Thursday, March 21, 2013

The Sum of All Things 4

Live and on-air, folks... all day long... this Saturday, April the 13th...

... And on May the 11th!

Join me from 4:30 to 5:00 PM Central

Click below for the continuous streaming of this most recent live monthly event

Listen to the Archives 


“True wisdom comes to each of us when we realize how little we understand about life, ourselves, and the world around us.”



What is hateful to thee, do not unto thy fellowman; this is the whole of the Law. The rest is but commentary.

--Rabbi Hillel (30 BC – 10 AD)


“Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.”

--Samuel Johnson (Apr. 7, 1775)


“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”

--William Pitt, November 18, 1783


“A well-instructed people alone can permanently be a free people.”

--James Madison (Dec.  5, 1810) 


“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

--H.L. Mencken


Research completed by chemist Charles E. Perkins surmises the consumption of fluoridated water best:

“…any person who drinks artificially fluorinated water for a period of one year or more will never be the same person mentally or physically.” 

(October 2 1954)

 "...I am committed against everything which, in my judgment, may weaken, endanger, or destroy the 1787 Constitution... and especially against all extensions of  Executive power; and I am committed against any attempt to rule the free people of this country by the power and patronage of the Government itself..." 

--Daniel Webster


“In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence:

                                  Abolition of private property.”                                             

Karl Marx – Communist Manifesto chapter 2, 1848


  "Our age has seen priests of the mind teaching that gregarious is the praiseworthy form of thought, and that independent thought is contemptible. It is moreover certain that the group which desires to be strong has no use for a man who claims to think for himself."

  --Julien Benda, in La Trahison Des Clercs

     The Treason of the Intellectuals (1927)


We are at present working discreetly, with all our might, to wrest this mysterious force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local nation states of the world.  And all the time we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands."

 Arnold Toynbee – International Affairs, p.809, November 1931


“Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.”

--John Adams, letter to John Taylor, April 15, 1814


“Gold is the money of kings; Silver the money of gentlemen; Barter the money of peasants; But debt is the money of slaves.”

--Norman Franz


"... The Idumeans (Edomites) were... made Jews... and a Turkish people (Khazars) were mainly Jews in South Russia... The main part of Jewry never was in Judea and had never come out of Judea."

--H.G. Wells, The Outline of History, 3rd ed., MacMillian, 1921, p. 494


 “Only those who decline to scramble up the career ladder are interesting as human beings. Nothing is more boring than a man with a career.”

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago 1918-1956


 "... The large majority of surviving Jews are of Eastern European origin, and thus perhaps mainly of Khazar origin... their ancestors came not from the Jordan but from the Volga, not from Canaan, but from the Caucasus... and that genetically they are more closely related to the Hun, Uigur and Magyar tribes than to the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob."

--Arthur Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe, 1967, p. 17


"Only one thing is needed to lead us to march forward more surely and more firmly to victory: namely, the consciousness everywhere that all communists, in all countries, must display the maximum flexibility in their tactics."

--Vladimir Lenin


“It makes no difference who you vote for – the two parties are really one party representing 4 percent of the people.”

 –Gore Vidal


"The Zionists and their co-religionists RULE these United States as though they were ABSOLUTE MONARCHS."

--Benjamin Freedman, 1961

  ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~

Remember that 'private money' produces 'private law' which results in ‘institutionalized slavery’ for ~everyone else~ that's touched by it.

Then too, that...

socialism = gangsterism = slavery

…And, yes…

[Jewish] capitalism + [Jewish] communism = communitarianism

 –Lark In Texas

~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~

 Non-Violence is a bronze sculpture by Carl Fredrik Reuterswärd of an oversized Colt Python .357 Magnum revolver with a knotted barrel and the muzzle pointing upwards. This is the original outside the United Nations Headquarters in New York City, USA.

Since 1993, the Non-Violence sculpture - also known as Knotted Gun - is the symbol of The Non-Violence Project, a non-profit organisation, promoting social change with violence prevention education programs.

 no justice; no peace

Recent correspondence... entitled:

Comprehensive and irrefutable proof of the worldwide Jewish conspiracy

The idea of secret societies being the force behind Communism was actually first noted not by White Russians but by Benjamin Disraeli, who stated [this in], "Lord George Bentinck: A Political Biography" (Colburn & Co., London, 1852, p. 497): 

Here is my refutation of Wikipedia's "New World Order (Conspiracy Theory)" article.  

New World Order (conspiracy theory)

By extension, it refutes much of your work. I did admit before to you that "aside from whatever nitty gritty details one wants to get into when analyzing claims, the fundamental problem with conspiracist thinking is this - it posits a world of "good" people vs. "evil" people. It assumes that if you get rid of the "evil" people, everything will be good. Violence in the world is an aggregate of all of our actions. It seems to me that the way out is to work within oneself to cease to be a part of that aggregate." I maintain this position. I would not want to live in a world dominated by many of the racial and religious extremists who are traditionally enmired in conspiracism, who want to replace the extremism they are opposing with their own. But, it is my view that illegitimate power certainly operates in the world as it stands now, and I attempt to substantiate this below. I have attempted to make everything as independently verifiable as possible. Here is my attempt to prove these claims:

Regarding the statement - "During the Red Scare of 1947–1957, agitators of the American secular and Christian right, influenced by the work of Canadian conspiracy theorist William Guy Carr, increasingly embraced and spread unfounded fears of Freemasons, Illuminati, and Jews being the driving force behind an "international communist conspiracy"."

My refutation:

Arguments against the idea of a Communist Conspiracy are refuted in Blacklisted by History (response to criticism of it, from Evans, is here:

The ex-Communist Louis Budenz noted the following of his superior J. Peters (Goldberger), who was a member of Bela Kun's regime in Hungary, "As a matter of fact, it was Peters who introduced me to the idea of the conspiratorial apparatus of the Communist Party. 

... He told me that the Communist Party is like a submerged submarine: 

The part you see above water is the periscope, but the part underneath is the real Communist organization; that is the conspiratorial apparatus."

(Hearings Regarding Communist Espionage in the United States Government. Hearings Before the Committee on Un-American Activities. House of Representatives. Eightieth Congress. Second Session. Public Law 601. Section 121, Subsection Q (2). July 31 ; August 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 20, 24, 25, 26, 27, 30 ; September 8 and 9, 1948. United States Government Priting Office. 1948. p.621 - bottom paragraph): 

The Librarian of Congress, James Billington, agreed with Nesta Webster that the Bavarian Illuminati initiated the Revolutionary flame, though he was not nearly as emphatic as her in trying to prove it's continuity. He did say, however, in "Fire in the Minds of Men" (his intellectual history of revolutionaries) that Illuminism exported the revolutionary fervor to France and suggested it lived on. Here are some quotes: (pp. 19-20) 

"Thus Germany - not France - gave birth to the sweeping, modern idea of revolution as a secular upheaval more universal in reach and more transforming in scope than any purely political change. This concept was transported to Paris by Count Mirebeau, a Former French ambassador in Berlin ... Mirebeau popularized the Illuminist term "revolution of the mind," introduced the phrase "great revolution", and invented the words "revolutionary," "counter-revolution," and "counter-revolutionary."": [1]

Billington also noted that Fillipo Buonarroti, the "Plato" of Revolution, was obsessed with Romantic Occultism (p. 91): [2], and stated (p. 99) "Whether or not Buonarroti was in effect propagating an Illuminist program during his revolutionary activity of the 1790s. he had clearly internalized a number of Illuminist ideals well before his revolutionary blueprint of 1810-1811. [Billington gives examples, and then states] Such borrowings from Illuminism seem substantial enough to challenge the long accepted judgement of the leading student of the subject that, after 1790, Illuminism "having disappeared from history ... lived on only in legend." 

There seems good reason to believe that Illuminist influence was not so much a "legend" as an imperfectly perceived reality. The same historian's perplexed observation that "the police legend" about Illuminists began to "develop with more amplitude and originality" in the Napoleonic era points to a surprising source of Illuminist influence.": [3]

"But existing society has chosen to persecute this race which should furnish it's choice allies, and what have been the consequences? They may be traced to the last outbreak of the destructive principle in Europe. An insurrection takes place against tradition and aristocracy, against religion and property. Destruction of the Semitic principle, extirpation of the Jewish religion, whether in the Mosaic or Christian form, the natural equality of men and the abrogation of property are proclaimed by the Secret Societies which form Provisional Governments, and men of the Jewish race are found at the head of every one of them. 
The people of God cooperate with atheists; the most skillful accumulators of property ally themselves with Communists; the peculiar and chosen race touch the hand of all the scum and low castes of Europe; and all this because they wish to destroy that ungrateful Christendom which owes them even its name, and whose tyranny they can no longer endure." (the search function is not working for this book, but go to the page cited and you will see that this is an accurate citation): [4]

In 1856, before the House of Commons, Disraeli stated of these secret societies: "There is in Italy a power which we seldom mention in this House ... I mean the secret societies.... It is useless to deny, because it is impossible to conceal, that a great part of Europe - the whole of Italy and France and a great portion of Germany, to say nothing of other countries - is covered with a network of these secret societies, just as the superficies of the earth is now being covered with railroads. And what are their objects? They do not attempt to conceal them. They do not want constitutional government; they do not want ameliorated institutions ... they want to change the tenure of land, to drive out the present owners of the soil and to put an end to ecclesiastical establishments. Some of them may go further..." (Hansard, Thomas C. Hansard's Parliamentary Debates: Third Series, Vol. CXLIII. Published by Cornelius Buck, London, 1856. p. 773): [5]

One of the members of these secret societies was the Jewish Freemason ( Moses Hess, who is described in the the Encyclopedia of Zionism in Israel as follows: "Hess was thus a forerunner of political and cultural Zionism and of socialist Zionism in particular. ... He became deeply involved in the rising socialist movement. Karl Marx and Frederick Engels acknowledged that they had learned much from him during the formative years of the movement.":

Many Jewish academics note that Hess was the real founder of BOTH Communism and Zionism, as in the text "Moses Hess: Prophet of Communism and Zionism" by Shlomo Avineri (and in his other works):

Significantly - a direct lineage from Illuminism can be traced -
The Journalist Eugene H. Methvin, in his book, “Rise of Radicalism: The Social Psychology of Messianic Extremism”, noted how Buonarotti’s influence extended to Moses Hess, the mentor of Karl Marx, who was also a key founder of the Zionist movement (p. 151): 

“In October of 1842 Frederick Engels stopped in Cologne and spent an afternoon with Moses Hess, then 30, who was known as the ‘communist rabbi’ for his missionary zeal in proselytizing for French utopian ideas. Hess later wrote a friend, ‘Engels, an embryonic revolutionary, parted from me the most enthusiastic communist’. Engels himself credited his conversion to Dr. Hess, and a year later expressly declared that the latter was ‘the first to make communism plausible to me and my circle’. He goes on to say, ‘Marx and Engels planned to publish a German edition of Buonarroti’s Conspiration pour l’egalite (Conspiracy for Equality), translated by Moses Hess … Marx’s extensive collection of books on the French Revolution contained a copy of Buonarroti’s Conspiration’.”:

 Karl Marx actually coined the term "New World Order" in the text “The Holy Family”, where he said: “The revolutionary movement which began in 1789 in the Cercle Social, which in the middle of its course had as its chief representatives Leclerc and Roux, and which finally with Babeuf’s conspiracy was temporarily defeated, gave rise to the communist idea which Babeuf’s friend Buonarroti re-introduced in France after the Revolution in 1830. This idea, consistently developed, is the idea of the new world order.”:

The Dreyfusard and Zionist Bernard Lazare noted in "Antisemitism: It's History and Causes"  the following, related to Karl Marx: The descendant of a long line of rabbis and teachers he inherited the splendid powers of his ancestors. He had that clear Talmudic mind which does not falter at the petty difficulties of fact. He was a Talmudist devoted to sociology and applying his native power of exegesis to the criticism of economic theory. He was inspired by that ancient Hebraic materialism, which, rejecting as too distant and doubtful the hope of an Eden after death, never ceased to dream of Paradise realized on earth. But Marx was not merely a logician, he was also a rebel, an agitator, an acrid controversialist, and he derived his gift for sarcasm and invective, as Heine did, from his Jewish ancestry. -

Incidentally, the archivist Salluste cited on p. 574 of his article  a letter from Baruch Levy to Karl Marx, which stated the following:

“The Jewish people as a whole will become its own Messiah. It will attain world dominion by the dissolution of other races, by the abolition of frontiers, the annihilation of monarchy and by the establishment of a world republic in which the Jews will everywhere exercise the privilege of citizenship.
In this New World Order the children of Israel will furnish all the leaders without encountering opposition. The Governments of the different peoples forming the world republic will fall without difficulty into the hands of the Jews. It will then be possible for the Jewish rulers to abolish private property and everywhere to make use of the resources of the state. Thus will the promise of the Talmud be fulfilled, in which is said that when the Messianic time is come, the Jews will have all the property of the whole world in their hands.”:

This is consistent with the writings of Marx given above, and with Jewish religious writings given below.

These beliefs actually do have an independently verifiable presence in Judaism. You may claim the following quotations are anti-Semitic, but they are relevant quotes from the source texts. adherents of this religion do a lot to obfuscate it, but if you do enough digging, the blemishes are there for all to see - as well as the lies of apologists. An example of the lies of apologists is provided here:

The relevant section from the Talmud is given below, in bold, but first, here are some other relevant citations:
In Isaiah 45:7 we find the following attributed to this "God" of the Old Testament: "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."

Deuteronomy 7:2 states “And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them”.

Exodus 19:5-6 states “Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people, for all the earth is mine. And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.”

Deuteronomy 15:6 states: “For the LORD thy God blesseth thee, as he promised thee: and thou shalt lend unto many nations, but thou shalt not borrow; and thou shalt reign over many nations, but they shall not reign over thee.”

Isaiah 60:16-17 states: “Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob. For brass I will bring gold, and for iron I will bring silver, and for wood brass, and for stones iron: I will also make thy officers peace, and thine exactors righteousness.”

The Old Testament book of Deuteronomy 7:16 states: "And thou shalt consume all the people which the LORD thy God shall deliver thee."

The Old Testament book of Ezekiel states: "Assemble yourselves, and come; gather yourselves on every side to my sacrifice that I do sacrifice for you, even a great sacrifice for you, even a great sacrifice upon the mountains of Israel, that ye may eat flesh and drink blood. Ye shall eat the flesh of the mighty, and drink the blood of the princes of the earth (39:17-18)… And ye shall eat fat till ye be full, and drink blood till ye be drunken (39:19)… and I will set my glory among the heathen, and all the heathen shall see my judgment that I have executed, and my hand that I have laid upon them (39:21)."

Treatise Soferim II, which contains what a Rabbi must say during a conversion process (and even converted Jews are demeaned in comparison to others), states, “the world was created only for the sake of Israel. There are none called the children of God, except Israel. There are none beloved of God, except Israel.” (

There are also some rather perverse parts of the Talmud. Tractate Sanhedrin (2A) Folios 42B-54B, states, “[As taught in Niddah 44b, intercourse with a girl less than three has no legal significance. Thus, for example, if a father commits incest with his daughter who is less than three, he is not liable to the death penalty.]” (,

Also, in this tradition, when a baby is circumcised, the Rabbi performs fellatio on him (, and adult Jewish women used to fight over who got to eat the freshly severed foreskin (!

It has incredible misogyny. The Soncino, English language edition of the Babylonian Talmud, Shabbath 152a reads: “Though a woman be as a pitcher full of filth and her mouth full of blood, yet all speed after her.” (

In Judaism Volume 32, published in 1983 by the American Jewish Congress, they quote from the Talmud as follows: “When the Messiah comes, all will be slaves to Israel.” (

In the Soncino edition (toned down): Eiruvin 43b, we find: “… the moment the Messiah comes all will be anxious to serve (slaves) Israel.” (, also, you should be able to find that text midway in this pdf:

In BT Shabbath 32b, we find that each Jew is promised 2800 slaves in the “messianic age” (

So, we thought the Talmud was bad, let’s look at the Zohar. Bereshith 47a of the Zohar states:

“living soul” refers to Israel, who have holy living souls from above, and "cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth” to the other peoples who are not “living soul”" (H. Sperling and M. Simon, Editors, “Bereshith 47a”, The Zohar, Volume 1, The Soncino Press, New York, (1984), p. 147):

Perhaps one of the most revealing expressions of the intentions and objectives of this group can be found in the following passage from an older translation of the Zohar:

“Happy will be the lot of Israel, whom the Holy One, blessed be He, has chosen from amongst the Gentile peoples of whom the Scriptures say: “Their work is but vanity, it is an illusion at which we must laugh; they will all perish when God visits them in His wrath.” At the moment when the Holy One, blessed be He, will exterminate all the Gentile peoples of the world, Israel alone will subsist, even as it is written: “The Lord alone will appear great on that day.”" (Jean de Pavly, Editor, “Vayschlah 177b”, Sepher ha-Zohar (Le livre de la splendeur), Volume II, Emile Lafuma-Giraud, Paris, (1908), p. 298):

And Rabbi Harry Waton clarified how Communism was an outgrowth of Judaism, stating, "It is not an accident that Judaism gave birth to Marxism, and it is not an accident that the Jews readily took up Marxism; all this was in perfect accord with the progress of Judaism and the Jews. The Jews should realize that Jehovah no longer dwells in heaven, but he dwells in us right here on earth ; we must no longer look up to Jehovah as above us and outside of us, but we must see him right within us." (Rabbi Harry Waton, A Program for the Jews and Humanity and An Answer to All Anti-Semites, p. 148):
So here we can see the paradox of so many Jewish Communists purportedly being "Atheists". These people had no need to believe in a transcendent God, since, as the master race, they themselves were "G_d". The Jewish people as a whole were their own Messiah.

Waton also noted (p. 90): “Since the Jews are the highest and most cultured people on earth, the Jews have a right to subordinate to themselves the rest of mankind and to be the masters over the whole earth. Now, indeed, this is the historic destiny of the Jews...”

He also stated (p. 100): "Judaism is communism, internationalism, the universal brotherhood of man, the emancipation of the working class and the human society. It is with these spiritual weapons that the Jews will conquer the world and the human race."

In its article on “Messianic Movements”, the Encyclopaedia Judaica writes (p. 121): “In his letters Leopold Zunz referred many times to the European revolution of 1848 as ‘the Messiah.’ Even many Jews who left the faith tended to invest secular liberation movements with a messianic glow.”:

The connection between Illuminism and Bolshevism was sealed by the admission of Leon Trotsky, who, along with Lenin, was the most preeminent revolutionary said, in "My Life" (describing his time in the Odessa prisons): "It was during that period that I became interested in freemasonry.

... In the eighteenth century freemasonry became expressive of a militant policy of enlightenment, as in the case of the Illuminati, who were the forerunners of the revolution; on its left it culminated in the Carbonari. Freemasons counted among their members both Louis XVI and the Dr. Guillotin who invented the guillotine. In southern Germany freemasonry assumed an openly revolutionary character, whereas at the court of Catherine the Great it was a masquerade reflecting the aristocratic and bureaucratic hierarchy. A freemason Novikov was exiled to Siberia by a freemason Empress. ... I discontinued my work on freemasonry to take up the study of Marxian economics. ... The work on freemasonry acted as a sort of test for these hypotheses. ... I think this influenced the whole course of my intellectual development.": 

In “The Jewish Experience” (1996, p. 364), Jewish historian Norman Cantor admits: “The Bolshevik Revolution and some of its aftermath represented, from one perspective, Jewish revenge. … During the heyday of the Cold War, American Jewish publicists spent a lot of time denying that—as 1930s anti-Semites claimed—Jews played a disproportionately important role in Soviet and world Communism. The truth is until the early 1950s Jews did play such a role, and there is nothing to be ashamed of. In time Jews will learn to take pride in the record of the Jewish Communists in the Soviet Union and elsewhere. It was a species of striking back.”:

There is more to the supposedly "unprovoked” "evil deeds" done against Jews in "pogroms" than meets the eye. The actual content of the Czar’s 1882 edict was as follows: “For some time the government has given its attention to the Jews and to their relations to the rest of the inhabitants of the empire, with a view of ascertaining the sad condition of the Christian inhabitants brought about by the conduct of Jews in business matters. … With few exceptions, they have as a body devoted their attention, not to enriching or benefiting the country, but to defrauding by their wiles its inhabitants, and particularly its poor inhabitants. This conduct of theirs has called forth protests on the part of the people, … thought it a matter of urgency and justice to adopt stringent measures in order to put an end to the oppression practiced by the Jews on the inhabitants, and to free the country from their malpractices, which were, as is known, the cause of the agitations.”: 

The Jewishness of Bolshevism has been intentionally obfuscated, but is well noted by authoritative sources. Harold Laski, perhaps one of the foremost experts on Communism, in his article on Bolshevism in the Encyclopedia Britannica (1946), said “In 1897 was founded the Bund, the union of Jewish workers in Poland and Lithuania … They engaged in revolutionary activity upon a large scale, and their energy made them the spear-head of the Party” (Article on “Bolshevism” by Harold J. Laski, Encyclopedia Britannica, 1946, Vol. III, p. 824):

the 1905 Jewish encyclopedia admitted: “While in Germany socialism has attracted individual Jews, in Russia it has become a movement of the Jewish masses.”:

When discussing the revolution of 1905, William Eleroy Curtis, before the National Geographic Society, stated the following:


Perhaps these reforms are the cause of the present tranquility, because the revolutionary leaders nearly all belong to the Jewish race and the most effective revolutionary agency is the Jewish Bund, which has its headquarters at Bialystok, where the massacre occurred last June. The government has suffered more from that race than from all of its other subjects combined. Whenever a desperate deed is committed it is always done by a Jew, and there is scarcely one loyal member of that race in the entire Empire. The great strike which paralyzed the Empire and compelled the Czar to grant a constitution and a parliament was ordered and managed by a Jew named Krustaleff, president of the workingmen’s council, a young man only thirty years old. He was sent to the penitentiary for life, and had not been behind the bars more than three weeks when he organized and conducted a successful strike of the prison employees.

Maxim, who organized and conducted the revolution in the Baltic provinces, is a Jew of marvelous ability. Last fall he came over here lecturing and collecting money to carry on the revolutionary campaign, but for some reason has vanished and nobody seems to know what has become of him.

Gerschunin, the most resourceful leader of the terrorists, who was condemned to life imprisonment in the silver mines on the Mongolian frontier, has recently escaped in a water cask, and is supposed to be in San Francisco. He is a Polish Jew only twenty-seven years old. I might enumerate a hundred other revolutionary leaders and every one of them would be a Jew. 

Wherever you read of an assassination or of the explosion of a bomb you will notice in the newspaper dispatches that the man was a Jew. The most sensational and dramatic episode that has occurred since the mutinies was on October 27, when, in the very center of Saint Petersburg, at the entrance of Kazan Cathedral, four Jews held up a treasury wagon and captured $270,000. They passed the package to a woman, who instantly vanished, and no trace of her has ever been found; but they were all arrested and were promptly punished. On the 8th of November a few Jewish revolutionaries entered a treasury car near Ragow, in Poland, got $850,000 and disappeared.

Every deed of that kind is done by Jews, and the massacres that have shocked the universe, and occurred so frequently that the name ‘pogrom’ was invented to describe them, were organized and managed by the exasperated police authorities in retaliation for crimes committed by the Jewish revolutionists.” (W. E. Curtis, “The Revolution in Russia”, The National Geographic Magazine, Volume 18, Number 5, (May, 1907), pp. 313-314): 

At the onset of the Bolshevik Revolution, Winston Churchill, in an article in the Illustrated Sunday Herald, noted that "The fact that in many cases Jewish interests and Jewish places of worship are excepted by the Bolsheviks from their universal hostility has tended more and more to associate the Jewish race in Russia with the villainies which are now being perpetrated."

He also discussed the connection between Illuminism and Bolshevism in that article, writing:

"From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognisable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.": 

The latter item has been verified, the former item can be verified by the fact that Edward Schoonmaker, writing in “Democracy and World Dominion” (1939, p. 211), discussed how the Bolsheviks razed churches, but spared synagogues:

“Fifteen years after the Bolshevist Revolution was launched to carry out the Marxist program, the editor of the American Hebrew could write:

"According to such information [as] the writer could secure while in Russia a few weeks ago, not one Jewish synagogue has been torn down, as have hundreds—perhaps thousands—of the Greek Catholic churches. …" (American Hebrew, Nov. 18, 1932, p. 12.) Apostate Jews, leading a revolution that was to destroy religion as the “opiate of the people," had somehow spared the synagogues of Russia.":

In "The Controversy of Zion", by the Central European London Times correspondent of the 1930s Douglas Reed, in a chapter entitled "The World Revolution Again", we read the following:

"The simultaneous triumphs of Bolshevism in Moscow and Zionism in London in the same week of 1917 were only in appearance distinct events. The identity of their original source has been shown in an earlier chapter, and the hidden men who promoted Zionism through the Western governments also supported the world-revolution. The two forces fulfilled correlative tenets of the ancient Law: “Pull down and destroy … rule over all nations”; the one destroyed in the East and the other secretly ruled in the West....The fact of Jewish leadership was a supremely important piece of knowledge and the later suppression of it, where public debate would have been sanative, produced immense effects in weakening the West. The formulation of any rational State policy becomes impossible when such major elements of knowledge are excluded from public discussion; it is like playing billiards with twisted cues and elliptical balls.  

The strength of the conspiracy is shown by its success in this matter (as in the earlier period, of Messrs. Robison, Barruel and Morse) more than by any other thing.

At the time, the facts were available. The British Government's White Paper of 1919 (Russia, No. 1, a Collection of Reports on Bolshevism) quoted the report sent to Mr. Balfour in London in 1918 by the Netherlands Minister at Saint Petersburg, M. Oudendyke: “Bolshevism is organized and worked by Jews, who have no nationality and whose one object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things.” The United States Ambassador, Mr. David R. Francis, reported similarly: “The Bolshevik leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90 percent of whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country but are internationalists and they are trying to start a worldwide social revolution.” M. Oudendyke's report was deleted from later editions of the British official publication and all such authentic documents of that period are now difficult to obtain."

The writings by David Francis are available:

Other officials of the time period noted this.  In November 1917, Count Ottokar von Czernin, the Foreign Minister of the Austro-Hungarian empire wrote:   "I have during the last few days received reliable information about the Bolsheviks. Their leaders are almost all of them Jews with altogether fantastic ideas, and I do not envy the country that is governed by them.":

In "Red Dusk and the Morrow" (page 303), by Sir Paul Dukes, formerly Chief of the British Secret Service in Russia, we read that a Lithuanian asked a prominent Bolshevik how the regime was maintained. The answer was: "Our power is based on three things: first, on Jewish brains; secondly, on Lettish and Chinese bayonets; and thirdly, on the crass stupidity of the Russian people.": 

And the documents Reed notes were difficult to obtain are now available. The British White paper on Bolshevism is an interesting source showing how the Jewishness of Bolshevism was later obfuscated - the initial report shows that it was so Jewish that it may be called Jewish - search "Jew" in the document for some chilling revelations:

p. 80 quotes Zinoviev as saying, "To overcome our enemies we must have our own Socialist Militarism. We must win over to our side, 90 millions out of the 100 millions of population of Russia under the Soviets. As for the rest, we have nothing to say to them; they must be annihilated."

Lenin desired for 90% of the Russian people to perish in order that 10% could be converted to the Communist faith:

The South African journalist Ivor Benson, who was associated with Douglas Reed, provides insight into these atrocities in his article "Russia 1917-1918: A Key to the Riddle of an Age of Conflict":  

Many of the Jewish Communists changed their names in order to get rid of the suspicion that Bolshevism was a Jewish Conspiracy (see the Encyclopedia Judaica, Volume 5, p. 91, which noted that the Communist International actually instructed Jews to change their names so as to “not confirm right-wing propaganda that presented Communism as an alien, Jewish conspiracy.”: 

Robert Wilton, the London Times Correspondent to Russia during the Revolution, in the French edition of The Last Days of the Romanovs, reprinted the official Bolshevik lists, which presented the proportion of Jews to gentiles in the Bolshevik leadership as much higher than was later claimed, namely, that out of the 556 important functionaries of the Bolshevik State there were in 1918-1919: 17 Russians, 2 Ukrainians, 11 Armenians, 35 Lets, 15 Germans, 1 Hungarian, 10 Georgians, 2 Poles, 2 Finns, 1 Karaim, and 457 Jews. Wilton also noted that the murderers of the Romanovs left behind an adaptation of the Jewish poet Heinrich Heine's lines on the fate of Belshazzar, King of the Chaldeans who, according to the Old Testament Book of Daniel, was murdered as God's punishment for an affront offered to Judah.  Douglas Reed, in the chapter of "The Controversy of Zion", cited the Official History of the Times to the effect that Wilton was deemed an extremely reliable reporter, but that he began to be shunned as soon as Zionist circles developed a distaste for his dispatches from Russia  (and this can be corroborated - see "The History of the Times" relevant to the time period)[6]. The English edition of Wilton's text was censored, but the French edition is more explicit. It also contains the pictures proving his claims (of ritual murder) that were omitted from the English edition:

Wilton's lists were corroborated in testimony before the Overman Committee in 1918, on p. 142 of the Hearings before the sub-committee on Bolshevik propaganda, which notes the adoption of pseudonyms by the Bolsheveki:

A chart purporting to show the percentage of Jews in the party as low is known to have been from a report full of errors:  

As for the actual percentage of Jews in the Communist apparatus, State Department documents, and other authoritative sources, show that they constituted over 50% of the Communist officials in Soviet Russia. 

State Department document 861.00/1757 was sent on 2 May 1918, from Moscow by US Consul General Summers. The lower one, State Department document 861.00/2205, was sent from Vladivostok on 5 July 1918, by US Consul Caldwell. Both describe the domination of the Bolshevik Communists by Jews, using the words "Fifty per cent of Soviet Government in each town consists of Jews of the worst type..."

Here also are snippets of Army Intelligence reports written by Captain Montgomery Schuyler. Schuyler made a point of the heavy Jewish involvement in the Communist revolution. Schuyler wrote that "It is probably unwise to say this loudly in the United States but the Bolshevik movement is and has been since its beginning guided and controlled but Russians Jews of the greasiest type.." and went on to point out that of the total 384 commissars running the Soviet Union, more than 300 were Jews.":

Stuart Kahan, in "The Wolf of the Kremlin", said "That Trotsky, unquestionably the most outstanding man among the Bolsheviks, was a Jew did not seem an insuperable obstacle in a party in which the percentage of Jews, 52 percent, was rather high compared to the percentage of Jews (1.8 per cent) in the total population." (Stuart Kahan, The Wolf of the Kremlin, p. 81). Kahan's book has been disputed, but arguments in it's favor are here - see the section entitled "Reply to the Statement of the Kaganovich family":

The Jewish quarterly of 1968 noted that Jewish domination of the Soviet Union occurred past Stalin, under the regime of Nikita Khrushchev, when the Minister of Culture, Yekaterina Furtseva, freely admitted that “the Government has found in some of its departments a heavy concentration of Jewish people, upwards of 50 per cent of its staff.”:

To illustrate the extent of the historical re-write, it is important to note that The Autobiography of Bertrand Russell: 1914-1944 (Little, Brown & Co., Boston 1968, p. 172) contains a letter in which he says "Bolshevism is a close tyrannical bureaucracy, with a spy system more elaborate and terrible than the Tsar's, and an aristocracy as insolent and unfeeling, composed of Americanised Jews. No vestige of liberty remains, in thought or speech or action." An image of this page is here: 

This is significant, because Russell was the exact opposite of a "Fascist" or "Black Hundreds member", the people who are supposed to have "fabricated" the connection between Jews and Bolshevism. He was a Fabian Socialist and a pro-Communist. So the situation must have been really bad for him to have made such a comment.

There is some controversy over Jewish bankers financing the bolshevik regime. There is some evidence for this though. The New York times specifically notes how Jacob Schiff contributed to the spread of 1905 revolutionary propaganda, stating (March 24, 1917, pp. 1-2):

"George Kennan, told of how a movement by the Society of the Friends of Russian Freedom, financed by Jacob H. Schiff, had at the time of the Russo-Japanese war spread among 50,000 Russian officers and men in Japanese prison camps the gospel of the Russian revolutionists. 'And,' said Mr. Kennan, 'we know how the army helped the Duma in the bloodless revolution that made the new Russia last week.' ...
Mr. Kennan told of the work of the Friends of Russian Freedom in the revolution.

He said that during the Japanese-Russian war he was in Tokio, and that he was permitted to make visits among the 12,000 Russian prisoners in Japanese hands at the end of the first year of the war. He told how they had asked him to give them something to read, and he had conceived the idea of putting revolutionary propaganda into the Russian Army.

The Japanese authorities favored it and gave him permission. Later he sent to America for all the Russian revolutionary literature to be had. He said that one day Dr. Nicholas Russell came to him in Tokio, unannounced, and said that he had been sent to help the work.

'The movement was financed by a New York banker you all know and love,' he said, referring to Mr. Schiff, 'and soon we received a ton and a half of Russian revolutionary propaganda. At the end of the war 50,000 Russian officers and men went back to their country ardent revolutionists.

The Friends of Russian Freedom had sowed 50,000 seeds of liberty in 100 Russian regiments. I do not know how many of those officers and men were in the Petrograd fortress last week, but we do know what part the army took in the revolution.'":

Schiff's role in supporting the Kerensky regime is well known - B.C. Forbes, in Men Who Are Making America, quoted Schiff as stating, "The Russian revolution is possibly the most important event in Jewish history since the race was brought out of slavery.":

In a Report on a May 1917 celebratory dinner of the "American Jewish Friends of a Free Russia", Jacob Schiff was introduced as a "Russian Revolutionist" to an outbreak of applause:

Jacob Schiff stated that “thanks are due to the Jew” that the Kerensky revolution in Russia had succeeded:

But it appears that this support went beyond the Kerensky regime to the Bolshevik regime:
Henry Wickham Steed was one of the most distinguished journalists of the twentieth century, was foreign correspondent of the London Times at Rome (1897-1902), Vienna (1902-1913), foreign editor of the Times (1914-1919), and editor (1919-1922). Among his many books, he wrote and published "Through Thirty Years" in 1924. On p. 302 of Volume Two of that book, he said:

"That day Colonel House asked me to call upon him. I found him worried both by my criticism of any recognition of the Bolshevists and by the certainty, which he had not previously realized, that if the President were to recognize the Bolshevists in return for commercial concessions his whole `idealism' would be hopelessly compromised as commercialism in disguise ... I insisted that, unknown to him, the prime movers were Jacob Schiff, Warburg, and other international financiers, who wished above all to bolster up the Jewish Bolshevists in order to secure a field for German and Jewish exploitation of Russia.":
Writing in the New York Times, on May 1 1922, Samuel Gompers, the president of the American Federation of Labor, stated:

"I am mindful of the newly adopted policy of the American- Anglo-German banking group, which perhaps constitutes the most dangerous element in the whole chain of pro-Bolshevik effort in America, because it has its hands on the most power.

The truth is that predatory international finance has its appetite up and believes it sees loot in Russia.

I know of nothing more cynical than the attitude of European statesmen and financiers toward the Russian muddle. 

Essentially it is their purpose as laid down at Genoa to place Russia in economic vassalage and give political recognition in exchange-recognition in exchange for concessions. They know immediate trade is not to be had, but they know that, eventually, they can get at the gold, the coal, the oil, the timber and future products of the soil.

Russia herself is on the bargain counter, behind which stands Lenine as a bandit merchant, to take what he can get and what will serve his purpose in exchange for the heritage of a people rendered helpless by him and his. America, let us hope, will continue to stand for Russian economic independence as well as political freedom.


American Business is asked to join in that helpless escapade, that miserable and contemptible business, the looting of that vast domain, and to facilitate its efforts certain American bankers engaged in mortgaging the world are willing to sow among their people the fiendish, anti-democratic propaganda of Bolshevism, subsidizing buying, intimidating, cajoling. There are splendid and notable exceptions, but he great powers of the American-Anglo-German financing combinations have set their faces toward the prize displayed by a people on their knees.


Most important is the espousal of the American- Anglo-German bankers who like to call themselves international financiers to dignify and conceal their true function and limitation. Specifically, the most important banker in this group, and speaking for this group, born in Germany, as it happens, has issued orders to high friends and associates that all must now work for Soviet recognition.":

From the journal Revolutionary Russia, Volume 21, Issue 1, 2008, in an article entitled "HIDDEN AGENDAS: SPIES, LIES AND INTRIGUE SURROUNDING TROTSKY'S AMERICAN VISIT OF JANUARY-APRIL 1917", is significant, as its documentation goes a long way towards refuting claims that these banking elements did not subsidize, or were against, the Bolshevik revolution: 

The abstract of that article reads: "Trotsky's short stay in the USA in early 1917, and his subsequent detention in Canada, has spawned many stories and left lingering questions. This article is basically a sequel to the author's `Interrupted Journey: British Intelligence and the Arrest of Leon Trotskii, April 1917', which appeared in this journal in 2000. 1 What follows substantially expands the scope of the earlier article and presents much new information drawn from recent releases by MI5, as well as new American, French and Russian sources. It shows that Trotsky was surrounded by a web of intrigue and agents of various stripes throughout, and even before, his American stay. He became a pawn, knowingly or not, in assorted plots. 

Above all, the article strengthens the conclusion that Trotsky was the target of a scheme by elements of the British intelligence services to secure his cooperation in revolutionary Russia."

Antony Sutton, while noting elsewhere Schiff's denial of financing the revolution, nevertheless noted in another work, the following, showing how he said one thing yet did another: "there is a report in the State Department files that names Kuhn, Loeb & Co. (the long established and important financial house in New York) as the financier of the First Five Year Plan. See U. S. State Dept. Decimal File, 811.51/3711 and 861.50 FIVE YEAR PLAN/236." (Sutton, Antony. Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development, Vol. II. Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace, Stanford University, 1973. p. 340n).

The most direct piece of evidence is from the following problematic documentary from Juri Lina (I would call him a conspiracy theorist because he combines high caliber and low caliber sources). In the beginning of his documentary giving an alternative view on Bolshevism, Juri Lina produces a document from Jacob Schiff inviting Trotsky to New York prior to the Bolshevik takeover (@5:45):
Lina is unfortunately very hard to contact, so it is difficult to get archival information on this.
Evidence is clearest for a Rothschild connection to the Bolsheviks. Mikhail Bakunin, the chief rival of Karl Marx, argued that Marx was creating a false liberation ideology at the behest of the Rothschild dynasty: 

The Rothschild's influence the Communist project continued onto the ascendancy of the Bolsheviks. Joseph Nedava, in a biography of Trotsky published by the Jewish Publication Society, noted that "A Jewish journalist who knew Trotsky from the period of his stay in Vienna ("when he used to play chess with Baron Rothschild in Cafe Central and frequent Cafe Arkaden daily to read the press there") is even firmer on the Yiddish issue:

 "He [Trotsky] knew Yiddish, and if at a later date, in his autobiography, he pretends to know nothing about Jews and Judaism, then this is nothing but a plain lie. He who had visited at Cafe Arkaden for years on end must have mastered both these matters to perfection. The language in greatest use at that Cafe was - besides `Viennese-German' - Yiddish.""(Trotsky and the Jews, The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia 5732, 1972, p. 36): [7] So much for Trotsky's "anti-capitalism" then. The Rothschilds also subsidized Stalin. Simon Sebag Montefiore noted in "Young Stalin" (2008), p. 186 that Stalin, prior to the revolution, was "on the Rothschild payroll", and on p. 90, that "Stalin started laughing, almost singing: "I'm working for the Rothschilds":

Also of interest is "Geneva versus Peace" (Sheed & Ward, New York, 1937), in which Comte de Saint-Aulaire, French Ambassador to Great Britain in the 1920s, discussed his meetings with Kuhn, Loeb, & Co. financiers. They had discussions regarding why they [the Kuhn, Loeb, & Co. bankers] financed the Bolshevik Revolution. One of them said (p. 80): "You say that Marxism is the very antithesis of capitalism, which is equally sacred to us. It is precisely for this reason that they are direct opposites to one another, that they put into our hands the two poles of this planet and allow us to be its axis. These two contraries, like Bolshevism and ourselves, find their identity in the International. These opposites, which are at the antipodes to one another in society and in their doctrines meet again in the identity of their purpose and end, the remaking of the world from above by the control of riches, and from below by revolution. ... Our mission consists in promulgating the new law and in creating a God, that is to say in purifying the idea of God and realizing it, when the time shall come. We shall purify the idea by identifying it with the nation of Israel, which has become its own Messiah. the advent of it will be facilitated by the final triumph of Israel, which has become it's own Messiah." This same financier also said (pp. 83-84): "... our essential dynamism makes use of the forces of destruction and forces of creation, but uses the first to nourish the second. ... Our organization for revolution is evidenced by destructive Bolshevism and for construction by by the League of Nations which is also our work. Bolshevism is the accelerator and the League is the brake on the mechanism of which we supply both the motive force and the guiding power. What is the end? It is already determined by our mission. It is formed of elements scattered throughout the whole world, but cast in the flame of our faith in ourselves. We are a League of Nations which contains the elements of all others. ...Israel is the microcosm and the germ of the City of the future.":

Dmitri Volkoganov, former director of the Institute For Military History in the USSR, wrote, "a little over a year later, Anna approached Stalin again, asserting that `in the Lenin Institute, as well as in the Institute of the Brain ... they have long recognized the great gifts of this nation and the extremely beneficial effects of its blood on the progeny of mixed marriages. Ilyich himself rated their revolutionary qualities highly, contrasting it with the more sluggish and unstable character of the Russians. He often pointed out that the great organization and the strength of the revolutionary bodies in the south and west arose precisely from the fact that 50 per cent of their members were of that nationality.'" (Volkoganov, Dmitri. "Lenin: A New Biography", pp. 8-9) Volkoganov also noted:

"He [Lenin] might have been thinking of Parvus (or perhaps himself?) when he said to Gorky: `the clever Russian is almost always a Jew or has Jewish blood in him.'" (Volkoganov, Dmitri. Ibid. p. 112)

This all continued during the reign of Stalin. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn noted on p. 79 of "The Gulag Archipelago II" (Harper & Row, 1975), the administrators of Stalin's Soviet Gulag system were Aron Solts, Yakov Rappoport, Lazar Kogan, Matvei Berman, Genrikh Yagoda, and Naftaly Frenkel - all Jews.:

As New York Times records from the time period show, contrary to popular opinion, Stalin did marry a Jewess, the sister of his mass murdering deputy Lazar Kaganovich (, named Rosa (

Montefiore also noted that after the purges of Stalin's Trotskyite Competitors (and the Moscow show trials were based on 90% fabricated evidence, but were 10% correct: even though Jews were a minority of total party members in Soviet Russia at the time, they still formed a majority of the government - that "Many Jewish Bolsheviks used Russian pseudonyms. As early as 1936, Stalin ordered Mekhlis at Pravda to use these pseudonyms: `No need to excite Hitler!'" (Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar, p. 306)

Rabbi Stephen Wise, in the Astor Hotel, NYC, May 12, 1946, stated: "As a Jew I want Jews to do all they can, and more than they can, for the Soviet Union and its peoples":

The publication "Jewish Voice" proclaimed that "anti-communism is anti-semitism":
The Global News Service of the Jewish people noted that official lists show that almost all the Communists who caused the Holodomor were Jewish (they also noted that Jewish groups wish to obfuscate that fact):

Stalin himself said, “In the USSR anti-semitism is punishable with the utmost severity of the law as a phenomenon deeply hostile to the Soviet system. Under USSR law active anti-semites are liable to the death penalty.”:

Incidentally, Soviets evacuated most of the Jews of Eastern Europe before the Nazis even reached them, according to the Jewish Telegraph Agency:
At the Yalta conference in 1945 Stalin declared: “I am a Zionist” (, and whatever the public perception was, that fact still remained. As David Rockefeller shows in his memoirs, King Faisal of Saudi Arabia had established as late as the 1970s that the Soviets and Israelis were deeply allied (, that purported “Soviet anti-Zionism” was merely a ruse.

It is important also to note that Richard Nixon, who presided over the prosecution of Alger Hiss, revealed that with the exception of Whittaker Chambers and Alger Hiss, the communist agents operating in the United States were almost all Jewish: "The only two non-Jews in the communist conspiracy were Chambers and Hiss. ...Every other one was a Jew and it raised hell with us." (Statement of President Richard Nixon in 1971, as recorded at the White House on tape and released by the National Archives in 1999 - as cited in the New York Times, Oct. 7, 1999):

And regarding the Protocols commentary - Zionist leaders have advocated world government proposals - e.g. David Ben-Gurion, in Look Magazine, January 16, 1962, p. 20 (see this facsimile: would predict the end of the Cold War by the end of the 1980s, the pattern of convergence, that is - adoption of Eastern ("socialist") attributes by the West and Western ("capitalist") attributes by the East, and the emergence of a World government led by Israel, which would house the "supreme court of mankind". He presented this as a "positive" development.

The New York Times noted that Nahum Sokolow boasted before the World Zionist Congress that the League of Nations was a "Jewish Idea", and that Jerusalem will one day be the capital of the World:

Other Zionist leaders would be more explicit. The motives underlying the Zionist ambition are lucidly expressed in a 1907 New York times article concerning David Wolffsohn's address to the Zionist congress of the time period: 

"Dr. David Wolffsohn of Cologne delivered the closing speech. He dwelt upon the success of the Congress, which, for the first time and in spite of divergence of opinion, had, he said, united in support of the idea if proceeding by political action to practical work for the deliverance of the poor Jewish people. Dr. Wolffsohn declared that the Jewish people must yet conquor [sic] the world."

This was repeated in the New York Times upon Wolffsohn's death, when it recorded the following: 

"In his closing address he pleaded for greater unity among the Jews and said that eventually they must conquer the world."

Tit is important to note that leading Zionists had no qualms about noting the dominance of the Rothschilds in their project. Theodore Herzl, credited by many as being the founder of the Zionist movement (though he was not), originally entitled his book “The Jewish State”, “An Address to the Rothschilds”[8]. In fact, the Balfour Declaration, which led to the establishment of the state of Israel, was addressed to Lionel Walter Rothschild:
Of relevance to the inception of Zionism is the following:
1) the Zionist leader Max Nordeau told the 6th Zionist Conference in 1903, that there would be a "world war" leading to the creation of Israel:

"Let me tell you the following words as if I were showing you the rungs of a ladder leading upward and upward: Herzl, the Zionist Congress, the English Uganda proposition, the future world war, the peace conference - where with the help of England a free and Jewish Palestine will be created." (cited in Rosenthal, Litman. "A Prophet Speaks", American Jewish News, New York, September 19, 1919. p. 464:

The paper is scarce, but a Worldcat search shows that the paper the article comes from, "American Jewish News", can be obtained at Harvard University if the need arises:

This is also quoted in the following sources:


Is this not incredible? A Zionist leader was able to predict exactly the course of the next couple of decades!
Interestingly, Samuel Landman, in "Great Britain, the Jews and Palestine" (New Zionist Press (New Zionist Publication Number 1), London, (1936), pp. 4-6.), noted: "In Germany, the value of the bargain to the Allies, apparently, was duly and carefully noted. In his 'Through Thirty Years' Mr. Wickham Steed, in a chapter appreciative of the value of Zionist support in America and elsewhere to the Allied cause, says General Ludendorff is alleged to have said after the War, that: 'The Balfour Declaration was the cleverest thing done by the Allies in the way of propaganda, and that he wished Germany had thought of it first.' [Footnote: Volume 2, page 392.] As a matter of fact, this was said by Ludendorff to Sir Alfred Mond (afterwards Lord Melchett), soon after the War. The fact that it was Jewish help that brought U.S.A. into the War on the side of the Allies has rankled ever since in German—especially Nazi—minds, and has contributed in no small measure to the prominence which anti-Semitism occupies in the Nazi programme."[9]

Here is the full document - including scans from the original:

This presentation accords entirely with the following presentation from Benjamin Freedman - Benjamin Freedman was a wealthy Jewish businessman who knew many of the leaders of the Zionist movement. He went rogue and started going against the Zionist leadership, and as a result he was/is the victim of a vicious smear campaign. Thus people will harp upon his collaboration with Sen. Joseph McCarthy in an attempt to block Anna Rosenberg's nomination due to her Communist affiliations. They will say that Anna Rosenberg's communist affiliations were a mere "invention" of Freedman's. But since then it's come out that the official Communist publication, 'New Masses', carried an article by Rosenberg in its issue for December 8, 1942. The magazine introduced her as 'Regional Director, War Manpower Commission,' the title which she held in the Roosevelt Administration at the time. The New Masses article even carried a drawing of Rosenberg as it's writer.

Freedman is a victim of such attacks because of his other actions. His 1961 speech is absolutely devastating to the Zionist movement:

Freedman stated that Germany was about to win World War One in 1916, to the point that they proposed a status quo ante bellum with Great Britain, but they lost it due to Zionist opportunism. His basic argument was that Germany was a major Zionist center, and that Zionists asked the Kaiser for Palestine. The Kaiser was in a bind because Palestine was controlled by the Turkish empire, and Germany was allied with the Turks against the allies. He essentially said that yes he would give them place for a homeland but that he could not make it a completely autonomous independent state. So the Zionists had no qualms about betraying Germany, when they entered into secret agreements with Great Britain promising to bring the United States into World War One in exchange for Palestine. He then claimed that because of Zionist influence in Europe and the west, exercised through Kuhn, Loeb, & Co., Bernard Baruch, and others, there was sufficient propaganda power to get the US into war, and that the origins of the subsequent Balfour Declaration lay in the fact that Zionists brought the US into world War One. He was subsequently present in a League of Nations delegation headed by Bernard Baruch that contributed substantially to the establishment of the state of Israel. He also went into the Khazarian origins of Jewry and the Kol Nidre prayer - claiming that many jews used it to break oaths to gentiles.

It also accords to the IHR study "Behind the Balfour declaration", which verifies Freedman's assertions:

I doubt any of you would give credence to the statements of a "right wing Jewish antisemite" like Freedman, or the IHR (which nevertheless provides some very interesting documentation), so let me offer items of corroboration.

The Khazarian thesis has recently been verified by genetic research:

As for the Kol nidre prayer - many jews deny the reality of it, but using jewish sources, I have refuted them, in the attached essay.

Freedman states that at the end of 1916, Germany had offered peace terms. This is quite correct, and was documented in "The Indepedent", Volume 88 (c. 1916):

The journalist E.J. Dillon said the following, in “The Inside Story of the Peace Conference” - regarding the Versailles conference, p. 496, “It may seem amazing to some readers, but it is none the less a fact, that a considerable number of delegates believed that the real influences behind the Anglo-Saxon peoples were Semitic.” ( Dillon continued, (p. 497), “They confronted the President’s proposal on the subject of religious inequality, and, in particular, the odd motive alleged for it, with the measures for the protection of minorities which he subsequently imposed on the lesser states, and which had for their keynote to satisfy the Jewish elements in Eastern Europe. And they concluded that the sequence of expedients framed and enforced in this direction were inspired by the Jews, assembled in Paris for the purpose of realizing their carefully thought-out program, which they succeeded in having substantially executed. However right or wrong these delegates may have been, it would be a dangerous mistake to ignore their views, seeing that they have since become one of the permanent elements of the situation. The formula into which this policy was thrown by the members of the Conference, whose countries it affected, and who regarded it as fatal to the peace of Eastern Europe, was this: ‘Henceforth the world will be governed by the Anglo-Saxon peoples, who, in turn, are swayed by their Jewish elements.’” (

Samuel Untermyer and others declared a holy war on Germany, before the Nazi government had enacted any anti-Jewish policies, as note in the New york times:

The Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann, as tensions surfaced between Germany and Britain, on September 10, 1941, offered Churchill to get the U.S. into war. He said, "we did it before, and we'll do it again" [referring to previous Zionist intrigues in World War 1] (Weizmann-Churchill correspondence, from the Weizmann archives in Rehovot, Israel - a facsimile of this letter is here: 

- derived from the following resource: 

The U.S. Secretary of Defense James Forrestal recorded in his diaries that according to Neville Chamberlain, Jewry in America wanted war also (, so the pressure was on both sides of the Atlantic.

On 9 February 1938, the Polish Ambassador in Washington, Count Jerzy Potocki, reported to the Foreign Minister in Warsaw on the Jewish role in shaping American foreign policy. He noted:

"The pressure of the Jews on President Roosevelt and on the State Department is becoming ever more powerful ...

... The Jews are right now the leaders in creating a war psychosis which would plunge the entire world into war and bring about general catastrophe.

... The Jews have also created real chaos: they have mixed together the idea of democracy and communism and have above all raised the banner of burning hatred against Nazism.

In conversations with Jewish press representatives I have repeatedly come up against the inexorable and convinced view that war is inevitable. This international Jewry exploits every means of propaganda to oppose any tendency towards any kind of consolidation and understanding between nations.

The American public is subject to an ever more alarming propaganda which is under Jewish influence...

... Propaganda is mostly in the hands of the Jews who control almost 100 percent radio, film, daily and periodical press.

In this action, various Jewish intellectuals participated: for instance, Bernard Baruch; the Governor of New York State, Lehman; the newly appointed judge of the Supreme Court, Felix Frankfurter; Secretary of the Treasury Morgenthau; and others who are personal friends of President Roosevelt. 

They want the President to become the champion of human rights, freedom of religion and speech, and the man who in the future will punish trouble-makers. These groups of people who occupy the highest positions in the American government and want to pose as representatives of 'true Americanism' and 'defenders of democracy' are, in the last analysis, connected by unbreakable ties with international Jewry.

For this Jewish international, which above all is concerned with the interests of its race, to portray the President of the United States as the 'idealist' champion on human rights was a very clever move. In this manner they have created a dangerous hotbed for hatred and hostility in this hemisphere and divided the world into two hostile camps. The entire issue is worked out in a masterly manner. Roosevelt has been given the foundation for activating American foreign policy, and simultaneously has been procuring enormous military stocks for the coming war, for which the Jews are striving very consciously.":

The Zionist leader Nahum Goldmann admitted in his autobiography that the whole Nuremberg trial, in which the Nazis were condemned for war crimes, had been prepared in advance, before the end of the war, in order to secure Palestine for the Zionists:

This certainly puts the whole affair in a different light.

If they find obstacles to their conquests, the leaders of the Zionist movement threaten to nuke the rest of the world. This intention was expressed by Martin Levi van Creveld, professor of military history at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, when he wrote: "We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force.... Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.":
Freemasonry: Albert Pike stated in "Morals and Dogma": regarding the occult origins of freemasonry (and this I don't have a problem with - I'm just including it here as a correction to those who claim otherwise), he stated - "Masonry, successor of the Mysteries, still follows the ancient manner of teaching. Masonry is identical with the ancient Mysteries." (p. 21) 

The fourteenth degree of freemasonry states - "The whole world is but one Republic of which each nation is a family and every individual a child.":

The problem with Freemasonry is that it is a club where members make blood oaths to each other, and thus it is a highly efficient means of hatching conspiracies. The former president John Quincy Adams condemned it for this reason. On page 249 of “Duncan’s Ritual and Monitor”, we find that Masonry is subservient to Judaism, given that a recipient of the Royal Arch Degree pledges himself “For the good of Masonry, generally, but the Jewish nation in particular.":

Round Table groups - There is not evidence that Rhodes abandoned his position - to the contrary, he became only more extreme. The New York Times, in 1902, noted that following the 1877 will, Rhodes, in 1890, put forth the same ideas, and set forth the goal that his secret society should work towards "gradually absorbing the wealth of the world":

Arnold J. Toynbee was very important in Royal Institute of International Affairs circles, being the RIIA director of studies. Given that position, he certainly would be qualified to state the intentions and objectives of that group, and it’s sister organizations. As recorded in the RIIA’s own journal, Toynbee said that "In the world as it is to-day, this institution can hardly be a Universal Church. It is more likely to be something like a League of Nations. I will not prophesy. I will merely repeat that we are at present working, discreetly but with all our might, to wrest this mysterious political force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local national states of our world. And all the time we are denying with out lips what we are doing with our hands, because to impugn the sovereignty of the local national state of the world is still a heresy for which a statesman or a publicist can be - perhaps not quite burnt at the stake, but certainly ostracized and discredited. The dragon of local sovereignty can still use its teeth and claws when it is brought to bay. Nevertheless, I believe that the monster is doomed to perish by our sword.

The fifty or sixty local states of the world will no doubt survive as administrative conveniences. But sooner or later sovereignty will depart from them. Sovereignty will cease, in fact if not in name, to be a local affair." ("The Trend of International Affairs Since the War", International affairs: 

Journal of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, Volume 10, p. 809):
We know that the tax-exempt foundations interlocked with this group and that the CFR and RIIA were offshoots of it. Arthur Schlesinger Jr., noted on p. 51 of his ultra-orthodox book "A Thousand Days: John F. Kennedy in the White House" that "The community [New York Finance Oligarchy] was at the heart of the American Establishment. It's household dieties were Henry L. Stimson and Elihu Root; it's present leaders, Robert A. Lovett and John J. McCloy; it's front organizations, the Rockefeller, Ford, and Carnegie Foundations and Council on Foreign Relations; it's organs, the New York Times and Foreign Affairs."

And on a related note - Reuters noted that "Invited as speakers, Bill Clinton and Tony Blair were groomed at Bilderberg meetings before rising to fame as U.S. President and British Prime Minister respectively." This used to be on yahoo news (*/, but it has been removed - fortunately it has been preserved here:

Key tax-exempt foundations have explicitly declared their goal of world government. An example is the American Historical Association's Report on the Commission on Social Studies, supports these claims, and is direct evidence of top-down subversion (a "silent revolution") - this was written on behalf of the Carnegie Endowment: 

"The Commission is under special obligation to its sponsor, the American Historical Association. Above all, it recognizes its indebtedness to the Trustees of the Carnegie Corporation, whose financial aid made possible the whole five-year investigation of social science instruction in the schools, eventuating in the following Conclusions and Recommendations." - p. xi "the Commission could not limit itself to a survey of textbooks, curricula, methods of instruction, and schemes of examination, but was impelled to consider the condition and prospects of the American people as a part of Western civilization now merging into a world order." - p. 1 "The Commission was also driven to this broader conception of its task by the obvious fact that American civilization, in common with Western civilization, is passing through one of the great critical ages of history, is modifying its traditional faith in economic individualism, and is embarking upon vast experiments in social planning and control which call for large-scale cooperation on the part of the people." - pp. 1-2 "the Commission recognizes the further fact of the inter-relationship of the life of America with the life of the world. In all departments of culture-intellectual, aesthetic, and ethical - the civilization of the United States has always been a part of European, or "Western," civilization . To ignore the historical traditions and usages which have contributed, and still contribute, to this unity is to betray a smug and provincial disregard of basic elements in American life and to invite national impoverishment, intolerance, and disaster. Moreover, the swift development of technology, industry, transportation, and communication in modern times is obviously merging Western civilization into a new world civilization and imposing on American citizens the obligation of knowing more, rather than less, of the complex social and economic relationships which bind them to the rest of mankind." pp. 11-12 "there are certain clearly defined trends in contemporary technology, economy, and society of the utmost importance in creating new conditions, fashioning novel traditions, reorienting American life, and thus conditioning any future program of social science instruction." - p. 13 "Under the moulding influence of socialized processes of living, drives of technology and science, pressures of changing thought and policy, and disrupting impacts of economic disaster, there is a notable waning of the once widespread popular faith in economic individualism; and leaders in public affairs, supported by a growing mass of the population, are demanding the introduction into economy of ever-wider measures of planning and control." - p. 16 "Cumulative evidence supports the conclusion that in the United States as in other countries, the age of laissez faire in economy and government is closing and a new age of collectivism is emerging." - p. 16 "As to the specific form which this "collectivism," this integration and interdependence, is taking and will take in the future, the evidence at hand is by no means clear or unequivocal. It may involve the limiting or supplanting of private property by public property or it may entail the preservation of private property, extended and distributed among the masses. Most likely, it will issue from a process of experimentation and will represent a composite of historic doctrines and social conceptions yet to appear. 
Almost certainly it will involve a larger measure of compulsory as well as voluntary co-operation of citizens in the conduct of the complex national economy, a corresponding enlargement of the functions of government, and an increasing state intervention in fundamental branches of economy previously left to individual discretion and initiative-a state intervention that in some instances may be direct and mandatory and in others indirect and facilitative. In any event the Commission is convinced by its interpretation of available empirical data that the actually integrating economy of the present day is the forerunner of a consciously integrated society, in which individual economic actions and individual property, rights will be altered and abridged." - p. 17 "While stressing the necessity of recognizing the emergence of a closely integrated society in America and the desirability of curbing individualism in economy, the Commission deems highly desirable the conscious and purposeful employment of every practicable means to ward off the dangers of goose-step regimentation in ideas, culture, and invention, of sacrificing individuality, of neglecting precious elements in the traditional heritage of America and the world, and of fostering a narrow intolerant nationalism or an aggressive predatory imperialism." - p. 23 

