This work presents and examines the analytical framework of conspiracy theorists in relation to the Order of Skull and Bones in an attempt to illuminate the clash between scholars of conspiracy theory and social science. This work specifically examines in detail the illegal financing activities of members of the Order of Skull and Bones to designated enemy regimes during two specific periods of war in the first half of the twentieth century.
The academic quarrel with the traditional mode of conspiracy theory is, in short, that conspiracy theory takes for granted certain conditions of generality and fixity which are not always, or always completely, satisfied; that rigid adherence to long- range assumptions narrowly limits the range of what can be properly defined; and entails that conspiracy theory, being unique, indeterminate, and subject to change, is indefinable. Conspiracy theory maintains a lack of simplicity in its theoretical explanation of historical events often incorporating complex explanations when other, more simplistic explanatory models may exist. Furthermore, conspiracy theory is an unfalsifiable explanation of events.
As a result, conspiracy theory has come to represent a political other to ‘proper’ democratic politics through the use of potentially illegitimate assumptions that seem to question that the Unites States is a benign, pluralistic democracy, and that seem to reject the popular notion that history moves through the triumph of progress and leadership, as well as through the vagaries of coincidence and mistake.
In regards to conspiratorial assumptions of illegal financing and the Order of Skull and Bones, specialists in the field of political science, who are confronted by ragged evidence, are likely to insist that a similar lack of uniformity and/or causation characterized financial decisions in the first half of the century, and that no conspiratorial collusion existed. To generalize about legality and motives of early international financing is undoubtedly hazardous, and one should be on guard against projecting bias and contemporary theories too far back into the past. Yet one must also be on guard against ignoring important evidence and its implications on society at that period of time.
The actual number of firms involved and level of international financing to both Germany and the Soviet Union during this time period is inevitably open to dispute. Even apart from the problem of trying to estimate the number of firms and amount of finance that went uncataloged by Senate investigations, contemporary evidence must be handled with caution, for it often yields false clues to the number of firms involved and the motives of the financiers. Furthermore, drawing correlations between firms that were involved in illegal financing requires listing managers, presidents, vice-presidents and directors who might have been involved in the decision making process. Such information is difficult to come by, and almost impossible to determine who was directly making individual decisions. As a result, certain assumptions have to be made and adhered to without the benefit of supporting evidence. This is one of many reasons that social scientists discredit conspiracy theory and the issues of illegal finance during times of war are largely ignored.
Nevertheless, although it has to be considered in conjunction with many other issues, the correlations between The Order of Skull and Bones and illegal finance certainly does deserve a closer study. One must be careful not to skew these historical events with speculation and assumption. But it is equally important not to go too far in the other direction and underestimate and/or ignore these correlations. In order to avoid this problem, a falsifiable test will be created in order to minimize problems associated with traditional conspiracy theory and to provide a framework through which the conspiracy theory evidence can be reexamined.
This work will begin with a historical look into the background of conspiracy theory and its prevalence in American culture. Section 2 will outline the framework of conspiracy theory in an attempt to illustrate the analytical approach used by conspiracy theorists in interpreting contemporary events. An abbreviated history of the Order of Skull and Bones and how this organization is interpreted through the framework of conspiracy theory will also be presented in this section. Section 3 will outline the benefits and problems of a conspiracy theory approach to history, focusing on terminology, the formulation of arguments and the assumptions necessary for a conspiracy theory. Section 4 will develop a cross-sectional, falsifiable test in order to determine if a relationship between membership in the Order of Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing exists. The results of the cross-sectional test will be applied to a larger set of evidence used by conspiracy theorists in order to minimize the degree of bias associated with conspiratorial interpretations in section 5. This work will then conclude with an examination of the results of the cross-sectional test in light of the conspiracy theorists’ evidence.
With the recent election of President, and Skull and Bones member, George W. Bush, as well as increased political support for presidential hopeful Senator John Kerry, also a Skull and Bones member, the subject of the Order of Skull and Bones has become very popular with certain media outlets, as well as very marketable. Hollywood recently produced a movie based loosely on the Order of Skull and Bones, an investigative documentary was produced for television and three books covering the subject of Skull and Bones are scheduled to be released between 2002 and 2003.
Such a rapid growth in the recent attention directed at Skull and Bones begs the question of why; why has this organization received so much attention of late, and why is much of the attention focused on allegations of conspiracy? Skull and Bones has been in existence since 1832; however, until the election of our former President and Skull and Bones member George H. W. Bush, only about half a dozen articles were written about this organization. So why are we seeing such recent explosive popularity and interest regarding this subject?
I propose two possibilities that tend to feed into each other compounding the underlying focus of recent attention. The first is the secrecy of this organization. Skull and Bones, whose actual name is “The Order 322” or “The Order of Skull and Bones,” is the most prestigious and influential of nine secret, senior societies at Yale University. Their meetings are held secretly, their initiations are held secretly, and until recently their membership was kept secret. The secrecy of this society is so prevailing that a member of The Order is allegedly required to leave the room when the subject of The Order is being discussed. As a result of this adamant secrecy, outsiders are left no option but to speculate about the purpose and intent of Skull and Bones.
Second, the secret society of Skull and Bones is very small. Membership is limited to the initiation of only 15 seniors each year. This fact was known at Yale since The Order’s founding; however, it was kept from public attention until 1984 when an anonymous member of Skull and Bones provided an author with inside information, thus allowing the author to obtain the previously secret membership list. This membership list provided the groundwork from which all speculation about the organization’s goals and intentions derive. The small size of Skull and Bones is not at all indicative of the power and influence that they have had on American society in the past 150 years.
As one investigative reporter so aptly claimed, “ For two centuries, the initiation rite of Skull and Bones has shaped the character of the men who have shaped the American character,”11 including three Presidents. This secret society is dominated by old-line wealth and power. In Skull and Bones we find family names such as Bush, Russell, Taft, Whitney, Lord, Phelps, Wadsworth, Allen, Bundy and Adams. Other Skull and Bones families that attained influence during the nineteenth century include Harriman, Rockefeller, Payne and Davison. A brief list of some of the members of Skull and Bones during the past century better illustrates the level of wealth, power and influence this small group wields.
George W. Bush (’68): President
George H.W. Bush (’48): CIA, Vice Pres. (1980-88), Pres. (88-92), Zapata Oil
Prescott Bush (’17): Union Banking Corporation, Brown Brothers, Harriman
William H. Taft (1878): President, Chief justice of Supreme Court
Alphonso Taft (1833): Secretary of war, Attorney General
Henry Stimson (1888): served 7 Presidents
Robert Lovett (’18): Advisor Kennedy administration
Harvey Bundy (’09): Advisor at war Department
McGeorge Bundy (’40): National Security Advisor, Kennedy
William Bundy (’39): Senior post CIA
Potter Stewart (’37): Supreme Court Justice
Winston Lord (’59): CIA, President of the Council on Foreign Relations.
Harold Stanley (’08): Founder of Morgan Stanley
Henry Davison (’20): Founder of Guaranty Trust
Averell Harriman (’13): Brown Brothers Harriman, Presidential advisor to 6 Pres.,
Thomas Daniels (’14): Founder of Archer-Daniels-Midland
Russell Wheeler Davenport (’23): Creator of Fortune 500 list
Alfred Cowles (’13): Founder of Cowles communications
Henry Luce (’20): Founder of Time-Life
Artemus Gates (’18): President of NY Trust Company, Union Pacific, Time, Boeing
Dean Witter, Jr. (’44)
Pierre Jay (1892): First Chairman of the New York Federal Reserve
Knight Woolley (’17): director of Federal Reserve Bank
As this short list indicates, these members were very influential leaders in American society. Because of the existence of a membership list, researchers are able to trace the activities of the members of Skull and Bones in an attempt to determine the goal of that secret society. However, instead of providing answers, such research only succeeded in generating new questions, assumptions and speculations. Such speculation resulted in numerous conspiracy theories ranging from organized crime and drug trafficking to the direct manipulation of education and brain washing of America; to the Nazi eugenics movement and ultimately the active creation and manipulation of war through illegal finance.
It is the latter subject that this thesis will explore. The claim of active creation and manipulation of war through illegal finance was chosen because there exists very strong and verifiable evidence documenting the illegal financing of enemy regimes by members of Skull and Bones prior to and during times of war.
This evidence and the subsequent claims are significant because of the positions of influence that members of Skull and Bones occupy in our government. If the members of this secret society who hold political positions in the government are involved in illegal activities, how will their actions affect the United States as a whole, as well as the creation of government policies that those members are able to influence? Second, how does public knowledge of illegal activities by political officials affect the democratic process? The focus of this thesis then is an attempt to answer the question: Does a causal relationship exist between membership in Skull and Bones and participation in illegal finance?
But first, it would be of value to provide a brief history of the emergence and growth of conspiracy theory in general. How and where did conspiracy theory start? How has conspiracy theory grown, and among whom is it most prevalent? An exploration of the emergence of conspiracy theory will then be followed by a brief history of the “Order of Skull and Bones.”
Conspiracy theory in the United States has received a great deal of popular attention in the past several decades. In the wake of the cold war, with events such as the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal still etched in the minds of millions of Americans, a strong sentiment of distrust aimed at the government arose. Groups, such as the John Birch Society, were formed for the purpose of combating the ‘government conspiracy,’ while numerous citizens harbor varying degrees of distrust toward politics and/or feelings of insignificance in the American political system.
As Professor Mark T. Reinhardt states, “On the one hand, conspiracy theory is often characterized as illegitimate, pathological, and a threat to political stability; on the other hand, it seems an entertaining narrative form, a populist expression of a democratic culture, that circulates deep skepticism about the truth of the current political order through contemporary culture.”22 Author Mark Fenster, in his book Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture, makes a powerful argument for regarding conspiracism (the belief in conspiracy theory) as an integral product of the political system, reflecting inadequacies the establishment itself is blind to and expressing strong desires for the realization of frustrated ideals. Fenster notes that conspiracy theory serves a useful purpose as a balm to the politically alienated segments of society, and he optimistically interprets the popular pursuit of uncovering the hidden mechanics of power as evidence of a latent populism waiting to be harnessed.33
Nevertheless, conspiracy thinking is not confined to the marginal and politically alienated segments of society as Fenster might imply. Rather conspiracy thinking is becoming a popular way of viewing the world around us. Political figures such as Joseph McCarthy and Barry Goldwater both made names for themselves through the claims and pursuance of conspiracy within the government. Numerous movies and television shows incorporate the themes of government conspiracy, abuse of power and political cover-up while New York Times best selling authors such as Dean Koontz consistently focus attention on secret government agencies and plots.
In 1996, the Gallup Organization and the Post-Modernity Project of the University of Virginia conducted a survey concerning American political beliefs entitled, The State of Disunion: 1996 Survey of American Political Culture. This study involved face-to-face interviews with a national sampling of over 2,000 adults. Among the many findings reported in the survey were the following:
Three out of four Americans (77 percent) agree with the statement that “the government is pretty much run by a few big interests looking out for themselves.” (Twenty-nine percent completely agree.) Similarly, 63 percent of all Americans say that America’s governing elite is “only concerned about its own agenda.” This same percentage agrees that “our country is run by a close network of special interests, public officials, and the media.” (Twenty-five percent completely agree.)44
The survey also revealed, “one quarter of the population repeatedly express the conviction that the government is run by a conspiracy, and one in ten Americans strongly subscribes to this view.”55
Conspiracy theory provides a framework, which for many, helps explain much of what would otherwise seem illogical or implausible in our contemporary society. Conspiracy theory does not question the foundations of our societal structure but rather conspiracy theory provides the ability for people to maintain their ideological convictions while scapegoating blame onto the ruling elite. Conspiracy theory centers on the surpluses of political and economic power, understanding them as integral to the maintenance of power, while attempting to discern who has the surpluses of power, how they obtained those surpluses and what they are doing with them.
Conspiracy theories were arguably a large influence on American thinking before the Revolutionary War. It was popularized just after World War I and the Bolshevik Revolution, asserting Communism as the manifested form of the global conspiracy, and has steadily gained influence and attention since then through its insistence on the rejection of both socialism and global governing organizations such as the United Nations. Conspiracy theory is not limited to certain segments of society nor is it exclusive to American culture.
The predominance of conspiracy thinking is found in numerous writings, speeches and records including U.S. congressional records and investigations, and many powerful and influential people have promoted it. For example, the California Senate Investigating Committee on Education states in their 1953 report on education that,
So called modern Communism is apparently the same hypocritical and deadly world conspiracy to destroy civilization that was founded by the secret order of the Illuminati in Bavaria May 1, 1776.66
Conspiracy thinking is not exclusive to American Culture. In a speech before the British Parliament in 1920, Winston Churchill stated,
From the days of Sparticus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, …this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization … has been steadily growing. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth century, and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America has gripped the Russian people...77
Both of these passages refer to a worldwide conspiracy originating with the “secret order of the Illuminati of Bavaria.” The Illuminati of Bavaria, for a vast majority of conspiracy theorists is the corner stone to understanding the worldwide conspiracy that allegedly exists today. Conspiracy theorist John F. McManus states,
“Let us openly assert, that there is operating in the world today, and especially within our own nation, a conspiracy that is either a direct descendant of the Illuminati of 1776 or something closely patterned after it.”88
So who or what is the Illuminati of Bavaria and why is so much attention focused on this group?
Adam Weishaupt formed the “Order of the Illuminati” in Bavaria on May 1, 1776. The philosophy of Weishaupt’s Illuminism “propose[d] as the end of Illuminism the abolition of property, social authority, and of nationality,”99 and was based primarily on revolution and secrecy as a means to bring about social change. Weishaupt’s goal was the complete and revolutionary restructuring of society, and to this end Weishaupt “felt the need of a powerful secret organization to support him in the conflict with his adversaries and in the execution of his rationalistic schemes along ecclesiastical and political lines.”1010
By 1778, only two years after its creation, Weishaupt was able to secure more then 1000 members for the Illuminati in Bavaria alone, and there were lodges in 12 other countries including France and the United States.1111 In 1784, a messenger was struck by lightning while carrying letters from Weishaupt to other members of the Illuminati. The police authorities confiscated these letters, which resulted in the raid of the homes of several leading members of the Illuminati. Weishaupt’s Order of the Illuminati was declared as subversive to the German government and the leaders of the Illuminati were banished from Germany.
After the French Revolution numerous books outlining alleged connections between the French Jacobins and Weishaupt’s Illuminati were produced. These books focused on the many shared members between the Illuminati and the Jacobins, showing that the leaders of the French Revolution were also high ranking members of the Illuminati, according the Illuminati’s records which were confiscated by the Bavarian government.
Concern over the influence of the Illuminati during the French Revolution spread all over the world, including America. In a letter to Rev. G.W. Snyder dated October 24, 1798, Former President George Washington States,
Reverend sir: It was not my intention to doubt that the doctrine of the Illuminati had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more satisfied of this fact then I am.1212
Many organizations that were allegedly involved with the conspiratorial Illuminati, because of their many shared members, became suspect. These various groups included Eclectic Freemasonry, the German Union and the League of the Just. The connection between the League of the Just and the Illuminati is of significance to conspiracy theorists because it was the League of the Just who “commissioned [Karl] Marx and [Frederick] Engels to draw up a definitive statement of its aims and program.”1313 According to J. Edgar Hoover, the League of the Just was a secret society that later became publicly known as the Communist League.
Conspiracy theorists emphasize the alleged link between the Illuminati of Bavaria and Communism. A comparison of the Communist Manifesto and of the writing of Adam Weishaupt, as confiscated by the Bavarian government and later published by John Robison in 1798, show that the two philosophies are essentially identical in both goals and in methodology. Other superficial evidence presented by conspiracy theorists include the Communist National holiday celebrated on May 1, the same day that the Illuminati was officially formed; the stated goal of Communism as expressed by former Communist leaders such as Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev and Gorbachev as being World Communism or Novus Ordo Seclorum (New World Order), is both the same goal and same terminology expressed by Adam Weishaupt; both the Illuminati and Communism were regarded by numerous political figures throughout the world as a well organized international conspiracy in pursuit of a ruinous end.
Following a three year investigation of the 1886 riot in Chicago that resulted in the death of 7 police officers and the injury of 63 more, Police Captain Michael Schaack stated,
In London there are all the factors for the most dangerous mob the world can produce. In France, the commune is stronger than ever it was and the Red terror may appear with every turn of the whirligig of politics. In Spain and Italy, the Socialists are busy while in Germany and Russia a crisis is at hand. Let none mistake either the purpose or the duration of these fanatics, nor their growing strength. This is a methodical, not a haphazard conspiracy. The ferment in Russia is controlled by the same heads and the same hands as the activity in Chicago. There is a cold-blooded, calculating purpose behind this revolt manipulating every part of it the world over to a common and ruinous end.1414
A majority of conspiracy theorists base their method of analysis of contemporary events on the assumption that Communism is still alive and active and that it is a manifestation of Weishaupt’s secret order of the Illuminati because members of the Illuminati created the Communist League and commissioned Marx and Engels to write the Communist Manifesto. As a result of the publication of the Illuminati’s records detailing their subversive agenda, conspiracy theorists assume a long-range plan of world domination by any group that might be aligned with the original Illuminati. This basis for analysis is critical to understanding the conspiracy theorists’ claims against the Order of Skull and Bones, because, as will be discussed shortly, the Order of Skull and Bones is considered to be a single lodge of the original Illuminati.
But why would wealthy capitalists support or finance communist or fascist regimes? There are three possible answers to this question. The first, and most obvious, is profit. It is possible that businesses seek profits regardless of ideology. In this case, expanding business to a larger market that includes communist or fascist regimes would increase revenues and profits for the firm. Second, capitalistic industrialists might favor a degree of social control and development by the government. Industrialists Henry Ford and Frederick Winslow Taylor, along with their revolutionary ideas on the efficiency of the individual in the work place such as specialization, departmentalization, mass production and employee satisfaction, also favored a stronger welfare state to provide the necessary atmosphere for maximum production. The third possibility, as expressed by conspiracy theorist Antony Sutton, claims that the eventual power structure between a communist state, a fascist state and a monopoly is essentially the same: control of production and elimination of industrial competition. Both communism and fascism control the means of production and the degree of competition while a monopoly attempts to do the same. Sutton maintains that these American capitalists might aid these regimes in an attempt to gain favor with the regime and gain industrial dominance.
William Huntington Russell and Alphonso Taft established the Order of Skull and Bones, officially called the “Order 322,” at Yale University in 1833. It was later incorporated as the Russell Trust in 1856. It is one of nine secret societies at Yale, and one of three senior societies that are exclusive to Yale University. Fifteen juniors are “tapped” each year by the seniors to be initiated into next year’s group. Each initiate is allegedly given $15,000 and a grandfather clock, although no one has yet been able to discover the significance of the clock.
The original founder of Skull and Bones, William Russell, studied in Germany from 1831-1832. While in Germany, it is believed that Russell joined a secret society at the German University and was then given permission to start a section of that same secret society at Yale. According to information acquired from a break-in to the “tomb” (the Skull and Bones temple and meeting hall located on Yale’s campus) in 1876, “Bones is a section of a corps in a German University … General Russell, its founder, was in Germany before his Senior Year and formed a warm friendship with a leading member of a German society. He brought back with him to college, authority to found a section here.”1515
This same break-in team, who mockingly referred to themselves as “the Order of File and Claw,” claimed that within the Skull and Bones Tomb was a room numbered 322, an elaborately decorated ceremonial room furnished in red velvet with a pentagram on the wall. In the parlor next to room 322 the break-in group found:
On the west wall, hung among other pictures, an old engraving representing an open burial vault, in which, on a stone slab, rest four human skulls, grouped about a fools cap and bells, an open book, several mathematical instruments, a beggar’s scrip, and a royal crown. On the arched wall above the vault are the explanatory words, in Roman letters, “We War Der Thor, Wer Weiser, Wer Bettler Oder, Kaiser? And below the vault is engraved, in German characters, the sentence: ‘Ob Arm, Ob Beich, im Tode gleich.’1616
The picture is accompanied by a card on which is written, ‘From the German section, Presented by D.C. Gilman of D. 50’. D.C. Gilman refers to Daniel Coit Gilman, initiated into the Order of Skull and Bones 1850. The two German phrases translate into “Who was the fool, who the wise man, beggar or king? Whether poor or rich, in death we are the same. This quote, and the initiation rituals that each new member must experience are extremely similar to the initiation ceremony of the Illuminati. An expose on the initiation rites of Skull and Bones by reporter Ron Rosenbaum, “The Last Secrets of Skull and Bones,” highlights the various initiation activities along with a comparison of the same Illuminati ceremonies as recorded by former Illuminati member John Robison. Many conspiracy theorists conclude that the Order of Skull and Bones is either a section of the original Illuminati or an extension thereof.
Conspiracy theorists, in light of potential Illuminati affiliation, emphasize three aspects of society in which members of Skull and Bones were profoundly influential: namely government, education and illegal finance. It is this latter subject that will be explored to some degree in this work.
Given the historical framework of the Illuminati/Communist long-range goal of world domination used by conspiracy theorists, and the possible connection between the Order of Skull and Bones and the Order of the Illuminati, it is easy to understand the concerns of conspiracy theorists in regard to illegal financing of enemy regimes by members of Skull and Bones. As conspiracy theorist Antony Sutton states,
Revolution is always recorded as a spontaneous event by the politically or economically deprived against an autocratic state. Never in Western textbooks will you find the evidence that revolutions need finance and the source of the finance in many cases traces back to Wall Street.1717
More importantly, concludes Sutton, is that members of Skull and Bones provide a large part of Wall Street’s financing to revolutionary movements.
Conspiracy theory maintains that, in a given state, power “is exercised from behind the scenes by a small secretive group of private citizens who want to change the government system or put the country under the control of a world government.”118 These conspiratorial groups are always made up of a group of powerful and/or influential businessmen or politicians who are intent on running the world. In essence, these small, secretive groups form a shadow government that is not elected but controls political decision-making not only for their own benefit but also at the detriment of the rest of society.
“In the past, the conspirators were usually said to be secret Communist sympathizers who were intent on bringing the United States under a common world government in conjunction with the Soviet Union, but the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 changed the focus to the United Nations as the likely controlling force in the ‘New World Order.”219 However, with deterioration of Soviet economies, the maintenance of Communist party leaders in positions of power and publicly popular soviet appeals for a return to Communism, many conspiracy theorists are reverting back to claims of the “Communist Threat.”
Smaller groups of conspiratorial thinkers, on the other hand, focus on a secret group of individuals whom, it is claimed, are located in the government itself. This secretive group is held responsible for the creation of government organizations such as the CIA, think tanks like the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission as well as the creation of war through both illegal finance in the corporate world and government policy-making in the political realm. One secret organization that receives a great deal of attention by conspiracists is the Order of Skull and Bones.
The allegations made against Skull and Bones by Antony Sutton and other conspiracy theorists undoubtedly fall into the realm of power politics. It would be highly enlightening to examine the claims made against Skull and Bones using other methods of analysis; however, because other methods of analysis have not yet been used to examine Skull and Bones activities, and because all Skull and Bones activities are generally presented through use of the conspiracy theory framework, we will focus our attention on a critical analysis of conspiracy theory.
There are both positive and negative aspects to using a conspiracy theory framework. As with many theories on power politics, the focus is on a specific framework, with a tendency to disregard or downplay the importance of other factors. An understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of conspiracy theory will aid in the overall assessment of the conspiracy theory’s evaluation of the claims against Skull and Bones.
The advantages of conspiracy theory are threefold: 1) conspiracy theory aids in the discovery of important facts and assessing personal guilt; 2) it allows society to admit horrors and express indignation without rejecting the basic norms of society; 3) it acts as a scapegoat for societal frustrations. These three advantages occur simultaneously within conspiracy theory and are inseparable. A conspiracy theory could not occur without assessing personal guilt for a societal atrocity. The blame for that atrocity is then placed solely on the individual and, by extension, any network or group he may be affiliated with, thereby disregarding any fundamental flaws in the fabric of society that may contribute to the problem.
Conspiracy theories can act as a forum through which members of society are able to admit horrors and express indignation about the outcomes and problems of society. However the discoveries of conspiracy theory are often dismissed because they are presented in a conspiracy theory framework that does not acknowledge errors in the basic norms of society, but rather shifts blame to clandestine networks working behind the scenes. The result of illegal financing then is not the result of a capitalist system which allows for profit maximization at the expense of others, but rather illegal financing occurs because a select, secretive group chose for it to happen in order to advance their global agenda. In this way, the blame is shifted from the political structure of society to a small group who are then held responsible for all the ills of society.
A conspiracy theory is a version of historical events that redirects an audience’s anger toward a scapegoat group. The theory seeks to lay blame for a legitimate issue on a perceived common enemy. As with any societal issue, there are legitimate concerns that need to be addressed. Conspiracy theories, however, fail to address legitimate concerns because realistic solutions are lost in the process of laying blame for the common problem on a select group. By only laying blame for the problem, the issue becomes, in effect, a renewable source of fuel for the audience.
Author Mark Fenster makes a powerful argument for regarding conspiracism as an integral product of the political system, reflecting the inadequacies of the establishment and expressing strong desires for the realization of frustrated ideals. Fenster notes that conspiracy theory should be perceived “as an active, indeed endless, process that continually seeks, but never fully arrives at, a final interpretation. It displaces the citizen’s desire for political significance onto a signifying regime in which interpretation replaces political engagement.320 Mark T. Reinhardt interprets Fenster’s claims when stating, “conspiracy theory serves a useful purpose as a balm to the politically alienated segments of society, and he optimistically interprets the popular pursuit of uncovering the hidden mechanics of power as evidence of a latent populism waiting to be harnessed.”421
The political significance of conspiracy theory is its ability to represent disenfranchised segments of society through expressions of distrust toward the government and the establishment of blame for society’s ills. The interpretation of conspiracy theory must begin with the observation that conspiracy theory is an attempt to apprehend the past and the present by placing potentially disparate events within a unifying interpretive frame. However, the process through which conspiracy theory results is very problematic. The problems of conspiracy theory can be arranged into 4 categories: 1) terminology, 2) information, 3) formulation of the argument and 4) formulation of conclusions. Each of these categories will be addressed separately so that the significance of each can be fully understood.
The first and most basic problem of conspiracy theory lies in the terminology and ambiguous meanings associated with the term “conspiracy theory.” A definite distinction exists between a conspiracy and a conspiracy theory. The former describes an actual instance of covert collusion, while the latter describes something that exists only in the imagination of an observer.
A conspiracy involves two or more conspirators jointly and secretly aiming to achieve a prohibited goal. Conspiracies do occur. The European powers did conspire to divide up the Middle East during World War I (the Sykes-Picot agreement); the Israelis did bomb American targets in Egypt in 1954 to put the blame on Gamal Abdel Nasser (the Lavon Affair); and the U.S. government did send arms to Iran in the mid-1980s (the Iran/contra scandal).
Conspiracies subdivide into petty conspiracies, which work within the existing order, and grand conspiracies, which aspire to world domination. The former are limited affairs that involve a handful of individuals plotting to make money or to seize power. They aim at transferring money from one pocket to another or replacing one set of rulers with another. With some exceptions, petty conspiracies receive little attention in the media and are generally not referred to as a conspiracy. Rather, grand conspiracies are what conspiracy theorists refer to when they use the term conspiracy. Larger and more vague, grand conspiracies go beyond plots for personal gain or for power or money; they seek to destroy religion, subvert society, change the political order, and undermine truth itself. Grand conspiracies involve not duplicitous politicians or evil merchants but covert international movements. They capture the imagination and inflame political passion; they are big enough to cause all the world’s ills. It is important to distinguish between a petty conspiracy and a grand conspiracy during our evaluation of Skull and Bones activities.
A conspiracy theory, on the other hand, is the unproven version of a conspiracy. Anyone might speculate about the odd conspiracy theory, but the conspiracy theorist makes this a habitual practice. He discerns malignant forces at work wherever something displeases him; plots serve as his first method for explaining the world around him. He suspects a plot or cover-up even when other, less malign explanations better fit the facts. This preoccupation with conspiracy theories is variously called conspiracism or the conspiracy mentality. Just as conspiracies divide into two sorts, the petty and the grand, so do conspiracy theories. Petty theories deal with limited aims; grand conspiracy theories involve fears of world domination.
Grand conspiracy theories may also have local manifestations, but they invariably fit into a larger scheme that maintains the ultimate goal of world hegemony. Such theories have a finite history as previously illustrated. They began during the Enlightenment in northwestern Europe, became a major factor with the French Revolution, and peaked in importance in the three decades after 1918. Grand conspiracy theories have a well-established structure and form. The story begins with a small group attempting to benefit itself by clandestinely making plans to take over the government or expand its influence abroad. Its means can be many - propaganda, destroying a political system, controlling multinational corporations - but the immediate goal is usually economic.
Good research is based on the ability to uncover accurate information. Hypotheses are formulated with information and historical events are analyzed using information recovered through research. However, there are three important problems with research information that play a major role in conspiracy theories. First, conspiracy theories, by their very definition, are not provable. Incomplete and/or insufficient evidence is the primary component of conspiracies, effectively moving the conspirator’s claims into the world of the uncertain and unknown. Conspiracy theories focus on relationships and events that are rarely covered in the media and are generally given very little attention. As a result, it is difficult to find records and information that would support a conspiracy theorist’s hypotheses. The question of legitimacy also comes into play disputing both the validity of records and/or information as well as disputing the context in which the records occurred verses the context in which it is used by conspiracy theorists.
Incomplete information is often used by conspiracy theorists to paint a limited picture of events in society from which certain assumptions must be drawn and which prescribes specific conclusions. Because causation is never known to conspiracy theorists, they focus on inconclusive correlations drawn from incomplete information. Certain assumptions must then be applied, generally of a secretive, collective, long-range nature, which then require conspiratorial conclusions. The use of conspiratorial assumptions in order to produce conspiratorial conclusions will become more evident as we analyze Skull and Bones involvement in both the Bolshevik Revolution and the rise of Hitler.
Second, the excessive amount of information used by conspiracy theorists in and of itself becomes problematic. Conspiracy theorists commonly rely on large amounts of information to prove their point. The assumption that since there is so much information available on the subject it must be true is based on a common fallacy of logic; resulting in the conclusion that the sheer enormity of printed text unquestionably makes the accusation fact, despite generally large amounts of irrelevant information and correlations that are unnecessarily included.
Third, the majority of conspiracy theory information and research is either unfalsifiable or unverifiable, or both. The strength and weakness of conspiracy lies at the fact that a conspiracy theory is unfalsifiable. The conspiracy theory generates a large amount of information that draws correlations and which, under certain interpretation, may point toward a specific conspiratorial explanation. However, the theory as a whole cannot be proven as a legitimate conspiracy, nor can it be proven as false, again drawing strength on correlations. Furthermore, conspiracy theories are based on “privileged information” provided by an insider who claims to shed light on a given conspiracy. By the very nature of the claims of an insider, there is no verifiability. Generally, an insider is alone when he attempts to illuminate a conspiracy, and supporting testimony is rare.
Such is the case with author Antony Sutton. He was the first non-member of Skull and Bones to allegedly obtain a membership list of Skull and Bones. According to Sutton, an insider disenchanted with the goals of Skull and Bones gave him a membership list. Much of the completed research on Skull and Bones is based on the membership list that Sutton was given. However, later research discovered that the membership list of Skull and Bones was annually printed in the annual reports of RTA (Russell Trust Association) under whom Skull and Bones is formally incorporated.22* If the connection between Skull and Bones and RTA was not discovered, then Sutton’s list of Skull and Bones members might never have been verified. As it stands, many of Sutton’s claims, based on insider information, remain unverified.
As a result, information used in conspiracy theory is almost always incomplete and inconclusive, unnecessarily excessive and unfalsifiable or unverifiable.
As opposed to a systematic approach to analysis, the approach and formulation of arguments for conspiracy theories are all too often circular, ad hoc, and biased. A circular argument is one of the most common fallacies for conspiracy theorists. This fallacy occurs when one tries to prove point A by using point B, which in turn is proved by the first point. An example of such an argument would be the claim that Skull and Bones is involved in a grand conspiracy. As evidence for this, theorists focus on the illegal financing activities of members. Conspiracy theorists argue that illegal financing of enemy regimes is a way to advance a global, conspiratorial agenda. Conspiracy theorists then claim that Skull and Bones involvement in illegal financing proves that Skull and Bones is involved in a Grand conspiracy. Did this circular endorsement prove anything about the nature of Skull and Bones?
An ad hoc explanation of events occurs when the fundamental criteria for a conspiracy changes from one event to the next, after the fact. Conspiracy theorists examine situation 1 and determine that factors A, B and C are the fundamental factors required for a conspiracy. An examination of situation 2 yields factors A, D and E, and not A, B and C as in situation 1. Conspiracy theorists then alter the fundamental criteria that are required for a conspiracy theory to exist in order to include situation 2. This alteration of fundamental criteria occurs after the occurrence and examination of each new situation.
Many social scientists would argue that the trademark of conspiracy theory is its lack of objectivity. It is difficult, if not impossible to find conspiracy theory literature that is not biased. Such literature is filled with the demonization of the alleged conspiracy group, and it too often appears that the alleged conspirators become the scapegoats of societal problems. Focus is spent on reiterating negative affiliations of individuals and negative representations of those affiliate groups. A great deal of emphasis is based on those groups that either use secrecy or which wield a great deal of power. Furthermore, all conspiracy research is presented in the conspiratorial framework, often focusing on one or two elements that fit the prescribed framework while dismissing or all together ignoring information or events that do not fit the framework.
There are two common errors that occur in the formulation of conclusions of conspiracy theories. The first is a faulty conclusion that is drawn from faulty information. The second is a faulty conclusion that is based on good evidence. These errors are not exclusive to conspiracy, but rather they are problems of any scholarly discipline.
