DAVID ROCKEFELLER

David Rockefeller (1915-2017):

"Some even believe [the Rockefellers] are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterising my family and me as 'internationalists' conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I'm proud of it."


Member of:

- Steering Committee of the Bilderberg Meetings [Bilderberg Official Website].
- Founder of the Trilateral Comission [Trilateral Official Website].
- Honorary Chairman of the CFR [CFR Official Website].

Other institutions where the Rockefeller family has influence.



"The United Nations Headquarters complex was constructed in stages with the core complex completed between 1948 and 1952. The Headquarters occupies a site beside the East River, on between 17 and 18 acres (6.9 and 7.3 ha) of land purchased from the real estate developer, William Zeckendorf, Sr. Nelson Rockefeller arranged this purchase, after an initial offer to locate it on the Rockefeller family estate of Kykuit was rejected as being too isolated from Manhattan. The US$8.5 million (adjusted by inflation US$84.7 million) purchase was then funded by his father, John D. Rockefeller, Jr. [father of David Rockefeller], who donated it to the city. The Rockefeller family owned the Tudor City Apartments across First Avenue from the site. Wallace Harrison, the personal architectural adviser for the Rockefeller family and brother-in-law to a Rockefeller daughter, served as the Director of Planning for the United Nations Headquarters." [Wikipedia]



"The American Committee on United Europe (ACUE), founded in 1948, was an American organization which sought to counter the Communist threat in Europe by promoting European political integration.

The structure of the organisation was outlined in early summer of 1948 by Donovan and Allen Welsh Dulles by then also reviewing the organization of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). in response to assistance requests by Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi* and Winston Churchill.
The ACUE itself received funding from the Rockefeller and Ford foundations." [Wikipedia] [The Telegraph]




* Fondation de l'ACUE par Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, constitution de l'UPE à Gestaad (du 04 au 05/07/1947) et congrès d'Interlaken (08/09/1948) [Historical Archives of the European Union. Document WL-173]



PS: A question for another day is why the Rockefellers (like the Rothschild) do not appear in the Forbes' list of World Billionaires...

The Former President of Estonia's Last 3200 Tweets Most Frequent Words

Ilves' E in E-stonia stands for "Elites"

There's one thing you have to admit about the President of Estonia, Toomas Hendrik Ilves: he hasn't lied, he has made exactly what he promised he would do during his Presidency of Estonia:

"In foreign policy, he thinks he can fill an important void, serving as the voice for new EU entrants who want to push the EU in two important directions: towards more liberal economics -- he points out that his Estonian Social Democratic Party votes more liberally on economic issues than the German CDU -- and a more pro-U.S. foreign policy." [Cable 06TALLINN582]

And this is exactly what he has done. Of course you could argue that he didn't tell the Estonian citizens, but only the American Embassy, but you can not say he lied...

Ilves is a man of the Elites, and his Presidency has been devoted to work for the Elites.

Well, he has also done two more things: to criticize/attack Russia, sometimes even becoming an obsession (as the President of Estonia, Ilves has mentiones more times Russia than Estonia, in Twitter!), and to defend inmigration. Both things also in the name of the Elites, and both things copying word by word George Soros' discourse, what is not a suprise, as we will say later.

The only question is, now that his Presidency ends, how will the Elites reward him? With the Secretary General of NATO, some position at the European Union or some position in any of their lobbies (Bilderberg, Trilateral -again-, CFR...)?


Ilves relations with the Elites:

Ilves was a member of the Rockefeller-founded Trilateral Commission, what he doesn't hide [President of Estonia Official Website], although he describes it as a "Civic Group" (sic). He is also member of the European Council on Foreign Relations [ECFR Official Website].

Ilves attended, George Soros' wedding. [The Baltic Times]. He, like Soros, demanded of the Eastern Europe countries to accept "its" share of refugees in a speech titled "Europe, tear down your walls!" [Politico], in a conference in the Aspen Institue (a think tank, by the way, funded by Carnegie Corporation, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Gates Foundation, the Lumina Foundation, and the Ford Foundation[Wikipedia]). Ilves said after the Ukraine crisis: "The world order found after the Cold War has been destroyed". [Die Welt]

In the Financial Times article "Estonia president criticises mainstream anti-immigrant sentiment", he praised Merkel's open borders politics: "When I talk about absence of leadership, she [Merkel]’s one of the few people in European politics who’s doing more than sticking her finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing, (...) Clearly, she’s taken a risk on the refugees issue. But why do you have elected politicians? If you just do politics by poll numbers, then a priori you’re not going to get leadership."

About Brexit [MUST READ]

"Corrupt elites always try to persuade people to continue to submit to their dominance in exchange for protection from forces that are even worse. That’s their game. But at some point, they themselves, and their prevailing order, become so destructive, so deceitful, so toxic, that their victims are willing to gamble that the alternatives will not be worse, or at least, they decide to embrace the satisfaction of spitting in the faces of those who have displayed nothing but contempt and condescension for them."

"Instead of acknowledging and addressing the fundamental flaws within themselves, they are devoting their energies to demonizing the victims of their corruption, all in order to delegitimize those grievances and thus relieve themselves of responsibility to meaningfully address them. That reaction only serves to bolster, if not vindicate, the animating perceptions that these elite institutions are hopelessly self-interested, toxic, and destructive and thus cannot be reformed but rather must be destroyed."

"But a major factor is that many people recognize that establishment journalists are an integral part of the very institutions and corrupted elite circles that are authors of their plight. Rather than mediating or informing these political conflicts, journalists are agents of the forces that are oppressing people. And when journalists react to their anger and suffering by telling them that it’s invalid and merely the byproduct of their stupidity and primitive resentments, that only reinforces the perception that journalists are their enemy, thus rendering journalistic opinion increasingly irrelevant."

"A sizable portion of the establishment liberal commentariat in the West has completely lost the ability to engage with any sort of dissent from its orthodoxies or even understand those who disagree. They are capable of nothing beyond adopting the smuggest, most self-satisfied posture, then spouting clichés to dismiss their critics as ignorant, benighted bigots."

"...media reaction to the Brexit vote — filled with unreflective rage, condescension, and contempt toward those who voted wrong — perfectly illustrates the dynamics that caused all of this in the first place. Media elites, by virtue of their position, adore the status quo. It rewards them, vests them with prestige and position, welcomes them into exclusive circles, allows them to be close to (if not wield) great power while traveling their country and the world, provides them with a platform, and fills them with esteem and purpose. The same is true of academic elites, financial elites, and political elites. Elites love the status quo that has given them, and then protected, their elite position."

"They are so persuaded of their own natural superiority that any factions who refuse to see it and submit to it prove themselves, by definition, to be regressive, stunted, and amoral."

"West’s establishment credibility is dying, and its influence is precipitously eroding — all deservedly so. The frenetic pace of online media makes even the most recent events feel distant, like ancient history. That, in turn, makes it easy to lose sight of how many catastrophic and devastating failures Western elites have produced in a remarkably short period of time."

"Elites can’t stop, or even affect, any of these movements because they are, at bottom, revolts against their wisdom, authority, and virtue."

“The Los Angeles Times’s Vincent Bevins, in an outstanding and concise analysis, wrote that “both Brexit and Trumpism are the very, very wrong answers to legitimate questions that urban elites have refused to ask for 30 years”; in particular, “since the 1980s the elites in rich countries have overplayed their hand, taking all the gains for themselves and just covering their ears when anyone else talks, and now they are watching in horror as voters revolt.” The British journalist Tom Ewing, in a comprehensive Brexit explanation, said the same dynamic driving the U.K. vote prevails in Europe and North America as well: “the arrogance of neoliberal elites in constructing a politics designed to sideline and work around democracy while leaving democracy formally intact.””


"Because of how generally satisfied they are with their lot, they regard with affection and respect the internationalist institutions that safeguard the west’s prevailing order: the World Bank and IMF, NATO and the west’s military forces, the Federal Reserve, Wall Street, the EU. While they express some piecemeal criticisms of each, they literally cannot comprehend how anyone would be fundamentally disillusioned by and angry with these institutions, let alone want to break from them. They are far removed from the suffering that causes those anti-establishment sentiments. So they search and search in vain for some rationale that could explain something like Brexit, or the establishment-condemning movements on the right and left, and can find only one way to process it: these people are not motivated by any legitimate grievances or economic suffering, but instead they are just broken, ungrateful, immoral, hateful, racist and ignorant."


These are some excerpts from the best analysis I have read so far about the revolt against the elites. This article is an absolutely MUST READ.

Brexit is Only the Latest Proof of the Insularity and Failure of Western Establishment Institutions.

A Bilderberg look into the current situation

"Losers have votes, too. That is what democracy means — and rightly so. If they feel sufficiently cheated and humiliated, they will vote for Donald Trump, a candidate for the Republican party’s presidential nomination in the US, Marine Le Pen of the National Front in France or Nigel Farage of the UK Independence party. There are those, particularly the native working class, who are seduced by the siren song of politicians who combine the nativism of the hard right, the statism of the hard left and the authoritarianism of both.

Above all, they [the economic losers] reject the elites that dominate the economic and cultural lives of their countries: those assembled last week in Davos for the World Economic Forum. The potential consequences are frightening. Elites need to work out intelligent responses. It might already be too late to do so. The projects of the rightwing elite have long been low marginal tax rates, liberal immigration, globalisation, curbs on costly “entitlement programmes”, deregulated labour markets and maximisation of shareholder value. The projects of the leftwing elite have been liberal immigration (again), multiculturalism, secularism, diversity, choice on abortion, and racial and gender equality. Libertarians embrace the causes of the elites of both sides; that is why they are a tiny minority.

In the process, elites have become detached from domestic loyalties and concerns, forming instead a global super-elite. It is not hard to see why ordinary people, notably native-born men, are alienated. They are losers, at least relatively; they do not share equally in the gains. They feel used and abused. After the financial crisis and slow recovery in standards of living, they see elites as incompetent and predatory. The surprise is not that many are angry but that so many are not."


And the following passage may give a glimpse on why the elites are so eagerly defending open borders for the refugees:

"Finally, the share of immigrants in populations has jumped sharply. It is hard to argue that this has brought large economic, social and cultural benefits to the mass of the population. But it has unquestionably benefited those at the top, including business."

Martin Wolf, in the Financial Times.

PS: What he says about Trump: "Mr Trump, Republican ideologues complain, is not a true conservative. That is indeed the point. He is a populist."

The Elites Want More Refugees

"IMF says refugee influx could provide EU economic boost.

Migration into Europe could lift GDP via greater state spending and long-term boost to jobs market with negative effects short-lived, says report.

The IMF called on EU governments to help refugees into the job market by easing restrictions on taking up work during the asylum application. Other suggestions include wage subsidies to private employers and temporary exceptions to minimum or entry-level wages, as well as startup funds for immigrant entrepreneurs." [The Guardian]

This links with two previous articles we wrote: about Refugees (read the reference about Peter Sutherland) and about Merkel being praised by the elites media.

Why TPTB ♥ Merkel?

The Economist (owned by the Rothschild and other families), says Merkel is "the indisensable European" for her Open Doors policy for refugees.

Look around Europe, and one leader stands above all the rest: Angela Merkel https://t.co/BTC2RPkYgW pic.twitter.com/93K49UWW9z

— The Economist (@TheEconomist) 8 novembre, 2015

But why have "the powers that be", fallen so madly in love with Merkel? This could be the reason:

"The German Chancellor told the Funke consortium of newspapers: "The right to political asylum has no limits on the number of asylum seekers."

"As a strong, economically healthy country we have the strength to do what is necessary" and ensure every asylum seeker gets a fair hearing", she said." [Sky]


"On Tuesday last week, Germany declared that any Syrian who reaches the country can claim asylum there. In the days that followed, 25,000 arrived at Munich central station and that number is growing fast. Some trains from Austria have been diverted to other German cities to ease the pressure. Merkel now wants to use her clout to distribute these refugees around Europe — arguing that EU plans to resettle 160,000 may not be sufficient." [The Spectator]

Some "left" media, like The Guardian, try to sell us Merkel's policy as opposed to liberalism: "Confronted by forces that would overwhelm British leaders, the woman the Greek left (and many on the British left who should know better) mistakenly accuse of being the leading advocate of conservative neoliberalism has stood up to be counted. Being the country to which so many want to migrate should be a source of pride, she says. She wants to keep Germany and Europe open, to welcome legitimate asylum seekers in common humanity, while doing her very best to stop abuse and keep the movement to manageable proportions."

But the truth is completely the opposite: liberals want migrants to come, as Peter Sutherland revealed.