Nations as Foreign Capital Corporations – The Saker Blog

Originally Published on December 2, 2018

Source: The Saker Blog

As shadow banks become authentic governments of countries, the nations gradually turn into foreign capital corporations or companies, which enslave the workforce. Capital or money doesn’t have a nationality. Its homeland is the accounts, hidden by its owners so as not to pay taxes. Traditionally these accounts were in Switzerland or in the Virgin Islands, but are now scattered around the world in many centers, turned into the cash boxes and are the true homeland of that one percent that monopolizes the riches of the planet.

This is especially true for small countries such as Honduras, which probably never was a proper country, but rather a group of ranches owned by a bunch of families and now on its way to definitively become a foreign capital corporation without nationals. Left behind are only wretched employees with miserable wages. The foreign capital company strips all of the homelands of its excess inhabitants, who then have to migrate on foot looking for other lands. The only nationals that Honduras has at the moment are Orlando Hernandez and his cadre of cocaine traffickers who are the only ones who feel at home in the country (although they would probably prefer to live in Miami and be North Americans) and perhaps the high-ranking US military stationed at the base of Palmerola. They are probably the only ones who can walk the streets of Tegucigalpa boasting with impunity of their elite privileges preserved only by the fear or ignorance of the people; an ignorance that they do everything in their power to encourage. I do not include the rank and file soldiers of the base, because surely they will spend their time dreaming of returning home from time to time; returning home to their own country, that probably has also turned into an immense foreign capital corporation with four or five subsidiaries (Blackrock, Vanguard Group … and of course the Carlyle group, the most emblematic). Nationals without a homeland or with a shrunken one like Syria may perhaps console themselves a little for their misfortune, thinking that the capital in the hands of some Arab sheiks is converting middle-class or lower-class Americans into employees of Ben Salman with slowly diminishing salaries. However scarce the rights enjoyed by the Hondurans that manage to enter the stepmother country of adoption that could be the USA, they’ll always have more than in their own country, where they have none and where their death isn’t news. Now finally they have become “news” after many decades of being anonymous victims, thanks to an epic journey on foot, crossing the hostile lands of Central America and North America: lands hostile to those who don’t have more capital than only their hands or their wit, as long as they do not use it to foment crime and robbery. It is possible that those Mexicans who contemplate this diaspora, and are also subject to the abuse of local mafia bosses backed by Washington, feel wrongly lucky. Thinking that they are on one higher rung of the global pyramid, and I don’t mean the Aztec one, but the pyramid of the Ponzi scheme perpetrated by the directors of the Vanguard group or Carlyle, is a false sense of consolation. It only allows the Mexicans to deceive themselves because the foreign capital corporations will continue oppressing them all the same. This hopeless consolation does serve the bigwigs of the banks and corporations in that the Mexicans don’t become fully aware of the oppression that they suffer and don’t decide to rebel against it.

Meanwhile, the nation of Honduras is on its way to becoming universal, because it is a model that Chiquita’s prominent executives want to export to the entire world. They do not want to only ship bananas. They are also committed to exporting slavery and misery as this is part of the model. And the Mexicans and the Americans themselves are becoming Hondurans exceptionally quickly, and if the immigrants don’t hurry to get into the northern country as soon as possible, they could find a nation as tyrannical as their own, but of a much bigger size. Because the real mission that Trump has entrusted to the army on the border with Mexico is not only to stop their progress but to keep intact the mirage that his is a free and prosperous nation, when it stopped being such, a few years ago.

The Bush administration by means of a rigged election, took good care of cutting the constitutional guarantees with its false war on terrorism (which is nothing more than a war against the liberties of America and the rest of the world). This started the long road to privatize the homeland and deliver their wealth into the hands of a few entrepreneurs who frequently disguise themselves as politicians and who change the legislation at will and for their own benefit. It seems very revealing to me that a banana company like Chiquita (because the banana one is the company and not the nation) is in charge of keeping at bay the thirst for freedom and justice of the Honduran people.

In this way, the Hondurans are diminished, and a distorted image of them is projected to the world that allows their oppressors to keep them in the status of serfs or ignorant peasants who serve only to work a land that doesn’t belong to them, with semi-starvation wages. If Honduras is a banana republic, it is because the banana foreign capital companies like Chiquita strangle its development. The role played by Chiquita in the financing of the death squads of Colombia is well demonstrated when they were condemned to pay a “symbolic” fine of 25 million dollars for financing the self-defense groups in that country.

