In "Theirs Was the Kingdom: Lila and DeWitt Wallace and the Story of the Reader's Digest". [New York: W.W. Norton, 1993. 701 pages], author John Heidenry writes how the Reader's Digest grew to become the world's most successful publisher of magazines, and largest global marketer of books. At one time the Digest had a circulation of 18 million. Heidenry also writes how the Reader's Digest through its Washington Bureau, was a major distributor of Cold War propaganda with strong connections to the US intelligence community.
What Heidenry, fails to point out are the strong connections the Reader's Digest has to the Council on Foreign Relations. Reader's Digest Chairman, and CEO George V. Grune is a Council on Foreign Relations member .
In April 1998 Reader's Digest printed an article by Senior Editor Daniel Levine, titled "HIGH ON A LIE." The article is about the "medical marijuana" movement and explains how the movement is a hoax and a fraud. Levine fails to point out the Council on Foreign Relations links to sponsorship of the movement.
In November of 1996 the California voters passed Proposition 215 - the Compassionate Use Act. It allows the marijuana to be grown and used for "any illness for which marijuana provides relief." The Campaign for the "Compassionate Use Act" to legalize medical marijuana would not have been successful without the funding of billionaires George Soros, Peter Lewis and John Sperling. Levine doesn't identify George Soros as a Council on Foreign Relations member.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff DoD Publication 1 (1987) Glossary of Department of Defense Military Associated Terms defines:
"COVERT OPERATIONS: (DoD, Interpol, Inter-American Defense Board) Operations which are so planned and executed as to conceal the identity of or permit plausible denial by the sponsor. They differ from clandestine operations in that emphasis is placed on concealment of identity of sponsor rather than on concealment of the operation."
The Council on Foreign Relations has used covert operations to conceal their identity while methodically taking control of the Department of State, Central Intelligence Agency, and the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the Government.
The Council on Foreign Relations is part of an international group of co-conspirators, that have been carrying out successful covert operations since the mid-1800's. If the Council and its branch organizations weren't so successful at divorcing themselves from their operations they would have been stopped long ago. The American Branch is the Council on Foreign Relations. The British Branch is the Royal Institute of International Affairs. They have a web site at http://www.riia.org/. They operate under what they call the Chatham House Rule http://www.riia.org/rule.html:
>THE CHATHAM HOUSE RULE
> When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule. participants are
> free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the
> speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed; nor may it be mentioned
> that the information was received at a meeting of the Institute.
> In 1992 the application of the Rule was clarified and its wording strengthened as
> Meetings of the Institute may be held 'on the record' or under the Chatham House Rule.
> In the latter case, in accordance with the Chatham House tradition, it may be agreed with
> the speaker(s) that it would be conducive to free discussion that a given meeting or part
> thereof, should be strictly private and thus held under the Chatham House Rule.
> Today the Rule is used by organizations and gatherings throughout the world.
The Council on Foreign Relations is one of the organizations. In 1942 Council on Foreign Relations member James Warburg was appointed deputy director of the overseas branch of the Office of War Information in London with responsibility for propaganda aimed at the Axis powers and occupied European Nations.In UNWRITTEN TREATY, Warburg writes,
" Psychological warfare aims at the undermining of a people's confidence in its cause, its strength, its leaders and itself, and at the destruction of its determination to fight for its cause or even for its life.
This combination of confidence and determination we call morale. When a nation's morale is destroyed, it commits suicide - as did Austria - or else it submits to conquest after feeble and disorganized resistance - as did France. In any case, it reaches a state of mind in which resistance seems hopeless and surrender less of an evil than endurance of armed conflict...
Psychological warfare against an enemy nation seeks to paralyze the will of that nation by spreading confusion, by alternating excessive hope and excessive fear, by exploiting every cleavage and adding fuel to every prejudice. "
The Council on Foreign Relations propaganda machine manipulates American Citizens to accept the particular climate of opinion the Council on Foreign Relations seeks to achieve in the world. Council on Foreign Relations members working in an ad hoc committee called the "Special Group" and through a vast intragovernmental undercover infrastructure called the "Secret Team" formulate this opinion in the US.
The dominant Council on Foreign Relations members belong to an inner circle that plan and co-ordinate the psycho-political operations used to manipulate the American public. These are the Council on Foreign Relations members in an ad-hoc governmental committee called the "Special Group."
The rest of the Council on Foreign Relations members, past and present, inside and outside of the government, are part of a "Secret Team" that play key parts in carrying out the psycho-political operations.The "Secret Team" is set up as circles within circles. Not every Council member knows exactly what psycho-political operations are being planed or what their exact role in the operation is. This allows them to deny responsibility and deny Council sponsorship of the operation.
Secret Team circles include Council on Foreign Relations members in top positions in: the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government; who control television, radio, and newspaper corporations; who head the largest law firms; who run the largest and most prestigious universities; who direct the largest private foundations; who direct the largest public corporations; who direct and staff the major think tanks and University Institutes; and who hold top commands in the military.
Council on Foreign Relations members are focusing psycho-political operations (psyops) at the American public. The psycho-political operations are designed to undermine our confidence, and destroy our determination to fight. The psycho-political operations target the family, loyalty to our nation, and our faiths. Two of the psycho-political operations are abortion, and legalization of drugs. Council on Foreign Relations member George Soros is helping to finance both operations. Council on Foreign Relations members in "the Special Group" and on the "Secret Team" help plan and co-ordinate the operations.
The abortion and drug legalization psyops are covert operations. The identity of the Council on Foreign Relations sponsorship is kept secret. A covert operation makes the target aware something is wrong while making them helpless to do anything about it because they don't know who is attacking them. A covert operation allows the sponsor to place members of its organization on both sides of an issue. Former Heath, Education and Welfare Secretary Council on Foreign Relations member Joseph A. Califano, Jr., calls Council on Foreign Relations member George Soros the "Daddy Warbucks of drug legalization." However, Califano never links the Council on Foreign Relations to sponsorship of drug legalization or abortion, thus participating in concealing the identity of CFR sponsorship and participation in the covert operation.
Council on Foreign Relations member George Soros is one of the world's richest men (estimated worth: $10 billion) and probably the biggest international investor of all time. This guy lost $600 million in one day speculating on which way the yen would jump and never flinched.
Soros doesn't flinch because he and his fellow Council on Foreign Relations members can always steal more money. In 1995, Senator Alfonse D'Amato, as head of the Senate Banking Committee, issued a report about the Clinton Administration's $20 billion loan to Mexico. The reason given for the loan was to prop up a staggering Mexico because any default on loans would end foreign investment in all developing countries.
The real reason was to rescue American and Mexican investors who had thrown their money into the craps game of high-interest Mexican Government bonds. For a year before the loan was ordered, on January 31, 1995, top Treasury officials and President Clinton were telling us how great things were going economically in Mexico. It was a cover-up to prevent Congressional defeat of the North American Free Trade Agreement, to bolster the Mexican and US administrations in upcoming elections in both countries, and to protect the major speculators.
An article from Newsday , "Peso Hits Record Low As Bailout Is Debated" ( Karen Rothmyer - 1/31/,95) identifies some of the Council on Foreign Relations members involved in the cover-up. They were "Former Presidents George Bush, Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford [who] signed a declaration of support for the [bailout] plan. Also endorsing the plan was George Soros, probably the world's most influential international investor."
George Soros is also a member of the Carlyle group. The Carlyle Group is an investor team led by Ronald Reagan's Defense Secretary Frank C. Carlucci III and funded in part by the Mellon family. Carlucci is a sawed off runt with a Napoleon complex and a poor self image. The furniture in Carlucci's office is miniaturized so he feels bigger. When Carlucci is photographed with other men, they sit down, and he stands up, to give the perception he is bigger. As president and CEO of Sears World Trade center, Carlucci left the company with a $60 million dollar loss, and went work for government.
The managing director of the Carlyle group is George Bush's White House Office of Management and Budget Director Richard Darman. A partner in the group is George Bush's Secretary of State James A. Baker III. Another member of the Carlyle group is Richard Nixon's White House Office of Management and Budget Deputy Director Frederic Malek. George Bush Sr.'s son George Bush Jr., former CIA Director Robert Gates and current SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt are advisors to, investors in or board members of Carlyle's companies. Included in Carlyle's press kit are Vernon Jordan and Bob Strauss.
Carlucci, Darman, Gates, Jordan, Malek and Strauss are Council on Foreign Relations members. The Carlyle group has exploited their governmental connections and ties to turn itself into one of the twenty-five largest defense contractors in the world. All the members of the Carlyle group have been part of dubious investment activities. Many have been exposed in scandals that involve the Central Intelligence Agency.
Soros uses some of the money he steals to fund a group of international foundations. Foundations are used by The Council on Foreign Relations to funnel corporate and personal wealth into the policy-making process. Foundations are tax-free. Contributions to foundations are deductible from federal corporate and individual income taxes. The Foundations themselves are not subject to federal income taxation. Foundations control hundreds of Billions of dollars of money that would normally go to pay federal and individual income taxes. In 1970 there were 7000 foundations that controlled $20 Billion in assets. Nearly 40% of these foundation assets were controlled by the top 12 foundations [ Ford Foundation, Lilly Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, Duke Endowment, Kresge Foundation, Kellogg Foundation, Mott Foundation, Pew Mutual Trust, Hartford Foundation, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, Carnegie Foundation]. The top twelve foundations were controlled by the Council on Foreign Relations.
Foundations can he created by corporations or individuals. These corporations or individuals can name themselves and their friends as directors or trustees of the foundations they create. Large blocks of corporate stock or large amounts of personal wealth can be donated as tax-exempt contributions to the foundations. The foundations can receive interest, dividends, profit shares, and capital gains from these assets without paying any taxes on them. The directors or trustees, of course, are not allowed to use foundation income or assets for their personal expenses, as they would their own taxable income, But otherwise they have great latitude in directing the use of foundation monies-to underwrite research, investigate social problems, create or assist universities, write research, investigate social problems, establish "think tanks," endow museums,etc. 
At the Soros foundation Web Site (http://www.soros.org/) we learn that the:
"National foundations are autonomous institutions established by Mr. Soros in particular countries to initiate and support projects. National foundations are located primarily in the previously communist countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, but also in Guatemala, Haiti, Mongolia, and South Africa. Each national foundation has a board of directors and staff who set the priorities for the foundation's work. The national foundations are, in most cases, autonomous nongovernmental organizations registered in their own countries and staffed by local professionals. The foundations develop distinct programs in support of the mission and strategic goals established by their directors and staff. These programs vary greatly in nature and urgency from country to country. The local nature of the foundations represented here is one of the distinctive features of Mr. Soros' approach to philanthropy."
One of the Foundations, the Open Society Institute, is issuing grants to promote abortion. Among the programs those that use abortion as a method for family planning.
Is the Soros foundation a way for the Council on Foreign Relations to use tax payer money to promote abortion and population control? Are the Soros foundations part of the Council on Foreign Relations "Secret Team." Do Soros Foundation employees double as covert operators who carry out well planned psycho-political operations in the Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union? Are any Soros' Foundation employees also CIA agents?
The Council on Foreign Relations controls the US Banking industry, and has controlled the Federal Reserve since it's inception. Council on Foreign Relations member Robert Edward Rubin was sworn in as the 70th Secretary of the Treasury on January 10, 1995. On May 18, 1998 Reuter's reported "Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and Attorney General Janet Reno, at a joint news conference, said a three-year undercover operation had resulted in the indictment of officials from 12 of Mexico's 19 largest banks. They said it was the first time that Mexican banks were "directly linked to laundering the Cali and Juarez cartels' U.S drug profits." Are any drug profits laundered by Council on Foreign Relations controlled US banks?
CFR member Congressman Richard Gephardt (D-MO), recently informed the TV audience America will soon have to relinquish control to a "International Regime." Are we approaching the day when students and workers marching in the United States will be crushed by UN Peacekeeping Forces under the control of this International Regime? Who will control the Regime? The Council on Foreign Relations? Should a major political party consider someone willing to turn our country over to a "International Regime" a possible presidential candidate?
Daniel Levine's article "High on a Lie" follows. It explains how George Soros is using his money to finance a psycho-political operation that would legalize and encourage drug use in America. Is the "medical marijuana" movement a psycho-political operation meant to create another problem that will divide and occupy the attention of the American people, while the Council on Foreign Relations continues to destroy America and make it part of an international Regime under Council on Foreign Relations member control?
High on a Lie
Funded by billionaires, the "medical marijuana" movement is blowing smoke in our eyes
BY DANIEL LEVINE, Senor Editor, READER's DIGEST, April 1998
ONE SATURDAY last September, 50,000 people, most of them teenagers, crowded into the Boston Common for the eighth annual Freedom Rally. Its organizers billed it as the largest marijuana-legaization event on the East Coast. Strolling through the crowd, holding a joint, was a 17-year-old high- school senior who said his name was Bill. "If they allow sick people to use it," he said, "it can't be that damaging."
Sharing a marijuana pipe with two friends, a 15-year-old named Nicole agreed. "Pot is harmless," she said. "It should be legalized because there are so many medical benefits. It helps you with a lot of things. It's the best."
An increasing number of young Americans agree. They have gotten this idea from a well-funded movement to legalize the "compassionate" use of marijuana. While every legitimate drug requires rigorous
testing by the FDA before being approved, marijuana advocates are opting for medicine by popular vote. This year signatures are being gathered for medical-marijuana initiatives in a half-dozen states and the District of Columbia.
Marijuana's main active ingredient, THC, is effective in relieving nausea and inducing weight gain in cancer and AIDS patients. That is why the FDA has approved Marinol, a synthetic pill form of THC. But marijuana in its smoked form has never been shown in controlled scientific studies to be safe or effective. In fact, marijuana smoke contains over 2000 chemicals many of which produce psychoactive reactions, cause lung damage and - in cancer and AIDS patients-increase the risk of pneumonia and weaken the immune system. Inhaling the smoke also disrupts short-term memory and leads to changes in the brain similar to those caused by heroin, cocaine and other highly addictive drugs.
"There is no conclusive scientific evidence that marijuana is superior to currently available medicines," says Dr. Eric Voth, chairman of the International Drug Strategy Institute in Omaha. "Medical marijuana is a scam that takes advantage of sick and dying patients."
Says Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey, (Ret.), director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, "Medical marijuana is a stalking-horse for legalization. This is not about compassion. This is about legalizing dangerous drugs."
"Daddy Warbucks" of Drugs.
The legalization of marijuana and other drugs has been debated for more than 30 years, with a vast majority of Americans standing in opposition. Legalization supporters have used the argument that drugs are necessary for medical reasons. But now, for the first time, they have significant financial backing.
In the last six years a handful of Americas wealthiest people have contributed $20 million to groups that promote medical marijuana or other radical drug-policy reforms. Billionaire financier George Sores is the biggest giver, donating more than $16 million. Others include Peter Lewis, CEO of Cleveland-based Progressive Corp., the nation's sixth-largest auto insurer, and John Sperling, president of the Apollo Group, a holding company that controls for-profit universities and job-training centers.
In an interview with Reader's Digest, the 76-year-old Sperling said he believes doctors should be allowed to prescribe all drugs, including heroin and LSD. Lewis declined to be interviewed.
A spokesman for Sores said he does not support drug legalization. Nonetheless, Soros has donated millions since 1992 to groups led by people advocating it. Former Heath, Education and Welfare Secretary Joseph A. Califano, Jr., calls him the "Daddy Warbucks of drug legalization."
Soros created a drug-policy institute called The Lindesmith Center and has funded it with $4 million. its director, Ethan Nadelmann, Sores's point man on drug policy, has said he wants to "legalize the personal possession of drugs by adult Americans."
Soros has also given $6.4 million to the Drug Policy Foundation (DPF) a leading advocate for medical marijuana. Its stated mission is "publicizing alternatives to current drug strategies." Its founder, attorney and college professor Arnold Trebach, calls himself a "flat-out legalizer" who advocates the repeal of current drug laws.
Richard J. Dennis, a 49-year-old Chicago commodities trader and member of DPF's board of directors, supports both medical marijuana and legalization in general. In fact, says Dennis, "I'd like to see legalization for adults for all drugs, including heroin."
On DPF advisory board is Harvard Medical School psychiatrist Lester Grinspoon, a leading advocate of medical marijuana for over 25 years. He compares marijuana's potential benefit to that of penicillin, predicting, "It will be the wonder drug of the new millennium."
Soros, Lewis and Spelling gained their biggest victory in November 1996 when California voters passed Proposition 215, also known as the Compassionate Use Act. It allows pot to be grown and smoked for "any illness for which marijuana provides relief." There are no age restrictions. "Illness" is loosely defined and can include headaches, chronic pain and arthritis. A doctor's oral recommendation is all that is required.
The principal author of the California initiative was 52-year-old Dennis Peron, a San Francisco "medical pot club" owner who's been arrested 15 times on marijuana charges. Peron says he worded the initiative vaguely because he believes "all marijuana use is medical."
Peron's Cannabis Cultivators' Club is the state's largest pot club, taking in over $20,000 a day. One day last fall, Peron wandered the club greeting patrons and handed one a bulging quarter-pound bag of marijuana. Standing in line at Peron's smoke-filled club to buy an eighth of an ounce of high-grade Mexican marijuana was a 39-year-old named Anthony. Under California's law, Anthony is considered a "seriously ill patient" who can purchase and smoke pot. He tokes up four or five times a day.
When asked about his ailment, Anthony answered: "Officially, hernia discomfort from overstrenuous intercourse. Actually, I can't feel it." He said the club admitted him without any medical referral. A self-described "potaholic," Anthony has smoked dope since he was 16. "My problems," he conceded, "are related to a general life-style kind of thing."
Peron's club had operated for years, despite violating state and federal drug laws. In August 1996, state drug agents raided it, seizing 86 pounds of pot and $62,000. "The club was running a sophisticated illegal drug distribution network," said a spokesman for California Attorney General Dan Lungren. A grand jury indicted Peron, and he awaits trial on felony drug charges. Meanwhile, Peron is running for governor of California. Peron's initiative never would have made it to the ballot without the help of Soros, Lewis and Sperling.
California requires 433,269 valid petition signatures before a "citizen's initiative" can be placed on the ballot. As the deadline neared, Peron and his unorganized group of volunteers had collected only 40,000.
That is when Ethan Nadelmann of Soro's Lindesmith Center stepped in. He helped create Californians for Medical Rights, a sophisticated campaign organization that pushed the medical-marijuana initiative. Soros and Lewis poured $400,000 into the group, which paid professional signature gatherers who, in 90 days, obtained more than 700,000 signatures.
Once the measure was on the ballot, Soros, Lewis and Sperling contributed a combined $450,000 for advertising. Commercials featured emotional appeals for relief through the use of marijuana. The ads never mentioned that Proposition 215 would allow marijuana to be smoked for any condition, without age restriction and without a prescription.
One of the numerous medical- marijuana clubs that opened as a result of Peron's measure was the Dharma Producers Group in San Francisco, which bragged that it offered "medical marijuana with a Tibetan touch." The club's "medical director," a pony-tailed 52-year-old named Lorenzo Pace, laughed when he explained his medical- marijuana credentials: "I did preliminary research all through the '60s."
Californians for Medical Rights has since changed its name to Americans for Medical Rights. Today it is leading a campaign to place medical-marijuana initiatives on state ballots across the country.
While Californians were voting on medical marijuana, their neighbors in Arizona were considering an even more radical initiative. The Drug Medicalization, Prevention and Control Act of 1996 proposed to legalize not only marijuana but also more than 100 other drugs--including heroin, LSD and PCP (angel dust) for medical use.
Arizona's initiative was sold to voters as a way to get tough on violent criminals. How? Open up jail space by paroling all first- and second-time drug offenders. This ignored the fact that virtually all of the 1200 inmates affected had plea-bargained down from much more serious charges or had prior felony records.
In Arizona, Sperling spearheaded the campaign. He, Soros and Lewis contributed a total of $1.2 million; the DPF gave $303,000. This accounted for 99 percent of the initiative total funding. As in California, much of this money paid for a massive media campaign. Opponents of the initiative, caught unprepared, did not run a single advertisement.
The measure passed, but a post-election survey revealed that Arizona voters had been badly misled. Seventy-four percent did not believe doctors should be able to prescribe drugs such as heroin, PCP and LSD, as the proposition allowed; 70 percent agreed the initiative would give children the impression the drugs were also acceptable for recreational use. The state legislature subsequently passed a statute that effectively overrode the initiative.
The organizers of Arizona's initiative moved to place a similar measure on the ballot in Washington State. Sperling, Lewis and Soros contributed a total of more than $1.5 million.
Despite being outspent more than ten to one, opponents of the Washington initiative were not about to be caught unprepared. They took every opportunity to stress that the measure was not about compassion, but about legalizing dangerous drugs. Last November voters rejected the measure.
The defeat in Washington has not sidetracked plans for similar medical marijuana initiatives in other states. Battlegrounds include Hawaii, Florida, Arkansas, Maine and Alaska. An Oregon initiative would not only legalize use of many drugs but also permit the sale of marijuana in state liquor stores. In Washington, D. C., Initiative 59 would allow up to four caregivers, including "best friends," to cultivate pot for a "seriously ill" person. Organizers are hoping that passage of these initiatives will spur Congress to legalize medical marijuana under federal law.
Says Dr. Robert DuPont, a former director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse: "Never in the history of modern medicine has burning leaves been considered medicine. Those in the medical-marijuana movement are putting on white coats and expressing concerns about the sick. But people need to see this for what it is: a fraud and a hoax."
You can stop the Council on Foreign Relations, by making them visible. Tell other Americans who the Council on Foreign Relations are, and what they are doing. Write your elected representatives and demand that they investigate the Council on Foreign Relations role in the CFR run Clinton administrations sale of military technology to China. Demand that the Iran-Contra investigation be reopened and that the Council on Foreign Relations links to key individuals under investigation and performing the investigation be explored and explained.
Petition For The Impeachment of President William Jefferson Clinton. This Petition is auto sent via email to all Senate/House/members. ( http://celebseries.com/slick/ ) .
Write letters to your local papers, radio, and TV stations, and ask them why they fail to link the CFR to many of their top news stories.
How would Council on Foreign Relations prize winning University Professors, Historians, Authors, Statesmen, Politicians, and Journalists explain to a Grand Jury, why links to the Council on Foreign Relations are missing from major news stories, and from the history books?
 Dye, Thomas R., Who's Running America?, Prentice-Hall, 1976, pgs 103-107
Visit the Roundtable Web Page: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/2807
Title-50 War and National Defense § 783 states - "It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to combine, conspire, or agree with any other person to perform any act which would substantially contribute to the establishment within the United States of a totalitarian dictatorship, the direction and control of which is to be vested in, or exercised by or under the domination of control of, any foreign government."
The Council on Foreign Relations are in violation of Title-50 War and
National Defense § 783. The Council on Foreign Relations has unlawfully
and knowingly combined, conspired, and agreed to substantially contribute to the
establishment of one world order under the totalitarian dictatorship, the direction
and the control of members of Council on Foreign Relations, the Royal Institute
of International Affairs, and members of their branch organizations in various
nations throughout the world. That is totalitarianism on a global scale.