Foundation X Is Prince Charles

People watching Lord James on Sky News talking about an organisation called Foundation X offering GBP 20 billion free of interest to the British Government to go ahead and build Crossrail are incredulous.  And not unnaturally.  The comments on Playpolitical showing the clip are of the ”this guy’s a nutter” variety.

Yet is he?

There have been many reports made in the last few years of central bankers acquiring massive wealth and powers over and above the level of national government.   Central banks are assumed by most to be part of government.  They are not.  The Bank Of England is said to be a nationalised bank – yet the names of the true owners do not have to be revealed under a special statute.

One of the best sources as to who and what is behind these shady power structures that exist over and beyond government, is the late Joan Veon, journalist who died in October 2010 of breast cancer.  She had researched the central banks and how they have accumulated vast reserves of wealth by lending to the governments of the world for centuries, combined with not a little market manipulation.

But beyond that she has identified political power structures, which are using a combination of state and corporate power to dominate all the countries of the world.  This is the existence of the One World Government, a phrase familiar to many, but its actual address as yet unknown and unknowable.  And yet how can that be?  If there is an organisation that is ruling the world, surely we know where it is, and who is at its head.

Joan Veon spent years of her life digging around the United Nations, the Bank Of International Settlements (The Central Bankers’ Central Bank), and found the existence of just such organisations that exist beyond the reach of the media, with structures that override the power of governments and political parties, with real people controlling their programmes and interventions.

At the apex of these structures, she finds that the British Royal family have been involved in central banking right from its very beginnings, and that now after four hundred years, the British Royal family still controls the bulk of the wealth of the world – in secret.

She wrote a book called ”The Sustainable Prince” exposing the true role of Prince Charles in this new undemocratic world, whereby the rich and powerful have found a way to operate above the national level, beyond the reach of democratic accountability, where they can impose their own values and restrict the freedom of people and control their behaviour.

The book is available online and in some book shops, though I haven’t seen it in the UK.

If people start reading this book and studying the work of the late Joan Veon (click Youtube), they would soon find that the rather bumbling and amateur description from Lord James of Foundation X’s ability and willingness to lend money to the British Government to fund environmentally beneficial investments such as Crossrail, is totally in line with her ideas.   The world is starting to work with these shadow organisations controlling events from above the level of the national governments, that most people assume are running the world.  They are not.

Here is an excerpt from Joan Veon’s book – The Sustainable Prince –


Chapter 8 – The Prince of Wales Business Leaders Forum
The Prince of Wales Business Leaders Forum is an educational charity with close to 50 multinational corporations from the United States, Britain, Germany, Japan, and several other countries on its executive directorate. The U.S. corporations who work very closely with the prince include: 3M, American Express, TRW, Coca-Cola, SmithKline Beecham, ARCO, CIGNA, DHL Worldwide Express, Levi Strauss & Company, The Perot Group, and U.S. WEST International. 


Additional partners are the American Chamber of Commerce, American Hotel & Motel Association, The Atlanta Project, Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, The City of Charleston, the Ford Foundation, the Kellog Foundation, Eli Lilly, the New York City Housing Partnership, the Office of Ronald Reagan, the Soros Foundation, Texaco, Tufts University, Turner Broadcasting, USAID, and Warnaco, to name a few.



The Forum is accountable to a board and council made up of the international CEOs and directors from the above listed principal supporters and funded by its members with programmes funded by other sponsors, international development agencies, and foundations. It works with the World Bank Group, United Nations agencies, the European Commission, Overseas Development Agencies, and a number of bilateral agencies from the UK, Japan, and North America.





“The mission of the Prince of Wales Business Leaders Forum (PWBLF) is to promote continuous improvement in the practice of good corporate citizenship and sustainable development internationally, as a natural part of successful business operations. It aims to work with members and partners to:

  1. Demonstrate that business has an essential and creative role to play in the prosperity of local communities as partners in development, particularly in economies in transition;
  2. Raise awareness of the value of corporate responsibility in international business practice;
  3. Encourage partnership action between business and communities as an effective means of promoting sustainable economic development.”


The PWBLF operates in 26 countries and concentrates on post-Communist countries and developing economies. It has held 26 high-level international meetings in 18 countries involving 5,000 corporate, government, and non governmental leaders.



Chapter 9 Charles — The Hidden Prince
In an interview that Prince Charles gave on BBC’s “Newsnight” program in 1994, “he expressed his devotion to his work for Britain and the Commonwealth. He said, ‘so much I try to do is behind the scenes. So it is difficult for people to understand how all the things fit together.’ He also asserted that there is a common theme to all his projects and insisted they will turn out to be for the long term good.”



Charles — The Defender of Faith
As a result of my personal study and in light of the above, I have come to believe that when the United States ratified the United Nations Charter, we and the other countries of the world who were not part of Britain’s Commonwealth reverted back under British rule through the United Nations organizational structure. Therefore, the fulfillment of the Rhodes Trust is complete.



King Charles III
There has been much speculation with regard to when Charles will become king. I surmise that he does not need a throne, for he already has one. The environmental agenda via sustainable development, and public-private partnerships with the world’s largest and strongest multinational corporations, many of which have cash flows and assets exceeding that of most countries, provide Charles his throne. It appears that he rules behind the scenes, encouraging, expanding, pushing, and strengthening the agenda of the United Nations, partnering with the World Bank and other global agencies, all of which are advancing world government, a philosophy with which he is not uncomfortable. After all, there have been many kings, popes, and world leaders who have tried to attain it.


Most people reading this will at first react with an entirely negative ”this cannot be true” reaction. How can that bumbling incompetent Prince that we know from the media have managed to accumulate so much power, and be in control?   I am inclined to agree.  It is just as possible that he is just being used by very powerful agencies to do their bidding for them.  But I would ask – who else is there who’s going to have GBP 20 Billion spare to knock up a few nice rail infrastructure projects around London?

This theory has to be given a proper examination, and much thought.

You’re joking, right.  The image Charles fosters to the public is of an amiable yet harmless buffoon.   At the United Nations and the EU he is taken very seriously, according to Veon. 

If the theory that Prince Charles is dominating the world through these structures is correct, at least we now know the address of the world’s new One World Government.  It is Windsor Castle, and the British Empire still rules the world – that or someone who’s clever enough to allow them to think they are in control.  Lord James hasn’t told the half of the full story as of yet.  The potential for things to go wrong is clearly huge, and the credit crisis is just the first sign that the Sustainable Prince, operating with his secret cronies, has cocked it up big time.  They’re getting windy which is why they are trying to offer the British Government free money.  Some how I think all this means we are very near to a major crisis, where confidence in a system of government, which operates out of sight and in secret, controlled by shadowy figures, with inherited status, of moderate ability and intelligence, is going to be shaken to the very core.

If the Prince Of Wales is thought to be ruling the world, I’m worried.

Here is the clip of Lord James –
From CH,
Lord James describes his dealings with a secret organisation called “Foundation X” to Sky News.  He claims that it “wants to help save the world”, and wishes to lend billions to Britain, interest free – in order to support a “massive improvement” in the jobs market, fund renewable energy, build schools and hospitals, and help the construction of Crossrail – which it will begin to provide the necessary funds for, if it receives a positive answer from the Government within the next week, by Christmas Day.

If this story gets ushered off the screen, which I suspect it will, watch out for signs of a large Quantitative Easing programme being announced by the British Government to fund large scale capital and infrastructure investment.  And see if there are any amazing deals given by the BoE on longterm debt.  Or will the spending apparently appear as if out of current year expenditure?  Either way, this Lord James story might be a foreteller of such events being planned, whether Prince Charles is the driving force behind them or not.

NEW PRINCE CHARLES STORY 1.1.11

interviewed by Alan Titchmarsh in sumptuous Highgrove House

Charles has successfully persuaded George Osborne to return the Crown Estates into the Monarch’s hands, which were handed to the government 250 years ago, when George the 3rd was in debt, and the Civil List system began.  He is asking for 15% of the Estate’s income to be paid to the Monarch, which would double the Civil List income.  The surge in interest in wind and tidal investment could double this as the Crown Estates own the first 12 miles offshore of the sea bed.

You have to ask yourself how Prince Charles is able to negotiate this incredible boost to the Monarchy’s finances, were it not for his having something to offer the government in return.  His involvement in Central Banking is not denied anywhere, and the evidence that he is in a position to influence Central Banking decisions to lend to a desperate British government is there, with the boot on the other foot to what it was two hundred and fifty years ago.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1343143/Ones-money-Why-Prince-Charless-secret-20-year-campaign-make-richest-king-history.html

UPDATE – This is how the MSM presents the role of Prince Charles totally ignoring his supranational position with the UN’s programmes, as if it never existed.

Extract – Although Harmony was a publishing flop, I urge you to dig through the remainder bins and find a copy. You will then realise that royal intransigence may soon present us with a national embarrassment which will make us forget last week’s undoubtedly perky events.

I already knew that the heir was a mark for every type of homeopathic quack and new age conman, but never realised that he was an open target for cultists as well. His book shows nothing but contempt for the scientific method, seeing it as our curse rather than our salvation. He wants us to return to a pre-Renaissance world and find the shared “sacred geometry” of the vagina in the designs of disparate ancient buildings.
We must then look heavenwards and see mystical significance in the mean orbit of Mercury, which sits “within the orbit of the earth in such a proportion that it fits exactly over the pentagon at the heart of the five-pointed star”.
It is the tale of The Da Vinci Code told by an idiot.
To say that Prince Charles’s views are reactionary is to libel honest conservatives. His hatred of science, his dismissal of technologies that might feed the hungry and heal the sick, his barely disguised admiration for the Middle Ages, when the credulous peasantry picked organic crops and presented them to princes – rather like himself – can be found today only on the extreme right of the green movement.
His courtiers tell the press that his behaviour in no way shows that he is unfit to be king. He may have meddled in politics since the late 1960s, they say, but that does not mean he will carry on meddling when he is head of state. He may have suggested that drinking carrot juice and taking coffee bean enemas may help combat cancer, but that does not mean he will carry on delivering his uninformed and unsought opinions when his mother dies.
He may have ignored his constitutional role in the most outrageous fashion by bombarding ministers with suggestions and objections, but that will cease as well. Even though he is a 62-year-old, set in his cranky ways and surrounded by flatterers, he will change. Trust us, he will.

UPDATE – Another member of the family involved in some unspoken business is Prince Andrew, who visits oil rich Kazahkstan with great regularity.  Maybe it’s the women, but there might also be business to do there for a member of the world’s key central banking family.

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2010/11/the-dictator-with-a-royal-warrant-why-has-prince-andrew-been-to-kazakhstan-six-times-in-seven-years.html



(Russell Brand/Prince Charles Picture – hattip Iain Dale)


The original Foundation X speech in the House Of Lords –


The Tap Blog is a collective of like-minded researchers and writers who’ve joined forces to distribute information and voice opinions avoided by the world’s media.
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

27 Responses to “Foundation X Is Prince Charles”

  1. Stuart Fairney says:

    Extraordinary, can this be true?

    One thing we know for sure, no-one but no-one gives away £17B for nothing, so what’s the payback?

  2. Tapestry says:

    I tend to believe this as it fits in with the writings of the late Joan Veon (Youtube has lots of her talks).

    The world’s central bankers are very worried about getting a recovery going. They simply don’t trust many other countries not to simply steal any large sums of cash.

