Economic Hit Men & The Government-Capitalist Conspiracy Against Other Nations

Thanks Thomas A


From: "Peter" <>
To: "Peter G Tocci" <>
Sent: Monday, December 27, 2004 2:22 PM
Subject: Helping Other Nations

> How the elite, via its USA/IMF/World Bank/Spy/corporate mechanisms, helps
> nations.
> Here is an excerpt from John Perkins's book "Confessions of an Economic
> Hit Man." "MAIN" is Charles T. Main, Inc, an international "consulting"
> firm that, like many other legitimate/criminal operations, keeps a very
> low profile (closely held, like Bechtel). Of note is the way in which the
> elite use women/sexual intrigue to get the job done.
> Not quoted here, but of special interest also are a couple of chapters
> detailing the background of the US Treasury/Bush/Saudi/Osama bin Laden
> connections that go back at least to GHW Bush's tenure as Ambassador to
> the UN (1971-73), that took off around 1974, and lead up to 9/11.
> The book is a worthy read, especially for those with delusions about
> America's righteousness and beneficence in the international community.
> My comments in [brackets].
> Peter
> *****
> MAIN was a macho corporation. There were only four women who held
> professional positions in 1971. However, there were perhaps two hundred
> women divided between the cadres of personal secretaries -- every vice
> president and department manager had one -- and the steno pool, which
> served the rest of us. I had become accustomed to this gender bias, and I
> was therefore especially astounded by what happened one day in the BPL's
> [Boston Public Library] reference section.
> An attractive brunette woman came up and sat in a chair across the table
> from me. In her dark green business suit, she looked very sophisticated.
> I judged her to be several years my senior, but I tried to focus on not
> noticing her, on acting indifferent. After a few minutes, without a word,
> she slid an open book in my direction. It contained a table with
> information I had been searching for about Kuwait -- and a card with her
> name, Claudine Martin, and her title, Special Consultant to Chas. T.
> Main, Inc. I looked up into her soft green eyes, and she extended her
> "I've been asked to help in your training," she said. I could not believe
> this was happening to me.
> Beginning the next day, we met in Claudine's Beacon Street apartment, a
> few blocks from MAIN'S Prudential Center headquarters. During our first
> hour together, she explained that my position was an unusual one and that
> we needed to keep everything highly confidential. She told me that no one
> had given me specifics about my job because no one was authorized to --
> except her. Then she informed me that her assignment was to mold me into
> an economic hit man.
> The very name awakened old cloak-and-dagger dreams. I was embarrassed by
> the nervous laughter I heard coming from me. She smiled and assured me
> that humor was one of the reasons they used the term. "Who would take it
> seriously?" she asked.
> I confessed ignorance about the role of economic hit men.
> "You're not alone," she laughed. "We're a rare breed, in a dirty
> business. No one can know about your involvement -- not even your wife."
> Then she turned serious. "I'll be very frank with you, teach you all I
> can during the next weeks. Then you'll have to choose. Your decision is
> final. Once you're in, you're in for life." After that, she seldom used
> the full name; we were simply EHMs.
> I know now what I did not then -- that Claudine took full advantage of the
> personality weaknesses the NSA profile had disclosed about me. I do not
> know who supplied her with the information -- Einar, the NSA, MAIN'S
> personnel department, or someone else -- only that she used it
> masterfully. Her approach, a combination of physical seduction and verbal
> manipulation, was tailored specifically for me, and yet it fit within the
> standard operating procedures I have since seen used by a variety of
> businesses when the stakes are high and the pressure to close lucrative
> deals is great. She knew from the start that I would not jeopardize my
> marriage by disclosing our clandestine activities. And she was brutally
> frank when it came to describing the shadowy side of things that would be
> expected of me.
> I have no idea who paid her salary, although I have no reason to suspect
> it was not, as her business card implied, MAIN. At the time, I was too
> naive, intimidated, and bedazzled to ask the questions that today seem so
> obvious.
> Claudine told me that there were two primary objectives of my work.
> First, I was to justify huge international loans that would funnel money
> back to MAIN and other U.S. companies (such as Bechtel, Halliburton,
> Stone & Webster, and Brown & Root) through massive engineering and
> construction projects. Second, I would work to bankrupt the countries
> that received those loans (after they had paid MAIN and the other U.S.
> contractors, of course) so that they would be forever beholden to their
> creditors, and so they would present easy targets when we needed favors,
> including military bases, UN votes, or access to oil and other natural
> resources.
> My job, she said, was to forecast the effects of investing billions of
> dollars in a country. Specifically, I would produce studies that
> projected economic growth twenty to twenty-five years into the future and
> that evaluated the impacts of a variety of projects. For example, if a
> decision was made to lend a country $1 billion to persuade its leaders
> not to align with the Soviet Union, I would compare the benefits of
> investing that money in power plants with the benefits of investing in a
> new national railroad network or a telecommunications system. Or I might
> be told that the country was being offered the opportunity to receive a
> modern electric utility system, and it would be up to me to demonstrate
> that such a system would result in sufficient economic growth to justify
> the loan. The critical factor, in every case, was gross national product.
> The project that resulted in the highest average annual growth of GNP
> won. If only one project was under consideration, I would need to
> demonstrate that developing it would bring superior benefits to the GNP.
> The unspoken aspect of every one of these projects was that they were
> intended to create large profits for the contractors, and to make a
> handful of wealthy and influential families in the receiving countries
> very happy, while assuring the long-term financial dependence and
> therefore the political loyalty of governments around the world. The
> larger the loan, the better. The fact that the debt burden placed on a
> country would deprive its poorest citizens of health, education, and
> other social services for decades to come was not taken into
> consideration [Of course it was--that's the plan! Both Claudine and
> Perkins here exhibit incomplete understanding of the power elite and its
> MO, part of which is the ongoing promotion of illness, poverty and slow
> genocide]. Claudine and I openly discussed the deceptive nature of GNP.
> For instance, the growth of GNP may result even when it profits only one
> person, such as an individual who owns a utility company, and even if the
> majority of the population is burdened with debt. The rich get richer and
> the poor grow poorer. Yet, from a statistical standpoint, this is
> recorded as economic progress [yes, 'even' in America].
> Like U.S. citizens in general, most MAIN employees believed we were doing
> countries favors when we built power plants, highways, and ports. Our
> schools and our press have taught us to perceive all of our actions as
> altruistic. Over the years, I've repeatedly heard comments like, "If
> they're going to burn the U.S. flag and demonstrate against our embassy,
> why don't we just get out of their damn country and let them wallow in
> their own poverty?"
> People who say such things often hold diplomas certifying that they are
> well educated. However, these people have no clue that the main reason we
> establish embassies around the world is to serve our own interests, which
> during the last half of the twentieth century meant turning the American
> republic into a global empire [and maintaining the global scene as a
> playground for ruthless elite power games]. Despite credentials, such
> people are as uneducated as those eighteenth-century colonists who
> believed that the Indians fighting to defend their lands were servants of
> the devil.
> Within several months, I would leave for the island of Java in the
> country of Indonesia, described at that time as the most heavily
> populated piece of real estate on the planet. Indonesia also happened to
> be an oil-rich Muslim nation and a hotbed of communist activity [The
> overall Indonesian 'operation' abetted by Gerald Ford and Henry-the-
> Reptile Kissinger resulted in 300,000 people shot down in cold blood on
> East Timor by our ally Suharto while we turned our back].
> "It's the next domino after Vietnam," [a couple of million lives] is the
> way Claudine put it. "We must win the Indonesians over. If they join the
> Communist bloc, well..." She drew a finger across her throat and then
> smiled sweetly [It's likely Claudine didn't understand that the USSR/
> Commie threat was an elite creation. She was sold a bill of goods which
> may partly underlie 'justification' for her behavior. Perkins also seems
> a bit out of touch on this subject.] "Let's just say you need to come up
> with a very optimistic forecast of the economy, how it will mushroom
> after all the new power plants and distribution lines are built. That
> will allow USAID and the international banks to justify the loans. You'll
> be well rewarded, of course, and can move on to other projects in exotic
> places. The world is your shopping cart." She went on to warn me that my
> role would be tough. "Experts at the banks will come after you. It's
> their job to punch holes in your forecasts -- that's what they're paid to
> do. Making you look bad makes them look good."
> One day I reminded Claudine that the MAIN team being sent to Java
> included ten other men. I asked if they all were receiving the same type
> of training as me. She assured me they were not.
> "They're engineers, she said. "They design power plants, transmission and
> distribution lines, and seaports and roads to bring in the fuel. You're
> the one who predicts the future. Your forecasts determine the magnitude
> of the systems they design -- and the size of the loans. You see, you're
> the key."
> Every time I walked away from Claudine's apartment, I wondered whether I
> was doing the right thing. Somewhere in my heart, I suspected I was not.
> But the frustrations of my past haunted me. MAIN seemed to offer
> everything my life had lacked, and yet I kept asking myself if Tom Paine
> would have approved. In the end, I convinced myself that by learning
> more, by experiencing it, I could better expose it later -- the old
> "working from the inside" justification.
> When I shared this idea with Claudine, she gave me a perplexed look.
> "Don't be ridiculous. Once you're in, you can never get out. You must
> decide for yourself, before you get in any deeper." I understood her, and
> what she said frightened me. After I left, I strolled down Commonwealth
> Avenue, turned onto Dartmouth Street, and assured myself that I was the
> exception.
> One afternoon some months later, Claudine and I sat in a window settee
> watching the snow fall on Beacon Street. "We're a small, exclusive club,"
> she said. 'We're paid -- well paid -- to cheat countries around the globe
> out of billions of dollars. A large part of your job is to encourage
> world leaders to become part of a vast network that promotes U.S.
> commercial interests. In the end, those leaders become ensnared in a web
