How the Zionist War Is Tilting the Global Power Balance

As America’s global empire of influence crumbles, a new alliance is looking to replace it. It consists of Russia, Iran & China. Will this alliance create a new World Order?

DUBAI—The war between Israel and Hamas isn’t just risking a regional conflagration. It is also affecting the global balance of power, stretching American and European resources while relieving pressure on Russia and providing new opportunities to China.

More than a decade ago, Israel started to understand that its occupation of Gaza through siege could be to its advantage.

It began transforming the tiny coastal enclave from an albatross around its neck into a valuable portfolio in the trading game of international power politics.

The first benefit for Israel, and its Western allies, is more discussed than the second.

The tiny strip of land hugging the eastern Mediterranean coast was turned into a mix of testing ground and shop window.

Israel could use Gaza to develop all sorts of new technologies and strategies associated with the homeland security industries burgeoning across the West, as officials there grew increasingly worried about domestic unrest, sometimes referred to as populism.

The siege of Gaza’s 2.3 million Palestinians, imposed by Israel in 2007 following the election of Hamas to rule the enclave, allowed for all sorts of experiments

How could the population best be contained? What restrictions could be placed on their diet and lifestyle? How were networks of informers and collaborators to be recruited from afar? What effect did the population’s entrapment and repeated bombardment have on social and political relations? 

And ultimately how were Gaza’s inhabitants to be kept subjugated and an uprising prevented?

The answers to those questions were made available to Western allies through Israel’s shopping portal. Items available included interception rocket systems, electronic sensors, surveillance systems, drones, facial recognition, automated gun towers, and much more. All tested in real-life situations in Gaza. 

Israel’s standing took a severe dent from the fact that Palestinians managed to bypass this infrastructure of confinement last weekend – at least for a few days – with a rusty bulldozer, some hang-gliders and a sense of nothing-to-lose. 

Which is part of the reason why Israel now needs to go back into Gaza with ground troops to show it still has the means to keep the Palestinians crushed.

Collective punishment

Which brings us to the second purpose served by Gaza.

As Western states have grown increasingly unnerved by signs of popular unrest at home, they have started to think more carefully about how to sidestep the restrictions placed on them by international law.

The term refers to a body of laws that were formalised in the aftermath of the second world war, when both sides treated civilians on the other side of the battle lines as little more than pawns on a chessboard.

The aim of those drafting international law was to make it unconscionable for there to be a repeat of Nazi atrocities in Europe, as well as other crimes such as Britain’s fire bombing of German cities like Dresden or the United States’ dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

One of the fundamentals of international law – at the heart of the Geneva Conventions – is a prohibition on collective punishment: that is, retaliating against the enemy’s civilian population, making them pay the price for the acts of their leaders and armies.

Very obviously, Gaza is about as flagrant a violation of this prohibition as can be found. Even in “quiet” times, its inhabitants – one million of them children – are denied the most basic freedoms, such as the right to movement; access to proper health care because medicines and equipment cannot be brought in; access to drinkable water; and the use of electricity for much of the day because Israel keeps bombing Gaza’s power station.

Israel has never made any bones of the fact that it is punishing the people of Gaza for being ruled by Hamas, which rejects Israel’s right to have dispossessed the Palestinians of their homeland in 1948 and imprisoned them in overcrowded ghettos like Gaza.

What Israel is doing to Gaza is the very definition of collective punishment. It is a war crime: 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks of every year, for 16 years.

And yet no one in the so-called international community seems to have noticed.

Rules of war rewritten

But the trickiest legal situation – for Israel and the West – is when Israel bombs Gaza, as it is doing now, or sends in soldiers, as it soon will do.

Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu highlighted the problem when he told the people of Gaza: “Leave now.” But, as he and Western leaders know, Gaza’s inhabitants have nowhere to go, nowhere to escape the bombs. So any Israeli attack is, by definition, on the civilian population too. It is the modern equivalent of the Dresden fire bombings.

Israel has been working on strategies to overcome this difficulty since its first major bombardment of Gaza in late 2008, after the siege was introduced.

A unit in its attorney general’s office was charged with finding ways to rewrite the rules of war in Israel’s favour.

At the time, the unit was concerned that Israel would be criticised for blowing up a police graduation ceremony in Gaza, killing many young cadets. Police are civilians in international law, not soldiers, and therefore not a legitimate target. Israeli lawyers were also worried that Israel had destroyed government offices, the infrastructure of Gaza’s civilian administration.

Israel’s concerns seem quaint now – a sign of how far it has already shifted the dial on international law. For some time, anyone connected with Hamas, however tangentially, is considered a legitimate target, not just by Israel but by every Western government.

Western officials have joined Israel in treating Hamas as simply a terrorist organisation, ignoring that it is also a government with people doing humdrum tasks like making sure bins are collected and schools kept open.

Or as Orna Ben-Naftali, a law faculty dean, told the Haaretz newspaper back in 2009: “A situation is created in which the majority of the adult men in Gaza and the majority of the buildings can be treated as legitimate targets. The law has actually been stood on its head.”

Back at that time, David Reisner, who had previously headed the unit, explained Israel’s philosophy to Haaretz: “What we are seeing now is a revision of international law. If you do something for long enough, the world will accept it.

“The whole of international law is now based on the notion that an act that is forbidden today becomes permissible if executed by enough countries.”

In fact, Israel’s meddling to change international law goes back many decades.

Referring to Israel’s attack on Iraq’s fledgling nuclear reactor in 1981, an act of war condemned by the UN Security Council, Reisner said: “The atmosphere was that Israel had committed a crime. Today everyone says it was preventive self-defence. International law progresses through violations.”

He added that his team had travelled to the US four times in 2001 to persuade US officials of Israel’s ever-more flexible interpretation of international law towards subjugating Palestinians.

“Had it not been for those four planes [journeys to the US], I am not sure we would have been able to develop the thesis of the war against terrorism on the present scale,” he said.

Those redefinitions of the rules of war proved invaluable when the US chose to invade and occupy Afghanistan and Iraq.

‘Human animals’

In recent years, Israel has continued to “evolve” international law. It has introduced the concept of “prior warning” – sometimes giving a few minutes’ notice of a building or neighbourhood’s destruction. Vulnerable civilians still in the area, like the elderly, children and the disabled, are then recast as legitimate targets for failing to leave in time.

And it is using the current assault on Gaza to change the rules still further.

The 2009 Haaretz article includes references by law officials to Yoav Gallant, who was then the military commander in charge of Gaza. He was described as a “wild man”, a “cowboy” with no time for legal niceties.

Gallant is now defence minister and the man responsible for instituting this week a “complete siege” of Gaza: “No electricity, no food, no water, no fuel – everything is closed.” In language that blurred any distinction between Hamas and Gaza’s civilians, he described Palestinians as “human animals”.

That takes collective punishment into a whole different realm. In terms of international law, it skirts into the territory of genocide, both rhetorically and substantively.

But the dial has shifted so completely that even centrist Western politicians are cheering Israel on – often not even calling for “restraint” or “proportionality”, the weasel terms they usually use to obscure their support for law breaking.

Britain has been leading the way in helping Israel to rewrite the rulebook on international law.

Listen to Keir Starmer, the leader of the Labour opposition and the man almost certain to be Britain’s next prime minister. This week he supported the “complete siege” of Gaza, a crime against humanity, refashioning it as Israel’s “right to defend itself”.


Starmer has not failed to grasp the legal implications of Israel’s actions, even if he seems personally immune to the moral implications. He is trained as a human rights lawyer.

His approach even appears to be taking aback journalists not known for being sympathetic to the Palestinian case. When asked by Kay Burley of Sky News if he had any sympathy for the civilians in Gaza being treated like “human animals”, Starmer could not find a single thing to say in support.

