Video Transcript: The Politics of Cancer (Part 2): Big Money = Big Changes in the Cancer Industry
Charlene Bollinger: Today in Part 2, G. Edward Griffin continues his discussion on the politics of cancer with an examination of the history of the medical industry.
Ty Bollinger: Power corrupts and as they say “follow the money trail” reveals some of the individuals who changed the course of history for personal gain.
G. Edward Griffin: So, that’s it. The science, in other words, the science of cancer therapy, summarized in probably about five minutes there, is not that complicated. The complicated part is the politics. And this is where we go now.
In my book, World Without Cancer, I documented the history, the history that I did not want to deal with, by the way, because I thought it was diversionary. People only wanted to care about what to do with your cancer, I mean how to get rid of it. They didn’t want to know about the history of it and the politics. And finally, reluctantly, I decided I had to deal with that. And so, here’s what I found.
And that is that historically, there’s a strong tie between the Rockefeller financial institutions and a German cartel called IG Farben. I don’t have time for all of that, but Farben was the first major world cartel, and it started off with the dye industry. That was how the whole chemical industry came into being, was with dyestuffs.
But it soon branched out into munitions and drugs. And it spread to the United States. It went into consortium, primarily with the Rockefeller group of companies. They struck a cartel agreement so that the Rockefellers and the Farben group in Germany could join forces without competing with each other.
The IG Farben group agreed not to compete in the production of oil products, they stay out of gasoline and all that stuff. And for that, they gave their—they shared their patents and processes with the Rockefellers in pharmaceuticals. And in return, Rockefeller agreed not to compete with them in Europe, and so forth.
So, it was a typical cartel agreement. And that’s how the Rockefellers got into it. It became—the Rockefellers became, and still are by the way, a major force in the pharmaceutical industry. But they adopted the formula that was pretty well perfected by the Rothschild banking family, which is what they worked in the background. They didn’t want their names in the foreground. They wanted to focus attention on front-runners, and they preferred to stay in the background so that their names were pretty much out of it.
And you have to be kind of a sleuth to even know that the Rockefellers are deeply involved in the pharmaceutical industry because they use street names and fronts, and all that kind of thing. But they are a major force, and that can now be pretty well documented.
The goal of the consortium was to capture control of the medical industry, believe it or not. Well, of course, you can believe it. Because we’re looking at it now in hindsight, don’t forget. But at the time, this would be a pretty hard idea to convince people that it was genuine, that somebody wanted to control the medical industry.
And they accomplished this, and this is all documented, by the way, if you’re having any doubts, waves of skepticism, which I hope you are, because I certainly did, and I think it’s a healthy attitude to take. So, when I wrote about this, I documented it and I’m going to kill you with documentation. You’re going to get tired of those footnotes.
But this all comes from their documents, from their sources, from friendly sources, and not from those who are critics. But they accomplished this through the tax-exempt foundations. And the tactic was pioneered by Rockefeller, who also teamed up with the Carnegie Endowment Fund and some of the other Carnegie institutions, the tax-exempt institutions, who also had a strong interest in the pharmaceutical industry.
And their strategy was simply this: to improve their public image, this was—well I’ll come to that in a moment. To improve their public image through the appearance of philanthropy, to preserve their fortunes from the income tax and inheritance taxes by having them concentrated into tax-exempt foundations, which they control just as totally and firmly as if they were the president and chairman of the board, and to finance commercially profitable or ideologically desirable projects under the guise of philanthropy.
A very brilliant strategy, when you think about it. And they accomplished all of those objectives, indeed. The mastermind behind this in the early days was an interesting fellow by the name of Fred Gates. Now Gates, he’s kind of hard to find in the history books, but he’s there. And his origin, he came from the George Pillsbury company. He was hired by George Pillsbury as a public relations agent. He was a brilliant guy at public relations.
Incidentally, he was the guy that they hired to go check out Adolf Hitler when he was an upcoming leader, politician. The people back at the foundational level actually sent Fred Gates to visit Adolf Hitler and analyze his capability of being a useful, to them, a useful political figure. He came back and said yes.
This is Fred Gates. He’s no small player in history, although he’s kind of difficult, not impossible, but difficult to find in the history books. And when he worked for George Pillsbury, he developed what was called the Pillsbury Formula. And I jokingly say this sometimes, that this is the formula for making bread. I don’t know. Some of you young folks may not recognize it, that was an old expression. “Hey, where’s the bread, man?” That means where’s the money.
So, the Pillsbury Formula was sort of known for making that kind of bread, because it was this. It said—he advised Pillsbury, who also had a bad reputation as being a miserly, mean old capitalist. And he said “Mr. Pillsbury, look. If you give away a dollar in donations to something, and you set in motion a citizen committee that will go out and raise money from the community, then for every dollar that’s raised in the community you agree to give a dollar,” he says
Now what you have is efficiency in philanthropy. Because now you give only half as much as you would have normally, and you’ve got thousands and thousands of people working with you and feeling an identity to you as a person because they like this project. So, it’s a means of reaching a lot of people and bringing them into your team, and they think better of you because of that.”
That was called the Pillsbury Formula. And it was their phrase. They called it efficiency in philanthropy.
Well, Mr. Gates soon left the employment of Mr. Pillsbury and went to work for Mr. Rockefeller. And Rockefeller said of him, he was a genius, he was a business genius. He praised him highly. And it was no doubt that Rockefeller and Carnegie, who now employed Mr. Gates, followed the Pillsbury Formula, which was efficiency in philanthropy.
So, what they did is they—they spent a little money. For them, a relatively small amount of money. In those days, it was a few million dollars, which today would be a few billion dollars probably. Still, a lot of—not very much money, I should say, for these types of people. And what they did is they financed a project to upgrade, it was described as a project to upgrade or improve the level of education, the quality of medical education in the medical schools of America.
At that time, this was—we’re going back to about 1910. Incidentally, that was the same year that—the same groups of people, by the way, same groups of people were meeting on Jekyll Island and laying the groundwork for the Federal Reserve system. Yeah. Boy, was I surprised to see that. Now I’m not surprised, because I see these people all over the place. They’re everywhere you look, you know?
But that’s not my topic, but I just thought I’d throw it out. These same people, Rockefellers, the Carnegies, they were putting in place a progressive tax system, which they were going to escape through the tax-exempt foundations and so forth.
Okay. So, in 1910, and actually, the turn of the century, about 1890 and thereon, there was a lot of concern among the people for the low quality of medical requirements. Almost anybody could say he or she was a doctor. For $20, I believe was the average figure, $20-50, you could send off your money to some institution and get back a diploma that says you’re a doctor of medicine, or doctor of something or other. You can put it in a frame, put it on your wall, and treat patients.
Well, there were a lot of quacks, of course. We call them quacks now. There were a lot of people that didn’t know what they were doing. But what you don’t hear about is there were a lot of people who did know what they were doing under that same plan, by the way. There were a lot of people that came into that field that didn’t have—they had a $20 diploma, and you say, “Isn’t that terrible?” But they had Grandma’s remedies, and Grandma knew what she was doing in a lot of cases.
So, a lot of those doctors were doing some good for their patients. But not all. So, the attention was focused on those people that were really not helping their patients at all, and collecting money, and pretending to have knowledge which they didn’t have. There was a lot of concern about that, and pressure on Congress to bring about reform.
Congress couldn’t raise the money. They couldn’t get enough momentum going. And so, Rockefeller and Carnegie stepped in and said, “We’ll solve the problem.” So, what they did is they hired a fellow by the name of Abraham Flexner, and they sent him around to tour all of the medical facilities in America. And he came back with a report.
And guess what he found? Medical education in America is terrible. Well, everybody knew that. But we had the Flexner Report, which highlighted it and gave names, dates, and budgets, and examples, and so forth. So, now we had an official document, a report to be concerned about. And so, this circulated through Congress, too. Still, no money coming, no real reform coming. Nobody knew how to reform medical education in America.
And so, now the second phase came, which is where Rockefeller and Carnegie started to offer rather sizable grants to reform education in America. They offered these grants to the medical schools in existence at that time who were cooperative with their agenda.
What was their agenda? Their agenda was to have control over the curricula of these schools. Need I say more? That was it. They would go to some university or some school that was struggling for money and they’d say “Well, here’s a million dollars. We like what you’re doing. And all we ask is that in return for this benevolent grant, we just ask would you mind if we had a member or two that we could recommend that you put on your board of directors?”
And of course, they said “That would be wonderful. We’d be glad to do that so that you could see how the money was being spent.” That was how it was phrased. “We want to see how our money is being spent. We recommend Dr. So-and-so and Dr. So-and-so. Would you mind?” “Oh, these are very fine people. We’d be delighted, we’d be honored to have them on our board of directors.”
So, in every case, there was a triumvirate, they called it, of three people: Fred Gates was one, Abraham Flexner was the other, and his brother, Simon Flexner, was the other. Those three people wound up on the board of directors of just about every medical school in America that accepted the money, which was all of them except one.
So, well, I guess I shouldn’t say except one. That’s not true. There’s only one that survived that didn’t accept the money.
I think that was the Hahnemann school. I’d have to go back and check my notes on that. But there was one that did not accept the money and survived, whereas the others that did not accept the money fell by the wayside, because those that were granted huge amounts of money were able to construct buildings, get new equipment, hire the best minds, the most brilliant minds that were available, pay them respectable salaries.
And it didn’t take long before the medical profession of America was literally in the lap of the donors from these tax-exempt foundations.
Charlene Bollinger: Wow! Amazing information from our good friend, G. Edward Griffin. We hope you learned a lot from this video.
Ty Bollinger: That’s right and if you did, please share it on your social media and tell your friends and family about The Truth About Cancer. Thank you and God Bless.