A faulty conclusion drawn from faulty information is common with conspiracy theory for many reasons. Legitimate information on a true conspiracy will be nearly impossible to obtain. There is a lack of complex data; as a result, conspiracy researchers are forced to draw conclusions from very limited information. They are given to misinterpretation of information, which results in the furtherance of faulty conclusions as conspiracy researchers rely heavily on secondary sources to obtain their information. Many conspiracy researchers focus on work already completed by others and generally fail to check their primary sources in order to prevent misinterpretation and/or the misquoting of primary sources. This problem is furthered by the Internet, where large amounts of information is passed along, but very rarely provides primary documentation of claims, which lends itself toward misunderstanding and misquoting from other secondary sources.
A simple key word search of Skull and Bones on the Internet will yield 100’s of websites with information pertaining to Skull and Bones. A careful study of these web pages show that they all reiterate the same basic information, but as the information is passed from one secondary source to the next, it loses its informational accuracy. Names are misused and dates are confused. Each new site attempts to add its own information and conclusions to be passed to the next person for further evaluation and change. In the end we are left with 100’s of web sites each dedicated to Skull and Bones, each with its own conclusions and assumptions based on information that may have lost its original accuracy.
Faulty conclusions based on good evidence can result from a fundamental element of any scholarly work: the assumptions of each argument. Incorrect assumptions can misdirect and bias any research, resulting in a logical fallacy. For example, the claim that Skull and Bones is involved in the illegal financing of enemy regimes is based on the assumption that illegal financing is a focus of Skull and Bones, and that its members, as a whole, are engaged in this practice. Evidence indicates between 25 to 30 members of Skull and Bones were involved with firms who provided illegal financing, over a 30-year period. Noting that during any given year there are about 700 members of Skull and Bones living, 25-30 members does not seem to be an accurate representation of Skull and Bones as a whole. Further research indicates that the majority of members, during this time period, pursued fields in education or business, and were not involved in illegal activities. The above assumption that Skull and Bones is involved in illegal financing because a very small percentage of members are involved in such activities leads to a logical fallacy.
Another basic assumption of conspiracy theorists derives from the terminology and definition of a conspiracy. As we stated earlier, the definition of a conspiracy is when two or more conspirators jointly and secretly aim to achieve a prohibited goal. However, the definition used by conspiracy theorists is slightly different. As stated by John F. McManus, a conspiracy is “an endeavor engaged in secretly by two or more persons for the accomplishment of an evil goal.”5 From the very outset conspiracy theorists have attached specific values of good and evil to certain behaviors. No longer is a conspiracy an attempt to achieve a prohibited goal, or an act against the law, but a conspiracy becomes ambiguous as it begins to include anything and anyone who might aid in the accomplishment of an “evil” goal, as defined by the conspiracy theorists. The ambiguity of the conspiracy theorists’ definition becomes far-reaching and too inclusive as it begins to include any liberal or non-conservative program or behavior.
Often the assumptions of conspiracy theory are not explicitly stated but implicitly assigned through the use of complex questions. A complex question is formed when your proposition affirms more than one thing, but your question allows for an answer to only one. An example of this line of questioning would be “how was Skull and Bones involved in illegal financing?” In order to answer the question, we must assume and acknowledge that Skull and Bones was involved in illegal financing without having proved that Skull and Bones was actually involved. In this manner, conspiracy theorists focus not on whether or not a group is involved in a conspiracy, but rather the focus is on how they are involved in a conspiracy, already assuming that a conspiracy is occurring without proper examination and proof.
This section discussed the many potential flaws that surface when dealing with conspiracy theory: namely the lack of uniformity in definition, the inadequacy of information and the formulation of both argument and conclusion. In order to fully understand the connection between Skull and Bones and illegal financing, I will attempt to reduce these problems by eliminating both the assumptions of conspiracy and the conspiratorial framework in an effort to create a falsifiable test. This test will be used to then assess any possible correlations that may exist between Skull and Bones and illegal financing.
In order to accurately study and assess correlations between membership in Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing, a reliable scientific test design must be created. Although scientific methods are not always necessary to answer research questions, they can be very effective in minimizing the biases that affect subjective opinion. Many scientific designs rely on experimentation. Experimental designs allow researchers the ability to control one or more variables thereby eliminating potentially confounding factors. Such designs are powerful because they can be effective in determining causal relationships between variables.
However, because we are unable to control the variables that we are studying (membership in Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing), we are forced to rely on a non-experimental test design. Non-experimental test designs do not allow for control or manipulation of variables, but rather strict observations are used, from which conclusions can be drawn. Non-experimental test designs do not yield results that are as strong as those of experimental test designs, and they generally do not establish a causal relationship between the variables. However, non-experimental tests are generally effective at determining correlations among variables, and continuation of the test design over a period of time dramatically strengthens its conclusions.
There are two problems associated with non-experimental test designs. First the quality of information that is observed and used for the test could be incomplete, inaccurate or biased, which could result in unreliable and/or inconclusive conclusions. Furthermore, the information that is used in the test could be selectively chosen and biased, again resulting in unreliable and/or inconclusive conclusions. Second, a lack of direct manipulation or control in the non-experimental design can cause problems in the interpretation of results because the investigator might not be able to properly handle extraneous factors. As a result, variables may become compounded and factors that are not of concern in the study may complicate or taint the conclusions.
For the purpose of testing the relationship between membership in Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing, a non-experimental cross-sectional test design will be used. This test design is simplistic in that it “requires nothing more than the collection of two or more measures on a set of subjects or social entities at one point in time and requires no treatments or manipulations.”123 The cross-sectional design can be effective in determining whether or not two or more variables are related. Because we will be unable to determine causation through a non-experimental test, the establishment of correlations will be the goal of our test.
A cross-sectional test design is useful in this study because it provides a scientific framework through which the specified events can be studied. A scientific hypothesis maintains validity when the hypothesis can be tested and can, potentially, be falsified. On the other hand, as previously noted, conspiracy theory relies on ad hoc explanations, explanations that do not provide a testable hypothesis because their basic assumptions change with each new event in order to maintain specific conclusions. The conspiracy theory does not provide a process for systematic evaluation of more then one situation. As a result, its conclusions are not generally considered scientifically valid. The cross-sectional test will provide both testable hypotheses and a framework for systematic evaluation of the hypotheses through the studied events.
A cross-sectional test design has both limitations and advantages. It does not allow us to control specific variables; as a result we are forced to examine historical events. Not only are we limited in how we conduct the study, but we are also limited in the information available for testing. Information pertaining to this subject is scarce and often biased in its traditional presentation by conspiracy theorists. Second, the conclusions of a cross-sectional test do not show causation and depending on the rigidity of the hypothesis that is used, could lend itself to misinterpretation. Third, a cross-sectional test over one period in time produces weak conclusions. Continuation of the same test is required with a large test sample over a long period of time in order to add strength to any conclusion produced.
However, the advantages of a cross-sectional test far outweigh the limitations. Given a random sample, the testing of several hypotheses will not show causation but can indicate correlations between the variables. The test is also able to show a much broader picture of the behavior of segments of society or society as a whole, thereby reducing the occurrence of sample bias. The test also provides a means of systematically testing various hypotheses in order to sustain or disprove a given hypothesis.
The purpose of the cross-sectional test is to determine a relationship between membership in Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing. The data for this test will be drawn from historical records as well as research and claims made by several conspiracy theorists. The test will have two variables each specifically measured. These variables will be tested against five separate hypotheses in order to 1) maintain an unbiased examination of events and evidence as well as 2) examine the results of a hypothesis that will be acceptable to both social scientists and conspiracy theorists. This test will examine illegal financing to the Bolshevik Revolution and the rise of Hitler by United States based financial firms.
Variables
Two variables will be used on our cross-sectional test design: 1) membership in Skull and Bones and 2) participation in illegal financing by a firm.
Membership in Skull and Bones will be determined through the membership records of Skull and Bones. Membership in Skull and Bones is only important to this study if the individual was a member of Skull and Bones during the time period being examined (1917-1945).
A firm will be defined as a financial institution whose primary activity is providing financing to industrial corporations or other entities. This definition intentionally excludes industrial and production companies. A company such as Ford or GE, who participated in illegal financing will not be included in this study because the primary activities of both Ford and GE are production and not financing. On the other hand, a company such as Guaranty Trust Company, whose primary objective is to provide financing to production companies, would fit the requirements.
Participation in illegal financing will be determined when a firm participates in providing funds to a state or group against the established laws of the country where the financing took place.
A firm is determined to be associated with Skull and Bones in one or more of the following ways: if it was directly created by members of Skull and Bones; if its president, chief executive officer, or chairman of the board is a member of Skull and Bones; or if 25 percent or more of its managing directors are members of Skull and Bones. Conversely, a firm is determined to not be associated with Skull and Bones if fewer then 25 percent of its managing directors are members of Skull and Bones, if it was not created by a member of Skull and Bones or if neither its president, CEO or Chairman are not members of Skull and Bones. I am requiring 25 percent of a firm’s directorship to be members of Skull and Bones before that firm is classified as being associated with Skull and Bones in order to eliminate the effects of confounding variables.
The variables to be studied are binary. In other words, a firm either participates in illegal financing or it does not; Skull and Bones is either present, according to the above definition, or it is not. I am not allowing for variations of illegal financing, nor am I examining intentions behind illegal financing at this time. Likewise, there occur variations of Skull and Bones affiliations with various firms. However, a firm will only be classified as affiliated with Skull and Bones if it fits the specific requirements above. The elimination of variance in variables will aid in the interpretive process.
The use of a binary state of variables is intended to avoid pitfalls such as the following example: a corporate financier is a director of company A and company B. He is not a member of Skull and Bones, but company A is heavily dominated by Skull and Bones members. Both companies A and B are involved in illegal financing. The link between company A and company B through the mentioned financier would lead some to conclude that company B is also under the influence of Skull and Bones through the common financier. However, such a link does not indicate Skull and Bones influence over company B, and inclusion of company B as a Skull and Bones dominated firm could skew the results of the data.
As with all forms of measurement, there is always some degree of error. Establishing membership in Skull and Bones through reference to a private membership list is subject to error because, despite strong research supporting the validity of the membership list, Skull and Bones is secretive about its membership and no member of Skull and Bones has either confirmed or denied the accuracy of the membership list. In the case of participation in illegal financing, we cannot know which directors initiated and/or were involved in illegal financing. We are forced to assume that all managing directors, by the very nature of their position, were aware of the illegal financing, and with at least 25 percent of the directorship consisting of members we can conclude that members of Skull and Bones had some degree of influence and/or leverage in the decisions made.
For analysis I chose to examine the financing activities of firms during the Bolshevik Revolution (1917-1926) and the rise of Hitler (1923-1942). I chose these two historical events because during both time periods the United States government had established very specific laws forbidding financial support to the belligerent regimes by United States residents. Second, these two events occurred in a relatively close time frame and the structure and laws pertaining to international finance were relatively similar. Third, these two events are the primary focus of conspiracy theorists when claiming that Skull and Bones is involved in a conspiracy.
The further examination of an additional historical period of conflict such as the Vietnam War or the Gulf War would add strength to the conclusions that will result from our test, however very little research has been completed by conspiracy theorists or scholars in regards to potentially illegal financial transactions of US firms after World War II. Furthermore, the occurrence of changes in international law after World War II resulted in a change in both the definitions of international finance and the methods through which international finance occurred. As a result, it would be very difficult to find another situation of finance that maintained similar circumstances, laws and public opinion.
As previously stated, the core of the validity of scientific test designs is a hypothesis that can be tested and potentially disproved. For our cross-sectional test we will propose four separate hypotheses that were derived from the conspiracy theorists’ allegations in order to determine the existence of relationships as well as provide a testing method that may be accepted by both social scientists and conspiracy theorists. Four hypotheses will be presented, starting with a very strict hypothesis and then loosening the restrictions with each consecutive hypothesis.
The term “strict hypothesis” refers to a hypothesis that has strong and clear assumptions resulting in a strong prediction of results. A hypothesis that is “loose” is one that is weak and unclear and results in weak predictions. A hypothesis that is very restrictive or strict will be more favorable to a social scientist’s analytical framework and will be rejected by conspiracy theorists because of its strict assumptions, while a hypothesis that is too loose could result in the failure to explain the events in question. The hypothesis that will be most beneficial will most likely be one that falls somewhere between the very strict hypothesis and the very loose hypothesis; being strict enough to point toward important correlations without potentially ignoring other possibly significant connections.
As previously stated, the cross-sectional test has two variables: membership in Skull and Bones, and participation in illegal financing. As shown by Figure 1, the presence of members of Skull and Bones is demonstrated by boxes A and B, while the absence of members of Skull and Bones is demonstrated by boxes C and D. Participation in illegal financing is represented by boxes A and C and the absence of participation in illegal financing is represented by boxes B and D.
Each of the four falsifiable hypotheses will be presented in detail separately. Each hypothesis will include requirements for falsification, the predictions of the hypothesis and the significance of each possible outcome of the hypothesis. After all four hypotheses are presented, the falsifiable test for event 1 (Bolshevik Revolution) and event 2 (rise of Hitler) will be presented, followed by the results of the test in relation to each hypothesis.
The first hypothesis, the most restrictive, is the hypothesis that Skull and Bones related firms will provide illegal finance to enemy regimes while non-Skull and Bones related firms will not provide illegal financing. In this hypothesis, we will predict that all of the test data will fall into either box A or box D, will all Skull and Bones related firms participating in illegal finance and all non-Skull and Bones related firms not participating in illegal finance.
The occurrence of data in boxes B and/or C will disprove this hypothesis. Data in box B indicates that some Skull and Bones related firms did not participate in illegal financing, while data in box C indicates that some non-Skull and Bones related firms did participate in illegal financing.
If we were to find our data in box B, regardless of where other data falls, our hypothesis that Skull and Bones is directly related with illegal financing would be falsified, because it would indicated that members of Skull and Bones were in a position to provide illegal financing but did not.
If our data were to fall exclusively in boxes C and D then again the hypothesis would be disproved, however because we are examining the relationship between membership in Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing, we can conclude that at least some of the data will fall into box A.
If the data were to fall into boxes A and C, the results would also disprove the hypothesis. Although, a collection of the data falling into boxes A and C does not necessary disprove that a relationship might exist between members of Skull and Bones and involvement in illegal financing, it does demonstrate that other firms in similar positions are engaging in illegal financing; and may indicate that there are other factors responsible for the illegal activity which does not include membership in Skull and Bones.
Hypothesis 1 will be rejected by conspiracy theorists because conspiracy theorists will consider the assumptions of the hypothesis to be inaccurate. The hypothesis limits participation in illegal finance exclusively to Skull and Bones related firms while also making participation in illegal financing mandatory of Skull and Bones members. However, a falsification of this hypothesis is useful to this study and the establishment of relationships in that a falsification of hypothesis 1 would indicate that illegal finance is not an exclusive behavior of Skull and Bones. A falsification of hypothesis 1 also indicates that other factors may exist that may influence a firm’s decision regarding participation in illegal financing.
The second hypothesis states that the presence of Skull and Bones may or may not result in the participation in illegal financing but non-Skull and Bones related firms will not participate in illegal financing. In hypothesis 2 we predict that the presence of Skull and Bones may or may not result in participation in illegal financing. Therefore, if hypothesis 2 is correct, our data will fall in boxes A, B, and D, with Skull and Bones related firms either participating or not participating in illegal financing while non-Skull and Bones related firms would not be participating in illegal financing.
This hypothesis indicates that if a relationship exists between Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing, then it would be a weak relationship and participation in illegal financing would not be a primary behavior of Skull and Bones. In other words, Skull and Bones may not be the primary motivation for participation in illegal financing. Hypothesis 2 will be falsified if any of the data falls into box 3, indicating that non-Skull and Bones related firms are also participating in illegal financing. Again, a falsification of hypothesis 2 indicates that illegal financing is not an exclusive behavior of Skull and Bones and indicates that there are other factors influencing the decision to participate in illegal financing.
The third hypothesis is that the presence of Skull and Bones will always result in illegal financing while the non-presence of Skull and Bones may or may not result in illegal financing. In hypothesis 3 we predict that all of our data will fall into boxes A, C and D, with Skull and Bones related firms participating in illegal financing and non-Skull and Bones related firms participating in both illegal financing and non-illegal financing.
This hypothesis would indicate that a relationship did exist between Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing but it would also indicate that other factors exist which are driving participation in illegal financing. Therefore, a relationship between Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing would exist, but would be weak. This hypothesis would be falsified if any Skull and Bones related firms did not participate in illegal financing, indicating that no relationship between Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing exists.