Instead, he deflected to an outright deception: blaming Hamas for sabotaging a “peace process” that Israel both practically and declaratively buried years ago.

Confirming that the Labour party now condones war crimes by Israel, his shadow attorney general, Emily Thornberry, has been sticking to the same script. On BBC’s Newsnight, she evaded questions about whether cutting off power and supplies to Gaza is in line with international law.


It is no coincidence that Starmer’s position contrasts so dramatically with that of his predecessor, Jeremy Corbyn. The latter was driven out of office by a sustained campaign of antisemitism smears fomented by Israel’s most fervent supporters in the UK.

Starmer does not dare to be seen on the wrong side of this issue. And that is exactly the outcome Israeli officials wanted and expected.

Israeli flag on No 10

Starmer is, of course, far from alone. Grant Shapps, Britain’s defence secretary, has also expressed trenchant support for Israel’s policy of starving two million Palestinians in Gaza.

Rishi Sunak, the UK prime minister, has emblazoned the Israeli flag on the front of his official residence, 10 Downing Street, apparently unconcerned at how he is giving visual form to what would normally be considered an antisemitic trope: that Israel controls the UK’s foreign policy.


Starmer, not wishing to be outdone, has called for Wembley stadium’s arch to be adorned with the colours of the Israeli flag. 

However much this schoolboy cheerleading of Israel is sold as an act of solidarity following Hamas’ slaughter of Israeli civilians at the weekend, the subtext is unmistakeable: Britain has Israel’s back as it starts its retributive campaign of war crimes in Gaza.

That is also the purpose of home secretary Suella Braverman’s advice to the police to treat the waving of Palestinian flags and chants for Palestine’s liberation at protests in support of Gaza as criminal acts.

The media is playing its part, dependably as ever. A Channel 4 TV crew pursued Corbyn through London’s streets this week, demanding he “condemn” Hamas. They insinuated through the framing of those demands that anything less fulsome – such as Corbyn’s additional concerns for the welfare of Gaza’s civilians – was confirmation of the former Labour leader’s antisemitism. 

The clear implication from politicians and the establishment media is that any support for Palestinian rights, any demurral from Israel’s “unquestionable right” to commit war crimes, equates to antisemitism.

Europe’s hypocrisy

This double approach, of cheering on genocidal Israeli policies towards Gaza while stifling any dissent, or characterising it as antisemitism, is not confined to the UK.

Across Europe, from the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin, to the Eiffel Tower in Paris and the Bulgarian parliament, official buildings have been lit up with the Israeli flag.

Europe’s top official, Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, celebrated the Israeli flag smothering the EU parliament this week.

She has repeatedly stated that “Europe stands with Israel”, even as Israeli war crimes start to mount.

The Israeli air force boasted on Thursday it had dropped some 6,000 bombs on Gaza.

At the same time, human rights groups reported Israel was firing the incendiary chemical weapon white phosphorus into Gaza, a war crime when used in urban areas.

And Defence for Children International noted that more than 500 Palestinian children had been killed so far by Israeli bombs.

It was left to Francesca Albanese, the UN’s special rapporteur on the occupied territories, to point out that Von Der Leyen was applying the principles of international law entirely inconsistently. 

Almost exactly a year ago, the European Commission president denounced Russia’s strikes on civilian infrastructure in Ukraine as war crimes.

“Cutting off men, women, children of water, electricity and heating with winter coming – these are acts of pure terror,” she wrote. “And we have to call it as such.”

Albanese noted Von der Leyen had said nothing equivalent about Israel’s even worse attacks on Palestinian infrastructure.


Sending in the heavies

Meanwhile, France has already started breaking up and banning demonstrations against the bombing of Gaza.

Its justice minister has echoed Braverman in suggesting solidarity with Palestinians risks offending Jewish communities and should be treated as “hate speech”.

