover for “a crash program to disarm the United States of America and make us a province of the United Nations.” The scare set off by Task Force and other far right outlets forced the Army to dramatically limit the scope of the deployment after frantic calls began pouring in to Congressmen about Water Moccasin.

Nor was Water Moccasin the only plot against the Republic. The July 21, 1963 New York Times recorded a host of others:

35,000 Communist Chinese troops bearing arms and wearing deceptively dyed powder-blue uniforms are poised on the Mexican border, about to invade San Diego; the U.S. has turned over – or will at any moment – its Army, Navy and Air Force to the command of a Russian colonel in the United Nations; almost every well-known American or free-world leader is, in reality, a top Communist agent; a U.S. Army guerrilla-warfare exercise in Georgia, called Water Moccasin III, is in actuality a United Nations operation preparatory to taking over our country.48
Del Valle’s papers also provide rare glimpses into the underground world of the far right. He was in contact with the far rightist Col. William P. Gale (Ret.), whom he described as “a natural leader and a fighter and perhaps miscast in a purely political role.” Nonetheless, Gale was “doing a fine job of another sort out there, preparing for the inevitable clash between Christianity and the anti-Christians.”49 Del Valle, however, had problems with Gale and other British Israelites like Wesley Smith. Smith, in particular, was seen as “wildly anti-Catholic.”50 Gale, however, seems to have been considered indispensable. There is also a suggestion that Gale was acting on orders from some unidentified group above him.51
Exactly how much del Valle’s paramilitary network operated in reality – as opposed to Walter Mitty-like fantasy – is hard to determine and many questions remain unanswered.52 It seems undeniable, however, that the DAC was, in fact, committed to building an armed underground resistance movement to the “New World Order” even if the scope of such activity remains highly murky to this day.
Part Four: The DAC and the League of Empire Loyalists

The DAC and LEL were set up within a year of each other; the DAC sometime in mid to late 1953 and the LEL in October 1954. (The LEL’s publication Candour, however, began publishing in late October 1953, almost simultaneous with the DAC’s creation.) There were other intriguing similarities. Like the DAC, the LEL had some leading retired military men in its ranks, most prominently Field-Marshal Lord Ironside, who had headed up the British expedition to overthrow the Soviet government in 1919. Ironside was a member of the LEL’s General Council, along with the Earl of Buchan, Lt. General Sir Balfour Hutchison, Brigadier A.R. Wallis and other retired military men.53 Del Valle was also a friend of Admiral Charles Freeman (Ret.).54 Freeman became the U.S. agent for Kenneth De Courcy’s Intelligence Digest after the war. De Courcy, in turn, had extensive contacts with far-right British military and intelligence circles favored by the LEL.

The LEL’s founder and leader Arthur Keith Chesterton (better known as “A.K.”) was the cousin of the famous writer G.K. Chesterton. A one-time member of Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists (BUF), Chesterton broke with Mosley in 1938. During World War II, he supported England’s efforts against Hitler and thus never had to face the charge of treason that haunted Mosley throughout his postwar career.55 In the late 1940s, Chesterton even held a fairly prestigious job in Lord Beaverbrook’s press empire.
From its inception, the LEL combined “rightwing Tory Empire loyalism and conspiratorial anti-Semitism.”56 Its members regularly heckled speakers and disrupted political meetings, most famously the 1958 Tory Political Conference in Blackpool that culminated in fist fights between League members and Tory stewards. (After that debacle, the Tories implemented strong measures against LEL sympathizers in its ranks.) The LEL also served as the
most important training ground for the next generation of British neo-fascists and extreme loyalists. It contained men like John Tyndall, Martin Webster, Colin Jordan and John Bean, men who, after leaving Chesterton and indulging in the Nazi fantasy, returned (with the exception of Jordan) to provide the leadership of the National Front. Chesterton was the focal point of ‘respectability’ around which these men circulated.57
The journalist George Thayer, who interviewed leading members of the LEL, summarized its program this way: 1) British sovereignty should be maintained at all cost; 2) instead of liquidating its Empire, England should continue to build it; and 3) Third World immigration to England must be stopped. For the LEL

Any tendency towards world government or international alliances that requires a partial relinquishing of British sovereignty is an anathema . . . The UN, NATO, SEATO, CENTO, and the Common Market are all “monster plots to rob Britain of her independence and strength.”58

In November 1954 the DAC’s co-founder Col. Eugene Pomeroy spent eight days in London where he held extensive talks with LEL leaders. Pomeroy told Task Force readers that the DAC and LEL “have in common the driving force of the same ideology.”59 In a more candid 11/10/54 letter to del Valle, Pomeroy reported that the LEL felt that “the Jews seem to exercise even greater influence here over the British Parliament and politicians than they do at home.” The group was firmly convinced that Winston Churchill and his son Randolph (along with Anthony Eden) were “the abject slaves of Bernie Baruch.”