The directors of Chiquita could have saved the money paid to the death squads by raising the salary and improving the coverage of their employees (instead of cutting it as they intend to do now in La Lima). We must ask ourselves, then, why didn’t they do it?. Does such behavior gratify the ego of executives who take a sadistic pleasure in subduing and oppressing their employees under the soles of their feet to feel themselves important? Are they psychiatric fodder? Are they perverts who desperately need someone to knock them down on a couch to be psychoanalyzed? Is that the only explanation? Or would such an initiative have found the rejection of the Colombian elites, of a no less sinister profile, who contemplate any improvement in the living conditions of the humble classes of that country as a threat? Do they fear that this improvement will arouse the envy of other sectors of the population that could claim, in turn, more just living conditions for themselves? The relationship between corporate fascism and sadomasochism is very clear. It is not necessary to consult with any specialist in mental illnesses about that. The problem, or one of them, is that the victims of the sadism of the fascists do not usually present themselves on a voluntary basis. About the sadism of the assassins, I do not want to joke because it’s too terrible.

Regarding this, the Argentine psychoanalytic school has failed us; it didn’t penetrate into the heart of horror, it didn’t sit the assassins on the couch, and sadly neither in the dock to dig into the garbage of their minds, more tormenting than tormented, and profoundly sick with an infectious disease that looks remarkably like the rage. You only have to read their threatening statements. But perhaps psychoanalysis wanted to transform the patient so that it would integrate better or worse in a sick society, and not to transform the sick society as a whole, and I mean into everyone’s society. Because in the new neo-liberal order, psychopaths spring up like mushrooms. Psychopathy is the crop that gets favored most, together with that of transgenic soybeans. They are transgenic psychopaths fed with Kelloggs watered with glyphosate.

We must ask ourselves these things because it is not enough to accuse the corporations of all the evils of this world. Their bad practices thrive in societies of authoritarian tradition that prevail in most Latin American countries (and increasingly everywhere) where the armed man is worshiped, and solidarity or the disinterested struggle for the common good is considered a dishonor. It is a cult of death and weapons that spread everywhere with fascism, and that also corrodes American society. The “perverse” exaltation of the bully, on the part of both men and women, intensifies with the crisis and threatens to plunge us all into a new global conflagration of apocalyptic consequences. The new times, and the new model propose the villain as a hero. We can not get tired of repeating it: the money to pay the thugs and murderers was foreign, but the murderers are native.

Chiquita has changed ownership (supposedly, because it is impossible to know who is hiding behind that innocent-looking name), but it does not seem to be willing to change its practices. And now it is engaged in breaking the strikes, utilizing the Honduran army, which is actually the army of Chiquita. We saw this in La Lima, Colonia San José not long ago,where 400 workers were shot, and several of them were tortured. Chiquita Honduras dismissed 105 workers in retaliation, and 34 arrest warrants were issued against the leaders of the strike committee.

The links that Chiquita Brands maintained with prominent figures of the American political and economic panorama are very clear. Many accuse it of being behind the coup that ousted Zelaya. Chiquita was represented by a powerful US law firm, Covington & Burling LLP and its consulting firm, McLarty Associates. President Obama’s Attorney General, Eric Holder, was a Covington partner and defense attorney for Chiquita when the company was accused of hiring the death squads in Colombia. George W. Bush’s ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, currently Trump’s national security adviser, worked as a lawyer for that firm, and the vice president of McLarty Associates was none other than John Negroponte, who played a leading role in the Contra war against Sandinista Nicaragua.

The organizations and individuals that conspire in Honduras are undoubtedly the same ones that want to put an end to the Nicaraguan democracy by disguising themselves as a non-profit or an altruistic organization, now named the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation. The old School of the Americas, where General Romeo Vásquez did his studies as coup supporter, has graduated to a new name just as Vásquez graduated “cum laude” in the techniques of torture, intimidation, and extermination. The fact that such a school remains open despite its bloody history of dishonor and infamy, gives us an idea of how highly it is esteemed in the new world order (which is the same as the old one, but only worse). The degree of impunity which war criminals walking free enjoy, is rampant. We need a non-profit or philanthropic organization that tells us which NGOs are worthy of the name, and that does not include the Cosa Nostra or the Ndrangheta among its members, who will very soon call themselves philanthropic organizations. I recommend Front Line Defenders, committed to the clarification of the murder of the defender of the land, and president of Muca, Jose Angel Flores as well as the defender Mr. Silmer. Another black chapter in the history of Honduras that deserves a separate essay.