Naturally, Washington is unwavering in its support for whatever Israel decides to do to Gaza, as secretary of state Anthony Blinken made clear during his visit this week. 

President Joe Biden has promised weapons and funding, and sent in the military equivalent of “the heavies” to make sure no one disturbs Israel as it carries out those war crimes.

An aircraft carrier has been dispatched to the region to ensure quiet from Israel’s neighbours as the ground invasion is launched. 

Even those officials whose chief role is to promote international law, such as Antonio Gutteres, secretary general of the UN, have started to move with the shifting ground.

Like most Western officials, he has emphasised Gaza’s “humanitarian needs” above the rules of war Israel is obliged to honour.


This is Israel’s success.

The language of international law that should apply to Gaza – of rules and norms Israel must obey – has given way to, at best, the principles of humanitarianism: acts of international charity to patch up the suffering of those whose rights are being systematically trampled on, and those whose lives are being obliterated.

Western officials are more than happy with the direction of travel.

Not just for Israel’s sake but for their own too. Because one day in the future, their own populations may be as much trouble to them as Palestinians in Gaza are to Israel right now. 

Supporting Israel’s right to defend itself is their downpayment.

New Rockefeller COVID-19 Action Plan

Before you watch the feature video below, watch this video first, it’s just a few minutes. Then as we watch the feature video… It’s so weird to watch how things are falling into place. I always thought it was a far flung conspiracy not even to happen in my lifetime But here it is.

I watch this video years ago, back when many of us were just waking up from 9/11.

Recently Spiro was joined by Helen Buyniski a journalist for RT, to break down the Rockefeller Foundation’s 2010 document titled ‘Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development.’

The 2010 Rockefeller document, particularly the ‘Lock-Step’ portion, laid out a scenario involving a global health pandemic.

The document ultimately came to the conclusion that the only way to mitigate a global pandemic was by implementing China’s hardcore authoritarian police state lockdown as the model worldwide.

And here we are today, as we find ourselves in this exact scenario, just a coincidence? Just about a month ago, on April 21st the Rockefeller Foundation released another document titled ‘National Covid-19 Testing Action Plan Pragmatic steps to reopen our workplaces and our communities.’

In this report Spiro is joined by Helen Buyniski to break down what the social engineers have in store for us in this Rockefeller blueprint document.

Spiro and Helen also discuss the United Nations New World Order website (yes it is real) in addition to recent reports of the CDC going door to door in Atlanta, Georgia taking people’s blood for antibody tests related to the Coronavirus and much more.

Their 50 Year Plan Found- CORONAVIRUS…

This is a must see website: Advancing Global Digital Content Safety

Online content has the power to influence minds, incite action, and shape the fabric of society. What is posted and shared on digital platforms has proliferated substantially, leading to questions of how harmful content should be governed to uphold the safety of society while considering diverse stakeholder interests and responsibilities across the media ecosystem. [In other words, inhibit free thinking and knowledge sharing]

Advancing Global Digital Content Safety is tackling the spread of harmful content online, including anti-vaccination content and coronavirus content which does not align with the recommendations of the World Health Organization. The project will focus on:

    • Developing a framework of public-private cooperation and principles for online content moderation, including basic standards to define harmful content, accountability, and performance targets  
    • Reducing the spread of harmful content online by identifying complementary set of regulatory, technical, process, product, and business-driven solutions 
  • Identifying ways to increase literacy and promote safe digital experiences / spaces 

“Israel’s” days are numbered

Hezbollah shoots down Israeli drone over Lebanon

The Israelis love to muddy the water in order to take the focus away from the fact that they’re not Hebrews (all Hebrews are irrevocably dead) and have no right to the land of Palestine, a country they’ve stolen and destroyed.

They also impose on the world their psychotic Islamophobia and unabashed Hebraic pretense, as well as creating all sorts of malicious lies and satanic-inspired false flag terrorism, in order to choke the truth and lure the weak-minded into looking over there (Palestinians???) and not over here (Jewish impostors and terrorists!!!).

Below: Excerpted from U.S. posture in the Middle-East: preparing for disaster

The Israelis have been feeding us all a steady diet about this or that country or politician being a “new Hitler’ who will either gas 6M Jews “again”, or wants to wipe Israel “off the map” or even engage in a new Holocaust.

Gilad Atzmon brilliantly calls this mental disorder “pre-traumatic stress disorder”, and he is spot on.

The Israelis mostly used this “preemptive geschrei*” as a way to squeeze out as many concessions (and money) from the western goyim as possible.

But in a deep sense, it is possibly that the Israelis are at least dimly aware that their entire project is simply not viable, that you cannot ensure the survival of any state by terrorizing all of your neighbors.

Violence, especially vicious, rabid, violence can, indeed, terrorize people, but only for so long.

Sooner or later, the human soul will outgrow any fear, no matter how visceral, and will replace that fear by a new and immensely powerful sense of determination.

Here is what Robert Fisk said in distant 2006, 14 years ago:
You heard Sharon, before he suffered his massive stroke, he used this phrase in the Knesset, you know, “The Palestinians must feel pain.”

This was during one of the intifadas. The idea that if you continue to beat and beat and beat the Arabs, they will submit, that eventually they’ll go on their knees and give you what you want.

And this is totally, utterly self-delusional, because it doesn’t apply anymore.

It used to apply 30 years ago, when I first arrived in the Middle East. If the Israelis crossed the Lebanese border, the Palestinians jumped in their cars and drove to Beirut and went to the cinema.

Now when the Israelis cross the Lebanese border, the Hezbollah jump in their cars in Beirut and race to the south to join battle with them.

But the key thing now is that Arabs are not afraid any more. Their leaders are afraid, the Mubaraks of this world, the president of Egypt, King Abdullah II of Jordan.

They’re afraid. They shake and tremble in their golden mosques, because they were supported by us. But the people are no longer afraid.

20 years ago this was unheard of. Even Palestine was mostly unheard of!

What was true only for some Arabs in 2006, has now become true for most (maybe even all?) Arabs in 2020.

As for the Iranians, they have never had any fear of Uncle Shmuel, they are the ones who “injected” the newly created Hezbollah with this qualitatively new kind of “special courage” (which is the Shia ethos, really!) when this movement was founded.

Empires can survive many things, but once they are not feared anymore, then their end is near.

The Iranian strike proved a fundamental new reality to the rest of the world: the USA is much more afraid of Iran than Iran is afraid of the USA. U.S. rulers and politicians will, of course, claim otherwise.

But that futile effort to re-shape reality is now doomed to failure, if only because even the Houthis can now openly and successfully defy the combined might of the “Axis of Kindness”.

You can think of U.S. and Israeli leaders as the orchestra on the Titanic: they play well, but they will still get wet and then die.

The Saker

(*geschrei: the Yiddish word for yelling, crying out, to shriek)

The Committee of 300 and The Fall of America

“They scheme, and Allah schemes (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers”

Another Quran verse I like is this: “If you are planting a tree and someone comes and tells you it’s the end of the world, continue planting the tree.”

So, unless there is an organized revolution I can join, I don’t spend my time fretting the end of the world, I just like Kurt Nimmo.

| February 26, 2018

In the case of John F. Kennedy, the assassination was carried out with great attendant publicity and with the utmost brutality to serve as a warning to world leaders not to get out of line.

Image result for Clubs of Cultus Diabolicus.

In the Committee of 300, which has a 150-year history, we have some of the most brilliant intellects assembled to form a completely totalitarian, absolutely controlled “new” society only it isn’t new, having drawn most of its ideas from the Clubs of Cultus Diabolicus.

It strives toward a One World Government rather well described by one of its late members, H.G. Wells, in his work commissioned by the Committee which Wells boldly called:

The Open Conspiracy – Blue Prints for a World Revolution“.

Most of the Committee of 300’s immense wealth arose out of the opium trade with China and India.

Related image

Obscene profits went straight into the royal coffers, and into the pockets of the nobility, the oligarchs and plutocrats, and made them billionaires. The ordinary people of China, India, and England profited nothing from “opium revenues”.

In the same way the people of South Africa, black and white, never profited from the gold mining industry, whose revenues were piped directly into the City of London banks and Merchant banks.

Related image

The Committee of 300 is responsible for the phony drug wars here in the U.S. These phony drug wars were to get us to give away our constitutional rights. Asset forfeiture is a prime example, where huge assets can be seized without trail and no proof of guilt needed.

Image result for US phoney war on drugs

Also the Committee of 300 long ago decreed that there shall be a smaller-much smaller-and better world, that is, their idea of what constitutes a better world.

The current criminal agenda of the Committee of 300 is further evidenced by recently leaked Club of Rome documents, as they describe how they will use drugs to help stifle resistance to their New World Order scheme:

“…having been failed by Christianity, and with unemployment rife on every hand, those who have been without jobs for five years or more, will turn away from the church and seek solace in drugs.

A woman snorts coke in the toilet of a Jerusalem bar. (illustrative photo credit: Michal Fattal/Flash90)

A woman snorts coke in the toilet of a Jerusalem bar. A report noted an increase in money laundering in Israel and a connection between drug money and “terror financing and human trafficking.”

By then, full control of the drug trade must be completed in order that the government of all countries who are under our jurisdiction have a monopoly in place which we will control by controlling supplies reaching the market…

Drug bars will take care of the unruly and the discontented. Would-be revolutionaries will be turned into harmless addicts with no will of their own…”


The crowned cobras of Europe and their Eastern Liberal Establishment families will not tolerate any true war against drugs.

Image result for the mena connection

The war on drugs, which the Bush administration was allegedly fighting, was for the legalization of all types and classes of drugs. Such drugs are not solely a social aberration, but a full-scale attempt to gain control of the minds of the people of the United States. At present, this is the principal task of the Committee of 300.

Nothing has changed in the opium-heroin-cocaine trade.

It is still in the hands of the same “upper class” families in Britain and the United States. It is still a fabulously profitable trade where what appear to be big losses through sometimes seizures of drug shipments are actually small interlopers trying to break into the preserves of the drug trade hierarchy, who sit in paneled board rooms in New York, Hong Kong and London over port and cigars and congratulate another success in the eradication of “competitors.”

Current Membership List of The Committee of 300

Image result for romper room transparent gif

I see Billy Clinton, Shimon Peres, Wesley Clark, H. Kissinger, Al Gore, Colin Powell…oh and there is the King of Jordan, little Susie Rice, HW Bush, Johnny Kerry, Davy Cameron, oh look, there’s Billy Gates, Timmy Geithner, lots of Jewish names…hmm, where is Vladimir Putin? Not here, boys and girls.

Abdullah II, King of Jordan
Abramovich, Roman
Ackermann, Josef
Adeane, Edward
Agius, Marcus
Ahtisaari, Martti
Akerson, Daniel
Albert II, King of Belgium
Alexander, Crown Prince of Yugoslavia
Amato, Giuliano
Anderson, Carl A.
Andreotti, Giulio
Andrew, Duke of York
Anne, Princess Royal
Anstee, Nick
Ash, Timothy Garton
Astor, William Waldorf
Aven, Pyotr
Balkenende, Jan Peter
Ballmer, Steve
Balls, Ed
Barroso, José Manuel
Beatrix, Queen of the Netherlands
Belka, Marek
Bergsten, C. Fred
Berlusconi, Silvio
Bernake, Ben
Bernstein, Nils
Berwick, Donald
Bildt, Carl
Bischoff, Sir Winfried
Blair, Tony
Blankfein, Lloyd
Blavatnik, Leonard
Bloomberg, Michael
Bolkestein, Frits
Bolkiah, Hassanal
Bonello, Michael C
Bonino, Emma
Boren, David L.
Borwin, Duke of Mecklenburg
Bronfman, Charles
Bronfman, Edgar Jr.
Bruton, John
Brzezinski, Zbigniew
Budenberg, Robin
Buffet, Warren
Bush, George HW
Cameron, David
Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall
Cardoso, Fernando Henrique
Carington, Peter
Carl XVI Gustaf, King of Sweden
Carlos, Duke of Parma
Carney, Mark
Carroll, Cynthia
Caruana, Jaime
Castell, Sir William
Chan, Anson
Chan, Margaret
Chan, Norman
Charles, Prince of Wales
Chartres, Richard
Chiaie, Stefano Delle
Chipman, Dr John
Chodiev, Patokh
Christoph, Prince of Schleswig-Holstein
Cicchitto, Fabrizio
Clark, Wesley
Clarke, Kenneth
Clegg, Nick
Clinton, Bill
Cohen, Abby Joseph
Cohen, Ronald
Cohn, Gary
Colonna di Paliano, Marcantonio, Duke of Paliano
Constantijn, Prince of the Netherlands
Constantine II, King of Greece
Cooksey, David
Cowen, Brian
Craven, Sir John
Crockett, Andrew
Dadush, Uri
D’Aloisio, Tony
Darling, Alistair
Davies, Sir Howard
Davignon, Étienne
Davis, David
de Rothschild, Benjamin
de Rothschild, David René
de Rothschild, Evelyn
de Rothschild, Leopold
Deiss, Joseph
Deripaska, Oleg
Dobson, Michael
Draghi, Mario
Du Plessis, Jan
Dudley, William C.
Duisenberg, Wim
Edward, Duke of Kent
Edward, Earl of Wessex
Elizabeth II, Queen of the United Kingdom
Elkann, John
Emanuele, Vittorio, Prince of Naples
Ernst August, Prince of Hanover
Feldstein, Martin
Festing, Matthew
Fillon, François
Fischer, Heinz
Fischer, Joschka
Fischer, Stanley
FitzGerald, Niall
Franz, Duke of Bavaria
Fridman, Mikhail
Friso, Prince of Orange-Nassau
Gates, Bill
Geidt, Christopher
Geithner, Timothy
Georg Friedrich, Prince of Prussia
Gibson-Smith, Dr Chris
Gorbachev, Mikhail
Gore, Al
Gotlieb, Allan
Green, Stephen
Greenspan, Alan
Grosvenor, Gerald, 6th Duke of Westminster
Gurría, José Ángel
Hague, William
Hampton, Sir Philip
Hans-Adam II, Prince of Liechtenstein
Harald V, King of Norway
Harper, Stephen
Heisbourg, François
Henri, Grand Duke of Luxembourg
Hildebrand, Philipp
Hills, Carla Anderson
Holbrooke, Richard
Honohan, Patrick
Howard, Alan
Ibragimov, Alijan
Ingves, Stefan
Isaacson, Walter
Juan Carlos, King of Spain
Jacobs, Kenneth M.
Julius, DeAnne
Juncker, Jean-Claude
Kenen, Peter
Kerry, John
King, Mervyn
Kinnock, Glenys
Kissinger, Henry
Knight, Malcolm
Koon, William H. II
Krugman, Paul
Kufuor, John
