[In this video Mark Collett, leader of the pro-White British nationalist movement, Patriotic Alternative, says:

“The British Board of Deputies – Britain’s most powerful Jewish organisation – have called for Patriotic Alternative to be banned because of two statements that I made on social media. Find out exactly what I said and why these statements have led to calls for a new clampdown on freedom of speech.”

– KATANA]

Mark Collett

Jewish Leaders Want Us Banned!

Fri, May 26, 2023

https://odysee.com/@MarkCollett:6/20230526-Jewish-Leaders-Want-Us-Banned:b

Published on Fri, May 26, 2023

Description

Jewish Leaders want us BANNED!
May 26, 2023
1,273 views

255
0
Support
Save
4 Reposts
Share
Mark Collett

@MarkCollett
13K followers
Join
Following
The British Board of Deputies – Britain’s most powerful Jewish organisation – have called for Patriotic Alternative to be banned because of two statements that I made on social media. Find out exactly what I said and why these statements have led to calls for a new clampdown on freedom of speech.
Ways you can help contribute to my work:
BitCoin: bc1qzgjz953f4gznway0hvz6lx360yd2autdkwf6nu
Etherium: 0xb44739a8f2c57Cad38F96Aab8F2a0cA18258A7bA
BitCoin Cash: qpaaukrttfvq0j99gfl43hhs5q0tmhzfevkhp3r2c9
Monero: 42qypZQGMzNfFa5yXBxkqxL4iDw5cmzbtCC81dKcQbMrhLrsJUYAFSsLs9Um4hG32R5GfaqfgGj7oR6ZJ7pGyaY3FFu9HKD
You can also donate to my work via Entropy:
https://entropystream.live/app/markcollett
My book, The Fall of Western Man is now available. It is available as a FREE eBook and also in hardback and paperback editions.
The Official Website:

http://www.thefallofwesternman.com

FREE eBook download:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3cctZ95PDYZTnRjSUd5VUtRR2c/view
Hardback Edition:
https://www.lulu.com/shop/mark-collett/the-fall-of-western-man/hardcover/product-23388841.html
Paperback Edition:
http://amzn.eu/9LaS7HN
PLEASE NOTE: If you wish to debate with me in the comments about anything I have said, I welcome that. However please listen to the complete podcast and ensure you argue with the points I have made. Arguments that simply consist of nonsense such as “what gives you the right to judge” or “I’m a [insert religious affiliation] and you should be ashamed of yourself” or other such vacuous non-arguments will simply be ridiculed.
File size
106.1 MB
Less
9.5K
55 comments

_____________

TRANSCRIPT QUALITY = 5 Stars

1 Star — Poor quality with many errors, contains nonsense text 2 Stars — Low quality with many errors, some nonsense text. 3 Stars — Medium quality with some errors. 4 Stars — Good quality with only a few errors. 5 Stars — High quality with few to no errors.

NOTE: Users can help improve the quality of this transcript by putting corrections in the Comment section. Thanks.

TRANSCRIPT

(11:58 mins)

CONTENTS

British Board of Deputies of British Jews Calling for PA to Be Banned

How Powerful is the British Board of Deputies?

Why Do They Want to Ban PA?

The Board’s Demands to the Government Regarding Illegal Migrants

Long History of Supporting Migration and Opposing Anti-Migrant Groups

Jews Vastly over Represented in the Media and Silence Those That Mention This

Biden’s Speech About Jews

British Board of Deputies Fears the Truth

Jewish Chronicle Article Pushing for Stronger Anti-Free Speech Laws

Our Greatest Weapon is the Truth.

British Board of Deputies of British Jews Calling for PA to Be Banned

top

“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise.”

Now I know you’ve heard that before, and I know that I myself have used that quote many times over the last few years. But I think it’s a pretty important quote, despite who may, or may not have originally come up with it! And in the grand scheme of things, it doesn’t really matter who said it first – what matters, is that it is the truth!

And right now I am finding out just how true that quote is. I am in the firing the line! So much so, that an article in the Jewish Chronicle has revealed that the British Board of Deputies, Britain’s most powerful jewish organisation, are calling on the Government to ban Patriotic Alternative – the organisation that I founded.

How Powerful is the British Board of Deputies?

top

But exactly who are the British Board of Deputies, and how powerful are they?

Well, Wikipedia states, and I quote:

“The Board of Deputies of British jews, commonly referred to as the Board of Deputies, is the largest and second oldest jewish communal organisation in the United Kingdom, after only the Initiation Society which was founded in 1745. Established in 1760 by a group of Sephardic jews, the board presents itself as a forum for the views of most organisations within the British jewish community, liaising with the British government on that basis.

Notably, while Lord Rothschild was President of the Board of Deputies, the Balfour Declaration was addressed to him and eventually led to a jewish state in Palestine. It is affiliated to the World jewish Congress and the European jewish Congress. Its current president is Marie van der Zyl who, due to holding this position, also sits on the Executive Committee of the World jewish Congress.”

End quote.

Not only does every Prime Minister go directly to the British Board of Deputies – and yes, even Liz Truss, Britain’s shortest serving Prime Minister managed to bend the knee to them in her rather stunted 40-day reign – but they are also the body that ‘liaises’ directly with the British Government in order to relay to the government what the jewish community desires.

But the Board’s power doesn’t end there, their former president, Lord Rothschild was actually responsible for the founding of the state of Israel, as the Balfour Declaration was addressed directly to him on behalf of the British Government!

So, does the Board of Deputies have power? Yes, they do! Have they influenced world politics? Yes, they have! And do they hold power that is disproportionate to their numbers? Yes, they do!

Why Do They Want to Ban PA?

top

And now we have established how powerful they are, the next pressing question is what have I done to anger them so greatly that they want the organisation that I founded to be banned?

[03:07]

Now I started this video with a well-known quote, and that quote was all about learning who you are not allowed to criticise. So, you might be expecting me to reveal that I have issued some stinging criticism of the British Board of Deputies. And if you are expecting that, you will probably be disappointed. As I haven’t criticised them at all! I have simply made two factual statements which have, to put it politely, annoyed them.

The first of those statements is, and I quote:

“The British Board of Deputies supports mass immigration into Britain and opposes groups that call for immigration control. They oppose the idea of indigenous Britons remaining a majority in their ancestral homeland.”

End quote. This is not a criticism, but simply an example of me summing up the policies held by the British Board of Deputies. The Board have repeatedly called for tolerance and acceptance of migrants and have recently opposed the Government’s calls to send so-called “refugees” to Rwanda.

The Board’s Demands to the Government Regarding Illegal Migrants

top

And if you take some time to read over their own website, you will find the following list of demands that the Board have made to the British government in relation to the treatment of illegal migrants. This is what the Board has to say, and I quote:

“1. Allow asylum seekers the right to work.

2. Reunite refugee families.

3. Create a properly funded programme to resettle unaccompanied refugee children and young people in the UK.

4. Protect the Race Disparity Unit, which monitors the extent of racial inequality in Britain.

5. Provide funding for a permanent memorial to the victims of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade.

6. Make sure all political parties have clear and transparent procedures for dealing with all forms of racism, including anti-semitism, Islamophobia and anti-black racism.”

End quote.* Not only does the Board of Deputies support mass immigration into Britain, but they actually wish to force every political party in Britain to adopt procedures to support their drive for diversity!

[* See comment below “These demands decoded“]

Yet when I point these things out, they wish to silence me.

Long History of Supporting Migration and Opposing Anti-Migrant Groups

top

The Board have a long history of supporting migration into Britain and have a similar history of opposing anti-migrant groups. They have routinely been highly critical of nationalist groups and have openly supported policies that will eventually result in White Britons becoming a minority. And as such, I haven’t criticised them, I have merely told the truth about them.

Now let’s move on to the second statement that I made that has upset them. I am quoted as saying the following:

“Whilst jews constantly talk about White over-representation and demand ethnic quotas that always result in fewer Whites being employed, jews themselves are vastly over represented in the media and are quick to silence anyone who mentions this fact.”

Jews Vastly over Represented in the Media and Silence Those That Mention This

top

End quote. Again, none of this is a lie! Jews are over represented within the media in comparison to their numbers. And it is also clear that people are silenced for daring to speak about these things, and now, this powerful jewish group is calling for the government to silence me!

[06:38]

Now at this point I was going to cite a number of sources that backed up the things that I said in that second quote, but most people watching this video will already have seen lots of quotes and evidence that backs up the point I was making. I will however draw the viewer’s attention to a recent speech made by Joe Biden, the US President. The speech was covered by a website called the New York Mag, under the headline:

“Biden Praises jews, Goes Too Far, Accidentally Thrills Anti-Semites”

Biden’s Speech About Jews

top

New York Mag reports President Biden said the following about jews in America, and I quote:

“The jewish people have contributed greatly to America. No group has had such an outsized influence per capita as all of you standing before you, and all of those who went before me and all of those who went before you, … You make up 11 percent of the seats in the United States, Congress. You make up one-third of all Nobel laureates, … I think you, as usual, underestimate the impact of jewish heritage. I really mean that. I think you vastly underestimate the impact you’ve had on the development of this nation.”

“‘The embrace of immigration’ is part of that, as is the involvement of jews in social justice movements.”

“‘You can’t talk about the Civil Rights Movement in this country without talking about jewish freedom riders and Jack Greenberg,’ he said, telling a story about seeing a group of jewish activists at a segregated movie theatre in Delaware. ‘You can’t talk about the women’s movement without talking about Betty Friedan.’”

“‘I believe what affects the movements in America, what affects our attitudes in America are as much the culture and the arts as anything else,’ he said. That’s why he spoke out on gay marriage ‘apparently a little ahead of time.’”

“‘It wasn’t anything we legislatively did. It was ‘Will and Grace,’ it was the social media. Literally! That’s what changed peoples’ attitudes. That’s why I was so certain that the vast majority of people would embrace and rapidly embrace gay marriage.’ Biden said. ‘Think behind of all that, I bet you 85 percent of those changes, whether it’s in Hollywood or social media are a consequence of jewish leaders in the industry. The influence is immense! And, I might add, it is all to the good.’”

End quote.

This is a frank admission, one that was meant as praise. However, Biden’s admission really does speak volumes, as it’s exactly what I have been saying for years.

But when I say it, I am banned from social media, lose bank accounts and I am threatened by powerful jews in Britain who wish to see the Government silence me completely!

[09:35]

British Board of Deputies Fears the Truth

top

What I am saying isn’t ‘criticism’, it’s simply the truth! And it seems that the British Board of Deputies fears this truth, it seems that they would rather that the British public didn’t know about the degree of power they wield, or the fact that jews are over represented in comparison to their numbers in Hollywood, the media, and that jews have played a pivotal role in shaping immigration policy in the Western world.

How curious! Why aren’t they proud of these things? Why don’t they want everyone to know about their achievements?

Now the article about me did raise one other point: And that was that apparently some people who replied to the comments I made did so angrily. And this is something that I absolutely do not endorse.

Jewish Chronicle Article Pushing for Stronger Anti-Free Speech Laws

top

The article written about me in the Jewish Chronicle was clearly an attempt to build support for more numerous and stronger anti-free speech laws and for more restrictions to be placed upon our fundamental rights to organise and articulate ourselves.

I haven’t told any lies! I haven’t defamed anyone! And I haven’t called for any form of violence – nor would I. I have exercised my right as a free Englishman to put forward my opinion, and really, I haven’t even done that. I haven’t even stated an ‘opinion’ sI have simply reported something in a short, truthful and accurate manner.

So, my plea to all those listening is clear: Please don’t give those who wish to silence us the ammunition they desire to call for groups to be banned or for truth tellers to be locked up! And that brings me to my most important point:

Our Greatest Weapon is the Truth.

top

Our greatest weapon is, quite simply, the truth!

The two comments have I made have caused such outrage and condemnation – not because they are lies, not because they threaten violence, not because they are wild accusations or conspiracy theories – but because the comments I made are true! And because more than anything, powerful people fear greater numbers of people knowing the truth.

Please help me to spread that truth – but do so in a lawful, polite, yet robust manner.

[11:58]

END

top

============================================

Odysee Comments

top

(Comments as of 5/26/2023 = 55)

Fred Dibnah’s Land Rover
12 hours ago
Tbh if they weren’t after you I would be worried. They fear most the peaceful, legal & respectful opposition as they can’t be easily derided.

21
0
Hide replies

@vettekid407
12 hours ago
maybe

1
0

@BritishGammon
12 hours ago
5:00
No mention of procedures for “dealing with all forms of anti-Whiteism” though!
Strange that.

13
0
Dissident Doctrine
11 hours ago
I want Jews banned. I guess we’re at an impasse.

7
0
Hide replies
volkhero
10 hours ago
This

3
0

@TheLastBoyScout
10 hours ago
banned??? I guess I would settle for that but honestly I want justice for all they have done

3
0
Show reply

@MilosM.
4 hours ago
not banned, but subjugated to control. like a court fools.

@TwentyFourHours
11 hours ago
In a functioning political system this conversation (and many others) would be allowed to take place, but the state wants to keep the public in the dark, paying taxes towards a dysfunctional system, and blindly voting for more of the same – and they claim to be legitimate! Keep up the great work Mark & PA. You are the real voice speaking for British people and the truth will out

5
0
GloboSimp
9 hours ago
You’ve got them on the ropes, keep punching ‘em Mark

1
0

@Grumpole
11 hours ago
Not only do they want us silenced, they want all Christians dead, as they have for thousands of years, Satan’s spawn will loose out in the End Times, as they all get consigned to hell.

2
1
Show reply

@ИванКожедуб
10 hours ago
The Jews have been infiltrating other people’s countries and deliberately ruining them from within for as far as I know, nearly two thousand years! So many people have documented their unpleasant behaviour: different people of different ethnicities, nationalities, languages, religions and cultures, in different places at different times!
They can’t keep getting away with this! Someone needs to put a stop to it!

1
0

@MilosM.
11 hours ago
4:30
– middle finger to this. these people are not the government, it’s not theirs to meddle into governmental policies (then again…)

1
0

@W_Poe_White
12 hours ago
Here are the six demands of the Board of Deputies which Mark quotes beginning at
4:29
:
(1) Allow asylum seekers the right to work.
(2) Reunite refugee families.
(3) Create a properly funded programme to resettle unaccompanied refugee children and young people in the UK.
(4) Protect the Race Disparity Unit, which monitors the extent of racial inequality in Britain.
(5) Provide funding for a permanent memorial to the victims of the transatlantic slave trade.
(6) Make sure all political parties have clear and transparent procedures for dealing with all forms of racism, including antisemitism, Islamophobia and anti-black racism.

These demands decoded:

(1) Let non-White replacement migrants have jobs.
(2) Let non-White replacement migrants serve as anchors for chain migration.
(3) Have the British government at taxpayer expense facilitate replacement migration of non-White migrant children and youths.
(4) Make sure the Race Disparity Unit is able to continue monitoring progress toward the replacement of indigenous Britons.
(5) Create a victimological propaganda center (modeled on “Holocaust remembrance” centers) to stoke resentment of non-White replacement migrants toward indigenous Britons, and implant White guilt in indigenous Britons, by implicitly or explicitly blaming all indigenous Britons, no matter when they were born, no matter how innocent, for the transatlantic slave trade while ignoring the major roles played by Jewish slave traders and slave owners as well as African leaders who captured the slaves and sold them to European, Sephardic and Ashkenazic slave traders.
(6) Require all political parties to actively support the replacement of indigenous Britons by non-White migrants by repressing all indigenous resistance to their replacement.
Plainly, by calling for the banning of Patriotic Alternative, the Board of Deputies is modeling the actions they want political parties to take per demand (6).
Less

@hungowapower
9 hours ago
It’s now antisemitic to notice things

Ron P
11 hours ago
‘If the Jew, with the help of his Marxian creed, conquers the nations of the world, his crown
will be the funeral wreath of the human race’
A. Painter
What a f-in mess we are in

9
0

@JackRoberts28
12 hours ago
The board is against you, great change is coming. The tide is changing and they know the time is near.
They pushed degeneracy and wars now people are waking up 1 at a time.

8
0

@MilosM.
14 hours ago
They can only bend over. Keep going on, Mark! If they want to silence you, that means something is cooking up.

8
0

@Euclid
11 hours ago
Very clear and concise. As in the introductions to Red Ice Flashback Friday ‘Truth is a far superior weapon than deceit’. Keeping their power secret to the public is what maintains their huge power.

7
0

@Mut_zum_Wut
12 hours ago
\o

5
0
anti nwos , anti invasions
12 hours ago
aren t they proving that they are indeed behind the criminal destructives invasions ( and many other vicious activities )?

6
0

@noreplacement
9 hours ago
Don’t be daft. Facts are for conspiracy theorists. Now stop having too much to think and go back to watching Ant n Dec and do as your told!

4
0
Hide replies
Freshly Made Ghosts
7 hours ago
”There were no fact checkers until people started stating facts” somebody once said, similarly there were no conspiracy theorists until conspiracies started being prodded.

1
0
Matt Hammond
10 hours ago
Building a world takeover strategy based on compulsive lying probably won’t work out in the end.

4
0
Hide replies
Freshly Made Ghosts
6 hours ago
The Chinese will have their way with them once whites are gone.

1
0
Hide replies

@What2
5 hours ago
the chinese are extremely brutal and no nonsense. AND they have a high iq AND they have aggressive in group preference. dare i say, the chinese are the jews of asia.

italix
11 hours ago
It is one reason why the Nobel prize has become overrated.

4
0
Hide replies
Freshly Made Ghosts
6 hours ago
Tesla never won a Nobel prize, peculiar.

1
0
Freshly Made Ghosts
7 hours ago
”Gradually I began to hate them”.

2
0
HydraulicHydra
7 hours ago
“Anti-black racism” does not roll off the tongue anywhere near as well as “negrophobia”.
Just sayin’.

1
0
Hide replies
Freshly Made Ghosts
6 hours ago
Philosemitism remains an absurdity above everything else.

1
0
ThinRedLine
8 hours ago
The reign of the evil tribe will come to an end

2
0
Hide replies

@MilosM.
7 hours ago
One day.

2
0

@What2
5 hours ago
The “how” is what people cant seem to give details on. More hope, hope is poison, as there can be no despair without it.

@W_Poe_White
11 hours ago
At
8:55
Mark quotes President-Select Joe Biden saying “I bet you 85% of those changes [in media cultural advocacy such as support for gay marriage], whether it’s in Hollywood or social media are a consequence of Jewish leaders in the industry.”
What Biden is Noticing is the multi-generational Jewish campaign for the “pro-tolerance” and “anti-racist” remolding of White American consciousness. Andrew Joyce made a major contribution toward understanding this campaign in his article ‘Modify the Standards of the In-Group’: On Jews and Mass Communications which appeared in the Summer 2019 edition of The Occidental Quarterly and online at

“Modify the standards of the in-group”: On Jews and Mass Communications

2
0

@Justsomeguy115
4 hours ago
110 now!

1
0

@NormanKing1066
5 hours ago
Oy vey! The goyim are saying things we don’t like! Shut them down!

1
0
Name the Jesuits
11 hours ago
Rome sure does like sowing division amongst the cattle to keep them distracted.

0
1

@VicTomised
5 hours ago
It seems that they are calling themselves out. With every such action, it seems they are proving you to have been right all along.
Surely it is up to the government to uphold the constitution, which allows for lawful assembly, protests of grievances and the like?

@What2
6 hours ago
11:17
Not saying your advice isnt noted mark but we and people like us will be locked up regardless, its just going to be later rather than sooner if the low iqs dont sperg out about antagonizing jews instead of what jews do. Jews themselves do not care about nuance when it is not advantageous to their rhetoric. Not saying i disagree with you, im making an observable claim.

@MarkCollett

Hide replies

@VicTomised
5 hours ago
I’m not so sure. Yes the traitorous politicians are trying to shut us down, and are passing as many laws as they possibly can in this regard, but as yet, the new laws have not been rigorously tested and challenged.
(Apparently Sven just wanted to get it over with so he decided not to challenge the verdict and I believe the sentence).
I believe many of us would be in a position to challenge such travesties of justice if they come after us too.
It’s not over ‘til it’s over.

HydraulicHydra
7 hours ago
I saw a documentary noting that the Balfour Declaration was a cryptic receipt, giving in exchange for American Jews, via their control of the press, getting America involved in WW1 on Brittain’s behalf. Is that accurate?

HH
7 hours ago
Why don’t they want to the world know about all their brilliant contributions (orchestrated) to immigration and diversity.

0
0

==========================

See Also

top

Mark Collett — It’s Okay To Be White — TRANSCRIPT

Mark Collett — Christmas Adverts – Multicultural Propaganda — TRANSCRIPT

Mark Collett — What We Must Do To Win — TRANSCRIPT

Mark Collett — Assad Didn’t Do It – Faked Syrian Gas Attack — TRANSCRIPT

Mark Collett — The Plot to Flood Europe with 200 Million Africans — TRANSCRIPT

Mark Collett — The jewish Question Explained in Four Minutes — TRANSCRIPT

Mark Collett at The Scandza Forum, Copenhagen – Oct 12, 2019 — Transcript

Patriotic Weekly Review – with Blair Cottrell – Dec 4, 2019 — TRANSCRIPT

Dangerfield – Talking Tough with Mark Collett – Mar 28, 2020 — Transcript

============================================

PDF Download

top

• Total words in post = 3,908
• Total words in transcript = 1,825
• Total images = xx
• Total A4 pages = xxx

Click to download a PDF of this post (x.x MB): (Available later)

Version History

top

Version 5:

Version 4:

Version 3:

Version 2: Mon, Jun 5, 2023 — Added images.

Version 1: Wed, May 31, 2023 — Published post. Includes Odysee comments (55).

[Part 03]

[Benton Bradberry’s 2012 book, “The Myth of German Villainy” is a  superb, must-read, revisionist look at how the German people have been systematically, relentlessly and most importantly, unjustly vilified as the arch criminal of the 20th century. Bradberry sets out, coolly and calmly as befits a former US-Navy officer and pilot, to show why and how the German people have been falsely accused of massive crimes and that their chief  accuser and tormenter, organized jewry is in fact the real party guilty of monstrous crimes against Germans and the rest of the world.

In Part 03, organized jewry’s key role in prolonging and turning the war into a global conflict by getting America to declare war on Germany is described. Organized jewry allow the British to turn down peace offers from Germany when they promise to get the US involved provided they receive a British promise (the Balfour Declaration) of an eventual Jewish homeland in Palestine. Prominent American jews instruct their puppet, President Woodrow Wilson to achieve this goal, with Congress declaring war on April 6, 1917.

At the Paris Peace Conference the dominating jewish influence, both official and behind the scenes, is detailed, with organized  organized jewry achieving its three principle aims: the creation of the League of Nations as the first step toward world government; the recognition of Jewish “minority rights” in Eastern Europe; and the creation of a British Mandate in Arab Palestine.

Lastly, the history of the thorough jewish infiltration of British aristocracy through marriage, usually of jewesses with landed gentry in financial difficulties, is described —  KATANA.]

NOTE: The author has very generously given me permission to reproduce the material here — KATANA.

The Myth of

German Villainy

by

Benton L. Bradberry

Contents

[Clicking on a link in the Contents here will take you to that Part, in a separate post]

[Part 01]

Preface

Chapter 1 – The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Germany’s Positive Image Changes Overnight

[Part 02]

Chapter 2 – Aftermath of the War in Germany

The Versailles Treaty

Effect of the Treaty on the German Economy

Was the War Guilt Clause Fair?

Did Germany Really Start the War?

[Part 03]

Chapter 3 – The Jewish Factor in the War

Introduction

Jews at the Paris Peace Conference

Jews in Britain

[Part 04]

Chapter 4 – The Russian Revolution of 1917

Bolsheviks Take Control

Jews and the Russian Revolution

Origin of East European Jews

Reason for the Russian Pogroms Against the Jews

Jews Leave Russia for America

Financing the 1917 Revolution

Jews in the Government of Bolshevik Russia

[Part 05]

Chapter 5 – The Red Terror

Creation of the Gulag

Bolsheviks Kill the Czar

Jews as a Hostile Elite

The Ukrainian Famine (Holodomor)

[Part 06]

Chapter 6 – The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Jews in the Hungarian Revolution

Miklos Horthy Saves Hungary

Jews in the German Revolution

The Spartacist Uprising in Berlin

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Italy

Jewish Bolsheviks Attempt to Take Spain — The Spanish Civil War

Czechoslovakia in Danger of Communist Takeover

The Comintern’s Aim? World Domination!

[Part 07]

Chapter 7 – The Nation of Israel

History of the Expulsion of Jews

[Part 08]

Chapter 8 – Jews in Weimar Germany

Jews Undermine German Culture

[Part 09]

Chapter 9 – Hitler & National Socialists Rise to Power

The 25 Points of the National Socialist Party

[Part 10]

Chapter 10 – National Socialism vs. Communism

National Socialism

Jews Plan Marxist Utopia

[Part 11]

Chapter 11 – Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Text of Untermeyer’s Speech in New York

The Jewish Persecution Myth

Effect of Boycott on the German Economy

Jewish Exaggerations are Contradicted by Many

[Part 12]

Chapter 12 – The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

The Nuremberg Laws – 1935

The Zionist Movement

[Part 13]

Chapter 13 – Life in Germany Under Hitler

Night of the Long Knives

1934 Annual Nazi Rally at Nuremberg

Hitler Revives the German Economy

Hitler Becomes the Most Popular Leader in the World

[Part 14]

Chapter 14 – Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory

Chapter 15 – The 1936 Olympics

[Part 15]

Chapter 16 – “Anschluss”. The Unification of Austria and Germany

Austrian Economy Revived

Austria’s Jews

[Part 16]

Chapter 17 – Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

[Part 17]

Chapter 18 – War with Poland

The Polish Problem

Hitler’s Proposal to Poland

Kristallnacht

German-Polish Talks Continue

Jews Influence both Roosevelt and Churchill

British and American Political Leaders Under Jewish Influence

Roosevelt’s Contribution to Hostilities

Lord Halifax Beats the War Drums

Germany Occupies Bohemia and Moravia

Roosevelt Pushes for War

Anti-war Movement Becomes Active

Poles Murder German Nationals Within the Corridor

[Part 18]

Chapter 19 – The Phony War

Russo-Finnish War

The Norway/Denmark Campaign

German Invasion of Denmark and Norway

Churchill Takes Chamberlain’s Place as Prime Minister

[Part 19]

Chapter 20 – Germany invades France Through the Low Countries

The Phony War Ends.

Churchill the War Lover

The Fall of France

Hitler Makes Peace Offer to Britain

[Part 20]

Chapter 21 – The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

[Part 21]

Chapter 22 – Germany as Victim

Rape and Slaughter

Jewish Vengeance

The Jewish Brigade

[Part 22]

Chapter 23 – Winners and Losers

Bibliography

Chapter 3

The Jewish Factor in the War 

Introduction

top

On December 12, 1916, two and a half years into the war, Germany made a peace offer to the Allies to end the war on a status quo ante basis. That is, no one wins and no one loses, and no one pays reparations; everyone just stops fighting and goes back home. Germany had never wanted the war in the first place. By that time in the course of the war, Germany seemed on the verge of victory. Germany’s submarine force had effectively stopped the supply convoys coming from America to Britain, creating critical shortages of all war materiel in Britain. France had already lost 600,000 men in the battles of Verdun and the Somme, and French soldiers were beginning to mutiny. The Italian army had collapsed completely and Russian soldiers were deserting in droves and returning home. Germany appeared to be winning on both fronts. But the slaughter had been too great and the British and the French were unwilling to stop fighting short of a victory. The only way to justify the carnage and the horrific loss of life was to fight on until victory could be obtained. Moreover, as explained in the previous chapter, Britain had entered the war to destroy Germany as an industrial and commercial rival, and that remained her goal. British leaders were determined to find a way to break the stalemate and win the war, and they knew that the one sure way of doing so was to bring America in on their side. A relentless effort was already under way to bring that about, but so far, without success.

Zionist Jews and the British government had already been finagling behind the scenes over a Jewish homeland in Palestine. In October, 1916, two months prior to the German peace offer, a group of Zionist Jews led by Chaim Weizmann (later the first president of Israel) had met with British leaders with a proposition. If Britain would guarantee the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine after the war, the Jews would use their influence through powerful Jews in America to bring America into the war on the side of Britain and the Allies, which would assure an Allied victory. These Jews were so confident of their power and influence that they virtually guaranteed that they would be able to achieve this.

Sir Arthur Balfour

Chaim Weizmann

At that time, Palestine was under the control of the Ottoman Empire, which was allied to Germany. If Germany were to win the war, the Ottoman Empire would have remained intact with no possibility of a Jewish homeland there, but if the Allies were to win the war, then Britain would control Palestine and be in position to hand it over to the Jews. (Whether or not Britain had the right to give other people’s land to the Jews is another issue.)

With the offer of the Zionists Jews to bring America into the war in hand, Britain rejected Germany’s peace offer and decided to take the Zionists up on their proposition. The British promised the Jews that if they could, indeed, bring America into the war, that Palestine would be theirs. The Zionist Jews went to work immediately.

[Add. Image — Thomas Woodrow Wilson (1856 – 1924) served as the 28th President of the United States from 1913 to 1921.]

The tiny group of elites who ran the United States, including President Wilson and his administration, all resided on the East Coast, and all were enthusiastic Anglophiles and already predisposed to enter the war on the side of mother England. They only needed a push and a pretext, which could easily be manufactured. But the great heartland of America, which included millions of ethnic Germans, wanted nothing to do with the war. The job at hand, then, was to bring public opinion around from opposing entry into the war to supporting it. That would be achieved through propaganda. The British had already been waging a very sophisticated anti-German propaganda campaign of their own in America since the war first began, and had had considerable success in turning American public opinion against Germany, but they by no means yet had a majority.

The Jews were very powerful in America. In addition to owning most of the big banking firms, they also owned most of the newspapers, and they owned Hollywood. They controlled all the means of running an effective propaganda campaign. Because of their wealth and their willingness to support the campaigns of politicians, they also had enormous political influence and would have little trouble in persuading politicians to see things their way.

Jewish motivations in international affairs were complicated at the time, which requires a bit of explaining. Jews, then as now, lived as minorities in numerous other “host” countries, without a state of their own, but all considered themselves to be a part of the “International Nation of Israel,” a single nation, encompassing all Jews everywhere.

What happens to Jews in one corner of the world is a concern of Jews worldwide. As a nation of its own, International Jewry has “national interests,” and one of their national interests at that time was the eventual destruction of the Czarist regime in Russia. Jews in Russia had long been restricted and suppressed by one Czarist regime after another, to the extent that millions of Jews had left Russian controlled areas for other European countries, but mainly to America. Czarist Russia was the avowed enemy of the International Jewish nation, and since Germany was at war with Russia, International Jewry tended to support Germany in the war on the principle that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” At the same time, they restricted their support of all kinds to Britain and France because Britain and France were allied with Russia. Jacob Schiff, the German Born head of the Kuhn, Loeb bank in New York, and the most influential figure of his day in American Jewish life, wrote in “The Menorah Journal” of April, 1915:

“It is well known that I am a German sympathizer…England has been contaminated by her alliance with Russia…am quite convinced that in Germany anti-Semitism is a thing of the past.”

Schiff’s pro-Germany sympathies were shared by Jews everywhere, particularly by Zionist Jews.

Nevertheless, after the Zionists saw their chance of obtaining Palestine as a Jewish homeland by switching their support to Britain, International Jewry switched sides overnight, and Germany then became their avowed enemy. They not only withdrew their financial support, they also began a vicious propaganda attack against Germany. American and British Jews joined the British government’s already intense anti-German propaganda campaign. All the Jewish owned newspapers and other publications, as well as Jewish owned Hollywood, joined in the attack. The Germans who had so recently been the Jews favored nationality, suddenly became brutal, knuckle dragging, baby killing “Huns” in the International Jewish press. International Jewish bankers cut off financial support to Germany and began to pour their money into France and Britain instead. Even Jewish banks in Germany refused further financing of the German war effort.

Prior to the war, Germany had been a hospitable country for Jews. Due to the absence of any kind of restrictions on them, Jews became very powerful in Germany, and through their dominance of banking and finance, they were able to control much of Germany’s industrial power. Once Palestine had been promised to the Jews by Britain, even German Jews were no longer willing to support the German war effort. Instead, they became something of an Allied “fifth column” inside Germany, betraying the country they lived in. Jewish newspapers in Germany began to criticize and condemn the war. Jewish labor leaders in Germany began to agitate for strikes and work stoppages, and Jewish Communist leaders began to agitate for revolution. This combined effort of Jewish groups in undermining war production and in creating unrest among the German people proved very detrimental to Germany’s war effort. The Jews had taken the British bribe, and proved once again that their primary interest in all events is, “what is good for Jews,” and that their loyalty is first and foremost to the international Nation of Israel.

Immediately after the British promise of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, American Jews began pressuring the Wilson administration to enter the war against Germany. President Woodrow Wilson was highly malleable in the hands of the Jews, as his political career had been a product of Jewish financial and media support and he remained closely associated with Jews throughout his political career. Even his non-Jewish right hand man, “Colonel” Edward Mandell House, had been closely associated with Jews prior to his association with Wilson. House had been employed as an agent for the Jewish House of Rothschild, negotiating U.S. cotton purchases for them before he linked up with Wilson.

[Add. Image — Edward Mandell House (1858 – 1938) was a powerful American diplomat, politician, and presidential advisor, commonly known by the courtesy title Colonel House, although he had no military experience. He was a highly influential back-stage politician in Texas before becoming a key supporter of the presidential bid of Woodrow Wilson in 1912. He did not hold office but was Wilson’s chief advisor on European politics and diplomacy during World War I (1914–18) and at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919.]

Wilson’s campaign for governor of New Jersey was financed by a group of Jewish bankers and financiers, including Jacob Schiff, president of the Kuhn, Loeb Bank, Paul Warburg, brother-in-law to Schiff and Wilson appointee to the Federal Reserve Board; and by Henry Morgenthau, Sr., a financier and Wilson appointee as ambassador to the Ottoman Empire.

[Image — These powerful American Jews financed, and therefore controlled President Woodrow Wilson’s political career. They used that influence to pressure Wilson into entering the war against Germany.]

These same Jews, as well as others, financed his run for the presidency. Other Jews who influenced Wilson included the first Jewish Supreme Court Justice, Louis Brandies, whom Wilson had appointed; Barnard Baruch, the wealthy and powerful financier; Rabbi Stephen Wise, founder of the Federation of American Zionists in 1897, who later became Wilson’s most trusted advisor; and Felix Frankfurter, a crypto communist, who was later appointed to the Supreme Court by FDR. These Jews virtually controlled Wilson because they had been responsible for his career. All of them applied relentless pressure on Wilson to enter the war against Germany, which, as previously mentioned, he was already predisposed to do. Meanwhile, the Jewish information and entertainment media had completely converted American public opinion from opposition to the war to virtually demanding it. Wilson, himself, made the decision that America would enter the war and he then went before Congress and persuaded Congress to declare war on Germany.

On April 6, 1917, less than six months after the meeting between Weizmann and the British leaders during which these Zionist Jews promised to bring America into the war, the United States Congress declared war on Germany.

[Add. image (click to enlarge) — The Chicago Daily Tribune headline announces that the U.S. is at war with Germany.]

On November 2, 1917, as a quid pro quo, the British government issued the Balfour Declaration in the form of a letter from the British government to Zionist, Baron Walter Rothschild, promising Palestine to the Jews as a national homeland.

[Add. image (click to enlarge)— The “Balfour Declaration” written by Arthur Balfour to Lord Rothschild and dated, November 2nd, 1917.]

The war ended on November 11, 1918 after an armistice was signed, based on President Wilson’s “Fourteen Points.” If the Peace Conference which met in Paris to work out the peace treaty after the war had kept its word and used Wilson’s Fourteen Points as the basis for the treaty, all would have been different, but as outlined in the previous chapter, that is not what happened. The Peace Conference ignored Wilson’s Fourteen Points – which would have guaranteed a just peace for all sides. Germany was blamed for the war and a harsh, punitive treaty was drawn up which turned out to be anything but a just peace. It was destructive and demoralizing for the German people. The treaty was presented to Germany as a diktat which Germany was forced to sign under duress. The German people were astounded when they learned of the contents of the treaty. They were outraged and wanted someone to blame for it. Their wrath became focused on the Jews.

Thus, the “stab-in-the-back” theory was established blaming communists and Jews for the loss of the war, as well as for the harsh peace treaty. There was enough truth in these allegations for it to be widely believed. International Jewry did, in fact, take sides against Germany in exchange for the promise of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, which only the British were in position to grant. Jews also poured money into the British and French war effort and used their international banking influence to cut off financing to Germany. Moreover, many of these Jews were German Jews who wound up undermining their own country.

Jews at the Paris Peace Conference

top

The extent of Jewish influence at the Paris Peace Conference after the war is not very well known today, but, the fact is that Jews flocked there from all over the globe. They came from Russia, Eastern Europe, France, and particularly from the United States and Britain. From Britain came Lord Walter Rothschild, Lionel de Rothschilld, Chaim Weizmann, Lucien Wolfe, Moses Montefiore, Nachum Sokolove, Julius Kahn, Professor Sylvain Levi, and M. Bigar, among others.

From the United States came Rabbi Stephen Wise, Felix Frankfurter, Oscar Strauss, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, Walter Lippman, the historian Simon Dubnow, Harry Friedenwald, Jacob de Haas, Mary Fels, Louis Robison, Bernard Flexner, and Judge Julian Mack of Philadelphia, among others. Ten additional Jews came as members of the American Jewish Congress, formed in 1918 specifically for the Paris Peace Conference.

From France came a group of Jews representing the Alliance Israelite Universelle, a Paris based international Jewish organization founded in 1860 to safeguard the human rights of Jews around the world.

Representing the American banking interests was the Jewish banker Paul Warburg, Chairman of the Federal Reserve. His brother Max Warburg, head of the German banking firm of Warburg and Company, was there, along with other German Jews, as a representative of German banking interests (but not representing Germany, per se, only Germany’s Jewish banking interests). These groups were joined by large numbers of Jews from Bolshevik Russia, Poland and Ukraine. Though they ostensibly represented several different countries, all the Jewish delegates congregated together as one group, first and foremost to secure the interests of International Jewry. The interests of the various countries they represented were only secondary, and of a much lower priority, if considered at all.

Astonishingly, each of the Allied leaders at the peace talks had a Jew as his primary advisor. President Wilson had Bernard Baruch. France’s Clemenceau’ had Jeroboam Rothschild, aka Georges Mandel. Britain’s David Lloyd George had Sir Phillip Sassoon. Italy’s representative at the talks, Prime Minister Vittorio Emanuele Orlando, was himself half Jewish, and self identified as a Jew.

All of these Jews were comprehensively involved at every level in the numerous decisions which had to be made by the Conference, particularly those pertaining to their own interests. Jewish interests were given an inexplicably high priority in the final drafting of the peace settlement known as the Versailles Treaty. The Jews had a number of interests which they vigorously pursued, but they were especially determined to have the following three requirements included in the final treaty:

(1) A League of Nations as the first step toward world government;

(2) the recognition of Jewish “minority rights” in Eastern Europe and;

(3) the creation of a British Mandate in Arab Palestine as the necessary first step toward an eventual Jewish state there.

They accomplished all three.

It seems remarkable that Jewish interests could have so predominated at the conclusion of a war in which Jews had not participated as a separate corporate entity. And yet, there they were, at war’s end, having come from countries on both sides of the conflict, fully participating in the Peace Conference, and securing for themselves a major share of the spoils. Jewish power has never been more overtly demonstrated. They achieved everything they had set out to obtain.

Jews in Britain

top

The Jews have long been powerful in Britain. So powerful that the British social critic Hilaire Belloc, in his book, The Jews, 1922, described the British Empire as a partnership between Jewish finance and the British aristocracy. Britain was the financial capital of the world, and the Rothschilds dominated British finance. Belloc goes on to say that:

“… the Jews, in spite of their small numbers, color every English institution, especially the Universities and the House of Commons…through their control of the politicians by Jewish finance…” (The same can be said of the United States today.)

[Add. image — Hilaire Belloc and his book, “The Jews”, 1922.]

In his book, Tales of the British Aristocracy, 1956, L. G. Pine claims that the British Aristocracy is thoroughly mixed with Jewish blood. In fact, Pine says, the British aristocracy is about half Jewish. Ancient estates fell on hard times after the Industrial Revolution as the shift of financial power slipped away from agriculture and the great landed estates and went over to manufacturing.

[Add. image — L. G. Pine and his book, “Tales of the British Aristocracy”, 1956]

Jews controlled the money in Britain and even financed the British government through the Rothschild controlled Bank of England, and they financed British industry. Down-and-out gentry with ancient titles and large estates, but no money, began marrying the daughters of rich Jews, so the marriage of Jewish finance and British aristocracy took place literally. Pine gives as an example the marriage of the 5th Earl of Roseberry who married the only daughter and heiress of Baron Mayer de Rothschild, head of the Bank of England. Roseberry went on to become Prime Minister in 1894. Roseberry’s Rothschild wife:

“… stayed in the Jewish religion but her children were educated as Christians… The alliances between Jewish ladies and British lords are mostly of this type, the wife providing large sums…while the aristocrat has the title and ancient estate. The children are able to look back upon a varied bag of ancestors.”

Other wealthy and powerful Jewish families who penetrated into British aristocracy included the Sassoons, the Cassels, the Montefories, the Montagues, and the Goldsmids, among others. These Jews were the money men behind important politicians and political leaders on the make, especially so in the case of Winston Churchill. Churchill had no money, yet, he lived like an oriental pasha, thanks to a group of wealthy Jewish backers known among themselves as “The Focus.” This group backed Churchill throughout his entire career, and were particularly instrumental in making him Prime Minister. All of these wealthy Jews were socially intertwined with the most powerful men of Britain, including the King, himself. Cassel’s daughter married Lord Louis Mountbatten, a member of the Royal family. Cassel was related to the Rothschilds, the preeminent Jewish family in Europe. Thus, the marriage of a Cassel to a Mountbatten tied the Rothschilds to the Royal family by marriage.

Before the First World War, much of the British aristocracy was Jewish, and the rest was thoroughly mixed with Jewish blood. Britain even had a Jewish Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli; who wrote:

“The Jews have made themselves so closely connected with the British peerage that the two classes are unlikely to suffer loss which is not mutual.”

[Add. Image — Benjamin Disraeli (1804 – 1881) was a Jewish politician who became Prime Minister of the United Kingdom for the so-called Conservative Party; he was also a literary figure. Starting from comparatively humble origins, he served in government for three decades, twice as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.]

Thus, the Jews had a powerful influence upon every aspect of British policy, including entry into World War One against Germany.

_______________________

[END of Part 03]

PDF Notes

* Total words = 4,514

* Total pages = 27

*Total images = 11

*Note: Images not in original book are indicated as “Add. image” (Additional image).

*Text in [square brackets] is not part of the original book.

*Special thanks to reader “mblaine” for providing the text for this book.

======================================

Click to download a PDF of this post (2.3 MB).

The Myth of Germany Villainy – Part 03

Click on a link to go to another part:

[Click images to enlarge]

Part 01 — Cover text; About the Author; Preface; Chapter 1: The Myth of Germany as an Evil Nation

Part 02 — Chapter 2: Aftermath of the War in Germany

Part 03 — Chapter 3: The Jewish Factor in the War

Part 04 — Chapter 4: The Russian Revolution of 1917

Part 05 — Chapter 5: The Red Terror

Part 06 — Chapter 6: The Bolshevik Revolution Spreads Throughout Europe

Part 07 — Chapter 7: The Nation of Israel

Part 08 — Chapter 8: Jews in Weimar Germany

Part 09 — Chapter 9: Hitler and National Socialists Rise to Power

Part 10 — Chapter 10: National Socialism vs Communism

Part 11 — Chapter 11: Jews Declare War on Nazi Germany

Part 12 — Chapter 12: The Nazis and the Zionists Actually Work Together for Jewish Emigration out of Germany

Part 13 — Chapter 13: Life in Germany Under Hitler

Part 14 — Chapter 14 & 15: Hitler Begins Reclamation of German Territory; The 1936 Olympics

Part 15 — Chapter 16: “Anschluss” The Unification of Austria and Germany

Part 16 – Chapter 17: Germany Annexes the Sudetenland

Part 17 – Chapter 18: War with Poland

Part 18 – Chapter 19: The Phony War

Part 19 – Chapter 20: Germany invades France – The Phony War Ends

Part 20 – Chapter 21: The Allied Goal? Destruction of Germany!

Part 21 – Chapter 22: Germany as Victim

Part 22 (last) – Chapter 23: Winners and Losers

See also:

The Myth of German Villainy: Author Ben Bradberry Interview — TRANSCRIPT

_____________________

Version History

Version 5: Mar 13, 2021 – Added new Go2 Cover images (3).

Version 4: Jul 8, 2020 — Added new Contents with links.

Version 3: Jan 14, 2020 — Re-uploaded images and PDF for katana17.com/wp/ version.

Version 2: Oct 8, 2016 — Expanded Table of Contents

Version 1: Oct 5, 2016 — Created post.

[Very informative interview by Jim Rizoli with Benton Bradberry and the story behind his excellent book that exposes the lies behind our “official” understanding of the events of the 20th century whereby Germany is most wrongly portrayed as the “evil villain“. The truth is the very opposite — KATANA.]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc-l5AYu6fg

Click on the above link to watch the video.

NOTE: Commenter mblaineo (see comments section) submitted the full text of the transcript.

I applaud him for his efforts in doing his bit to help bring truth to the public about recent history that is suppressed by our enemies.

This is a German translation of The Blackguard — Winston Churchill. If readers spot any significant errors in the translation please let me know in the comment section.]

[Click to enlarge]

Das Blackguard

Winston Churchill

The Barnes Review — 2012 Januar – Februar

ILLUSTRATION: RICHARD COLE I DRAWN & QUARTERED/NEWSCOM

& KATANA

Der Artikel wird von BROSCHÜRE exzerpiert kühn berechtigt, That Bastard Churchill, von patriotischen Schriftsteller Maj. ME Thurgood. Es wird eine Blasenbildung ausgesetzt werden von Winston Churchill Mangel an Menschlichkeit und Ritterlichkeit im Krieg, seine schlechte Laune und bizarren Gewohnheiten und seine unersättliche Gier nach Alkohol – unten gewaschen mit einer guten Dosis von Christian Blut. Die jahrzehntelange Propaganda haben Millionen von Menschen glauben, Churchill war eine Art eines englischen Retter, wenn in der Tat, der Architekt der Zerstörung des britischen Empire war er.

Von Major MERVYN F. THURGOOD

[Bild] Eine junge Winston Churchill (1881).

Winston Spencer Churchill wurde 1874 als Sohn von Lord Randolph Churchill, dem dritten Sohn des Herzogs von Marlborough, geboren. Die erste Erziehungschule des Knaben war Harrow. Nach dreimaligem Versuch gelang ihm später die Aufnahme zum Sandhurst Military College. Seine Stärke war die englische Sprache. In der Mathematik war er ein Versager, und beim Schulabgang zählte er zu den Schlechtesten seiner Klasse.

[Bild] Winston Churchill trat Sandhurst 1893 als Kavalleriekadetten.

Während seiner Sandhurstzeit wurde er eines schwerwiegenden moralischen Vergehens im “Oscar Wilde Stil” (homosexuelle Betätigung, d. F.) angeklagt. Churchill strengte ein Verfahren gegen den Vater eines der ihn beschuldigenden Kadetten an. Die Klage wurde zurückgezogen, und Churchill erhielt eine Abfindung von 400 Pfund. Kaum war dieser Zwischenfall vergessen, war Churchill in einen Steeplechaseschwindel (steeplechase = Hindernisjagdrennen, d. V.) verwickelt. Als Folge davon wurden er und seine Kumpanen von der Zeitschrift TRUTH angegriffen.

[Bild] Dezember 1894 im Alter von 20, Winston links Sandhurst als Kavallerieoffizier in der 4. Husaren.

1895 verbrachte Churchill zusammen mit einem Freund, Reginald Barnes, sechs Wochen mit spanischem Militär auf Kuba, von wo er tägliche Berichte an den Daily Graphic verschickte.

[Bild] Daily Graphic war eine britische Wochen illustrierte Zeitung, zunächst am 4. Dezember 1869 von William Luson Thomas Firmen Illustrated Newspapers Limited veröffentlicht.

Im Jahr 1895, Churchill und Kameraden Reginald Barnes, nach Kuba zu beobachten, die im Kampf gegen die spanische kubanischen Guerilleros; er den Auftrag, über den Konflikt von der Daily Graphic Schreiben erhalten hatte.

Die Betätigung als Journalist schien ihm interessanter als das Soldatenleben. Er erkannte jedoch schnell, daß die Armee ein gutes Sprungbrett für eine politische Karriere war. So schloß er sich der Malakandtruppe an der Nordwestgrenze Indiens an und beteiligte sich an gelegentlichen Scharmützeln mit den Afridis, die jedoch entgegen Churchills Darstellungen von schweren Kämpfen nur mit Steinen geworfen hatten. Churchills nächstes militärisches Abenteuer führte ihn 1898 mit den 21. Lancers beim Vorstoß Kitcheners auf Chartum nach Omdurman. Auch hier überwog das Schreiben von Berichten für die Times und die Morning Post über seinen militärischen Ehrgeiz.

Lord Kitchener sagte von ihm, daß er zwar Mut habe, jedoch die Armee nur als Hilfsmittel nutzte, und daß er seine Kommandierungen, die für seine Zwecke nützlich schienen, sich über seine Beziehungen durch seine Mutter verschaffen konnte. Von 1899 bis 1900 diente er als Kriegsberichter in Südafrika, und er verstand es, den Ruhm für sich zu begründen, daß er in Gefangenschaft geraten und daraus geflohen war. [1]

[Bild] Winston Churchill (rechts mit den Händen hinter dem Rücken). Picture drei Tage nach seiner Gefangennahme durch die Buren gemacht.

[Bild] Als Churchill aus dem Kriegsgefangenenlager entkommen, ein Fahndungsplakat herausgegeben wurde, mit £ 25 (tot oder lebendig) für seine Rückeroberung.

Im Jahre 1900 wurde er mit 26 Jahren als Konservativer zum Parlamentsabgeordneten für Oldham gewählt. 1904 trat er zu den Liberalen über. 1908 wurde er als Präsident des Board of Trade ins Kabinett berufen. 1910 wird er Innenminister, und 1911 Erster Lord der Admiralität. Man wird an eine Zeile in Gilbert and Sullivans HMS Pinafore erinnert:

“Bleib dicht an deinem Pult, fahre nie zur See, und du kannst Lord über die Königliche Flotte werden.”

 

 

[Bild] Winston Churchill eher genossen Krieg. Im Juli 1914, als Großbritannien vorbereitet für den entgegenkommenden Katastrophe, Churchill, die zum Zeitpunkt der Erste Lord der Admiralität, schrieb seiner Frau;

“Ich bin interessiert, und glücklich ausgerichtet. Ist es nicht schrecklich, so zu bauen?”

Und im Jahr 1916, in einem Brief an David Lloyd George Tochter, gab Churchill:

“Ich denke, ein Fluch soll auf mir ruhen – denn ich liebe diesen Krieg. Ich weiß, es zerschlagen und zerschmetterte das Leben von Tausenden jeden Augenblick, und doch, ich kann mir nicht helfen, ich genieße jede Sekunde davon.”

Im 1. Weltkrieg entwarf Churchill in seiner Eigenschaft als Erster Seelord den Plan, durch Öffnung der Dardanellen den Russen Unterstützung zu bringen, wobei er vornehmlich seine “Kolonialen” (Australier, Neuseeländer usw.) ausnutzte. Der Angriff auf Gallipoli wurde ein Fiasko und brachte den Ersten Seelord zu Fall. Schwerwiegender und unheilvoller noch waren seine Intrigen bei der Versenkung der Lusitania am 8. Mai 1915.

Er war mit dem damaligen Untersekretär der amerikanischen Flotte, Franklin Roosevelt, in eine Verschwörung verwickelt, durch die Versenkung des Cunardriesen (Cunard = bedeutende englische Reederei, d. V.) Amerika in den Krieg zu zerren. Die Deutsche Botschaft in New York hatte der Presse zwei mal Warnungen vor dem Luxusdampfer ausgegeben, weil er Konterbande und Munition enthielt. Die Deutschen konnten zudem darauf hinweisen, daß die Lusitania in einen bewaffneten Handelsdampfer umgebaut war und daß sich eine Kompanie Soldaten nebst Artillerie und Munition an Bord befände.

[Bild] RMS Lusitania (nach dem alten römischen Reiches Name für die Provinz, die heute den Namen Portugal benannt). RMS Lusitania war ein britischer Ozeandampfer, Inhaber der Blaue Band und kurz größte Schiff der Welt. Sie wurde von der Cunard Line im Jahre 1907 ins Leben gerufen, in einer Zeit des harten Wettbewerbs für den Nordatlantik Handel. Im Jahr 1915 wurde sie von einem Torpedo von einem deutschen U-Boot zu schlagen. Anschließend werden die Munition wurde das Schiff heimlich trägt explodierte verursacht den Tod von 1.198 Passagieren und Besatzung.

[Bild] (links) Die offizielle Warnung von der kaiserlichen deutschen Botschaft über das Reisen auf Lusitania ausgestellt.

(Rechts) Ein Plakat Iren drängen, um den Untergang der Lusitania rächen.