If we try to find out the nationality of a corporation like Chiquita, we enter an authentic labyrinth where it is difficult not to get lost. According to some sources it is – in theory – Swiss. Switzerland, the homeland of evaded fortunes is an ideal country and opaque as no other to hide your gains, but its headquarters is in the canton of Vaud and in Florida, which means that it has at least a double nationality. The Safra Cutrale group that acquired it not long ago is an international network of companies that has its headquarters in Sao Paulo, that is, in Brazil, the perfect country to establish the headquarters of a corporation like that one, now that Bolsonaro and the ultra-right is ruling it. Did the executives of Chiquita decide to make the company Brazilian because, in a country as corrupt as that one, where judges send to prison whoever pleases them based on the false testimonies on the part of criminals without credence, their crimes would never come to light?

Safra and Cutrale, the new owners of Chiquita, not only commercialize bananas, but they also commercialize transgenic soybeans, which is a crop that spreads like fascist cancer through Argentina, Paraguay and Brazil, and just as neoliberalism, takes hold of those countries. The cultivation of soybeans thrives and already represents 50 percent of the arable land in Argentina. This, however, compromises food security and contributes to spreading the hunger that its defenders say they intend to fight. Violent expulsion of farmers from their lands and introducing changes in legislation that favor the cultivation of these crops, support the concentration of land and wealth in a few hands. It is hugely ironic that the profits of such crops are dedicated to paying the national debt contracted by corrupt politicians or members of the army following the wise advice of the IMF. As many already know, this institution is expert in ruining the economy of countries with the only objective being to fatten their accounts and those of the financial funders who are very savvy in tricks of all kinds. These fraudulent practices deserve a separate essay.

Transgenic soybeans (generously irrigated with Monsanto’s carcinogenic insecticide) not only threaten Argentina’s food security, but it is also a threat to health throughout the world since such poisonous pesticide has been found in alarming proportions in a multitude of foods consumed everywhere. The oppression in the Americas don’t come free of charge for the rest of us: we get it served on a tray, food dressed with carcinogenic. Pharmaceutical lobbies (Monsanto merged with Bayern not long ago) are very active bribing or pressuring European MEPs (like Richard Ashworth and John Agnew) who dine together in restaurants serving organic food. Of course, the glyphosate is left for the masses.[1]

Thus, if Honduras is described as a banana republic, we can already speak of a soy republic in Brazil, Paraguay, and Argentina, or would it be better to call them soy dictatorships? Monsanto impoverishes us all as it impoverishes the variety of seeds and degrades and sickens them; suppressing small farmers and suppressing diversity in agriculture and putting countries on their knees before the big foreign capital corporations of the food, pharmaceutical and armaments complex.  The foreign based bankers can only but smile.  

Honduras is a priority; together with El Salvador and Guatemala it is the cornerstone where the lies and the tyranny in the Americas, need many schools. Its freedom is the freedom of all of us. That is why it is so important that we help it to free itself so that Honduras exports not only bananas but liberty and justice to the rest of the continent.

[1] https://corporateeurope.org/food-and-agriculture/2017/10/last-minute-pro-roundup-lobbying-ahead-high-level-monsantopapers

The Big Guns: The Carlyle Group

Originally Published in July 2002

New Internationalist Magazine

With board members like these, who needs lobbyists? The Bush connection to US defence giant the Carlyle Group.

ON 12 March 2002, Frank Carlucci, the former US Secretary of Defense and chair of the Carlyle Group, presided over a closed-door conference of US and Taiwanese defence officials. At Carlucci’s invitation, Taiwan’s Defence Minister Tang Yao-Ming flew in from Taipei and met with Deputy US Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, the Bush administration’s leading hawk and a man with close ties with conservative leaders in Asia.

The meeting turned out to be the highest-level defence contact between the United States and Taiwan since diplomatic relations were severed in 1979. It provided the Bush administration with an opening to pursue its policies of expanding arms sales to Taiwan outside the glare of the media. Wolfowitz promised to do ‘whatever it takes’ to strengthen Taiwan’s military capabilities against China – a policy of great interest to Carlyle and its largest defence subsidiary, United Defense Industries, which was one of 12 military contractors to sponsor the conference.

This incident illustrates the extraordinary reach of the Carlyle Group and the man at its helm. Carlucci came to Carlyle in 1987 after a long career in the top ranks of the US national security establishment, including stints as deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Advisor to former President Reagan. During the 1980s, he ran Sears World Trade, a company that became deeply involved in shady arms deals and commodity imports before going bankrupt.

Under Carlucci’s leadership, Carlyle has become one of the world’s largest private equity funds, with over $13 billion worth of investments in defence, manufacturing, telecommunications, healthcare and finance.

As the eleventh largest US defence contractor, Carlyle is involved in nearly every aspect of military production, including making the big scandal for guns used on US naval destroyers, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle used by US forces during the Gulf War and parts used in most commercial and military aircraft. United Defense has joint ventures in Saudi Arabia and Turkey, two of the United States’ closest military allies in the Middle East.