Lajolo, Giovanni
Lake, Anthony
Lambert, Richard
Lamy, Pascal
Landau, Jean-Pierre
Laurence, Timothy
Leigh-Pemberton, James
Leka, Crown Prince of Albania
Leonard, Mark
Levene, Peter
Leviev, Lev
Levitt, Arthur
Levy, Michael
Lieberman, Joe
Livingston, Ian
Loong, Lee Hsien
Lorenz of Belgium, Archduke of Austria-Este
Louis Alphonse, Duke of Anjou
Louis-Dreyfus, Gérard
Mabel, Princess of Orange-Nassau
Mandelson, Peter
Manning, Sir David
Margherita, Archduchess of Austria-Este
Margrethe II, Queen of Denmark
Martínez, Guillermo Ortiz
Mashkevitch, Alexander
Massimo, Stefano, Prince of Roccasecca dei Volsci
Massimo-Brancaccio, Fabrizio Prince of Arsoli and Triggiano
McDonough, William Joseph
McLarty, Mack
Mersch, Yves
Michael, Prince of Kent
Michael, King of Romania
Miliband, David
Miliband, Ed
Mittal, Lakshmi
Moreno, Glen
Moritz, Prince and Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel
Murdoch, Rupert
Napoléon, Charles
Nasser, Jacques
Niblett, Robin
Nichols, Vincent
Nicolás, Adolfo
Noyer, Christian
Ofer, Sammy
Ogilvy, Alexandra, Lady Ogilvy
Ogilvy, David, 13th Earl of Airlie
Ollila, Jorma
Oppenheimer, Nicky
Osborne, George
Oudea, Frederic
Parker, Sir John
Patten, Chris
Pébereau, Michel
Penny, Gareth
Peres, Shimon
Philip, Duke of Edinburgh
Pio, Dom Duarte, Duke of Braganza
Pöhl, Karl Otto
Powell, Colin
Prokhorov, Mikhail
Quaden, Guy
Rasmussen, Anders Fogh
Ratzinger, Joseph Alois (Pope Benedict XVI)
Reuben, David
Reuben, Simon
Rhodes, William R.
Rice, Susan
Richard, Duke of Gloucester
Rifkind, Sir Malcolm
Ritblat, Sir John
Roach, Stephen S.
Robinson, Mary
Rockefeller, David Jr.
Rockefeller, David Sr.
Rockefeller, Nicholas
Rodríguez, Javier Echevarría
Rogoff, Kenneth
Roth, Jean-Pierre
Rothschild, Jacob
Rubenstein, David
Rubin, Robert
Ruspoli, Francesco, 10th Prince of Cerveteri
Safra, Joseph
Safra, Moises
Sands, Peter
Sarkozy, Nicolas
Sassoon, Isaac
Sassoon, James
Sawers, Sir Robert John
Scardino, Marjorie
Schwab, Klaus
Schwarzenberg, Karel
Schwarzman, Stephen A.
Shapiro, Sidney
Sheinwald, Nigel
Sigismund, Grand Duke of Tuscany, Archduke of Austria
Simeon of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha
Snowe, Olympia
Sofía, Queen of Spain
Soros, George
Specter, Arlen
Stern, Ernest
Stevenson, Dennis
Steyer, Tom
Stiglitz, Joseph
Strauss-Kahn, Dominique
Straw, Jack
Sutherland, Peter
Tanner, Mary
Tedeschi, Ettore Gotti
Thompson, Mark
Thomson, Dr. James
Tietmeyer, Hans
Trichet, Jean-Claude
Tucker, Paul
Van Rompuy, Herman
Vélez, Álvaro Uribe
Verplaetse, Alfons
Villiger, Kaspar
Vladimirovna, Maria, Grand Duchess of Russia
Volcker, Paul
von Habsburg, Otto
Waddaulah, Hassanal Bolkiah Mu’izzaddin, Sultan of Brunei
Walker, Sir David
Wallenberg, Jacob
Walsh, John
Warburg, Max
Weber, Axel Alfred
Weill, Michael David
Wellink, Nout
Whitman, Marina von Neumann
Willem-Alexander, Prince of Orange
William Prince of Wales
Williams, Dr Rowan
Williams, Shirley
Wilson, David
Wolfensohn, James
Wolin, Neal S.
Woolf, Harry
Woolsey, R. James Jr.
Worcester, Sir Robert
Wu, Sarah
Zoellick, Robert