Am 17. April 1915 verließ Liverpool Lusitania auf ihrer 201. Atlantiküberquerung, Ankunft in New York am 24. April. Eine Gruppe von Deutsch-Amerikaner, in der Hoffnung, um Kontroversen zu vermeiden, wenn Lusitania wurden von einem U-Boot angegriffen, diskutierten ihre Anliegen mit einem Vertreter der deutschen Botschaft. Die Botschaft beschlossen, die Passagiere vor ihrer nächsten Kreuzung nicht an Bord Lusitania segeln zu warnen. Die kaiserliche Botschaft platziert eine Warnung Anzeige in 50 amerikanischen Zeitungen, unter anderem in New York:

HINWEIS!

TRAVELLERS die beabsichtigen, an der Atlantikfahrt begeben werden daran erinnert, dass ein Kriegszustand zwischen Deutschland und seine Verbündeten und Großbritannien und seine Verbündeten besteht; dass die Zone des Krieges gehören die Gewässer um die britischen Inseln; dass im Einklang mit Mahnschreiben von der kaiserlichen deutschen Regierung gegeben, die die Flagge von Großbritannien, oder einen seiner Verbündeten, unterliegen Zerstörung in diesen Gewässern, und dass Reisende Segeln im Kriegsgebiet auf den Schiffen von Großbritannien oder ihre Verbündeten, tun dies auf eigene Gefahr.

IMPERIAL Deutsche Botschaft

Washington, D.C., 22. April 1915.

————————————————————-

Es war Routine, daß Linienschiffe von der Südküste Irlands ab von mindestens einem leichten Kreuzer und zwei Zerstörern begleitet wurden. Am 6. Mai erhielt Kapitän WT Turner die Warnung, daß deutsche U‑Boote an der Südküste Irlands gemeldet waren. Er erwartete demzufolge, daß er seinen Kurs um die Nordküste Irlands verlegen dürfe. Normalerweise kümmerte der Erste Lord sich nicht um solche Dinge. Doch Churchill erließ Befehl, die Lusitania ohne Geleitschutz nach Liverpool laufen zu lassen. Er reiste dann nach Paris, wo er sich als Mr. L. Spencer ins Gästebuch eines Hotels eintrug.

[Bild] Commander William Thomas Turner (1856 – 1933) war der Kapitän der Lusitania, als im Mai 1915. Abgebildet sank hier an Bord der Aquitania 1914.

Um 14.12 Uhr des 8. Mai feuerte Kapitänleutnant. Schwieger, Kommandant von U-­20, seinen letzten Torpedo in den Bug der Lusitania.

[Bild] Walther Schwieger (7. April 1885, Berlin – 5. September 1917, Nordsee) war ein Offizier der Kaiserlichen Marine (Kaiserliche Marine) und einem U-Boot-Kommandant im Ersten Weltkrieg, bekannt für seine Rolle in der Untergang die RMS Lusitania.

Die Deutschen konnten deutlich eine zweite Explosion beobachten. Die mit Doppelwänden ausgestattete Lusitania galt als unversenkbar, aber sie verschwand binnen 20 Minuten in den Fluten. In der gerichtlichen Untersuchung wollte man feststellen, daß die zweite Explosion von Kohlenstaub hergerührt habe. Aber spätere Untersuchungen ergaben, daß es kaum Kohlenstaub auf dem Schiff gab und zweifellos nicht vorne am Bug. Diese Explosion mußte also von der Explosion mehrerer Tonnen Explosivstoffe im Vorderrumpf herrühren.

Beim Untergang des Schiffes waren 1.198 Passagiere und Mannschaften ums Leben gekommen, einschließlich 171 einflußreicher Amerikaner. Der Dampfer war nur 10 Meilen von Kinsdale Head, in Sicht von Queenstown, gesunken. Patrouillenboote verblieben jedoch so lange im Hafen, bis jede Hilfe zu spät kam.

Die Untersuchung hatte schwerwiegende Fakten unterschlagen, besonders die Rolle Churchills und die vermutliche von Roosevelt. Churchill war übrigens stets der Meinung, in Roosevelt einen Freund zu besitzen. In Wirklichkeit verachtete Roosevelt ihn zusammen mit seinem zerfallenden Empire.

Genau wie Kitchener ihn beurteilt hatte, benutzte Churchill die Armee wiederum als Sprungbrett als er am 18. Nov. 1915 als Major in die Queen’s Own Oxfordshire Hussars eintrat. Nach seiner Ankunft in Frankreich wurde er Sir John French vorgestellt, der ihm die Führung einer Brigade anvertrauen wollte. Premier Asquith, dem dies zu Ohren kam, war nicht von dieser Idee begeistert. French entschloß sich daraufhin, Churchill zum 2. Bataillon der Grenadier Guards zu versetzen, um Erfahrung im Grabenkrieg zu sammeln. Churchill verbrachte nur fünf Tage bei den Guards. Bei seiner Abmeldung äußerte der Oberst:

“Wir wollen nicht unhöflich erscheinen, aber ich darf sagen, daß Ihr Auftreten bei uns eine Sache war, bei der wir nicht mitzureden hatten.”

[Bild] Churchill, Mitte, in Uniform mit Kollegen.

Churchill wanderte nun von Hauptquartier zu Hauptquartier, in der Hoffnung, doch noch das Kommando über eine Brigade zu erhalten. Diese Sucht zu kommandieren sollte im 2. Weltkrieg zu traurigen Ergebnissen führen. Am Neujahrstag 1916 übertrug man ihm das Kommando über das 21. Batl. der Royal Scots Füsiliere. Während der 3 1/2 Monate dieses Einsatzes lag seine Einheit abseits von gefährlichen Frontabschnitten. So konnte er die meiste Zeit auf seine “parlamentarischen Pflichten” verwenden. Nach dem 6. Mai 1916 sah er keinen Frontdienst mehr. Am 22. Juli 1917 wurde er Munitionsminister. Wieder einmal hatte ihm die Armee gute Dienste geleistet.

Churchill immer gedacht, dass er einen Freund in Roosevelt, der in der Tat verachtet den Mann und seine “dekadenten” Reich hatte.

Churchills politischer Stern stieg und sank über die Kriegsjahre. Seine Nachkriegsbemühungen, die Weißrussen zu unterstützen, fanden bei den kriegsmüden Soldaten wenig Verständnis, die inzwischen von der Aristokratie aller Länder genug hatten. Im Jahr 1922 wurde er zum Kolonialsekretär für den Nahen Osten ernannt. Beeinflußt von seiner aus jüdischen Kreisen stammenden Mutter, spielte er eine bedeutende Rolle bei der Unterstützung der Balfour Declaration, die die mit England verbündeten Araber verriet und eine großzügige Einwanderung von Juden nach Palästina gewährte. In Churchills Augen war der Zionismus eine “mitreißende Bewegung”, und er schrieb:

“Falls in unserer Generation, wie es wahrscheinlich ist, an den Ufern des Jordan ein jüdischer Staat, geschützt durch die englische Krone entstehen sollte, der zwischen drei und vier Millionen Juden umfaßt, so wird ein Ereignis in der Weltgeschichte eingetreten sein, das von jeder Seite betrachtet, gewinnbringend und besonders in Harmonie mit den Interessen des britischen Empire sein wird.”

Jawohl! Er lebte lange genug, um die jüdische Immigration nach Palästina verfolgen zu können, und wie am 22. Juli 1946 die Sternbande (jüdisch-zionistische Terrorgruppe, d. V.) das King David Hotel, Hauptquartier der 6. Luftlandedivision in die Luft jagte, wobei 91 Soldaten, die einst als Befreier in der Normandie abgesprungen waren, getötet wurden.

[Bild] 2. Juli 1946: Das King David Hotel in Jerusalem wurde von Juden bombardiert, tötete 91 Menschen. Menachem Begin geplant die Zerstörung des King David Hotel und das Massaker von Deir Yassin. Ex-Premier, Shamir, war ursprünglich ein Mitglied der jüdischen Terrorist Bande genannt Irgun, die von keinem anderen als Menachem Begin geleitet wurde. Shamir später ging zur noch radikaleren “Stern-Bande”, die viele bösartige Greueltaten begangen.

Am 27. März versuchte Churchill, den Emir Abdulla zu bestechen, den Juden den Zuzug nach Palästina zu gestatten. Aber Abdulla warnte ihn, daß es das Ziel der Zionisten sei, ein jüdisches Königreich in Palästina zu begründen, um von dort nach und nach die Welt zu beherrschen. Die Engländer könnten eines Tages in die Lage versetzt werden, Deutschland und Rußland um Hilfe anzugehen.

Als Kolonialminister empfing Churchill seine ersten Eindrücke, daß die Kolonien selbstbewußter geworden und nicht mehr willens waren, blindlings dem Rufe Englands zu folgen. Doch er zog es vor, diese Entwicklung zu übersehen. Zuerst fragten die Kanadier an, ob es Churchills Absicht sei, den Juden die Regierungskontrolle in Palästina zu überlassen. Churchill antwortete, daß, falls die Juden die Mehrheit gewinnen würden, wie er es wünschte, sie natürlich auch die Regierungsgewalt bekommen würden. Im Jahre 1922 wurde England wegen der Gallipoli‑Halbinsel und der Dardanellen in einen Konflikt mit der Türkei verwickelt.  Am 9. September, die Türken eingegeben Smyrna, und griechische Herrschaft in Kleinasien zu Ende ging. Die 1000 britischen Truppen auf der asiatischen Seite der Dardanellen waren, um zur Halbinsel Gallipoli von Canakkale zurückziehen, aber später durch Aufträge aus dem lokalen Kommandanten blieb.

Sowohl Lloyd George wie Churchill wollten die Türken aus Europa heraushalten. Churchill schickte ein Telegramm an alle Dominien mit der Forderung, militärische Verstärkungen zu entsenden.

[Bild]  Lloyd George und Churchill (1922)

Die Haltung der Dominien zu dieser Forderung Churchills war unterschiedlich. Neufundland und Neuseeland boten ihre Unterstützung an, aber sowohl die kanadische wie die australische Regierung waren ungehalten darüber, daß sie vor Veröffentlichung dieser Forderung nicht einmal konsultiert worden waren. Der australische Premierminister [Billy Hughes] telegrafierte nach London:

“Für eine gute Sache sind wir bereit, alles zu geben, für eine schlechte nicht einen Mann!”

Auch Kanada weigerte sich, Truppen zu entsenden. Churchill gingen nie die wahren Hintergründe dieser Weigerungen auf. Auch später als Premierminister bildete er sich ein, noch immer volle Verfügungsgewalt über seine “Kolonialen” zu haben.

[Bild] Generalstreik, Mai 1956 in Stratford Broadway, England.

Churchill war ein Mann, dem am Los des einfachen Engländers wenig gelegen war. Während des Generalstreiks im Mai 1926 war er Finanzminister und nebenbei noch Schriftleiter der British Gazette. Seine Zeitung war die einzige, die während des Streiks erscheinen konnte. Darin nannte er die Streikenden “den Feind” und verlangte dessen bedingungslose Kapitulation! Seine gewerkschafts‑ und arbeiterfeindliche Einstellung waren der Grund zu ausgedehnten Streiks und Sabotageakten auch in der Rüstungsindustrie. Sie führten schließlich zu seiner politischen Niederlage in den Wahlen von 1945. Als Finanzminister schlug er Vorschläge für die Verbesserung der englischen Schulen und Arbeiterwohnungen in den Wind. Er stellte auch weiterhin eine seiner schlechtesten Eigenschaften zur Schau. Wie in einem Brief von Lord Milner an Herbert Samuel beschrieben:

“Er war immer vorschnell in seinen Entschlüssen, ohne über die nötigen Kenntnisse zu verfügen.”

Als er nicht mehr im Amt war, stürzte Churchill sich in Schulden. Darüber hinaus wurde er noch in Verleumdungsklagen verwickelt. Seinem Privatsekretär, Martin Gilbert, gegenüber hatte er einmal geäußert:

“Gib mir die Tatsachen, und ich werde sie so verdrehen, daß sie zu meinen Argumenten passen.”

Sein Kommentar war Gegenstand von Antony Cave-Brown zwei Bänden, Bodyguard of Lies [Leibwächter, der niemals lebte].

Obwohl er Finanzminister gewesen war, war Churchill unfähig, seine eigenen Finanzen in Ordnung zu halten. Durch seine Trunksucht, seine Schulden und seine jüdische Mutter geriet er an eine Clique und wurde ihr hörig, die später unter dem Namen FOCUS bekannt wurde.

Der Präsident der Anglo‑Jüdischen Association, Leonard Montefiore, erkannte in Churchill das perfekte Sprachrohr für seine Gruppe: Ein Mann mit einem Namen, mit Beziehungen, ein Zionist und ‑ tietverschuldet. Montefiore wandte sich an Churchill wegen der Behandlung der Juden in Deutschland, obwohl die Juden in den meisten Ländern Europas von ähnlichen Mißständen betroffen waren. Churchill sagte der Guppe seine Unterstützung zu, trotz der Tatsache, daß er früher einmal eine anglo-deutsche Entente befürwortet hatte. Die anglo‑jüdische Gruppe nannte sich später Anti‑Nazi‑Council. Es war daher nicht verwunderlich, daß die Nazis und auch das deutsche Volk Anstoß an Fremden nahmen, die sich in innerdeutsche Angelegenheiten mischten.

[Bild] LEONARD G. MONTEFIORE, O .B .E .

Da der Name Anti‑Nazi vielen Engländern mißfiel, wurde er in FOCUS abgeändert. Unter Sir Henry Wickham Steed und dem neuen Namen fanden sich Menschen verschiedener politischer wie ethnischer Herkunft zusammen. Prominente neue Mitglieder waren Sir Walter Citrine vom Gewerkschaftskongreß bis zu Sir Robert Waley‑Cohen, dem Vorsitzer von Shell Oil. Im Verlauf seines Wachstums rekrutierte FOCUS Gewerkschaftsführer wie Manager, Juden und Nichtjuden, darunter Josiah Wedgewood, Sir Henry Strakosch, ein südafrikanischer Minenmillionär und Vorsitzer von Union Corporation Limited, ein in Mähren geborener Jude.

[Bild] Sir Robert Waley Cohen, KBE (8. September 1877 – 27. November 1952) war ein britischer Industrieller und prominenter Führer der Anglo-Judentums.

 Andere Mitglieder waren Dr. Chaim Weizmann, von dem wir noch weiter hören werden, David Ben Gurion, Simon Marks und Israel Moses Sief von Marks und Spencer, Lord Melchett und Nathan Laski, um nur einige zu nennen. Interessanterweise gehörte zeitweilig, obwohl kein Jude, auch Captain Basil Liddell‑Hart, der bekannte Militärschriftsteller, zu diesem Kreis.

Als Churchills Schulden weiter anwuchsen, schrieb er für viele von Juden beherrschte Zeitungen. Trotzdem konnte er seine laufenden Unkosten nicht begleichen. Seine Lage verschlimmerte sich noch weiter, als er für $ 200.000 von der amerikanischen Zeitschrift TABLOID [The Enquirer] wegen einer Diffamierung verklagt wurde. Er musste seine Familienbesitz, Chartwell anzubieten, zu verkaufen. Obige Summe und seine übrigen Schulden wurden von seinem jüdischen Freund Sir Henry Strakosch und anderen Mitgliedern von FOCUS übernommen. Er war jetzt nicht nur an diese Leute gebunden; er kam unter die Kontrolle des Anti‑Nazi-Council, und all seine Reden und Schriften waren nun folgerichtig gegen die Hitlerbedrohung und die schlechte Behandlung der Juden durch die Nazis gerichtet.

[Bild] Chartwell war der Haupt Erwachsenen Haus von Sir Winston Churchill. Churchill und seine Frau Clementine kaufte das Grundstück, befindet sich zwei Meilen südlich von Westerham, Kent, England, im Jahre 1922 (Hinweis: die Menora im Garten ist nicht wirklich da.)

Churchill bestätigte “Milner’s Beobachtung” auch während der Münchenkrise, als er eine Gelegenheit sah, den Krieg gegen Hitler zu starten. Der Ausbildungsgrad und die geographische Position der regulären englischen Armee störten ihn dabei wenig. Sein Plan war, Frankreich und die Dominien seine Schlachten schlagen zu lassen, um schließlich auch die USA in den Krieg gegen Deutschland zu hetzen. Sowohl Chamberlain wie Hore-Belisha kannten den Zustand von Englands Streitkräften, die zu einem solchen Kampf nicht in der Lage waren.

Wichtiger noch, Churchill ignorierte die Tatsache, daß Polen schon rund 10 Jahre mit der Tschechoslowakei in Streit lag. Er übersah, daß, falls Rußland der Tschechoslowakei zu Hilfe eilen möchte, es entweder in Polen oder Rumänien oder beide Staaten einfallen müsse und daß England mit beiden Ländern Verträge zu deren Unterstützung im Falle eines Angriffs hatte. Das Ergebnis wäre gewesen, daß England und Deutschland gegen Rußland stehen würden. Churchill zog ebenfalls die mögliche Handlungsweise des jüngsten Achsenpartners, Japan, nicht in Rechnung. Ferner erkannte er nicht, daß abgesehen vom allgemein starken Wunsch nach Frieden, die meisten Staaten in Stalins Kommunismus eine größere Bedrohung als die von Hitler , und die meisten Hitler als ein Bollwerk gegen Stalin sahen.

Deutschland am Ende war ich von einem Mob von Streitereien, instabile Staaten mit jeweils großen Massen von Deutschen umgeben.

Nichtsdestotrotz verurteilte Churchill Chamberlain, weil er bei der Sudetenkrise nicht zum Krieg aufrief. Aber irgendwie würde er seinen Krieg bekommen und seine Wohltäter zufriedenstellen.

Erst nach der Zerstörung von Deutschland hat er die reale Bedrohung erkennen, als er sagte, um Gen. Hastings Lionel “Pug” Ismay (erste Baron Ismay):

“Wir haben das falsche Schwein getötet!”

Sowohl die Medien und Churchill wählte Chamberlain Aktionen in München falsch darstellen.

Gegen Ende des Jahres 1938 fielen die Polen in die Provinz Teschen (Oktober 1938 Annexion des Olsagebiets, d. V.) ein, während die Deutschen ins Sudetenland einmarschierten, das zu 90% deutsch, aber durch Woodrow Wilson der Tschechoslowakei zugesprochen worden war. Der Rest der Tschechoslowakei wurde von deren Nachbarn, einschließlich Ungarn, aufgeteilt. Alfred Duff-Cooper, ein überzeugter Zionist und Mitglied im Fokus, trat als erster Lord der Admiralität aus Protest für Chamberlain nicht mit, um Krieg mit Deutschland (und möglicherweise Poland) gegangen, über Sudetenland.

[Bild] Churchill und Duff Cooper

Churchill sieht über die Schulter des Alfred Duff Cooper, der Informationsminister. Cooper, Churchills Freund und politischen Verbündeten, wurde wieder in das Kabinett nach seiner sehr öffentlichen Rücktritt als Erster Lord der Admiralität aus Protest gegen Chamberlains Politik auf die Tschechoslowakei gebracht. Später wurde er der Zusammenarbeit mit den Freien Französisch Kräfte und war Botschafter in Frankreich nach der Befreiung 1944.

Gegen Ende März [1939] fielen tschechische Truppen in Preßburg ein und setzten seinen Präsidenten, Pfarrer Tiso, ab. Die Slowakei und Ruthenien (Ruthenen = Ukrainer im Gebiet Ost-Galizien, Nordost-Ungarn und Teilen der Bukowina, d. V.) erklärten nun ihre Unabhängigkeit von dem vom Völkerbund geschaffenen Kunstgebilde, von dem David Lloyd George gesagt hatte:

“Ich kann mir keinen ärgeren künftigen Kriegsgrund vorstellen als daß das deutsche Volk von einem Mob von Kleinstaaten eingeschlossen sein soll, von denen viele aus Völkern bestehen, die in der Vergangenheit nie selbst in der Lage waren, stabile Regierungen zu stellen und die sämtlich große Minderheiten von Deutschen einschließen.”

Aus Furcht vor einem Bürgerkrieg unterzeichnete (15. März 1939), Präsident Hacha ein Abkommen, das Deutschland den Schutz von Böhmen und Mähren übertrug. Ungarische Truppen überschritten die Grenze zu Ruthenien und vertrieben die tschechischen Einheiten. Dieser Wirrwar wurde von der englischen Presse verfälscht oder unterschlagen. Was das englische Volk, die Dominien und die ganze Welt dagegen zu hören bekam, war, daß Hitler die gesamte Tschechoslowakei geschluckt hatte.

Obwohl sämtliche Mitglieder des Völkerbundes zugestanden, daß der polnische Korridor rechtmäßig zu Deutschland gehörte, verfocht Churchill hinter Chamberlains Rücken. die Forderung, daß England wegen Polen den Krieg eröffne, obwohl Austen Chamberlain, der englische Außenminister erklärt hatte, daß der polnische Korridor nicht einen englischen Unteroffizier wert sei! Doch Churchill und Focus erkannten ihre Chance, den Krieg gegen die Nazis zu starten, deren Aufwertung und Besserung des Loses deutscher Arbeiter ihnen und den meisten Westmächten ein Dorn im Auge war. Polens Souveränität war das letzte, was Churchill und FOCUS im Sinne hatten, besonders nachdem Polen sich am Einfall in die Tschechei beteiligt hatte.

Dem englischen und französischen Volk lag nichts ferner als ein neuer blutiger Krieg wegen eines abgelegenen und unbekannten Landes. Doch dank FOCUS und Churchill wurden England und Frankreich und letztlich die Welt in einen Krieg gedrängt, den niemand wollte und der nichts als Unheil bringen sollte!

[Bild] Schlagzeilen, als Großbritannien und in Kürze folgen, Frankreich, erklären Deutschland den Krieg.

Am 3. September 1939 erklärte England Deutschland den Krieg. Churchill wurde zum Ersten Lord der Admiralität ernannt. Er erließ einen Funkspruch an alle Einheiten der Royal Navy: “Winston is back”. Aber die Freude über Churchills Ernennung in der Flotte war nicht groß, zumal Churchill sich benahm, als wäre er auch zum Kriegsminister bestimmt worden. Er fing an, Befehle auch an andere Truppengattungen auszugeben. Sein erster Befehl als Erster Lord erging an die Royal Air Force, die deutschen Kriegshäfen in Wilhelmshaven und Brunsbüttel anzugreifen.

Von 29 Blenheim‑ und Wellingtonbombern verfehlten zehn das Ziel und kehrten um. Eine der Maschinen bombardierte Esbjerg, eine Stadt in Dänemark ca. 170 km vom Angriffsziel entfernt. Drei Maschinen griffen eigene Schiffe in der Nordsee an, sieben wurden von der Flak abgeschossen. Nur acht Bomber fanden das Ziel und griffen das Schlachtschiff Scheer mit drei nicht scharf gemachten Bomben an, ohne Schaden. für das Schiff. Der Kreuzer Emden erhielt einige Treffer. Der einzig wirkliche Schaden entstand durch den Absturz einer der Bomber auf den Kreuzer. Die Treffsicherheit der RAF verbesserte sich nur unerheblich während der nächsten zwei Jahre.

MAJOR MERVYN F. THURGOOD ist Autor Um die Feinde und die Herausgeber der ein Symposium zu dem Zweiten Weltkrieg zu bestrafen. Er ist auch Autor eines viel längere Version dieses Artikels, dass bastard Chill berechtigt, geboren 1923 in British Columbia, serviert Thurgood mit dem Seaforth Highlanders kanadische Infanterie-Regiment.

Winnie the Kriegsverbrecher:

Eine Übersicht über die Gräueltaten von Churchill Bestel

Winston Churchill geplant und Kriegsverbrechen begangen, Wegwerfen die Regeln der “zivilisierten” Kriegsführung, die im Laufe der Jahrhunderte in der westlichen Welt entwickelt worden war.

Auf der Zweiten Quebec-Konferenz (16. September 1944), Churchill und Kollegen Monster Franklin D. Roosevelt nahm die finsteren Morgenthau-Plan, der Dutzende von Millionen von Deutschen getötet worden wäre, was den Deutschen eine erschreckende Bild davon, was “bedingungslose Kapitulation” würde bedeuten, in der Praxis. Deutschen aus Ostpreußen, Oberschlesien und alle westlichen Deutschland beraubt werden, und der Rest würde in separate nördlichen und südlichen Staaten aufgeteilt werden.

Churchill war überzeugt, der Plan würde;

“Britain vor dem Bankrott zu retten, indem sie einen gefährlichen Konkurrenten.”

Die Schätzung, dass Millionen sofort beim Einatmen sterben, und weitere Millionen würden später zu erliegen, in Betracht gezogen Chill fallen Zehntausende von Anthrax-Bomben auf die Zivilbevölkerung und bestellte eine detaillierte Planung für einen chemischen Angriff auf sechs deutschen Großstädten.

Seine größte Kriegsverbrechen beteiligt den Teppich-Bombardierung deutscher Städte, die 600.000 Zivilisten getötet und rund 800.000 verletzt. [Hinweis: rund 40.000 Briten während der Blitz getötet] Churchill angelogen des House of Commons und der Öffentlichkeit und behauptete, nur militärische und Industrieanlagen wurden gezielt, während das eigentliche Ziel war es, so viele Zivilisten wie möglich zu töten.

Tausend Jahre alten Stadtkultur wurde vernichtet, als große Städte, in den Annalen der Wissenschaft und Kunst berühmt wurden, um schwelende Trümmer. Churchill und Roosevelt waren zerstört mehr als Attila.

Dresden wurde mit Flüchtlingen um ihr Leben rennen von der Roten Armee aufgefüllt. Der Krieg war praktisch über. Aber für drei Tage und Nächte, vom 13 bis 15 Februar 1945 regnete britischen Bomben auf den wehrlosen Stadt, tötete 135.000 Menschen oder mehr.

Die Bombardierung von Deutschland und Tötung von Zivilisten weiterhin erst Mitte April 1945 nur zu stoppen, weil es nicht mehr links, um Ziele bombardiert werden.

— JOHN TIFFANY

———————————-

Fußnoten

[1] Hier ist ein kleiner “heroischen” wegen Churchills “Flucht” aus der Buren aus den Seiten 44 genommen – 45 von  Hidden History — The Secret Origins of the First World War [Hidden History – Die geheimen Anfänge des Ersten Weltkrieges] von Gerry Docherty und Jim Macgregor:

Winston Churchill hatte in Südafrika als Kriegsberichterstatter für die konservative Morning Post im Jahr 1899 übergeben und landete in einem Boer Gefangenenkriegsgefangenenlager. Die Geschichte, und es wurde weitgehend seine, leitet sich von Churchills Autobiographie. [57] Nach eigenen Angaben eine Aufklärungsmission an Bord eines gepanzerten Zug wurde er am 15. November 1899 und wurde zusammen mit rund 60 britische Offiziere und Soldaten gefangen genommen, als die Buren angegriffen. Getroffen, um Pretoria, sie in einer alten Schule mit einem zehn Meter hohen Wellblechwand umgeben abgehalten wurden. Churchill gab einen Bericht über die Entgleisung und seine Folgemaßnahmen bei der Herstellung einer “waghalsige Flucht” zu anderen Journalisten. The Daily Telegraph gedruckt eine Depesche von Reuters titelte “Mr. Churchill Mut und Coolness als herrliche beschrieben”. Der Held selbst erstellt.