The fourth hypothesis is that all firms will participate in illegal financing. In this hypothesis we predict that all of our data will fall into boxes A and C. All firms will participate in illegal financing and there will be no firms that will not participate in illegal financing. This hypothesis would indicate that Skull and Bones is not a contributing factor to participation in illegal financing, but that there are other motivating factors that are enticing other segments of society to participate in illegal financing. If data falls into boxes B or C, then this hypothesis is falsified. A falsification of hypothesis 4 indicates participation in illegal financing is not a behavior of all financial firms and there must exist some separating factor that influences some firms to participate in illegal financing while not influencing other firms.
Two models are being examined. Model 1 demonstrates financial activities of several firms during the Bolshevik revolution, while Model 2 demonstrates financial activities of several firms during the rise of Hitler. Each model will be examined separately followed by a comparison of the conclusions of each model.
An error in our methodological framework is that much of the evidence used for observation was drawn from government records and from conspiracy work already completed, which also draws from government records. Consequently, the available evidence provides a very narrow sample, which presents two fundamental problems. First, the sample itself is too small and lends itself toward a large deviation in results. In the observation of the Bolshevik Revolution, seven firms are a small portion of the American financial community. With a sample of only seven firms, only a few of the firms would be required to both participate in illegal financing and to be involved with Skull and Bones in order for a relationship to appear to exist between the two. As it stands in our test, 28 percent of the firms involved in the Bolshevik revolution were also involved in Skull and Bones. A larger sample could very well decrease that percentage and show a different relationship.
Furthermore, the sample is not representative of the society as a whole. For example, the inclusion of illegal financial assistance to Germany by American industrialists would show more then 300 American firms involved in trade with Germany that aided in the development of the German war machine. Thus, illegal financing of Germany was not an exclusive behavior committed by a very small few. However, it is difficult to determine what percentage of industrialists were involved in illegal financing verses those industrialists who were not without counting all industrial companies at the time, which would negate the purpose of using a sample.
The second problem is that of sample bias. The original research question of this work is based on the knowledge that some Skull and Bones dominated firms were providing illegal financing to enemy regimes. Further research indicates that there were other companies that were also involved in illegal financing but were not involved with Skull and Bones. However, the inclusion of these firms in our sample negates random sampling and steers our conclusions in a particular direction. Furthermore, a lack of sufficient research in regards to those firms who did not participate in illegal financing, and more importantly, those firms who did not participate in illegal financing and who were associated with Skull and Bones definitely lends itself toward a biased conclusion.
Results - Model 1. In the cross-sectional analysis of a firm’s participation in illegal financing and membership in Skull and Bones during the Bolshevik Revolution we find that just over 28 percent of our sample data (or two of the seven firms studied) fell into box A, showing that roughly 28 percent of our sample were firms that participated in illegal financing and were affiliated with Skull and Bones. We also find that roughly 56 percent of our sample (four of the seven firms studied) participated in illegal financing but were not affiliated with Skull and Bones. We also find that roughly 14 percent of our sample (one of the seven firms studied) did not participated in illegal financing and was not affiliated with Skull and Bones. An interesting point is that there was no data for box B, representing Skull and Bones affiliated firms that did not participate in illegal financing. This result is due in part to a lack of investigation into the careers of all Skull and Bones members during this time period. Rather then investigate the careers of each member during this time period, I examined the board of directors of various firms to determine if there was influence by Skull and Bones, according to the previously stated definition of what Skull and Bones influence requires. It is possible that Skull and Bones members entered various financial firms and did not participate in illegal financing, but our evidence does not indicate whether this is or is not the case.
Given the results of the data, model 1 disproves hypothesis 1, hypothesis 2 and hypothesis 4. Non-Skull and Bones related firms did participate in illegal financing while some non-Skull and Bones related firms did not participate in illegal financing. These results indicate that participation in illegal financing is not an exclusive behavior of Skull and Bones. It also indicates that there exist other factors, which motivate participation in illegal financing. However the data does not necessarily reject hypothesis 3; that the presence of Skull and Bones will always result in illegal financing while the non-presence of Skull and Bones may or may not result in illegal financing. The sample evidence indicates that there does exist a relationship between Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing. However, it appears that membership in Skull and Bones is not a driving motivation; rather there exist other motivating factors that encourage firms to participate in illegal financing. The data also shows that whatever external factor is motivating firms to participate in illegal financing, it is not affecting all firms equally. No evidence exists to determine if there were Skull and Bones related firms that did not participate in illegal financing, as a result our conclusions are weakened.
The objective in using a cross-sectional test was two-fold: First, although it is not effective in determining causation, the cross-sectional test is able to point toward significant correlations. Second, those correlations can then be used to provide a framework, or new perspective, through which the evidence can be re-examined and bias can be reduced. On the other hand, the cross-sectional test was unable to provide us with a direct answer as to what relationship exists between membership in Skull and Bones and illegal financing. As a result, we will need to turn to the evidence and arguments of conspiracy theorists for further insight. The results of the cross-sectional test will aid this evaluation of evidence by forcing us to focus on specific correlations and minimize any bias or assumptions that have traditionally accompanied such evidence.
Results - Model 2. In the cross-sectional analysis of a firm’s participation in illegal financing and membership in Skull and Bones during the rise of Hitler, we find that 50 percent of our sample (five of the ten firms studied) were firms that participated in illegal financing and were affiliated with Skull and Bones. We find that 40 percent of our sample (four of the ten firms studied) participated in illegal financing but were not affiliated with Skull and Bones. We also find that 10 percent of our sample (one of the ten firms studied) did not participated in illegal financing and was not affiliated with Skull and Bones. Again there was no data for box B, representing Skull and Bones affiliated firms that did not participate in illegal financing.
Given the results of the data, model 2 also disproves hypothesis 1, hypothesis 2 and hypothesis 4. Once again, non-Skull and Bones related firms did participate in illegal financing. Some non-Skull and Bones related firms did participate in illegal financing while other non-Skull and Bones related firms did not participate in illegal financing. This model also indicates that participation in illegal financing is not an exclusive behavior of Skull and Bones, and indicates that other motivating factors may exist. The data of model 2 also does not necessarily reject hypothesis 3; that the presence of Skull and Bones will always result in illegal financing while the non-presence of Skull and Bones may or may not result in illegal financing. The sample evidence indicates that there does exist a relationship between Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing; however, membership in Skull and Bones is not a driving motivation. There appear to exist other motivating factors that are encouraging non-Skull and Bones related firms to participate in illegal financing. The data also shows that whatever external factors are motivating firms to participate in illegal financing, they are not affecting all firms equally.
The conclusions of models 1 and 2 appear almost identical. Both models disproved hypotheses 1, 2 and 4 while accepting hypothesis 3. Both models appear to confirm that a relationship does exist between being a member of Skull and Bones and participating in illegal financing; however, that relationship is weak. Both models indicate that Skull and Bones is not a motivating factor for participating in illegal financing but rather other factors exist which motivate firms to participate in illegal financing. In light of the results of this test, namely: 1) a relationship does exists between being a member of Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing, 2) the relationship is weak and Skull and Bones is not a motivating factor, and 3) other factors exist in society that are driving participation in illegal finance; an examination of the evidence of illegal financing by Skull and Bones members, as presented by conspiracy theorists, is necessary.
The results of our cross sectional test will provide us with a new perspective and framework through which we can reevaluate the evidence proposed by conspiracy theorists. The goal of the cross-sectional test was threefold: first, it was intended to help eliminate interpretive bias; second, to show possible relationships between the variables, and three to provide a larger view of the behavior of society. The results of the cross-sectional test will aid in the reevaluation of the evidence as it will bring into perspective the behavior of the financial community during this time period as well as aid in recognizing and eliminating biased representation of information.
The cross-sectional test completed in section four highlighted some very important correlations regarding Skull and Bones and illegal financing. Nevertheless, it did not provide strong answers to our question regarding the nature of the relationship between Skull and Bones and illegal financing. A further evaluation of the evidence presented by conspiracy theorists is now needed in conjunction with the results of the cross-sectional test in order to gain additional insight.
Because conspiracy theorists focus on the existence of a grand conspiracy aimed at taking over the world, events such as the Bolshevik revolution and the rise of Hitler will be examined in order to see how members of Skull and Bones are allegedly advancing the grand conspiracy. The conspiracy theorists argument, as formulated by Skull and Bones researcher Antony Sutton, emphasizes the illegal financial activities of Skull and Bones members through three Skull and Bones dominated firms between the years 1917 to 1943. These firms include W. A. Harriman and Co. (later became Brown Brothers, Harriman), Guaranty Trust Company, and the Union Banking Corporation. Additional emphasis is then placed on the corporate subsidiaries and affiliated corporations of these three firms.
Sutton states that both the W. A. Harriman and Co. and Guaranty Trust Company were the “operational vehicles” through which Skull and Bones was able to concentrate its illegal financing efforts, focusing on both the large percentage of Skull and Bones members who make up the board of directors of each of these companies as well as the many directors shared between these two companies. By extension of the W.A. Harriman & Co., the Union Banking Corporation is also included for the same reasons mentioned above as well as its unique financial agenda for which it was created.
Furthermore, according to Sutton, the goal of Skull and Bones, through its illegal financial efforts, is to advance a financial domination of the world through support of fascism and communism. As explained in section two, conspiracy theorists believe that Skull and Bones supports both fascist and communist regimes because both style of regime maintains a government controlled economy, which would benefit Skull and Bones firms through the elimination of competition. Yet, the financing of these regimes would only be a means to an end. Sutton argues that financial support of the extreme left (communism) and the extreme right (fascism) would cause a popular rejection of both extremes in favor of a different form of government that could both prevent and control extremist regimes. Eventually a New World Order would be adopted with the members of Skull and Bones in control.
Sutton argues that this plan will be accomplished through the use of the Hegelian Dialectic process, or managed conflict. This process involves the creation of a conflict, and the control of both sides of the conflict in order to steer the conflicts resolution toward a desired goal. In the case of Skull and Bones, according to Sutton, through the financing of both Communism (thesis) and Germany’s National Socialism (Antithesis), a conflict would arise which, if controlled correctly, would result in an increased policy and public approval for the implementation of a world government. The assumption being that a world government would control the world’s finances and would in turn be controlled by members of Skull and Bones.
An illustration of the Managed Conflict process involving Skull and Bones and the illegal financing of the Bolshevik Revolution and the rise of Hitler, as proposed by Sutton, breaks down into five basic parts, as illustrated in Figure 8.
The top box indicates what the subject of the diagram is focusing on: Skull and Bones involvement in the illegal financing of enemy regimes. The diagram then splits into two columns to show the Controlled thesis on the left and the antithesis on the right. The first set of boxes indicates the two sides of the conflict that are being managed along with a general period of time. The subsequent row of boxes indicates how the thesis and antithesis are being created and managed followed by the third set of boxes showing the method by which Skull and Bones is attempting to accomplish the creation and management of the thesis and antithesis. The final box then shows the controlled goal as a result of the management of conflict.
As was discussed in section 3, the conspiracy framework of analysis is far too limiting and problematic. Sutton maintains that the illegal financing of enemy regimes by members of Skull and Bones “can only be explained in the terms of the Hegelian dialectic” 124, process. This framework assumes that Skull and Bones is involved in a conspiracy of a grand nature without proving that to be the case. Second, because it assumes a conspiracy is at work, it eliminates other possibilities that might explain the situation. Using the results of the cross-sectional test performed in section 4 as a framework, a new analysis of the claims against Skull and Bones must be conducted.
The evidence that will be examined in the following pages is in no way an exhaustive study of illegal financing activities during the Bolshevik Revolution or the rise of Hitler. Instead, we will focus our attention on the evidence that is presented by conspiracy theorists against Skull and Bones in an attempt to better explain the events in question as well as to draw further insights as to the correct nature of the relationship between Skull and Bones and illegal financing by using the results of the cross-sectional test.
To begin this analysis of evidence, we will start with an examination of the Guaranty Trust Company and Brown Brothers, Harriman (formerly W.A. Harriman & Co.) in order to explain why conspiracy theorists focus so heavily on the activities of these two companies, and why these companies were labeled as affiliated with Skull and Bones in the cross-sectional test. The activities of these companies and their subsidiaries will then be presented for evaluation starting with the illegal financing during the Bolshevik Revolution and then followed by the activities of these firms during the rise of Hitler, in order to show that the aid of these companies was critical to the development and/or maintenance of Soviet communism and German fascism.
In addition to following these three companies, we will also follow the activities of specific members of Skull and Bones through their involvement with the above-mentioned firms. This work will examine the activities of Averell Harriman (’13), Prescott Bush (’17), Roland Harriman (’17), Ray Morris (’01) and George H. Walker, highlighting their illegal activities through these firms and their subsidiaries.
For simplicity, and in order to accurately present the correlations stressed by conspiracy theorists, members of Skull and Bones will be indicated by including the year of their initiation into the Order of Skull and Bones next to their name.
Guaranty Trust Company was founded in 1864 in New York. It grew rapidly by the absorbing other banks and trust companies including the Morton Trust Company, the Standard Trust Company, and the National Bank of Commerce. Guaranty Trust Company became a subsidiary of the J.P. Morgan firm in 1912 when the Harriman family sold 8,000 shares of 20,000 total outstanding shares to J.P. Morgan, and has been known as Morgan-Guaranty Company since 1954.
The original capital for Guaranty Trust came from the Whitney, Rockefeller, Harriman and Vanderbilt family, all of which are represented in The Order of Skull and Bones, and on the Board of Guaranty Trust throughout the time period being discussed. Directors of Guaranty Trust Company during this time frame, who were also members of Skull and Bones, include:
Membership in The Order Of Skull and Bones and Guaranty Trust Company:
* indicates directorship in both W.A. Harriman & Co. and Guaranty Trust Company.
Harold Stanley (’08)
W. Murray Crane (’04)
Harry P. Whitney (1894)
W. Averell Harriman (’13) *
Knight Woolley (’17) *
Frank P. Shepard (’17) (VP from 1920-1934)
Joseph R. Swan (’02)
Thomas Cochrane (1894)
Percy Rockefeller (’00)
George H. Chittenden (‘39)
William Redmond Cross (’41)
Henry P. Davison, Jr. (’20)
Thomas Rodd (’35)
Clement D. Gile (’39)
This concentration of members of Skull and Bones, according to Sutton, represents a tight collusion that could be very influential in the decision-making process of the firm. This firm was classified as affiliated with Skull and Bones because this firm: 1) was created by Skull and Bones members, 2) the Vice-President of the Firm was a member of Skull and Bones during the time period discussed, and 3) more then 25 percent of the firms directors were members of Skull and Bones.
Guaranty Trust Company was involved in illegal financing both before and after the Bolshevik Revolution; was the backer of Ludwig Martens and his soviet bureau; was the first Soviet representative in the United States; the first Soviet fiscal agent in the United States; and received the first shipments of Soviet gold to the United States.225
W.A. Harriman & Co. was established in 1920 by Averell Harriman(’13) with George Herbert Walker (father-in-law of Prescott Bush (’17)) as President and Roland Harriman (’17) as Vice-President. W.A. Harriman & Co. merged with the British-American investment house, Brown Brothers, on January 1, 1931. George Herbert Walker retired to his own G. H. Walker & Co, leaving the Harriman brothers, Prescott Bush and Thatcher M. Brown of the Brown Brothers firm as the Senior-partners. From its inception, the W.A. Harriman & Co. (Brown Brothers, Harriman) housed members of The Order.
Like the Guaranty Trust Company, members of The Order of Skull and Bones also established the original W.A. HARRIMAN & CO. Furthermore, this firm was also dominated and substantially owned by members of the Order of Skull and Bones. It is in this context that some investigators attempt to unravel episodes of illegal financing to both the Bolshevik Revolution and Hitler’s rise to power.
Membership in The Order of Skull and Bones and of Brown Brothers, Harriman (Formerly W.A. Harriman & Co.):
* indicates directorship in both W.A. Harriman & Co. and Guaranty Trust Company.
^ indicates directorship in both W.A. Harriman & Co. and the Union Banking Corporation.
W. Averell Harriman (’13) *
E. Roland Harriman (’17) ^ (VP from 1920-1926)
Ellery S. James (’17)
Ray Morris (’01)^
Prescott Sheldon Bush (’17)^ (VP 1926 -)
Knight Woolley (’17) *
Mortimer Seabury (’09)
Robert A. Lovett (’18)
Eugene WM. Stetson, Jr. (’34)
Walter H. Brown (’45)
Stephen Y. Hord (’21)
John Beckwith Madden (’41)
Grange K. Costikyan (’29)
Partners not in The Order:
Matthew C. Brush
Thatcher M. Brown
Here too we find a large concentration of members of Skull and Bones within W.A. Harriman & Co. although the board of directors of W.A. Harriman & Co. has grown since the World War II, during the period of time in question only four partners existed, three of whom where members of Skull and Bones. This firm was also included in my classification as affiliated with Skull and Bones because 1) it was created by members of Skull and Bones, 2) both the President and Vice-President were members of Skull and Bones, and 3) more then 25 percent of the directors were members of Skull and Bones.
Conspiracy Theorists generally focus their attention on the illegal financing activities of W.A. Harriman & Co. and Guaranty Trust Company which benefited the Soviet regime during and following the Bolshevik Revolution. Special emphasis is placed on those industrial companies that were controlled by these two firms, namely the International Barnsdall Corporation, the Georgian Manganese Company, which provided the technology and equipment needed for industrial production in the Soviet Union, and the USSR’s first national bank, Ruskombank, which provided a means by which the Soviet regime could establish credit with the United States. Conspiracy theorists also draw attention to the anti-communist activities conducted by these companies domestically as evidence of the Hegelian managed conflict process.
The Bolsheviks took control of the Caucasus and the Baku oil fields in 1920-21. As a result of mismanagement and political chaos, the oil field drilling in the Baku almost ceased between 1921-1923. The Chairman of Azneft (The Soviet oil production trust), put forward a program for recovery of the oil fields, however the program required equipment and technology that was not available in Russia. In an article published in Pravda, September 21, 1922, Serbrovsky states,
But just here American capital is going to support us. The American firm International Barnsdall Corporation has submitted a plan … Lack of equipment prevents us from increasing the production of the oil industry of Baku by ourselves. The American firm … will provide the equipment, start drilling in the oil fields and organize the technical production of oil with deep pumps. 326
International Barnsdall Corporation, together with Lucey Manufacturing Company and other major foreign oil well equipment firms fulfilled Azneft ‘s plan. The first International Barnsdall Corporation concession was signed in October 1921 and was followed by two more in September 1922,427 despite the fact that Federal Authorities prohibited trading in Russian credits in the United States.528
Guaranty Trust Company, W.A. Harriman & Co. and Lee, Higginson Company owned the Barnsdall Corporation. The Barnsdall Corporation owned 75 percent of the International Barnsdall Corporation, with the other 25 percent owned by H. Mason Day. A member of Skull and Bones represented the Lee, Higginson Company on the Board of Directors of International Barnsdall Corporation. The Chairman was Matthew C. Brush, one of the very few directors of W.A. Harriman & Co. who was not a member of The Order of Skull and Bones. It is argued that Skull and Bones had a significant hold and influence on the affairs of the International Barnsdall Corporation through its strong representation in three of the four companies owning the International Barnsdall Corporation. Nevertheless, evidence tends to ignore the other major firms involved in this transaction. Conspiracy theorists argue that members of Skull and Bones, through the W.A. Harriman & Co. and Guaranty Trust Company, were able to use the International Barnsdall Corporation in order to aid in the development of communism (the Hegelian thesis.) We shall see similar behavior with the Georgian Manganese Company.
W. Averell Harriman, with Matthew C. Brush as Chairman, formed the Georgian Manganese Company in 1923. On July 12th, 1925, a concession agreement was made between the W. A. Harriman & Co. of New York and the USSR to provide loans and foreign exchange for the purpose of exploitation of the Chiaturi manganese deposits and extensive introduction of modern mining and transportation methods.629 Under this agreement $4 million was spent on mechanizing the mines and converting them from hand to mechanical operation, including the production of a railroad system, an aerial tramway for the transfer of manganese ore and loading elevators.
On August 10, 1920, the U.S. State Department adopted the policy of unrecognition to be the official U.S. policy toward the Soviet Union.730 This policy prevented the extension of credit to the Soviet Union and permitted only pre-approved trading. This policy was in effect until President Roosevelt took office in 1933. The activities of both the International Barnsdall Corporation and the Georgian Manganese Company in the years of 1921-22 and 1925 respectively, were not approved by the U.S. government and were in direct violation of the State Department’s prohibition.
Both the International Barnsdall Corporation and the Georgian Manganese Company were both heavily involved in illegal activity in support of Soviet development while receiving a large percentage of their financing through W.A. Harriman & Co. A member of Skull and Bones, Averell Harriman(’13) founded the Georgian Manganese Company, while W.A. Harriman & Co. and Guaranty Trust Company owned more then two-thirds of the Barnsdall Corporation, which in turn owned 75 percent of the International Barnsdall Corporation. Despite having partial ownership, it is difficult to tell what role the members of Skull and Bones in the W.A. Harriman & Co. and Guaranty Trust Company firms played in the decision making process of either the International Barnsdall Corporation or the Georgian Manganese Company. I did not include these two companies in the cross-sectional test because the primary function of these companies is not to provide financing to other corporations or entities, but rather their primary function is industrial.
It is argued that members of Skull and Bones were not only providing technology and equipment to the Soviet Union, but they were involved in the creation of a bank that would allow Credit to the Soviet Union. In 1920 the Anglo-Russian Chamber of Commerce was created to promote trade with Russia. The Chairman of its Executive Committee was Skull and Bones member Samuel R. Bertron(’85), a Vice President of Guaranty Trust Company. In a letter from the Anglo-Russian Chamber of Commerce to the State Department, dated July 1, 1921, requests, “What date trading in Russian credits was prohibited in the United States by Federal Authorities?”831
Despite knowledge of Guaranty Trust Company’s Vice-President Samuel Bertron(’85) that trading and banking with the Soviet Union was deemed illegal by the State Department, Guaranty Trust Company initiated trade with the Soviet Union against State Department regulations. Guaranty Trust Company, in association with several German, Swedish and British bankers, formed a joint banking agreement with the Soviets in the fall of 1922. Ruskombank (Foreign Commercial Bank or the Bank of Foreign Commerce) became the first Soviet commercial bank, and was headed by Olof Aschberg.932 A Vice-President of Guaranty Trust Company was installed as the first VP of Ruskombank in charge of its foreign operations.1033 Guaranty Trust Company came to represent Ruskombank the in the US.
The objectives of Ruskombank “were to raise short-term loans in foreign countries, to introduce foreign capital into the Soviet Union, and generally to facilitate Russian overseas trade.”1134 At the opening of the bank, Olof Aschberg commented, “The new bank will look after the purchasing of machinery and raw material from England and the United States and will give guarantees for the completion of contracts.”1235
Conspiracy theorists point toward the illegal financing that was provided by U.S. firms as evidence of a conspiracy, as well as the joint directorship of these firms by Skull and Bones members such as Averell Harriman as proof of collusion. There is a link between membership in Skull and Bones and directorship in both W.A. Harriman & Co. and Guaranty Trust Company. There also exists a link between these firms and their subsidiaries: the Georgian Manganese Company and the International Barnsdall Corporation. The most dominant link that appears to exist is the presence of Averell Harriman in the directorship of W.A. Harriman & Co. and Guaranty Trust Company, as well as both subsidiaries.
A broader view of society shows that during this time period the Soviet government had enacted their New Economic Program (NEP). The NEP promised a reform of Communist policies and cooperation with capitalist business and resulted in a massive infusion of financial and technological aid from numerous countries. Although the U.S. State Department refused to acknowledge the new Soviet government and deemed trade with the USSR illegal, numerous American companies, both industrial and financial, provided aid to the USSR during the NEP.
As the results of the cross-sectional test indicated, a broader view of society does show similar illegal involvement by non-Skull and Bones related firms. Conspiracy theorists who emphasize Skull and Bones involvement in illegal financing rarely evaluate the illegal financing of other firms and their subsidiaries. A few of these non-Skull and Bones related firms that were involved in illegal financing include National City Bank who was involved in illegal financing before WWI as well as after the Bolshevik Revolution, the Chase National Bank who was involved in illegal financing during WWI, Kuhn, Loeb and Company who was involved in illegal financing before and during WWI as well as post Bolshevik Revolution, and the Mechanics and Metals National Bank who was also involved in illegal financing before and during WWI. Important production companies and industrialist who received financing from the above-mentioned firms, and who also aided in the industrial development of the Soviet Union include the Daniel Williard of Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, Westinghouse Air Brake Company, General Electric, Henry Ford and the Vacuum Oil Company.
In order for the Hegelian managed conflict process to work, an antithesis is required. Hitler’s fascist NAZI party became the antithesis, according to Sutton, and as a result became the benefactor of heavy financing and aid from members of Skull and Bones. Brown Brothers Harriman (formerly W.A. Harriman & Co.) headed by Averell Harriman (’13), the Sullivan and Cromwell Law Firm headed by John Foster Dulles, and the Union Banking Corporation (UBC) headed by Roland Harriman (’17) and Prescott Bush (’17), came to represent the entire business interests of the NAZI cartels in the U.S. before and during World War II.1336 On October 1942, the U.S. government charged Prescott Bush (’17) with running NAZI front groups in the United States. Under the Trading with the Enemy Act, all the shares of the Union Banking Corporation were seized, including those held by Prescott Bush (’17), W. Averell Harriman (’13) and Roland Harriman (’17) as being, in effect, held for enemy nationals. The Union Banking Corporation was an affiliate of Brown Brothers, Harriman (formerly W.A. Harriman & Co.), where Prescott Bush, Averell Harriman and Roland Harriman were partners.
Once the government obtained access to The UBC’s records, an intricate web of Nazi front corporations began to unravel. Within days two of Union Banking Company’s subsidiaries (the Holland American Trading Corporation and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation) were also seized. The government later went after the Harriman Fifteen Holding Company (which was shared by Prescott Bush, his father-in-law George Herbert Walker and the Harriman brothers), the Hamburg-Amerika Line, and the Silesian-American Corporation. The U.S. government found that huge sections of the UBC Empire was operated on behalf of Nazi Germany and had greatly assisted the German war effort.
By determining that Prescott Bush (’17), Roland Harriman (’17), George Herbert Walker and other directors of Union Banking Corp. were legally front men for the Nazis, a host of business networks for the build-up of Germany emerged. In light of the results of the cross-sectional analysis we will re-analyze the Union Banking Corporation’s role in financing Germany during the rise of Hitler, to determine whether or not illegal support for a violent regime was intentional as well as what role members of Skull & Bones played in these activities.
Again, the evidence presented here is not a comprehensive examination of the available evidence nor is it a comprehensive presentation of the argument against Skull and Bones, however it is more then sufficient to show the connections and relationships between firms in an attempt to show the intent of each firm.
Conspiracy theorists claim that Averell Harriman(’13) began plans to take advantage of the economic crisis in Germany during the post-World War I period, starting in the early 1920’s. Government investigators reported that “W. Averell Harriman was in Europe sometime prior to 1924 and at that time became acquainted with Fritz Thyssen, the German industrialist.” During this time Harriman and Thyssen agreed to set up a bank for Thyssen in New York. “Certain of Harriman’s associates would serve as directors…” while Thyssen’s agent “H.J. Kouwenhoven … came to the United States … prior to 1924 for conferences with the Harriman Company in this connection.”1437
The Union Banking Corporation was formally established in 1924 as a unit of the Manhattan offices of W.A. Harriman & Co., interlocking with the Thyssen-owned bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart (BHS) in the Netherlands. Thus by personal agreement between Averell Harriman and Fritz Thyssen in 1922, W.A. Harriman and Co., through the Union Banking Corporation, would be transferring funds back and forth between New York and the Thyssen interests in Germany by way of BHS in the Netherlands. By fronting $400,000 during the upstart, W.A. Harriman and company became joint owner and manager of Thyssen’s banking operations in the U.S., the UBC.1538 Government investigators concluded “the Union Banking Corporation has since its inception handled funds chiefly supplied to it through the Dutch bank by the Thyssen interests for American investment.”1639
An article in the Herald Tribune on July 31, 1941 declared that while the majority of Thyssen’s interest within the United States had been frozen, the Union Banking Corp was currently holding $3 million for Thyssen.1740 This article launched an investigation by the U.S. government’s Justice Department, and on October 20, 1942 the U.S. government, under the trading with the Enemy Act, seized the assets of the Union Banking Corporation including stock shares, all of which were owned by E. Roland Harriman, Prescott Bush, three Nazi executives and two associates of Bush.1841
The list of Directors and their affiliations at the time of seizure are important in order to understand the aid that the UBC provided to the Nazi movement in Germany. These directors and their affiliations are:
E. Roland Harriman – 3991 shares
[Chairman and director of Union Banking Corp. (UBC); Partner in Brown Brothers Harriman; Member of Skull & Bones (’17).]
Cornelis Lievense – 4 shares
[President and Director of UBC; New York resident banking functionary for the Nazi party.]
Harold D. Pennington – 1 share
[Treasurer and Director of UBC; an office manager employed by Bush at Brown Brothers, Harriman.]
Ray Morris – 1 share
[Director of UBC; Partner of Prescott Bush and both Averell and Roland Harriman; member of Skull & Bones (’01).]
Prescott S. Bush – 1 share
[Director of UBC, which was co-founded and sponsored by his father-in-law George Herbert Walker; senior managing partner for E. Roland Harriman and Averell Harriman; Partner Brown Brothers, Harriman; member of Skull & Bones (’17).]
H.J. Kouwenhoven – 1 share
[Director of UBC; organized UBC as the emissary of Fritz Thyssen in negotiations with George Herbert Walker and Averell Harriman; managing director of UBC’s Netherlands affiliate under Nazi occupation; industrial executive in Nazi Germany; director and chief foreign financial executive of the German Steel Trust.]
Johann G. Groeninger – 1 share
Director of UBC and of its Netherlands affiliate (BHS); German industrial executive.]
At the time of the US Government’s seizure, of the six Directors, three were members of Skull and Bones while three other Directors were members of Germany’s Nazi party.
Investigators soon discovered that illegal financing of Germany by the UBC was just the tip of the iceberg. On October 28, 1942, the US government seized two Nazi front organizations run by the UBC: the Holland-American Trading Corporation and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation.1942 Then on November 17, 1942, Nazi interest in the Silesian-American Corporation (long managed by Averell Harriman, Prescott Bush and father-in-law George Herbert Walker) was seized under the Trading with the Enemy Act.2043 These three front organizations, along with two UBC affiliates, the German Steel Trust and the Hamburg-Amerika Line, played a great part in the arming of Germany before and during World War II. The U.S. based UBC became the pivotal component of US aid to Germany prior to and during the war.
The 1942 US government investigative report states that the UBC was an interlocking concern with the Vereinigte Stahlwerke (United Steel Works Corporation or German Steel Trust.)2144 The UBC began making financial arrangements for the German Steel Trust and its co-owner, Friedrich Flick, before 1926.2245 Flick was the major co-owner of the German Steel Trust with Fritz Thyssen. At the wartime tribunal at Nuremberg, the US government said that Flick was “one of the leading financiers and industrialist who from 1932 contributed large sums to the Nazi party [and] to the SS.”2346
After the war, a Congressional investigation examined the Thyssen interests in relation with the UBC (The UBC was also the New York office for the German Steel Trust) and other Nazi entities, and determined that the Vereinigte Stahlwerke (German Steel Trust) had produced the following approximate proportions of total German national output as of 1938:
50.8% of Germany’s pig iron
41.4% of Germany’s universal plat
36.0% of Germany’s heavy plate
38.5% of Germany’s galvanized sheet
45.5% of Germany’s pipes and tubes
22.1% of Germany’s wire
35.0% of Germany’s explosives2447
The major co-owners of the Germany Steel Trust were Fritz Thyssen and Friedrich Flick. Both of these men were long-time supporters of the Nazi movement in Germany and were held on trial after the war for their financial and industrial support to Germany during the War.
Fritz Thyssen told Allied interrogators after the war that he provided financing to the Nazi party in several different ways. Arrangements were made with Hitler’s deputy Rudolph Hess to received credit with the Dutch bank in Rotterdam, the Bank Handel und Schiff (i.e. Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart (BHS), the UBC affiliate bank).2548 Thyssen also donated large sums of money for the maintenance of Hitler’s private armies: the Schutzstaffel (S.S. or Black Shirts) and the Sturmabteilung (S.A., Brown Shirts).2649 Flick also, since 1932, donated large sums to the Nazi party and was a member of the infamous “Circle of Friends” who contributed large sums to the maintenance of the S.S.2750 For the role he played in the buildup of Hitler’s army, Flick was condemned to seven years in prison at the Nuremberg trials.
The 1929-31 economic collapse bankrupted the German Steel Trust and the German government took over the Trust’s stock shares. Konrad Adenauer and interest associated with the anti-Nazi Catholic Center Party attempted to acquire the shares. However, the UBC, with the help of British financier Montagu Norman, made the financial arrangements that guaranteed Fritz Thyssen would regain control over the shares and the Trust.2851
The Silesian-America Corporation was founded in 1926 by Herbert Walker at the same time as the German Steel Trust, and was held as a unit of the Harriman Fifteen Corporation. The Harriman Fifteen Corporation consisted entirely of George Walker as president, and Prescott Bush (’17) and Averell Harriman (’13) as the sole directors of the corporation. At the time of the merger of W.A. Harriman & Co. and Brown Brothers in 1931, The Harriman Fifteen Corporation held a substantial stake in the Silesian Holding Co., which resulted in Averell Harriman’s Chairmanship of the Consolidated Silesian Steel Corporation, with the Harriman Fifteen Corporation owning one-third of a complex of steel-making, coal-mining and zinc-mining activities in Germany and Poland, while Friedrich Flick owned the majority of the other two-thirds.2952 A director of the Silesian-America Corporation was Ray Morris (’01), a partner of Prescott Bush (’17) and the Harrimans at both The UBC and Brown Brothers, Harriman.
An investigative report of the Silesian-American Corporation determined the “NATURE OF BUSINESS: The subject corporation is an American holding company for German and Polish subsidiaries, which own large and valuable coal and zinc mines in Silesia, Poland and Germany. Since September 1929 these properties have been in the possession of and have been operated by the German government and have undoubtedly been of considerable assistance to that country in its war effort.”3053
In 1920 Herbert Walker, as president of the W.A. Harriman and Co., arranged the necessary credits to take control of the Hamburg-Amerika Line. Walker then organized the American Ship and Commerce Corp. as a unit of the W.A. Harriman and Co., with contractual power over Hamburg-Amerika’s affairs.3154 The Bush-Harriman shares in American Ship and Commerce Corp. were held by the Harriman Fifteen Corp., which was run by Prescott Bush (’17) and Herbert Walker.3255
Directors of the Hamburg-Amerika Line included Baron Rudolph von Schroeder and Albert Voegler: Voegler was the chief executive of the German Steel Trust associated with the UBC and a director of the BHS Bank in Rotterdam which was also the Dutch bank affiliated with the UBC. Voegler donated heavily to the Nazi party between 1930-1933 and helped to organize the Nazi leap into national power.3356
The Hamburg-Amerika Line was not only involved in the buildup of Hitler’s army, but was an active agent in the promotion and arming of Hitler’s Nazi party. Before Hitler’s accession to power, his private army of an estimated 300,000 men raised concern with Germany’s established government, which moved to defend national freedom by ordering the Nazi party’s private armies to be disbanded. The U.S. Embassy reported that the Hamburg-Amerika Line was purchasing and distributing propaganda attacks against the German government for attempting to disband Hitler’s forces.3457
Furthermore, the Hamburg-Amerika Line and its affiliates were being used to ship American weapons to Germany. A key figure in these activities was Samuel Pryor. Pryor was a founding director of both the UBC and the American Ship and Commerce Corp. with Herbert Walker and Averell Harriman. Pryor was also the executive committee chairman of Remington Arms.3558 A US Senate investigation on arms trafficking began after Remington contracted to supply the German firm I.G. Farben with explosives. The Senators found that,
German political associations, like the Nazi and others, are nearly all armed with American … guns … Arms of all kinds coming from America are transshipped in the Scheldt to river barges before the vessels arrive in Antwerp. They then can be carried through Holland without police inspection or interference. The Hitlerists (sic) and Communists are presumed to get arms in this manner. The principal arms coming from America are Thompson submachine guns and revolvers. The number is great.3659
On September 5, 1933, under official Nazi supervision, the Hamburg Amerika Line (Hapag) and the North German Lloyd Company merged. On November 4, 1933, Prescott Bush, through the American Ship and Commerce Corp, personally chose Christian J. Beck to be the manager of freight and operations in North America for the new joint Nazi shipping lines (Hapag-Lloyd).3760
According to testimony of officials of the companies before Congress in 1934, a supervisor from the Nazi Labor Front rode with every ship of the Hapag-Lloyd line; employees of the New York offices were directly organized into the Nazi Labor Front organization; Hamburg-Amerika provided free passage to individuals going abroad for Nazi propaganda purposes; and the line subsidized pro-Nazi newspapers in the USA, as it had done in Germany against the constitutional government.3861
Two months before the seizure of the UBC, the US government ordered the seizure of all property of the Hamburg-Amerika Line and the North German Lloyd Company under the Trading with the Enemy Act. The investigators noted in the pre-seizure report that Christian J. Beck was still acting as an attorney representing the Nazi firm.3962
As is argued by Sutton and other conspiracy theorists, the Guaranty Trust Company and the W.A. Harriman & Co. were both involved in illegal financial activities, which resulted in the economic and industrial build-up of the Soviet Union and Hitler’s army. However, the conspiracy theorists conclude that because a large percentage of these firms are made up of Skull and Bones members, Skull and Bones must then be involved in a conspiracy. An examination of other companies who received financing from these firms might show that the majority of companies aided by either the Guaranty Trust Company and the W.A. Harriman & Co. were not involved in the build-up of Hitler’s Nazi party. However, this information is not available.
Second, it is difficult to determine how much of the decision making was done by members of Skull and Bones verses non-member partners and directors. As was indicated in the presented evidence, many of the managers and presidents of subsidiary companies were not members of Skull and Bones, and it was these latter companies that were providing the material build-up of Germany and the Soviet Union.
Furthermore, it might be erroneous to argue that because members of Skull and Bones were involved in illegal financing that it is a behavior of the Skull and Bones group. Conspiracy theorists, despite showing individual guilt, have largely failed to provide proof that causation exists between being a member of Skull and Bones and participating in illegal financing.
Throughout all the evidence, we not only find W.A. Harriman & Co. and Guaranty Trust Company with all its subsidiaries, but more importantly we find five individuals at the head of all these affairs. The presence of Skull and Bones members Averell Harriman (‘13), Prescott Bush (‘17), Roland Harriman (‘17), Ray Morris (‘01) and non-member George H. Walker. Many of these members were involved in the creation of the majority of the above-mentioned firms.
This evidence demonstrates the personal blame for illegal financing on the five above-mentioned individuals, at the very least. It also demonstrates important family correlations such as Averell and brother Roland Harriman or Prescott Bush and father-in-law George H. Walker. Furthermore, although George H. Walker was not a member of Skull and Bones, his progeny were initiated, along with the progeny of the other four financiers. The evidence also indicates that illegal financing is not an exclusive behavior of members of Skull and Bones, but rather many firms were engaged in such practices.
The falsifiable test conducted in section four yielded three important results. First, a relationship between being a member of Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing did appear to exist. Despite the behavior of non-Skull and Bones related firms, our evidence indicated that all members of Skull and Bones who were in a position that allowed them to provide illegal financing did so. Second, the existence of many non-Skull and Bones related firms who were also providing illegal financing indicates that the relationship between being a member of Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing may be spurious, and membership in Skull and Bones does not appear to be a motivating factor in the participation of illegal financing. Third, the participation of non-Skull and Bones related firms in illegal financing indicates that other factors exist in society that are acting as the motivating force behind illegal finance.
An examination of the evidence used by conspiracy theorists against Skull and Bones during both the Bolshevik Revolution and the rise of Hitler was enlightening for three reasons: it assessed personal blame, it presented a broader view of society, and it highlighted important family connections that were not discernible in the falsifiable test.
The presentation of evidence in both cases showed clearly a number of companies that acted illegally during this time period. In some instances the evidence was able to indicate individual guilt and intent, although evidence for the latter is generally incomplete and circumstantial. The assessment of personal guilt is important in criminal investigations. However, the assumption that a grand conspiracy is taking place or that Skull and Bones is involved in such a conspiracy remains unproven.
Using the evidence illustrated in section five, we were able to present the charges made against Skull and Bones members while at the same time glimpse a broader view of society during that time period. Although conspiracy theorists tend to focus only on those firms controlled or associated with Skull and Bones members, a closer examination of society shows that several hundred firms and industrial companies illegally aided in the build-up of the Soviet Union during and after the Bolshevik Revolution as well as Hitler’s accession to power. No evidence exists showing correlations between being a member of Skull and Bones and these other companies who were also providing illegal financing. The evidence also indicates that many of America’s largest corporations, such as General Electric, Ford, Standard Oil and the Vacuum Oil Company participated in illegal financing during this time period.
Participation in illegal financing by such a large group of the corporate elite indicates that other factors in society might exist that motivates firms to participate in illegal activity. The most obvious factor is the profit maximization of financial gains. These corporations were able to take advantage of post war Germany and Russia in an attempt to increase profits through the sale of products these countries desperately needed. As indicated in section five, several companies formed a lobbying group in an attempt to persuade congress to recognize the USSR and aid in the new government’s development. Certainly any financial aid to the USSR by the US government would have ended up in the pockets of the American businesses that were providing the USSR with technology and equipment. Other companies such as Standard Oil and W.A. Harriman & Co. were granted ownership, by the foreign country, over portions of the industry they were financially aiding.
Another factor that might motivate firms to participate in illegal activity could be the desire for power. However, power seems to be directly connected to financial gains. Increased profits would allow a company to gain a larger share of the industry and thus create even larger profits. The company could gain stronger influence in government through increased lobbying and the creation of foundations and think tanks. The company could also gain stronger influence among the public through propaganda and advertising, publications by the company’s foundations and think tanks, and through goal-specific grants and donations. By extension, an individual would gain these same powers through the company. Or more accurately, the company would act as the vehicle through which the individual is able to gain and exercise power.
Status is another factor that might motivate a firm to participate in illegal finance, although again, status is also directly related with financial gains as well as power.
Conspiracy theorists assert that these factors are legitimate factors for explaining why so many companies were involved in illegal financing. However, conspiracy theorists go one step further to argue that there exists a few individuals who are encouraging and even organizing the activities of others in order to accomplish their conspiratorial goals. Examples would include the financing of dozens of industrial companies who were intent on illegally conducting business with the USSR or Germany by W.A. Harriman & Co. and Guaranty Trust Company. Or conspiracy theorists point toward the exclusive representation of American firms in their dealings with pre-World War II Germany by the Sullivan and Cromwell Law Firm headed by John Foster Dulles.
These claims would suggest that the majority of business is intent on profit maximization, and businesses would engage in illegal activity if there was a possibility of not suffering consequences. But conspiracy theorists also suggest that there exist a few individuals who are trying to carry out a hidden agenda. These clandestine individuals position themselves in situations where they are able to steer the actions of others. In such a way, these clandestine few could position themselves in the financial world and then aggressively aid those companies that are willing to act in a way that benefits the financier’s agenda. In the same way, these conspiratorial financiers would be able to prevent companies from acting in a way that harms the agenda of the financiers through the denial of business finance.
However, proving that a select few individuals are steering the actions of others is nearly impossible as it involves proving intent. Second, such agenda-based manipulation of the corporate world could still be explained through profit maximization, which would not necessarily require secrecy or a conspiracy of a grand nature.
The third benefit of the examination of evidence is that it highlights important family correlations that were not discernible in the falsifiable test. Evidence shows two strong family links that were heavily involved in illegal finance in both case studies. The Harriman family, which includes W.A. Harriman(’13) and brother Roland Harriman (’17), were responsible for the creation of the W.A. Harriman & Co. and the Union Banking Corporation. These firms, of which both the Harrimans were directors, were the focal points of illegal financing to the Bolshevik Revolution and the rise of Hitler. W.A. Harriman was also a director of Guaranty Trust Company.
The second family correlation is that of Prescott Bush (’17), which includes his father-in-law George Herbert Walker. George Herbert Walker was one of the original directors of W.A. Harriman & Co.; he helped set up the Union Banking Corporation and later established G.H. Walker & Co. and the Harriman Fifteen Company. His son-in-law, Prescott Bush (’17) was a director of both the Union Banking Corporation and W.A. Harriman & Co. Although George Herbert Walker was not a member of Skull and Bones, both his son and grandson were initiated into the Order of Skull and Bones. Prescott was the first in his family to be initiated, but his son, George H.W. Bush, and grandson, George W. Bush, were initiated as well as numerous relatives. There are no other prominent family connections between the members of Skull and Bones that participated in illegal financing.
The evidence of illegal financing could lead to numerous conclusions and explanations. The methodological framework used in section four was intended to reduce those possibilities. However, even with both the falsifiable test and a reevaluation of the evidence we are left with several possible conclusions.
As previously explained, power, prestige and wealth could be the ultimate motivating factor for illegal financing, whether by members of Skull and Bones or by non-Skull and Bones related firms; however, this does not exclude occasional non-profit, agenda-based motivators. The results of the falsifiable test indicate that a weak relationship exists between being a member of skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing, however a relationship still appears to exist. A much stronger correlation exists between being involved in a powerful firm and participation in illegal financing. As a result, we could conclude that Skull and Bones membership appears to have nothing to do with illegal financing as a whole.
However, our evidence indicates that a relationship does exist between being a member of Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing. It is difficult to determine what that relationship is, or if our test is accurate. Because of the small size of the test sample the results could be skewed, incorrectly indicating that a relationship may exist when in reality it might not. Nevertheless, for the purpose of evaluation we are going to assume that the test sample is an accurate representation of each case study. With that assumption, our results indicate that a relationship between the two variables exists, but now we need to explore the possible forms the relationship between Skull and Bones and illegal finance might take.
Conspiracy theorists claim that the relationship is direct and conspiratorial, stating that the appearance of several members of Skull and Bones indicates group collusion. Often in the arguments presented by conspiracy theorists, no distinction is made between the organization of Skull and Bones and its members. Rather, each is generically referred to as Skull and Bones. In this way, an implicit assumption and accusation is made against the Skull and Bones organization whenever one of its members is accused of a crime. Firms are not referred to as being dominated by members of Skull and Bones but rather the firm is referred to as being Skull and Bones dominated. Illegal financing is not referred to as illegal financing by members of Skull and Bones, but rather it is illegal financing by Skull and Bones. The potentially erroneous assumption is that a direct relationship exists between the behavior of Skull and Bones members and the Skull and Bones organization itself, despite the fact that no evidence exists to prove that illegal financing is the agenda of the Skull and Bones organization.
Another simple cross-sectional test might help to bring into perspective the conspiracy theorists assumptions about the proposed Skull and Bones agenda. If illegal financing was the agenda of Skull and Bones, then a significant percent of the group’s members should be involved in this activity. Never the less, not enough significant evidence exists which would allow us to calculate the percentage of Skull and Bones members that were involved in illegal financing during this time period.
So what then is the nature of the relationship between Skull and Bones and illegal financing? The research indicates four possible explanations for the relationship that appears to exist: 1) positive networking, 2) agenda based networking, 3) status and 4) collective guilt of Skull and Bones.
It could simply be a coincidence that there are so many members of Skull and Bones working together at firms where illegal financing is taking place; however, that seems highly unlikely. A better explanation would be to examine the networking capabilities among alumni members of Skull and Bones. Networking with alumni, and especially among fraternity pledge classes is quite common in most American universities. There is no evidence to suggest that networking was any less useful between the years of 1917 and 1943. It is reasonable to conclude that members of Skull and Bones who were interested in international finance were able to network with alumni Skull and Bones members to gain access to particular jobs, especially when members such as Averell Harriman and Prescott Bush were so well connected in the financial world.
Given the high concentration of members of Skull and Bones found in certain firms such as W.A. Harriman & Co., or Guaranty Trust Company, it is reasonable to conclude that some form of networking was taking place. At this point however, the question shifts from whether or not members of Skull and Bones networked with each other, to what role networking played in illegal financing. On the one hand, positive networking could have occurred in which case members of Skull and Bones networked with each other to gain particular positions of employment. Nothing conspiratorial would exist in this relationship, and the existence of numerous members of Skull and Bones located within a single firm where illegal finance occurs is simply coincidental. On the other hand, could agenda-based networking have occurred? More specifically, if deviant members of Skull and Bones wanted to engage in illegal financing, did they network within the membership of Skull and Bones to find other members who would also be willing to engage in illegal financing? This variation seems plausible, and given that members of the Order of Skull and Bones are already bound by oaths of secrecy, it does not seem to be a far stretch to accept a claim that deviant members are able to network within the Order of Skull and Bones for deviant purposes.
Regardless, there is no information as to whether or not the many Skull and Bones members who were employed by the firms that participated in illegal finance were actively participating in the decision making process to provide illegal finance. We must assume that by the very nature of their positions as directors of the company, that they were aware of such activity, but that is an assumption that remains unproven. It could be that these members of Skull and Bones networked to gain jobs with various firms but were not involved in illegal activity. If this is true, then the number of Skull and Bones members who were actively participating in illegal finance would be much smaller then originally indicated.
A third possible explanation is that the Order of Skull and Bones merely represents status. Skull and Bones is the most prestigious of the nine secret societies at Yale University. It is made up of very wealthy prestigious family names. As previously stated, Prescott Bush was the first in his family to be initiated into the Order, but both his son and grandson were initiated; the same is true of Averell Harriman. George H. Walker was not a member, but was associated in all his business ventures with prominent members. Both his son and grandson were initiated into the Order of Skull and Bones. It is plausible to conclude that there exists no relationship between being a member of Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing, but rather the bonds that were established between individuals such as the Harrimans, Prescott Bush and George H. Walker resulted in the initiation of the progeny of these men into the prestigious Order of Skull and Bones.
However, a very slight twist on this third conclusion might state that the Skull and Bones organization is not, in and of itself, goal oriented, but rather Skull and Bones becomes the reflection of the agenda of its members during any given time period. If members of prominent families within Skull and Bones collectively work to accomplish a given goal, how does that effect the Skull and Bones organization as a whole as well as the potential agenda of the organization? Furthermore, if the progeny of individuals who were involved in illegal financing are initiated into Skull and Bones as a status symbol, does that not represent an implicit acceptance (or even reward) for illegal financing?
The fourth possible relationship is that Skull and Bones is collectively guilty of illegal financing. Our falsifiable test indicated that the relationship between membership in Skull and Bones and illegal financing may be spurious, but it does not negate possible guilt of the Skull and Bones organization. Conspiracy theorists have long argued that a conspiracy only requires a few collaborative individuals in key positions to successfully accomplish a goal. Recent events involving Enron and Arthur Anderson certainly showed how only a few well-placed individuals were able to commit illegal financial activities and hide such activities from other officers in the firm. It is possible that a secret agenda of Skull and Bones is illegal financing, and only certain members are chosen to accomplish that specific agenda while other members or kept out of the loop, or more ominously, other members are pursuing other Skull and Bones promoted activities.
The cross-sectional test was unable to indicate if causation between membership in Skull and Bones and participation in illegal finance exists. The research and evidence was useful in assessing the personal guilt of members of Skull and Bones, yet it too failed to prove causation. As a result, it is still unclear as to whether or not membership in Skull and Bones is the reason that the guilty members participated in illegal financing.
The purpose of using a scientific test design is to eliminate error and problems associated with bias; however, those problems can still occur. The primary problem associated with the test conducted in section four is that of sample size and bias. As previously stated, the sample for our test was very small, which leads to a larger margin of error. A sample of 10 companies, with four of those companies affiliated with Skull and Bones, indicates that 40 percent of the sample was associated with Skull and Bones. If the sample were to be increased to 20 firms, holding the number of Skull and Bones related firms constant, then the percentage of firms that would be associated with Skull and Bones would be reduced by 50 percent, indicating that only 20 percent of the firms were affiliated with Skull and Bones.
The purpose of a sample is to try to show an accurate representation of society as a whole. That task is difficult to do with so small a sample. Second, increasing our sample size by 100 percent while holding constant the number of firms that are affiliated with Skull and Bones shows a dramatic decrease in comparison with the rest of the sample.
Biased sampling further complicates this problem. This study was initiated by the knowledge that some firms that were affiliated with Skull and Bones were also participating in illegal finance. By intentionally including those firms in our sample we begin to bias our results, especially considering that the sample is so small. Second, a majority of the research for this work focused on those firms that did participate in illegal finance, generally lacking sufficient research of those firms that were not participating in illegal finance. As a result there is further biasing of the test sample. An unbiased test sample would most likely show that a great deal of firms did not participate in illegal financing.
In addition, no evidence was presented that fit the requirements of box B in our testing sample: Membership in Skull and Bones and non-participation in illegal financing. Again, further research into those firms that did not participate in illegal financing might show Skull and Bones members in the directorship of those firms, indicating that members of Skull and Bones members were in a position to participate in illegal finance but did not. However, no research was completed in that area and as a result the conclusions from the cross-sectional test are further weakened.
The hypotheses of this particular cross-sectional test find themselves caught in much the same dilemma as any other conspiracy verses social science work; it is not accepted or supported by both social scientists and conspiracy theorists alike. This particular work will fall into the favor of social scientists while conspiracy theorists might argue that by comparing large sections of society we are dismissing the potentially critical links that need to be explored between Skull and Bones and any conspiracy that may stem from it. While social scientists can argue that illegal financing may have been a behavior practiced by several firms of influential power without the benefit of Skull and Bones membership, conspiracy theorists would counter that the activities of other firms does not downplay the importance of the activities of firms dominated by Skull and Bones.
The difference in the interpretations of these events stem from the very different methodologies used in the analytical frameworks of conspiracy theorists and social scientists. These differences include the testing of assumptions, differing definitions and induction.
Social scientists rely on controlled assumptions in order to test their hypotheses. As stated previously in this section, scientists run tests by controlling certain variables while manipulating others to determine relationships. These relationships are then tested in order to find a universality that holds true. As one theory is proven false, a new theory is designed from the new evidence and is then tested, and this process is repeated until the theory utterly fails or until it cannot be proven false. On the other hand, conspiracy theorists tend to create theories of a grand conspiracy using the evidence of one or two situations. Then as new situations arise, new characteristics of the conspiracy theory emerge to adapt to the new situation. As a result, a tightly constructed universal framework for the classification of a conspiracy is not possible because each situation requires different defining characteristics in order to classify it as a conspiracy.
In many ways, social scientists examine the micro events of particular situations in order to develop a theory that will apply to the macro level. The events of the Bolshevik revolution are examined to develop the defining characteristics of a conspiracy and are then used and tested on other similar historical events. On the other hand, conspiracy theorists focus on the macro level in order to interpret the micro events that take place. Because conspiracy theorists focus on the existence of a grand conspiracy aimed at taking over the world on the macro level, events such as the Bolshevik revolution and the rise of Hitler are then examined in order to see how the grand conspiracy is being advanced through these events. The framework of conspiracy theory and a long-range goal of world socialism and domination are used to interpret historical events, rather then using an accumulation of historical events to determine whether or not a conspiracy is taking place.
There also exists the confusion of terminology with conspiracy and conspiracy theory. As previously stated, two forms of a conspiracy can exist. A grand conspiracy aspires to world domination while a petty conspiracy works within the existing order. A petty conspiracy is limited to affairs that involve a handful of individuals plotting to make money or to seize power. A petty conspiracy aims at transferring money from one pocket to another or replacing one set of rulers with another. With a few possible exceptions, grand conspiracies are extremely difficult to prove, while petty conspiracies are very rarely referred to as a conspiracy. When conspiracy theorists say that a conspiracy exists, they are referring to a grand conspiracy, and therein lies the problem. As the evidence in section five indicates, very likely a conspiracy was indeed taking place. Numerous companies were involved in the illegal financing of enemy regimes against specific instructions issued by the U.S. State Department. This conspiracy was of a petty nature as the seemingly obvious goal of this conspiracy was financial gain. If conspiracy theorists would emphasize that their evidence points toward a petty conspiracy, it might be more acceptable to social scientists. Never the less, conspiracy theorists use the evidence of a petty conspiracy to point toward the possible existence of a grand conspiracy, which also requires the affiliation of a secret and subversive organization such as the Order of Skull and Bones.
In testing, a social scientist will often examine the evidence of many different events in order to draw correlations and create hypotheses. These hypotheses are tested against other events to determine if they will hold up or be rejected. On the other hand, conspiracy theorists tend to create a theory, and then only use the favorable evidence of other events to prove it. As we saw in the presentation of evidence, focus is on the Skull and Bones related firms in order to prove that Skull and Bones is involved in a grand conspiracy. No attention is given to those companies who are involved in illegal activity and are not affiliated with Skull and Bones, nor is there an investigation into the activity’s of Skull and Bones related firms that might not have participated in illegal finance.
The selective presentation of only favorable evidence also leads to problems of induction. Because only Skull and Bones members who are involved in illegal activity are presented, the reader is left to the conclusion that all Skull and Bones members are involved in illegal activity. If a book were written celebrating the great amount of influence Skull and Bones members had on the American educational system, only listing those members who contributed significantly to education as well as the great percentage of members who become professors, the reader would plausibly induce from the evidence that Skull and Bones membership is focused on higher education and teaching. Again, biased representation of evidence leads both the conspiracy theorists and the reader to fallible conclusions.
Never the less, the evidence presented by conspiracy theorists is valuable as it helps to assess individual guilt. Furthermore, the scientific cross-sectional test did not produce strong conclusions, and therefore did not necessarily negate the conspiracy theory. Rather, it helped to see through the shortcomings of the conspiracy theory evidence as well as provide insight into important correlations that can be further evaluated in conjunction with the evidence. The results of the cross-sectional test provided a framework that, when combined with the evidence and commentary, helps to better explain a larger view of the situation. In order to gain additional explanations and insights into the relationship of illegal finance and membership in Skull and Bones, it would be useful to use the results of the cross-sectional test in conjunction with other theories of power politics.
This study did not prove or disprove the existence of a conspiracy in relation to Skull and Bones and illegal financing, but it did provide interesting insights into possible explanations. In order to prove that a conspiracy exists, very specific requirements must be met. First, the conspiracy must be jointly planned and acted upon. There must be direct collusion between the members of the conspiracy. There is the possibility that not all members of the conspiracy will be actively involved, but a large percentage of the members of the conspiracy should be actively involved. Second, the conspiracy must be secret. By the very definition of a conspiracy, secrecy is required for individuals to achieve a prohibited goal. If the goals of the group are public knowledge and the group is still trying to accomplish them, then it cannot be classified as a conspiracy. Third, the goals of the conspiracy must be prohibited by law. Conspiracy theorists make a distinction here by stating that the goals of the conspiracy must be evil, but evil is too ambiguous a term for proper evaluation.
If a group of students jointly and secretly decided to earn a grade of “A” on their final exams, then this would not fit the requirements of a conspiracy. If these same students jointly and secretly plotted to steal the answer key to the exams, then it would fit the requirements of conspiracy. Likewise, if all of the members of an extremist group such as the Ku Klux Klan began rallies and demonstrations in an attempt to segregate the community, this would not be classified as a conspiracy. Although there is group collusion and they are attempting to achieve a prohibited goal, there is no secrecy in their actions. On the other hand, the assassination of civil rights leaders during the 1960’s and 70’s would fit the requirements or a conspiracy provided that more then one person was involved in the planning of the assassination.
In regards to the Order of Skull and Bones and participation in illegal financing, the group as a whole meets the requirement of secrecy, but there is no evidence that the Order of Skull and Bones is secretly planning specific and illegal actions. Conspiracy theorists would need to prove that the Order of Skull and Bones is in some way promoting illegal financing. Second, group collusion in regards to participation in illegal financing is uncertain. Collusion between certain members exists, but it is unknown as to whether or not that collusion is representative of the Skull and Bones organization. Third, conspiracy theorists would need to prove that the stated goals of the Order of Skull and Bones are conspiratorial or are attempting to achieve a prohibited goal. No such stated goal of Skull and Bones has been proven to exists (although if a conspiracy does exist then no such goal will be found.)
Conspiracy theorists attempt to prove these three requirements by first demonstrating a possible link between the Order of the Illuminati and the Order of Skull and Bones. Existing records do indicate that the Order of the Illuminati was involved in a conspiracy of a grand nature. Conspiracy theorists use these claims against the Illuminati along side strong similarities between both the Illuminati and Skull and Bones in an attempt to show that these two organizations are really one and the same. Conspiracy theorist conclude that if the Order of Skull and Bones was originally a section of the Order of the Illuminati then the revealed goals of the Order of the Illuminati must be the same for Order of Skull and Bones.
Conspiracy theorists do not focus on group cohesion in micro activities such as illegal finance, but rather on a cumulative cohesion to the ultimate goals of the conspiracy. In which case, it is argued that only a few members need to be involved in illegal finance while other members can be involved in government, in education, in media, etc. This way, the goals of the conspiracy can be furthered through many different means all working together. This point is also consistent with the plans of the Order of the Illuminati.
Finally, the general and extreme policy of secrecy by members of Skull and Bones is referred to as a fulfillment of the final requirement of secrecy. If they exist, the goals of Skull and Bones are not known by anyone outside of the Order. It is assumed by conspiracy theorists that goals do exist and that they are conspiratorial in nature. The secrecy of the group only adds fuel to the fire of suspicion.
In reality, a conspiracy theory version of history assumes a top-down, macro framework of a long-range global conspiracy, which is then used to interpret all historical events. Such a framework is required in order to arrive at the conclusion of a grand conspiracy. As already stated, conspiracy theorists showed the individual guilt of members of Skull and Bones, but assessing the collective guilt of Skull and Bones is a difficult task. The burden of proof lies with the conspiracy theorists. This work has provided valuable insights into the nature of the relationship between membership in Skull and Bones and participation in illegal finance, yet that relationship remains unclear.
**
Confiscation of Union Banking Corporation
Federal Register, Saturday, November 7, 1942
[Vesting Order Number 248]
All of the capital stock of Union Banking Corporation and certain indebtedness owing by it.
Under the authority of the Trading with the Enemy Act, as amended, and Executive Order No. 9095, as amended, and pursuant to law, the undersigned, after investigation, finding:
(a) That the property described as follows:
All of the capital stock of Union Banking Corporation, a New York corporation, New York, New York, which is a business enterprise within the United States, consisting of 4,000 shares of $100 par value common capital stock, the names of the registered owners of which, and the number of shares owned by them respectively, are as follows:
Names Number of Shares
E. Roland Harriman 3,991
Cornelius Lievense 4
Harold D. Pennington 1
Ray Morris 1
Prescott S. Bush 1
H. J. Kouwenhoven 1
Johann G. Groeninger 1
Total 4000
all of which shares are held for the benefit of Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart, N.V., Rotterdam, The Netherlands, which bank is owned or controlled by members of the Thyssen family, nationals of Germany and/or Hungary, is property of nationals, and represents ownership of said business enterprise which is a national, of a designated enemy country or countries (Germany and/or Hungary);
(b) That the property described as follows:
All right, title, interest and claim of any name or nature whatsoever of the aforesaid Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart, and August Thyssen-Bank, Berlin, Germany, and each of them, in and to all indebtedness, contingent or otherwise and whether or not matured owing to them, or each of them by said Union Banking Corporation, including but not limited to all security rights in and to any and all collateral for any or all of such indebtedness and the right to sue for and collect such indebtedness.
is an interest in the aforesaid business enterprise held by nationals of an enemy country or countries, and also is property within the United States owned or controlled by nationals of a designated enemy country or countries (Germany and/or Hungary);
and determining that to the extent that any or all of such nationals are persons not within a designated enemy country, the national interest of the United States requires that such persons be treated as nationals of the aforesaid designated enemy country or countries (Germany and/or Hungary), and having made all determinations and taken all action, after appropriate consultation and certification, required by said executive order or Act or otherwise, and deeming it necessary in the national interest, hereby vests such property in the Alien Property Custodian, to be held, used, administered, liquidated, sold or otherwise dealt with in the interested of and for the benefit of the United States.
Such property and any or all of the proceeds thereof shall be held in a special account pending further determination of the Alien Property Custodian. This shall not be deemed to limit the powers of the Alien Property Custodian to return such property or the proceeds thereof, or to indicate that compensation will not be paid in lieu thereof, if and when it should be determined that such a return should be made or such compensation should be paid.
Any person, except a national of a designated enemy country, asserting any claim arising as a result of this order may file with the Alien Property Custodian a notice of his claim, together with a request for a hearing thereon, on Form APC-1, within one year from the date hereof, or within such further time as may be allowed by the Alien Property Custodian. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to constitute an admission of the existence, validity or right to allowance of any such claim.
The terms “national,” “designated enemy country” and “Business enterprise with the United States” as used herein shall have the meanings prescribed in section 10 of said executive order.
Executed at Washington, D. C. on October 20, 1942.
Leo T. Crowley
Alien Property Custodian,
[F.R. Doc. 42-11568; Filed, November 6, 1942; 11:31 a.m.]
*
*
Section 2
1. Ron Rosenbaum, New York Observer, August 23, 2001
2. Mark Fenster, Conspiracy Theories: secrecy and power in American Culture. P.69
4. Gallup Organization and the Post-Modernity Project of the University of Virginia. The State of Disunion: 1996 Survey of American Political Culture.
6. 1953 California Senate Investigating Committee on Education: As presented in An Overview of Our World: An Analysis of the Great Conspiracy and Its Effect on Contemporary History. By John F. McManus. Appleton, WI: The John Birch Society, 1991, videotape.
7. In a speech before the British Parliament in 1920, Winston Churchill … video
8. John F. McManus. An Overview of Our World: An Analysis of the Great Conspiracy and Its Effect on Contemporary History.
9. Webster, Nesta. Secret Societies and Subversive Movements. p. 207
10. Gruber, Hermann. Illuminati, The Catholic Encyclopedia. p. 661
12. In a letter to Rev. G.W. Snyder dated October 24, 1798, Former President George Washington; as presented in An Overview of Our World: An Analysis of the Great Conspiracy and Its Effect on Contemporary History. By John F. McManus. Appleton, WI: The John Birch Society, 1991, videotape.
13. J. Edgar Hoover, A Study of Communism. N.Y. p.25
14. Schaack, Michael. Anarchy and Anarchist: A History of the Red Terror and the Social Revolution in America and Europe.
15. Lawrence, John. A Brief History of Skull and Bones Society at Yale University.
16. Rosenbaum, Ron. The Last Secrets of Skull and Bones.
17. Sutton, Antony C. America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the order of Skull and Bones. p. 122
Section 3
1. Domhoff, G. William. Who Rules America?, p. 14
3. Fenster, Mark. Conspiracy theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture, p. 72.
4. Reinhardt, Mark T. Publishers Weekly.
5. John F. McManus. An Overview of Our World: An Analysis of the Great Conspiracy and Its Effect on Contemporary History.
Section 4
1. Spector, Paul E. Research Design, p 32.
Section 5
1. Sutton, Antony C. America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the order of Skull and Bones. p. 115.
2. Sutton, Antony C. Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution. p. 163
3. Pravda, September 21,1922; Presented in America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull and Bones. p. 150.
