South America had the doubtful privilege of being the first continent to suffer under the grasp of Internationalist Capitalism. South America

However it was the East India Company that can rightly be called the world's first corporation. It was an early stock company founded by a coterie of businessmen who obtained the Crown's Charter from Elizabeth 1 of England on December 31 1600 with the intention of favouring trade privileges in India. It had 125 shareholders and a capital of £72000 led by one Governor and twenty four Directors who were appointed by and reported to the Court of Proprietors.

The key event that provided the Company with the favour of the Mughal emperor Jahangir was their victory over the Portuguese in 1612. In 1615 Sir Thomas Roe visited the Mughal emperor who ruled over most of the sub-continent along with Afghanistan for a commercial treaty which would give the company exclusive rights to reside in and build factories in Surat and other areas.

The mainstay business was cotton, silk, indigo dye, saltpetre and tea. Oliver Cromwell renewed the charter of 1609 and brought about minor changes in the holding of the company. By 1689 the company was virtually a nation in the Indian mainland independently administering the vast presidencies of Bengal, Madras and Bombay and possessing a formidable military strength.

The company transformed from a commercial venture to one that virtually ruled India as it acquired auxiliary governmental and military functions until its dissolution in 1858 following the "Indian Mutiny".

The prosperity that the employees of the company enjoyed allowed them to return home to England to establish estates and businesses and to obtain political power. Consequently the company developed for itself a lobby in England's Parliament.

Under pressure from ambitious tradesmen who wanted to establish private trading firms in India a de-regulating act was passed in 1694 which allowed a new parallel East India Company to be floated. However the powerful stockholders of the old company quickly subscribed the sum of £350,000 in the new company and dominated the new body. Both companies finally merged in 1702.

Realising the need for local Illuminati operatives Freemasonry made its entry into India. The first lodge was established in 1730 in Calcutta. Motilal Nehru (grandfather of Indira Gandhi), was an Illuminati operative as was Helena Balavsky who founded the Theosophical Society in India.

A key Theosophist activist was Mrs. Annie Besant who despite acting against the British managed to escape being punished by them.

The East India's company's Charter of 1599 to trade in the east derived from Parliament and the Crown but its authority to govern in India actually legally flowed from the person of the Mughal Emperor who had officially taken on the company as his tax collector in Bengal in the years following the battle of Plassey on the 2nd August 1765.

As recently as 1832 when Zafir (the last Mughal Emperor) was fully fifty-eight years old the company had acknowledged itself to be the Mughal Emperor's vassal on its coins and even on its great seal which was covered with the inscription "Fidvi Shah Alam (ie Shah Alam's devoted dependant). This was removed only under the influence of Sir Charles Medcalfe in 1833 . Since then nothing had happened to change the legal relationship of the two parties. Although the Company had unilaterally no longer proclaimed its vassalage on its coins or on its seal, neither it nor Shah Alam himself ever renounced his sovereignity over the company.

From this point of view after the end of the Mutiny, Zafir could certainly be tried as a defeated king but he had never been a subject and so could not possibly be called a rebel guilty of treason. Instead from a legal point of view a good case could be made that it was the East India Company which was the real rebel guilty of a revolt against a feudal superior to whom it had sworn allegiance for nearly a century.

What was never discussed was whether the company was legally empowered to try Zafir at all, because although the government took the position that Zafir received a pension from the company and was therefore the Company's pensioner and thus subject to it the actual legal position was considerably more ambiguous.

The Time's correspondent, William Howard Russell, arrived at the ruins of Delhi around this time 1857. Aware of Zafir's history and stirred by the ruined magnificence of the Mughal's great palace Russell was sceptical about the legality of the Company's charges against Zafir:

"We, it is true, have now the same right and the same charter for our dominions that the Mohammedan of the House of Delhi had for the sovereignity they claimed over Hindustan. i.e. the right of conquest, but we did not come into India as they did at the head of great armies with the avowed intention of subjugating the country, we crept in as humble barterers whose existence depended on the bounty and favour of the lieutenants of the kings of Delhi and the generosity we have shown was but a small acknowledgment of the favours his ancestors had conferred to our race."

There was nothing inevitable about the demise and extinction of the Mughals as the sepoys' dramatic surge towards the court of Delhi showed. Zafir always put huge emphasis on his role as protector of the Hindus and the moderator of Muslim demands. He never forgot the central importance of preserving the bond between his Hindu and Moslem subjects. But in the years to come Muslim prestige and learning sank and Hindu confidence, education and power increased and Hindu and Moslems would grow to be apart as British policies of divide and rule with willing collaboration between the chauvinists of both faiths.

The rift opened in 1857 slowly widened into a great gash and at partition in 1947 finally broke down.

When Delhi fell in September 1857 it was not just the city and Zafir's court were uprooted and destroyed but the self confidence and authority of the wider Mughal political and cultural world throughout India.

All this exacerbated the sudden shift of power from the Muslim elite who had dominated the city before the uprising to the Hindu bankers who were its most wealthy citizens afterwards.

The idea of a general amnesty eventually became official policy and was proclaimed in November 1858. At the same time in the Act for the Better Government of India the British crown finally assumed all governmental responsibilities held by the East India Company and its 24,000-man military force was incorporated into the British Army. If Hindustan was to lose the Mughals its rulers of nearly three hundred years standing it would at least now be ruled by a properly constituted colonial government rather than a rapacious multi-national acting at least partly in the interests of its shareholders.

For India the English occupation has left a dismal legacy. Dismal because through deliberate political policy it has left the Hindu and Muslim population at loggerheads whereas previously, under the Mughals, the two had co-habited without stress

The destruction of the old ruling class - a typical theme of those who favour world government has also destroyed the central core of the society.

In the independence movement the British made a play at antagonising the Indian National COngress and then caving into their demands, when in truth the transfer of power to the independence movement was predetermined. Mohammed Aly Jinnah realising that Indian National Congress leaders were phoney managed to get a Mandate for all Muslim Pakistan.

It is no coincidence that British imperialism only started after the Illuminati Jewish bankers became established in Britain and they used the British as their extensions in non-western lands.

The British Empire to which many loyal subjects gave their lives under the impression they were working for "king and country" was in fact only a facet of the grand plan of the Internationalists.

Hence the rapidity with which it was disbanded once its principal aim had been achieved.

It only remained for the final step: