The socialist origins of Brussels's Europe

The Euro. The idea of a "european" single currency was born in the mind of Walter Funk, Hitler's nazi Minister of Finance.

That has been a long term project of Henry Kissinger. This last worked in 1945 in Oberammergau in Bavaria in the Interrogation Service where they interrogated the Nazi officers, who were arrested or who gave themselves up to the American forces. He was to work for about a year in this service still as staff sergeant, but with responsibilities well above this grade as often happens in intelligence.

But one night, the Interrogation Service caught someone red-handed contacting and passing on documents to the Soviets. It was the head of the interrogators, Ernest Bosenhard.

His code-name was “Bar”, according to the documents that were seized. A certain “Bor” was his accomplice. Unfortunately, it is certain that this “Bor” is a certain Henry Kissinger, but it had not been able to arrest him because there were no material evidence.

Having been arrested, Bosenhard was condemned to several years in prison. Kissinger, however was urged, a few weeks later to return to the United States, demobilised.

The archives partially opened in Moscow in 1991 have confirmed the liaison established between Kissinger and Hanoi at that time, and so from 1967 and 1968 in the greatest of secrecy he negotiates (notably with the Duke Tho) behind the backs of the South Vietnamese. Made official in 1971, these negotiations undoubtedly opened up South Vietnam to the Communist troops who in 1975 swept in without meeting any opposition, not only towards Saigon but also to Laos and Cambodia.

It is standard practice in Fabian Socialism not really to fall out with anyone, to make it known to the opponent that one is only wanting to be on good terms with him, so that negotiation takes precedence over confrontation. ‘One’ does not want to know that across the table there exists possibly a dictatorship, the Soviet Gulag or the Chinese Gulag. The most important thing is to come to an agreement. Even if this is on the back of whole populations.

Today’s chroniclers are unaware of the fact that, in the summer of 1940, Hitler’s then Minister of Economic Affairs, Walter Funk, put before the Council of Ministers a proposal for the creation of a European central bank controlling the currencies of the occupied countries, in preparation for the time when they would be replaced by a single currency. Soon after, his Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ribbentrop, appointed the lawyer and “brother” Ernst Achenbach as assistant to “brother” Otto Abetz. Both of them had influence with newspapers and columnists, one of whom, Marcel Déat, wrote in L’Œuvre (his German-controlled newspaper), in April and June 1943 in Paris, “It is no longer possible for any nation to try its luck in isolation…States will have to lose a part of their national sovereignty… People will warm to a Europe that is synonymous with justice and a new order, that is socialist in shape, that is one large community… There will be a federal Council with a European Executive, one currency, one police force, one army… The European Order will socialist or will not exist at all…”

François Hollande, National Secretary of the French Socialist Party, undoubtebly inspired by Déat's 'prophecy', confirms Europe's Socialist origins and framing, in Le Monde, 16 September 2004:

"...besides the treaty itself, Socialists must be true to their history. It is they who, for the past twenty years, have taken the major decisions for Europe: in 1983, with the European Monetary System; in 1986, with the Single European Act; in 1992, the Maastricht Treaty; in 1999, the Amsterdam Treaty... The draft European Constitution codifies these treaties; to reject it would mean abandoning our action..."

From 1954 to 2004, Europe, as conceived by American business representatives and their associates, including Jean Monnet and his assistants, only took shape because various organizations in New York and Washington secretly secured the necessary budgets. This assertion is not contentious, but is based on irrefutable sources, which are cited below. Other people – often with very different beliefs from our own – had expressed their concerns about the hidden side of the project; one of these was the Canadian trades union leader, Charles Levinson. Levinson was Deputy Secretary-General of the International Federation of Metalworkers from 1956 to 1964, and in his book Vodka-Cola28 in 1976, he attacked the economic, financial and technological collusion between a number of multinational corporations, the majority of them American, and the Soviet dictatorship. Levinson exposed in passing the role played by the majority of individuals cited here as the inspiration for, or as officials of, the Bilderberg Group, and after 1973, of the Trilateral Commission. In the course of correspondence with him, I discovered facts and trails which were also being explored by another friend, Antony Sutton.
In London, in 1975, the Conservative MP Richard Body had publicly asked Prime Minister Harold Wilson (a Fabian) to investigate the claim in the magazine Time Out, that the American Secret Services were financing the pro-Common Market campaign in Great Britain. Time Out added that Lord Duncan-Sandys had gone to the United States to collect the money in aid of Jean Monnet’s European Movement and that the American Committee on United Europe (the ACUE, founded under the aegis of Coudenhove-Kalergi) had agreed “to subsidise the Movement to a total of 50% of its budget”. At the time, its budget was calculated at 16 million francs.

It was remarkable, said Richard Body, “that the European Movement has always refused to publish its accounts. As co-president of the Movement, the Prime Minister ought to ask for their publication”. A Time Out headline went even further, ‘Uncle Sam goes to market’, it proclaimed. Below, it claimed that Cord Meyer, then in London as station chief of the CIA for the United Kingdom, was busy nudging Great Britain into the Common Market, and that, between 1947 and 1953, more than a million dollars had passed from the CIA into the coffers of the American Committee on United Europe.
MP Body said ironically, “Roy Jenkins, Dick Taverne and others had good reasons for wanting us to join the Common Market. In a few years time, according to them, the Socialists will be in power in most of the countries of Europe, so it will be a Socialist Europe. But that’s nothing new, because Trotsky himself advocated the creation of a Socialist United States of Europe.”
We should not get bogged down in the chronology of Europe’s long march towards the Treaty of Maastricht and, since then, to the Constitution proposed in 2003-2004 by Valéry Giscard d’Estaing (Bilderberg member since 1968).

All in all, from 1948 to 1960, secret American accounts supplied funds to individuals, movements and organisations dedicated to a European project, which the public was told was new and without ulterior motive. As if the impetus to progress towards a New Continental Order had no connection with the United States! If we go back to the words of John Rarick speaking to the House of Representatives in 1971 the trickery is blatant and irrefutable. We read that the Bilderberg Group was created, “to allow transnational groups to hold off-the-record discussions, and to take decisions capable of influencing the classic political structures, on both sides of the Atlantic”.
For whose benefit? One only has to look down the lists of Bilderberg members from 1955 to 2004 to note that 70% of permanent members represent businesses, companies and banks wielding considerable weight on the world stage. And they want us to believe that the way Europe has been organising itself, from the Coal and Steel Community in 1951, to the Treaty of Rome in 1957, from the European Monetary System in 1979 to the Maastricht Treaty in 1991, and finally to the ‘enlargement’ of 2004, has its origin in a spontaneous popular movement towards a New Continental Order, to be integrated into a New World Order?
In any case, if this were true, why the desire to keep their proceedings and membership secret, and the names of those who, little by little, have been given the levers of decision-making in the European Community, or have been placed in positions within the structures and parliaments that, according to the documents, are due to disappear along with the Nation States?

The best concise guide to the financing of all the movements and activists of the Retinger-Monnet-Coudenhove lineage appeared in Diplomacy and Statecraft, published in London30, issue 1/1997, under the suggestive title: OSS, CIA and European Unity: The American Committee on United Europe 1948-1960. The author of this analysis, Richard J. Aldrich, professor at Nottingham University and expert on secret service operations, wrote:

“One of the most interesting secret operations by the Americans in post-war Europe was the financing of the European Movement… Its main handicap in 1948 was the lack of funds. We show here that, between 1949 and 1960, more than three million dollars were discreetly funnelled to it, mostly from American Government sources, and that this was decisive in encouraging the public to support the Schuman Plan, the European Defence Community and a European Assembly… This secret contribution never represented less than 50%, and, after 1952, met at least two-thirds of the European Movement’s budget...
The channel for this American aid was the American Committee on United Europe (ACUE), under the direction of the heads of the Intelligence Community, established by Allen Dulles in early summer 1948 … in response to similar appeals from Count R. Coudenhove-Kalergi and Winston Churchill… The ACUE worked closely with officials of the American Government and with the National Committee for a Free Europe…
In 1949 and 1950, the ACUE saved the European Movement from bankruptcy… In spite of substantial aid in 1949, Thomas Braden returned from Europe early in 1950 saying that the Movement was again short of funds. The ACUE funded the conference held in Brussels in February 1949, and in Westminster the following April, and in particular covered the secretarial and administrative expenses… The same small group of officials, the majority of them from the Intelligence Community, were behind the three most significant and international elitist organisations which emerged in the 1950s: the European Movement, the Bilderberg Group and Jean Monnet’s Action Committees for the United States of Europe…”