Unbeatable contacts Carlyle’s extraordinary investment strategy is what sets it apart. It focuses on industries, such as defence and telecommunications, where government spending, regulations and policies play critical roles in defining the market. But unlike its competitors in the military-industrial complex or investment banking, Carlyle doesn’t lobby Congress or the White House to fund pet projects or push for legislation that would help its interests. It doesn’t need to. Instead, it has hired a stable of former statesmen and senior officials, including former President George Bush, former Secretary of State James Baker III and former British Prime Minister John Major, to exploit their experience in government and diplomacy to open doors and gather intelligence on investment opportunities.

Through their unbeatable high-level connections, Carlyle has direct lines to government leaders in Asia, the Middle East and Europe. And, not least, to George W Bush who once served as an executive with Caterair, one of hundreds of companies Carlyle has bought and sold over the past 15 years. In an unprecedented twist on the Washington influence game, through Bush Senior’s ties to Carlyle and United Defense, President George W Bush’s family is making untold sums from the war he is directing against terrorism. This fact is underscored by Carlyle’s decision after the opening salvoes of the war to go public with two of its defence companies, including United Defense.

‘We’ve never in the history of the republic had a former US president working for arms manufacturers,’ says Charles Lewis, the executive director of the Center for Public Integrity, a Washington-based research group that investigates the influence of money and politics. ‘What is most offensive to me is that we have a former president of the United States with a substantial pension from US taxpayers, and we cannot find out what he is doing for the eleventh largest defence contractor.’

Since 1987 Carlyle has invested $6.4 billion in 233 transactions, with a rate of return of 36 per cent on its completed investments. It invests on behalf of 435 pension funds, banks and investment funds, 40 per cent of which are based overseas. During a recent (and rare) public briefing on its investment strategies, one of Carlyle’s senior managers disclosed that the Group has $7 billion in cash ready to invest. That’s not chump change: $7 billion is the minimum amount the world community should invest every year to fight AIDS and HIV, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said last year.

The extraordinary connections with former high-level statesmen has given Carlyle a great deal of expertise on tap. Bush Senior, who was CIA director and US ambassador to China and the UN before becoming president, is the senior adviser on Asia and makes his money by giving speeches at Carlyle’s investment conferences makes those speeches or how much he earns). Baker, who also served as Treasury Secretary during the Reagan administration and defended George W during the disputed 2000 election with Al Gore, is Carlyle’s senior counsellor and a member of the firm’s Asia, Europe and Japan advisory boards. Since last spring, John Major has been chair of Carlyle Europe and heads meetings of its European advisory board.

Other recent hires include Arthur Levitt, the former chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which regulates the US stock market; William E Kennard, the former chair of the Federal Communications Commission, which has jurisdiction over the US telecom and wireless industries; and Afsaneh Beschloss, the former chief investment officer of the World Bank, who runs Carlyle’s new asset management group. Carlyle’s advisory boards are peppered with corporate executives from Boeing, BMW, Toshiba and other big transnationals, and influential characters like former Bundesbank President Karl Otto Pohl, former Thai Prime Minister Anand Panyarachun, former Philippines President Fidel Ramos and former US Ambassador to Japan and former Speaker of the House Thomas Foley.

The Saudi connection After Bush was inaugurated in January 2001, Carlyle’s Republican connections – and the role of the President’s father – became grist for several press exposes, including a detailed article in the New York Times that focused on Bush Senior and Baker’s close ties with the Saudi royal family.

But few took notice until shortly after September 11, when the Wall Street Journal revealed that the bin Laden family, which owns a major construction company in Saudi Arabia, had committed at least $2 million to one of Carlyle’s funds and entertained Bush Senior, Baker and Carlucci at their family compound in Jeddah during the 1990s. Carlyle, deeply embarrassed, quickly severed the investment ties. But a few months ago, The Washington Post revealed that the bin Laden money had been solicited by members of the Saudi royal family, who encouraged wealthy Saudi citizens to invest in Carlyle as a sign of respect for Senior and Baker, their hero from the Gulf War.

Judicial Watch, a conservative US legal group, seized on the bin Laden connection to launch a vitriolic attack, urging Bush Senior to resign from Carlyle. Charles Lewis of the Center for Public Integrity believes the bin Laden connection may be the tip of the iceberg of Carlyle’s political relationships. ‘I actually think this is a potentially more serious scandal for the Bush administration than Enron, because it’s more personal,’ he said.

Carlyle only tells the public what it wants. That makes information about Bush Senior’s meetings with heads of state and his other activities on Carlyle’s behalf almost impossible to obtain.