4. Sutton, Antony C. America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull and Bones. p. 150
6. U.S. State Decimal File 316-138-12/331.
7. State Department Policy as Stated in Revolutionary Cyclone, http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/20th/1910s/cyclone.html
8. Letter from the American-Russian Chamber of Commerce to the U.S. State Department, Russian Division, Washington, D.C., July 1st, 1921. Photostat presented in America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull and Bones. p. 158
9. Sutton, Antony C. Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution. p. 60
10. US state department decimal file 861.516/140. Published in Sutton, Antony C. America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull and Bones. p. 157.
11. Sutton, Antony C. Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution. p. 66.
12. U.S. State Department Decimal File, 861.516/140, Stockholm, October 23, 1922.
13. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, p. 14.
14. Oct. 5, 1942, Memorandum to the executive Committee of the Office of Alien Property Custodian, stamped CONFIDENTIAL, from the division of Investigation and Research, Homer Jones, Chief. Now declassified in United States National Archives, Suitland, Maryland annex. See Record Group 131, Alien Property Custodian, investigative reports, in file box relating to Vesting Order no. 248.
15. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin, George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, section 2, page 3.
16. Oct. 5, 1942, Memorandum to the executive Committee of the Office of Alien Property Custodian, stamped CONFIDENTIAL, from the division of Investigation and Research, Homer Jones, Chief. Now declassified in United States National Archives, Suitland, Maryland annex. See Record Group 131, Alien Property Custodian, investigative reports, in file box relating to Vesting Order no. 248.
17. Herald Tribute, Associated Press, July 31, 1941.
18. Office of Alien Property Custodian, Vesting Order No. 248. The order was signed by Leo T. Crowley, Alien Property Custodian, executed October 20, 1942; F.R. Doc. 42-11568; Filed, November 6, 1942. 11:31 AM; 7 Fed. Reg. 9097 (Nov. 7, 1942). See also the New York City Directory of Directors (available at the Library of Congress). The volumes for the 1930s and the 1940s list Prescott Bush as a director of Union Banking Corporation for the years 1934 through 1943.
19. Alien Property Custodian Vesting Order No. 259: Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation; Vesting Order No. 261: Holland-America Trading Corp.
20. Alien Property Custodian Vesting Order No. 259: Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation; Vesting Order No. 261: Holland-America Trading Corp.
21. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, p. 3
22. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, p. 6
23. Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression Supplement B, by the Office of United States Chief of Counsel for Prosecution of Nazis Criminality, United States Government Printing Office, (Washington: 1948), pp. 1597, 1686.
24. Elimination of German Resources for War: Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Military Affairs, United States Senate, Seventy-Ninth Congress; Part 5, Testimony of [the United States] Treasury Department, July 2, 1945. P. 507: Table of Vereinigte Stahlwerke output figures are percent of German total as of 1938; Thyssen organization including Union Banking Corporation pp. 727-731.
25. Interrogation of Fritz Thyssen, EF/Me?1 of Sept. 4, 1945 in U.S. Control Counsel records, Photostat on page 167 in Anthony Sutton, An introduction to the Order (Billings, Mt.: Liberty House Press, 1986).
27. Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression Supplement B, by the Office of United States Chief of Counsel for Prosecution of Nazis Criminality, United States Government Printing Office, (Washington: 1948), pp. 1597, 1686
28. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, p.13.
29. Consolidated Silesian Steel Corporation [minutes of the] meeting of Board of Directors, Oct. 31, 1930 (Harriman papers, Library of Congress), shows Averell Harriman as Chairman of the Board.
Prescott Bush to W.A. Harriman, Memorandum Dec. 19, 1930 on their Harriman Fifteen Corp.
Annual Report of United Konigs and Laura Steel and Iron Works for the year 1930 (Harriman papers, Library of Congress) lists “Dr. Friedrich Flick … Berlin “ and “ William Averell Harriman … New York” on the Board of Directors.
“Harriman Fifteen Corporation Securities Position February 28, 1931,” Harriman papers, Library of Congress. This report shows Harriman Fifteen Corporation holding 32,576 shares in Silesian Holding Co. V.T.C. worth $1,628,800, just over half the value of the Harriman Fifteen Corporation’s total holdings.
The New York City Directory of Directors volumes for the 1930s (available at the Library of Congress) show Prescott Sheldon Bush and W. Averell Harriman as the directors of Harriman Fifteen Corp.
“Appointments,” marked “Noted may 18, 1931 W.A.H., “ (among the papers from Prescott Bush’s New York Office of Brown Brothers Harriman, Harriman papers, Library of Congress), lists a meeting between Averell Harriman and Friedrich Flick in Berlin at 4:00 P.M., Wednesday April 22, 1931. This was followed immediately by a meeting with Wilhelm Cuno, chief executive of the Hamburg-Amerika Line.
The “Report To the Stockholders of the Harriman Fifteen Corporation,” Oct. 19, 1933 (in the Harriman papers, Library of Congress) names G.H. Walker as president of the corporation. It shows the Harriman Fifteen Corporation’s address as 1 Wall Street the location of G.H. Walker and Co.
30. Sept. 25, 1942, Memorandum To the Executive Committee of the Office of Alien Property Custodian, stamped Confidential, from the Division of Investigation and Research, Homer Jones, Chief. Now declassified in United States National Archives, Suitland, Maryland annex. See Record Group 131, Alien Property Custodian, investigative reports, in file box relating to Vesting Order NO. 370.
31. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, p. 8.
32. George Walker was a director of American Ship and Commerce from its organization through 1928. Consult New York City Directory of Directors.
33. See Elimination of German Resources for War, op. cit., pp. 881-882 on Voegler.
34. Confidential memorandum from U.S. embassy, Berlin, op.cit.
35. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, p. 9.
36. U.S. Senate “Nye Committee” hearings, Sept. 14, 1934, pp. 1197-98, extracts from letters of Col. William N. Taylor, dated June 27, 1932 and Jan. 9, 1933.
37. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, p. 11.
38. Investigation of Nazi Propaganda Activities and Investigation of Certain Other Propaganda Activities: Public hearings before A Subcommittee of the Special Committee on Un-American Activities, United States House of Representatives, Seventy Third Congress, New York City, July 9-12, 1934 Hearings No. 73 NY-7 (Washington: U.S. Govt. Printing Office, 1934). See testimony of Capt. Frederick C. Mensing, John Schroeder, Paul von Lilienfeld-Toal, and summaries by Committee members.
See New York Times, July 16, 1933, p. 12, for organizing of Nazi Labor Front at North German Lloyd, leading to Hamburg-Amerika after merger.
39. Office of Alien Property Custodian, Vesting Order No. 126. Signed by Leo T. Crowley, Alien Property Custodian, executed August 28th, 1942. F.R. Doc. 42-8774; Filed September 4, 1942, 10:55 A.M.; 7F.R. 7061 (No. 176, Sept. 5, 1942.) July 18, 1942, Memorandum To the Executive Committee of the Office of Alien Property Custodian, stamped CONFIDENTIAL, from the Division of Investigation and Research, Homer Jones, Chief. Now declassified in United States National Archives, Suitland, Maryland annex. See Record Group 131, Alien Property Custodian, investigative reports, in file box relating to Vesting Order No. 126.
*Editor’s note: I do not know what annual reports these are. Annual state corporation filings list only the directors and officers.
1 1. Ron Rosenbaum, New York Observer, August 23, 2001
2 2. Mark Fenster, Conspiracy Theories: secrecy and power in American Culture. P.69
3 3. Ibid p 18
4 4. Gallup Organization and the Post-Modernity Project of the University of Virginia. The State of Disunion: 1996 Survey of American Political Culture.
5 5. Ibid
6 6. 1953 California Senate Investigating Committee on Education: As presented in An Overview of Our World: An Analysis of the Great Conspiracy and Its Effect on Contemporary History. By John F. McManus. Appleton, WI: The John Birch Society, 1991, videotape.
7 7. In a speech before the British Parliament in 1920, Winston Churchill … video
8 8. John F. McManus. An Overview of Our World: An Analysis of the Great Conspiracy and Its Effect on Contemporary History.
9 9. Webster, Nesta. Secret Societies and Subversive Movements. p. 207
10 10. Gruber, Hermann. Illuminati, The Catholic Encyclopedia. p. 661
11 11. Ibid, p. 662
12 12. In a letter to Rev. G.W. Snyder dated October 24, 1798, Former President George Washington; as presented in An Overview of Our World: An Analysis of the Great Conspiracy and Its Effect on Contemporary History. By John F. McManus. Appleton, WI: The John Birch Society, 1991, videotape.
13 13. J. Edgar Hoover, A Study of Communism. N.Y. p.25
14 14. Schaack, Michael. Anarchy and Anarchist: A History of the Red Terror and the Social Revolution in America and Europe.
15 15. Lawrence, John. “A Brief History of Skull and Bones Society at Yale University.”
16 16. Rosenbaum, Ron. “The Last Secrets of Skull and Bones.”
17 17. Sutton, Antony C. America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the order of Skull and Bones. p. 122
18 1. Domhoff, G. William. Who Rules America?, p. 14
19 2. Ibid, p. 14
20 3. Fenster, Mark. Conspiracy theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture, p. 72.
21 4. Reinhardt, Mark T. Publishers Weekly.
22 *Editor’s note: I do not know what annual reports these are. Annual state corporation filings list only the directors and officers.
23 1. Spector, Paul E. Research Design, p 32.
24 1. Sutton, Antony C. America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the order of Skull and Bones. p. 115.
25 2. Sutton, Antony C. Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution. p. 163
26 3. Pravda, September 21,1922; Presented in America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull and Bones. p. 150.
27 4. Sutton, Antony C. America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull and Bones. p. 150
28 5. Ibid p. 158.
29 6. U.S. State Decimal File 316-138-12/331.
30 7. State Department Policy as Stated in Revolutionary Cyclone, http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/20th/1910s/cyclone.html
31 8. Letter from the American-Russian Chamber of Commerce to the U.S. State Department, Russian Division, Washington, D.C., July 1st, 1921. Photostat presented in America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull and Bones. p. 158
32 9. Sutton, Antony C. Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution. p. 60
33 10. US state department decimal file 861.516/140. Published in Sutton, Antony C. America’s Secret Establishment: An Introduction to the Order of Skull and Bones. p. 157.
34 11. Sutton, Antony C. Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution. p. 66.
35 12. U.S. State Department Decimal File, 861.516/140, Stockholm, October 23, 1922.
36 13. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, p. 14.
37 14. Oct. 5, 1942, Memorandum to the executive Committee of the Office of Alien Property Custodian, stamped CONFIDENTIAL, from the division of Investigation and Research, Homer Jones, Chief. Now declassified in United States National Archives, Suitland, Maryland annex. See Record Group 131, Alien Property Custodian, investigative reports, in file box relating to Vesting Order no. 248.
38 15. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin, George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, section 2, page 3.
39 16. Oct. 5, 1942, Memorandum to the executive Committee of the Office of Alien Property Custodian, stamped CONFIDENTIAL, from the division of Investigation and Research, Homer Jones, Chief. Now declassified in United States National Archives, Suitland, Maryland annex. See Record Group 131, Alien Property Custodian, investigative reports, in file box relating to Vesting Order no. 248.
40 17. Herald Tribune, Associated Press, July 31, 1941.
41 18. Office of Alien Property Custodian, Vesting Order No. 248. The order was signed by Leo T. Crowley, Alien Property Custodian, executed October 20, 1942; F.R. Doc. 42-11568; Filed, November 6, 1942. 11:31 AM; 7 Fed. Reg. 9097 (Nov. 7, 1942). See also the New York City Directory of Directors (available at the Library of Congress). The volumes for the 1930s and the 1940s list Prescott Bush as a director of Union Banking Corporation for the years 1934 through 1943.
42 19. Alien Property Custodian Vesting Order No. 259: Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation; Vesting Order No. 261: Holland-America Trading Corp.
43 20. Alien Property Custodian Vesting Order No. 259: Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation; Vesting Order No. 261: Holland-America Trading Corp.
44 21. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, p. 3
45 22. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, p. 6
46 23. Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression Supplement B, by the Office of United States Chief of Counsel for Prosecution of Nazis Criminality, United States Government Printing Office, (Washington: 1948), pp. 1597, 1686.
47 24. Elimination of German Resources for War: Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Military Affairs, United States Senate, Seventy-Ninth Congress; Part 5, Testimony of [the United States] Treasury Department, July 2, 1945. P. 507: Table of Vereinigte Stahlwerke output figures are percent of German total as of 1938; Thyssen organization including Union Banking Corporation pp. 727-731.
48 25. Interrogation of Fritz Thyssen, EF/Me?1 of Sept. 4, 1945 in U.S. Control Counsel records, Photostat on page 167 in Anthony Sutton, An introduction to the Order (Billings, Mt.: Liberty House Press, 1986).
49 26. Ibid
50 27. Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression Supplement B, by the Office of United States Chief of Counsel for Prosecution of Nazis Criminality, United States Government Printing Office, (Washington: 1948), pp. 1597, 1686
51 28. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, p.13.
52 29. Consolidated Silesian Steel Corporation [minutes of the] meeting of Board of Directors, Oct. 31, 1930 (Harriman papers, Library of Congress), shows Averell Harriman as Chairman of the Board.
Prescott Bush to W.A. Harriman, Memorandum Dec. 19, 1930 on their Harriman Fifteen Corp.
Annual Report of United Konigs and Laura Steel and Iron Works for the year 1930 (Harriman papers, Library of Congress) lists “Dr. Friedrich Flick … Berlin “ and “ William Averell Harriman … New York” on the Board of Directors.
“Harriman Fifteen Corporation Securities Position February 28, 1931,” Harriman papers, Library of Congress. This report shows Harriman Fifteen Corporation holding 32,576 shares in Silesian Holding Co. V.T.C. worth $1,628,800, just over half the value of the Harriman Fifteen Corporation’s total holdings.
The New York City Directory of Directors volumes for the 1930s (available at the Library of Congress) show Prescott Sheldon Bush and W. Averell Harriman as the directors of Harriman Fifteen Corp.
“Appointments,” marked “Noted may 18, 1931 W.A.H., “ (among the papers from Prescott Bush’s New York Office of Brown Brothers Harriman, Harriman papers, Library of Congress), lists a meeting between Averell Harriman and Friedrich Flick in Berlin at 4:00 P.M., Wednesday April 22, 1931. This was followed immediately by a meeting with Wilhelm Cuno, chief executive of the Hamburg-Amerika Line.
The “Report To the Stockholders of the Harriman Fifteen Corporation,” Oct. 19, 1933 (in the Harriman papers, Library of Congress) names G.H. Walker as president of the corporation. It shows the Harriman Fifteen Corporation’s address as 1 Wall Street the location of G.H. Walker and Co.
53 30. Sept. 25, 1942, Memorandum To the Executive Committee of the Office of Alien Property Custodian, stamped Confidential, from the Division of Investigation and Research, Homer Jones, Chief. Now declassified in United States National Archives, Suitland, Maryland annex. See Record Group 131, Alien Property Custodian, investigative reports, in file box relating to Vesting Order NO. 370.
54 31. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, p. 8.
55 32. George Walker was a director of American Ship and Commerce from its organization through 1928. Consult New York City Directory of Directors.
56 33. See Elimination of German Resources for War, op. cit., pp. 881-882 on Voegler.
57 34. Confidential memorandum from U.S. embassy, Berlin, op.cit.
58 35. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, p. 9.
59 36. U.S. Senate “Nye Committee” hearings, Sept. 14, 1934, pp. 1197-98, extracts from letters of Col. William N. Taylor, dated June 27, 1932 and Jan. 9, 1933.
60 37. Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin. George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography, p. 11.
61 38. Investigation of Nazi Propaganda Activities and Investigation of Certain Other Propaganda Activities: Public hearings before A Subcommittee of the Special Committee on Un-American Activities, United States House of Representatives, Seventy Third Congress, New York City, July 9-12, 1934 Hearings No. 73 NY-7 (Washington: U.S. Govt. Printing Office, 1934). See testimony of Capt. Frederick C. Mensing, John Schroeder, Paul von Lilienfeld-Toal, and summaries by Committee members.
See New York Times, July 16, 1933, p. 12, for organizing of Nazi Labor Front at North German Lloyd, leading to Hamburg-Amerika after merger.
62 39. Office of Alien Property Custodian, Vesting Order No. 126. Signed by Leo T. Crowley, Alien Property Custodian, executed August 28th, 1942. F.R. Doc. 42-8774; Filed September 4, 1942, 10:55 A.M.; 7F.R. 7061 (No. 176, Sept. 5, 1942.) July 18, 1942, Memorandum To the Executive Committee of the Office of Alien Property Custodian, stamped CONFIDENTIAL, from the Division of Investigation and Research, Homer Jones, Chief. Now declassified in United States National Archives, Suitland, Maryland annex. See Record Group 131, Alien Property Custodian, investigative reports, in file box relating to Vesting Order No. 126.