> of debt that ensures their loyalty. We can draw on them whenever we
> desire -- to satisfy our political, economic, or military needs. In turn,
> these leaders bolster their political positions by bringing industrial
> parks, power plants, and airports to their people. Meanwhile, the owners
> of U.S. engineering and construction companies become very wealthy."
> That afternoon, in the idyllic setting of Claudine's apartment, relaxing
> in the window while snow swirled around outside, I learned the history of
> the profession I was about to enter. Claudine described how, throughout
> most of history empires were built largely through military force or the
> threat of it. But with the end of World War II, the emergence of the
> Soviet Union, and the specter of nuclear holocaust, the military solution
> became just too risky [Not at all. Many wars have been created since. One
> development was secretly supporting overt 'monsters' in other nations to
> demonize and potentiate violence--Saddam perfect example].
> The decisive moment occurred in 1951, when Iran rebelled against a
> British oil company that was exploiting Iranian natural resources and its
> people. The company was the forerunner of British Petroleum, today's BP.
> In response, the highly popular, democratically elected Iranian prime
> minister (and TIME magazine's Man of the Year in 1951), Mohammad
> Mossadegh, nationalized all Iranian petroleum assets. An outraged England
> sought the help of her World War II ally, the United States. However,
> both countries feared that military retaliation would provoke the Soviet
> Union into taking action on behalf of Iran.
> Instead of sending in the Marines, therefore, Washington dispatched CIA
> agent Kermit Roosevelt (Theodore's grandson). He performed brilliantly,
> winning people over through payoffs and threats [major field 'experiment'
> for fledgling CIA]. He then enlisted them to organize a series of street
> riots and violent demonstrations, which created the impression that
> Mossadegh was both unpopular and inept. In the end, Mossadegh went down,
> and he spent the rest of his life under house arrest. The pro-American
> Mohammad Reza Shah became the unchallenged dictator. Kermit Roosevelt had
> set the stage for a new profession, the one whose ranks I was joining [my
> money is on the probability that the Shah was also brought down in
> similar way].
> Roosevelt's gambit reshaped Middle Eastern history even as it rendered
> obsolete all the old strategies for empire building [not entirely true,
> as is patently obvious now. It has become an amalgam of methods]. It also
> coincided with the beginning of experiments in "limited nonnuclear
> military actions," which ultimately resulted in U.S. humiliations in
> Korea and Vietnam [military/strategic losses only--certainly not profit-
> wise, a major plus for any military operation]. By 1968, the year I
> interviewed with the NSA, it had become clear that if the United States
> wanted to realize its dream of global empire (as envisioned by men like
> presidents Johnson and Nixon), it would have to employ strategies modeled
> on Roosevelt's Iranian example. This was the only way to beat the Soviets
> without the threat of nuclear war.
> There was one problem, however. Kermit Roosevelt was a CIA employee. Had
> he been caught, the consequences would have been dire [CIA owned by
> elites/Wall Street from day one--only ostensibly operated/operates as US
> agency]. He had orchestrated the first U.S. operation to overthrow a
> foreign government, and it was likely that many more would follow but it
> was important to find an approach that would not directly implicate
> Washington.
> Fortunately for the strategists, the 1960s also witnessed another type of
> revolution: the empowerment of international corporations and of
> multinational organizations such as the World Bank and the IMF. The
> latter were financed primarily by the United States and our sister empire
> builders in Europe. A symbiotic relationship developed between
> governments, corporations, and multinational organizations [Another
> example of unfamiliarity with the elite MO. This was a tactical
> development in a long-established relationship; e.g., unconstitutional
> Federal Reserve, a tentacle of the Rothschild/Rockefeller central-bank
> cartel].
> By the time I enrolled in BU's business school, a solution to the
> Roosevelt-as-CIA-agent problem had already been worked out. U.S.
> intelligence agencies -- including the NSA -- would identify prospective
> EHMs, who could then be hired by international corporations. These EHMs
> would never be paid by the government; instead, they would draw their
> salaries from the private sector. As a result, their dirty work, if
> exposed, would be chalked up to corporate greed rather than to government
> policy. In addition, the corporations that hired them, although paid by
> government agencies and their multinational banking counterparts (with
> taxpayer money), would be insulated from congressional oversight and
> public scrutiny, shielded by a growing body of legal initiatives,
> including trademark, international trade, and Freedom of Information laws
> [the FOI bit seems contradictory--not sure what he means here].2
> "So you see" Claudine concluded, "we are just the next generation in a
> proud tradition that began back when you were in first grade" [new phase
> of a very old tradition].
> *****



Freedom isn't free! To insure the continuation of this website and the survival of its creator in these financially-troubled times, please send donations directly to the Birdman at
PO Box 66683, St Pete Beach FL 33736-6683

"The smallest good deed is worth the grandest intention."

Please contribute today - buy our books - and spread the word to all your friends!
Remember: Your donation = our survival!

* * * Back to the Home Page of John "Birdman" Bryant, the World's Most Controversial Author * * *