“Transcript of Norman Dodd Interview”
1982
A.D.
with
G.
Edward Griffin
Alan Gaither
was, at that time, President of the Ford Foundation. Mr. Gaither had sent for me when I found
it convenient to be in New York, asked me to call upon him at his office, which
I did. On arrival, after a few
amenities, Mr. Gaither said, "Mr. Dodd, we have asked you to come up here today
because we thought that, possibly, off the record, you would tell us why the
Congress is interested in the activities of foundations such as
ourselves."
Before I
could think of how I would reply to that statement, Mr. Gaither then went on to
say, "Mr. Dodd, all of us who have a hand in the making of policies here, have
had experience operating under directives, the substance of which is, that we
use our grant-making power so as to alter life in the United States that it can
be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union."
Warning! You are about to enter the Reality Zone
-- a place were truth is stranger than fiction -- where knowledge is king --
where myths are shattered and deception exposed. It is a place where the lessons of
history are found, and where true-life adventures reveal the hidden nature of
man.
If you
proceed, you will not be able to return to the twilight zone from which you
came.
You have
five seconds remaining to escape.
1 – 2 – 3 –
4 – 5.
Welcome
to the Reality Zone. I am Ed
Griffin. The story we are about to
hear represents a missing piece in the puzzle of modern history. We are about to hear a man tell us that
the major tax-exempt foundations of America, since at least 1945, have been
operating to promote a hidden agenda.
That agenda has nothing to do with the surface appearance of charity,
good works or philanthropy.
This man
will tell you that the real
objective has been to influence American educational institutions and to control
foreign policy agencies of the Federal government. The purpose of the control has been to
condition Americans to accept the creation of world government. That government is to be based on the
principle of collectivism, which is another way of saying socialism; and, it is to be ruled from behind the
scenes by those same interests which control the tax-exempt
foundations.
Is this a
believable scenario?
Well, the
man who tells this story is none other than Mr. Norman Dodd who, in the year
1954, was the staff director of the Congressional Special Committee to
investigate tax-exempt foundations -- sometimes referred to as the Reece
committee, in recognition of its chairman, Congressman Carroll Reece. I conducted the interview we are about
to hear, in 1982. I had no
immediate use for the material at that time, but I realized that Mr. Dodd's
story was of great importance.
Since
he was advanced in age and not in good health, I wanted to capture his
recollections on videotape while he was still with us. It was a wise decision, because Mr. Dodd
did pass away just a short time afterwards.
In
later years there was a resurgence of interest in Mr. Dodd's story, and we
released the videotape to the public in 1991. And so, what now follows is the sound
track taken from the full, unedited interview, broken occasionally only for a
tape change, or to omit the sound of a passing airplane. It stands on its own as an important
piece in the puzzle of modern history.
[begin
interview]
Griffin: Mr. Dodd, let's begin this interview by
a brief statement, for the record, telling us who you are, what your background
is, and your qualifications to speak on the
subject.
Dodd: Well, Mr. Griffin, as for who I am, I am
just as the name implies -- an individual born in New Jersey and educated in
private schools, eventually in a school called Andover, Massachusetts, and then
Yale University.
And,
running through my whole period of being brought up, growing up, I have been an
emphaticable [sic] reader, and I
have had one major interest and that was this country, as I was led to believe
that it was originally founded.
I
entered the world of business knowing absolutely nothing about how that world
operated. And, I realized that the
only way to find out what that world was, and consisted of, would be to become
part of it. And I then acquired
some experience in the manufacturing world, and in the world of international
communications, and finally chose banking as the field I wished to devote my
life to.
I was
fortunate enough, to secure a position in one of the important banks in New
York. I lived there. I lived through the conditions which led
up to what is known as the crash of 1929.
I witnessed what is tantamount to a collapse of the structure of the
United States as a whole.
Much to
my surprise, my superiors, in the middle of the panic in which they were
immersed, confronted me. I was
confronted with the question, "Norm, what do we do
now?"
I was
thirty at the time, and I had no more right to have an answer to that question
than the man in the moon. However,
I did manage to say to my superiors, "Gentlemen, you take this experience as
proof of something that you do not know about banking." And you better go find out what that
something is, and act accordingly.
Four
days later, I was confronted by these same superiors, with a statement to the
effect that, “Norm, you go find out.”
And I really was fool enough to accept that assignment, because it meant
that you were going out to search for something, and nobody could tell you what
you were looking for. I felt so
strongly on the subject that I consented to it.
I was
relieved of all normal duties inside the bank and, two and a half years later, I
felt that it was possible to report back to those who had given me this
assignment. So, I rendered such a
report and, as a result of the report I rendered, I was told the following: "Norm, what you are saying is, we should
return to sound banking." And I
said, “Yes, in essence, that's exactly what it is that I am
saying.”
Whereupon,
I got my first shock, which was a statement from them to this effect: "We will never see sound banking in the
United States again." And they
cited chapter and verse, to support that statement.
What
they cited was as follows: since
the end of WWI, we have been responsible for what they call the
institutionalizing of conflicting interests. And they are so prevalent inside this
country, that they can never be resolved.
This
came to me as an extraordinary shock because the men who made this statement
were men who were deemed as the most prominent bankers in the country. The bank of which I was a part was
spoken of a Morgan bank. Coming
from men of that caliber, a statement of that kind made a tremendous impression
on me.
The type
of impression that it made on me was this:
I wondered if I, as an individual, as what they call a junior officer of
the bank, could with the same enthusiasm foster the progress and the policies of
the bank. I spent about a year
trying to think this out, and came to the conclusion that I would have to
resign.
I did
resign. As a consequence of that, I
had this experience. When my letter
of resignation reached the desk of the president of the bank, he sent for
me. I came to visit with him and he
stated to me, "Norm, I have your letter, but I do not believe you understand
what has happened in the last ten days."
I said, “No, Mr. Cochran, I have no idea what's
happened.”
“Well,”
he says, "the directors have never been able to get your report to them out of
their minds and, as a result, they have decided that you, as an individual, must
begin at once, and you must re-organize this bank in keeping with your own
ideas." He then said, "Now, can I
tear up your letter?”
And
inasmuch as what had been said to me, what he was offering me, at the age of (by
then) thirty-three, was about as fine an opportunity for service to the country
as I could imagine. I said,
“Yes.” And they said they wished me
to begin at once, and I did.
Suddenly,
in a span of about six weeks, I was not permitted to do another piece of
work. And, every time I brought the
subject up, I was kind of patted on the back and told, "Stop worrying about it,
Norm. Pretty soon you will be a
vice-president and you will have quite a handsome salary, and ultimately be able
to retire on a very worthwhile pension and, in the meantime, you can play golf
and tennis to your hearts content on weekends."
Well,
Mr. Griffin, I found I could not do it.
I spent a year, figuratively, with my feet on the desk, doing
nothing. I just couldn't adjust to
it. So I did resign. This time my resignation
stuck.
Then, I
got my second shock, which was the discovery that the doors of every bank in the
United States were closed to me and I never could get a job, as it were, in the
bank. So I found myself for the
first time since I graduated from college, out of a
job.
From
then on, I followed various branches of the financial world, ranging from
investment counsel, to membership in the stock exchange. I finally ended up as an advisor to a
few individuals who had capital funds to look
after.
In the
meantime, my major interest became very specific, which was to endeavor, by some
means, to get the educational world to actually, you might say, teach the
subject of economics realistically, and move it away from the support of various
speculative activities that characterized our
country.
I have
had that interest and you know how it is, if you generate a specific interest,
you find yourself gravitating toward persons with similar interests. Ultimately, I found myself kind of at
the center of the world of dissatisfaction with the direction in which this
country was headed. And, I found
myself in contact with many individuals who, on their own, had done a vast
amount of studying and research in areas which were part of the
problem.
Griffin: What point in your career did you become
connected with the Reece Committee?
Dodd: Nineteen hundred and fifty-three
(1953).
Griffin: 1953. And what was that capacity,
Sir?
Dodd: That was in the capacity of what they
called “Director of Research.”
Griffin: Can you tell us what the Reece Committee
was attempting to do?
Dodd: Yes, I can tell you. It was operating and carrying out
instructions embodied in a Resolution passed by the House of Representatives,
which was to investigate the activities of foundations as to whether or not
these activities could justifiably be labeled “un-American” -- without, I might
add, defining what they meant by “un-American.” That was the Resolution and the
committee had, then, the task of selecting a counsel, and the counsel, in turn,
had the task of selecting a staff;
and, he had to have somebody who would direct the work of that staff, and
that was what they meant by the “Director of Research.
“
Griffin: What were some of the details, the
specifics, of what you told the committee at that
time?
Dodd: Well, Mr. Griffin, in that report, I
specifically -- number one -- defined what was, to us, meant by the phrase
“un-American.” And, we defined
that, in our way, as being a determination to effect changes in the country by
un-Constitutional means.
We have
plenty of Constitutional procedures, assuming that we wished to effect a change
in the form of government, and that sort of thing. And therefore, any effort in that
direction, which did not avail itself of the procedures authorized by the
Constitution, could be justifiably called “un-American.” That was the start of educating them, up
to that particular point. The next
thing was to educate them as to the effect on the country, as a whole, of the
activities of large, endowed foundations over the then past forty
years.
Griffin: What was that effect,
Sir?
Dodd: That affect was to orient our
educational system away from
support of the principles embodied in the Declaration of Independence, and
implemented in the Constitution;
and to educate them over to the idea that the task now was to effect an orientation of
education away from these briefly
stated principles and self-evident truths.
And,
that’s what had been the effect of the wealth which constituted the endowments
of those foundations -– foundations that had been in existence over the largest
portion of the span of fifty years -- and holding them responsible for this
change. What we were able to bring
forward was -- what we had uncovered was -- the determination of these large
endowed foundations, through their trustees, actually to get control over the
content of American education.
Griffin: There is quite a bit of publicity given
to your conversation with Rowan Gaither.
Will you please tell us who he was, and what was that conversation you
had with him?
Dodd: Rowan Gaither was, at that time,
President of the Ford Foundation.
Mr. Gaither had sent for me, when I found it convenient to be in New
York. He asked me to call upon him
at his office, which I did.
Upon
arrival, after a few amenities, Mr. Gaither said, "Mr. Dodd, we have asked you
to come up here today, because we thought that, possibly, off the record, you
would tell us why the Congress is interested in the activities of foundations
such as ourselves."
And,
before I could think of how I would reply to that statement, Mr. Gaither then
went on, and voluntarily stated, "Mr. Dodd, all of us who have a hand in the
making of policies here, have had experience either with the OSS during the war,
or with European economic administration after the war. We have had experience operating under
directives. The directives emanate,
and did emanate, from the White House.
Now, we still operate under just such directives. Would you like to know what the
substance of these directives is?"
I said,
“Yes, Mr. Gaither, I would like very much to know.” Whereupon, he made this statement to me,
"Mr. Dodd, we are here to operate in response to similar directives, the
substance of which is that we shall use our grant-making power so to alter life
in the United States, that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet
Union."
Well,
parenthetically, Mr. Griffin, I nearly fell off the chair. I, of course, didn't, but my response to
Mr. Gaither then was, “Oh, Mr. Gaither, I can now answer your first
question. You've forced the
Congress of the United States to spend a hundred and fifty thousand dollars to
find our what you have just told me.”
I said, “Of course, legally, you're entitled to make grants for this
purpose. But, I don't think you're
entitled to withhold that information from the People of this country, to whom
you're indebted for your tax exemption.
So why don't you tell the People of the country just what you told
me?” And his answer was, “We would
not think of doing any such thing."
So, then I said, “Well, Mr. Gaither, obviously, you forced the Congress
to spend this money, in order to find out what you just told
me.”
Griffin: Mr. Dodd, you have spoken, before, about
some interesting things that were discovered by Kathryn Casey at the Carnegie
Endowment. Would you tell us that
story, please?
Dodd: Sure, glad to, Mr. Griffin. This experience you just referred to,
came about in response to a letter which I had written to the Carnegie Endowment
Center, National Peace, asking certain questions and gathering certain
information.
On the
arrival of that letter, Dr. Johnson, who was then President of the Carnegie
Endowment, telephoned me and said, "Did you ever come up to New York?" I said, “Yes, I did, more or less each
weekend.” And he said, "When you
are next here, will you drop in and see us?” Which I
did.
And
again, on arrival, at the office of the Endowment, I found myself in the
presence of Dr. Joseph Johnson, the President, who was the successor to Alger
Hess, two vice-presidents and their own counsel, a partner in the firm -- a
fellow by the name of Cromwell. And
Dr. Johnson said (again after amenities), "Mr. Dodd, we have your letter. We can answer all those questions, but
it would be a great deal of trouble.
We have a counter-suggestion.
Our counter-suggestion is that, if you can spare a member of your staff
for two weeks, and send that member up to New York, we will give to that member
a room in the library, and the minute books of this Foundation since its
inception. And we think that, whatever you want to find out or that the Congress
wants to find out, will be obvious from those
minutes."
Well, my
first reaction was they had lost their minds. I had a pretty good idea of what those
minutes would contain, but I realized that Dr. Johnson had only been in office
two years, and the vice-presidents were relatively young men, and counsel also
seemed to be a young man. I guessed
that, probably, they had never read the minutes
themselves.
And so, I
said that I had somebody and I would accept their offer. I went back to Washington, and I
selected the member of my staff who had been a practicing attorney in
Washington. She was on my staff to
ensure I did not break any Congressional procedures or rules. In addition to that, she was
unsympathetic to the purpose of the investigation. She was a level-headed and very
reasonably brilliant, capable lady, and her attitude toward the investigation
was this: “What could possibly be
wrong with foundations? They do so
much good.”
[Start
of side 2]
Well, in
the face of that sincere conviction of Kathryn's, I went out of my way not to
prejudice her in any way, but I
did explain to her that she couldn't possibly cover fifty years of handwritten
minutes in two weeks. So, she would
have to do what we call “spot reading.”
I blocked out certain periods of time to concentrate on. Off she went -- to New York. She came back at the end of two weeks,
with the following recorded on dictaphone belts.
We are now
at the year nineteen hundred and eight, which was the year that the Carnegie
Foundation began operations. And,
in that year, the trustees meeting, for the first time, raised a specific
question, which they discussed throughout the balance of the year, in a very
learned fashion. And the question
is this: Is there any means known
more effective than war, assuming you wish to alter the life of an entire
people? And they conclude that, no
more effective means to that end is known to humanity, than war. So then, in 1909, they raise the second
question, and discuss it, namely, how do we involve the United States in a
war?
Well, I
doubt, at that time, if there was any subject more removed from the thinking of
most of the People of this country, than its involvement in a war. There were intermittent shows in the
Balkans, but I doubt very much if many people even knew where the Balkans
were. And finally, they answer that
question as follows: we must
control the State Department.
And
then, that very naturally raises the question of how do we do that? They answer it by saying, we must take
over and control the diplomatic machinery of this country and, finally, they
resolve to aim at that as an objective.
Then, time passes, and we are eventually in a war, which would be World
War I. At that time, they record on
their minutes a shocking report in which they dispatch to President Wilson a
telegram cautioning him to see that the war does not end too quickly. And finally, of course, the war is
over.
At that
time, their interest shifts over to preventing what they call a reversion of
life in the United States to what it was prior to 1914, when World War I broke
out. At that point, they come to
the conclusion that, to prevent a reversion, we must control education in the
United States. And they realize
that is a pretty big task. To them
it is too big for them alone.
So they
approach the Rockefeller Foundation with a suggestion: that portion of education which could be
considered domestic should be handled by the Rockefeller Foundation, and that
portion which is international should be handled by the
Endowment.
They
then decide that the key to the success of these two operations lay in the
alteration of the teaching of American History. So, they approach four of the then most
prominent teachers of American History in the country -- people like Charles and
Mary Byrd. Their suggestion to them
is this, “Will they alter the manner in which they present their subject”” And, they get turned down,
flatly.
So, they
then decide that it is necessary for them to do as they say, i.e. “build our own stable of
historians." Then, they approach
the Guggenheim Foundation, which specializes in fellowships, and say” “When we find young men in the process
of studying for doctorates in the field of American History, and we feel that
they are the right caliber, will you grant them fellowships on our say so? And the answer is,
“Yes.”
So,
under that condition, eventually they assemble twenty (20), and they take these
twenty potential teachers of American History to London. There, they are briefed in what is
expected of them -- when,
as, and if they secure appointments in keeping
with the doctorates they will have earned.
That
group of twenty historians ultimately becomes the nucleus of the American
Historical Association. And then,
toward the end of the 1920's, the Endowment grants to the American Historical
Association four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000) for a study of our history
in a manner which points to what this country look forward to, in the
future.
That
culminates in a seven-volume study, the last volume of which is, of course, in
essence, a summary of the contents of the other six. The essence of the last volume is
this: the future of this country
belongs to collectivism, administered with characteristic American
efficiency.
That is
the story that ultimately grew out of, and of course, was what could have been presented by the members
of, this Congressional Committee, and the Congress as a whole, for just exactly
what it said. But, they never got
to that point!
Griffin: This is the story that emerged from the
minutes at the Carnegie Foundation?
Dodd: That's
right.
Griffin: And so?
Dodd: It was official to that
extent.
Griffin: And Kathryn Casey brought all of these
back, in the form of dictated notes, or verbatim readings, of the
minutes?
Dodd: On dictaphone
belts.
Griffin: Are those in existence
today?
Dodd: I don't know. If they are, they're somewhere in the
archives, under the control of the Congress, the House of
Representatives.
Griffin: How many people actually heard
those? Or, were they typed up,
transcripts made?
Dodd: No.
Griffin: How many people actually heard
those recordings?
Dodd: Three maybe. Myself, my top assistant, and
Kathryn. Yeah, I might tell you
this experience, as far as its impact on Kathryn Casey is concerned. Well, she was never able to return to
her law practice. If it hadn't been
for Carroll Reece's ability to tuck her away in a job with the Federal Trade
Commission, I don't know what would have happened to Kathryn. Ultimately, she lost her mind as a
result of it. It was a terrible
shock to her. It is a very rough
experience for her to encounter proof of this kind.
Griffin: Mr. Dodd, can you summarize the
opposition to the Committee, the Reece Committee, and particularly the efforts
to sabotage the Committee?
Dodd: Well, it began right at the start of the
week of the operating staff, Mr. Griffin.
It began on the day on which the Committee met for the purpose of
consenting to, or confirming, my appointment to the position of Director of
Research. Thanks to the abstention
by the minority members of the Committee from voting, that is, the two
Democratic members – that is why, technically, I was unanimously
appointed.
Griffin: Wasn't the White House involved in
opposition?
Dodd:
Not at this particular point, Sir.
Mr. Reece ordered Counsel and myself to visit Wayne Hayes. Wayne Hayes was the ranking minority
member of the Committee, as a Democrat.
So, we -- Kathryn and I -- had to go down to Mr. Hayes’ office, which we
did. Mr. Hayes greeted us with the
flat statement, directed primarily to me,
“I am opposed to this investigation. I regard it as nothing but an effort on
the part of Carroll Reece to gain a little prominence. So, I'll do everything I can to see that
it fails.” Well, I have a strange
personality, in the sense that a challenge of that nature interests
me.
Our Counsel
withdrew. He went over and sat on
the couch in Mr. Reece's office, and pouted. I, sort of, took up this statement by
Mr. Hayes as a challenge, and set myself a goal of winning him over to our point
of view.
I started by
noticing that, on his desk, there was a book. The book was of the type – and there
were many in those days -- that would be complaining about the spread of
communism, and Hungary. That type
of book.
This meant
to me that, at least Hayes had read the book. So, I brought up the subject of the
spread of the influence of the Soviet World. For two hours, I discussed this with
Hayes and, finally, he ended up by rising from his desk and saying, "Norm, if
you will carry this investigation toward the goal that you have outlined to me,
I will be your biggest supporter."
I said, “Mr.
Hayes, I can assure you. I will not
double-cross you. Subsequently, Mr.
Hayes sent word to me that he was in Bethesda Naval Hospital, with an attack of
ulcers. He asked if would I come
and see him. Which I did. He then said, "Norm, the only reason
I've asked you to come out here is that I just want to hear you say, again you
will not double-cross me." I gave
him that assurance, and that was the basis of our
relationship.
Meanwhile,
Counsel took the attitude expressed in these words, “Norm, if you want to waste
your time with 'this guy' (as he called him), then you can go ahead and do it,
but don't ever ask me to say
anything to him, under any conditions, on any
subject.”
So, in a
sense, that created a deck for me to operate in relation to Hayes, on my
own.
As time
passed, Hayes offered friendship, which I hesitated to accept because of his
vulgarity. I didn't want to get
mixed up with him socially, under any conditions.
Well,
that was our relationship for about three months. Eventually, I had occasion to add to my
staff. As a result of adding to my
staff a top-flight intelligence officer, both the Republican National Committee
and the White House resorted to stopping me from continuing this investigation
in the direction Carroll Reece had personally asked me to
go.
Mr.
Griffin, that direction was to utilize this investigation to uncover the fact
that this country had been the victim of a conspiracy. That was Mr. Reece's conviction. I eventually agreed to carry out that
direction.
I
explained to Mr. Reece that his own
Counsel wouldn't go in that direction. He gave me permission to disregard our
own Counsel and to set up an aspect of the investigation outside of our office
-- more or less secretly. The
Republican National Committee got wind of what I was doing, and they did
everything they could to stop me.
They appealed to Counsel to stop me. Finally, they resorted to the White
House.
Griffin: Was their objection because of what you
were doing, or because of the fact that you were doing it outside of the official auspices of the
Committee?
Dodd: No. The objection was, as they put it, my
devotion to what they called "anti-Semitism." That was a cooked-up idea. In other words, it wasn't true at all. But, any way, that's the way they
expressed it.
Griffin: Excuse me. Why?
Dodd: Then they made it
stick.
Griffin: Why did they do that? How could they say
that?
Dodd: Well, they could say it, Mr.
Griffin. But, they had to have
something in the way of a rationalization of their decision to do everything
they could to stop completion of this investigation, given the direction that it
was moving. That direction would
have been exposure of this Carnegie Endowment story, and the Ford Foundation,
and the Guggenheim, and the Rockefeller Foundation -- all working in harmony
toward the control of education in the United
States.
Well, to
secure the help of the White House in the picture, they got the White House to
cause the liaison between the White and the Hill -- a major person -- to go up
to Hayes and try to get him, as it were, actively to oppose what the
investigation was engaged in.
Hayes, then,
very kindly, would listen to this visit from this major person. Then he would call me and say, “Norm,
come up to my office. I have a good
deal to tell you.”
I would go
up. He would tell me he just had a
visit from this major person, and he wants me to break up this
investigation. So then I said,
“Wayne, what did you do? What did
you say to him?” He said, “I just
told him to get the hell out.” And
he did that three times. I got
pretty proud of him, in the sense that he was, as it were, backing me up. We finally embarked upon hearings at
Hayes’ request. Hayes wanted to get
them out of the way, before he went abroad in the
summer.
Griffin: Why were the hearings finally
terminated? What happened to the
Committee?
Dodd: What happened to the Committee, or to
the hearings?
Griffin: The
hearings.
Dodd: The hearings were terminated. Carroll Reece was up against such a
furor in Hayes, through the activity of our own Counsel. Hayes became convinced that he was being
double-crossed; and he put on a
show in the public hearing room, Mr. Griffin, that was an absolute
disgrace. He called Carroll Reece
publicly every name in the book.
Mr. Reece
took this as proof that he couldn't continue the hearings. He actually invited me to accompany him
when he went down to Hayes’ office and, in my presence, with the tears rolling
down his face, Hayes apologized to Carroll Reece for all he'd done, and his
conduct. He apologized to me. I thought that would be enough, and
Carroll would resume. He never
did.
Griffin: This charge of anti-Semitism is kind of
intriguing to me. What was the
basis of that charge? Was there any
basis for it at all?
Dodd: The basis used by the Republican
National Committee was that the intelligence officer I had taken on my staff --
when I oriented this investigation to the exposure of, and proof of, a
conspiracy -- was known to have a book, and that book was deemed to be
anti-Semitic. It was childish, but
it's what the second-in-command at the Republican National Committee said, and
he told me I'd have to dismiss this person from my
staff.
Griffin: Who was that
person?
Dodd: A Colonel Lee
Loraine.
Griffin: Lee Loraine. And what was his book? Do you
recall?
Dodd: The book they referred to was called
Waters Flowing Eastward. It
was a very strong castigation of the Jewish influence in the
world.
Griffin: What were some of the other charges made
by Mr. Hayes, against Mr. Reece?
Dodd: Just that Mr. Reece was utilizing this
investigation for his own prominence inside the House of Representatives. That was the only charge Hayes could
think up.
Griffin: How would you describe the motivation of
the people who created the foundations -- the big foundations -- in the very
beginning? What was their
motivation?
Dodd: Their motivation was, well, let's take
Mr. Carnegie, as an example. His
publicly declared and steadfast interest was to counteract the departure of the
colonies from Great Britain. He was
devoted just to putting the pieces back together
again.
Griffin: Would that have required the
collectivism to which they were dedicated?
Dodd: No. No. No. These policies are the foundations'
allegiance to these un-American concepts;
these policies are all
traceable to the transfer of the funds over into the hands of Trustees, Mr.
Griffin. Those Trustees were not
the men who had a hand in the creation of the wealth that led to the endowment,
or the use of that wealth for what we would call public
purposes.
Griffin: It was a subversion of the original
intent, then?
Dodd: Oh, yes! Completely so. We got into the worlds, traditionally,
of bankers and lawyers.
Griffin: How have the purpose and direction of
the major foundations changed, over the years, up to the present? What are their purposes and directions
today?
Dodd: 100% behind meeting the cost of
education, such as it is presented through the schools and colleges of this
United States, on the subject of our history -– to prove that our original ideas
are no longer practical. The future
belongs to collectivistic concepts.
There is just no disagreement on this.
Griffin: Why do the foundations generously
support communist causes in the United States?
Dodd: Well, because, to them, communism
represents a means of developing what we call a monopoly -- as the organization,
we'll say, of large-scale industry into an administrable
unit.
Griffin: Do they think that they
will?
Dodd: They will be the beneficiary of it,
yes.
[end
interview]
# #
#
This
is an edited transcript of a program from the Audio Archives of the Reality Zone
and posted here -
http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/dodd/interview.htm
If you
are a subscriber to the Audio Archives, you are entitled to make as many
duplicate copies as you wish -- to share with your
friends.
There is
no additional charge for this, as long as you are a subscriber, and the copies
are given freely and not sold.
If you
would like to become a subscriber, please ask for our free introductory tape,
which provides the details.
“Zone”
dwellers receive three cassettes each month in an attractive binder, suitable
for book shelves.
For more
information, please visit our website at URL: http://www.realityzone.com/ or call our
toll free number: 1-800-595-6596.
The
Reality Zone is a subsidiary of American Media.
If
you wish to obtain a copy of the videotape on which this program is based, call
the Reality Zone at our toll-free number and ask for product information. That number again is:
1-800-595-6596
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For further information please refer to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Back to Top
Back to I want my Country back!
Citizens for a Constitutional Republic
E-MAIL THIS PAGE TO A FRIEND