Was lief nicht gemeldet war, dass nach seiner Internierung Churchill selbst als Nicht-Kombattant der Begründung, dass er Journalist war Kleinanzeigen wollte. Er nutzte seine Verbindungen, um einen Bettelbrief an Alfred Milner am 24. November senden fordern, dass er in einer Liste von Gefangenen einbezogen werden, um freigegeben und sagte, dass er seine Mutter gebeten hatte, um ihn durch Milner zu schreiben. [58] Er legte auch Anfragen nach seiner Freilassung am 26. November und 8. Dezember, [59] und versprach, dass:

“wenn ich entlassen werde ich keine Bewährung, die ich nicht kann erforderlich, um gegen die republikanischen Kräfte dienen zu geben”. [60]

Am 12. Dezember einigten sich die Boer commander-in-chief, ihn freizulassen, und einige Zeit danach Chill wurde nie wieder im Lager gesehen.

Bei seiner Ankunft in der nachfolgenden portugiesischen Hafen von Lourenco Marques Chill weitergeleitet ein fantastisches Abenteuer. Er behauptete, durch die Umzäunung unter den Augen der Wachen Boer geschnitten haben und machte einen gewundenen Weg in die Freiheit. Seine “waghalsige Flucht” wurde legendär. Auf eigene Faust und nicht in der Lage, entweder Afrikaans oder Kaffir sprechen, aber durch die überraschend große Summe von £ 75 (im Wert von über £ 6.000 in der heutigen Währung) gestärkt, machte er die 250-Meile Reise in den sicheren Hafen von Lourenco Marques. Seine Odyssee war würdig jeder griechischen Helden des antiken Mythos. Crossing gefährliche Terrain und Ausweichen der schwer bewaffneten Boer Kommandos, die die Jagd auf ihn, schließlich kam er zu einer Eisenbahnstrecke und sprang auf einen Zug, wie es donnerte vorbei. Dies muss mit erheblichen Schwierigkeiten wurden “zum Teil wegen seiner Schulter ausgerenkt” erreicht haben,. [61]

In einer anderen kriecherisch Konto wird Churchill gesagt haben:

“stürzte sich auf einen Lastwagen, und nach einem qualvollen Kampf gelang hockend auf den Kupplungen zwischen zwei Wagen zu bleiben”. [62]

Innerhalb kürzester Zeit jedoch zwang ihn Durst auf der Suche nach Wasser Sprung aus. Kriecht auf dem Bauch, schleppte er sich durch Sümpfe, bevor er über den Boer Township von Witbank. Er war unglaublich glücklich, an der Tür des “die einzige Familie, für 20 Meilen, wo er nicht übergeben worden” klopfen. [63] Nach drei Tagen im Versteck, die angeblich in der Gesellschaft von Ratten ab einem Bergwerksschacht, bekam er an Bord einer anderen Eisenbahnwagen und selbst unter Wollballen versteckt. Es war der Zug nach Delagoabai, Freiheit und “einer Flamme der Triumph”. [64] Das ist, wie Churchill seine Geschichte erzählte.

Kontroverse hing um sein Konto wie die Ratten in seiner Bergwerksschacht. Es gab Vorwürfe, dass er egoistisch und schlecht, indem Sie auf eigene Faust und die Schaffung einer solchen selbstsüchtigen Werbung benommen hatte. Glück und entschlossen Gerichtsverfahren jedoch scheinen solche Vorbehalte entfernt haben. Britische Offiziere im Lager, Captain Haldane, Sergeant Brockie und Lieutenants le Mesurier und Frankland fühlte er ihre Chancen der Freiheit ruiniert. Haldanes Ansprüche wurden durch seine Weigerung, vor Gericht auf Churchills Namen in einer Verleumdungsklage gegen Blackwoods Magazine im Jahr 1912. Trotz dieser Gegenteil Stimmen erscheinen gestärkt, seine “waghalsige Flucht” gedreht Chill in eine öffentliche Held und begabt ihm einen konservativen Sitz für Oldham in der Parlamentswahlen nur ein paar Monate später.

___________________________

Versionsgeschichte & Hinweise

Version 1: Veröffentlicht 20. Juli 2015

__________________

Aufzeichnungen

* Google Translate hat für einige Teile des Dokumentes verwendet. Wenn Leser finden keine wesentlichen Fehler bitte lassen Sie mich in den Kommentaren meines Blogs wissen.

* Bilder nicht in das Originaldokument.

* Fußnoten sind nicht in dem Originaldokument.

* Titelbild ist nicht Teil des ursprünglichen Dokuments.

Notes

* Google Translate has been used for some parts of this document. If readers find any significant errors please let me know in the comments section of my blog.

* Images not in the original document.

* Footnotes are not in the original document.

* Cover image is not part of the original document.

__________________

Knowledge is Power in Our Struggle for Racial Survival

(Information that should be shared with as many of our people as possible — do your part to counter Jewish control of the mainstream media — pass it on and spread the word) … Val Koinen at KOINEN’S CORNER

======================================

Versionsgeschichte

Version 2: Jun 3, 2020 — Re-uploaded images and PDF for katana17.com/wp/ version.

Version 1: Veröffentlicht 20. Juli 2015

[Click to enlarge]

That Blackguard

Winston Churchill

The Barnes Review — 2012 January – February

ILLUSTRATION: RICHARD COLE I DRAWN & QUARTERED/NEWSCOM

& KATANA

THE ARTICLE IS EXCERPTED FROM A BOOKLET boldly entitled That Bastard Churchill, by patriotic writer Maj. M.E Thurgood. It is a blistering expose of Winston Churchill’s lack of humanity and chivalry in war, his bad temper and bizarre habits, and his insatiable lust for alcohol — washed down with a good dose of Christian blood. Decades of propaganda have millions of people believing Churchill was some kind of an English savior when, in fact, he was the architect of the destruction of the British empire.

By MAJOR MERVYN F. THURGOOD

[Image] A young Winston Churchill (1881).

Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill was born in 1874, son of Lord Randolph Churchill, the third son of the duke of Marlborough. Winston Churchill was educated at Harrow and after three attempts gained entrance to Sandhurst Military College. His forte was English, but he was innumerate and graduated near the foot of his class.

[Image] Winston Churchill entered Sandhurst in 1893 as a cavalry cadet.

While at Sandhurst, he was accused of committing an act of gross immorality of the “Oscar Wilde” type. Churchill brought suit against the father of one of the cadets who accused him, A. C. Bruce-Pryce. The charges were withdrawn, and Churchill received 400 pounds in damages. No sooner was that incident over than Churchill became involved in a steeplechase fraud, and he and his cohorts became the target of a tabloid called Truth.

[Image] December 1894 at the age of 20, Winston left Sandhurst as a cavalry officer in the 4th Hussars.

In 1895, Churchill and a friend, Reginald Barnes, went to Cuba and spent some six weeks with the Spanish forces, sending daily reports to the Daily Graphic. 

[Image] The Graphic was a British weekly illustrated newspaper, first published on 4 December 1869 by William Luson Thomas’s company Illustrated Newspapers Limited.

In 1895, Churchill, and fellow officer Reginald Barnes, travelled to Cuba to observe the Spanish fight the Cuban guerrillas; he had obtained a commission to write about the conflict from the Daily Graphic.

Churchill become more interested in being a writer than a soldier but realized that the army would be a good foundation for political life and joined the Malakand Field Force on the North West Frontier and on occasion enjoined in skirmishes with Afridis, who, despite Churchill’s reports of heavy fighting, only threw stones at the British. Churchill’s next military exploit was in 1898 at Omdurman with the 21st Lancers under Kitchener, advancing on Khartoum. Here again his military energies were directed to writing for the Times and the Morning Post.

Lord Kitchener was to say of him that he had grit enough but only used the army as a convenience and could secure postings that would suit his purpose through his mother. He served in South Africa for part of a year, from 1899 to 1900, as a war correspondent, and his claim to fame was that he had been taken prisoner and had escaped. [1]

[Image] Winston Churchill (right with hands behind his back). Picture taken three days after his capture by the Boers.

[Image] When Churchill escaped from the PoW camp, a wanted poster was issued, offering £25 (dead or alive) for his recapture.

He was elected MP for Oldham as a Conservative in 1900 at the age of 26, but joined the Liberals in 1904 and attained cabinet rank: as president of the Board of Trade in 1908. He became home secretary in 1910 and was made first lord of the Admiralty in 1911. Which of course, brings to mind Gilbert and Sullivan’s HMS Pinafore,:

“Stick close to your desk and never go to sea, and you may be the leader of the queen’s na-vee!”

 

[Image] Winston Churchill rather enjoyed war.

In July 1914, as Britain prepared for the oncoming catastrophe, Churchill, at the time the First Lord of the Admiralty, wrote to his wife;

‘I am interested, geared up and happy. Is it not horrible to be built like that?’

And in 1916, in a letter to David Lloyd George’s daughter, Churchill admitted:

“I think a curse should rest on me — because I love this war. I know it’s smashing and shattering the lives of thousands every moment, and yet, I can’t help it, I enjoy every second of it’.

In his capacity as first lord of the Admiralty, he devised a plan to bring support to the Russians by opening up the Dardanelles by the army, using mostly colonials, the ANZACs. The attack on Gallipoli was a disaster, and it was here that Churchill blotted his copybook. But far deeper and more sinister was his role in the sinking of the Lusitania on May 8, 1915.

Churchill was linked with the then-undersecretary of the U.S. Navy, Franklin D. Roosevelt, in a conspiracy to bring America into the war by sinking the Cunard liner out of New York. Twice the German Embassy in New York issued warnings in the U.S. press against sailing on the ill-fated liner, which, the Germans claimed was carrying contraband and munitions and was being converted to an armed merchant ship. It was also known that it would be carrying about one company of soldiers, field guns and ammunition.

[Image] RMS LUSITANIA, (named after the old Roman Empire’s name for the province which is now called Portugal). RMS Lusitania was a British ocean liner, holder of the Blue Riband and briefly the world’s biggest ship. She was launched by the Cunard Line in 1907, at a time of fierce competition for the North Atlantic trade. In 1915 she was hit by one torpedo by a German U-boat. Subsequently the munitions the ship was secretly carrying exploded causing the deaths of 1,198 passengers and crew.

[Image] (Left) The official warning issued by the Imperial German Embassy about travelling on Lusitania.

(Right) A poster urging Irishmen to avenge the sinking of the Lusitania.

On 17 April 1915, Lusitania left Liverpool on her 201st transatlantic voyage, arriving in New York on 24 April. A group of German–Americans, hoping to avoid controversy if Lusitania were attacked by a U-boat, discussed their concerns with a representative of the German Embassy. The embassy decided to warn passengers before her next crossing not to sail aboard Lusitania. The Imperial German Embassy placed a warning advertisement in 50 American newspapers, including those in New York:

NOTICE!

TRAVELLERS intending to embark on the Atlantic voyage are reminded that a state of war exists between Germany and her allies and Great Britain and her allies; that the zone of war includes the waters adjacent to the British Isles; that, in accordance with formal notice given by the Imperial German Government, vessels flying the flag of Great Britain, or any of her allies, are liable to destruction in those waters and that travellers sailing in the war zone on the ships of Great Britain or her allies do so at their own risk.

IMPERIAL GERMAN EMBASSY

Washington, D.C., April 22, 1915.

————————————————————-

It was normal procedure for all such liners to be escorted from the south coast of Ireland to Liverpool by at least one light cruiser and two destroyers. On the 6th of May, Capt. W.T. Turner received warning of submarines along the south coast of Ireland, and he expected to be diverted around the north coast of Ireland. The first lord of the Admiralty didn’t normally concern himself with such things, but Churchill issued orders that the Lusitania was not to be escorted to Liverpool. He then left for Paris and signed himself in at his hotel as Mr. L. Spencer.

[Image] Commander William Thomas Turner (1856 – 1933) was the captain of the Lusitania when it sunk in May 1915. Pictured here aboard the Aquitania, 1914.

At 2:12 pm on May 8 Capt. [Walther] Schwieger, commanding the submarine U-20, fired his last torpedo into the bow of the Lusitania. He witnessed two distinct explosions, as did others.

[Image] Walther Schwieger (7 April 1885, Berlin – 5 September 1917, North Sea) was an officer of the Imperial German Navy (Kaiserliche Marine) and a U-boat commander during World War I, noted for his role in the sinking of the RMS Lusitania.

The Lusitania was unsinkable and had double hulls, but it went down in 20 minutes. The inquiry stated that the second explosion came from coal dust, but recent investigations indicate that there would be little coal dust, and it was very unlikely it would be in the forward hold, and that the second explosion could only have come from several tons of explosive carried in the forward hold.

By 2:33 pm the Lusitania was gone, taking with her 1,198 of her passengers and crew including 171 influential Americans. The liner went down 10 miles off Kinsale Head within sight of Queenstown (Ireland). But patrol boats remained in the harbor until it was too late to help.

The official inquiry skirted many issues, including the role played by Churchill and possibly Roosevelt. Churchill always thought that he had a friend in Roosevelt, who in fact despised the man and his “decadent” empire.

True to Kitchener’s predictions, Churchill used the army as a convenience and enlisted as a major in the Queen’s Own Oxfordshire Hussars on the 18th of November, 1915. On his arrival in France he was taken to Sir John French, who offered him a promotion to brigadier general, to command a brigade. This did not delight the ears of Prime Minister Asquith, and French decided to send Churchill to the 2nd Battalion Grenadier Guards for experience in the trenches. Churchill only spent five days with the guards. On his leaving, the colonel would comment:

“We don’t want to be in any way inhospitable, but I think it only right to say that your coming was not a matter in which we were given any choice.”

 

[Image] Churchill, centre, in army uniform with colleagues.

Churchill meandered from headquarters to headquarters, looking for a command, hoping to eventually command a brigade. His desire to command would manifest itself with sad results in World War II. On New Year’s Day, 1916, he was given command of the 6th Bn. Royal Scots Fusiliers. During his three and one-half months in command, his unit was in no threat, and he spent most of his time working on his parliamentary duties. He saw no more of the trenches after the 6th of May 1916, and on the 22nd of July 1917, he became minister of munitions. Again the army had served him well.

Churchill always thought that he had a friend in Roosevelt, who in fact despised the man and his “decadent” empire.

Churchill’s political fortunes waxed and waned through the war, and his attempts to support the white Russians received no support from the trench weary soldiers who were now becoming disenchanted with the aristocracy of all countries. In 1922, he became colonial secretary in the Middle East and inspired by his American mother’s Jewish background, played a major role in supporting the Balfour Declaration that betrayed Britain’s Arab allies and allowed massive immigration of Jews into Palestine. He wrote Zionism is an “inspiring movement,” saying:

“If, as may well happen, there should be created, in our lifetime, by the banks of the Jordan, a Jewish state under protection of the British crown, which might comprise 3 to 4 million Jews, an event will have occurred in the history of the world which, from every point of view, would be beneficial and would be especially in harmony with the truest interests of the British empire.”

He would live to see Jewish immigration into Palestine, and on July 22, 1946, the Jewish Stern Gang blew up the King David Hotel, the headquarters of the 6th Airborne Division, killing 91 men who had jumped into Normandy to free the Jewish people.

[Image] July 2, 1946: The King David Hotel in Jerusalem was bombed by jews, killing 91 people.  Menachem Begin planned the destruction of the King David Hotel and the massacre of Deir Yassin. Ex-prime minister, Shamir, was originally a member of the Jewish terrorist gang called Irgun, which was headed by none other than Menachem Begin. Shamir later moved over to the even more radical “Stern Gang,” which committed many vicious atrocities.

On the March 27, Churchill tried to bribe the Emir Abdulla to allow the Jews to immigrate into Palestine but he was warned by Abdulla that the aim of the Zionists was to establish a Jewish state in Palestine and gradually control the entire world, and the British might have to call on Germany or Russia for some help.

As colonial secretary, Churchill got his first indication that the colonies were coming of age and would no longer be blindly subservient to Britain’s call. This he would ignore. First Canada asked Churchill if his aim was to give the Jews control of the government in Palestine. To this Churchill replied that if they become the majority, as he wished, naturally they would take it over. In 1922, Britain, primarily through Churchill, became involved with Turkey over the Gallipoli Peninsula and the Dardanelles. On Sept. 9, the Turks entered Smyrna, and Greek rule in Asia Minor came to an end. The 1,000 British troops on the Asiatic side of the Dardanelles were to withdraw to the Gallipoli Peninsula from Canakkale but later remained by orders from the local commander.

Both Lloyd George and Churchill supported the decision to keep the Turks out of Europe. Churchill sent a telegram to all the dominion governments to “dispatch military reinforcements.”

[Image]  Lloyd George and Churchill (1922)

The dominions varied in acceptance of Churchill’s demand. Newfoundland and New Zealand offered their support, but both the Canadian and Australian governments were furious at not even being consulted before the request was made public, and at the request itself. The Australian prime minister [Billy Hughes] telegraphed London, saying:

“In a good cause we are prepared to venture our all, in a bad one, not a single man!”

Canada would send no troops at all. Churchill never got the true implications of these refusals and later as prime minister, still felt that he had absolute command over his “colonial troops.”

[Image] General Strike, May 1956 at Stratford Broadway.

Churchill again surfaced as one who cared little for the common Englishman. It was during the general strike of May 1926, when he was chancellor of the Exchequer (minister of finance), and editor of the British Gazette. It was only his paper that appeared on the streets during the strike, in which he referred to the strikers as the enemy and demanded unconditional surrender. That same demand would prolong the war with Germany and his anti-union, anti-labor attitude would be the basis for escalating strikes and sabotage in war industries and turn him out of office in the 1945 elections. Again as chancellor of the Exchequer he turned down proposals for better schools and housing for the people Britain. He would continue to display one of his worst qualities: as described by Lord Milner in a letter to Herbert Samuel:

“He was too apt to make up his mind without sufficient knowledge.”

Out of office Churchill continued to run up debts, and, because of Milner’s observation, he became involved in libel suits. Churchill had commented to his personal secretary, Martin Gilbert [Jewish]:

“Give me the facts, and I will twist them the way I want, to suit my argument.”

His comment was the subject of Antony Cave-Brown’s two volumes, Bodyguard of Lies.

Though he had been minister of finance, Churchill could not control his own personal finances and was always in debt. It was through his drinking, debt and his Jewish mother that he became involved and beholden to a group that would eventually become known as Focus.

It first began with the president of the Anglo-Jewish Association, Leonard Montefiore, who found in Churchill a perfect spokesman for his association, a man well known, with connections, a Zionist and in debt. Montefiore approached Churchill with the plight of the Jews in Germany the Jews shared the same “plight” in nearly all countries in Europe. Churchill agreed to support the association despite the fact that Churchill had previously pushed for an Anglo German Entente. The Anglo-Jewish Association later became known as the Anti-Nazi Council. So it was not surprising that both the members of the National Socialist German Worker’s Party (the Nazis) and the German people, as a whole, took umbrage with foreigners of a certain ethnic background, interfering in strictly domestic German affairs.

[Image] LEONARD G. MONTEFIORE, O .B .E .

The name “Anti-Nazi Council” became offensive to many Britons, and the name was changed to “The Focus” under Sir Henry Wickham Steed. The change of name brought many people of different political as well as ethnic cultures together. Some of the new members were Sir Walter Citrine of the Trades Union Congress up to Sir Robert Waley-Cohen, the chairman of Shell Oil. As Focus grew it recruited both labor and management, Jew and non-Jew, including Josiah Wedgewood, Sir Henry Strakosch, a South African mining multimillionaire and chairman of Union Corp. Ltd. and a Jew, born in Moravia.

[Image] Sir Robert Waley Cohen, KBE (8 September 1877 – 27 November 1952) was a British industrialist and prominent leader of Anglo-Jewry.

Other members were Dr. Chaim Weizmann, of whom we will hear much more, David Ben Guirion, Simon Marks and Israel Moses Sief of Marks and Spencer, Lord Melchett and Nathan Laski — to mention a few. It is of interest to note that Capt. Basil Liddel-Hart, the noted strategist and military writer, was a member, though he was not a Jew.

As Churchill’s debts grew, he wrote for many Jewish-dominated newspapers but couldn’t cover his living expenses. To make matters worse, he was sued for libel by the American tabloid The Enquirer for $200,000. He now put up the family estate “Chartwell” for sale. His debts and libel problem were met by his Jewish friend Sir Henry Strakosch and other members of Focus. He was now not only beholden to, but also under the control of this Anti-Nazi Council and now all his speeches and writings were directed against the threat of Hitler and the ill treatment of the Jews by the Nazis.

[Image] Chartwell was the principal adult home of Sir Winston Churchill. Churchill and his wife Clementine bought the property, located two miles south of Westerham, Kent, England, in 1922. (Note: the menorah in the garden is not really there.)

Once again Churchill displayed “Milner’s observation” during the Munich Crisis, where he saw an opportunity to go to war with Adolf Hitler. He gave little thought to the state of training and the geographic location of the British Regular Army, and his only plan was to bring France and the dominions into the war to fight the land battles and eventually bring the United States into war with Germany. Both Chamberlain and Sir Leslie Hore-Belisha knew the true state of readiness of Britain’s armed forces, which were in no condition to fight.

But more important, Churchill gave little thought to the fact that Poland had been at war with Czechoslovakia for some 10 years over the Teschen province. He overlooked the fact that if Russia were to come to the aid of Czechoslovakia, it would have to invade either Poland or Romania, or both, and that Britain had treaties with both countries if they were attacked. The result of which would be that Britain and Germany would be fighting Russia, and Churchill did not consider the possible actions of the new Axis partner, Japan. Nor did he see that, apart from a strong desire for peace, most countries saw Hitler as a bulwark against Stalin.

Germany ended up being surrounded by a mob of squabbling, unstable states with each containing large masses of Germans.

But still Churchill condemned Chamberlain for not going to war with Hitler over the Sudetenland. Only after the destruction of Germany did he realize the real threat when he commented to Gen. Hastings Lionel “Pug” Ismay (first baron Ismay):

“We’ve killed the wrong pig!”

But somehow Winnie would get his war and satisfy his benefactors.

Both the media and Churchill chose to misrepresent Chamberlain’s actions at Munich. But by the end of September 1938, the Poles had invaded Teschen, as the Germans marched into Sudetenland, which was some 90% German ethnically and a product of Woodrow Wilson. The rest of Czechoslovakia was dissected by her neighbors, including Hungary. Alfred Duff-Cooper, a staunch Zionist and member of Focus, resigned as first lord of the Admiralty in protest for Chamberlain not having gone to war with Germany (and possibly Poland), over Sudetenland.

[Image] Churchill and Duff Cooper

Churchill looks over the shoulder of Alfred Duff Cooper, the Minister of Information. Cooper, Churchill’s friend and political ally, was brought back into the Cabinet after his very public resignation as First Lord of the Admiralty in protest at Chamberlain’s policy on Czechoslovakia. He later became the liaison with the Free French forces and was Ambassador to France following the liberation in 1944.

By the end of March 1939, Czech troops marched into Bratislava, Slovakia and deposed the president, Father Jozef Tiso, while Slovakia and Ruthenia declared their independence from the state created by the League of Nations and about which David Lloyd George was to say:

“I cannot conceive any greater cause of a future war than that the German people should be surrounded by a mob of small states, many of them consisting of peoples who have never previously set up stable governments by themselves, but each of them containing large masses of Germans.”

Through fear of civil war, President of the Second Czechoslovakian Republic Dr. Emil Hacha signed an agreement (March 15, 1939) making a German Protectorate of Moravia and Bohemia. Hungarian troops crossed the Ruthenian border, driving out the Czech units. This mess was played down by the British media as well as Germany’s offer of Slovakia to Poland, for the Port of Danzig.

The news that the people of Britain, the dominions and in fact all the world heard was that Hitler had occupied all of Czechoslovakia.

Though all members of the League of Nations agreed that the Polish Corridor rightly belonged to Germany, Churchill would organize a mutiny within Neville Chamberlain’s caucus to demand that Britain go to war over Poland, even though Austen Chamberlain, the British foreign secretary, had said that the Polish corridor was not worth one British corporal. But Churchill and Focus saw it as a chance to destroy Hitler. Polish independence was the last thing on their minds, especially after Poland had invaded Czechoslovakia, for which Churchill demanded war.

The last thing the people of Britain and France wanted was another bloodbath over some distant and unknown land. But through Focus and Churchill, both Britain and France and later the world, would be dragged into a war nobody wanted and that would solve nothing.

[Image] Newspaper headlines when Britain and soon to follow, France, declare war on Germany.

On Sept. 3, 1939, Britain declared war on Germany, and Churchill was made first lord of the Admiralty. He arranged to have a signal flashed to all ships in the Royal Navy, “Winston is Back.” But there was no joy throughout the fleet at Churchill’s appointment. Churchill behaved as though he had been made “secretary of state for war” and began issuing orders to the other armed services. His first act as first lord was to issue orders to the Royal Air Force to attack the German naval bases at Wilhemshaven and Brunsbuttel.

Here is the record; 29 Blenheims and Wellingtons attacked; 10 bombers failed to find their targets and returned to base; one plane bombed Esbjerg, a town in Denmark some 110 miles from their target, three planes attacked their own “men-of-war” in the North Sea; seven were shot down by German flak; eight bombers found their targets and attacked the battleship Von Scheer with three unprimed bombs, doing no damage. They scored several hits on the cruiser Emden, the only real damage being done when a plane crashed on the ship. The marksmanship of the RAF improved very little over the next two years.

———————————-

MAJ. MERVYN F. THURGOOD is the author of To Punish the Hostiles and the editor of A Symposium on World War II. He is also author of a much longer version of this article entitled That Bastard Churchill, Born in 1923 in British Columbia, Thurgood served with the Seaforth Highlanders Canadian infantry regiment.

Winnie the War Criminal:

A Synopsis of Atrocities Ordered by Mr. Churchill

Winston Churchill planned and committed war crimes, trashing the rules of “civilized” warfare that had been developed over the centuries in the Western world.

At the Second Quebec Conference (September 16, 1944), Churchill and fellow monster Franklin D. Roosevelt adopted the sinister Morgenthau Plan, which would have killed tens of millions of Germans, giving the Germans a terrifying picture of what “unconditional surrender” would mean in practice. Germans would be robbed of East Prussia, Upper Silesia and all of western Germany, and the remainder would be split into separate northern and southern nations.

Churchill was convinced the plan would;

“save Britain from bankruptcy by eliminating a dangerous competitor.”

