MUST WATCH!!! How the world really works and who controls it: Sullivan & Cromwell, Allen Dulles, the origin of the world order, and the neocons.

I’ll try to keep this brief, although I could easily turn it into 20 or even 100 pages with all the connections to what I’ve written previously. It ties together so many dots that I’d argue it’s one of the best lectures I’ve ever listened to.

First, I’d like to connect it to my most recent post:

Reinhard Gehlen & His Organization: Anti-Fascist Archives — The Nazis didn’t lose; they simply merged with the American-led West. A bit of Polish perspective.

In that post, I discuss the truth about World War II and how the Nazis didn’t lose but rather merged with the American-led West. I aimed to reveal the reality and disillusion people about the myth of post-war justice and the idea that "we," the West, are always the good guys. Only by understanding the truth can we look objectively at history and grasp how the world really works - which I try to explain in that post.

While the video in that post focuses on specific Nazis and how the post-war merging happened, this lecture looks at the broader picture. Instead of asking how it happened, it explains why it happened.

I find it hard to pick a specific part to highlight because literally every minute of the lecture is so insightful and connects to so many broader themes. Let’s start with the myth of the “magical city of London” controlling everything - a theory popular among people like Alex Krainer and Tom Luongo. This lecture effectively debunks that idea, showing instead that it’s not some mythical London cabal, but America and Wall Street driving these global events.

While they did collaborate with the British, I’ve explained before how they also worked against them - such as helping the Germans engineer the Soviet revolution as a strategic move against British interests. Contrary to what people like Krainer claim, the Soviet revolution was not orchestrated by British - it was supported by both Americans and Germans to force the British to seek U.S. help in World War I. That, in turn, allowed the U.S. to extract concessions from Britain.

Although Britain technically “won” the First World War, it emerged weakened and had to make those concessions. That’s precisely why America helped orchestrate the Soviet revolution - it wasn’t about ideology, but strategy. Then, again acting against British interests, the U.S. supported Hitler in the lead-up to World War II same as the Soviets. Just as America had helped the Germans halt the Eastern Front during WWI to weaken Britain, later they, just like Soviets, helped Hitler to start WWII, further draining British power.

After WWI, Britain may have been on the winning side, but it was seriously weakened. American strategists realized that another war - regardless of outcome - would sap Britain’s strength even more. The Soviets, meanwhile, saw another war as a chance to spread their revolution. The British held an empire, but the U.S. wanted to become one. Their goal was to ignite a war and take the British Empire for themselves - and that’s exactly what they did. The Soviets, by participating, achieved their aim of expanding revolutionary influence.

Now, for all the Nazi fanboys who believe that Hitler and the Nazis were fighting “Jewish bankers” - in reality, they were working for and being used by American bankers, or more accurately, banksters. Instead of fighting the banking oligarchy, the Nazis were tools of that very system. Quite a twist.

This also explains my recent post and why, after the war, the Nazis merged with the American-led West - because they had been working for them and serving their interests all along. The truth about the war is perfectly captured in this short part of the lecture:

18:57

During the war, they would use these to supply themselves, and also they'd come to these patent agreements that would prevent the United States from producing technologies because German corporations had patents on them. And strangely, even though it was obviously total war, they had to respect these—the laws of multinational corporations apparently trumped the necessities of a country at war because they would allow these German patents to halt vital materials. To admit that, American aid, and John Foster, was all he did, the legal work for a lot.

It was total war, yet somehow the laws governing multinational corporations remained above it all. This reveals a deeper truth about the world and how it really works. Even then, the laws and interests of multinational corporations took precedence over national interests. So the question arises: who truly rules the world - nation-states or multinational corporations - if corporate interests consistently override those of the state?

This realization gives you a completely different perspective on the world, doesn’t it? And it's not about some imaginary, magical “City of London,” but rather about firms like Sullivan & Cromwell and powerful multinational corporations. This system truly originated in America.

While the first modern markets and corporations began in the Netherlands and then moved to England, the system reached its final form in the United States with trusts like Rockefeller’s Oil Trust and Carnegie’s Steel Trust.

What I didn’t know - and what this great lecture explained - is that these trusts received legal and structural support from Sullivan & Cromwell, which helped transform them into the multinational corporations we see today.

4:11

Okay, so he's after the Civil War, Cromwell's kind of taking over. How, how is he running? You said here he was helped uh J.P. Morgan create U.S. Steel. Yes, that, did they create, there was this at the time, was this anti-trust legislation? So they created this new thing called a multinational, I mean a new thing called a corporation was actually just to get around this trust thing. And this was a U.S. Steel was like a steel trust that was made with, you know, basically the most powerful or like I think there were two of them, steel companies in the United States. So they'd like JFK went up against U.S. Steel during the '60s, where he was killed because they were cheating the people with their monopoly. So, and uh Cromwell was criminal basically, and he gave him the idea and he did all like the legal work. That was kind of like what he would do is they would have states that were trying to pass regulations, so they would create these corporations would disband and create a new corporation in the state that didn't have those regulations because criminal had already like got the people to pass the laws that make it a corporate haven, places like New Jersey. They still have this thing where the reason why all those Wall Street firms don't pay taxes is because they're like a lot of them are incorporated in New Jersey where like they passed these laws that they wouldn't have to barely pay any taxes and they could do whatever they wanted. So, uh, as a servant to corporate power, he rose and Seldom probably became the top Wall Street law firm.

Here is interesting part:

9:42

Cromwell created Panama. He created the Panama Canal. It was like this: he was working for this French company that had built the Suez Canal, but then went bankrupt building the Panama Canal. I guess like 15,000 poor Black workers had died during the French project—that part was like left out, and they found it out recently—basically almost like slave labor conditions. And, um, Cromwell also had, I guess, America always planned to build a canal through Nicaragua, and especially the Southern senators had always favored this thing because they wanted to be able to ship their products cheaply to California, I guess. And so he had to go up against the powerful Nicaraguan canal lobby, and just by like getting close to William McKinley through his right-hand man, Mark Hanna, by bribing various congressmen, he hired journalist Roger Farnham to set up a PR firm. Farnham would go on to be the vice president of National City Bank, which is Citibank today, and the president of the Haiti Railway. Citibank has been involved with like so much crazy bad stuff over the years, uh, like during the Iraq-Contra era and long before that. Anyways, Cromwell caused riots in Paris, but he like mastered this scheme where like his big investors would get paid back, and the small investors would get like barely anything, which is what happens over and over again every time things crash or whatever. It's always like people that invest their savings in there that gets wiped out, and like big corporations always get their money back. And Stalin and Cromwell always managed to break things that way. They've done it again and again.

It's like when you read this book, it's like every time, you know, history repeats itself, and the same people with  Sullivan & Cromwell were defending back in 100 years ago, or the same people that like screwed everybody over during the crash of 2008, this stuff is still going on. I mean, Sullivan & Cromwell is still the most powerful corporate law firm.

This shows that it’s not some magical, mystical British force or the City of London controlling everything - it’s America and firms like Sullivan & Cromwell. The heart of this capitalist banking cancer isn’t in Britain or London, but in America and New York City.

Here is a segment explaining the end of the war and the origins of the Cold War:

22:10

There were these two competing factions in the US. You had the FDR faction, or especially the people to the left of him, like uh Henry Morgenthau, who thought they wanted to crack down on all these people, lock them in jail, etc. And then, of course, there was the Dulles faction, which was the one that would have been locked in jail. So obviously, they took the opposite approach. They were supporting, they supported Hitler. They thought FDR was like a commie, and they were basically completely, like during the war, John Foster Dulles was completely pro-German during the whole thing, and he just sort of disguised it under, he became a spokesman for the Federal Council of Churches and the six pillars of peace, and he was like, "We have to get rid of the idea of demonizing certain leaders," like, and he'd find, he made Hitler, Mussolini, and but then after the war, he became the prime person who created like the demonic view of the Soviet Union, where everything they did was sinister and evil. Like, if they wanted peace, it's just a trick, like a dastardly thing to like get you to drop your guard. If they're aggressive, respond to America aggressively, you know, it's like, "They clearly want to conquer the world," right? Right. So basically, yes, they were traitors out, and they would have been, some people think, I think really FDR, he was kind of more pragmatic. So there's really no like what he would have done or if he could have, would have prevented the Cold War, if he would actually lock the people up. But he definitely told like his, his friends that he would do it, so like they believed it. But actually, after, as soon as, before the war ended, FDR died, Truman came in, and the Dulles, the anti-Soviet Dulles faction completely went over because after, it was really everyone at the State Department supported the Dulles, were actuated, and like the only could get some people to like do what he said while he was alive, but as soon as they were, he was dead, it was sort of like, "Of course, they're gonna rebuild Germany and not punish them," and the pro-German faction that was like more linked with corporate America totally took over the American foreign policy. They never let go since. Yeah, hence the Cold War.

Here, we touch on a subject that almost no one knows about - one that I previously addressed in my post on fascist military coup attempts.

24:18

The Dulles faction, did they have anything to do with that, um, with the Business Plot in 1934? I specifically find that they did, but it was their friends who were involved in it, so I would not be at all surprised if they did know about it because it was like they'd worked for J.P. Morgan off and on for many years. And like the Du Ponts were another like super pro-German American corporation that they didn't work for, but I'm sure he, I'm sure he probably supported the coup against FDR if he was in on it. So did General MacArthur, right? He was like another coup candidate, but unfortunately, they went to Smedley Butler, and he, although he was like kind of a right-winger, that was going way too far for him, and he exposed it. But the corporate backers never got punished.

Business Plot - Wikipedia

The Business Plot, also called the Wall Street Putsch and the White House Putsch, was a political conspiracy in 1933, in the United States, to overthrow the government of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and install Smedley Butler as dictator.

Funny how no one knows about the fascist coup attempt in America. No history books mention it, no Discovery Channel documentaries cover it - it’s been completely erased from the past. Yet it seems like a pretty important part of history, doesn’t it? Strange, isn’t it?

25:19

Hitler passed these laws that you, you couldn't take money out of Germany. You had to reinvest your profits. Like if you were, let's say, Ford, you had to reinvest your profits in Germany. And so, like, there were two main things you could invest in. One was illegal armaments. The other one was this "voluntary Aryanization" in quotes, because it wasn't actually voluntary, but just on the surface. Before they, like, just came later, they moved to involuntary. But the beginning was this uh voluntary organization where basically German firms would buy up Jewish-owned businesses for pennies on the dollar. They would buy it using bonds floated out of the international market by people like the Dillon Read investment bank, which is as important as Sullivan & Cromwell in like the history of of influential people that came out of Dillon Read that later became foreign policy planners. It's like eight people, including like the three main ones: uh William Draper, James Forrestal, and Paul Nitze. But um during the '30s, and William Draper was especially above this voluntary organization. So basically, because you could buy a business for less than it's actually worth, that generates huge profits for whoever it was, big business basically. It's kind of like the '80s with hostile takeovers, but then you had this extra element where it's behind the scenes. You have the Gestapo pressuring the company to sell at like a super low price because they would like literally lock the owners up in jail and, you know, beat them up and be like, "Do you want to get sent to the death camp, or do you want to sell off your company?" And so that was like a billion-dollar businesses. Like the German owners took over the Jewish, all the Jewish business-owned businesses in Germany. And then after the war began, that process was expanded out all over Europe, where they just like looted all of not just Jewish business, but especially Jewish businesses all over uh the areas that they occupied. And American companies, and it was the American investors, they were, they would put these bonds, these German bonds on the market, and that's where the money was actually going, was for these Aryanization deals. You know, it's like Americans like William Draper, and John Foster was involved in doing the legal work for a lot of these bonds that were the ones giving them the pennies to buy the company.

You have something here: "After the war, the Dulles brothers made sure nobody was punished." Yes, and that was a, that's another theme of uh Christopher's classic, "Let's Split This Up," bad beast, is like it's the story of two times the Dulles brothers swoop in to avoid Germany having to pay for its crimes. But like really in World War I, their crimes were very minor, and really they were more other, it was very equal like what they were doing versus what the Allies were doing, because they lost, they had to pay for all the damage they caused basically. But after World War II, the Germans had committed this massive genocide, had killed like possibly up to like 50 million people, and the Dulles brothers again moved in to save the corporations that backed Hitler and to save the SS war criminals and to save all of the different fascist death squads that they, like for example, the Ukrainians who are in the news today, whatever that was, when they, I think like 20,000 of them or more were like smuggled out, settled in Canada, America, Argentina, Australia, places all over the world.

So there's that element, and then there's like the list of, he would, all the German companies that he was in business with before the war, he made sure that they had made huge profits off of slave labor, and because they didn't have to feed their workers, and they would just die, and the assets would send more slaves. So that was hugely profitable. The Japanese were also bigger than that, and they made sure that all those German companies that it was covered up what they'd done through the war, that they're all good Germans, and really deep in their hearts they'd opposed Hitler, but they unfortunately, you know, made huge sums of money off slavery and genocide, but they were still the good Germans because all the really bad Germans and their vines, you know, communist people opposed Hitler, right? Was there, was there similar things going on with the Japanese uh or no? Oh, absolutely. And that I wrote an article earlier this year based on the "Gold Warriors" by the the Seagraves, the husband and wife writers, this Peggy and Sterling Seagrave, and that was like a similar story where the Japanese had like looted all this gold and made these huge fortunes off slave labor that America and like told the world that like they were totally bankrupt after the war for like a sizable cut that the CIA used to finance its covert operations, just like they seized a certain amount of the Nazi gold and then let them keep a lot of the rest of it. And that is really the reason why Germany and Japan became, were able to like rise back up to becoming these huge economic superpowers that they were about the 1980s was because of this like they're allowed to keep their their loot hidden and they use it to rebuild their industries so there was even competing with America and Sullivan Cromwell actually was ticket full sir supposedly selling criminal actually did the legal work for these huge Japanese corporations that are now household wars in the 70s to bring him on the world stage for the 80s like Sony's people like that.

Funny how Hitler talked about evil American Jewish bankers, while in reality he was working with them - and, in fact, working for them. Funny how nothing has changed since then. Even back then, politicians like Hitler were full of nonsense - saying one thing and doing the complete opposite in practice.

The lecture also touched on something I wrote about before: the post-war rebuilding of Germany and Japan. Their success didn’t come because they were somehow better or inherently superior, but because they benefited from war loot - gained through war crimes - which the Americans helped them keep and launder.

I had previously posted about this in a video, mostly focused on Germany, but I also touched on Japan’s example:

Himmler’s Fourth Reich – SS Assets Saved in a Global Conspiracy (German Neocon Project and the European Union)

Now, let’s talk about the similarities to today.

35:51 

For talking about the origin of the CIA, we should talk about the origin of the American media, which is another book that Christopher talked about, where basically all the most, all the heads of these major media corporations were all OSS former psychological warfare experts. And that's like a vital element of Cold War history that they all forget. It's like, that's why you shouldn't trust the media because it's basically they're waging psychological warfare on you to get you to support America's foreign policy and turn the world on its head, where like you think America is just trying to defend itself and that, you know, aggressors are coming at it from everywhere, but really it's America that was the aggressor during the Cold War, and the Soviets were just scared. And this is C.D. Jackson, right? Henry, yes, C.D. Jackson, Henry Luce, people like that. Um, Arthur Bliss Lane at Reader's Digest, he's another important one. And they also sat on these secret committees of like Operation Bloodstone, which was this bringing all these fascists into the American detail of Gentia and putting in all these universities and putting them in the media and putting them in foreign policy planning. That should be history. It should be more famous than Operation Paperclip, but I think I've only read Christopher Simpson talking about it. And Arthur Bruce Lane was, you know, a lot of these guys were on that. So it's kind of like there's only 200 of these international people with experience in international business that work for these multinational corporations, and they made up the American foreign policy elite, and they all know each other, and a lot of them, the sons of the rich, join the intelligence agencies during the war so they don't get killed. So all these media empires were controlled by the OSS, basically former OSS adults could just call up any, any newspaper in the country, just be like, "Fire this guy here, he's talking too much about what's going on in Guatemala," about how our brand is good. "Fire this guy here in Japan, he's like revealing too much about what MacArthur is up to or the CIA behind the scenes is controlling the media."

Funny enough, most people in the West who talk about the horrors of communism still live within the very paradigm, the zeitgeist, the matrix created by the psychological warfare orchestrated by the American deep state.

38:08

Once Eisenhower came into power, he appointed John Foster Dulles as Secretary of State because after the war, John Foster Dulles had positioned himself as a top GOP foreign policy expert. So why did he, was he there for like the birth of the UN, to like ruin that? And so the Russians called them like uh the worst imperialist. It's never that he actually took that as a point of pride and bragged about it. It was always like, like the Soviets tried to expose all their Dulles brothers' business ties to the Nazis, and so that after that, no American journalist could say anything about it because then the Dulles brothers would be like, "You're towing the Moscow line," like today how they try to do it by calling things Russian propaganda, like, "Oh, there are Nazis in Ukraine, all your that's just Russian propaganda," or, "You must be a bunch of propagandists if you say this."

Funny how people now compare Western propaganda to Communist propaganda, when in reality, today’s Western propaganda isn’t like Communist propaganda at all - it’s the same as the old Western anti-Communist propaganda.

41:46

And so then, when Eisenhower came in, he was like, "Yes, go for this coup." They falsely claimed that Mossadegh was a communist because he would not ban the communist party, and that was a major American foreign policy at the time, which was that to be declared democratic, you had to ban communists from the government, right? Even if they were popular. So the votes, even if like say Congress could win like a certain number of votes, they shouldn't be allowed to serve. And a lot of people, like, they worked themselves into Congress, but they're like, "No." I mean, especially since the communists were siding with Mossadegh, he's like, "No, I'm not gonna ban them from power." And so they were like, "You know, reds are about to take over Iran," even though Mossadegh could work with America to force the Soviets to leave northern Iran because they had been through the war, they'd been allowed to occupy northern Iran to make sure that the oil supplies wouldn't be cut off by the British. And then after the war, they're like, "You know, get out of here as soon as possible," like, you know, creating a stereotype as if, you know, they're about to take over the whole country. And so then they got them to withdraw, and then but then they forced Mossadegh out too, like years later, a couple of few years later.

This part is funny because doesn’t it remind you of the current situation with the far-right and parties like the AfD? Just like before, in the West it didn’t matter that people voted for communists - to be considered democratic, those votes had to be ignored. Similarly, today, no matter how many people vote for far-right parties like the AfD, those votes must be ignored in the name of democracy.

It’s funny how history repeats itself, but in different directions. People are now outraged about banning far-right parties like the AfD and ignoring the votes of those who supported them, claiming it’s undemocratic - as if this were something new. Yet, the same thing was done with communist parties in the West in the past. So, it’s nothing new.

Most people don’t even know this history. And even if they do, they justify it by saying communism was evil, so it was okay to suppress it. Now, people accuse far-right parties like the AfD of being evil, but claim that suppressing them is not okay. What’s happening now is nothing new for the West - but hardly anyone realizes it.

How ironic it is that people lack knowledge and self-awareness about these recurring patterns.

43:08

And that was when like Al Dulles wasn't even at the CIA, but he was working behind the scenes with the Office of Policy Coordination, and he was working at what point? He went around all these different corporate heads and got them to like give them millions of dollars to like break the Italian election in 1948. And then Iran was the big example where they set up these, you know, they waged psychological warfare, they carried out false flag terror attacks where they would, they had people pretend to be communists who would attack religious leaders, and then the religious leaders would denounce the communists. And then they bribed this military guy to like side with the Shah against Mossadegh, and eventually after like what failed a coup attempt, they got, they had a successful coup attempt. It was badged by Teddy Roosevelt's grandson, Kermit Roosevelt. So Mossadegh was thrown out, the Shah was brought in, and the CIA and Israel helped him train like this brutal internal secret police, the SAVAK, which would use all these horrible methods of torture to keep people in line.

Now, let’s compare Iran to Ukraine: “false flag terror attacks” = Bucha, “successful coup attempt” = Maidan Revolution, “brutal internal secret police, the SAVAK” = Azov. All of this happening now is nothing new.

44:43

Finding ways to do illegal business with Germany against the wishes of the American and British governments to regulate it or whatever, but that was like, but Allen's specialty, that's why corporate law, that's what they have in common with the CIA is that they set up these fronts and these things all over the world and move money in secret. And well, it's funny, they always accuse uh, you know, communism of being internationalist and and being conspiratorial, but that is exactly what they are doing. They have no regard for their own national government, and they are operating in total secret. Well, of course, the KGB was an intelligence agency, like when it came to spying, they were actually better than the Americans, but they never mounted these coups all over the world. So when people claim it's like equal signs, like no, it never happened. It was never like, they just claimed that they were like, whenever our nationalists would take power, they're like, "No, they're secretly controlled by the Kremlin. We don't need proof, we know just because if their goals are in line with the Kremlin," then they just say that they were criminal institutions just because they wanted to like nationalize their things.

In response to similarities with today’s world, the argument goes: “No, they’re secretly controlled by the Kremlin. We don’t need proof - we know it just because their goals align with the Kremlin’s.” For example, Hungary’s goals align with Putin’s, so they must be controlled by Putin - no proof needed. This ignores the fact that nothing is new here and simply rehashes old Western propaganda playbooks.

Everything I’ve written about in this post, all those similarities, was best summarized at the end of this lecture with the following fragment:

47:27

They tried to claim that the sign of the Soviet split was just a big fake. Like I was saying earlier, it's like Michael Parenti does this great routine about it, where you interpret everything the Soviet Union does as bad—whether it's aggressive, peaceful, or even if they do nothing at all. It's just, "They're trying to lull you into a false sense of security." The decision is already made, and they're just trying to set you up so they can secretly have an advantage.

It's the same thing with the fracking issue here. That’s even become a Vladimir Putin thing, because people absolutely - well, that’s why they bring it back. It’s so useful to say, “Oh, of course everyone opposed to the war in Syria is just a Russian agent. Everybody exposing what we're doing in Ukraine is a Russian agent. Black Lives Matter protesters? They're just Russian agents.” Everything is just framed as a Russian thing to divide our "perfect" democracy - which is a joke.

Because the average person doesn’t actually want all these wars. They just ignore us. Average people don’t want corporations to get super rich while the rest of us are super poor - but they just ignore us. So it’s not really a democracy when you can only vote for two parties that both support capitalism and both support war. One is just more openly racist than the other.

That’s basically what it’s come down to. So, they have to create this second Cold War.

In the end, it’s both funny and ironic how people compare what is happening today in the West to Communism, while in reality, what is happening now is nothing new for the West. It’s not similar to what the Soviets did, but rather what the West itself did in the past to fight communism. This irony is so strong that I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.

What we have today is not the West turning into Communism, but the West reverting to its own old strategies used to combat communism. The fact that people say we are turning into Communism only shows how little they truly understand the real world.

Thanks to everyone who stuck with me until the end of my post. And, as always…

“Knowledge will make you be free.”

― Socrates

+

“Knowledge isn’t free. You have to pay attention.”

― Richard P. Feynman

=

“Freedom is not free, you need to pay attention.”

― Grzegorz Ochman

Please pay enough attention, or we will all be screwed. God bless you all.

“The worst forms of tyranny, or certainly the most successful ones, are not those we rail against but those that so insinuate themselves into the imagery of our consciousness, and the fabric of our lives, as not to be perceived as tyranny.”

― Michael Parenti

“The enormous gap between what US leaders do in the world and what Americans think their leaders are doing is one of the great propaganda accomplishments of the dominant political mythology.”

― Michael Parenti

“The West is despicable/scummy/lousy.”

― Józef Piłsudski