"The Commission deems possible and desirable an enlightened attitude on the part of the masses of the American people toward international relations, involving informed appreciation of the cultural bonds long subsisting among the nations of Western civilization and now developing rapidly among all the nations of the world, and special knowledge of the increasing economic interdependence of politically separate areas and peoples, and of the emerging economic integration of the globe." - p. 25 "The Commission, under the frame of reference here presented, deems desirable the vitalizing of the findings of scientific inquiry by the best social thought of the present and of the past, and the incorporation into the materials of social science instruction in the schools of the best plans and ideals for the future of society and of the individual." - p. 27 "The implications for education are clear and imperative: (a) the efficient functioning of the emerging economy and the full utilization of its potentialities require profound changes in the attitudes and outlook of the American people, especially the rising generation-a complete and frank recognition that the old order is passing, that the new order is emerging." - pp. 34-35 "Organized public education in the United States, much more than ever before, is now compelled, if it is to fulfill its social obligations, to adjust its objectives, its curriculum, its methods of instruction, and its administrative procedures to the requirements of the emerging integrated order." - p. 35 "If the school is to justify its maintenance and assume its responsibilities, it must recognize the new order and proceed to equip the rising generation to cooperate effectively in the increasingly interdependent society and to live rationally and well within its limitations and possibilities...." - p. 35

The UNESCO director Julian Huxley stated the following concerning the purpose of UNESCO: "That [fundamental] task [of UNESCO] is to help the emergence of a single world culture, with its own philosophy and background of ideas, and with its own broad purpose. This is opportune, since this is the first time in history that the scaffolding and the mechanisms for world unification have become available, and also the first time that man has had the means (in the shape of scientific discovery and its applications) of laying a world-wide foundation for the minimum physical welfare of the entire human species. And it is necessary, for at the moment two opposing philosophies of life confront each other from the West and from the East, and not only impede the achievement of unity but threaten to become the foci of actual conflict. You may categorise the two philosophies as two super-nationalisms; or as individualism versus collectivism; or as the American versus the Russian way of life; or as capitalism versus communism; or as Christianity versus Marxism; or in half a dozen other ways. The fact of their opposition remains and the further fact that round each of them are crystallising the lives and thoughts and political aspirations of hundreds of millions of human beings. Can this conflict be avoided, these opposites be reconciled, this antitheses be resolved in a higher syntheses? I believe not only that this can happen, but that, through the inexorable dialectic of evolution, it must happen - only I do not know whether it will happen before or after another war." (Julian Huxley, "UNESCO: It's Purpose and It's Philosophy", p. 61): 

In the UNESCO book "Towards world understanding", Volume 5, it is stated, "As long as the child breathes the poisoned air of nationalism, education in world-mindedness can produce only rather precarious results. As we have pointed out, it is frequently the family which infects the child with extreme nationalism. The school should therefore use the means described earlier to combat family attitudes.": [10]

One of the first motivators used by adherents of the World government ambition was using public fears of nuclear War, that we must have "one world or none". Perhaps the most vocal proponent of this idea was Bernard Baruch, one of Roosevelt's key "advisers", who after WWII promoted the idea of building up the UN into a World Government with atomic powers:

Baruch, who stated to a Senate Committee after World War I: "I probably had more power than perhaps any other man did in the war; doubtless that is true."[11]

... Stated the following after WWII, in an address to the UN Atomic Energy Commission as recorded in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists:

“Behind the black portent of the new atomic age lies a hope which, seized upon with faith, can work out salvation … Let us not deceive ourselves: we must elect world peace or world destruction. … We must provide the mechanism to assure that atomic energy is used for peaceful purposes and preclude its use in war. To that end, we must provide immediate, swift and sure punishment of those who violate the agreements that are reached by the nations. Penalization is essential if peace is to be more than a feverish interlude between wars. And, too, the United Nations can prescribe individual responsibility and punishment on the principles applied at Nuremberg by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom, France and the United States – a formula certain to benefit the world’s future. In this crisis, we represent not only our governments, but, in a larger way, we represent the peoples of the world. . . The peoples of these democracies gathered here are not afraid of an internationalism that protects; they are unwilling to be fobbed off by mouthings about narrow sovereignty, which is today’s phrase for yesterday’s isolation.

… Peace is never long preserved by weight of metal or by an armament race. Peace can be made tranquil and secure only by understanding and agreement fortified by sanctions. We must embrace international cooperation or international disintegration.”[12]

Stalin was a bit of a Buonapartist, and foiled this, so the cold war was on. Stalin would later face some problems where he was located, and be murdered:

Baruch interestingly stated before a Senate Committee in 1948: “Although the shooting war is over, we are in the midst of a cold war which is getting warmer.” He was one of the first people I am aware of to use this term[13]

The disgusting thing here is that, as Maj. George Racey Jordan showed in his diaries, Roosevelt's other key adviser, Harry Hopkins, supplied the Soviets with atomic weapons during WWII: 

And throughout the war, the West still supplied essential technology to the Soviet Union, as revealed in the research of Dr. Antony Sutton, popularized in his book “The Best Enemy Money Can Buy”:

Bernard Baruch is also a special character. I discuss him in my article on the Rothschilds. Col. Curtis Dall also discusses his significance in “FDR: My Exploited Father In Law”. Dall, in that book, and Douglas Reed, in a chapter of “Far And Wide” entitled “Communism Penetrant”, also noted that FDR sacrificed American interests in favor of Globalism and what was at the time Communism. In that chapter, Reed showed how Roosevelt consciously worked to subvert Constitutional safeguards, helped further the aims of World Communism, and ultimately served higher circles. He asked, “What real purpose did Mr. Roosevelt promote through the way he used his imperial powers?”, and then noted:

“He furthered the main principles of a plan for the redistribution of the earth published in 1942 (but clearly prepared much earlier) by a mysterious `Group for a New World Order’, headed by a Mr. Moritz Gomberg. What this group proposed was startling at the time but proved farsighted. The main recommendations were that the Communist Empire should be extended from the Pacific to the Rhine, with China, Korea, Indo-China, Siam and Malaya in its orbit; and that a Hebrew State should be set up on the soil of `Palestine, Transjordan and the adjoining territories’. 

These two projects were largely realized. Canada and numerous `strategic islands’ were to pass to the United States (the reader should keep these `strategic islands’ in mind). The remaining countries of Western Europe were to disappear in a `United States of Europe’ (this scheme is being vigorously pursued at present). The African continent was to become a `Union of Republics’. The British Commonwealth was to be left much reduced, the Dutch West Indies joining Australia and New Zealand in it. The scheme looks like a blueprint of the second stage in a grand operation of three stages, and substantial parts of it were achieved; what was not then accomplished is being energetically attempted now.”

He subsequently cited Admiral William D. Leahy’s text “I was There” (1950) to argue that “Mr. Roosevelt’s grand design was for a large apportionment of the globe between the Communist Empire and the United States, at the expense of the British Commonwealth and French Empire. Support of Communism in China, too, was primarily intended to prevent a British revival there and in the planning of the Pacific campaign everything was done to exclude the British and make China and Japan into a Soviet-American sphere of influence.”:

Of relevance then is Pearl Harbor. Contrary to mainstream thought today, there was very significant Soviet Influence in the American government in the 1940s. The VENONA documents and other disclosures show that the FDR administration was permeated with Soviet spies. These, along with Anglophile internationalists, were the deciding influences in getting the United States into WWII. First, as for the Anglophile internationalists, Thomas E. Mahl establishes in “Desperate Deception: British Convert Operations in the United States, 1939-1944″ (, that William Stephenson (“Intrepid”) and a few hundred other British intelligence agents infiltrated the United states in order to bring the United States into WWII. And in this scheme, Lord Victor Rothschild, a confidant of Churchill, would act as a key Soviet agent (, relaying all the intelligence information Churchill found out to Stalin. Of course, in addition to Communism and British operations, Zionism was the other major force leading to the U.S. involvement in WWII, as I have noted before.
Jarrold and Leona Schecter established in “Sacred Secrets” ( that Harry Dexter White, a very influential Soviet Agent, would also be a key agent of influence in getting the U.S. into the war. White, on direct orders from Stalin, authored 8 of 10 points in the Hull Memorandum which provoked war with Japan. We know now from the McCollum Memorandum, first brought to public attention by Stinnet in his authoritative book on the subject, “Day of Deceit”, that FDR provoked the Japanese. The McCollum Memorandum explicitly calls for Japan to be provoked into committing an “overt act of war” and describes how that might be done:

Historian Harry Elmer Barnes and his colleagues, after the war, wrote the revisionist classic, “Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace”. In Ch. 7 of that book, “The Pearl Harbor Investigations”, Percy L. Greaves, Jr. noted (p. 645), “The APHB top-secret report concluded with this paragraph: Up to the morning of December 7, 1941, everything that the Japanese were planning to do was known to the United States…”:

The notable historian Charles Beard quoted Henry Stimson’s diary in “President Roosevelt and the coming of the war, 1941: appearances and realities” (p. 517), as saying “The question was how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves.”:

The geopolitical background to all of this is provided by historian Charles Callan Tansill in his book “Back Door to War” (1952):

Stalin of course was not threatened by the Japanese, which would be dealt with by the U.S., so he unleashed his fury on Central Europe (

And as for the subsequent war with Germany that followed, historian Thomas Fleming, in “The New Dealers War” (, noted that FDR had written plans to invade Europe by 1943 that were leaked just before Pearl Harbor, and that this was what contributed to Germany’s declaration of war on the United States.

The Schecters also verified the claim, put forth by Elizabeth Bentley and Maj. George Racey Jordan and others, that Harry Dexter White provided stolen U.S. treasury plates to the Soviets, which they subsequently used to used to print extremely high quantities of occupation currency in the eastern zone of postwar Germany, sparking a black market and serious inflation throughout the occupied country. The Schecters noted that this was just “another thread in the tapestry of service [White] wove on behalf of the Soviets.”

Alger Hiss, another instrumental Soviet agent, would be an instrumental figure in the Yalta decisions (, which included giving Stalin vast amounts of Europe, greatly expanding the power of the Soviet Empire, and which also led to Operation Keelhaul, which forced the repatriation of two million Soviet refugees for either slave labor or death in the vast Soviet GULAG system. He also founded the United Nations (, becoming it’s first Secretary General, assisting the Globalist intentions of families like the Rockefellers ( The UN would subsequently become a hotbed of Soviet activity (

The IPR and Owen Lattimore, on behalf of the Rockefeller Foundation, would play a decisive role in the Communist victory there.

The Tydings Committee was a smear job against McCarthy, and dismissed his concerns over Lattimore. The McCarran Committee, was set up after that, because people were aware that Tydings Committee dismissals were based on insufficient evidence. This Committee, which investigated the Institute of Pacific Relations, showed in great detail in it’s Report how the IPR subverted policy. Se pp. 204-205:

“This section will relate how IPR people in and out of Government were instrumental in keeping United States policy on a course that was anti-Chiang and often pro-Communist in orientation. …

At the end of 1945 when General Marshall left for China, the balance of power was with the Chinese Nationalists … and remained so until at least June 1946. … Chiang’s divisions were chasing the Communists northward and the prospect of victory by Nationalist China was at its highest. … However, when General Marshall arrived in China, he undertook to bring about the coalition government which his directive demanded. … This plan failed when coalition failed. …
When the Chinese government did not effect coalition, by the summer of 1946 United States military assistance to China was brought to an end. Not only did the United States stop sending military supplies to the Chinese Government; the shipment of war materials actually purchased by the Chinese also was halted. … The Chinese also had purchased surplus equipment that remained on Okinawa and other Pacific islands. Even the shipment of this was banned. … A complete embargo took effect in the summer of 1946. It was maintained at least until May 1947.

General Chennault testified that the first shipment arrived in Shanghai in December 1948. … Chennault further stated that the war material sent to China after the embargo did not arrive in time to aid the Chinese Nationalists in the field. … Admiral Cooke … testified that the Chinese had a number of divisions equipped with American arms. …

When the flow of American ammunition was stopped, these divisions lost their fire power and were defeated. Even after the Eightieth Congress appropriated $125,000,000 for aid to the Chinese, shipments were delayed and when the guns finally reached the Chinese general in north China they were without bolts and therefore useless.”

The full details concerning this and connections to the IPR, Lattimore, etc., are given in the Report. See p. 208 ff., as well as information given before the citation I provided:

Why might this bizarre situation have occurred? In “The Daily Compass” (NY), Sunday, July 17, 1949, in an article entitled “SOUTH KOREA – ANOTHER CHINA”, Owen Lattimore revealed his intentions and objectives – “The problem was how to allow them [China] to fall without making it look as if the United States had pushed them.” He then stated, “The thing to do, therefore, is to let South Korea fall-but not to let it look as though we pushed it.” (this was before the Korean war – hence we can ):

Conservapedia (which I normally don’t recommend), nevertheless has an article on Lattimore that is very well documented:

Significantly, as the article notes (and this relates to the Pearl Harbor topic),

“On November 25, 1941, twelve days before Pearl Harbor, Lattimore dispatched an anxious cable to Currie in the White House arguing against a proposed diplomatic understanding between the United States and Japan. When Congress later investigated the Pearl Harbor attack, U.S. Secretary of State Cordell Hull testified that he took a tough line with the Japanese because of this cable from Lattimore to Currie reporting on Chinese morale in the Kuomintang. This cable was the only documentary evidence Hull presented which influenced his decision to reverse himself and send the ultimatum to Japan.[19] The use of harsh, demanding language toward Japan only strengthened the position of the war party in Tokyo. Japanese Ambassador Nomura found it impossible to reach an agreement because the U.S. demands were extreme.[20]

Prof. Anthony Kubek has written that Lattimore, by this one act, designed to accomplish the Soviet objective of promoting war between the United States and Japan – did more to promote the Sovietization of China than in any other act of his career. All Comintern designs for conquest of China hinged upon destroying Japan and the balance of power in the Pacific. [21]”

It also notes:

“Lattimore wrote a letter of introduction for Haakon Chevalier to KGB operative, Lauchlin Currie. Chevalier was attempting to obtain a Government job during this period of time. Chevalier is a known Soviet Secret Intelligence Service (KGB) contact and was associated with numerous members of the Communist Party on the West Coast. Currie also recommended Lattimore to President Roosevelt to serve as a special advisor to Chiang Kai-shek. Currie gave evidence in New York to a grand jury investigating Lattimore’s role in the publication by Amerasia magazine of secret State Department documents. In December 1952, Lattimore was indicted for perjury.[34]”

The rest of the article should be read, as it establishes the extent of Lattimore’s propaganda, and how he, among other things, completely whitewashed the Soviet Gulags.

The McCarran Committee Report stated emphatically (p. 214 of the document, 222 of the pdf) “OWEN LATTIMORE WAS FROM SOME TIME IN THE MIDDLE 1930′S A CONSCIOUS, ARTICULATE INSTRUMENT OF THE SOVIET CONSPIRACY” (emphasis in original)

The full story on Lattimore is presented by journalist John T. Flynn in “While You Slept: Our Tragedy in Asia and Who Made It” (, and “The Lattimore Story” (

Here’s where things get interesting – the McCarran Committee Report noted (p. 3) that the Institute of Pacific Relations received “generous support from the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Corp.” – that of the total funding for the organization from 1925-1950, “48 percent came from the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Corp.”
This was one of the contributing factors in the development of the Cox Committee (See Cox Committee transcripts here: Budenz, who had testified about Lattimore, gave some very important testimony in the Cox Committee. And of course the Cox Committee eventually evolved into the Reece Committee (see Reece Committee transcripts here:
Carroll Quigley, a historian of international financial groups that set up various “power structures” to influence governments, noted the following in his macro-history text “Tragedy & Hope”, when discussing the Reece Committee (pp. 954-955): “It was this group of people, whose wealth and influence so exceeded their experience and understanding, who provided much of the framework of influence which the Communist sympathizers and fellow travelers took over in the United States in the 1930s. It must be recognized that the power of these energetic Left wingers exercised was never their own power or Communist power but was ultimately the power of the international financial coterie, and, once the anger and suspicions of the American people were aroused as they were in the 1950s, it was a fairly simple matter to get rid of the Red sympathizers. Before this could be done, however, a congressional committee, following backward to their source the threads which led from the admitted Communists like Whittaker Chambers, through Alger Hiss, and the Carnegie Endowment to Thomas Lamont and the Morgan Bank, fell into the whole complicated network of the interlocking tax-exempt foundations. The Eighty-third Congress set up in 1953 a Special Reece Committee to investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations. It soon became clear that people of immense wealth would be unhappy if the investigation went too far and that the “most respected” newspapers in the country, closely allied with these men of wealth, would not get excited enough about any revelations to make the publicity worthwhile. An interesting report showing the Left-wing associations of interlocking nexus of tax-exempt foundations was issued in 1954 rather quietly. Four years later, the Reece Committee’s general counsel, Rene A Wormser, wrote a shocked, but not shocking, book on the subject called 'Foundations: Their Power and Influence.'"
Reece Committee research director Norman Dodd, in his investigations, encountered the Ford Foundation chieftain Rowan Gaither, who told him, off the record, “Mr. Dodd, we are here operate in response to similar directives, the substance of which is that we shall use our grant-making power so to alter life in the United States that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.”


And significantly, David Rockefeller would state in The New York Times, August 10, 1973, in an article entitled “From a China Traveller” , which praised of Mao’s regime, just after a massive period of death: “One is impressed immediately by the sense of national harmony… There is a very real and pervasive dedication to Chairman Mao and Maoist principles. Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community purpose. General social and economic progress is no less impressive… The enormous social advances of China have benefitted greatly from the singleness of ideology and purpose… The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in history.”: 

Then, in the 1970s, David Rockefeller, as admitted in his memoirs, was actually responsible for building up China into the superpower that it is today: 

See also the following New York Times article - "Eaton Joins Rockefellers To Spur Trade With Reds; Cleveland and New York Financiers to Set Up an East-West Exchange Eaton Joins With Rockefellers To Press for East-West Trade":

It noted that "Mr. Eaton acknowledged the difficulties that Amtorg's representatives had encountered here in trying to arrange licensing agreements with American companies." As you can imagine," he said, " it is almost impossible for a Russian to walk into the research department of an American aerospace company and try to arrange the purchase of a patent.""

The solution, then, was that the Soviets would be able to deal directly with the Rockefellers. As the article noted:

"An alliance of family fortunes linking Wall Street and the Midwest is going to try to build economic bridges between the free world and Communist Europe. The International Basic Economy Corporation, controlled by the Rockefeller brothers, and Tower International, Inc., headed by Cyrus S. Eaton Jr., Cleveland financier, plan to cooperate in promoting trade between the Iron Curtain countries, including the Soviet Union..."

LIFE Magazine, Dec 26, 1938, recorded the following statement from Leon Trotsky: "You will have a revolution, a terrible revolution. What course it takes will depend much on what Mr. Rockefeller tells Mr. Hague to do. Mr. Rockefeller is a symbol of the American ruling class and Mr. Hague is a symbol of its political tools.":

Continuing with this trend of convergence - State Department Publication No. 7277 - entitled "Freedom From War", written in 1961 (which corresponds to Public Law 87-297) stated the following: p. 10: "The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those of agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N. Peace Force and those required to maintain internal order. All other armaments would be destroyed or converted to peaceful purposes." it also called for (p. 11): "The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their reestablishment in any form whatsoever other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations Peace Force" it also called for (p. 12): "The establishment and effective operation of an International Disarmament Organization within the framework of the United Nations to ensure compliance at all times with all disarmament obligations." This was later updated in a document entitled Blueprint for the Peace Race. This becomes especially infuriating when you consider the information disclosed in Sutton's Hoover Institution studies, showing that this "threat" was assisted all along, and built up to act as the anti-thesis, leading to a new synthesis. 

Public Law 101-216 reinforces Public Law 87-297, and was passed on October 12, 1989. Facsimiles of all these documents, and more, are in the following pdf file from a pro-gun organization. You can ignore the commentary, and just focus on the documentation, which is very important:

Then, from Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt, we have the following document (signed by George Schultz), which she aptly describes as follows: "Copy of Agreement between United States (President Reagan) and the Soviet Union (President Gorbachev) related to many fields of endeavor, but with special reference to merger of U.S.A. and Soviet (Russian) education systems. Important excerpts follow regarding the purpose of the agreements: 

"The facilitation of the exchange, by appropriate organizations, of educational and teaching materials (including textbooks, syllabi and curricula), materials on methodology, samples of teaching instruments and audiovisual aids." "The Parties will encourage exchanges of representatives of municipal, local and state governments of the U.S.A and the U.S.S.R . to study various functions of government at these levels."

A copy of the document is here: 

Remember that this was still when the "Cold War" was raging, and Reagan was issuing his "evil empire" rhetoric.
However, it is important to note that many globalist theoreticians argued that gradual Regionalization and submerging nations in complex webs of international relations would be preferable to just announcing a World Government controlled by the UN. Former U. S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Trilateralist and CFR member Richard Gardner, writing in an April, 1974 Foreign Affairs article entitled The Hard Road to World Order, provided insight into how the World State was to be built: “In this unhappy state of affairs, few people retain much confidence in the more ambitious strategies for world order that had wide backing a generation ago-’world federalism,’ `charter `review,’ and `world peace through world law.’… If instant world government, Charter review, and a greatly strengthened International Court do not provide the answers, what hope for progress is there?… In short, the `house of world order’ would have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great `booming, buzzing confusion,’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.”: 

In 1987, Mikhail Gorbachev stated: “We are moving toward a New World, the world of Communism. We shall never turn off that road.” (cited in Conquest, Robert and Paul Hollander. "Political Violence: Belief, Behavior, and Legitimation" Palgrave Macmillan; First Edition (October 28, 2008). p. 118) [14]

Communism did not “fall”, but dialectically synthesized into the Communist-Capitalist synthesis known as Globalism. This, is of course being implemented via regionalism. The EU would follow this pattern of Capitalist-Communist convergence (and other Continental Unions are to follow). 

The Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky, who was allowed to examine secret Soviet archives, proved this in his monograph "EUSSR: The Soviet Roots of European Integration", which shows that the modern EU was implemented as a result of a conspiracy between the Politburo and the elite of the Trilateral Commission - David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, Yasuhiro Nakasone, and Valéry Giscard d’Estaing:
a document leaked by wikileaks concerning regionalization in North America stated the following, in contrast to the claims of deniers:

"An incremental and pragmatic package of tasks for a new North American Initiative (NAI) will likely gain the most support among Canadian policymakers. Our research leads us to conclude that such a package should tackle both "security" and "prosperity" goals. This fits the recommendations of Canadian economists who have assessed the options for continental integration. While in principle many of them support more ambitious integration goals, like a customs union/single market and/or single currency, most believe the incremental approach is most appropriate at this time, and all agree that it helps pave the way to these goals if and when North Americans choose to pursue them."

But, although giving lip service to popular sentiment, it is (or was, until leaked) still a clandestine initiative, and the document stated that it would be implemented gradually, mostly by appealing to the interests of the multinationals, and not by public referendum (p. 2):

"There is little basis on which to estimate the size of the "upside" gains from an integration initiative concentrating on non-tariff barriers of the kind contained in NAI. For this reason, we cannot make claims about how large the benefits might be on a national or continental scale. When advocating NAI, it would be better to highlight specific gains to individual firms, industries or travelers, and especially consumers."

I would like to make a digression and discuss the Rothschilds - who are of relevance to what will be revealed below. The historian Niall Ferguson, despite his apologetics for the Rothschilds in his biography of the family, nevertheless noted, in other works, the fact that Nathaniel Rothschild (the individual whom David Loyd George called the "dictator" of England[15]), dominated Rhodes' imperial and mining operations. Ferguson wrote that [16], "Rhodes could not have won his near monopoly over the South African diamond production without the assistance of his friends in the City of London: in particular, the Rothschild bank, at that time the biggest concentration of capital in the world." (Niall Ferguson, "Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power", New york, Basic Books, 2004, p. 186) Ferguson elaborated[17], "It is usually assumed that Rhodes owned De Beers, but this was not the case. Nathaniel de Rothschild was a bigger shareholder than Rhodes himself; indeed, by 1899, the Rothschilds' stake was twice that of Rhodes. In 1888 Rhodes wrote to Lord Rothschild: 'I know with you behind me I can do all I have said. If however you think differently I have nothing to say.'" (Ibid., p. 187)

The following might appear as a digression, but it's not. In "The Jews and Modern Capitalism", we find that Jewish Amsterdam bankers were the power behind the establishment of the Bank of England.[18] The Encyclopedia Americana stated the following about the Bank of England: 

"Its weakness is the weakness inherent in a system which has developed with the smallest amount of legislative control ... its capital is held privately, and its management is not in any way directly or indirectly controlled by the state. On the other hand, during its whole history, it has been more or less under the protection of the state; its development has been marked by successive loans of its capital to the state in return for the confirmation or extension of its privileges, and it still continues to exercise powers and owe responsibilities delegated by the state ... The bank of England is controlled by a governor, deputy-governor and a court of 24 directors who are elected by the proprietors on the nomination of the directors ..."[19] (it would later become more "nationalized",

 but still act as a conduit for credit created by the international banking system - similar to the FOMC.) In 1960 the Radcliffe Committee examined the functions of the Bank of England. Vol. 1, Memoranda of Evidence (from the committee investigation), stated (p. 9. 4.: [20]) - "Because an entry in the books of a bank has come to be generally acceptable in place of cash it is possible for banks to create the equivalent of cash [i.e. - credit]. Thus a bank may pay for a security purchased from a customer merely by making an entry in its books to the credit of that customers account; or it may make an advance by means of a similar entry. In either case an increase in it's deposits will occur." The Report of the Royal Commission on Monetary, Banking, and Credit Systems, published in 1956, stated ([21]) "The process called "creation of credit" or "creation of money" is no new development. Its origin in England in the seventeenth century as a development of the activities of the goldsmiths is described in the following passage from The Theory of Credit by Macleod (first published in 1891), Vol. II, Part II, at page 520." (That text just describes the history of fractional reserve banking, and is available here for the interested reader[22]) The New Zealand report also noted that following about this system: "The fact that a large proportion of our money supply comes into existence as a result of the operations of the trading banks obviously disturbed many witnesses who appeared before us."[23]
A similar situation exists in the United States with the Federal Reserve. some people think that those instantiating the system were merely "benevolent planners". An actual look at the system they designed dispels that notion. Insight into the system they designed comes from the interrogation of Federal Reserve Chairman Marriner Eccles in the HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES EIGHTIETH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON H. R. 2233: p. 31: "Mr. PATMAN: NOW, in order to get our definitions straight a little further, our economy is based upon debt; our bank system and our money are based on debt; that is right, is it not? 
Mr. ECCLES: Money is created by bank credit.
 Mr. PATMAN: Yes. 
Mr. ECCLES: That is right. And the bank reserves are created by
the central bank. Mr. PATMAN: With some exceptions, if all the people were to pay
their debts to the banks and the United States Government should
 pay its debts, there would not be any money to do business with, 
would there, except just a little, like Civil War money, and coins, and
things like that, probably about four or five billion dollars; is that
 not right? Mr. ECCLES: That is right. That is what happened after 1929.
With debt contraction- we have never had a period of prosperity
when there has not been an expansion of debt on balance, by either
the Government or by the private individuals or corporations, or by 

 Whenever debt has contracted on balance, you have had a depression. From 1929 to 1933 I think there was a total debt con
traction, as I recall, of something like $30,000,000,000. This was bank debt and also private debt. 
Mr. PATMAN: Well, is the reason not obvious, that since our money is based upon debt, and our bank system also, and money is created
 through the bank system by debt, that we can only be prosperous if
we go into debt, and if we pay our debts, why, we are in a depression; 
is that not right?
 Mr. ECCLES: YOU have got to distinguish between bank debt and debt outside of the bank. The expansion of debt to the banks creates deposits and deposits, of course, are always available to be withdrawn as currency. In other words, the growth of debts to banks, whether 
in the form of public debt, such as the ownership of Government bonds, municipal debt, or private debt, creates deposits. That is where the great growth of bank deposits has come from, largely through the growth of debt, and largely Government debt. And
 that, of course, is responsible for our very large, what we term, money
 supply." See also the following exchange given in the Hearings on the Retirement of Federal Reserve bank stock, Volumes 1-2, p. 41.[24], [25]: PATMAN: "Now Mr. Allen, when the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee buys a million dollar bond you create the money on the credit of the Nation to pay for that bond, don't you? 
ALLEN: That is correct. 
PATMAN: And the credit of the Nation is represented by Federal Reserve Notes in that case, isn't it? If the banks want the actual money, you give Federal Reserve notes in payment, don't you?
 ALLEN: That could be done, but nobody wants the Federal Reserve notes. 
PATMAN: Nobody wants them, because the banks would rather have the credit as reserves."

To create this debt money, the FOMC works with banks called "primary dealers" that are, at present, international: 

So we're dealing with a cartel. And given that money is created via loans, but since loans have interest rates attached to them, there is always more money owed than is in circulation. Hence all real wealth inevitably gravitates to the financiers making use of this "technique", and this occurs in any country with the modern central banking system. It is important to note that according to 31 USCA §714, it is the functions of the FOMC, where the action really is, that are exempt from audits: Some of the most eminent economists in the United States have condemned this debt slavery system, and outlined it's origins. Irving Fisher was hailed by Milton Friedman as "the greatest economist the United States has ever produced.": [26] Robert Hemphill was the first credit manager of the Atlanta Federal Reserve, who wished to end fractional reserve lending, believing instead that banks should keep 100% reserves, and collaborated with Fisher on this: [27] He drafted a bill that Fisher supported called S.3744: [28] He noted, in the forward to Fisher's text 100% Money, the following: "If all bank loans were paid, no one would have a bank deposit, and there would not be a dollar of currency or coin in circulation. This is a staggering thought. We are completely dependent on the commercial banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit. If the banks create ample synthetic money, we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent monetary system. When one gets a complete grasp upon this picture, the tragic absurdity of our helpless position is almost incredible, but there it is.": [29] Commenting on all this, Hemphill stated, before the House of Representatives: "... there has been for 200 years, since one certain man came into power as a financial genius, Mayer Anselm Rothschild, who was born in 1790 [sic] since he came into power there has been a constant, organized, shrewd conspiracy to convince the people of the world that this is not true, to convince men against their own judgment, against a thing which is self-evident. And that conspiracy has involved the press, it has involved the pulpit, it has involved a conspiracy to mislead people about the importance of a very simple thing - money. The interests who promote this confusion profit by retaining for themselves the monopoly of manufacturing our money.": [30]

All of this becomes particularly interesting when you consider the tax situation as revealed by the Grace Commission: p. 12 (of the document, not the pdf): "Resistance to additional income taxes would be even more widespread if people were aware that:

  • One-third of all their taxes is consumed by waste and inefficiency in the Federal Government as we identified in our survey.
*Another one-third of all their taxes escapes collection from others as the underground economy blossoms in direct proportion to tax increases and places even more pressure on law abiding taxpayers, promoting still more underground economy-a vicious cycle that must be broken.
*With two-thirds of everyone's personal income taxes wasted or not collected, 100 percent of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal debt and by Federal Government contributions to transfer payments. In other words, all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services which taxpayers expect from their Government."
Of course, it is important to keep in mind what the fundamental source of this debt is, and how it keeps on expanding, beyond the actual amount of money in circulation, due to the interest attached to it.

The Rothschild apologist Niall Ferguson denied that the Rothschilds scored a financial coup d’etat when, with advance intelligence, they started dumping securities as the battle of Waterloo was ending, creating the expectation that they knew Napoleon had won, when, in reality, they knew that Napoleon had lost, and they thus monopolized Britain’s market in consols, which formed the basis of British debt. In reality, historian Ignatius Balla had established that this had indeed occurred in a book that was almost suppressed

 (, but was proven accurate in a court case.


It was also discussed by Rothschild biographer Frederic Morton on p. 49 of his biography of the family[31]. The financier Henry Clews noted in "The Wall Street Point of View", Vol. III, p. 253, "The Consolidated Act in 1757 ... by which the debts of the nation, including annuities, were consolidated or brought together into one scheme, and average rate of interest being struck at three per cent. [T]hese "consols", ... are kept in account in the Bank of England and virtually form the great bulwark of its deposits." ([32]) As monopolizers of British Bank of England consols, the Rothschilds won control of the Bank of England, henceforth they ruled England, and collected interest on the debts they were owed, which of course exceeded the amount of money in the society in the first place, since money was/is created as a debt to the nation via book entry!

Frederic Morton noted that "We cannot guess the number of hopes and savings wiped out by this engineered panic. We cannot estimate how many liveried servants, how many Watteaus and Rembrandts, how many thoroughbreds in his descendants' stables, the man by the pillar won that single day."[33]

The Cyclopaedia of Commercial & Business Anecdotes printed in 1865 stated: "The Rothschilds, Wealthiest Bankers in the World. The House of Rothschild is the impersonation of that money power which governs the world."[34]
Baron Philippe de Rothschild described his family as "the richest and most powerful family in the world."(De Rothschild, Philippe, Littlewood, Joan. The Very Candid Autobiography of Baron Phillippe De Rothschild. NY; Ballantine Books. 1984. p.283)[35]

The British economist John A. Hobson’s seminal book “Imperialism” published in 1902, states:

“Does any one seriously suppose that a great war could be undertaken by any European State, or a great State loan subscribed, if the house of Rothschild and its connections set their face against it?”

Andrew Carnegie, the famous industrialist who was connected to these circles, also discussed how much more powerful City of London financiers were than the monarchy in his text "Triumphant Democracy" (p. 380) - "My American readers may not be aware of the fact that, while in Britain an act of Parliament is necessary before works for a supply of water or a mile of railway can be constructed, six or seven men can plunge the nation into war, or, what is perhaps equally disastrous, commit it to entangling alliances without consulting Parliament at all. This is the most pernicious, palpable effect flowing from the monarchial theory, for these men do this in `the king's Name,' who is in theory still a real monarch, although in reality only a convenient puppet, to be used by the cabinet at pleasure to suit their own needs."[36]
Former president Franklin Delano Roosevelt said "The real truth of the matter is that a financial element in the large centers has owned the Government since the days of Andrew Jackson" (Letter to Col. Edward Mandell House (21 November 1933); as quoted in F.D.R.: His Personal Letters, 1928-1945, edited by Elliott Roosevelt (New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, 1950), p. 373)[37]

Kent Cooper served as general manager of the Associated Press from 1925 to 1943, and then became it's executive director. In "Barriers Down", pp. 6-9, he noted that by the beginning of the 20th century, the news agencies Reuters, Wolff, and Havas were a triumvirate that together monopolized international news. On p. 21, he noted that in his circles, the account was that international bankers, led by the Rothschilds, assumed ownership of those agencies at the beginning of the 20th Century. Relevant excerpts are here:  

Thus we know why they were subsequently seldom mentioned in the world's media, since they owned the media.

The 1919 Encyclopedia Americana noted that "The political events of 1813 raised the House of Rothschild to the important position it has SINCE occupied in the commercial and financial world"[38] It stated further that "much intermarriage among cousins indicates the family is destined long to retain control of European finance"[39]

Rothschild biographer Frederic Morton noted that, "[T]hough they control scores of industrial, commercial, mining and tourist corporations, not one bears the name Rothschild. Being privately held partnerships, the family houses never need to, and never do, publish a single public balance sheet or any other report of their financial condition."[40]

Even on their website, the Rothschilds note that they are de facto, an agency separate from governments, that acts in an "advisory" capacity, writing, "We are widely regarded as the adviser who best understands the needs of governments and the benefits of a discreet, long-term relationship.":

In May 2011, a Swiss banker, who would not be named for fear of the consequences, was interviewed by the Russian magazine NoviDen. He revealed the mentality of these people, what they like to do in their spare time:

"[T]hese people are corrupt, sick in their minds, so sick they are full of vices and those vices are kept under wraps on their orders. Some of them like Strauss-Kahn rape women, others are sado maso, or paedophile and many are into Satanism. When you go in some banks you see these satanistic symbols, like in the Rothschild Bank in Zurich.

 These people are controlled by black-mail because of the weaknesses they have. They have to follow orders or they will be exposed, they will be destroyed or even killed."

He also noted that, "The big banks are training their staff with Anglo-Saxon values. They are training them to be greedy and ruthless. And greed is destroying Switzerland and everybody else."

He also noted, regarding the powerful policy steering group known as the Bilderberg group: "You have the inner circle who are into Satanism and then there are the naive or less informed people. Some people even think they are doing something good, the outer circle."

So - why did I include all that? Merely to note that also of relevance are recordings of the recent 4th World Wilderness Congress that preceded the 1992 Earth Summit. Here people like you and I are called "the cannon fodder, unfortunately, that populates the Earth". And a banking system set up by and for the Rothschilds is shown to be the centerpiece of the new mode of organization that "sustainability" measures will create. The attendees (like Maurice Strong) have no qualms about acknowledging the dominance of that family in World Affairs. Strong states that there is "no better person" to spearhead this project than Edmund Leopold de Rothschild, and that he (Rothschild) "epitomizes in his own life that positive synthesis between environment and conservation on the one hand and economics on the other":  

The following overview notes what this would metastasize into, that "The 4th WWC introduced the concept of a World Conservation Bank, leading to the formation of the The Global Environment Facility (GEF) of the World Bank.":

We can see the outlines of these proposals being promoted at the present time. In a document called "Trading Emissions: Full Global Potential" (London: The Social Market Foundation, January 2008: - written by Simon Linnett, Executive Vice Chairman of N.M. Rothschild, London (see "about the author" section of that document). In the document, he defines "greenhouse emissions" as the new form of "social market" and states:

"That such a market has to be established on a world basis coordinated by an international institution with a constitution to match.... That, perhaps, it might be regarded as having wider benefits than merely `saving the planet' - perhaps it might be the basis of a new world order, one that is not based on trade and/or conflict resolution. 

Perhaps one can see a way to achieve this goal through leadership, vision and some marginal and manageable renunciation of national sovereignty, how the world might just get there. The repercussions of addressing climate change may extend well beyond that single but critical issue.... Implicit in all the above is that nations have to be prepared to subordinate, to a certain extent, some element of their sovereignty to this world initiative." He notes that "The political costs of such loss of sovereignty are lengthy. Loss of competitiveness (massively overstated in the activities in which energy is used - especially since trade will be more difficult, if, at the margin, transport is made more costly), loss of power and loss of direct control over economic levers are potentially the most significant and give the most cause for concern.

 But these actions are necessary if we are to answer the accusation that "it doesn't matter what we do when China is expanding its energy usage at its current rate" - we have to bring China and India in and they are not going to enter a scheme where they do not have a "say". 

When countries are already foregoing the right of direct control over monetary policy through the creation of independent central banks, this [the above] could be a relatively small price to pay for such inclusion." He furthermore states that "The EU member states have recognised their need to subordinate sovereignty to the EU; in time, if this is to work, the EU itself will need to yield sovereignty to a bigger world body on carbon trading." He states "Above all, this plan requires "sponsors" - a country prepared to host it and a senior politician prepared to lead this new initiative. If such a route map could be found, then perhaps we might be at the beginning of a new world constitution and a new world order." He states that regulating this should be a "World Environment Authority" operating from a "world city with world skills and world facilities." He then notes, in a section entitled "A natural role for London", "London is a world financial centre (possibly "the" world financial centre)." and that "London would make a compelling case to house the World Environmental Agency."

Documents retrieved from the congress from which audio of Edmund de Rothschild was taken state the following (in the introductory email, I endorsed Mullins - an endorsement which I redact because he is such a problematic source, but I stand behind everything else in the email prefacing the document. The document itself gives insight into the accumulated degeneracy of the elite of the world at present):

Excerpts are as follows: "The time is pressing. The Club of Rome was founded in 1968, Limits to Growth was written in 1971, Global 2000 was written in 1979, but insufficient progress has been made in population reduction. Given global instabilities, including those of the former Soviet bloc, the need for firm control of world technology, weaponry, and resources, is absolutely mandatory. The immediate reduction of world population, according to the mid-1970's recommendation of the Draper Fund, must be immediately affected. The present vast overpopulation, now far beyond the world carrying capacity, cannot be answered by future reductions in the birth rate due to contraception, sterilization and abortion, but must be met in the present by the reduction of numbers presently existing. This must be done by whatever means necessary. ... Compulsory cooperation is not debatable with 166 nations, most of whose leaders are irresolute, conditioned by localist "cultures" and lacking the appropriate notions of the New World Order. Debate only means delay and forfeiture of our goals and purpose.

  The UN action against Iraq proves conclusively that resolute action on our part can sway other leaders to go along with the necessary program. The Iraq action proves that the aura of power can be projected and sustained and that the wave of history is sweeping forward. ... We are the living sponsors of the great Cecil Rhodes will of 1877 ... We stand with Lord Milner's credo. We too are "British Race Patriots" and our patriotism is "the speech, the tradition, the principles, the aspirations of the British Race". Do you fear to take this stand, at the very last moment when this purpose can be realized? do you not see that failure now, is to be pulled down by the billions of Lilliputians of lesser race who care little or nothing for the Anglo-Saxon system?

  ...The Security Council of the UN, led by the Anglo-American Major Nation Powers, will decree that, henceforth, all nations have quotas for REDUCTION on a yearly basis, which will be enforced by the Security Council by selective or total embargo of credit, food, medicine or military force, when required. ... outmoded notions of sovereignty will be discarded and the Security Council has complete legal, military and economic jurisdiction in any region in the world, to be enforced by the Major Nations of the Security Council. The Security Council of the U.N. will explain that not all races are equal, nor should they be. Those races proven superior by superior achievements ought to rule the lesser races, caring for them on sufferance that they cooperate with the Security Council. ... All could be lost if opposition by minor races is tolerated and the vacillations of those we work with, our closest comrades, is cause for our hesitations. Open declaration of intent followed by decisive force is the final solution."


The Rebel

The Myth of the Good Jew

Article by John Kaminski

Video tutorial by John Alan Martinson, Jr.

poorrichards blog

the truth is anti-semitic

Making My Way

Communism’s Christian roots

by Robert

I’ve lately been reading Robert Service’s excellent Comrades!: Communism – A World History, a book which aims to deliver a “general account of communism around the world.”  Like many works so grand in scope, Comrades starts at the beginning: the origins of communism.  Service does a superb job describing these origins, enumerating the many influences on the ideology throughout history.  Two facts stand out: 1) as a vision of the ideal society, types of communism existed long before Marx and Engels in the 19th century; 2) a significant number of those influences were Christian thinkers, taking from Christian doctrines.  This latter fact is something I wish to explore further here.

Before I get into that, it might be useful to define what we mean by “communism”.  Service correctly notes how stubbornly it has defied definition.  “One communist’s communism is another communist’s anti-communism,” he writes.  Still, there are at least two core elements virtually all communisms (with a small “c”) have built upon: 

  • Common, as opposed to private, ownership of property and the means of production
  • “From each according to their ability, to each according to their need.”
What those who identify themselves as communist or socialist have never agreed on is the means to achieve this vision.  Marx and Engels, members of a long line of communist theorists, by no means settled the debate, but they were the first to thoroughly elaborate an allegedly scientific analysis of why capitalism would inevitably collapse and lead ultimately to communism.  They drew inspiration from wide-ranging array of philosophers, economists, historians, and scientists, both classic and contemporary.
While today’s Christians tirelessly strive to promote atheism as the genesis of communism, a claim I’ve refuted many times on this blog (see right sidebar), they’ve never explained why no atheist thinker mentions anything like it until the 19th century.  In contrast, communist principles are found at the very birth of Christianity:

All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. (Acts 2:44-45, NIV)

All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.
Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means Son of Encouragement), sold a field he owned and brought the money and put it at the apostles’ feet. (Acts 4:32-37, NIV).
 These passages excited the imaginations of later Christians, inspiring real and theoretical applications.  One of the most influential was Catholic Saint Thomas More’s Utopia.  Published in the early 16th century, it described a society free of private ownership and unemployment, where communal living is the norm, and worship of all forms is tolerated, except forms of non-worship like atheism. Other similar works by fellow Christian thinkers followed, including The City of the Sun and Description of the Republic of Christianopolis.  Christian sects such as the Anabaptists, the True Levellers, the Plymouth colonists, and the Mormons made attempts to put communist principles into practice.  They weren’t successful, to put it mildly.

The industrial revolution begun in the 18th century resulted in some severe side-effects, such as social dislocations and abysmal working conditions, which in turn provided fertile ground for the rapid growth of leveling ideologies like communism. Christians were among the vanguard in the “social justice” movements that emerged in the 19th century, both as leaders and ideologists.  A roundly influential tract was written by Joseph Proudhon titled What is Property? Or, an Inquiry into the Principle of Right and Government, the famous conclusion of which was “property is theft.”  Proudhon cited the Bible as the primary influence on his beliefs.

Another popular figure in the early 19th century proto-communist movement was Wilhelm Weitling, who wrote Gospel of Poor Sinners, a book which traced communism back to early Christianity.  Weitling produced another work, Guarantees of Harmony and Freedom, which was praised my Marx. It was influential among the founders of the League of the Just, whose goal was “the establishment of the Kingdom of God on Earth, based on the ideals of love of one’s neighbour, equality and justice”.  The League of the Just would later become the Communist League.  Marx and Engels were members, and they were commissioned to draw up a manifesto for the organization.  They did just that, and so came into existence

 The Communist Manifesto.

Although Christians were prominent in founding and promoting communism, it would be a mistake to view communism as primarily a Christian ideology until Marxism.  Indeed, many Christians going back centuries defended private property, and they opposed communism in both word and deed (but sometimes not for the most noble of reasons…), particularly Marx’s religiously-unfriendly brand of communism.  Yet it would also be a mistake to deny communism’s indebtedness to Christian scriptures and thinkers, a rich legacy from which a sizable number Christians draw even up to the present time.  Liberation theology is the most notable species of Christian communism that remains alive and well, albeit in an evolved form.

Needless to say, most Christians have not taken it kindly when confronted with communism’s kinship to their religion.  They primarily object that the social order described in works like Acts was a voluntary arrangement, not one to be imposed by force as attempted by the Marxist-Leninist brand of communists, or that it was applicable only to that time period.  The objections are peculiar in that Christians have never denied themselves the right to be guided by scripture in questions about how the social order should be arranged; abortion and gay marriage being two notable, contemporary examples.  Moreover, if indeed it’s the case that “all Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16), then it would imply the Christian god has sanctioned the communist ethos described in Acts as his desired state for everyone, or at least for his followers.  Even if Christians blanche at imposing it on unwilling participants, either democratically or dictatorially, that doesn’t prevent them from imposing it on themselves.  That all Christian attempts at doing so have failed cannot indicate a problem in the principles themselves, since they were “God-breathed” and thus infallible.  Christians, why are you running from your communist heritage, rather than embracing it?

{Ah, but most Christians have embraced a variant of communism already, mon amis! ~Lark}

The Book of the Law

By Aleister Crowley


Do what thou wilt is the whole of the law.

--The Book of the Law, by Aleister Crowley

Christian Liberty Publishing


Dr. Naomi Jacobs

All around the world, increasingly “socialist” central/local governments and councils, in collusion with the international bankers who fund them, are frantically getting deeper and deeper into unsustainable debt – or worse, are going bankrupt. Harsh austerity measures are being implemented, with drastic cuts in spending, privatization of assets and huge, onerous increases in rates and taxes on property owners  – Is all this happening just by chance – or is it a deliberate plot?  Is it a global phenomenon? Who is responsible? Where will all this eventually end? Using the small country of New Zealand in the South Pacific as an example, this account attempts to unmask exactly why all this is happening, and provides some unique answers how it may be stopped.

{Must read! Special thanks to David for this. ~Lark} 

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy


Crossroad Ministries

What the Communitarians Stand For

    Compiled by Niki Raapana, revised 3/04/05

{Best go-to site on the net to learn why communitarianism is so very un-American! ~Lark}

Channeling Reality

{The view of reality from computer systems analyst Vicky Davis ~Lark}

Invisible Serfs Collar

{The story of your socialization... to communitarian enslavement... by attorney Robin Eubanks}

Anthony Judge

{Mr. Judge posits that all human value [and self-worth] can be measured and adjudged by one's attachment to syndicalist trade unions and professional associations. He is considered a leading proponent and chronicler of this collectivist [communitarian] worldview today. ~Lark}


 Summary: Anthony Judge (Australia) is the instigator of the Union of Imaginative Associations ( -- following his retirement in May 2007 as Director of Communications and Research at the Union of International Associations (UIA) ( He had held this operational position since the 1970s in addition to his formal role as Assistant Secretary-General. Based in Brussels for the century since its founding in 1907, the UIA has been a self-financed, international, nonprofit, research clearinghouse for information on all international nonprofit organizations and their preoccupations. 

His continuing responsibility, dating from 1972, had been the development of interlinked databases on: these international organizations, their meetings, their strategies, the problems on which these focus, and their values, together with associated databases on modes of human development, bibliographical data, and biographical profiles -- and on the networks linking these various kinds of entity. Over that period he was specifically responsible for publication of this information in a range of reference media -- including the Yearbook of International Organizations, the International Congress Calendar -- and on enabling web access to their hyperlinked content. In particular, with the financial assistance of Mankind 2000 ( of which he became Executive Director, he developed the Encyclopedia of World Problems and Human Potential for the UIA from 1972 through to its current online integration with these other databases. 

As a development of these knowledge management initiatives, and their associated learnings, he has authored a collection of over 1,600 documents on information and knowledge organization of relevance to governance and strategy-making -- including challenges to configuration, comprehension, credibility, communication, and related software possibilities, especially in conferencing dialogue contexts. Specific interests have included futures research and transdisciplinarity with particular interest in exploring user-controlled visual representations of complex knowledge networks over the web (see also Richer Metaphors for Our Future Survival : Narrative autobiography as a futurist, 1996). Other series of papers explore issues relating to governance through metaphor, electronic implications for organization network operation, and the future of dialogue and sustainable community.

Encyclopedia of World Problems 
and Human Potential

Union of International Associations

The Union of International Associations is a non-profit non-governmental organization researching, under UN mandate, the global civil society and publishing information on international organizations, international meetings, world problems, etc. Headquarters are in Brussels, Belgium. It was founded in 1907 by Henri La Fontaine, the 1913 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, and Paul Otlet, a founding father of what is now called information science.

Its stated goals (taken from its website) include:

  • Contribution to a universal order based on principles of human dignity, solidarity of peoples and freedom of communication;
  • Facilitation of the development and efficiency of non-governmental networks in every field of human activity, especially non-profit and voluntary associations, considered to be essential components of contemporary society;
  • Collection, research and dissemination of information on international bodies, both governmental and non-governmental, their interrelationships, their meetings, and problems and strategies they are dealing with;
  • Experimentation with more meaningful and action-oriented ways of presenting such information to enable these initiatives to develop and counterbalance each other creatively, and as a catalyst for the emergence of new forms of associative activity and transnational co-operation;
  • Promotion of research on the legal, administrative and other problems common to these international associations, especially in their contacts with governmental bodies.

laetus in praesens
joy in the present

Anthony Judge / Collected Works


Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds

By Charles Mackay (1814 – 1889)


eBook and audiobook links

Notes on Diogenes of Sinope

Thanks Unk!

Diogenes said, "The art of being a slave is to rule one's master.”
He also said, “I know nothing, except the fact of my ignorance.”
And, “He has the most who is content with the least.”

Diogenes was a very playful philosopher who liked to use great wit when challenging the values and beliefs of his fellow citizens in ancient Athens.  He lived in great poverty, probably begging and stealing his food, and steadfastly disdained all forms of luxury.  It was because of his determination to follow his own dictates and not adhere to the conventions of society that he was given the epithet "dog," from which the name "cynic" is derived.
A young man contemplating marriage sought advice from Diogenes. "Should I marry?"
"Marriage is too soon for a young man"
"Would you have me wait then until I am old."
"Oh no, Marriage is far too late for an old man."
"What am I to do then? I love the girl."
"Love is a luxury no one can afford. It is for those who have nothing better to do."
"What should we be doing then?"
"To seek freedom. But it is not possible to be free if you have a wife and children."
"But having a wife and family is so agreeable."
"Then you see the problem, young man. Freedom would not be so difficult to attain were prison not so sweet."
"You mean to be free is to be alone?"
"We come into the world alone and we die alone. Why, in life, should we be any less alone?"
"To live, then, is terrible."
"No, not to live, but to live in chains."
Very few of Diogenes' disciples had the physical and mental stamina to become cynics. One in particular left the circle, but not before entreating Diogenes to give him one of his books. "You really are a silly fellow," said Diogenes. "Surely you wouldn't have painted figs instead of real ones. And yet you pass over the genuine practice of wisdom and would be satisfied with what is merely written."

Diogenes was asked, "Tell me, to what do you attribute your great poverty?"
"Hard work," he replied.
"And what advice can you offer the rich?"
"Avoid all the good things in life."
"Because money costs too much. A rich man is far poorer than a poor man."
"How can that be?"
"Because poverty is the only thing money can't buy."

Diogenes was once invited to dinner by a wealthy man. During the evening, one of the guests became so outraged by Diogenes' general behavior that he began to throw bones at him, calling him a "dog." Whereupon Diogenes got  up, went to the guest, cocked up his leg and urinated on him.

Freemasonry: Mankind's Death Wish

By Henry Makow Ph.D.

Snakes In Suits

When Psychopaths Go To Work

By Paul Babiak, Ph.D. & Robert D. Hare, Ph.D.

1845 - Common Law to be usurped by Admiralty Law

Declaration of Independence - 1776
Articles of Confederation - 1777
The Constitution for the United States, Its Sources and Its Application
Our Enemy, The State
It Is Our Choice Who We Will Serve!
Who is Running America?
A Special Report on the National Emergency in the United States of America

Treason in Government!
Admiralty on Land!!
Where's the Water?

    The Constitution for the United States, Its Sources and Its Application

    It Is Our Choice Who We Will Serve!

Who Is Running America?

The Bankruptcy of America, the Corporate United States,
and the New World Order

The 20th Century: Talmudic triumph over Western civilization

Jewish Dominance Of America - Facts Are Facts

Mark Dankoff Interviews Professor Ray Goodwin of the Barnes Review

I Pledge Allegiance To The One World Government

Uncensored Magazine Interview Reveals Lord Monckton
Involved In Chemtrails/Geoengineering Cover Up

Published on Apr 10, 2013


Controlled Opposition – From Goldstein to Soros and Beyond

 By Gilad Atzmon
Jewish power is the unique capacity to stop us from discussing or even contemplating Jewish power. It is the capacity to determine the boundaries of the political discourse and criticism in particular.
  In his new book, “The Invention Of The Land of Israel”, Israeli academic Shlomo Sand, manages to present conclusive evidence of the far fetched nature of the Zionist historical narrative - that the Jewish Exile is a myth as is the Jewish people and even the Land of Israel.
Yet, Sand and many others fail to address the most important question: If Zionism is based on myth, how do the Zionists manage to get a way with their lies, and for so long?

If the Jewish ‘homecoming’ and the demand for a Jewish national homeland cannot be historically substantiated, why has it been supported by both Jews and the West for so long? How does the Jewish state manage for so long to celebrate its racist expansionist ideology and at the expense of the Palestinian and Arab peoples?

Jewish power is obviously one answer, but, what is Jewish power? Can we ask this question without being accused of being Anti Semitic? Can we ever discuss its meaning and scrutinize its politics? Is Jewish Power a dark force, managed and maneuvered by some conspiratorial power? Is it something of which Jews themselves are shy? Quite the opposite - Jewish power, in most cases, is celebrated right in front of our eyes. As we know, AIPAC is far from being quiet about its agenda, its practices or its achievements. AIPAC, CFI in the UK and CRIF in France are operating in the most open manner and often openly brag about their success.

Furthermore, we are by now accustomed to watch our democratically elected leaders shamelessly queuing to kneel before their pay-masters. Neocons certainly didn’t seem to feel the need to hide their close Zionist affiliations. Abe Foxman’s Anti Defamation League (ADL) works openly towards the Judification of the Western discourse, chasing and harassing anyone who dares voice any kind of criticism of Israel or even of Jewish choseness. And of course, the same applies to the media, banking and Hollywood. We know about the many powerful Jews who are not in the slightest bit shy about their bond with Israel and their commitment to Israeli security, the Zionist ideology, the primacy of Jewish suffering, Israeli expansionism and even outright Jewish exceptionalism.

But, as ubiquitous as they are, AIPAC, CFI, ADL, Bernie Madoff, ‘liberator’ Bernard Henri Levy, war-advocate David Aaronovitch, free market prophet Milton Friedman, Steven Spielberg, Haim Saban, Lord Levy and many other Zionist enthusiasts and Hasbara advocates are not necessarily the core or the driving force behind Jewish Power, but are merely symptoms. Jewish power is actually far more sophisticated than simply a list of Jewish lobbies or individuals performing highly developed manipulative skills. Jewish power is the unique capacity to stop us from discussing or even contemplating Jewish power. It is the capacity to determine the boundaries of the political discourse and criticism in particular.

Contrary to popular belief, it is not ‘right wing’ Zionists who facilitate Jewish power, It is actually the ‘good’, the ‘enlightened’ and the ‘progressive’ who make Jewish power the most effective and forceful power in the land. It is the ‘progressives’ who confound our ability to identify the Judeocentric tribal politics at the heart of Neoconservatism, American contemporary imperialism and foreign policy. It is the so-called ‘anti’ Zionist who goes out of his or her way to divert our attention from the fact that Israel defines itself as the Jewish State and blinds us to the fact that its tanks are decorated with Jewish symbols. It was the Jewish Left intellectuals who rushed to denounce Professors Mearsheimer and Walt, Jeff Blankfort and James Petras’ work on the Jewish Lobby. And it is no secret that Occupy AIPAC, the campaign against the most dangerous political Lobby in America, is dominated by a few righteous members of the chosen tribe. We need to face up to the fact that our dissident voice is far from being free. Quite the opposite, we are dealing here with an institutional case of controlled opposition.

In George Orwell’s 1984, it is perhaps Emmanuel Goldstein who is the pivotal character. Orwell’s Goldstein is a Jewish revolutionary, a fictional Leon Trotsky. He is depicted as the head of a mysterious anti-party organization called “The Brotherhood” and is also the author of the most subversive revolutionary text (The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism). Goldstein is the ‘dissenting voice’, the one who actually tells the truth. Yet, as we delve into Orwell’s text, we find out from Party’s ‘Inner Circle’ O’Brien that Goldstein was actually invented by Big Brother in a clear attempt to control the opposition and the possible boundaries of dissidence.

Orwell’s personal account of the Spanish Civil War “Homage To Catalonia” clearly presaged the creation of Emmanuel Goldstein. It was what Orwell witnessed in Spain that, a decade later, matured into a profound understanding of dissent as a form of controlled opposition. My guess is that, by the late 1940’s, Orwell had understood the depth of intolerance, and tyrannical and conspiratorial tendencies that lay at the heart of ‘Big Brother-ish’ Left politics and praxis.

{Read more at above link - highly recommended! ~Lark}

Jews, Scots, Armenians, Dutch
 By Gary North

The Myth of American Meritocracy

How corrupt are Ivy League admissions?

By Ron Unz • November 28, 2012

An Open Letter to My Friends attending the American Renaissance Conference

By David Duke, Ph.D.

Can the New World Order be defeated? Yes!
Can Americans save this nation and the world? Absolutely!
Masters of Seduction shows the way!

Condensed from the book
Masters of Seduction
(Plus Vital New Facts)


Beguiling Americans Into Slavery and Self-destruction

Copyright © 2000 by Jeri Lynn Ball