Check Your Pattern
David Rockefeller’s meeting with Nikita Khrushchev, the KGB-influenced removal of Khrushchev and Rockefeller’s meetings with Alexei Kosygin
By Nicholas Hagger (Copyright © 29 December 2014)
Editors note: This is a response to Will Banyan’s earlier article, Check Your Sources, Gentlemen! (Part 2).
It is more than ten years since my book The Syndicate first appeared. It provided a context for the activities of the New World Order and focused on the evidence. More evidence has since come through for David Rockefeller’s meeting with Khrushchev on 29 July 1964, and this meeting can now be seen within the context of Rockefeller’s many meetings with Brezhnev’s Premier Alexei Kosygin after the downfall of Khrushchev in October 1964.
On pp.ix–x of The Syndicate I wrote that a judgment has to be made as to whether the New World Order – the elitist, self-serving attempt at world government as distinct from a democratic World State – works for the good of everyone or for the interests of the few. I wrote: “In covering so much ground in one book I realize it often makes assumptions and judgments that may seem questionable, particularly in the case of recent events. As in any court of law, some of the evidence for the Syndicate and its actions will be less than satisfactory – circumstantial, hearsay and inadmissible. But a judgment has to be made.” On pp.275–7 I set out the case for the prosecution and defence and invited the reader to give a verdict. On pp.325–7 I discussed the varying quality of my sources in a ‘Note to the Reader on the Quality of the Sources’.
In The Syndicate I presented (say) a thousand facts like pieces of a jigsaw and fitted them together to convey a picture and pattern. I added 109 pages of ‘Notes/Sources’. I invited the reader to decide whether the whole picture and pattern were accurate. I also invited further scrutiny of the evidence so that readers could be certain of the truth.
We are now looking at just one of the thousand jigsaw pieces and are, for the moment, ignoring the larger pattern. David Rockefeller gives an account of his meeting with Khrushchev on 29 July 1964 in his Memoirs, which arrived too late to be included in The Syndicate (although I was able to add it to the Bibliography of the final proof). He includes a “paraphrase” of the notes his daughter Neva took of the meeting. Neva’s notes (pp.226–231) show that the topics discussed were:
- the Soviet use of Communist parties in Latin America to bring into power governments that favoured the Soviet Union;
- China’s support for North Vietnam/the Vietcong when there should be neutral independence in South Vietnam (which would help Rockefellers’ business interests);
- preventing China from sweeping through Asia (which again would help Rockefellers’ business interests);
- the Soviet interference in Cuba;
- trade – “we feel our position to be jeopardized by the actions of the Soviet Union” (which were hindering Rockefellers’ business interests);
- wartime sacrifices and the weaknesses of capitalism;
- peace – finding “more means of contact through which we may avoid unnecessary and irresponsible conflicts”.
On pp.76–7 of The Syndicate I wrote that Khrushchev was ousted because of his failure to advance Rockefellers’ oil and banking interests. The second, third and fifth of the above topics covered Khrushchev’s failure to advance Rockefellers’ oil and banking/business interests.
David Rockefeller says he visited Russia in 1964 to attend a Dartmouth Conference in Leningrad. The first Dartmouth Conference took place in Dartmouth College, New Hampshire, in 1962, and was under the umbrella of the Bilderberg meetings which had begun in 1954. The overt aim of the Dartmouth conference of 1964 was to improve the understanding between the superpowers, but along with the Bilderberg Group and Trilateral Commission, both Rockefeller projects, its real aim was to further a one-world government that would advance Rockefellers’ business interests. A number of sources link the Dartmouth conferences to the Bilderberg meetings. Emanuel Josephson refers to the 1964 Dartmouth Conference as David Rockefeller’s “Bilderberger ‘Dartmouth group’ to discuss politics and stimulate Communist Russo-Chinese business for the branch of his Chase Manhattan Bank he had opened six months earlier, in Hong Kong, for the specific purpose of trading with the Communists” (The “Federal” Reserve Conspiracy and Rockefeller, p.293).
The conventional account of Khrushchev’s downfall has Brezhnev considering Khrushchev’s removal in March 1964 and again in June 1964. The conspirators, who included Leonid Brezhnev (then a member of the Central Committee), Alexander Shelepin (then ex-Head of the KGB), Vladimir Semichastny (then Head of the KGB) and Alexei Kosygin (then First Deputy Chairman of the Council of Ministers) struck on 12–14 October 1964 when they ousted Khrushchev for policy failures and erratic behaviour. The question is whether David Rockefeller’s unsatisfactory meeting with Khrushchev (when three of his business-interest topics were blocked) influenced the actions of the conspirators. Unsurprisingly the sources dry up regarding the input of a Westerner into the KGB-influenced conspiracy. As we have just seen, two of the conspirators had strong KGB links – one was the then Head of the KGB – and the KGB would have made sure that there were no evidential sources they wanted to exclude regarding the coup.
On p.76 of The Syndicate I quoted a speech by Khrushchev that was reported in the Cominform weekly journal of 11 February 1955: “Comrades deputies, on the instruction of the Central Committee of the CPSU [Communist Party of the Soviet Union] and the Council of Elders, I wish….” This Council of Elders has never been explained. Who were the Elders? Bearing in mind that in 1925 Stalin sold Rockefellers a half interest in Russian oil in return for their funding his Five-Year Plans (as described in another piece of the jigsaw in The Syndicate, p.22), a deal that Stalin’s daughter Svetlana said she was unaware of during my long meeting with her, could it be that a Rockefeller had been one of these Elders ever since Stalin’s early days? Who knows? This speculation is unsourced but raises the closeness of mysterious Elders to Central Committee members such as Brezhnev.
If we return to the pattern in the jigsaw and look at one of the other pieces, we find that David Rockefeller was very active in his dealings with Khrushchev’s business successor Alexei Kosygin throughout the following decade. Rockefeller says in his Memoirs (p.237) that he “visited Moscow almost every year during the 1970s, either for Dartmouth Conference meetings or on bank business”. He says his principal government contact was Alexei Kosygin, who had become Premier. Kosygin had “participated in the coup that overthrew Nikita Khrushchev in 1964” but had lost the power struggle in the Kremlin to Leonid Brezhnev “and had been subordinated to the position of Premier – the chief operating officer of the Soviet economy”. Rockefeller says, “My conversations with Kosygin were always pragmatic and business-oriented (p.238).” Their first such discussion took place in 1971 after a Dartmouth meeting in Kiev, and Kosygin was always looking for “areas of co-operation”.
So the pattern shows that Rockefeller tried to sort out his business interests with Khrushchev in July 1964, was blocked, and then benefited from Khrushchev’s removal as “almost every year during the 1970s” he was able to sort out his business interests with Kosygin, who replaced Khrushchev in his role as Premier. Did Rockefeller influence Khrushchev’s removal by speaking to one of the conspirators after July 1964? I know from personal experience that such conspiracies are not fully sourced: I was involved in planning a coup in Libya before Gaddafi’s coup, and although I was present at the meetings of the conspirators, so far as I am aware there is no evidential source that the meetings ever took place. In the case of Libya I know it would be wrong to say that because there is no hard evidence the meetings never happened. In the same way, because there is no hard evidence for Rockefeller’s influence on the KGB/Soviet conspirators, we cannot say with certainty that such an influence or contact never happened.
As regards the pattern, whether or not Rockefeller contacted the KGB/conspirators his business interests flourished under Kosygin, who was an improvement on Khrushchev from his point of view. It is very hard to do a jigsaw of a thousand pieces to show a picture and pattern, and relatively easy to say that one piece doesn’t fit, that a meeting with KGB-influenced conspirators never happened because there are no evidential sources. I am on the side of a World State under the right altruistic and democratic conditions, but looking objectively at the pattern I have to say that to deny Rockefeller’s contact with the KGB/conspirators is as speculative as to confirm it. There is no hard evidence either way, and as the KGB were involved we should not expect otherwise. And so we are left with the pattern that carries forward from Rockefeller’s meeting with Khrushchev into his relationship with Kosygin.
And so to the request “Check your sources, gentlemen” I would reply: “Check your pattern, gentlemen, for you are in danger of missing the complete picture by concentrating on one piece of the jigsaw.”
Your speculation regarding the Rockefeller (or Wall Street) connection the rise and spread of communism in 20th century channels the work of Antony Sutton. His research revealed that at critical moments during the Russian Civil War, the Bolsheviks were recipients of Western aid. This support continued throughout the century up to the time of fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989. Why? Sutton’s conclusion was that oligarchs in the West wanted to destabilize Russia thus “capturing” her markets while gaining access to her natural resources. Meanwhile, with Russia suffering under the boot Soviet communism, her economy would not be develop and compete with the West. Moreover, with the Soviet Union, Western oligarchs had a convenient adversary for their “strategy of tension” commonly referred to as the Cold War. The manufactured tension between East and West greased the legislative skids for bloated military spending thus enriching a few elite corporations at the expense of the common man.
A wonderfully concocted argument Nicholas! Most people nowadays are too busy focusing on one piece of the jigsaw rather than the full picture! You have taught me to broaden my surroundings and take a step back sometimes to view the whole thing!