Estimating that millions would die immediately by inhalation, and millions more would succumb later, Churchill contemplated dropping tens of thousands of anthrax bombs on the civilian population and ordered detailed planning for a chemical attack on six major German cities.

His greatest war crimes involved the carpet-bombing of German cities that killed 600,000 civilians and left some 800,000 injured. [Note: approximately 40,000 British were killed during The Blitz] Churchill lied to the House of Commons and the public, claiming only military and industrial installations were targeted, whereas the real aim was to kill as many civilians as possible.

A thousand-year-old urban culture was annihilated, as great cities, famed in the annals of science and art, were reduced to smoldering ruins. Churchill and Roosevelt were destroying more than Attila the Hun.

Dresden was filled with refugees running for their lives from the Red Army. The war was practically over. But for three days and nights, from February 13 to 15, 1945, British bombs rained down on the defenseless city, killing 135,000 people or more.

The bombing of Germany and killing of civilians continued as late as the middle of April 1945, only stopping because there were no more targets left to be bombed.

— JOHN TIFFANY

———————————-

Footnotes

[1] Here is a less “heroic” account of Churchill’s “escape” from the Boers  taken from pages 44 – 46 of Hidden History — The Secret Origins of the First World War by Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor:

Winston Churchill had been sent to South Africa as a war correspondent for the conservative Morning Post in 1899 and ended up in a Boer prisoner-of-war camp. The story, and it was largely his, derives from Churchill’s autobiography. [57] According to his own account, he joined a reconnaissance mission aboard an armoured train on 15 November 1899 and was captured along with around 60 British officers and men when the Boers attacked it. Taken to Pretoria, they were held in an old school surrounded by a ten-foot-high corrugated-iron wall. Churchill gave an account of the derailment and his subsequent action in making a ‘daring escape‘ to other journalists. The Daily Telegraph printed a dispatch from Reuters headlined ‘Mr Churchill’s bravery and coolness is described as magnificent‘. The hero created himself.

What went unreported was that following his internment Churchill wanted himself classified as a non-combatant on the grounds that he was a journalist. He used his connections to send a begging letter to Alfred Milner on 24 November asking that he be included in a list of prisoners to be released and said that he had asked his mother to write to him through Milner. [58] He also submitted requests for his release on 26 November and 8 December, [59] and promised that ‘if I am released I will give any parole that I may be required not to serve against the Republican forces‘. [60] On 12 December, the Boer commander-in-chief agreed to release him, and some time thereafter Churchill was never seen again in the camp.

On his subsequent arrival in the Portuguese port of Lourenco Marques Churchill relayed an amazing adventure. He claimed to have cut through the fencing under the noses of the Boer guards and made a tortuous journey to freedom. His ‘daring escape‘ became the stuff of legend. On his own and unable to speak either Afrikaans or Kaffir, but bolstered by the surprisingly large sum of £75 (worth over £6,000 in today’s currency), he made the 250-mile journey to the safe haven of Lourenco Marques. His odyssey was worthy of any Greek hero of ancient myth. Crossing dangerous terrain and dodging the heavily armed Boer commandos who were out hunting for him, he eventually came to a railway track and leapt onto a train as it thundered past. This must have been accomplished with considerable difficulty, ‘partly because of his dislocated shoulder‘. [61]

In another fawning account, Churchill is said to have ‘hurled himself upon a truck, and after an agonising struggle managed to remain crouching on the couplings between two wagons‘. [62] Within a very short time, however, thirst forced him to leap off in search of water. Crawling on his belly, he dragged himself through swamps before coming across the Boer township of Witbank. He was unbelievably fortunate to knock on the door of ‘the only family for twenty miles where he would not have been handed over‘. [63] After three days in hiding, allegedly in the company of rats down a mineshaft, he got aboard another railway truck and concealed himself under bales of wool. It was the train to Delagoa Bay, freedom and ‘a blaze of triumph‘. [64] That is how Churchill told his story.

Controversy hung around his account like the rats in his mineshaft. There were accusations that he had behaved selfishly and badly by leaving on his own and creating such self-seeking publicity. Fortune and determined legal proceedings, however, seem to have removed such reservations. British officers in the camp, Captain Haldane, Sergeant Brockie, and Lieutenants le Mesurier and Frankland felt he had ruined their chances of freedom. Haldane’s claims were strengthened by his refusal to appear in court on Churchill’s behalf in a libel case against Blackwood’s Magazine in 1912. Despite these contrary voices, his ‘daring escape‘ turned Churchill into a public hero and gifted him a Conservative seat for Oldham in the parliamentary elections just a few months later.

___________________________

PDF Version History & Notes

Version 4: Jul 19, 2015 — Added footnote on Churchill’s “escape” from the Boers.

Version 3: Jul 18, 2015 — cartoon image updated

Version 2: Jul 18, 2015 — 2 images updated

Version 1: Published Jul 18, 2015

__________________

Notes

* Images not in the original document.

* Footnotes are not in the original document.

* Cover image is not part of the original document.

__________________

Knowledge is Power in Our Struggle for Racial Survival

(Information that should be shared with as many of our people as possible — do your part to counter Jewish control of the mainstream media — pass it on and spread the word) … Val Koinen at 

KOINEN’S CORNER

======================================

of the

20th Century

by Douglas Reed

Published: 1977

[Image] Douglas Reed.

http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Reed

Douglas Launcelot Reed (11 March 1895 – 26 August 1976) was a British journalist, playwright, novelist and author of a number of books on politics. His book Insanity Fair (1938) was influential in analyzing the state of Europe and the rise of Adolf Hitler before the Second World War. By the time of his death, Reed had fallen victim to an organized campaign of character assassination reserved for those critical of Jewish supremacism; his best known work on the Jewish Question is The Controversy of Zion.

Biography

At the age of 13, Reed began working as an office boy, and at 19 a bank clerk. At the outbreak of the First World War he enlisted in the British Army. He transferred to the Royal Flying Corps, gaining a single kill in aerial combat and severely burning his face in a flying accident. (Insanity Fair, 1938) Around 1921 he began working as a telephonist and clerk for The Times. At the age of 30, he became a sub-editor. In 1927 he became assistant correspondent in Berlin, later transferring to Vienna as chief central European correspondent. He went on to report from a variety of major European cities including Warsaw, Moscow, Prague, Athens, Sofia, Bucharest and Budapest.

According to Reed, he resigned from his job by expostulant letter in protest at the appeasement of Hitler after the Munich Agreement of 1938 and the following outbreak of the Second World War, Reed retired to Durban, South Africa. In his Insanity Fair, Reed recounted that he was informed that he had to leave Germany quickly, and there was concern as to his whereabouts in diplomatic circles.

Richard Thurlow confirms that Reed was one of the first scholarly writers to state that Hitler did not persecute the Jews as per post-war propaganda.

In the 1960’s Reed was outspoken in his opposition to the decolonization of Africa, considering the Black Africans to be unable to govern themselves and needing prolonged colonial tutelage. In his “The Battle for Rhodesia” (1966) Reed explicitly compared decolonization to the above-mentioned appeasement of Hitler and outspokenly supported Ian Smith‘s unilateral declaration of independence, arguing that Smith’s Rhodesia had to be defended as “the last bulwark against the Third World War”, like Czechoslovakia had to be defended in 1938.

Works

• The Burning of the Reichstag (1934)
• Insanity Fair: A European Cavalcade (Jonathan Cape, 1938)
• Disgrace Abounding (do., 1939)
• Fire and Bomb: A comparison between the burning of the Reichstag and the bomb explosion at Munich (do., 1940)
• Nemesis? The Story of Otto Strasser (do,1940)
• A Prophet at Home (do., 1941)
• All Our Tomorrows (do., 1942)
• Lest We Regret (do., 1943)
• The Next Horizon;: Or, Yeomans’ Progress, novel (do., 1945)

• Downfall, play (do., 1945)

• From Smoke to Smother (1938-1948): A Sequel to Insanity Fair (do., 1948)
• Somewhere South of Suez (do., 1949)
• Far and Wide: A Further Survey of the Grand Design of the Twentieth Century (1951)
• The Battle for Rhodesia (HAUM, 1966)

• The Siege of Southern Africa (Macmillan, Johannesburg, 1974), ISBN 0-86954-014-9
• Behind the Scene (Part 2 of Far and Wide) (Dolphin Press, 1975; Noontide Press, 1976, ISBN 0-911038-41-8)

• The Grand Design of the 20th Century (Dolphin Press, 1977)
• Galanty Show, novel
• Reasons of Health, novel
• Rule of Three, novel
• Prisoner of Ottawa
• The Controversy of Zion (Veritas, 1985)

See also

• John Beaty
• Charles Lindbergh

Quotes

“The plan I think is the old one of world dominion in a new form. The money power and the revolutionary power have been set up and given sham but symbolic shapes, (Capitalism or Communism) and sharply defined citadels (America and Russia). Such is the spectacle publicly staged for the masses, but what if similar men with a common aim secretly rule in both camps and propose to achieve their ambition through the clash between those masses? I believe that any diligent student of our times will discover that this is the case.”

———————–

“The appalling thing … is not the tumult but the design”

Lord Acton (Essays on the French Revolution).

Contents

INTRODUCTION

Part One — The Century of the Grand Design

Dialogue in Hell

Conspiracy of Silence

Plenty of Money

The Presidential Adviser

The Roosevelt Era

The Presidential “Fixer”

The “No-Win” Wars

The World Government

Experiment Enlightened

Progressivism Convergence with Communism

The Watergate Affair

The Money Power

Part Two — The Anglo-Saxon Peoples

Churchill: Man of Paradoxes

This Worldwide Conspiracy

The New Imperialism

The Rhodes Scholarships

Institutes of International Affairs

From Far and Wide

America and Russia

The Plan for Africa

Back to Darkest Africa

The Conspiracy of Truth

INTRODUCTION

The ways in which people try to explain what is happening in the world around them, whether in politics or economics, can be divided roughly into two classes. Or, as some would put it, there are two theories of contemporary history.

The one held by the majority of people hardly deserves to be called a theory, but if that word must be used, then let us call it “The Idiot Theory”. Why “The Idiot Theory”? Because it insists that no one is to blame for the way history unfolds; things just happen. Likewise, the actions and policies of politicians, when they produce results we don’t like, are simply the product of mistaken ideas, misunderstandings, lack of sufficient information. Or, as some Americans would say: “History unfolds as the cookie crumbles” — the precise way in which the proverbial cookie crumbles being beyond all human control.

The late President Roosevelt, possibly in an unguarded moment, made a simple statement of the rival theory when he remarked:

“Whatever happens in politics, you may be sure there is someone who wanted it to happen and made it happen”.

He would have had much to answer for if that test had been applied to all that happened while he was President of the United States.

Douglas Reed was foremost among those who declared, with Roosevelt, that when things happen in the world of politics and economics, especially when they continue to happen with marvellous consistency, then they are being made to happen and are meant to happen.

His experience before World War II as the London Times’s Chief Foreign Correspondent in Europe, his familiarity with all the principal actors in the unfolding dramas and tragedies of those years, left him in no doubt that politicians, as a rule, are activated always by motives, and very often by motives which they take the greatest care to conceal.

The real task for the investigator, therefore, is to look for and find the motive.

Like so many before him and after him, Reed had merely rediscovered a piece of ancient wisdom which the Romans summarised in two words pregnant with meaning: Cui Bono? Or, as we would say when trying to unravel some political mystery: Who stands to benefit?

In this little book Douglas Reed presents in a highly compressed form the story which emerges when this simple test of cui bono? is applied to all that has happened in the world since before the beginning of the 20th Century, right up to the present day. It is a simple, well written story which helps us to understand that changes in the world which disturb most ordinary people, leaving them confused and worried about the future, have been deliberately brought about and are part of a conspiratorial jig-saw puzzle which he has described as “The Grand Design”.

Reed rendered a most valuable last service shortly before his death in August 1976 by reducing to some 13,000 words a history of our century which could be expanded into enough books to fill a large library.

Those wishing to emancipate themselves from that sickness of mind and heart engendered by what they are told by the mass media will be greatly helped by this brilliantly written summary which serves as an introduction to the masses of excellent literature available.

Indeed, there is not a page in Reed’s little book which could not be expanded into a large book. In many cases the necessary books are already available. The mention of the American traitor Alger Hiss, for example, reminds us that a long shelf would be needed to accommodate the books which have been written on this subject alone, the best of them being Witness, by Whittaker Chambers, the former Communist, whose evidence it was which sent Hiss to prison for three years.

Can the story of The Grand Design be still further compressed? We can but try! Conspiratorial activity has been going on from time immemorial, conducted by different groups with different ends in view.

Winston Churchill, writing with all the authority of a member of the British Cabinet, made it clear in 1922 that he regarded the Bolshevik Revolution, like the French Revolution over 100 years earlier, as part of what he called “a worldwide conspiracy”.

That, however, is only one half of the story of The Grand Design of which Douglas Reed writes.

The other half can be traced back to Cecil Rhodes, the South African multi-millionaire mining magnate, who had grandiose visions of a world government to be run mainly by people of his own Anglo-Saxon race, with some assistance from their cousins the Germans. This scheme he launched with his millions and it blossomed after his death into the Rhodes Scholarship Trust, the Royal Institute of International Affairs and similar organisations in America, the most important of these being the Council on Foreign Relations.

Cecil Rhodes, we may be sure, would turn in his grave if he could see what has happened to his own secret and semi-secret enterprise, with its huge funds and its highly intellectualised and inflated “idealism” supplied by John Ruskin, high priest of Britain’s so-called Pre-Raphaelite movement in art and literature. Rhodes would find that it has been taken over by that other lot of conspirators (mentioned by Churchill), whose “ideal” of world government is best exemplified by what has happened in the Soviet Union.

So today the conspiracy is like a highjacked airliner. Many of the passengers, still hypnotised by the Rhodes “vision” think they know where they are going, while the high-jackers, with 2,000 years of conspiratorial training and experience behind them, KNOW where they are going — and it is not the destination the passengers have in mind.

It needs only full exposure to thwart and destroy a criminal conspiracy which has many well- intentioned but misguided people in its thrall — and no one has contributed more to the process of exposure than Douglas Reed.

IVOR BENSON February, 1977.

Part One

THE CENTURY OF THE GRAND DESIGN

“… We are beginning an era that will make the achievements of the past look like two bits. No limit to our progress can be seen … by 1930 we shall be the richest and greatest Country in the world!”

(The Razor’s Edge by Somerset Maughan)

Thus spoke one of Mr. Somerset Maugham’s heroines in the 1920’s and all agreed that he accurately captured the sanguine American mind. Today, fifty years later, the words sound like a joke. The 200th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence has been celebrated and the state of America is woefully different from that prognosis: indeed, George Washington, were he to return, would shrink appalled from the shape he would behold.

Inextricably held in the coils of an international conspiracy of which the last eight Presidents were the prisoners, his republic is becoming, de facto if not de jure, a satellite of the Soviet Union and will not see the year 2000 in anything resembling the shape he bequeathed to it. By “covert and insidious methods” (his phrase) the principles and admonitions of his Farewell Speech have been abandoned, and America, like a pirated ship, has lost all control of course and destination.

The conspiracy against nations has succeeded in hijacking the American inheritance of wealth and energy and diverting it to the purpose of destroying nations and setting up the world dictatorship.

Now that the 20th Century is three parts done, the track of the conspiracy can be charted and its promoters identified. Only the lunatic fringe and the perjured public men still deny that it exists. The initiates have long since made public their plan for a world where nationhood would be a punishable offence, a plan, in fact, for a world concentration camp. The great Plan now overshadows our every day and is the reason why we live in a present without a future.

The conspiracy has gained so much ground in this century that the attempt to bring off the final coup by the time the Christian clock strikes two thousand seems certain to be made. The instrument is ready: the Mafia-like mob in New York called the United Nations: it was created to destroy nations.

The conspiracy is so old that efforts to trace its ultimate source flounder in the sands of time: the fanciful might picture it originating with the devil in council. It has reappeared periodically through the ages and between times seemed to become dormant or defunct: but it was always there.

DIALOGUE IN HELL

Five hundred years ago Machiavelli propounded the basic idea of world government: rule without any scruple of justice or humanity. Then the conspiracy hibernated for three centuries until the Bavarian Government in 1785 discovered the documents of Adam Weishaupt’s Illuminati, which showed that it was fully active and as evil as ever. Weishaupt’s disciples gave the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution its satanic character.

Then in the mid-nineteenth century Maurice Joly revived Machiavelli’s ideas in his Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu. In 1897 the most explicit exposition of the methods of the conspiracy appeared in Russia: The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

This title was probably chosen for purposes of obfuscation: too many non-Jewish names have appeared, down the centuries until today, in the story of this conspiracy for the Protocols to be considered the product of an exclusively Jewish cabal. The thing is evidently a compendium of earlier manuals of conspiratorial practice, but it is the clearest and most evil of them. To peruse the Protocols is to look into a dark pit filled with writhing, evil shapes: the work induces in most people feelings of nausea, of intimate communion with evil. All evil thought since time began is in these few pages.

By the methods there laid down America was infected when this century began: the disease spread there and then into the surrounding world, like a cancer. So effective are the age-old practices prescribed that the American Republic has been taken over, as it were, by sleight of hand or pickpocketry: the victim has remained unaware of his loss or of his own helot’s plight resulting from it.

The Protocols were translated into European languages in the 1920’s, and the effect was explosive. Their truth, attested by results already visible, was immediately seen.

The Times (then still a trustworthy newspaper) asked:

“Which malevolent society made these schemes and is now triumphing over their realisation? … From where does the weird gift of prophecy spring that partly has come true and is partly to be realised? Have we fought these years to destroy the nefarious organization of the German Empire, merely to discover behind it a much more dangerous conspiracy because of its secrecy?”

The Times was right: that was exactly the fact of the matter. But when, 25 years later, the outcome of yet another war even more clearly revealed the existence of “a much more dangerous conspiracy” The Times, with all the world’s newspapers, had nothing to say about it. By that time The Times, and all the others, themselves observed that “secrecy” which it thought so dangerous in the 1920’s.

CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE

When the Protocols were published “secrecy” (people might have thought) was finished. Far from it: the public debate about the Protocols was immediately quashed by a frantic clamour of “forgery” and “anti-semitism” from all parts of the world.

Following the precepts of the Weishaupt papers and the Protocols, the conspiracy proved that it was able to control the public debate, and from that day no public man has dared mention this, the most important document of our century and the recognisable blueprint of our universal catastrophe.

“Secrecy” is no longer necessary when open debate is forbidden, and that has become the case.

A notable authority, Lord Sydenham, took a lonely stand against this conspiracy of silence, to which by the 1940’s all the world submitted. The source of the Protocols, he said, was an irrelevant matter: the vital thing was the vast store of evil knowledge they contained and the results already achieved. As to that, 0. Henry or Damon Runyon might have said, in the American vernacular, “You ain’t seen nuthin’ yet”.

Lord Sydenham died before he could see the much greater spread of the conspiracy and the suppression of all public mention of its manual, (in some countries, by actual official ban: in others, by tacit agreement among politicians, newspaper owners and editors). The content of the Protocols, as Lord Sydenham perceived, was the paramount thing, not the origin. Here some mind or minds knew everything that was to happen in the new century, and how it was all to be brought about. The same mind or minds knew how the Bolshevist revolution was brought about.

Even before that revolution America (all unknown to its people) became the creature and financier of it. The first open sign of this came in 1917, when America entered the First War. President Wilson then welcomed “the wonderful and heartening things” that were happening in Russia (the revolution) and the next day authorized credits amounting to 325,000,000 dollars for the provisional government there.

PLENTY OF MONEY

This was the start of something that has continued ever since. Without American money there would never have been Communism, or the abandonment of hundreds of millions of people behind the Berlin line to a concentration camp lethally enclosed by electrified wire, mines, machine-guns mounted on sentry-towers and searchlights that play all night.

While he was still in Europe Lenin wrote to Angelica Balabanoff, then secretary in Stockholm of the International:

“Spend millions, tens of millions if necessary: there is plenty of money at our disposal”.

The flow of American wealth and treasure in every imaginable form went on through the fourteen Rooseveltian years, and those of Truman, Eisenhower, Johnson and Nixon and continues today. It began with a man who until his death remained unknown to the American masses and of whom few Americans since have heard. This man, behind the scene, enabled the conspiracy to reduce the Washingtonian Republic to the plight of hired man of the revolutionary conspiracy.

He is one of the great wreckers of the 20th Century, and in the destructive effect of his scheming the peer of Stalin. His name was Edward Mandell House, and he prefixed it with an unearned military title: “Colonel” House. The unusual middle name, “Mandell”, probably held some allusion recognisable to fellow-conspirators (who often identify themselves to each other by code-names, as the Freemason knows a brother by his handshake).

This obscure Mr. House, long before the conspiracy triumphed in Russia, was its creature in America. He shunned publicity, but engineered the choice of Woodrow Wilson for President in 1912. Mr. Wilson was the first of the marionette presidents who were required by their captors to do what they were told. President Wilson’s welcome to and financial support for the revolution in Russia were acts dictated to him, and so was his introduction of the graduated income tax according to Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto.

The historian owes gratitude to Mr. House (mankind owes him only tribulation) for the revealing picture he left of a conspiracy “managing” the frontal politicians from behind the scene. In 1912 a leftist American publisher issued a “novel” (Philip Dru, Administrator) authorship of which Mr. House disclaimed and then admitted. This described in fictional form a “conspiracy” (the author’s word) which succeeded in electing a puppet-president by means of “deception regarding his real opinions and intentions”.

THE PRESIDENTIAL ADVISER

A character in the book (evidently Mr. House himself) enlists the support of a group of wealthy men in choosing a candidate for the presidency, and invites a potential candidate to dine “in my rooms at the Mandell House”. The candidate (called “Rockland”) is instructed that he must never go against the advice of his sponsors. (Here is seen the start of the regime of “the advisers” who haunted the White House for the next sixty years and dictated the actions of successive presidents).

The best known of these “advisers” was Mr. Bernard Baruch, also recognisable in the tale as one of the stern “sponsors” of the new puppet-president. Mr. Baruch, who came to be popularly acclaimed as “the adviser to six Presidents”, was an obsessed advocate of despotic world government and to his “advice” may be traced the disastrous course of American foreign policy which to thoughtful Americans (as Mr. Gary Allen says):

“for the past three decades has been a compounding mystery and concern. Administrations have come and gone like the Ides of March but spring never arrives”

But Mr. Baruch went on forever, or nearly, and advised his six pupils to follow the path leading to despotic world government. The mob, led by the kept press, and ignorant of the kind of advice he was giving or of its effect on themselves, lustily applauded the veteran “adviser” through six presidencies.

Philip Dru is enthralling reading for the student of this century’s managed ordeal and of the conspiracy. “Rockland” (the president-select);

“once or twice asserted himself and acted upon important matters without having first conferred with the ‘advisers’. For this indiscipline he was bitterly assailed by his sponsors’ newspapers and made no further attempt at independence … He felt that he was utterly helpless in these strong men’s hands, and so, indeed, he was”.

President Wilson presumably read the book and if he was capable of feeling humiliation, must have suffered severely. He pined into senility and at last was pushed out of the White House (or locked away inside it by his second wife, a determined woman who was for some time the de facto President).

Another fascinating glimpse of life behind the conspiratorial scene is given in this “novel”: namely, that “bugging” was already known to the plotters of 1908! Another man in the plot, a Senator, visits one of the big-banker group and tells the whole story of “Rockland’s” nomination and rigged- election campaign. He also describes “Rockland’s” “effort for freedom” and his recall to duty, “squirming under his defeat”. The “exultant conspirators laugh joyously” at this.

Their mirth is short-lived because they find that the conversation has been recorded by an eavesdropping machine concealed in the next room and given to a newspaper, which publishes it.

The attentive reader will note that, sixty years later, President Nixon was brought down by “tapes” recording his conversations, to which his enemies’ ears listened.

I append a footnote of my own to this strange story. Mr. Baruch went on his advisory way from president to president, but no doubt retained a healthy respect for “bugging” devices. This, I fancy, is the reason why he came to be known as “the park-bench statesman”. He could do no wrong and the suggestion of “folksiness” implicit in this description made him even more popular with the idiot mob.

The first puppet-president, Wilson, died, the stomach of America having revolted against his “League to Enforce Peace” (obviously, by war!) and its amended version, the League of Nations, the first trial world-government. The world owed a debt to the America of that period, still with its healthy love of country. Wilson was followed by three Presidents, Harding, Coolidge and Hoover, who were non-Illuminist, as far as one now can tell, and then the Gadarean slide was resumed with the choice and election of Mr. Roosevelt, who hastened from the nomination convention to Mr. House in Massachusetts, from whom, evidently, he received the same instructions about his duty to his “sponsors” as “Rockland” (Wilson) received in Philip Dru.

Mr. House told his biographer in the 1950’s that he “was still very close to the centre of things, although few people suspect it.” He was (for the second time) “close to the movement that nominated a president” (Roosevelt), and this new president gave him a “free hand in advising the then Secretary of State”.

Such was the ominous sponsorship of a most ill-omened presidency.

THE ROOSEVELT ERA

Now followed the disastrous fourteen Roosevelt years. Briefed (as were “Rockland” and Wilson) by Mr. House, what Mr. Roosevelt was told to do became clear as soon as he entered the White House. He recognised the Soviet Union forthwith and resumed the financing of the Soviet which Wilson began. This continued throughout his fourteen years and parallel with it went infiltration of Soviet agents into the American Administration, at all levels.

Roosevelt, a crippled man, was evidently as putty in the hands of his “sponsors”: when a repentant Communist informed him that a Soviet agent held a high post in the government, he told his informant to “go jump in the lake — but only in much cruder language”. The man he protected was the traitor Hiss, who “managed” the Yalta Conference to abandon half of Europe to the Soviet plague and was a founding father of the United Nations, the second trial world government.

Under Mr. Roosevelt the conspiracy spread its cancerous capillaments ever deeper into the American body politic. Its mastery of the press and all means of public misinformation produced in the American masses that condition of bewildered inertia which the Protocols foresaw as ideal for the consummation of the great Plan. Two decades of this treatment anaesthetized the healthy instinct which led “the rubes on Main Street” to reject the Wilsonian League. Now the men behind the scene worked feverishly to have the world slave state come out of the approaching war against slavery.

“Colonel” House died on the eve of the Second War. Mr. Baruch, his collaborator in the selection and disciplining of President Wilson, now became the chief manager of the Washingtonian Republic’s decline. Unlike the secretly scheming House, Mr. Baruch was publicly known and adulated by the lapdog Press as the permanent adviser of presidents and “park-bench statesman”. This name particularly endeared him to the mob, which thought to see in him “the man in the street” who from simple fellow-feeling sat among the common “folks” in Central Park. (I think I might be the only spectator who related his park-benchmanship to the “bugging” episode in Philip Dru, and understood why he took an obvious precaution against being taped).

Mr. Roosevelt, responding mindlessly to the articulated mechanism of the marionette, may yet have realised that he was being used for the aggrandisement of the Communist Empire and the ruination of his own country. This is implicit in “a strange statement” (Mr. Robert Sherwood, a Roosevelt biographer and White House intimate) which Roosevelt made when urged to quote in a wartime speech Mr. Churchill’s encomium:

“The United States is now at the highest pinnacle of her power and fame”.

Roosevelt objected, saying:

“We may be heading before very long for the pinnacle of our weakness”.

This looks like the open confession of purpose by a man of long servitude to the conspiracy who had come to make its destructive ambition his own. This revelation of truth, as always, went unheard by the public masses, but probably was bruited around with glee by the Communist conspirators who were rife in the Roosevelt Administration.

When Hitler’s attack in 1941 on Russia brought the Soviet Union into the Allied side, Mr. Baruch’s influence became even more powerful, and also his ability to direct the course of the war towards the consummation devoutly desired by him. He was ever insistent, in both wars, that the times demanded “one man” as an administrator, not a board. In the First War he was the “one man”, becoming head of an “Advisory Commission” to the Defence Council, of which an investigating committee of Congress said after that war (in 1919):

It served as the secret government of the United States … it devised the entire system of purchasing war supplies, planned a press censorship, designed a system of press control … and in a word designed practically every war measure which the Congress subsequently enacted, and all this behind closed doors, weeks and even months before the U.S. Congress declared war against Germany … There was not an act of the so-called war legislation afterwards enacted that had not before the actual declaration of war been discussed and settled upon by this Advisory Commission …

The 1914-1918 war ended before Mr. Baruch could show all that he had in store for the American people. In 1935 he stated “had the 1914-1918 war gone on another year our whole population could have emerged in cheap but serviceable uniforms”, shoe-sizes being the only permissible variation.

Mr. Baruch in these words revealed his vision of a future America: a faceless mindless mob allowed only to do allotted labour, provided with identity numbers and bread cards.

Mr. Baruch was not appointed to be the “one man” when the Roosevelt War Production Board was set up, but the man who was appointed was a creature of his, one Harry Hopkins, and even Mr. Baruch could not have disposed of America’s wealth more autocratically than he or more perfectly in accordance with the Plan.

THE PRESIDENTIAL “FIXER”

I am not aware that this Mr. Hopkins ever received any particular appointment enabling him to act as an imperial despot. Presumably Mr. Roosevelt, who loved to picture himself as the common man, just said, “Go right ahead, Harry”.

Anyway, this Hopkins was the product of the conspiracy and could only by this qualification have become permanently resident in the White House. Even Mr. Churchill was taken in by this almost illiterate “fixer” who could have boasted (like Mr. House);

“No important foreigner has come to America without talking to me … All the Ambassadors have reported to me frequently …”

In past times, when the West was toiling upward to some state of civilization, men who came to high places in their countries brought with them some token of experience and qualification. Mr. Hopkins had no such background. Like Dr. Kissinger thirty years later, he was publicly unknown when he began to bestride the narrow world like a Colossus. He had hopped around in the East Side from the claque for Caruso and Geraldine Farrar to a stint with the Red Cross in 1917, returning then to charity appeal work in the slums. Acquaintances depict him:

“an ulcerous type, intense, jittering with nerves, a chain-smoker and black coffee drinker”.

This man, says Mr. Sherwood, was “in all respects the inevitable Roosevelt favourite”, (a more damning disparagement of Mr. Roosevelt could hardly be imagined). He was a dying man from 1937 and under Roosevelt in the next eight years became the global replanner and dispenser of billions. The American Congress and people alike were by that time bamboozled by their president and the corrupted press into thinking that all was well, but an occasional voice was heard in Congress asking to know more about the uncontrolled, and unrecorded, transfer of treasure to Moscow. This annoyed the bountiful donor, who dealt with Congress as the conspirators dealt with “Rockland” in Mr. House’s novel.

“The United States” (he said, in answer to a proposal that before further aid was given to Soviet Russia full information should be required about their military situation);

“the United States is doing things which it would not do for other nations without full information from them. This decision to act without full information was made with some misgiving … but there is no reservation about the policy … it is constantly being brought up by various groups for rediscussion. I propose that no further consideration be given to these requests for rediscussion”.

Thus spoke Mr. Hopkins from East Side, and lo! it was so! (Whereat the conspirators no doubt “laughed joyously”).

The conspiracy had taken firm grip on the American Republic. When the Second War ended with the “peace” conference at Yalta, Stalin saw his own henchmen (including Hiss) on the other side of the table so that the parley ended with the abandonment by the Western allies of half Europe to the Communist conspiracy.

The Yalta Conference, historically considered, marked the end of the Washingtonian Republic and of the British Empire. The process of dissolution began there. Mr. Roosevelt and his “inevitable favourite”, Hopkins, both returned to America to die. These two men did more to destroy the West than any invader could have achieved.

THE “NO-WIN” WARS

Roosevelt was succeeded by the Vice-President, a Mr. Harry Truman from Missouri, who soon gave proof of following dutifully the Wilson-Roosevelt (and House-Baruch) course. Re-elected in 1948, he declared war on “the Communist aggressor” in Korea in 1950. For a moment the American people thought the debacle of the Second War was to be amended and the Communist invader trounced. Few, if any of them had read Philip Dru, or they would have known that their rulers always practised “deception regarding their real opinions and intentions”.

The American people responded loyally to the call to rescue at least one small country from the Communist plague, and their wartime allies, Britain, Australia, Canada, South Africa and the rest sent troops to join in the crusade.

It was all “deception”. When the successful American commander, MacArthur, wished hotly to pursue a beaten enemy across the Yalu, Mr. Truman sacked the general. Then Korea was partitioned, like Germany and Europe, and the Communists were left in possession of the northern half. This was the first of the “no-win” wars in which American troops were sent to fight against aircraft, artillery and armour supplied during the war by Mr. Hopkins to the Communists.

At this time Hiss had been exposed, the Canadian Government had published the full story of Communist agents and spies infiltrating into its administrative machine, and the story of British traitors was also beginning to become known. “Communism in government”, therefore, was a matter which even the American masses could understand and the cry for a cleaning of the stables was growing to a clamour. At this very juncture Mr. Truman (no doubt recalling Mr. Roosevelt’s “Go jump in the lake”) dismissed the public demand to “clear out the Communists”, as merely “drawing a red herring” across the debate, and the American tragedy (unless it is a comedy) continued.

Mr. Truman was succeeded in 1952 by General Eisenhower, the formerly unknown American army officer who was catapulted over numerous seniors into the supreme command of the Allied invasion of 1944. This general used his command power to reject the British General Montgomery’s plan to shorten the war by striking hard for Berlin after the successful invasion of Normandy. The effect of this obviously politically motivated action was to reserve Berlin, and therewith half Europe, to Communist annexation.

THE WORLD GOVERNMENT EXPERIMENT

Historically, General Eisenhower must be seen as a conscious agent of the Communist conspiracy. He cannot have ignored the obvious effect of his action. He was indeed one of a growing number of men in high places who supported the aims of the conspiracy through their membership of an invisible-government-type body called the Council on Foreign Relations, which effectively operated as a secret world government organisation inside the American machinery of government (it was formed in 1921 after the failure of the first experiment in world-government, the League of Nations, and with growing strength pursued the ambition all through the inter-war years).

General Eisenhower began his presidency with the now common, almost obligatory obeisance to Mr. Baruch, whose biographer, evidently after consultation with the great Adviser, summarised the recommendations which Mr. Baruch would probably make to the new Administration.

General Eisenhower quickly and dutifully confirmed this prognosis, telling Los Angeles electors, as if to demonstrate his servitude, “I believe if Bernie Baruch were here tonight he would subscribe to every one of them” (he was referring to recommendations which, according to the biographer, “related entirely to preparatory mobilisation for war, controls, global strategy” and the rest of Mr. Baruch’s oft-repeated recipes for a “one man” controller, or dictator).

When the Second War ended Mr. Baruch was 75. His vigour was unabated and his imperial vision boundless. The two atom bombs, exploded in August 1945, prompted him to still greater ambitions. Like some ancient Hebrew prophet, he cried, “I offer you living or dying”. “Hasten”, he cried. “Hasten” (or, as the Broadway barker might have put it, “Hurry, hurry, hurry”). “Hasten, the bomb will not wait while we deliberate.” What was needed, obviously, was “one man”.

Mr. Baruch availed himself of the seeds of human panic sown by the two bombs to proffer himself;

“for the most vital undertaking of his life, the devising of a workable plan for the international control of atomic energy, and for achieving its adoption by the Atomic Energy Commission of the United Nations” (his biographer).

President Truman duly appointed Mr. Baruch U.S. representative to the United Nations in March 1946. The “Baruch Plan” was then worked out “on a park bench” (where else?) together with a crony from 1919 Peace Conference days, one Mr. Ferdinand Eberstadt. In those days Messrs. House and Baruch had worked hard to push through a “League to Enforce Peace”, but a few responsible statesmen were still extant then and they talked it out.

Nevertheless, all through the between-war years of 1918-1939 the conspirators worked away at their pet proposal to set up a supernational high command with “teeth” to enforce its dictates, and now Mr. Baruch’s Plan of 1946 went as far as even the most zealous of them could wish.

He presented his Central Park Plan to the U.N. Atomic Energy Commission in June 1946. He began, in Hebrew-prophet vein, by saying: “We (sic) must elect world peace or world destruction.” Atomic energy must be used for peaceful purposes and its warlike use be precluded. To that end, “we” would have to provide for “immediate, swift and sure punishment of those who violate the agreements that are reached by nations”.

So the “League to Enforce Peace” idea was dished up again: merely, the word “penalisation” was substituted for “enforce”, but the same thing was meant: a supernational dictatorship with “teeth”.

Mr. Baruch’s crowning proposal was for a Nuremberg-type court, apparently of permanent nature, to be set up to inflict this “penalisation”. He explained that “individual responsibility and punishment” could be prescribed “on the principles applied at Nuremberg by the Soviets, the United Kingdom, France and the United States”.

Finally, Mr. Baruch proposed the creation of “an Authority” (one man?) to supervise all atomic energy activities potentially dangerous to world security. “Immediate and certain penalties”, continued Mr. Baruch, were to be fixed for illegal possession of an atom bomb or for “wilful interference with the activities of The Authority”.

Even the embattled conspirators in the Western governments and in the United Nations choked slightly on this heady stuff, and despite the compliant Mr. Truman’s announcement that the White House and State Department endorsed The Plan, it was talked out and shelved — to be brought out again after any third war.

Mr. Baruch then resigned and resumed his permanent Advisorship. He died in 1965 having greatly harmed his fellow men and his country. A numerous phalanx of powerful men, ensconced in the Council on Foreign Relations, carried on the House-Baruch world-government conspiracy. No escape from these toils offered the American Republic in the last quarter of this century.

ENLIGHTENED PROGRESSIVISM

From the start of his presidency, General Eisenhower revealed his continuance of the House-Baruch line. He looked on the Republican Party, which still contained a dwindling number of conservative-minded men, as his enemy, and thought of founding a new party which would offer the electorate “enlightened and progressive ideas” (as propounded by Marx and Lenin). He only abandoned this idea when Senator Robert Taft, the natural Republican leader, died, and when Senator Joseph McCarthy was “censured”. These events left Eisenhower in control of the Republican Party, for its sins.

At that time masses of Americans saw in McCarthy the only man who told the truth about Communist infiltration of government and America’s involvement in the world-government conspiracy.

General Eisenhower, himself tarred with this brush through his abandonment of half Europe to the Communist conspiracy, particularly hated Senator McCarthy. This became known and as at a given signal the kept press opened up a deafening chorus of “witch-hunt” against McCarthy. Any who have kept copies of this Senator’s speeches and pamphlets can check for themselves that he did not make unsubstantiated charges. He had no need to: what had become publicly known about the treachery of Hiss and the group around him was ample enough to support McCarthy’s arraignment of successive presidents.

But the strength of the conspiracy was shown by the way McCarthy, like others before and after him, was politically destroyed. The Senate “censured” McCarthy for “conduct unbecoming a Senator”, and Eisenhower warmly thanked the chairman of the censuring committee, one Watkins, for “doing a splendid job”.

When the Eisenhower presidency ended, in 1960, he had served the conspiracy well through suppressing public discussion of Soviet infiltration and espionage by his attack on McCarthy. His presidential years were rife with Soviet efforts, through a horde of spies in the United States, to gain full knowledge about the atom bomb and its method of production. These efforts succeeded, so that the Communists made their own bomb.

The eight Eisenhower years showed that subservience to the World Revolution continued to be the paramount rule of American governmental policy.

Under this paramount law, American generals if they encountered Communism anywhere in the globe, were forbidden to defeat it: the Soviet arsenals and armouries were kept bulging with armaments paid for with American loans and credits: these were used to kill many thousands of American and allied soldiers: and each successive American president became the patron and protector of Communism within the governmental ranks.

CONVERGENCE WITH COMMUNISM

In 1960 Eisenhower was succeeded by John Kennedy, scion of an immensely wealthy Massachusetts family. He was assassinated before his first four-year term ended, but his previous career showed that there would not have been any change, had he lived to complete his term. The reason for his assassination has never become publicly known. His life was cut short before he could show what he could or would do, but all the signs are that he too would have followed the course set by his four predecessors.

A story was put about that he had “stood up to Moscow” by demanding, and obtaining the withdrawal from Cuba of Soviet missiles there, pointed America-ward, which were discovered by aerial photography. If this were true, he would have mortally offended the Revolution, and this would offer a feasible explanation for his murder.

The story was as manna in the desert to the American masses, thirsting for an affirmative answer to Senator Robert Taft’s question, “Do we really mean our Communist policy?”

Unhappily, the story was never confirmed and in the context of American policy in this century seems improbable, so that the murder remains mysterious.

Another mysterious event of the short Kennedy presidency was the attack on Cuba by an ill- organised force of Cuban exiles, which ended in such an appalling fiasco that it might have been betrayed beforehand by someone in the State Department or Council on Foreign Relations.

The Vice-President, Mr. Lyndon Johnson, took the dead president’s place and occupied it until 1968 without diverging from the House-Baruch pattern.

American presidents, because of their subservience to the overriding dogma of world government, tended to become shadowy figures and Mr. Johnson was not more sharply focused than others before him. He may be said to have shown zeal in following the Baruch-House, Wilson-Roosevelt-Truman-Eisenhower-Kennedy line.

About that time the “Insiders” of the Council on Foreign Relations let slip a phrase which indicated what that line was. Allusions to a “convergence with Communism” appeared here and there in the all-powerful, and all-subservient “media”, so that Americans could have gained some idea of what was coming to them.

In 1968 the bewildered mass of Americans thought the end of the long dark tunnel of their frustrated hopes was near, for Mr. Richard Nixon stood and was elected with a thumping majority.

He was the man whose name was connected with an event of 1949 in which Americans of traditional allegiance had seen one bright light during the bewildering years: the exposure and conviction of the traitor Hiss. True, Hiss was only convicted of “perjury” in denying that he was a Communist agent or had abstracted top-secret documents and transmitted them to Moscow: the influence of the conspirators was strong enough to protect him from the graver charge of “treason” and the greater penalty. Still, he had been forced into the light and had been convicted, and Congressman Richard Nixon had done it.

It seemed that deliverance had come, like a cleansing wind. Here, thought the electors, was a man who really “meant his Communist policy”. He had proved it, nineteen years ago, true: but that was not forgotten. It was so rare, in these times of presidential protection for spies and traitors, to find a man who believed as honest folk believed and suited his actions to his beliefs. There had only been one other such, McCarthy, and he had been “smeared” and was dead.

It was one more illusion, Mr. Nixon was no different from the other presidents. He too was made to toe the line. Electioneering, he promised a drastic rooting-out of Communists in government: little, or nothing was done.

Nixon surpassed even previous presidents in deficit-spending on “welfare state” notions. He made the familiar pilgrimage to Moscow and virtually wrote off the Soviet wartime Lend-Lease debt of $9,100,000,000, and offered a further $2,500,000,000 in credit for the purchase of American exports.

Fifty years after Wilson, America was still to be the banker of the Revolution.

THE WATERGATE AFFAIR

Mr. Nixon was accompanied on his Moscow trip by the recently-discovered Dr. Kissinger, born in Germany, who in his rocket-like rise to international power and vast undertakings reminded me of that other “profoundly ominous man”, Harry Hopkins.

His first four presidential years showed that Mr. Nixon was doing all he could, by zeal in following the Roosevelt-Truman-Eisenhower line, to expunge from the memory of the conspirators his achievement in obtaining the conviction of Hiss. It was in vain: all through the twenty years between the “media” had maintained an unremitting tirade against him. He had mortally offended the conspiracy by that and they could not forgive him or let him forget.

The conspirators prepared to “get” him. They followed one of the precepts laid down in the Protocols for gaining control of politicians or agents likely to be useful. It is, to obtain knowledge (or manufacture knowledge) of some shady episode in a man’s past, some scandal which can be used to cow or blackmail him. Every Scotland Yard or FBI detective who has had to do with the tactics of Communist espionage can quote instances where this technique has been used.

Now President Nixon’s turn came to suffer this ordeal by forged evidence and mass intimidation. Had he read Philip Dru, or understood why Mr. Baruch preferred to do business “on a park bench”, he need never have fallen into the trap.

Early in his second term the American Secret Service installed a monitoring system in the White House which in its omniscient knowledge of what went on there probably excelled anything in the world. The sound of a human voice automatically set the tapes working. The President could not stir in the White House without his movements being recorded and followed by buzzers and flashing lights on the monitoring apparatus. Every word the President spoke was recorded, (as he thought for his private benefit).

The reason for this elaborate set-up became clear when the word “Watergate” became part of mob-parlance. The Watergate building contained the Democratic Party’s offices. The burglary was done with the utmost publicity short of placards proclaiming or loudspeakers announcing: “The Democratic offices are being burgled by the President’s order”. After the initial “discovery” one burglar returned to the scene of the crime and was found to carry a notebook with (guess what?) a White House telephone number in it.

The word “Watergate” then spread over the world. I was in various countries at the time and grew to loathe the spectacle of the booboisie telling each other all about “Watergate” as if they had consulted the oracle and now were privy to the most closely guarded secrets of doings and goings-on in high places.

Mr. Nixon, not having read Philip Dru, was taken aback by the sound and fury of the attack on him and at first, probably knowing nothing of the “burglary” but what the press told him, could not take the affair seriously, so that he refused assent when a Senate Committee, investigating the affair, called for tapes of his private conversations (unhappily for him, these were not “private”: they were overheard by those out to “get” the president).

The tapes! They had been spinning endlessly, recording every word of his innumerable conversations. The president thought them privileged, private. But someone had listened to these miles and miles of tapes, someone on the watch for the smallest slip or contradiction. The President appealed against the Senate Committee’s order to produce the tapes and the Supreme Court upheld the Senate Committee’s order. By this time it was obvious to all that the tapes contained something which might be used against the President, and that someone knew what it was. The exact portions of the tapes to be produced were specified. The President, obviously, had been surrounded by spies in his own White House.

The plot thickened to its appointed end. On June 23, 1972 the President’s voice had directed the Central Intelligence Agency to halt the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s enquiry into the “burglary”. On May 22, 1973 the President had made a public statement denying that any use had been made of the Central Intelligence Agency “for domestic political purposes”.

A gasp of horror went through the great country where two presidents had refused to remove the Soviet arch traitor from the State Department (in Mr. Truman’s case the Canadian Prime Minister, no less, had provided the ignored information) and had given him protection to do his worst for the United States: the same country where a third president had used all his influence to have the one consistent anti-Communist censured and made politically outcast.

Now the kept press and radio kept up their clamour that President Nixon was guilty of the heinous crime of “covering up” (the burglary) and of “obstructing the course of justice”. In the White House the cloaked men, the keepers of “the tapes”, gathered round the president and whispered “Resign, resign!”

The cumulative strain was too much for Mr. Nixon, who already had twenty-five years of this unrelenting vituperation behind him. His physical collapse was visible in the pictures shown. By the methods described in the Protocols and in Mr. House’s “novel”, he was thrown out of office, the first American President ever to be so humiliated.

The conspiracy won its greatest victory. What American president would dare to step out of line, after this!

THE MONEY POWER

The Vice-President, Mr. Gerald Ford, succeeded to the White House. He was an appointed, not an elected vice-president, having been chosen by Mr. Nixon when his original vice-president, Mr. Spiro Agnew, fell by the wayside somewhere along the line.

In the light of preceding events ‘It was difficult to see Mr. Ford doing anything so unorthodox as rebelling against the forces which had proved too strong for all preceding presidents in this century. He, in turn, appointed Mr. Nelson Rockefeller as vice-president, who is on record as saying “When you think of what I had, what else was there to aspire to?” (but the White House). His appointment brought him (as Mr. Gary Allen commented) “within a heartbeat” of the White House.

Mr. Nelson Rockefeller is a member of an enormously wealthy family, or dynasty, whose interests are worldwide and deep-rooted. The “conspirators” of Mr. House’s Story of Tomorrow, (which has proved to be a photographic forecast of all that has happened in and to America in this century) were immensely wealthy men. The massive fortunes accumulated in America by a relatively small group of men in the last hundred years have been put to serve the purpose of the Revolution, and of the world dictatorship designed to come of it.

These great fortunes have usually left behind them great bequests ostensibly to be devoted to noble-sounding purposes, particularly “international peace”. Most of them have in fact served as hidey-holes for agents of the conspiracy: they are exempt from the “graduated income tax” introduced by Woodrow Wilson at his “sponsors’” behest.

The fact is demonstrable that the Communist revolution was from the start financed by money from America and that the great fortunes substantially contribute to the “invisible government” (the Council on Foreign Relations) which for decades now has been steering America towards “convergence with Communism”, and towards the ultimate world super-state. Thus Mr. Nelson Rockefeller’s appearance on the stage at this late (possibly penultimate) stage in the game is of particular interest.

The student of these affairs constantly finds himself confronted by other, less-advanced seekers to truth who snarl at him:

“Why would rich men support Communism, eh? Explain that. It doesn’t make sense!”

This writer always advises such innocents abroad to accept the incontrovertible fact that the thing is, and to work back from that point to the “Why?” He might take as starting point the testimony of an unassailable authority, Professor Carroll Quigley (Tragedy, And Hope, Macmillan, London, 1966). Professor Quigley, who has the advantage of himself being of the “Insiders” with inside experience of the conspiracy at work, says:

“There does exist and has existed for a generation an international … network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the Communists act … This network … has no aversion to co-operating with the Communists … and frequently does so.”

Another diligent explorer, Mr. Gary Allen (The C.F.R., Conspiracy To Rule The World, American Opinion, Belmont, Mass., 1969) says:

“Why would international bankers and financiers be interested in promoting a Socialist World Government? Clearly, socialism is only the bait to obtain the support of the political underworld and to create the structure necessary to maintain dictatorial control. What this small group of financiers and cartel-oriented businessmen are interested in is monopolistic control over the world’s natural resources, trade, transportation and communications … something that despite their great wealth they could not achieve otherwise. Therefore the super-capitalists become super-socialists, realising that only a World Government under their control can give them the power necessary to achieve their goal. Only this could explain why these extremely wealthy men would be willing to support movements which seem to be aimed at their own destruction.”

***

Part Two

THE ANGLO-SAXON PEOPLES

I quoted at the start the word of Mr. Maugham’s American heroine about the boundless future of the United States: “… by 1930 we shall be the richest and greatest country in the world … no limit to our progress can be seen …”

About the same time (the 1920’s) Mr. Noel Coward was composing a patriotic milestone drama about England, Cavalcade, which met the public yearning for reassurance about the future and made him, as he says, “extremely popular”. As the curtain fell, his heroine, glass in hand, drank;

“to the hope that this country of ours, which we love so much will find dignity and greatness and peace again …”

The positive expectations of Mr. Maugham’s “Isabel” and the wistful hopes of Mr. Coward’s “Jane” were alike doomed to disappointment.

England, in fact, was caught in the same world-government conspiracy that was destroying America, and its leaders promoted the aims of the conspiracy as effectively as Presidents Wilson and Roosevelt.

The plight of the American Republic, seventy years after the House-Baruch partners “captured” President Wilson and set him to work preparing the One Government Of All The World, was bound to have some effect on the other English-speaking country across the Atlantic, the one where I was born.

CHURCHILL: MAN OF PARADOXES

Mr. Winston Churchill once during the Second War said that England and America were going to get “somewhat mixed up” and added that he could not stop that process even if he wished: he welcomed it.

He was a man of occasional, strange paradoxes. A patriot of patriots, he never explained that strange statement, which to most Englishmen, and probably to most Americans, was inexplicable and unwelcome. He had no brief for so disputable an assertion. When he made it America was evidently, to any diligent observer, in the grip of a conspiracy which was dragging it towards “convergence with Communism” and the World Slave State. Mr. Churchill’s whole life-story seemed sure to make him shun any involvement with “world government” plans.

Oddly, like all American presidents of this century, he was a devotee of Mr. Bernard Baruch, whose world-government efforts went back to the first World War and the bid at the Versailles Peace Conference to set up a “League to Enforce Peace”; a first attempt to establish world government in the confusion following a world war, which was foiled by the able Secretary of State, Mr. Robert Lansing, who clearly saw the intention to foist war upon the world in the name of peace (Mr. Lansing was soon removed from office, the first of a long series of Americans who paid the price for opposing the conspiracy).

A significant incident in Mr. Churchill’s career was the receipt of a deathbed letter to him from President Roosevelt asking him “to see Bernie Baruch as soon as convenient …” Mr. Churchill answered that:

“Bernie is one of my oldest friends and I am telegraphing to say how glad I am he is coming. He is a very wise man.”

The two had “long and intimate talks”. During these Mr. Baruch presumably spoke of the atom bomb soon to be exploded (it would never have been dropped without the foreknowledge and approval of the great Adviser) and may have informed Mr. Churchill of his intention to propose the establishment (once the bomb had been exploded) of an authority with monopolistic rights in its use and control, and power to inflict quick and condign punishment on any who offended The Authority.

History does not record what Mr. Churchill thought about this, the greatest Baruch Plan: it would obviously have meant that;

“dissolution of the British Empire over which I have not become the King’s first Minister in order to preside”.

THIS WORLDWIDE CONSPIRACY

The dissolution of that Empire followed before his death. His inner feeling about the world government, which was evidently meant to be set up in its wake, is unclear. In 1920, when the revolution in Russia and its authors were subjects of lively public discussion (this was before an occult censorship effectively stopped all free discussion of such matters) Mr. Churchill wrote an article in the Illustrated Sunday Herald which showed that he perfectly understood the nature and authors of the revolution and the methods of conspiracy. Being asked in 1953 for permission to reprint that article, he had his secretary refuse.

Certainly, Bernie (“a very wise man”) would not have approved of that article, for his favourite notion, the despotic world government with powers of enforcement, was the very child of that revolution. Mr. Churchill must certainly have been aware of the world government conspiracy because in various forms it preoccupied the minds of many leading men during his lifetime and he moved in their company.