The LEL shared the DAC’s obsession with the “hidden hand.” One 1950s LEL pamphlet, The Menace of World Government, claimed
There is a hidden power, which only to close students of international politics is a revealed power, wielded by a known group of international financial interests, who brought into existence the UN and the International Bank as instruments to secure its further advance to world domination. It has openly declared war on nationhood and racial pride. It approves of every approach, direct or functional, which will render mankind defenseless against its cold war in the West and the hot war in Asia to stampede us into NATO, the European Union, and their projected Pacific counterparts. It uses dread of the H-bomb to try to secure acceptance of its full World Government. Once our sovereignty is abandoned, and we are completely at its mercy, it will drop its disguise as the foe of Russian aggression and betray us to the Soviet conspiracy as surely as it betrayed us at Yalta through the incredible simpleton Roosevelt and his incredible adviser, Alger Hiss. Hiss, let it be known, was only a fugleman. His protectors were powerful men who constituted – and still constitute – the effective hidden government of the United States.

The LEL’s polemics against the “one world order” culminated with the1965 publication of Chesterton’s book, The New Unhappy Lords (NUL). In NUL, Chesterton set out to document a conspiratorial plot by “Money Power” to establish “world tyranny” by using both “Communism and Loan Capitalism as twin instruments with which to subdue and govern, not the British nations alone, but all mankind.”60 NUL quickly went through several editions and it continues to be sold today. Its success led Chesterton’s biographer to remark that A.K’s “extremely doubtful privilege” is “to go down in modern history as the man most responsible for keeping alive, spreading, and developing the British tradition of conspiracy thinking.”61

Writing in seemingly reasonable tones, in NUL Chesterton attacks British foreign policy for the loss of the Suez Canal and other former colonies as well as for the government’s support for Third World immigration. He also criticized British involvement in a “Federated Europe,” the European Common Market, the Treaty of Rome, and any attempt to implement a NAFTA-like “Free Trade Area” that would bring Britain’s tariff policies into line with the Common Market:
This would have meant joining the British economy to competitive economies, and the reservations intended to safeguard the British farmers and overseas producers must soon have been jettisoned, the complementary economy covered by the Imperial Preference system would have been abandoned and the British market flooded by products from Common Market countries with a lower standard of living.62
Chesterton, however, used his critique of what he saw as specific failures by the British establishment to prove that “Money Power’s” hidden hand now pulled England’s strings. His attacks on such elite groups as the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA), the American Council of Foreign Relations (CFR), and the Bilderberger Society as well as on organizations like NATO and the UN, served a larger narrative goal; namely, proving the existence of a vast Jewish conspiracy. In a chapter entitled “Is the Conspiracy Jewish?” he claims that “the major Zionist objective” is no less than “One World.” “Moscow and Peking” were “no more than branch headquarters of the conspiracy” whose “supreme headquarters” for the “overthrow of the West” was actually based in New York. According to A.K.,
World Jewry is the most powerful single force on earth and it follows that all the major policies which have been ruthlessly pursued through the last several decades must have the stamp of Jewish approval.63

Indeed, “when Hitler rebelled against the Money Power,” World Jewry decided to “smash him and his barter system.”64

Not long after the publication of New Unhappy Lords, Chesterton LEL’s played a pivotal role in the 1967 founding of the National Front (NF), England’s most significant postwar far-right party. The NF was established out of a merger of the LEL, the British National Party, the Greater Britain Movement, and the Racial Preservation Society. Chesterton served as the NF’s chairman for its first four years.65 Unlike the DAC-backed Constitution Party, the NF was a real political force until the late 1970s when Margaret Thatcher’s Tory Party stole much of its anti-immigrant thunder and the group spiraled into rapid decline.
Del Valle and Chesterton maintained regular contacts for two decades. In 1962, for example, Chesterton asked del Valle to supply him with contact addresses for American rightists who might be willing to help Candour out of some serious financial problems.66 After Del Valle sent Chesterton some names, Austin Brooks, the LEL’s number two man, then visited the United States in 1963 on a fundraising tour.67 A.K. also sent del Valle updates on his trips to South Africa and Rhodesia.

In 1966 Chesterton asked del Valle to write an introduction to a proposed American edition of NUL that the Chicago-based rightwing publisher Henry Regnery had agreed to issue. Regnery, however, backed out of the deal at the last minute. Chesterton next approached another American conservative publisher, Devin Adair, but it too rejected the book.68 At Chesterton’s request, del Valle searched for yet another American publisher. Through Josephine Beaty, the DAC Vice President and widow of Iron Curtain over America author John Beaty, del Valle found OMNI Press/Christian Book Club located in Hawthorne, California.69 When OMNI’s edition of NUL appeared, it included a short introduction by del Valle that praised Chesterton for bringing the reader “face to face with the fact that a conspiracy to rule the world does exist and that it is rapidly approaching its goal.” NUL also showed that “the powerhouse of this conspiracy resides not in Moscow, nor in London, but in New York.” For del Valle, The New Unhappy Lords was “a treasure house of facts which patriots of all nations can use in the struggle against the Satanic power of the Conspiracy.”

1   2   3   4   5

The database is protected by copyright © 2017
send message

    Main page