“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 Hiss, 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.
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:
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