In the later decades of the 19th century, when England and the Empire were at the zenith of their might and renown under the great Queen, the world government conspiracy (as the developing fluid of time now reveals) was already eating, cancer-like, at the entrails of the Commonwealth.

The conspirators were no cloak-and-dagger persons of the Cafés des Exilés type. They were public men of renown and great wealth, as in America.

THE NEW IMPERIALISM

The man whose name first appears in the story on the eastern side of the Atlantic, although his ideas obviously grew out of earlier conspiracies such as that of Weishaupt, was John Ruskin. He was of the type for which the modern vernacular has found the name, Do-Gooder, a tribe of which may be said that the evil they do lives long after them. He was deeply moved, in that period of the industrial revolution, by the contrast between great wealth in Victorian England, and the poverty of the lower orders, and became famous, in his day, for his impassioned championship of “the downtrodden masses”.

Ruskin’s life ended with a mental breakdown, as is sometimes the lot of beings who come to think themselves godlike. Ruskin’s “new imperialism” rested on the theory, which he imparted to his aristocratic students at Oxford, that their privileged lot in life could not be preserved unless the English lower classes were absorbed into it, and it extended to “the non-English masses throughout the world”.

Ruskin’s ideas made a great and fatal impression on the mind and life of Cecil Rhodes, the gold-and-diamond multi-millionaire from Kimberley. Rhodes’s name is commemorated in that of the little country, Rhodesia, which seventy years after his death is waging a lonely struggle against a world of enemies, leagued together in the world-government-conspiracy, on the path of which Rhodesia is a small but obdurate obstacle.

What Rhodes’s ambition was is a question befogged by the different opinions of his biographers, who assert variously that “the government of the world was his simple desire” or that he wanted to “paint the map of Africa red” (i.e. British).

The words of his first will should make the matter clear (but where, in conspiracy, which always deals in “deception regarding real intentions and opinions” is anything ever quite clear?) for he states the ambition of “extending British rule throughout the world … and founding so great a power as to hereafter render wars impossible and promote the interests of humanity”. World-government proponents always proclaim that eternal peace will come of their plans, and simultaneously contend (as Mr. Baruch ever contended) that war must be made on any who question their dominion, so that this verbal flourish need not be taken seriously.

What is clear is that out of Rhodes’s initial moves grew the world-government conspiracy that undermined all good government in England and America in the century that followed Rhodes’s death in 1902.

Rhodes’s wills set up the secret society which was to pursue his ambition through the century to come. The first (the secret society will) took the Society of Jesus as organisational model (Weishaupt similarly used the Jesuitical structure as model for his Illuminati).

THE RHODES SCHOLARSHIPS

Another will endowed the “Rhodes Scholarships” under which young men from the Empire, Germany and America were to be brought to Oxford for specialised training so that;

“after thirty years there would be between two and three thousand men in the prime of life scattered all over the world, each one of whom would have impressed on his mind in the most susceptible period of his life the dream of the Founder, each one of whom, moreover, would have been specially, mathematically selected towards the Founder’s purpose …”

What, then, was the Founder’s purpose? Was it “simply the government of the world” or “the extension of British rule throughout the world”? Rhodes’s planning took definite shape in 1891 when, with his collaborator and literary apostle, William Stead, he formed his secret society with himself as leader and Stead, Lord Esher and Sir John Milner (later British High Commissioner for South Africa) as members of an executive committee. A “Circle of Initiates” was to be formed with Mr. Balfour, Lord Rothschild, Sir Harry Johnston and other personages prominent on the South African scene. The outer circle (the pattern of circles-within-circles used by Weishaupt and the Communists) was to be an “association of Helpers” (in the Communist vocabulary such “helpers” are known as “friends” or “useful fools”.)

If Rhodes’s dream or purpose was in fact “to extend the British Empire to encompass the world” its dissolution within sixty years of his death in 1902 was this “imperial statesman’s” mocking epitaph. If his “simple desire” (a biographer, Mrs Millin) was “government of the world”, the conspiracy he set in motion was far advanced towards this aim after those sixty years.

He left behind him a “circle” of publicly renowned men who were (privately) devoted to that ambition. Outwardly they appeared to be rocklike pillars of Empire (as their counterparts in America seemed to be steadfast upholders of the Declaration of Independence).

Lord Milner became leader of the Round Table organisation begotten by Rhodes’s secret society of 1891. When I joined The Times in 1921 I became vaguely aware of the existence of a band of brothers known as “Lord Milner’s young men”. I little recked, then, of what they might be at, or could ever imagine that their work, fifty years later, would entwine itself, poison-ivy-like, around my life and lot. One of them, Mr. Geoffrey Dawson, became editor of The Times in my day.

Another initiate was Mr. Philip Kerr who held many offices in British South Africa and became, as Lord Lothian, British Ambassador at Washington. Another was Mr. Lionel Curtis, who took over leadership of the Round Table group when Lord Milner died. Something in the South African air seems to have produced this abundant crop of Round Table schemers at that period.

Some of these gentlemen took the loftiest view of the shape their future world government would assume. Lord Lothian held that “we should strive to build the Kingdom of Heaven on this earth” (and added that the leadership in that task “must fall first and foremost upon the English-speaking peoples”). At that phase in his scheming “Colonel” House across the Atlantic was also talking about rebuilding the world on a basis of the “solidarity of the Anglo-Saxon peoples”.

On both sides of the Atlantic the conspiracy was from the start one of wealthy men: in South Africa, Rhodes, Lord Rothschild (to whom Rhodes at one stage bequeathed his money), Sir Abe Bailey and Alfred Beit: in America, the great money-dynasties of Morgan, Rockefeller, Carnegie and others. One might naively wonder if these great men ever considered the human suffering their ambition would involve, particularly during the Second War, which brought the conspiracy a giant stride nearer its goal. Probably not: great men as a rule are completely cynical about any whom the Juggernaut crushes, provided that the Juggernaut continues towards the destination which they desire.

INSTITUTES OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

The great men involved in this often had differing views about the shape of the consummation desired by them. The languid and lisping Mr. Balfour, a typical fin de siecle figure, much in demand by the ladies for their Victorian patball parties, held that the world government should be a Jewish one. Mr. House, across the Atlantic, wrote of establishing “Socialism as dreamed by Karl Marx” as the golden rule of world government.

Before and after the First War the conspiracies of Rhodes and House began to converge. In the antechambers of World War One the schemers were already busy preparing to set up world government on the ruins. The attempt, at that first bid, was foiled by the American people, who spotted the thief in the woodpile, and discarded President Wilson.

The One World conspirators at once regrouped and reorganised their forces for the next bid, through another war. Mr. Lionel Curtis was charged to reshape the Round Table group and established throughout the “English-speaking” lands separate “front organisations” (to use the Communist phraseology) each pursuing the common ambition behind a facade of fine-sounding designations.

In England this became the Royal Institute of International Affairs, which absorbed the membership of the ci-devant Round Table group. In America Mr. House’s dictum about “deception regarding real opinions and intentions” was honoured in the name chosen for the new body which was incorporated in 1921: the Council on Foreign Relations.

In the next fifty years, until today, this became the invisible government of the United States, supplying the government with increasing numbers of its graduates and in fact directing American state policy towards that “convergence with Communism” which is the truth behind the official protestations of undeviating antagonism to Communism.

This CFR has become the protégé of the great banking dynasties and its membership now comprises fourteen hundred leading names in American banking, industry and communications.

This invisible government has provided the men to fill nearly all the top posts in the Administration during the past forty-five years. Hence the course of American foreign policy, which by rights is the domain of the Secretary of State. For many years every Secretary of State has been a CFR man, and when he was not, a CFR appointee was leapfrogged over him. Witness President Roosevelt’s Harry Hopkins in the Second War and Dr. Kissinger today: both these publicly unknown men bestrode the narrow world like a colossus and the groundlings paid the price.

The innocents abroad (and who is not “abroad” in this dark and haunted terrain of international conspiracy?) can always be heard plaintively asking, “Why?”, or alternatively, “How can wealthy men back those who seek to destroy them?”

I am not in these great men’s minds but think the answer is contained in some words which I heard the late Lord Birkenhead use, once long ago. This was in the late ‘Twenties, when even to hint that peace might not be eternal was to earn the epithet, “Warmonger”. Lord Birkenhead, a realist said warningly, “There are still glittering prizes to be won” (by making war), and the next morning had the whole coyote-like press pack yelping “Warmonger” at him.

I see no other explanation for these dealers in death (for such their worldwide concentration camp would be) than this dazzling allure of the glittering prize. The One-Worlders aim at monopolistic control of the sources of wealth, of which they now control only “a piece”. Total control cannot be acquired by purchase and payment: only world government offers the ultimate seat of power. In Karl Marx’s paradise this absolute power would obtain: in that utopia the human being would be nothing, a zero.

An authority with long-term inside knowledge of the conspiracy, (Prof. Carrol Quigley, Tragedy & Hope, Macmillan 1966) says:

There has existed for a generation an international network which operates to some extent in the way that the radical Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may indicate as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to co-operating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so.

In the two decades following its incorporation in Paris in 1921 the CFR went from strength to strength, and prepared, through its stranglehold on American foreign policy, to prepare the way for the next attempt to set up world government after another war. When it came, its agents were able to present the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour (of which warning had been given to and ignored by President Roosevelt) as a dastardly surprise (“a day which will live in infamy”).

While the war went on the CFR was busy, through an Advisory Committee on Post-War Foreign Policy completely staffed by its appointees, laying the basis for the World State designed to come of it. This group designed the United Nations as the keystone of the World Superstate, and at the founding conference at San Francisco in 1945 the man subsequently convicted as a Communist traitor (Alger Hiss), was Secretary General.

FROM FAR AND WIDE

When the Second War ended I, and many other British writers, left the suffocating climate of post-war England, where the Socialists waited, like vultures on a bough, for the England where I grew up to breath its last.

I was already, in my little way, a victim of the great conspiracy. Before the Second War I published a book which gave warning of its imminent approach, and because it broke out promptly I was held up as a man of brilliant foresight and insight. My eminence lasted but an instant. When I saw, and wrote, that the war was being fought merely to build up Communism, I was howled down as a Fascist and soon found that I was on every publisher’s black list.

Thus I brought no illusions with me to South Africa where I arrived, like Othello, my occupation gone. For the next thirty years the spate of anonymous letters and newspaper attacks continued, that is, until today. Humble workaday scribe though I was, I found that the world-government conspirators could not, or would not forget me: no sparrow might fall from a roof, I gathered, but that their minions plausibly presented this as a foul, reactionary and counter-revolutionary deed.

Even I was not beneath their notice, I found from this unending vituperation. That was not the worst: I saw that the last chapter of my life, like the twenty years between the two wars, was to be spent in the shadow of another threatening war: and it, like the other two wars, was designed to be one more move towards world government.

After two years in South Africa I paid a visit to America and was there when the abominable Hiss was at last exposed and (reluctantly) convicted. I saw how numerous were his friends and patrons, how powerful they were to protect him and cover up his deeds. I saw that the man who denounced him was pilloried on every hand, reduced to poverty, kept in fear of his life (he soon died: the other still lives). I saw how the Widow Roosevelt, the “Madame de Farge” of the conspiracy, openly placed herself before him and even referred jeeringly, in court, to his accuser as “the defendant”.

I felt in my journalist’s bones that this America could not long survive in the shape hitherto familiar to the world: it was rotting at the core. I learned of things more directly menacing to South Africa, and to me and my young wife and her babes who lived there.

I learned that President Truman, having stepped from the vice-presidential into the presidential shoes on Roosevelt’s death, had grandiose plans for Africa, where he had never been, of which he knew nothing.

I saw the red light at once. Had Mr. Truman inherited the House-Baruch plan from Mr. Roosevelt? If so, life in South Africa was going to be precarious.

Mr. Truman soon showed that he had indeed inherited the fatal “sponsors”. I believe he was never outside America before he became president: he was a typical product of the American political machine, which, as manipulated by the House-Baruch group, produced presidents pre-tailored to a pattern of submissiveness.

Now Mr. Truman, or someone in his name, produced a programme of bountiful undertakings in the world, Point Four of which related to Africa, a place quite unknown to him. Under “Point Four” he proposed to build great roads and railways, ports and airports and the like more. Obviously he had neither the knowledge nor the experience to have hit on such notions unaided. Someone was speaking through him, Charlie McCarthy-like.

Simultaneously, the Communist leader in America (at that time, a Mr. Earl Browder) came out with a programme of gigantic undertakings in Africa which was in its essentials a duplicate of Mr. Truman’s Point Four.

Neither of these benefactors, America and the Soviet Union, had any presence or foothold in Africa. How, then did they propose to get there and do these wonderful things? At this point my blood ran cold, as the saying is: I saw what was coming and returned to Africa with visions of earlier thundercloud days in Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland heavy on my spirit.

I wrote a book about my discoveries in America (Far and Wide). I think it was the last one I was allowed to get published in England and it brought me even more obloquy than the preceding three or four. This book acquired a habit of vanishing from library shelves. Librarians, consulted by me, said they knew this was happening but could not catch the “book-burners”.

AMERICA AND RUSSIA

The parallelism of American and Soviet policy, under the invisible guiding hand of the CFR, was again shown by this announcement of the two great Plans. The two “World Powers” (with the enfeebled British one trotting behind them like a carriage dog) were united in the resolve to carry out Lenin’s dictum that the expulsion of the colonial powers from their territories was essential to the achievement of the world revolution. The Soviet power avowedly desired this: American presidents continued to preach opposition to Communism and to practise support of it. President Roosevelt protected the Communist traitors in his administration: President Truman sacked the American general who wanted to win the war against Communism in Korea.

The game went on, plain for all to see, but very few perceived its meaning.

Next, President Truman, evidently desiring to show zeal to his sponsors, sent a roving emissary to Africa, a Mr. Mennen “Soapy” Williams, who stumped the continent calling for South Africa to be “brought to its knees”.

Africa (this became obvious) was to be the new area of Communist expansion, aided and financed by America.

Following Mr. Truman’s lead, every aspiring politician and newspaper editor in the world joined in furious attack on the White governments in Southern Africa, and this continues as I write, nearly thirty years later.

This down-with-the-White-man campaign was immensely popular with politicians everywhere, who always rejoice to be able to divert attention from matters at home by pointing a finger at countries far away, and the further the better. Thus, politicos in places as distant from the scene as Australia and New Zealand, the enslaved countries behind the Berlin Wall, and the banana republics of Central America happily stayed in office year after year by this simple method of crying “Fie!” and sternly gazing in the direction of South Africa, thousands of miles away across the oceans.

THE PLAN FOR AFRICA

Africa at that period was a continent of order under the colonial powers, Britain, France, Belgium and Portugal. Unnumbered centuries of infant mortality, lethal diseases, slave raiding and tribal wars had left it a depopulated continent until the white man came, who put a stop to all those things, so that in the 19th century it rapidly became an over-populated continent.

The orderly process, and the rule of law, were all to be changed when the conspiracy took Africa in hand. America and the Soviet Union set out hand in hand to destroy everything that had been gained, and to recreate Darkest Africa. American politicians fell into paroxysms of simulated moral indignation about the colonial powers and their treatment of the Black man (who soon would look back on the colonial era, when a man could call on the law even against his chief and the witch doctor, as the golden age).

In America all the politicians saw in the anti-White man campaign a vote-winning ticket. Macaulay might have said of America at that time, even more truly than of the England of his day, that “We know of no spectacle so ridiculous as the public in one of its periodical fits of morality”. For example, a Mr. Robert Kennedy (younger brother of the late President John Kennedy) came to Africa with his wife and was accorded the hospitality of Natal University for a violent diatribe against the South African Government. I watched this disreputable performance with the eyes of a man who had seen two generations of politicians whipping the mob towards its own destruction.

In America, too, Mrs. Roosevelt, gave much vent (publicly) to her feelings of indignation and compassion about the Black man, and helped (privately) to arrange for supplies of arms to the terrorists in Angola.

What was coming was clear: America, under any president at all, was to help Communism take over Africa.

For a decade this farce continued and then, lo presto and behold, the colonial powers revealed that they too were in the plot. There was no irresistible pressure on them to quit. They received their marching orders from somewhere and just upped and went. One day they were there and the next they were gone, reacting like marionettes to the hidden strings. Belgium went first, then France pulled out of Algeria, and then …

Ah, then! Was Britain to desert and dissolve the Empire, and to abandon alike the White people there and the Black ones who still in some places seen by me kept the picture of the great Queen in their kraals and trading stores?

Yes, even that. The man chosen to read the dictated death sentence was the British Prime Minister of the day, a Mr. Harold Macmillan. He spoke with the turn of voice and phrase which the frontal politicians of my unfortunate country are adept in using to gloss over an act of perfidy.

“The wind of change”, Mr. Macmillan told the Cape Town Parliament, was blowing Britain out of Africa. The wind of change! In any anthology of political prevarication this rates a high place. The wind bloweth where it listeth, and no “wind” was blowing the Empire away. It was being broken up by decisions reached long before in secret conclave, and its demolition was done to clear the way for the world-government conspiracy.

Followed, in all the British territories, the pantomime of abdication: flags being lowered, plumed hats and gold-encrusted uniforms worn a last time, a Royal Personage handing over the deeds and so on. The only truth behind this woeful pageant was that the Black man was being handed back to slavery.

BACK TO DARKEST AFRICA

In the next ten years the Black man foretasted the future which had been arranged for him. “Independent” Black states emerged on all hands, and in all of them the politician with the most guns shouldered his way to the front and took over, to be thrust aside a little later by another of the same kind who had been supplied with weapons by someone or other. The tale of carnage and chaos will never be told: it followed the same pattern everywhere, and the world was indifferent to it anyway. Darkest Africa was back.

Of the White man’s era only South Africa remained (which immediately broke away from the Empire), and Rhodes’s Rhodesia, which saw that it was to be betrayed and proclaimed Independence on the Washingtonian model on November 11, 1965, and the eastern and western coastal territories of Mozambique and Angola, where the Portuguese had been since before the British Empire or the America Republic were thought of.

The Sixties and Seventies, therefore, were filled with the enraged clamour of the outer world (particularly America and England) against these remaining White-governed territories. In England the Socialists were in office and they had long awaited the moment of imperial demise, like vultures on a bough intent on the victim’s last breath. The Socialist leader, a Mr. Harold Wilson, habitually used the language of George III’s prime minister, Lord North, about the Rhodesians. They were “rebels”, he declared.

After canvassing the feeling of the British army about an attack on Rhodesia, and drawing blank, he announced at Blackpool (to the cheers of terrorists in the balcony) that he would give “unconditional support” in arms to the Communist bands which succeeded to power in the Portuguese territories neighbouring Rhodesia when the beleaguered Portuguese, after thirteen years of siege by the entire world, collapsed in 1973.

I was in Rhodesia, Angola and Mozambique during these years, and although my own part in the imbroglio was but that of one small leaf in a gale, I felt that I was hard done by, after my embittering years in Europe between the wars, in being caught up in yet another chapter of the great conspiracy’s expansionist thrusts.

I returned from Rhodesia, Mozambique and Angola to South Africa to await what yet might come. What came, in 1975, was the proof that Mr. Truman’s “Point Four” of 25 years earlier, was a simple restatement of the parallelism of American and Soviet policy, jointly leading to a Communist takeover in Africa.

Angola gave clear token of that. Soviet arms, originally financed by America, were supplied to one of the contending factions which fought for power when the Portuguese left, and the Soviet called in Cuban troops to ensure the victory of that faction.

The American President at that time was named Ford (the only difference between successive presidents was that of name: in subservience to the overriding world government conspiracy they were all alike) and he was seen, a shadowy figure on the television screen, making sounds of formal disapproval of the Soviet and Cuban incursions into Africa.

The real effect of these sotto voce remonstrances was nil: America led the world in tacitly accepting the deed and the appearance of Black Communist states on the eastern and western shores of Africa.

By this time it was obvious that no American president, with the example of President Nixon’s overthrow ever in his mind, would presume to affront the pupils of the House-Baruch school, embattled in the Council on Foreign Relations. Whichever contestant might win the 1976 presidential election, nothing would change: and that would hold good for any subsequent election.

THE CONSPIRACY OF TRUTH

Thus I awaited my closing years in South Africa. Already, many years before, one of the enormously wealthy “peace” endowments in America (the Carnegie one) had produced a battle plan, complete to the last ballistic detail, for an attack on South Africa by air, sea and land. This open involvement of America in the Communist conspiracy has hung over South Africa ever since it was published in 1965. From my personal eyrie, overlooking the turbulent scene, I saw in it the co-ordination of another holocaust, the essential third stage in the conspiracy to bring about the super-slave-state.

At the age I have reached, for a’that, my personal interest in the great melodrama is only to see to it, if I possibly can, that any tombstone of mine shall have the inscription, “He survived!” My ambitions are modest, and for more than that I do not hope. The conspiracy has progressed so far that it will not, possibly cannot stop now. Too many leading men are enchained to it for that.

While they are in power over us, we shall all continue to be Gadarea-bound, and the new age of darkness is nigh upon us. When that comes we shall all need to start again and work for another renaissance. Many good men and true are preparing now for that, and tomorrow’s day will be theirs.

The perjurers and their kept press will call it the counter-revolution. Its proper name will be The Conspiracy Of Truth.

***

Know the Truth and the Truth shall make you free

(John 8:32)

======================================

PDF of this post. Click to view or download (0.6MB).

Douglas Reed – The Grand Design of the 20th Century (1977) Ver 2

 

Gaza Everywhere — Amren

Deleted Comments

The recent article by Brett Stevens sparked a lively exchange of comments both at Amren and at Daily Stormer. Of the total number of comments about 30% have been deleted by the mods in the final Comments Closed version.

The following two PDFS show what comment gets deleted and what stays.

NOTE: This is not necessarily a criticism of of Amren, but rather for those interested to see Amren’s comment policy in action, for better or worse.

UPDATE: For an informative discussion on Jared Taylor’s (the owner of American Renaissance website) “hands off” approach regarding jews, please see this over at VNN: Jared Taylor is Anti-White Thread

BTW, what got me to post this stuff was a comment left at Amren:

——————–

” • Reply • 

LACountyRedneck • 6 hours ago 

I hope none of this gets deleted. These comments have been a great education for myself and others. “

——————

And yes, it was … deleted!

All Comments (Including Deleted) – Version 4

Total Published & Deleted Comments = 711

Total Published Comments = 475

Total Deleted Comments = 236

Comments in RED have been DELETED in Comments Closed Version

Comments in BLUE have been been ADDED from Comments Closed Version (They were not present at the time the comments were copied)

UPDATE: 23 comments by Black Swan were all marked as SPAM and do not appear in the COMMENTS CLOSED version at AMREN’s website.

I’ve added them to the end of the PDF document (below).

PDF file (1 MB)>> Gaza Everywhere ALL COMMENTS American Renaissance Ver 4

Comments Closed Version

[Note: This is outdated – see above]

— 464 Comments —

Comments that have been deleted have this message: “This comment was deleted.”

NOTE: Not all deleted comments have the above message (for whatever reason).

PDF file (0.4 MB)>>  Gaza Everywhere COMMENTS CLOSED American Renaissance

=========================================================

Gaza Everywhere

Brett Stevens, American Renaissance, August 4, 2014

http://www.amren.com/news/2014/08/gaza-everywhere/

The Third World is at our gates.

Israel withdrew its troops from Gaza last night, but the problems that brought them there remain. Two populations find themselves locked in a conflict with no end. Many people think this is a clash between different religions, but the roots lie deeper.

Many Western liberals see a group of poor people confronting relatively wealthy people, and using the logic of the French Revolution, assume that the rich oppress the poor. They accuse the victims of genocide during the Second World War of committing genocide when they defend themselves from poorer, browner Third-World people.

That view ignores historical fact. Both groups have had a chance to develop within the same territory. Israelis followed the European model and created a society of learning, technology, arts and culture. Palestinians remain a Third World people, and now that they have been displaced by Zionism, have added religious fanaticism to their traditional social organization. Across the Muslim world, religion tends to be more extreme and to guide collective action, whereas in the First World it is largely a personal moral imperative.

Some argue that societies are made of laws and that anyone may come, learn the laws, and become equally valuable citizens. History teaches otherwise. Third World populations bring with them not only their own habits and folkways, but ingrained tendencies and limitations that clash with the standards of the First World.

If the Third World lacks what the First World has, why haven’t Third-Worlders simply copied the successful methods of the First World? Why have they continued to act in ways that produce Third World conditions? It is because genetic differences constrain their choices.

…

Please go the Amren’s website to read the rest:

http://www.amren.com/news/2014/08/gaza-everywhere/  

======================================

Click to download PDF file containing all comments (1.7 MB)

>> Gaza Everywhere ALL COMMENTS American Renaissance Ver 4

Version History

THE EMPIRE OF

“The City”

(World Superstate)

by E. C. Knuth

[Part 9]

The Five Ideologies of Space and Power

1. “One World” Ideology

2. “Pan-Slavic” Ideology

3. “Asia for the Asiatics”

4. Pan-Germanism

5. Pan-American Isolationism

The 130 Years of Power Politics of the Modern Era

[Page 1]

“I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past.”

— Patrick Henry

Copyright 1946, by E. C. Knuth

Milwaukee, Wis.

Previous Edition, Copyrighted May 22, 1944

Chapter XI, Copyrighted Feb. 22, 1945

Printed in U. S. A.

[Page 2]

Table of Contents PAGE

Introduction …………………… 5

I. The Fundamental Basis of Internationalism …………………… 7

II. Geopolitics and the Background of Modern Wars …………………… 11

III. The Eastern Question …………………… 17

IV. The Concert of Europe …………………… 23

V. The European Concert Ends in the East …………………… 26

VI. The New Order of Freedom …………………… 34

VII. The New Order Ends in the East …………………… 43

VIII. The Liberals Against the Conservatives and War ………………. 50

IX. The Money Power in Power Politics …………………… 59

X. The Secret Sixth Great Power …………………… 67

XI. A Study in Power …………………… 72

XII. The Problems of The Peace …………………… 79

XIII. The Five Ideologies of Space and Power …………………… 86

XIV. Conclusion …………………… 98

Index …………………… 106

[Page 6]

_____________________

THE EMPIRE OF “The City” – Part 9

THE EMPIRE OF

“The City”

(World Superstate)

by E. C. Knuth

[Part 8]

The Five Ideologies of Space and Power

1. “One World” Ideology

2. “Pan-Slavic” Ideology

3. “Asia for the Asiatics”

4. Pan-Germanism

5. Pan-American Isolationism

The 130 Years of Power Politics of the Modern Era

[Page 1]

“I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past.”

— Patrick Henry

Copyright 1946, by E. C. Knuth

Milwaukee, Wis.

Previous Edition, Copyrighted May 22, 1944

Chapter XI, Copyrighted Feb. 22, 1945

Printed in U. S. A.

[Page 2]

Table of Contents PAGE

Introduction …………………… 5

I. The Fundamental Basis of Internationalism …………………… 7

II. Geopolitics and the Background of Modern Wars …………………… 11

III. The Eastern Question …………………… 17

IV. The Concert of Europe …………………… 23

V. The European Concert Ends in the East …………………… 26

VI. The New Order of Freedom …………………… 34

VII. The New Order Ends in the East …………………… 43

VIII. The Liberals Against the Conservatives and War ………………. 50

IX. The Money Power in Power Politics …………………… 59

X. The Secret Sixth Great Power …………………… 67

XI. A Study in Power …………………… 72

XII. The Problems of The Peace …………………… 79

XIII. The Five Ideologies of Space and Power …………………… 86

XIV. Conclusion …………………… 98

Index …………………… 106

[Page 6]

XIII

THE FIVE IDEOLOGIES OF SPACE AND POWER

By the tested and effective device of constant repetition the international claque has manufactured into apparently accepted fact the falsehood that the United States has heretofore had no established foreign policy. That this is not true may be apparent from a consideration of the five great ideologies involved in the modern struggle for space and power, listed in the order of their presumed geographical scope. They are as follows:

1. The secret ideology of international finance, which has been described in comprehensive and precise detail hereinbefore, and which is aimed at eventual rule over all the world by the British Government. World rule by a closely knit and well-disciplined group of special privilege, secret mostly only in the United States as most European people have a fair conception of its existence and workings.

2. The ideology of Russia which was originally conceived in the Will of Peter the Great. A. H. Granger in “England’s World Empire,” published 1916 (page 173) dwells on the fear of the Russian Pan-Slavic ideology which has overshadowed Europe for over a century, and he quotes the whole of this document which is directed at first eliminating the obstacle of Austria and Germany, then proposes the conquest of India and Persia, and ends with the words: “. . . which will ensure the subjugation of Europe.” This fundamental scope has been broadened to encompass the entire world by the Bolshevist doctrine of world rule by the proletariat, with death to Capitalism and the International Capitalist.

3. The ideology of Japan “Asia for the Asiatics,” with its pretentions to almost half of the people of the world in a confederation dominated by Japan.

4. Pan-Germanism, German political control over the European continent, freedom from British restriction of the seas, and “the open door” in the trade and commerce of all the world.

5. Pan-Americanism, prerogative of the United States of political control of the Americas; the ideology of “America for the Americans,” given early expression by the Monroe Doctrine.

Not only was Ideology No. 5 the expression of the established foreign policy of the United States from 1823 to its abandonment 75 years later by the adherents of the ideology of world rule by international finance, in order to ally the United States with the wider scope of Ideology No. 1; but it is still the fundamental ideology of those in favor of that theory of geopolitical thought which proposes isolation from the entanglements of Europe and Asia. (See footnote.)

[Page 86]

The first four of these ideologies all overlap and clash in their scope; and even the total destruction of any one would still leave a fair balance among the other three; which would restrain any one of them from exposing itself in an attack upon the Americas and the United States; particularly, if the United States could achieve real unity in the Americas. But the abandonment by the United States of its own Ideology No. 5 to align itself with Ideology No. 1 with the avowed purpose of totally destroying Ideologies No. 3 and No. 4, will leave only the world embracing and absolutely opposed Ideologies No. 1 and No. 2 to possibly engage in a duel to the death with the aid of such subjugated peoples as each can wheedle or compel to join its forces. Such a duel seems inevitable in view of the deep animosities and the explosive economic pressures already existing.

That those in control of American foreign affairs do not propose to retain any allegiance to Ideology No. 5, or of making it an ideology within an ideology, and to evidently give the British Government assurance of this fact, seems indicated by the delegation of American purchases and of American finances in South America to British deputations and commissions. It would seem impossible as participants of Ideology No. 1 to maintain the iron tariff wall permitted us under the policy of isolation, which has been the principal bulwark of a scale of wages and a scale of life far above those of other countries; regardless of its condemnation at times due to misuse by selfish interests.

Of the five great ideologies of the world only the Pan-American ideology ever substantially attained its objectives. It is the oldest of these modern ideologies except for that part of the Russian ideology expressed in the Will of Peter the Great, and that part of Ideology No. 1 laid down early in the history of the British oligarchy in the following rules of empire:

1. Gain and hold territories that possess the largest supplies of the basic raw materials.

2. Establish naval bases around the world to control the sea and commerce lanes.

3. Blockade and starve into submission any nation or group of nations that opposes this empire control program.

———————–

The expression of isolation by the Monroe Doctrine was reiterated by Secretary of State Root in 1906, in replying to a petition requesting the United States to take action to prevent the persecution of the Armenians by the Turkish Government:

“By the unwritten law of more than a century, we are,” he said, “debarred from sharing in the political aims, interests, or responsibilities of Europe, just as by the equally potential doctrine, now nearly a century old, the European powers are excluded from sharing or interfering in the political concerns of the sovereign states of the Western Hemisphere.”

Secretary Olney had previously held in his note to Lord Salesbury during the Venezuela boundary dispute in 1895-6, that:

“American non-intervention in Europe implied European non-intervention in America.”

[Page 87]

Ideology No. 1 did not arise until the 1890’s and was the expression of the vision of Cecil Rhodes of a one-government warless world. It caught the fancy of many other dreamers and idealists who saw in it a solution of the periodical wars of the world, and failed to see in it the seed of gigantic wars of the future in the opposition of powerful races who would decline to recognize the fantastic doctrine of the racial superiority of the Anglo-Saxon and of his pre-ordained destiny to rule all the races of the earth. This doctrine was an integral part of Ideology No. 1 and was definitely expressed by one of its leading American proponents, the late William Allen White, newspaper publisher, in these words:

“It is the destiny of the pure Aryan Anglo-Saxon race to dominate the world and kill off or else reduce to a servile status all other inferior races.”

Only a very limited number of the British ruling class can make any pretentions of being “pure Aryan Anglo-Saxons,” as the average Englishman is a mixture of all the races on earth, of all the oppressed peoples and fugitives who crossed the waters of the British Channel to the new free land beyond over a period of a thousand years; and of the British nobility itself a large proportion is Jewish. The Angles and the Saxons were Germans, and more of their descendants and relatives remained in Germany than migrated to England. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines an Anglo-Saxon as a member of the mixed race which forms the English nation. Few people can trace all branches of their ancestry very far, and those that can trace it back to some worthy individual in any branch, are content to stop there and to accept that as the answer to their own pretentions; and when we note that Adolf Hitler was still a 23 year old common laborer on building construction at a time when the words of Mr. White received wide acclaim in Britain and America, we can reasonably ask who started all this hokum of the master race.

The American pilgrims and partners who entered the new secret ideology in 1897 knew that they were renouncing and abandoning the established isolationism of “America for the Americans” for a presumably bigger and better ideology, despite the fact that for another 45 years the pretension of Pan-Americanism was kept up, until the recent acquisition of absolute control over American foreign affairs made possible the deft substitution of global Ideology No. 1.

The Monroe Doctrine was promulgated in 1823 at a time when the newly formed British-French alliance of the international bankers was faced with a rising discontent in the vast Mohammedan world and when their fleets were needed to protect their holdings in the Near-east, the Middle-east and the Far-east. Its inception was greeted with derision by the British press, but no immediate overt move resulted, because an uprising in the Greek Christian provinces of Turkey, nominal protector of Mohammedanism, had provided a suitable cause for intervention, and it was urgent to overcome the menace of the Mussulman first.

[Page 88]

Due to her sympathy with the suppressed Greek Christians, Russia entered the war against Mohammedanism and on October 20, 1827, the allied British-French-Russian fleet destroyed the allied Mohammedan fleet at the Battle of Navarino. Having initiated Russia into the war with Turkey and Egypt, Britain and France withdrew from the conflict, and after Russia had defeated Turkey two years later, curtailed her victory to such an extent that Turkey emerged out of the conflict as a British ally.

This initiated the long-drawn friction with Russia which ended in the great Crimean War, in which Russia was totally defeated and disarmed in the Black Sea area in 1856, and the Russian influence in the power politics of Europe removed for one hundred years in the opinion of many prominent British statesmen and writers.

Thus the British interest had been actively engaged in other parts of the world for 33 years after the Monroe Doctrine had been initiated, but now they were able to turn their attention at last to America. A close business relationship had grown up between the cotton-growing aristocracy of the southern states and cotton manufacturing England, and the southern states were swarming with British agents. Soon a great conspiracy arose among southern politicians, which erupted with the secession of South Carolina from the Union on December 20, 1860, followed by six more states in about one month. The conspirators raised armies and seized forts, arsenals, mints, ships and other National property. Members of the Cabinet actively engaged in crippling the Union, injuring the public credit and working to bankrupt the nation, with the apparently passive assent of President Buchanan. (*)

It was in this situation that the Republican dark-horse candidate Abraham Lincoln, victor in a four-cornered slave and anti-slave race for the Presidency, came into office on March 4, 1861. There had been a lot of bloodshed before Lincoln was inaugurated, but it is part of the American Fable that the first shot of the Civil War was fired at Fort Sumter on April 12, 1861.

In December, 1861, a large British, French and Spanish expeditionary force was landed at Vera Cruz in defiance of the Monroe Doctrine. This, together with direct British aid to the Confederacy, and the fact that the Confederate army was far better trained and armed than the Federal forces at the outset of the war, brought the fortunes of the North to a very low ebb; and every indication at this stage was that Britain was preparing to enter the war.

———————–

(*) Illustrated Univ. History, 1878 — page 504.

[Page 89]

In this extremity, President Lincoln appealed to Britain’s perennial enemy Russia for aid. When the document with this urgent appeal was given to Alexander II, he weighed it unopened in his hand and stated;

“Before we open this paper or know its contents, we grant any request it may contain. On the day on which your President was inaugurated, we, Alexander II of Russia, signed the protocol which liberated twenty-three million serfs. Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, has freed four million slaves. Therefore, whatever he asks of Russia, Russia will grant, for Alexander II will not be a factor in the enslavement of any man.”

Unannounced, a Russian fleet under Admiral Lisiviski steamed into New York harbor on September 24, 1863, and anchored there; while the Russian Pacific fleet under Admiral Popov arrived at San Francisco on Oct. 12th. Of this Russian action, Gideon Wells said:

“They arrived at the high tide of the Confederacy and the low tide of the North, causing England and France to hesitate long enough to turn the tide for the North.”

As a matter of fact, Russian interest had made the entire matter a subject of the Concert of Europe, and Britain had already been obliged to withdraw from the Mexican venture and leave the same to Napoleon III by the dangerous reaction in Europe, and the rising tide of Liberalism and anti-imperialism at home; while the imperialistic aspirations of Napoleon III were shortly after drastically snuffed out by Bismarck, to be followed by 43 years of relative peace in Europe.

The British interference had caused a furious resentment in the United States, immortalized by the words of the song:

“In every battle kill our soldiers by the help they give the foe;”

and when a demand for payment of direct and contingent damages due to this interference was rejected by Britain in 1869, war again was close. The controversy dragged out, however, and did not again break out until February 1872, when a Court of Arbitrations met and the British Arbitrator, Sir Alexander Cockburn, violently objected to the consideration of claims for indirect or contingent damages. After several months of futile argument, the United States gave up this part of its claims, and on September 6, 1872, was awarded very nominal damages of fifteen and one-half million dollars.

Napoleon III withdrew his troops from Mexico shortly after the end of the Civil War upon demand of the United States ; and the Mexican Emperor placed on the throne created by him, Archduke Maximilian of Austria, was executed June 19, 1867.

An interesting sidelight on the relationship between certain members of the British and Southern aristocracies and elite of Civil War days, appears from the large part played by Joseph E. Wheeler, renowned Confederate and Spanish-American War cavalry general, in his activities in the subsequent subversion of the now firmly established and invincible ideology of the Monroe Doctrine and Pan-Americanism to Ideology No. 1; for Joe Wheeler was a principal organizer of the Pilgrim secret society of International Finance, as related by Sir Harry Brittain in his “Pilgrim Partners.”

[Page 90]

The argument was expressed by Chauncey M. Depew, founder vice-president of the Pilgrims, that incontrollable overproduction would inevitably lead America back to stagnation and poverty, a very potent and fearful prospect at a time when it was just barely creeping out of the horror of the giant depression of the 1890’s, but for its entry in what is herein indicated for purpose of brevity as Ideology No. 1.

In denial, former Congressman Towne in his speech “Lest We Forget,” condemning American participation in the grand plan of International Finance to immediately eliminate Germany and Russia from the markets of the Far East with the aid of Japan, said of the theory of remediless overproduction which supplied the justification of this intrigue:

“When men freeze at the mouth of a coal mine and starve in front of a bake shop, when the per capita consumption of wheat decreases as population multiplies, when millions of our citizens lack roof and raiment, to say that there is an overproduction of the necessaries of life is both an economic absurdity and an arraignment of our American civilization at the bar of humanity and justice . . .”

At about the same time the Rev. Henry Van Dyke stated in a sermon:

“. . . if Americans do not thirst for garrison duty in the tropics they must be bought or compelled to serve . . . to willfully increase our need of military force by an immense and unnecessary extension of our frontier of danger is to bind a heavy burden and lay it upon the unconscious backs of future generations of toiling men . . . If we go in among them we must fight when they blow the trumpet.”

Further comment on the desperate expedient adopted by the exponents of the “Full Dinner Pail” to fulfill their campaign promise and to overcome the terrible depression of the 90’s appears in an article written by the late Samuel Gompers, President of the American Federation of Labor, in which he stated:

“A ‘foreign war as a cure for domestic discontent’ has been the device of tyrants and false counselors from time immemorial, but it has always lead to a Waterloo, a Sedan, to certain decadence and often utter ruin.”

The above statements are to be found among over thirty great speeches and articles against the great intrigue of 1897 in William J. Bryan’s “Republic or Empire?” published in 1899; and the American statesmen and educators whose they are, proved to have been great and true prophets in the crucible of 45 years; but they are prophets without honor in their own country, for to revive their words is to expose facts that those in interest want forgotten.

[Page 91]

There is no interval in American history so obscure as that between the secret agreement of 1897 and the tipping of the scales in favor of the British-French division of Africa by Theodore Roosevelt at the Conference of Algeciras in 1906. The second Hay-Pauncefote Treaty, one of the greatest political horse-trades of history, was concluded November 18, 1901, in order to obtain the British-French “permission” to build the Panama Canal; but writers and historians of this era are, in general, very vague as to the nature of the deal by which the noxious British restrictions, among other prohibiting the fortification and defense of the Canal Zone, were eliminated from the first treaty of Feb. 5, 1900; which the U. S. Senate had rejected.

John K. Turner in “Shall It Be Again?” published 1922, covers the fact that secret diplomacy was employed by our presidents in precisely the same manner as our allies and enemies employed it; and there is little question that the two presidents who have deplored secrecy and hypocrisy the loudest, Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, were among the most prolific users of secret diplomacy. (See footnote.)

In accordance with the British rule of Empire: “Establish naval bases around the world to control the sea and commerce lanes;” Britain maintains a mighty array of island approaches to the Americas, and while the United States is now permitted air bases on some of these islands; these air bases, constructed at immense cost, must all be returned to become the property of the “Crown” or “City” after the war is over. Despite her rebuff in America after the Civil War, Britain has tolerated, but never accepted, the ideology of Pan-Americanism and the Monroe Doctrine. She has insisted on her full rights as the dispenser of the “Freedom of the Seas,” and therefore building of the Panama Canal required a “material quid pro quo” for the interests of the British-French Financial oligarchy, which in all probability involved our entry into Ideology No. 1, support of their contentions at Algeciras, participation in World War I, and many more things.

———————–

In “From Isolation to Leadership,” published 1918, John Holladay Latane, Professor of American History in the Johns Hopkins University, states in regard to the Conference at Algeciras in 1906, (page 76):

“The facts in regard to America’s part in this conference have never been fully revealed. There is nothing in any published American document to indicate that the participation of our representatives was anything more than casual.

Andre Tardieu, the well-known French publicist, who reported the conference and later published his impressions in book form, makes it evident that President Roosevelt was a positive factor in the proceedings. He states that at a critical stage of the conference the German Kaiser sent several cablegrams to President Roosevelt urging him to modify his instructions to Mr. White.”

“There can be no doubt that our participation in the Moroccan conference was the most radical departure ever made from our traditional policy of isolation. Roosevelt’s influence was exerted for preserving the balance of power in Europe. As we look back upon the events of that year we feel, in view of what has happened that he was fully justified in the course he pursued. Had his motives for participating in the conference been known at the time, they would not have been upheld either by the Senate or by public opinion. There are many serious objections to secret diplomacy, but it cannot be done away with even under a republican form of government until the people are educated to a fuller understanding of international politics.”

[Page 92]

There has been fostered an illusion that some nations have certain established rights in their ideological aims and position, while others are law breakers. To give body to this allusion, there is usually added positive reference to International Law. Prof. Edwin J. Clapp developed in his “Economic Aspects of The War,” mentioned hereinbefore, that there is no such thing as International Law. International Law had consisted of the interpretation of the successive interlocking international agreements made by the nations of the world in meetings assembled under the provisions of the Concert of Europe. The Concert of Europe operated from about 1813 until it was laid to its final rest in the waters of Manila Bay on the morning of May 1, 1898, by International Finance, after it already had been reduced previously to a rather feeble shadow by the same forces. International Finance thereafter salvaged as many of the interpretations of the Concert of Europe as were useful, and added other desirable interpretations by “Order-in-Council,” as needed, as largely developed by Prof. Clapp.

The eminent British engineer, scientist and inventor, Arthur Kitson, Chairman of the Committee of Science and Arts of Franklin Institute of Philadelphia for ten years, and author since 1894 of a number of profound works attacking the fallacy of the “Money Power” and of “Economic Depressions” and of that menacing over-production of food and merchandise side by side with the most dire want condemned by former Congressman Charles A. Towne forty-five years ago as an “economic absurdity,” in an article in the New Britain Magazine of London, of June 20, 1934; cited a devastating assertion by David Lloyd George that “Britain is the slave of an international financial bloc;” quoted words written by Lord Bryce that: “Democracy has no more persistent or insidious foe than the money power . . . ;” pointed out Mr. Winston Churchill as one of the supporters of International Finance; and stated:

“Questions regarding the Bank of England, its conduct and its objects, are not allowed by the Speaker.” (of the House of Commons).

Mr. Kitson stated further:

“Democracy in this country has become a farce! The real governing power is not at Westminster nor at Downing Street, but rests partly in Threadneedle Street and partly in Wall Street, New York! There sits every day in the Bank of England premises, during banking hours, a representative of the Federal Reserve Board of New York for the purpose of advising and even instructing the Governor of the Bank regarding his policies. When the Governor and Deputy-Governor were invited to testify before the recent MacMillan Committee, the Governor introduced Mr. Sprague — his American adviser!”

[Page 93]

This American ascendancy in the affairs of the British Empire has so far cost the American people a vast sum of money, but this money seems to be in the nature of a purchase of an interest in that Empire, for exuberant American post-war planners are openly making plans which seem to proclaim them the successors of those controlling the British Empire; themselves the jugglers of world power which would make certain that the American people would not only be the principal participants in the major wars of the world, but would also take a part in all the minor wars of the British Empire and the world; that borrowing the words of the English Professor Cramb;

“Scarcely a sun will set in the years to come, which will not look upon some American’s face dead in battle — dead not for America — dead to satisfy the ambitions of power-crazed men.”

Mr. Haxey in his “England’s Money Lords M. P.” covers at some length the Anglo-German Fellowship and its high Tory members, among whom is listed Sir Harry Brittain of the Pilgrims. Lord Mount Temple, son-in-law of the great Jewish financier Sir Ernest Cassel, was at one time a Chairman of this organization. Another member, Lord Redesdale, father-in-law of Sir Oswald Mosley, stated in 1936 that he was one of those who considered it high time that some arrangement should be made whereby Germany should have some of her Colonial territory restored to her. Many highly placed Germans were close to these high members of International Finance, and Conservatism and this secret organization may well be prepared to function in any situation where the upstart amateur American planners in their delusions of grandeur forget their junior status in the organization of the master planners of an eventual British dominated world; for, as developed by Prof. Spykman on page 103 of “America’s Strategy in World Politics,” the game of the balance of power permits no enduring friendships. He concludes that British tactics have invariably made the friend of today the opponent of tomorrow. The possibility of the Anglo-German Fellowship taking over from the Pilgrims may not be too remote with only a slight shift in British home politics.

The post-war plans of other countries with large natural resources, particularly those of China and Russia as now indicated, are being shaped to follow the American plan of prosperity by keeping out the goods of other countries in order to encourage their own industry and wealth by the aid of a high tariff wall or some equivalent measure; then to use every possible means of outselling other lands in foreign markets. China, free after 100 years of British overlordship and encirclement, will be a mighty competitor with her intelligent and industrious population. Her bankers and businessmen rank among the most able in the world. Her tariff wall has always been among the highest, but heretofore a large part of the customs has been in British hands, and British agents have disbursed the funds collected by them under the provisions of that part of the “Laws of England” (Vol. 23, p. 307, par 641) quoted in the footnotes of Chapter V.

[Page 94]

According to an article “How Fast Can Russia Rebuild?” by Edgar Snow in the Saturday Evening Post of Feb. 12, 1943, Russia has made some far-reaching post-war plans which apparently do not include any markets in Russia for American made goods; which do definitely propose to equal and surpass the United States in every line of production before 1960. They plan to sell these goods in the same markets for which the United States is fighting, and it would seem that the Commissar of the Russian Foreign Trade Monopoly may have a considerable edge over American private enterprise.

In attempting to meet this foreign competition the United States would be unable to take independent action as a member of Ideology No. 1. It would have to consult and await the views of its British and other associates, and abide by the decision of other peoples. So handicapped, the crash of the American standard of living to the common level, conjectured as a possibility by Professor Usher in “The Challenge of the Future,” published in 1916, is moving into the range of nearby probability; and many of the startling postulates advanced by Professor Usher in his works of 1913; 1915 and 1916, have already moved into the realm of fact.

The American standard of living was well illustrated in a discourse entitled “What the Machine Has Done to Mankind” presented at the 1937 Annual Meeting of the Western Society of Engineers by James Shelby Thomas, in which he stated that with only 7% of the population of the world we produce half of the food crops of this planet, that half of the world’s communication system belongs to us, that we use half of the world’s coffee and tin and rubber, 3/4 th’s of its silk, 1/3 of the coal and 2/3 of all the crude oil in the world; and then goes on to defend the cause of the machine against those that blame on it some of the ills of the world.

The American people lead the world in science and invention, but their geopolitical sense has not kept in step with developments, so there is cause to fear that in that respect the United States is in the precarious predicament of the prehistoric dinosaur whose body grew too large for its head. Instead of ascribing the marvelous prosperity of the United States to its self-sufficiency and its isolation from the wars and the crushing burden of armaments and taxation that have kept the people of Europe in endless and hopeless poverty, a false theory has been created that this prosperity depends on eliminating other peoples from the markets of the world; a resurrection of the barbarous conceptions of biblical times in which conquering hosts put whole peoples to the sword.

[Page 95]

It is said that only a few dozen men in the world know the nature of money; and therefore these few men are allowed to practice the manipulation of money and of that mysterious commodity known as credit as a mystic rite, despite the fact that their machinations cause recurrent giant depressions in which many of the life savings of the people are lost, and cause recurrent gigantic bloodshed in which the people must sacrifice their lives to protect the manipulators from the fury of those nations and peoples who have been their victims; and despite the fact that eminent students of high business, financial and social position, such as Vincent C. Vickers and Arthur Kitson, have condemned this money system as a fraud; have condemned the men who manipulate it as super-criminals and traitors to their own lands and peoples, and have condemned the recurring economic depressions and wars as the deliberate products of the money power.

The deranged conception that a nation to retain its prosperity and to escape return to stagnation and poverty, must always continue to sell more than it buys, most certainly demands that some other nation or nations must always buy more than they sell. Once these other nations have exhausted their surplus gold and credits this process must end, and the account must be added up and balanced. To keep up American-British preponderance of sales the process was artifically extended and aggravated by the extension of immense credits by International Finance to those countries drained of gold, adding an immense interest burden to their already seriously strained economy, and thus paving the way to repudiation, anarchy and dictatorship as a release from an impossible dilemma.

The power of International Finance rests upon the doctrine of government advanced by Niccolo Machiavelli, which holds that any means, however unscrupulous, may be justifiably employed in order to maintain a strong central government; and this doctrine has always been used as a vindication and the mandate of imperialists and dictators, and it cannot gain a foothold unless the forces of freedom have become undermined and are no longer able to offer open opposition. (See footnote.)

The people could regain their power by voting into office men definitely on record in opposition to International Finance. The power of International Finance could then be curbed by prohibiting any interchange of international values or credits by any private agency, and the prohibition of any intercourse or dealings by any government representative with any private agency, such as the Bank of England, in any foreign country. Foreign trade could be conducted under the supervision of a Commission formed of representatives of all nations, operating a central bank dealing only in credits arising out of commodity sales and purchases; permitting no interchange of gold or paper credits except under its strict supervision. By this means no nation would be able to sell more values than they are able to buy.

———————–

In a lengthy well-detailed article “Let’s Quit Pretending” in the Saturday Evening Post of December 18, 1943, Demaree Bess described the extent of the deceptions and the contradictions by which “propagandists” and the Government have kept the American people in the dark as to their foreign position over a period of years. He described how far the American Government was actively engaged in war with unconditional commitments to foreign governments and foreign political factions months before Pearl Harbor. He dwelt also on the fears of many Americans that a “bad mess” may result in this country out of the expenditure of American lives and money to bring about a world such as is apparently in the making.

[Page 96]

The United States would not be affected very adversely as will be readily apparent from an examination of foreign trade statistics over the past 45 years, in short our foreign trade was never very important; and would actually profit by trade with a revived Europe. Nations with large populations and small natural resources and territory, being obliged to import heavily, would also be able to sell in proportion; thus overcoming a large part of the lack in self-sufficiency. Debtor nations to be permitted excess sales to liquidate their obligations, and their creditors to be penalized equivalent values in sales until the debts are liquidated. Other affairs between nations to be subject to a semi-formal organization such as the late Concert of Europe, electing its own temporary presiding officers and allowing no man, or nation, or group of nations a definite ascendancy; and subjecting each representative to qualification as to personal connection with any power or pressure group.

As matters stand now, with the end of the war considered by many as a near-by possibility, there is little talk of a “Peace Conference” or of some world organization, such as the League of Nations of the last war, to take over after the war. It appears that the end of the war is to find the defeated in the position of apprehended criminals coming up to the bar to hear their sentence from the lips of the dictators of the “United Nations;” with subsequent events in the hands of “Post-War Planners.”

In the penetrating classic, “The American Commonwealth,” published in 1888, James Bryce stated: