World Government and its Secret Institutions

Though written in 1987, Jacques Bordiot’s Le Gouvernement Invisible (The Invisible Government) has lost none of its relevance. The following extract gives an insight into two of the world’s most powerful institutions.


The Bilderberg Group

The Bildberg Group was created by Józef Retinger *, a Jewish adventurer of Polish descent and a high-ranking member of the Swedish Freemasons, and Edward Mandell House (the “colonel”) a member of both the Illuminati and the Synarchic Masters of Wisdom as well as being the founder of the Council on Foreign Relations and a member of the Round Table. In 1946, Retinger was in frequent contact with two Beligain politicians, Paul-Henri Spaak and Paul van Zeeland, who was a member of the European Movement whose aim was to create a “united Europe”. In 1948, Retinger organised the Hague Conference. Among the participants were, notably, Jean Monnet’s Council for a United Europe and Robert Schuman, the “Father of Europe”.

 

Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands was behind the formation of the group. In May 1954, he organised a meeting in Oosterbeek at the Hotel Bilderberg (hence the name of the group). The meeting brought together a hundred or so leaders of different nationalities from various domains: politics, international organisations, high finance, multinational corporations, universities, the press, etc. The Bilderberg Group was born.

Meetings take place at least once a year, in different locations, invariably discreet. Discussions are strictly secret and minutes are never taken. Despite this, various leaks have allowed us to discover the main agenda items routinely proposed for debate: international financial problems; abolition of customs barriers; international economic union; the formation of an international police force with the abolition of national armies; the creation of an international parliament; limitation of state sovereignty delegated to the UN or any other international body.

From 1954 to 1976, Prince Bernhard was the group’s president. Several times he spoke out against national particularities which prevented the establishment of “united Europe”. And in an interview with the Nieuwe Rotterdamsche Courant, published on 2 November 1971, he proposed that parliamentary control be restricted by granting absolute power to national governments and that this power be subject to review every two years by elected representatives on the basis of a report prepared by the government itself, which is tantamount to a collective dictatorship. He also suggested that a hereditary monarchy rule “united Europe” and that this monarchy be subject to review every two years by an organisation similar to that of the United Nations, in other words practically unaccountable.

 

“The naivety with which the prince proposed his candidature was deceptive. His proposition was, in fact, a test to gauge how democrats, weary of their incoherent institutions, reacted to a plan for a federal Western Europe, ruled by a hereditary dictatorship” (Dictionnaire de la Politique française).

The idea of a “hereditary monarchy” enraged the politicians: they broke the “Lockheed scandal” and Prince Bernhard, somewhat shamed, was forced to resign as president of the Bilderberg Group. After several months of uncertainty, the group then resumed its activities.

As with all Rhodes-Stead organisations, the Bildergerg Group is based on the Bavarian Illuminati model of “concentric circles”. The outer circle includes conference members. At these conferences, members of the group come into contact with non-members, the aim being to recruit members or find a suitable cover for the group’s activities. The first “inner circle”, which is reserved for members only, forms the Steering Committee, the membership of which comprises twenty-four Europeans and fifteen Americans.

 

The majority are also members of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), examples being George W Ball, Robert Murphy, Dean Rusk and David Rockefeller. Certain members of the Steering Committee form the second “inner circle”, the Bilderberg Advisory Committee, which is even more exclusive. Regarding this committee, we only know that it comprises European and American members, and that all the American members belong to the CFR, the most notable among them being the general secretary for the US, David Rockefeller. The committee’s president is chosen by one of the members, who is not necessarily the official president of the Bilderberg Group.

According to M. Curtis B. Dall, the Bilderberg Group represents the “global stage” of the two twin organisations, the American CFR and the Royal Institute of International Affairs. M. Dall was writing in 1968. But, since 1973, another institution has been added to this structure.

 *See “Who’s heard of Józef Retingerhttps://geostrategieblog.wordpress.com/2015/10/29/whos-heard-of-jozef-retinger/


The Trilateral Commission

“The Trilateral Commission was founded in 1973 by private citizens from Western Europe, Japan and North America to foster the idea of closer cooperation in the resolution of the common problems facing these three regions of the world. It aims to improve the public’s understanding of these problems and establish the experience and habit of working together in these regions.”

The Trilateral Commission made this convoluted declaration in its “house organ”, Trialogue.  Pierre Hofstetter adds the following details:

“The inaugural meeting of the Trilateral Commission took place in 1973 and was presided by David Rockefeller, grand master of the Council on Foreign Relations. The meeting brought together some two-hundred bankers, financers and politicians from across the world with the view to create a “multinational planning committee”. (The first meeting took place in Tokyo, in October 1973. Its aims were to “modernise the global monetary system”, “radicalise” the so-called poor nations, develop relations with the Communist bloc, and the “international control” of energy resources)”

Referring to an article which appeared in the left-wing Italian newspaper Europea, American journalist, JC Blasdale, wrote on 18 August 1976 in The Review of the News that:

The Trilateral Commission was originally “entirely David Rokefeller’s idea”, according to George S Franklin, the commission’s North American secretary and member of the Council on Foreign Relations. But it was Brzezinski, sometimes dubbed “David’s Kissinger”, who was credited as being the “architect” of the Trilateral Commission. Europea reports that Brzezinski’s idea was for the commission to become “THE MOST POWERFUL FINANCIAL AND INTELLECTUAL GROUP THAT THE WORLD HAS EVER KNOWN…”

This time referring to an article written by the American journalist Rick Braum in the Communist National Guardian, Blasdale then added:

“According to Baum, Trilateral Commission documents indicate that the group suggests that there might be an attempt to include several Communist states in their organisation. During a meeting, the author of the report stated that he did not envisage a ‘new anti-Communist alliance’. In fact, at some point in the future, ‘the most advanced Communist states could choose to join us’.

Thus :

  • The TC is attempting to pull the USSR into its sphere of influence via certain “satellite” states.
  • It supplements the Bilderberg Group, the Council for Foreign Relations, the Institute of International Affairs and other such institutions. The members of the Trilateral Commission are often members of these other institutions. An example is Henry Kissinger.
  • It is another step towards world government.
  • David Rockefeller, chief coordinator of the Council on Foreign Relations, secret leader of the Bildergerg Group, and Founding President of the Trilateral Commission, has substantial resources at his disposal to push for the establishment of world government. Indeed, as demonstrated by recent history, he practically controls the domestic and foreign policy of the entire West and Japan.

 

An example of this : In the US, the Trilateral had got their protégé, Jimmy Carter, into the White House. Then, suddenly, his government became openly hostile to the Shah of Iran, who, up until that point, had been Washington’s chosen man. The motive for this : the unforgiveable crime of having nationalised the Iranian oil industry – and oil is Rokefeller’s domain. Now, if France had allowed Ayatollah Khomeini to reside in Neauphle-le-Château and prepare his revolution – illegally – this was because the Trilateral had placed three of its members in Valéry Giscard d’Estaing’s government, the most notable of whom being the prime minister, Raymond Barre.

Another example : The Falklands crisis, fabricated by the American administration to defeat the Agentinian military dictatorship. Magaret Thatcher, a long-standing member of the Bilderberg Group, received logistical support from Washington, and this explains why her leadership was given such emphasis.

Many more examples could be given.

It is worth noting that the Trilateral is opposed to the democratic system.

Notably, in the Crisis of Democracy, a report published in 1975 by the Trilateral Commission, it is stated that:

“In recent years the operations of the democratic process do indeed appear to have generated a breakdown of traditional means of social control, a delegitimation of political and other forms of authority, and an overload of demands on government, exceeding its capacity to respond”.

The true motive for the Trilateral’s hostility to democracy is clearly stated in the following passage:

“A significant challenge comes from intellectuals and related groups who assert their disgust with the corruption, materialism, and inefficiency of democracy and with the subservience of democratic government to monopoly capitalism.”

So democracy must be abolished, or at least limited, not so much because of the flaws inherent in its utopian ideology, but rather because it allows a particular group of intellectuals to oppose the domination of international finance.


Translated from French

The original author was Jacques Bordiot.

Source: Bordiot, Jacques (1987) Le Gouvernement Invisible (Paris, Avalon), pp 111-15.