In April, Cynthia McKinney, an outspoken Democrat Representative from Georgia, became the first public figure to criticize the relationship between the Bush family and the Carlyle Group. In a radio interview, McKinney accused the Bush administration of ‘serving the interests’ of Carlyle and said that ‘persons close to this administration are poised to make huge profits off America’s new war’. For that, she was vilified by her fellow lawmakers and the White House, which said through a spokesperson that: ‘The American people know the facts, and they dismiss such ludicrous, baseless views. The fact that she questions the President’s legitimacy shows a partisan mindset beyond all reason.’

Apparently it is out of bounds in American politics to question the ethics of a former president who makes money from policies pursued by his son in the White House. But without more voices like McKinney’s, the public is likely to remain in the dark about the global reach of the Carlyle Group, which combines the public and private interest in a form rarely seen in Washington. ~

Investing in War • Center of Public Integrity #CarlyleGroup #iraq #afghanistan #911truth

Originally Published on November 18, 2004

Source: The Center for Public Integrity

A dozen companies in which Carlyle had a controlling interest netted more than $9.3 billion in contracts.

Overall, six private investment firms, including Carlyle, received nearly $14 billion in Pentagon deals between 1998 and 2003. (See related report, “The Sincerest Form of Flattery.”)

From its founding in 1987, the Carlyle Group has pioneered investing in the defense and national security markets, and through its takeover of companies with billions of dollars in defense contracts became one of the U.S. military’s top vendors, ranking among better known defense firms like Lockheed Martin, Boeing Co., Raytheon Co., Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics.

Unlike those firms, however, the Carlyle Group itself is not a manufacturer. It offers no services directly to the Pentagon, and has no defense contracts. Rather, it manages investments—some $18.4 billion from 600 individuals and entities in 55 countries, according to its Web site. The firm’s business is making money for these investors, the vast majority of whose identities are not disclosed to the Securities and Exchange Commission or other government bodies.

Though Carlyle itself has won no contracts, the companies it has owned or controlled have done billions of dollars worth of business with the Pentagon. The Carlyle unit that brought in the largest share—$5.8 billion—was United Defense Inc., which manufactures combat vehicles, artillery, naval guns, missile launchers and precision munitions. United Defense also owns the country’s largest non-nuclear ship repair, modernization, overhaul and conversion company, United States Marine Repair Inc. Its most famous product may well be the Bradley fighting vehicle. United Defense brought in more than 60 percent of Carlyle’s defense business.

Carlyle took United Defense public in 2001; by April 2004 it had sold all its shares in the company.

Lear Siegler Services, a leading contractor in aircraft logistics support, maintenance, pilot training and ground support, received contracts worth more than $1 billion. Carlyle sold the company in August 2002.

Southwest Marine Inc. also received contracts worth more than $1 billion since 1998, and Norfolk Shipbuilding & Drydock received contracts worth $827 million. In 1998, Carlyle merged these two companies into United States Marine Repair.

Vought Aircraft Industries, a large subcontractor doing work for military cargo planes, bombers, and fighters, received contracts worth $85 million. Vought is among the few defense contractors that the Carlyle Group has not sold.

Among other private equity firms, New York-based Veritas Capital Management firm that employs many former high-ranking military officials received Pentagon contracts to the tune of more than $2.2 billion. Veritas is the 41st ranked defense contractor.

Companies under the ownership of Vectura Holding Co., another New York-based group, got deals to the tune of $1 billion, while companies controlled by Berkshire Hathaway, led by billionaire investor Warren Buffett, won contracts worth $688 million. Companies owned by Green Equity Investors II LP ($275 million) and Gores Technology Group ($153 million) also received substantial defense money.

New market

Private equity firms did not have any significant presence in the defense industry until the end of the Cold War. Traditionally, the Defense Department depended on mega contractors such as Boeing Corp., Lockheed Martin and Raytheon for weapons and services. But since the 1990s, the military has increasingly outsourced to private contractors a variety of jobs and services, ranging from planning of operations to the supply of linguistic services. A U.S. government decision in the 1990s to encourage small-business participation in contracts also contributed to the expansion of the market for smaller, privately-owned companies.

The Carlyle Group acquired controlling interests in several underperforming defense contractors, installed its own management teams and revitalized the companies, in part by landing big Pentagon contracts. Then, they sold the contractors to other investors for a large profit.

“There have always been [private equities] that went in with management and bankrolled management,” said Stuart McCutchan, editor of Defense Mergers & Acquisitions. “What Carlyle has done differently is they have taken it to a new level both in terms of size and in terms of being committed to an entire sector.”

“Carlyle is the biggest single success in Washington of a venture capital firm,” Dr. Loren B. Thompson Jr., a national security expert at the libertarian Lexington Institute, said.

In 1997, for example, the group made a 650-percent profit when it sold BDM International Inc., a McLean, Va., defense contractor. And in December 2001, Carlyle sold off the majority of its holdings in United Defense Inc. Altogether, Carlyle earned $1 billion in profit from the United Defense investment.

A windfall of war

The group cashed out many of its investments when the stock of defense companies rose dramatically in the aftermath of September 11 and the buildups to the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

“Defense properties are too expensive these days,” explained Carlyle spokesman Chris Ullman.

In 1997, Carlyle liked the price of United Defense, and beat out General Dynamics and Alliant Techsystems, which also coveted the underperforming artillery firm. General Dynamics bid more than Carlyle offered for the company, but potentially faced a lengthy, drawn out antitrust battle if it acquired United Defense. Carlyle ended up winning the bid.

Carlyle finally sold its stakes in United after taking it public in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. The Washington Post called the hugely successful public offering “one of the most successful single venture investments of recent years.”

But United did not seem all that lucrative before September 11.

“They [Carlyle] were really kind of in a pickle with United Defense,” McCutchan said. “They wanted to cash out on the equity. There wasn’t much money to be made… When 9/11 happened and the defense budget took off, suddenly they had a winner on their hands.”

Even Carlyle, which typically does not disclose its financial and operational details, crowed over the sale.

“It was one of Carlyle’s best investments,” Carlyle’s Ullman told the Center. “We did make more than a billion dollars on that deal, and we are very pleased that we served our investors quite well.”

The reason Carlyle’s defense portfolio is lean at the moment is the high value of defense firms, thanks in part to the ongoing U.S. wars. “If there comes a time when defense properties are priced in a way that we think makes sense for private equity investors, then we will certainly consider investing more of our dollars in that sector,” Ullman told the Center.

Investment expertise

Carlyle has a diversified portfolio, focusing its investments in sectors that have heavy government regulation and contracting—defense, telecommunications and banking. Carlyle has matched its investments with the expertise of high ranking government officials, whom the firm has courted almost from its inception.

It was under the leadership of former Defense Secretary Frank Carlucci—first as a managing director, from 1989 to 1993, and as chairman from 1993 to 2003—that Carlyle grew from a small private equity to a global investment giant, and became a major player among defense contractors.

Other former government officials who have recent or current ties to the firm include former British Prime Minister John Major and former Philippines President Fidel Ramos; former Office of Management and Budget director Richard Darman; former Clinton chief of staff Thomas F. “Mack” McLarty; former Securities and Exchange Commission chairman Arthur Levitt and former Federal Communications Commission chairman William E. Kennard. Former Secretary of State James Baker works for the firm, as did his former boss, President George H.W. Bush, who was an adviser for the firm’s Asian investment funds until he left Carlyle in 2003.

Critics have long denounced Carlyle’s practice of recruiting former high-ranking government officials at the same time as it invests in companies regulated by their former agencies, dubbing it “access capitalism.” For example, Kennard, who served as Bill Clinton’s FCC chairman, is now managing director for Carlyle’s global telecommunications and media group, directing the firm’s business investments in companies he regulated.

“Carlyle would never have gotten to the level that it is at today had it not been for this premeditated commingling of business and politics,” said Dan Briody, author of The Iron Triangle: Inside the Secret World of the Carlyle Group, a book that takes a critical look at the rise of the firm.

One of Carlyle’s most controversial hirings was of former president Bush to serve as a senior adviser for its “Asia advisory board.”

“The fact that George H.W. Bush was working for them while his son was president, while his son, in fact, was dramatically increasing defense spending—that seems to me one of the most blatant conflicts of interests in history,” Briody said.

Bush—who joined Carlyle in 1998, before his son, George W. Bush, became president—ended his relationship with the firm in October 2003, Ullman told the Center. But that hasn’t stopped the former president from continuing to give speeches for Carlyle, which he did at a Shanghai event sponsored by the firm in April 2004.

Ullman refused to disclose the remuneration Bush received for his services. “That’s not information that we disclose,” he said. “That’s his personal business. You are certainly welcome to ask him.”

Bush’s office did not respond to the Center’s request for an interview. Written questions faxed to the former president’s Houston office, at an aide’s request, did not elicit any response.

Though none are placed as closely as the president’s father, Carlyle’s other Washington insiders have ties to current Bush administration officials. Current Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Carlucci went to college together, for example, and Secretary of State Colin Powell was Carlucci’s deputy on the National Security Council in the mid-1980s.

The continued presence of Baker and Carlucci riles critics such as Briody. “If you look at the relationship that Frank Carlucci still maintains with Don Rumsfeld and Colin Powell and the reach that he has to those folks—and he has in fact used that reach in the past and tried to influence decisions those folks were making, decisions that could directly or indirectly affect Carlyle’s fortune,” Briody said.

Carlyle dismisses the notion that Carlucci or any other former government or military leader on its payroll has any conflicts of interest. “Are you aware of any solicitations from [Carlucci] to Secretary Rumsfeld to ask for any particular benefits to United Defense or any of our other portfolio companies?” Ullman said. “All they [Carlyle critics] do is, they say: ‘Oh, Carlucci used to work in the government and he went to college with Donald Rumsfeld, and Carlyle has defense investments, and now Secretary Rumsfeld is secretary of defense. Therefore, there is a conflict of interest.’”

Despite Ullman’s assertions, media accounts have noted occasions when former government officials working for Carlyle have approached the Pentagon brass. For example, Fortune magazine reported in March 2002 that Carlucci had contacted at least two senior Pentagon officials, though Carlyle claimed these contacts did not constitute lobbying.

Ullman added that all former government officials working for Carlyle abide by “all of the conflict of interests rules related to lobbying former colleagues for a year.” He pointed out that the Pentagon had cancelled the Crusader artillery system, produced by United Defense, adding, “So if we are as powerful as everyone thinks, why did they cancel it?”

Rumsfeld announced in May 2002 the termination of the artillery system; until then, the Pentagon had paid United Defense some $2 billion to develop the Crusader.

Researcher Sheetal Doshi contributed to this report.

Trilateral Commission • Two Ways of Looking at it

The following diagram shows members/entities that are directly plucked from the membership list of the Trilateral Commission as of September 2021 (green represent former members).

The first diagram shows the member and the node linked to each member is the entity/event that they are famous for.

The second diagram explains the impact of each node on the material conditions in America and then the world – that we all live under each and every day.

Post #1 – Modern Globalists behind Agenda 2030/Great Reset- David M. Rubenstein

It is often we hear the term Globalist interchangeable with Elitist, Internationalist, etc. There are obvious names we know: Rothschild, Rockefeller, Bezos, Gates, Soros, etc… my attempt is to pinpoint the less known individuals that are deeply entrenched in the push for a One World Order. This is my first entry, of which I am citing individuals that reside on the Board of Directors/Trustees for think tanks, multinational NGOs, NFPs, for-profit corporations, foundations and the like – that are all committed thru their language of policy papers/press releases/etc on all things 2030, Great Reset, Equity, Climate Change, Climate Action, Net-Zero, Circular Economy, Fourth Industrial Revolution, IoT, IoB, Stakeholder Capital, Communitarianism, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), etc.

David M. Rubenstein

In detail:

Noteworthy Quote:

“the business community has not lost its moral
compass. Capitalism may be the worst economic system except
for any of the others
”.

THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM A Partner in Shaping History 1971–2020
1. The Carlyle Group

Carlyle was founded in 1987 as an investment banking boutique by five partners with backgrounds in finance and government: William E. Conway, Jr.Stephen L. NorrisDavid M. RubensteinDaniel A. D’Aniello and Greg Rosenbaum. Rubenstein, a Washington-based lawyer, had worked in the Carter Administration.

Carlyle developed a reputation for acquiring businesses related to the defense industry. In 1992, Carlyle completed the acquisition of the Electronics division of General Dynamics Corporation, renamed GDE Systems, a producer of military electronics systems. Carlyle’s most notable defense industry investment came in October 1997 with its acquisition of United Defense Industries. The $850 million acquisition of United Defense represented Carlyle’s largest investment to that point.[12][17] Carlyle completed an IPO of United Defense on the New York Stock Exchange in December 2001, then sold the rest of the stock in April 2004.[18] In more recent years, Carlyle has invested less in the defense industry.

In September 2006, Carlyle led a consortium, comprising Blackstone GroupPermira and TPG Capital, in the $17.6 billion takeover of Freescale Semiconductor. At the time of its announcement, Freescale would be the largest leveraged buyout of a technology company ever.

The same year as Carlyle’s investment in PA Consulting, the UN published the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that have since become immensely influential in the public and private sectors. Working with the UNGC, the world’s largest corporate sustainability initiative.