    They have made so much by manipulating markets and lending cash to governments over hundreds of years that they are loaded up with massive wealth. They are now realising they’ve overdone the manipulations bankrupting the banking system of the west, and they’re desperate to find a way to turn the coming depression around.

    So they’re offering free money on an undated basis – to boost the economy.

    But why this appears on TV as if the government don’t understand what’s going on defeats me. Maybe politicians in this country don’t realise that central banks are private businesses with huge wealth out of the reach of national governments. They are now finding out, if Lord James manages to get the message across. He will.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Once again, as a matter of law the Bank of England is publicly owned, wholly owned by the Treasury, and there is no “special statute” to conceal its “true owners”.

    As for the US reverting to British rule when it ratified the UN Charter, has anybody ever mentioned this to any of the US Presidents since then?

    You really have got yourself entangled with a load of palpable nonsense, haven’t you?

  4. Tapestry says:

    Thank you Dennis Cooper? (anonymous). Yes I am writing total bollocks as usual. Just to annoy you.

    Wikipedis thinks there is a special statute which applies to the Bank Of England relieving the Banks nominees from obligation to disclose information. I reserve judgement at this stage, but keep an open mind until we have more idea as to who is controlling the activities of the world’s central banks.

    The Veon line is doubtless overstating the case, as she is writing for an American audience and needed to make a living. She was only a mere journalist after all. But Prince Charles does seem to have a major role in One World Government structures. The Central Banks certainly have a role, and the meeting of money with power is nothing new.

    You can discount Veon to zero if you like, but until we have more evidence and information, I prefer to keep an open mind. There is something going on here that needs further explanation, and we are not seeing the whole picture.

    Presumably you imagine Lord James a curious eccentric who’s imagined the whole thing about Foundation X. He might be an eccentric, but as what he is saying, fits in with what Veon has been saying for years, and she has researched this area for about ten years, I think there is something here of great significance.

    Do you deny it all?

  5. Anonymous says:

    I certainly don’t flatter myself that you’re doing it just to annoy me. The motivations of people who insist on spreading this nonsense about the Bank of England being a private bank are obscure, but I don’t suppose that annoying me is one of them.

    For what it’s worth I’ve looked again at the wikipedia entry on the Bank:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_England

    and the word “statute” doesn’t even appear in the article, while the word “secret” only appears in “Official Secrets Act”, and nor is there any indication that the Bank is no longer owned by the Treasury in accordance with Section 1 of the Bank of England Act 1946 – in fact the last sentence of the first paragraph is:

    “In 1997 it became an independent public organisation, wholly owned by Government, with independence in setting monetary policy.”

    If you asked me whether I thought that the Bank is operating in the best interests of the British people I would say “not always”; but that has nothing to do with your mistaken belief that it is privately owned and more to do with the fact the UK government, its owner and within the limits of law its controller, isn’t always operating in the best interests of the British people.

  6. Stuart Fairney says:

    Well if you issue fiat money you may not want that to collapse, but still the temptation to add strings to the £17B muct be great

  7. Tapestry says:

    Anon. The legal form is undeniable. Yet money has a language which can override the niceties. For example, what happened to the vast wealth of the individuals who owned the Bank Of England in 1946? There is no way that the government could have compensated them with so much money. Their wealth would have survived intact. Some of the shareholders were undoubtedly the Royal family, as the King (forget which one William?) was an original shareholder of the Bank of England, and the shares were never recorded as having been sold. Prince Edward did a programme on TV showing the original share certificate from four hundred years ago.

  8. Tapestry says:

    Yes Stuart – free loans will be as cheap mortgages. The free period will terminate at some point. It’s an invitation to negotiate.

    Come on government, do have some of our lovely free money. The debt puts the country even deeper into their power.

  9. Anonymous says:

    “For example, what happened to the vast wealth of the individuals who owned the Bank Of England in 1946? There is no way that the government could have compensated them with so much money.”

    Under the Bank of England Act 1946 they were required to accept compensation in the form of 3% gilts, which the Treasury could redeem on or at any time after April 5th 1966. The amount of gilts each shareholder received was calculated to give the same annual income as his Bank shareholding would have paid him in dividends, averaged over the preceding twenty years.

    http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/about/legislation/1946act.pdf

  10. Tapestry says:

    Shareholders were therefore compensated for the loss of their shares, but not for their funds, which they presumably were able to keep.

  11. Anonymous says:

    This is the same view that the Daily Bell blog/internet newsletter has. Although the Daily Bell has never explained this viewpoint as clearly as Tapestry has. The Daily Bell says that these anonymous & unseen, powerful, people are intent on world government, & that they are particularly devoted to their principal lovechild, the EU. That is why, whatever anti-EU promises British governments make in opposition, when in government they seem to become quislings & move ever closer to the EU. That’s because their secret masters tell them to do so – according to this thesis.

    What’s so hard for me to believe about this story is that it could be going on in a reasonably democratic world while remaining so completely secret & un-noticed. And despite the awful ravages of the 20th century, & the slaughterhouse caused by both the Nazis & the Commies. A recent theme of these would-be world rulers, if they truly do exist, would be the global warming scam & its attendant fraud called “cap-&-trade”.

    Obama was to be their agent, but the Tea-Partiers have scotched that. The euro was to seal European unity, but the current financial crisis has put paid to that too. The EU constitution & its near-identical successor, the Lisbon Treaty, all appear to come from the same stable, if this astonishing story is indeed true. If it is indeed true, then we are all meaningless pawns, & in the eyes of our would-be world rulers there only to vote for their favourites, support their parties with our donations & time, & pay taxes, taxes, taxes to keep these secret robbers in the luxurious manner that they have, regretably, become accustomed to. It all reminds me of 1789 – or even 1917!

  12. Anonymous says:

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  13. Anonymous says:

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  14. Anonymous says:

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  15. Anonymous says:

    Of course. If you were a customer of a bank you wouldn’t normally expect to lose money on deposit, valuables or securities in their safe keeping, etc if the bank was taken over. If you also owned shares in the bank, you’d get whatever was offered for those shares. In the case of the nationalisation of the Bank of England the shareholders were compelled to accept 3% gilts in exchange for their shares, all of which are now owned by the Treasury.

  16. Tapestry says:

    Someone’s spamming comments onto this thread without me being given a chance to monitor them. Very odd.

    Yes Denis, the shares are the small fry in the equation, and are mere window dressing in reality.

    The funds that are lent to government are vast, and these are all from private sources.

  17. Anonymous says:

    Now I think you’re getting closer.

    If a government can only survive by borrowing, then the lenders have the whip hand.

    There’s that famous quote, which I find was from an adviser to Clinton:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bond_market#Bond_market_influence

    “I used to think that if there was reincarnation, I wanted to come back as the president or the pope or as a .400 baseball hitter. But now I would like to come back as the bond market. You can intimidate everybody.”

    Usually the lenders will be private but a government can also get itself into hock to other governments – yesterday there was this article about Ireland by a professor of economics:

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2010/1108/1224282865400.html?via=rel

    which ends:

    “Ireland faced a painful choice between imposing a resolution on banks that were too big to save or becoming insolvent, and, for whatever reason, chose the latter. Sovereign nations get to make policy choices, and we are no longer a sovereign nation in any meaningful sense of that term.”

    And apart from politicians getting their country into unmanageable debt, they’re also potentially open to various forms of both bribery and blackmail.

    The Bank of England is owned by, and within the limits of the law controlled by, the Treasury; so the question then is not who is controlling the Bank, but who is controlling the Treasury.

    Incidentally I recently came across this reference to Keynes’ attitude towards nationalisation of the Bank of England, about halfway down the page:

    http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/andy.denis/research/keynes.htm

    “A salient example cited by Keynes in this context, and – significantly – prior to its nationalisation, is that of the Bank of England: ‘there is no class of persons in the kingdom of whom the Governor of the Bank of England thinks less when he decides on his policy than of his shareholders. Their rights, in excess of their conventional dividend have already sunk to the neighbourhood of zero’”

  18. Anonymous says:

    Tap, sorry about the multiple entries above about the Daily Bell’s similar views to your’s. Maybe it is just my computer at fault, but whenever I clicked “Submit” everything went blank until finally my comments stayed up – many times later! Again: apologies for it all.

    By the way, I blogged as ‘Anonymous’ as it wouldn’t take my normal handle ‘Agincourt’.

  19. Tapestry says:

    Agincourt, thanks for explaining. It seems that someone’s messing around with this thread.

    Anonymous, the power of the private lenders of money to governments must be vast. The same families have been engaged in this business for hundreds of years. The Prince Charles story is not totally incredible as the British Royal Family were known to be lending money to the British government and be shareholders of the Bank Of England since its inception.

    That situation has carried through to the present day, and has no doubt created a vast pool of wealth beyond the reach of any government. The way the world works is still entirely secret, despite 24 news coverage, in which we are presented with a theatre, which pretends that Prime Ministers and Presidents are in control of events.

  20. Anonymous says:

    If I had 17 Billion to save the UK, I would keep it as far away from the government as possible.

    Unless their was something only they could give in return, and it was worth that much money.

    Train tracks, like roads, can carry all kinds of vehicles, not just Oil powered ones, and will always be of use. Even if we have already reached Peak Oil.

    Imagine how much a rail network would be worth if air travel becomes too expensive for most people. Having full rights over income derived from it would be worth that much easily. And it will be cheaper than a car if oil rockets in price.

  21. Derek says:

    Of all the theories, stories, references and comments on the many blogs and websites I have heard over the past two years (not long is it?), this post, Lord James’s comments, and the subsequent comments made here, seem to fit together better than any I have accumulated in the past. Charles however, is either a conundrum, very clever, or a complete nincumpoop set up and guided from within or without. Is there a close connection with his Father? Who knows, and how does this Foundation X fit with the ‘Wanta Plan’?

    Interesting times.

  22. Tapestry says:

    The Wanta Plan seems to be an element of the revelations of the late Christopher Story, who believes the German postwar organisation set up in Madrid, the DVD, has the intention to destroy the United States from the inside, and to reduce Britain to nought through the EU. I am still reading the earthlinggb blog post and thinking about it.

    It all seems to stack up with the work of Alex Jones on Prison Planet, and other aspects that we are aware of, but it takes time to absorb it all.

  23. BRIT says:

    Maybe I have missed something. If the BoE is publicly owned, how much and when did which government pay for it?. Who did the government pay?. It is ,and always has been a private company with undisclosed owners. No one seems to mention the Bilderbergers.Whilst the BBC refuses to mention them, isn’t it curios that every day in the last week of June 2010 the meeting in Sitges,Spain made it onto the Russian news (also the Iranian news, Press tv). We in Britain live in one of the most controlled countries in the world (not just with cctv cameras either). All the media (radio, TV, newspapers ) toe the line,and “democracy” is a complete sham.

  24. Anonymous says:

    There is only 1 “one” WAR worth fighting.

    If these people are behind all wars my for fathers spilt blood.

    Then let me at them,

    I’ll press the button,

    I’ll do it let me in the front of the que.

    WAKE up world.

    bullseye the target you mustn’t miss. “URGENT”

    check this out:-

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61OZnl914P4

    HETT

  25. Anonymous says:

    Look into who heads the Central Banks, look also at the Bolshevik revolution, look closely.
    Look at how the Bolsheviks killed the Russian monarchs, these people do not like Monarchy, nor Nation states.

    Black is White, Up is Down and I doubt the Queen owns most of the Wealth of the World, though ‘THEY’ might want to deflect you into thinking that.
    Look at who owns the media.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.