The Politics of Cancer – Big Money = Big Changes in the Cancer Industry (Part 2)

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, following the money trail
reveals some of the individuals that change 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. What’s 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 said—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 really
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. If you did, please share it on your social
media. Tell your friends and family about The Truth
About Cancer. Thank you, and God bless.

7 thoughts on “The Politics of Cancer – Big Money = Big Changes in the Cancer Industry (Part 2)

  • WOW. So very glad I never touched any Big Pharma,Chemo or Radiation. I will continue to fight my stage 3 Breast cancer 100% natural. Thank you so much for sharing.

  • Please share this history of the rise of Big Pharma far and wide. Thank you so much for bringing this buried history to light!

  • Could you please post the link for Part 1 of this? I clicked on the link in the description above & it comes back to Part 2. Thank you & God Bless you all for these series!

  • There has always been alternative therapies and natural remedies out there to cure all kinds of cancers at all four stages, but medical oncologists just do not want to use them because they do not make money out of it. Big Pharma and the medical oncologists ONLY rely on conventional therapies such as surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy because that is how they make huge amounts of money.

  • Absolutely damning info against the legal drug barons. For those who missed Pt 1 here is the link:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *