Dear Daljit Bhai

I came to similar conclusion after reading the Stracker report (The two Stracker brothers were medical doctors). Yes, there are clear evidences that attempts to develop weapons that could kill without leaving any evidence were made, are being made right now (like HAARP). And biological weapons have been successfully developed, tried, tested, and available for deployment. But in case of AIDS, there are clear evidences that they failed. But they worked on destroying the immune system by other means: 'destroy/kill while profits are ensured.'

Grove's memo and several declassified memos, orders of his successors, clearly show that from 1943 onwards the US Government directed its army to develop all sorts of weapons, including depleted uranium.

Warmest regards and happy Diwali to all,
Arun Shrivastava

Daljit <daljits1@gmail. com> wrote:
The following information shall enlighten you about how AIDS was created in the laboratory, from the person who knows everything from insides out.

Daljit Singh
Amritsar

"THE WORLD WAR WITH THE AIDS WEAPON CONTINUES TO RAGE. ONLY KNOWLEDGE
AND TRUTH WILL DEFEAT IT."

Boyd E. Graves, J.D. 11/19/00

Dr. Boyd Ed Graves
The Man Who Solved AIDS

International Human Rights activist and HIV/AIDS Advocate, American
Dr. Boyd E. Graves is the first Black African American HIV+ AIDS
patient in the United States to have received the patented cure for
AIDS, a one-time infusion called Tetrasil (U.S. Patent Number 567677)
in November 2001.

This year Dr. Boyd Graves, accepting Africa's invitation, journeyed to
Motherland Africa to share his story of his AIDS cure hope and
personally encourage the initiation of independent clinical trials and
accessibility of the U.S. patented AIDS cures in African countries hit
hardest by HIV/AIDS.

Working alongside Africa's Health Ministries, top HIV/AIDS doctors,
community leaders, Special (HIV) Virus victims, and activists alike -
Dr. Graves' mission to bring the truth about the the man-made U.S.
Origins of HIV and the patented U.S. cure for AIDS has brought hope
and success to Africa.

Since 1999, Dr. Graves has served the People as the Director for AIDS
Concerns for the International Medical Research Foundation, Common
Cause headquartered in Canada. 2007 marks six years since Dr. Graves'
was given the one-time AIDS Cure infusion dose of Tetrasil to
experience the total reversal of AIDS diagnosis and the return to good
health without traditional ARV treatment (Anti-RetroViral) , the AIDS
industry's standard for modern HIV treatment.
Dr. Graves was released from HIV/AIDS care by his U.S. Veteran's
Hospital physicians because other than minor ailments related to the
aging process and some permanent damage caused by nine years of
traditional HIV treatments, Dr. Graves' physicians report him in
exceptionally good health.

Dr. Graves 15 years of research into HIV/AIDS concentrates on two
questions and answers:

"If there is evidence of a secret U.S. Virus development program the
15 years immediately preceding the 'discovery' of HIV/AIDS, should
this program be reviewed?"

AND "If there is evidence of a U.S. Patented Cure for AIDS, should
this cure be tested?"

The theoretical jury pool sample Dr. Graves has queried among American
and now African Peoples, across demographics, countries, borders,
oceans and cultures indicate the answers to Dr. Graves' questions on
HIV/AIDS are both, 'positive'.
Dr. Graves began his research into HIV/AIDS following his own personal
HIV+ diagnosis the 10th day of July, 1992; also his 40th birthday. Dr.
Graves graduated from The Ada Ohio School of Law earning his Doctorate
of Law. The positive HIV test result in 1992 altered the course of his
legal career, and life purpose.

Dr. Graves has filed multiple legal actions with U.S. Federal Courts,
Members of the United States Congress, and U.S. Attorney General
Albert Gonzales; calling also upon the United Nations for the
immediate review of the formerly secret U.S. Special (AIDS) Virus
Program. Dr. Graves serves as lead plaintiff, The People vs. The
United States of America.

Dr. Graves is the first to clarify his professional distinction as a
doctor of law, not medicine. Dr. Graves does not provide individual
medical advice.

Dr. Boyd 'Eddie' Graves, originally from Youngstown Ohio and a
graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, MD; served as
Communications Officer aboard the U.S.S. Buchanan during President
Richard Nixon's administration. Lawyer Graves continued his private
career as a legal advocate for the class of persons protected by the
American with Disabilities Act.

In 1999, while researching his own HIV+ diagnosis, Dr. Graves'
uncovered the hidden 1971 U.S. Special Virus Flow Chart. The 1971 Flow
Chart is the research logic of the United States' 'Special Virus.' A
1971 U.S. blueprint providing the absolute proof of purpose, intent,
and premeditation as evidence in the logic flow design of the patented
Human Immune Virus (HIV).

Dr. Graves makes the Special Virus Program's 15 years of 'missing'
medical history accessible to medical doctors, scientific researchers,
leaders in public health policy and the interested reading public at
large to further facilitate the independent international review of
the 15 years of Human Rights Violations evidenced inside The U.S.
Special Virus Program (1962-1978).

Dr. Graves continues asking leaders both in the United States' and
abroad to recognize the urgent responsibility and cooperation
necessary for an immediate independent international review of the
formerly secret "U.S. Special Virus Program" and the implementation of
accessible protocols for the clinical trials of the patented AIDS
cure, Tetrasil.

Today, Dr. Graves lives in San Diego continuing legal action against
the U.S. Special Virus. Graves is considered the world's leading
investigating research expert on the U.S. Special (HIV) Virus Program
and discoverer of the program's 30 year old HIV Research Logic Flow
Chart coordinating over 20,000 experiments and 15 years of 'missing'
medical history.

Dr. Graves is dedicated to helping HIV affected people adequate access
to cure resources, human rights, educational materials, and legal
information; including out-reach education and consulting for
communities hardest hit by HIV/AIDS.
Dr. Graves does not provide medical advice and encourages patients of
HIV/AIDS to discuss the patented HIV virus and patented AIDS cure
Tetrasil with their physician and health care providers. Dr. Graves
medical records are maintained by the U.S. Veteran's Hospital.

Dr. Graves receives no public or private foundation money for his
HIV/AIDS research and judicial activism. Dr. Graves does not profit
from the patented AIDS cure and makes no official endorsement of any
pharmaceutical company, government, NGO nor individual.

Dr. Graves contributes any book profits back toward the legal work to
continue his 'David and Goliath' scaled battle for the truth about
HIV/AIDS, its' laboratory origins and AIDS' hidden cures.

Dr. Graves' is the author of two books detailing his 15 years of
medical research discoveries and judicial activism, including: "STATE
ORIGIN: The Evidence of the Laboratory Birth of AIDS," and "WORLD WAR
AIDS: The Third World War." Dr. Graves forces the shadows of
disinformation into truth's light using the accurate factual records
of our legal, medical, and news media records.

Dr. Graves' books and videos are available for purchase via Amazon.com
and boydgraves.com
Dr. Graves' updated internet news archives, audio, video and web blogs include:

boydgraves.blogspot .com
boydgraves.com
boydgraves.info
myspace.com/ boydgraves

See Also: YouTube, GoogleVideo, eg Search = "Boyd Graves"

The Man Who Solved AIDS (Printable PDF)

Friends

The silence of the lambs is about to be broken. here's one.

One US Government lab did try to create a virus that would destroy the immune system but failed. So the US Govt directed and Bilderberg controlled drug industry created retroviral drugs to induce immune deficiency syndrom. The tests are spurious. So once a person is declared HIV+, the treatment drugs ensure that he/she dies of immune system collapse, while generating profits for the Big Pharmaceutical firms.

Wangari Maatha is right to suspect that AIDS is a biowarfare weapon; she is wrong in saying that it was successfully created in the labs. yes, attempt was made.

But there are far more effective bio-weapons in the arsenal than Manmohan or Bajpayee should like to know.
Best regards
Arun Shrivastava


AIDS Created as Biowarfare, Says Nobel Laureate

http://www.conspira cyplanet. com/channel. cfm?channelid= 34"contentid=1595

The first African woman to win the Nobel Peace Prize, Wangari Maatha of Kenya, spoke out on the AIDS virus saying it was man-made and deliberateloy created as a weapon of biowarfare.

"In fact it (the HIV virus) is created by a scientist for biological warfare," she said. "Why has there been so much secrecy about AIDS? When you ask where did the virus come from, it raises a lot of flags. That makes me suspicious," Maathai said.

The Kenya based East Africa Standard reported that in response to questions from Asian and European media, she said, "I want to dedicate the prize the African woman. I want to hold and embrace her. She has suffered so much and I feel this is an honour to her.

"Although I am a biologist, I have not done any research. I may not be able to say who developed the (HIV) virus but it was meant to wipe out the Black race," she continued.

"When she first blamed the HIV/Aids on 'some sadistic scientists, Professor Maathai kicked a storm, leaving some experts outraged and others supporting her," the Standard reported.
posted by
Arun Shrivastava

Wall Street, Banks, and American Foreign Policy by Murray N. Rothbard
by Murray N. Rothbard
window.onerror= function( ){clickURL= document. location. href;return true;} if(!self.clickURL) clickURL=parent. location. href;
DIGG THIS
This first appeared in World Market Perspective (1984) and later as a monograph published by the Center for libertarian Studies (1995). Afterword By Justin Raimondo.

Businessmen or manufacturers can either be genuine free enterprisers or statists; they can either make their way on the free market or seek special government favors and privileges. They choose according to their individual preferences and values. But bankers are inherently inclined toward statism.
Commercial bankers, engaged as they are in unsound fractional reserve credit, are, in the free market, always teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Hence they are always reaching for government aid and bailout.
Investment bankers do much of their business underwriting government bonds, in the United States and abroad. Therefore, they have a vested interest in promoting deficits and in forcing taxpayers to redeem government debt. Both sets of bankers, then, tend to be tied in with government policy, and try to influence and control government actions in domestic and foreign affairs.
In the early years of the 19th century, the organized capital market in the United States was largely confined to government bonds (then called "stocks"), along with canal companies and banks themselves. Whatever investment banking existed was therefore concentrated in government debt. From the Civil War until the 1890s, there were virtually no manufacturing corporations; manufacturing and other businesses were partnerships and had not yet reached the size where they needed to adopt the corporate form. The only exception was railroads, the biggest industry in the U.S. The first investment banks, therefore, were concentrated in railroad securities and government bonds.
The first major investment-banking house in the United States was a creature of government privilege. Jay Cooke, an Ohio-born business promoter living in Philadelphia, and his brother Henry, editor of the leading Republican newspaper in Ohio, were close friends of Ohio U.S. Senator Salmon P. Chase. When the new Lincoln Administration took over in 1861, the Cookes lobbied hard to secure Chase the appointment of Secretary of the Treasury. That lobbying, plus the then enormous sum of $100,000 that Jay Cooke poured into Chase’s political coffers, induced Chase to return the favor by granting Cooke, newly set up as an investment banker, an enormously lucrative monopoly in underwriting the entire federal debt.
Cooke and Chase then managed to use the virtual Republican monopoly in Congress during the war to transform the American commercial banking system from a relatively free market to a National Banking System centralized by the federal government under Wall Street control. A crucial aspect of that system was that national banks could only expand credit in proportion to the federal bonds they owned – bonds which they were forced to buy from Jay Cooke.
Jay Cooke " Co. proved enormously influential in the post-war Republican administrations, which continued their monopoly in under-writing government bonds. The House of Cooke met its well-deserved fate by going bankrupt in the Panic of 1874, a failure helped along by its great rival, the then Philadelphia- based Drexel, Morgan " Co.
J.P. Morgan
After 1873, Drexel, Morgan and its dominant figure J.P. Morgan became by far the leading investment firm in the U.S. If Cooke had been a "Republican" bank, Morgan, while prudently well connected in both parties, was chiefly influential among the Democrats. The other great financial interest powerful in the Democratic Party was the mighty European investment-banking house of the Rothschilds, whose agent, August Belmont, was treasurer of the national Democratic party for many years.
The enormous influence of the Morgans on the Democratic administrations of Grover Cleveland (1884–88, 1892–96) may be seen by simply glancing at their leading personnel. Grover Cleveland himself spent virtually all his life in the Morgan ambit. He grew up in Buffalo as a railroad lawyer, one of his major clients being the Morgan-dominated New York Central Railroad. In between administrations, he became a partner of the powerful New York City law firm of Bangs, Stetson, Tracey, and MacVeagh. This firm, by the late 1880s, had become the chief legal firm of the House of Morgan, largely because senior partner Charles B. Tracey was J.P. Morgan's brother-in-law. After Tracey died in 1887, Francis Lynde Stetson, an old and close friend of Cleveland's, became the firm's dominant partner, as well as the personal attorney for J.P. Morgan. (This is now the Wall St. firm of Davis, Polk, and Wardwell.)
Grover Cleveland's cabinets were honeycombed with Morgan men, with an occasional bow to other bankers. Considering those officials most concerned with foreign policy, his first Secretary of State, Thomas F. Bayard, was a close ally and disciple of August Belmont; indeed, Belmont's son, Perry, had lived with and worked for Bayard in Congress as his top aide. The dominant Secretary of State in the second Cleveland Administration was the powerful Richard Olney, a leading lawyer for Boston financial interests, who have always been tied in with the Morgans, and in particular was on the Board of the Morgan-run Boston and Maine Railroad, and would later help Morgan organize the General Electric Company.
The War and Navy departments under Cleveland were equally banker-dominated. Boston Brahmin Secretary of War William C. Endicott had married into the wealthy Peabody family. Endicott’s wife’s uncle, George Peabody, had established a banking firm which included J.P. Morgan’s father as a senior partner; and a Peabody had been best man at J.P.’s wedding. Secretary of the Navy was leading New York City financier William C. Whitney, a close friend and top political advisor of Cleveland’s. Whitney was closely allied with the Morgans in running the New York Central Railroad.
Secretary of War in the second Cleveland Administration was an old friend and aide of Cleveland’s, Daniel S. Lamont, previously an employee and protégé of William C. Whitney. Finally, the second Secretary of the Navy was an Alabama Congressman, Hilary A. Herbert, an attorney for and very close friend of Mayer Lehman, a founding partner of the New York mercantile firm of Lehman Brothers, soon to move heavily into investment banking. Indeed, Mayer’s son, Herbert, later to be Governor of New York during the New Deal, was named after Hilary Herbert.
The great turning point of American foreign policy came in the early 1890s, during the second Cleveland Administration. It was then that the U.S. turned sharply and permanently from a foreign policy of peace and non-intervention to an aggressive program of economic and political expansion abroad. At the heart of the new policy were America’s leading bankers, eager to use the country’s growing economic strength to subsidize and force-feed export markets and investment outlets that they would finance, as well as to guarantee Third World government bonds. The major focus of aggressive expansion in the 1890s was Latin America, and the principal Enemy to be dislodged was Great Britain, which had dominated foreign investments in that vast region.
In a notable series of articles in 1894, Bankers' Magazine set the agenda for the remainder of the decade. Its conclusion: if "we could wrest the South American markets from Germany and England and permanently hold them, this would be indeed a conquest worth perhaps a heavy sacrifice."
Long-time Morgan associate Richard Olney heeded the call, as Secretary of State from 1895 to 1897, setting the U.S. on the road to Empire. After leaving the State Department, he publicly summarized the policy he had pursued. The old isolationism heralded by George Washington's Farewell Address is over, he thundered. The time has now arrived, Olney declared, when "it behooves us to accept the commanding position... among the Power of the earth." And, "the present crying need of our commercial interests," he added, "is more markets and larger markets" for American products, especially in Latin America.
Good as their word, Cleveland and Olney proceeded belligerently to use U.S. might to push Great Britain out of its markets and footholds in Latin America. In 1894, the United States Navy illegally used force to break the blockade of Rio de Janeiro by a British-backed rebellion aiming to restore the Brazilian monarchy. To insure that the rebellion was broken, the U.S. Navy stationed war-ships in Rio harbor for several months.
During the same period, the U.S. government faced a complicated situation in Nicaragua, where it was planning to guarantee the bonds of the American Maritime Canal Company, to build a canal across the country. The new regime of General Zelaya was threatening to revoke this canal concession; at the same time, an independent reservation, of Mosquito Indians, protected for decades by Great Britain, sat athwart the eastern end of the proposed canal. In a series of deft maneuvers, using the Navy and landing the Marines, the U.S. managed to bring Zelaya to heel and to oust the British and take over the Mosquito territory.
In Santo Domingo (now the Dominican Republic) France was the recipient of the American big stick. In the Santo Domingo Improvement Company, in 1893, a consortium of New York bankers purchased the entire debt of Santo Domingo from a Dutch company, receiving the right to collect all Dominican customs revenues in payment of the debt. The French became edgy the following year when a French citizen was murdered in that country, and the French government threatened to use force to obtain reparations. Its target for reparations was the Dominican customs revenue, at which point the U.S. sent a warship to the area to intimidate the French.
But the most alarming crisis of this period took place in 1895–96, when the U.S. was at a hair’s breadth from actual war with Great Britain over a territorial dispute between Venezuela and British Guiana. This boundary dispute had been raging for forty years, but Venezuela shrewdly attracted American interest by granting concessions to Americans in gold fields in the disputed area.
Apparently, Cleveland had had enough of the "British threat," and he moved quickly toward war. His close friend Don Dickinson, head of the Michigan Democratic Party, delivered a bellicose speech in May 1895 as a surrogate for the President. Wars are inevitable, Dickinson declared, for they arise out of commercial competition between nations. The United States faces the danger of numerous conflicts, and clearly the enemy was Great Britain. After reviewing the history of the alleged British threat, Dickinson thundered that "we need and must have open markets throughout the world to maintain and increase our prosperity."
In July, Secretary of State Olney sent the British an insulting and tub-thumping note, declaring that "the United States is practically sovereign on this continent, and its fiat is law upon the subjects to which it confines its interposition. " President Cleveland, angry at the British rejection of the note, delivered a virtual war message to Congress in December, but Britain, newly occupied in problems with the Boers in South Africa, decided to yield and agree to a compromise boundary settlement. Insultingly, the Venezuelans received not a single seat on the agreed-upon arbitration commission.
In effect, the British, occupied elsewhere, had ceded dominance to the United States in Latin America. It was time for the U.S. to find more enemies to challenge.
The next, and greatest, Latin American intervention was of course in Cuba, where a Republican Administration entered the war goaded by its jingo wing closely allied to the Morgan interests, led by young Assistant Secretary of the Navy Theodore Roosevelt and by his powerful Boston Brahmin mentor, Senator Henry Cabot Lodge. But American intervention in Cuba had begun in the Cleveland-Olney regime.
In February 1895, a rebellion for Cuban independence broke out against Spain. The original U.S. response was to try to end the threat of revolutionary war to American property interests by siding with Spanish rule modified by autonomy to the Cubans to pacify their desires for independence. Here was the harbinger of U.S. foreign policy ever since: to try to maneuver in Third World countries to sponsor "third force" or "moderate" interests which do not really exist. The great proponent of this policy was the millionaire sugar grower in Cuba, Edwin F. Atkins, a close friend of fellow-Bostonian Richard Olney, and a partner of J.P. Morgan and Company.
By the fall of 1895, Olney concluded that Spain could not win, and that, in view of the "large and important commerce between the two countries" and the "large amounts of American capital" in Cuba, the U.S. should execute a 180-degree shift and back the rebels, even unto recognizing Cuban independence. The fact that such recognition would certainly lead to war with Spain did not seem worth noting. The road to war with Spain had begun, a road that would reach its logical conclusion three years later.
Ardently backing the pro-war course was Edwin F. Atkins, and August Belmont, on behalf of the Rothschild banking interests. The House' of Rothschild, which had been long-time financiers to Spain, refused to extend any further credit to Spain, and instead under-wrote Cuban Revolutionary bond issues, and even assumed full obligation for the unsubscribed balance.
During the conquest of Cuba in the Spanish-American War, the United States also took the occasion to expand its power greatly in Asia, seizing first the port of Manila and then all of the Philippines, after which it spent several years crushing the revolutionary forces of the Philippine independence movement.
An Aggressive Asian Policy
The late 1890s also saw a new turn in the United States' attitude toward the Far East. Expanding rapidly into the Pacific in pursuit of economic and financial gain, the U.S. government saw that Russia, Germany, and France had been carving up increasing territorial and economic concessions in the near corpse of the Chinese imperial dynasty. Coming late in the imperial game of Asia, and not willing to risk large-scale expenditure of troops, the U.S., led by Olney and continued by the Republicans, decided to link up with Great Britain. The two countries would then use the Japanese to provide the shock troops that would roll back Russia and Germany and parcel out imperial benefits to both of her faraway allies, in a division of spoils known euphemistically as the "Open Door." With Britain leaving the field free to the U.S. in Latin America, the U.S. could afford to link arms in friendly fashion with Britain in the Far East.
A major impetus toward a more aggressive policy in Asia was provided by the lure of railroad concessions. Lobbying heavily for railroad concessions was the American China Development Company, organized in 1895, and consisting of a consortium of the top financial interests in the U.S., including James Stillman of the then Rockefeller- controlled National City Bank; Charles Coster, railroad expert of J.P. Morgan and Co.; Jacob Schiff, head of the New York investment bank of Kuhn, Loeb and Co.; and Edward H. Harriman, railroad magnate. Olney and the State Department pressed China hard for concessions to the ACDC for a Peking-Hankow Railway and for a railway across Manchuria, but in both cases the American syndicate was blocked. Russia pressured China successfully to grant that country the right to build a Manchurian railway; and a Belgian syndicate, backed by France and Russia, won the Peking-Hankow concession from China.
It was time for sterner measures. The attorney for the ACDC set up the Committee on American Interests in China, which soon transformed itself into the American Asiatic Association, dedicated to a more aggressive American policy on behalf of economic interests in China. After helping the European powers suppress the nationalist Boxer Rebellion in China in 1900, the U.S. also helped push Russian troops out of Manchuria. Finally, in 1904, President Theodore Roosevelt egged Japan on to attack Russia, and Japan succeeded in driving Russia out of Manchuria and ending Russia's economic concessions. Roosevelt readily acceded to Japan's resulting dominance in Korea and Manchuria, hoping that Japan would also protect American economic interests in the area.
Theodore Roosevelt had been a Morgan man from the beginning of his career. His father and uncle were both Wall Street bankers, both of them closely associated with various Morgan-dominated railroads. Roosevelt's first cousin and major financial adviser, W. Emlen Roosevelt, was on the board of several New York banks, including the Astor National Bank, the president of which was George F. Baker, close friend and ally of J.P. Morgan and head of Morgan's flagship commercial bank, the First National Bank of New York.' At Harvard, furthermore, young Theodore married Alice Lee, daughter of George Cabot Lee, and related to the top Boston Brahmin families. Kinsman Henry Cabot Lodge soon became T.R.'s long-time political mentor.
Throughout the 19th century, the Republicans had been mainly a high-tariff, inflationist party, while the Democrats had been the party of free trade and hard money, i.e., the gold standard. In 1896, however, the radical inflationist forces headed by William Jennings Bryan captured the Democratic presidential nomination, and so the Morgans, previously dominant in the Democratic Party, sent a message to the Republican nominee, William McKinley, through Henry Cabot Lodge. Lodge stated that the Morgan interests would back McKinley provided that the Republicans would support the gold standard. The deal was struck.
William McKinley reflected the dominance of the Republican Party by the Rockefeller/ Standard Oil interests. Standard Oil was originally headquartered at Rockefeller' s home in Cleveland, and the oil magnate had long had a commanding influence in Ohio Republican politics. In the early 1890s, Marcus Hanna, industrialist and high school chum of John D. Rockefeller, banded together with Rockefeller and other financiers to save McKinley from bankruptcy, and Hanna became McKinley's top political adviser and chairman of the Republican National Committee. As a consolation prize to the Morgan interests for McKinley's capture of the Republican nomination, Morgan man Garret A. Hobart, director of various Morgan companies, including the Liberty National Bank of New York City, became Vice-President.
The death of Hobart in 1899 left a "Morgan vacancy" in the Vice-Presidential spot, as McKinley walked into the nomination. McKinley and Hanna were both hostile to Roosevelt, considering him "erratic" and a "Madman," but after several Morgan men turned down the nomination, and after the intensive lobbying of Morgan partner George W. Perkins, Teddy Roosevelt at last received the Vice-Presidential nomination. It is not surprising that virtually Teddy's first act after the election of 1900 was to throw a lavish dinner in honor of J.P. Morgan.
Teddy Roosevelt and the "Lone Nut"
The sudden appearance of one of the "lone nuts" so common in American political history led to the assassination of McKinley, and suddenly Morgan man Theodore Roosevelt was President. John Hay, expansionist Secretary of State whom Roosevelt inherited from McKinley, had the good fortune of having his daughter marry the son of William C. Whitney of the great Morgan-connected family. TR's next Secretary of State and former Secretary of War was his old friend Elihu Root, personal attorney for J.P. Morgan. Root appointed as his Assistant Secretary a close friend of TR's, Robert Bacon, a Morgan partner, and in due course Bacon became TR's Secretary of State. TR's first appointed Secretary of the Navy was Paul Morton, vice-president of the Morgan-controlled Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad, and his Assistant Secretary was Herbert L. Satterlee, who had the distinction of being J.P. Morgan's son-in-law.
Theodore Roosevelt's greatest direct boost to the Morgan interests is little known. It is well known that Roosevelt engineered a phony revolution in Columbia in 1903, creating the new state of Panama and handing the Canal Zone to the United States. What has not been fully disclosed is who benefited from the $40 million that the U.S. government paid, as part of the Panama settlement, to the owners of the old bankrupt Panama Canal Company, a French company which had previously been granted a Colombian concession to dig a Panama canal.
The Panama Canal Company's lobbyist, Morgan-connected New York attorney William Nelson Cromwell, literally sat in the White House directing the "revolution" and organizing the final settlement. We now know that, in 1900, the shares of the old French Panama Canal Company were purchased by an American financial syndicate, headed by J.P. Morgan " Co., and put together by Morgan's top attorney, Francis Lynde Stetson. The syndicate also included members of the Rockefeller, Seligman, and Kuhn, Loeb financial groups, as well as Perkins and Saterlee.
The syndicate did well from the Panama revolution, purchasing the shares at two-thirds of par and selling them, after the revolution, for double the price. One member of the syndicate was especially fortunate: Teddy Roosevelt's brother-in-law, Douglas E. Robinson, a director of Morgan's Astor National Bank. For William Cromwell was named the fiscal agent of the new Republic of Panama, and Cromwell promptly put $6 million of the $10 million payoff the U.S. made to the Panamanian revolutionaries into New York City mortgages via the real estate firm of the same Douglas E. Robinson.
After the turn of the century, a savage economic and political war developed between the Morgan interests on the one hand, and the