Some noteworthy captions from the embedded document is:

When the UN published its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, it saw sustainable tourism as important enough to include under multiple SDGs, none more prominently than SDG 8.9: “to devise and implement policies to promote sustainable tourism which creates jobs, promotes local culture and products” by 2030. – Page 64

As a part of the relationship, PA Consulting also produced a series called “The Disruptive
Technology Executive Briefs” that spotlighted the best thinking in sustainable innovation, showcasing innovators across mainstream companies and next generation entrepreneurs. The Briefs feature analysis and resources designed to help leaders understand the new business models and technologies that will be crucial in achieving the SDGs, such as unmanned air systems, the internet of things (IoT), digital agriculture, artificial intelligence, gene editing, additive manufacturing, blockchain, and big data.
– PA Consulting Brief – Page 60

We can see that Carlyle is deeply involved in the Great Reset. What’s interesting is this PA Consulting Unit referencing unmanned air systems (drones), IoT (which is evolving into IoB – Internet of Bodies), artificial intelligence, blockchain and big data (the race to artificial consciousness – the Fourth Industrial Revolution).

2. Council on Foreign Relations

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business executives, journalists, educators and students, civic and religious leaders, and other interested citizens in order to help them better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries. Founded in 1921, CFR takes no institutional positions on matters of policy. Our goal is to start a conversation in this country about the need for Americans to better understand the world.

The most interesting outright statement outside of Great Reset stuff is this entire operations devoted to GLOBAL GOVERNENCE – the cornerstone of a New World Order.

Below is an RSS feed of the most recent articles.

3. World Economic Forum:

Mr. Rubenstein is a member of the Board of Directors. The WEF is the author of the Great Reset. Under the umbrella of the United Nations web of sub-entities is this Joint SDG Fund. Rubenstein is a regular panelist at these events that cater to funding/financing the SDGs (which is interchangeable with the Great Reset)

Joint SDG Fund – Panelist

Organized at the margins of the United Nations General Assembly, a discussion on how the Joint SDG Fund can contribute to closing the financing gap to achieve the SDGs in developing countries by bringing together the UN system and the private sector. The Joint SDG Fund showcases its role in SDG Financing, that aims to support key initiatives that can leverage public and private financing to advance the SDGs.

World leaders have made ambitious commitments to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Yet, securing enough resources remains a major challenge, with developing countries facing a gap estimated between US$ 2.5 to 3 trillion per year. What’s more, with governments and markets facing the massive financial challenge of helping countries address the immediate socio-economic impact of Covid-19, private capital will play a critical role in both addressing these needs and financing paths towards achievement of the SDGs.

Panel includes:

  • Ms. Amina Mohammed, Deputy Secretary-General, United Nations
  • Ms. Mia Mottley, Prime Minister, Barbados
  • Ms. Carin Jämtin, Director General, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency
  • Mr. David Rubenstein, Co-Founder and Co-Executive Chairman of The Carlyle Group
  • Mr. Emmanuel Roman, Chief Executive Officer, PIMCO
  • Mr. Bill Tai, Co-Founder of ACTAI Global and ExtremeTechChallenge
  • Moderated by Dr. Natalia Kanem, Executive Director of UNFPA

Very noteworthy is that Rubenstein hosts his show on Bloomberg TV.

4. John Hopkins University

Rubenstein is on the Board of Trustees of the University. The important arm of the University is the John Hopkins University’s Bloomberg School of Public Health. This is the entity that held Event 201, in tandem with Gates Foundation, World Economic Forum and Open Philanthropy Project.

Remember Event 201 took place in October 2019 – these globalist maniacs running a hypothetical worldwide pandemic outbreak and how it would be handled.

5. Brookings Institution

Rubenstein is chair emeritus of the entity. Amongst the Board of Trustees are members that are in the executive capacity of known globalist titans such as: Heinz Family Foundation, Harvard University, Citizens Financial Group, Inc., Blum Capital Partners, LP, McKinsey & Company, Thomson Reuters Foundation, PwC, Goldman, Sachs & Co., Amazon, Time Warner Inc., Deutsche Bank AG and Old Harbour Partners, LLC.

Their stated mission is: The Brookings Institution is a nonprofit public policy organization based in Washington, DC. Our mission is to conduct in-depth research that leads to new ideas for solving problems facing society at the local, national and global level.

OUR BOARD OF TRUSTEES »
The Brookings Board of Trustees is a governing body composed of distinguished individuals from a variety of backgrounds. The Board has fiduciary responsibility for the Institution’s leadership, integrity, financial health, and scholarly independence.

OUR HISTORY »
The Brookings Institution traces its beginnings to 1916, when a group of leading reformers founded the Institute for Government Research (IGR), the first private organization devoted to analyzing public policy issues at the national level.

WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING »
See what key figures in the policymaking sphere have to say about the impact of our experts and their research, locally, nationally and globally.

There are a series of policy papers and press releases coming from Brookings. I chose to include this one – printed in tandem with the Rockefeller Foundation:

Bloomberg TV

Rubenstein also hosts a show on Bloomberg TV. Here is one of the recent episodes:

Interviewing Chairman of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab:

Relationships Illustrated: