Search results for protocol of the learned elders

Episodes 8 & 9 of “Out of the Darkness into the Light”

Here is Episode 8 and then Episode 9 of the series by Jake Morphonios on PizzaGate and the broader global control system through child sexual abuse and sacrifice.

Episode 8 is on the Knights Templar, an interpretation of them and their practices that is not uncommon, but one with which I completely disagree. In my view, they are one of several secret societies of the Light that has been overtaken by the dark, which is what has also happened to the derived organisation of Freemasonry, now a key tool of the global satanic control system. In the case of Freemasonry, this was begun soon after the creation of the Illuminati in the late 18th century, as outlined in Protocol 4 of the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.

Episode 9 is focussed on the very sinister Ordo Templi Orientis.

As you will see at the end of Episode 9, Jake is another who has seen his income from YouTube evaporate as his channel has been demonetised.


Check out the extraordinary new, life-changing technology at

How Jews are incited to disrupt the power structure of their host nations

I share this article by Gilad Atzmon in full:

The Plot Against Britain…

A few days ago in London, we witnessed a senior diplomat in the Israeli embassy caught on camera plotting to “take down” members of the British government including Foreign Office minister Sir Alan Duncan. We then learned that a senior official from the UK’s National Union of Students, as part of a sting involving the Israeli embassy, was covertly filmed conspiring to oust the organisation’s president Malia Bouattia.  Malia Bouattia is the first Muslim president of the NUS and some British Jewish institutes have been concerned by her overwhelming popularity.  It has also been revealed that the Israeli embassy has been plotting to undermine Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and caught on video allocating funds towards that goal.

Are these events connected to each other, or is it mere coincidence that the Jewish state and Jewish organisations such as AIPAC, LFI,  JDL, and JVP are, time after time, caught red-handed, plotting and conspiring against other people’s regimes and political institutions?

Must Watch: Al Jazeera’s Investigations-The Lobby Ep 1:

Embarrassingly enough, plotting against other people’s political institutes is deeply rooted in Judaic teaching. In fact, the Book of Esther is a biblical prototype, teaching Jews how to infiltrate and subvert the Goyim’s political affairs.  This Book of Esther* is a biblical story that is the basis of Purim, probably the most joyous Jewish festival.

The story is set in the third year of the rule of Ahasuerus in Persia and is usually identified with Xerxes I. It is a story of palace intrigue and of a brave and beautiful Jewish queen, Esther who, at the very last minute, manages to save the Jewish people of her time.

King Ahasuerus is married to Vashti, whom he repudiates after she rejects his request that she ‘visit’ him during a feast and it is Esther who is selected from all the candidates to be Ahasuerus’s new wife. As the story progresses, Ahasuerus’s prime minister Haman, without knowing that Esther is actually Jewish, plots to have the king kill all the Jews but Esther, together with her cousin Mordecai, saves the day for her people.

To read The Book Of Esther click here

At the risk of endangering her own safety, Esther warns Ahasuerus of Haman’s murderous anti-Jewish plot and Haman and his sons are hanged on the fifty-cubit gallows he had originally built for cousin Mordecai and Mordecai takes Haman’s place as prime minister. Unfortunately, Ahasuerus’ edict decreeing the murder of the Jews cannot be rescinded, so he issues another edict, allowing the Jews to take up arms and kill their enemies. This they do and it is this  genocide that, ever since, is celebrated at Purim.

The Judaic moral of the story is clear: If Jews want to survive, they’d better infiltrate into the corridors of power. With Esther, Mordechai and Purim in mind, Shai Masot, LFI, AIPAC and the notion of ‘Jewish power’ look like the very embodiment of a deep biblical and cultural ideology.

However, there’s a twist. Though the story is presented as an historic tale, the historicity of the Book of Esther is largely disputed by most modern bible scholars. It is largely the lack of clear corroboration of any of the details of the story of the Book of Esther with what is known from classical sources of Persian history that has led scholars to conclude that the story is mostly, or even totally fictional.

In other words, though the Judaic moral is clear, the attempted genocide is a fiction. It seems that by telling how Jews ‘save’ themselves by infiltrating their host nation’s politics, the Book of Esther propels its readers into a collective Pre-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PRE-TSD) and makes a fantasy of destruction into an ideology of survival.

Interestingly, the Book of Esther is one of only two books of the Bible that do not directly mention God (the other is Song of Songs). In the Book of Esther, it is the Jews who believe in themselves, in their own power, in their uniqueness, in their sophistication, in their ability to conspire, in their ability to take over kingdoms, in their ability to save themselves and in their ability to ‘take down’ Sir Alan Duncan, Jeremy Corbyn and NUS leader Malia Bouattia.  The only remaining question is how long will it take before the Brits and the British government grasp what they are up against.

* The following was written years ago and was published as a part of an extended article on

End of quote.

Again, Atzmon does not understand history since the control of Britain by the elite Jews is centuries old; however, these surface skirmishes help to hide the true power and control, which modern democracy was created to distract from. No-one can look at the following photo meme and not get this.

However, this does not detract from the key message from Atzmon (an awakened Jew) about how deeply embedded and celebrated this practice is in Jewish culture.

Maybe, one day the rest of us will wake up to it, but we probably have to transcend the holohoax myth first, and it’ll be a while before that’s widespread.


Check out the extraordinary new, life-changing technology at

Trigger Warnings, Safe Spaces, Bias Reporting: The New Micro-techniques of Surveillance and Control

A singular orthodoxy has infiltrated the discursive parameters of U.S. and other universities and colleges. This orthodoxy now constitutes the ethical vocabulary of academia. Adopted from feminism, anti-racism, and LGBTQ theory and practice, the language, doctrines, and mechanisms of this orthodoxy now dominate academia’s policies, procedures and handbooks. The terminology has become the vernacular among the swelling ranks of administrators, especially the relatively new cohort  of chief diversity officers, directors of diversity, associate provosts of diversity, assistant provosts of diversity, diversity consultants, and so on and so on. I refer not merely to the orthodoxy of “diversity,” but in particular to “diversity” initiatives as they are currently administered, using a particular set of policies, procedures, and mechanisms: trigger warnings, safe spaces, bias reporting, and the like.

While ridiculed by media outlets, and, at least where trigger warnings are concerned, disavowed by the American Association of University Professors, nevertheless, American colleges and universities are dominated by this ethos and its collective techne. At the University of Chicago for example, the Dean of Students, John (Jay) Ellison, Ph.D., announced  (to the great chagrin of some faculty and many students):

Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called  trigger warnings,’ we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual ‘safe spaces’ where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own…

Yet, the same university has also assembled and maintains a “Bias Response Team,” and “urges anyone who has experienced or witnessed a Bias Incident to report it to the Bias Response Team.”

As it usually happens, any perspective that deviates from this “academic” orthodoxy – or any opposition expressed by faculty members in reasoned commentary or debate about the premises of the creed and its techniques – is virtually proscribed in advance. Whether or not they happen to be progressives, left communists, or radicals of another stripe, potential critics rightly fear being figured as right-wing reactionaries opposed to diversity and the confrontation of oppression. Any complaints or criticisms, they fear, would be peremptorily dismissed, and likely circulated among other faculty members within their own universities or in academia at large as gossip, subjecting the critic to ridicule and disrepute.

Indeed, despite the fact that a new form of policing has been surreptitiously introduced into academia at large, one would be hard-pressed to find a single article, essay, or book that subjects the entire administratively controlled apparatuses of “diversity” to any kind of real scrutiny. While innumerable articles have appeared on one or another of these topics (mostly on trigger warnings and safe spaces), no one has explained the structural provenance nor analysed the probable effects of these developments as a whole.  Nor has anyone provided a theoretical or historical framework with which to understand them.

Ironically, perhaps, the most clearly appropriate critical theoretic for grasping the structural origins, as well as the social and political implications of this new largely “academic”[1][1] development can be found within the ambit of postmodern theory itself. The new mechanisms adapted and adopted by academic administrations clearly and incredibly mirror those described in a text widely read within humanities and social science studies courses throughout American universities and beyond. Indeed, it is a wonder that no one has, until now, applied this critique to the mechanisms of this academic creed. Faculty members, graduate students, and even many undergraduates, who have had even the slightest brush with trends in the humanities and social sciences, will know to what I refer here: Michel Foucault’s brilliant 1975 book, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Particularly uncanny is the resemblance of the academic mechanisms in question to the “micro-physics of power” described in the third chapter, “Panopticism.”

In this riveting essay, Foucault effectually describes the transmutation of power from the pre-modern to the modern period. Adducing Jeremy Bentham’s architectural model of the “Panopticon,” Foucault proffers what at the time was an utterly novel understanding of modern “discipline” and control. The new disciplinary mechanisms that Foucault discusses replace the earlier corporeal forms of punishment, such as quartering people in public, or branding them with the crimes they supposedly committed, and so forth. While first introduced by Bentham as a model of prison, asylum, and school reform, the forms of surveillance and discipline to some extent prefigured by the Panopticon and in some sense preceding it, for Foucault had already metastasized beyond the prison system, becoming the general means of discipline and control in so-called “democratic” societies.

The Panopticon itself is a circular building, in which its subjects – inmates, patients, students, etc. – are arrayed in cells surrounding a central tower. The subjects can be seen at any time by a guard, who may (or may not) occupy the central tower. The captive subjects cannot see into the tower, nor can they see each other. Likewise, they are never certain whether or not they are being observed:

Bentham’s Panopticon is the architectural figure of this composition. We know the principle on which it was based: at the periphery, an annular building; at the centre, a tower; this tower is pierced with wide windows that open onto the inner side of the ring; the peripheric building is divided into cells, each of which extends the whole width of the building; they have two windows, one on the inside, corresponding to the windows of the tower; the other, on the outside, allows the light to cross the cell from one end to the other. All that is needed, then, is to place a supervisor in a central tower and to shut up in each cell a madman, a patient, a condemned man, a worker or a schoolboy. By the effect of backlighting, one can observe from the tower, standing out precisely against the light, the small captive shadows in the cells of the periphery. They are like so many cages, so many small theatres, in which each actor is alone, perfectly individualized and constantly visible. The panoptic mechanism arranges spatial unities that make it possible to see constantly and to recognize immediately. In short, it reverses the principle of the dungeon; or rather of its three functions – to enclose, to deprive of light and to hide – it preserves only the first and eliminates the other two. Full lighting and the eye of a supervisor capture better than darkness, which ultimately protected. Visibility is a trap (Foucault 200).

Although the captive individual can never verify with certainty that she is being observed, the very possibility of being observed at any time produces the intended effect of self-circumspection on the part of the subject. As such, the subjects themselves internalize the observer, and effectively monitor and police themselves. As Foucault brilliantly describes the effects of this technological innovation:

He who is subjected to a field of visibility, and who knows it, assumes responsibility for the constraints of power; he makes them play spontaneously upon himself; he inscribes in himself the power relation in which he simultaneously plays both roles [that of observer and observed]; he becomes the principle of his own subjection. (203, emphasis added).

Make no mistake about it, Foucault describes and mobilizes the architectural model of the Panopticon in order to introduce his central argument – in modernity, entire societies are inscribed with, underwritten by, and even predicated upon a generalizable and generalized method of surveillance and control – panopticism. Even the once structure-bound, institution-specific disciplinary techniques as represented so well by the Panopticon have metastasized and traveled well beyond their former institutional borders. They now permeate the entire social body. In fact, in an important section, Foucault discusses “the swarming of the disciplinary mechanisms” of panopticism. The phrasing puts one in mind of the sentinels in “The Matrix,” the legion of squid-like robots that seek out, locate, and swarm about the escapees from the matrix in sweltering masses.

For our purposes, perhaps the most salient aspect of panopticism is the way it makes all of its subjects into potential sentinels of surveillance: “We have seen that anyone may come and exercise in the central tower the functions of surveillance” (207). That is, everyone and anyone is invited to become a functionary of panopticism. “If you see something, say something,” is the mantra that effectively encapsulates this logic. Trigger warnings, safe spaces and especially bias reporting are among the micro-techniques of power being used precisely in this fashion as described by Foucault.

At this point, I should make clear a parallel between the late eighteenth/early nineteenth-century model that Foucault treats, and the contemporary devices employed in academia and beyond. A point that is often lost on many readers of Foucault’s “Panopticism,” especially those unfamiliar with nineteenth-century cultural history, is that Jeremy Bentham was not some reactionary, right-wing or even conservative thinker attempting to impose a nefarious, draconian form of oppression on the population. In fact, during his own time, he was regarded as a radical, what today we would call a “progressive.” In fact, Bentham was known as the principle member of an early nineteenth-century group of reformers known as “the philosophical radicals.” As noted in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, he advocated numerous liberal reforms, including “annual elections; equal electoral districts; a wide suffrage, including woman suffrage; and the secret ballot. He supported in principle the participation of women in government and argued for the reform of marriage law to allow greater freedom to divorce.”

My point here is that regardless of the political provenance or original “intention” of the repertoire of “diversity” mechanisms, as Foucault makes clear, such methods and techniques, whether introduced initially by reformers for progressive ends or not, can and have often been co-opted by administers of power and wielded for oppressive ends. Likewise, the origin of the new academic instruments or “micro-physics of power” in feminism, anti-racism and LGBTQ discourse and practice in no way exempts them from being employed as oppressive mechanisms.

Academia has co-opted and now brandishes identity-politics and its techniques of micro-power – including trigger warnings, safe spaces, and bias reporting – as means of the disciplining of the subject. Bias reporting lines are examples of the ways universities are able to turn everyone within their ambit into sentinels of surveillance, discipline, and punishment. Bias reporting lines and reporting systems make everyone an instrument of panopticism, an instrument of self- and other-policing.

In terms of the academy, however, the use of such mechanisms does not represent a “perversion” of intent. They are coercive as such, by definition. Trigger warnings, safe spaces, bias reporting, and a growing host of micro-techniques of power represent the appropriation and defusing of politics, and the systems of oppression that they oppose.

These techniques of surveillance and control recall such organizations of the nineteenth century as The Society for the Suppression of Vice, founded in 1802. The only real difference involves what count as punishable offenses. In the early to mid-nineteenth century in Britain, reportable offenses included the production, distribution and consumption of pornography, as well as expressions of blasphemy, and the like. Today, “vices” and “blasphemies” include real or imagined “micro-aggressions,” or any conceivable display of “bias,” however absurdly construed. Both regimes, however, are equally religious in character, involving as they do moralistic, individualized, and personalized policing and control. While both are insidious, only contemporary academic panopticism, operating under the guise of protecting and encouraging “diversity,” is anathema to academic freedom and inquiry.

Meanwhile, and probably most importantly, none of this policing and self-policing will do anything to challenge or overturn systemic oppression in the least. In fact, while serving the ideological function of obscuring the underlying structural inequities, oppression and exploitation of capitalism, they also constitute their own form of oppression.
End of quote.

Anyone reminded of Orwell’s “Animal Farm”?

I am, but even more am I reminded of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.

It’s time to give them some context and then share them here. Unless you understand this agenda, you cannot easily make sense of the world in which we find ourselves.

It’s also not difficult to see why the brilliant, youthful and uncompromising Aaron Swartz was targeted and driven to suicide. He was far too intelligent, persuasive, political and capable to let live. He threatened the system, even though he was only just beginning to understand its totality. His understanding of it and his voracious attack upon it was inevitable. I have just finished reading “The Boy Who Could Change the World: The Writings of Aaron Swartz”, a collection of Aaron’s writings, much of it as a teenager. Such a loss.

I’m drawn to share this image that came my way, today:


It’s sadly accurate.

Unless we understand it, we cannot begin to change it.


Check out the extraordinary new, life-changing technology at


America’s Foundations Fund the “Left” Media

I was reading Kevin Barrett’s article about getting in the door to the “Left Forum”, a media event for the leftist US press, and it contains a very interesting diagram showing the funding structure behind the “Leftist” media:

phony left media left_gatekeepers

True to the fundamental principles expressed in the “Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion” (heatedly denied by the Zionists and their sympathisers but endlessly demonstrable by world events), they control both sides of every important element of life, and it is demonstrated perfectly by the above diagram.

BTW, if you haven’t figured it out, yet, taxation is only for the minions. The US uber rich have avoided taxation through the use of Foundations, a mechanism set up in time for the introduction of the US taxation system and the IRS, within a few short months of the setting up of the US Fed in 1913 – coincidental, of course. But I digress.

Kevin’s article is a useful insight to the Leftist media game and it led me to this article entitled The Left Gatekeepers Phenomenon, which focusses specifically on how the Leftist press studiously avoided exposing the truth of 9/11, which Kevin also touches on.

I quote this segment regarding Amy Goodman of “Democracy Now”:

Hypocrisy Now!

One of the most notable cases of Left denial is that of the respected journalist Amy Goodman and her show Democracy Now!. Goodman has long rebuffed requests that she interview an expert on the subject. Instead she has tiptoed around the core facts of the attack and addressed only peripheral issues, such as the EPA’s fraudulent assurances that the air in Lower Manhattan was safe to breathe while Ground Zero was still smoldering. Finally, after a concerted campaign by the 9-11 Visibility Project, Goodman featured David Ray Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor, on her May 26, 2004 show. Goodman pitted Chip Berlet against Griffin, and gave the last word and closing summary to Berlet, who spun the myth that the attack was strictly blowback. Nonetheless, Griffin was allowed to make the case that the attack was an inside job for the first time ever on the nationally syndicated show.

Mark Robinowitz recounts confronting Amy Goodman about her refusal to cover the issue prior to the Griffin interview.

In the fall of 2002, Ms. Goodman spoke in the same room at the University of Oregon during a previous speaking tour. After her speech (which was very similar to her May 2004 speech), I asked her after the event if she would help investigate the recently disclosed story of how the Air Force, CIA, NORAD and National Reconnaissance Office were conducting “war games” similar to 9/11 during the 9/11 “attacks,” which were apparently used to confuse the air defense response. She would not reply, and looked at me in apparent fear. It was a particularly strange response considering she had just spoken eloquently about her tremendous courage in reporting on the massacre in East Timor. (The issue of the 9/11 war games on 9/11 has not ever been mentioned on Democracy Now — and it is likely that if they were, DN would run the risk of losing their foundation funding, which would force them to lay off much of their staff.)

End of quote.

I have written previously about that darling of the Left, Noam Chomsky, who parrots the official 9/11 story as well as the nonsense about Oswald killing JFK. In my opinion, Chomsky is an example of one of those who is saved for protecting the deepest hidden truths whilst leading the well-meaning off the scent.

Oh, did I mention Chomsky and Goodman are Jewish? Must have been an oversight and can only be a coincidence. Goodman comes from a multi-generational family of rabbis.

May more of those wonderful Jews whose work I respect enormously and many of whom I count as friends wake up to what they are trapped inside of and how they are used and manipulated by those elite Jews who run our world. But I’m not holding my breath. Beliefs are powerful things. People die for them every day, whether they know it or not.




Check out the extraordinary new, life-changing technology at

The hidden hand behind the 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement

May 16th marks the centenary of the Sykes-Picot Agreement which officially saw Britain and France divide the Middle East between them, and there have been a number of articles discussing it. This one from Time and this one from the New Statesman trot out the usual historical perspective of this seemingly ham fisted approach by Britain, France and, somehow, Ireland.

But all of this is discussed in the false reality that these countries were independent powers at that time when they were not.

I recently read “The Nameless War” (1952) by Captain Archibald H. Maule Ramsay. I take the following from the beginning of the book:

Captain Archibald Maule Ramsay was educated at Eton and the Royal Military College, Sandhurst, and served with the 2nd Battalion Coldstream Guards in the First World War until he was severely wounded in 1916 – thereafter at Regimental H.Q. and the War Office and the British War Mission in Paris until the end of the war.

From 1920 he became a Member of H.M. Scottish Bodyguard.

In 1931 he was elected a Member of Parliament for Midlothian and Peeblesshire.

Arrested under Regulation 18b on the 23rd May, 1940, he was detained, without charge or trial, in a cell in Brixton Prison until the 26th September, 1944. On the following morning he resumed his seat in the House of Commons and remained there until the end of that Parliament in 1945.

End of quote.

Quite an interesting profile and it was this profile above all else that had me read his book. Why on Earth would a British MP be imprisoned for the bulk of the Second World War without charge or trial?

It turns out that Ramsay had recognised for some years that there was some hidden international interference in the affairs of Britain and he had worked long and hard to expose it. A close colleague of former Prime Minister Chamberlain, he had finally understood that this hidden hand was Jewish, and his book makes clear that he was imprisoned to prevent him from revealing this hand and the true forces behind the Second World War. In a way, his imprisonment gives credibility to what Ramsay writes that his words would otherwise not have.

And so, let me share with you some of the understandings that Ramsay came to and shared in his book.

Oliver Cromwell was funded and rewarded by international Jewish interests:

How well the Jews succeeded in this campaign in Britain may be judged from the fact that one of the earliest acts of ‘their creature and hireling’ Oliver Cromwell, after executing the King according to plan, was to allow the Jews free access to England once more [11].

I’m going to share with you a long quote because, without its completeness, you are unlikely to believe this piece of British and hence word history (much of it documented by the Jew Isaac Disraeli, father of British PM Benjamin Disraeli), and in it you see the first application of a template that was subsequently used in France and Russia, amongst others, along with the unfolding of global Reserve banking, as this now well-hidden global takeover proceeded:


“It was fated that England should be the first of a series of Revolutions, which is not yet finished.”

With these cryptic words Isaac Disraeli, father of Benjamin Earl of Beaconsfield, commenced his two volume life of Charles I published in 1851. A work of astonishing detail and insight, much information for which, he states, was obtained from the records of one Melchior de Salom, French envoy in England during that period.

The scene opens with distant glimpses of the British Kingdom based upon Christianity, and its own ancient traditions; these sanctions binding Monarchy, Church, State, nobles and the people in one solemn bond on the one hand; on the other hand, the ominous rumblings of Calvinism.

Calvin, who came to Geneva from France, where his name was spelt Cauin, (At a B’nai B’rith meeting in Paris reported in Catholic Gazette in Feb. 1936 he was claimed to be of Jewish extraction.) possibly a French effort to spell Cohen, organized great numbers of revolutionary orators, not a few of whom were inflicted upon England and Scotland. Thus was laid the groundwork for revolution under a cloak of religious fervour.

On both sides of the Tweed these demagogues contracted all religion into rigid observance of the “Sabbath.” To use the words of Isaac Disraeli, “the nation was artfully divided into Sabbatarians and Sabbath breakers.” “Calvin,” states Disraeli, “deemed the Sabbath to have been a Jewish ordinance, limited to the sacred people.” He goes on to say that when these Calvinists held the country in their power, “it seemed that religion chiefly consisted of Sabbatarian rigours; and that a British senate had been transformed [12] into a company of Hebrew Rabbins”: and later “In 1650, after the execution of the King, an Act was passed inflicting penalties for a breach of the Sabbath.”

Buckingham, Strafford and Laud are the three chief figures round the King in these early stages: Men on whose loyalty to himself, the nation, and the ancient tradition Charles can rely.

Buckingham, the trusted friend of King James I, and of those who had saved his life at the time of the Gowrie Conspiracy (of ominous cabalistic associations) was assassinated in the early years of King Charles’ reign under mysterious circumstances.

Strafford, who had been in his early days inclined to follow the opposite faction, later left them; and became a staunch and devoted adherent of the King.

This opposition faction became steadily more hostile to Charles and by the time that they were led by Pym and decided to impeach Strafford. “The King,” writes Disraeli, “regarded this faction as his enemies”; and he states that the head of this faction was the Earl of Bedford. Walsh, the eminent Catholic historian, states that a Jew wine merchant named Roussel was the founder of this family in Tudor times.

With the impeachment and execution of Strafford, the powers behind the rising Calvinist, or Cohenist, Conspiracy began to reveal themselves, and their focus, the City of London.

At this time there suddenly began to appear from the City armed mobs of “Operatives” (the medieval equivalent for “workers” no doubt). Let me quote Disraeli: “They were said to amount to ten thousand … with war-like weapons. It was a militia for insurgency at all seasons, and might be depended upon for any work of destruction at the cheapest rate … as these sallied forth with daggers and bludgeons (from the city) the inference is obvious that this [13] train of explosion must have been long laid.”

It must indeed ; and we must recollect here, that at this time Strafford was still unexecuted, and civil war in the minds of none but of those behind the scenes, who evidently had long since resolved upon and planned it.

These armed mobs of “workers” intimidated all and sundry, including both Houses of Parliament and the Palace at critical moments, exactly on the model employed later by the “Sacred Bands” and the “Marseillais” in the French Revolution.

Isaac Disraeli draws again and again startling parallels between this and the French Revolution: Notably in his passages on the Press, “no longer under restraint,” and the deluge of revolutionary pamphlets and leaflets. “From 1640 to 1660,” he writes, “about 30,000 appear to have started up.” And later, “the collection of French revolutionary pamphlets now stands by the side of the French tracts of the age of Charles I, as abundant in number and as fierce in passion.”

He goes on, “Whose hand behind the curtain played the strings … could post up a correct list of 59 commoners, branding them with the odious title of ‘Straffordians or betrayers of their country’.”

Whose hand indeed? But Disraeli who knew so much, now discreetly draws a veil over that iron curtain; and it is left to us to complete the revelation.

To do so we must turn to such other works as the Jewish Encyclopedia, Sombart’s work, The Jews and Modern Capitalism, and others. From these we learn that Cromwell, the chief figure of the revolution, was in close contact with the powerful Jew financiers in Holland; and was in fact paid large sums of money by Manasseh Ben Israel; whilst Fernandez Carvajal, “The Great Jew” as he was called, was the chief contractor of the New Model Army.

In The Jews in England we read:

“1643 brought a large [14] contingent of Jews to England, their rallying point was the house of the Portuguese Ambassador De Souza, a Marano (secret Jew). Prominent among them was Fernandez Carvajal, a great financier and army contractor.”

In January of the previous year, the attempted arrest of the five members had set in violent motion the armed gangs of “Operatives” already mentioned, from the city. Revolutionary pamphlets were broadcasted on this occasion, as Disraeli tells us: “Bearing the ominous insurrectionary cry of ‘To your tents, O Israel’.” Shortly after this the King and the Royal Family left the Palace of Whitehall. The five members with armed mobs and banners accompanying them, were given a triumphal return to Westminster. The stage was now set for the advent of Carvajal and his Jews and the rise of their creature Cromwell.

The scene now changes. The Civil War has taken its course. The year is 1647: Naseby has been won and lost. The King is virtually a prisoner, while treated as an honoured guest at Holmby House.

According to a letter published in Plain English (A weekly review published by the North British Publishing Co. and edited by the late Lord Alfred Douglas.) on 3rd September, 1921: “The Learned Elders have been in existence for a much longer period than they have perhaps suspected. My friend, Mr. L. D. van Valckert, of Amsterdam, has recently sent me a letter containing two extracts from the Synagogue at Mulheim. The volume in which they are contained was lost at some period during the Napoleonic Wars, and has recently come into Mr. van Valckert’s possession. It is written in German, and contains extracts of letters sent and received by the authorities of the Mulheim Synagogue. The first entry he sends me is of a letter received:

16th June, 1647.

From O.C. (i.e. Oliver Cromwell), by Ebenezer Pratt.

In return for financial support will advocate admission of Jews to England: This however impossible while Charles living. [15]

Charles cannot be executed without trial, adequate grounds for which do not at present exist. Therefore advise that Charles be assassinated, but will have nothing to do with arrangements for procuring an assassin, though willing to help in his escape.

In reply was dispatched the following:

12th July, 1647.

To O.C. by E. Pratt.

Will grant financial aid as soon as Charles removed and Jews admitted.

Assassination too dangerous. Charles shall be given opportunity to escape: His recapture will make trial and execution possible. The support will be liberal, but useless to discuss terms until trial commences.”

With this information now at our disposal, the subsequent moves on the part of the regicides stand out with a new clearness. On 4th June, 1647, Cornet Joyce, acting on secret orders from Cromwell himself, and, according to Disraeli, unknown even to General-in-Chief Fairfax, descended upon Holmby House with 500 picked revolutionary troopers, and seized the King. According to Disraeli,

“The plan was arranged on May 30th at a secret meeting held at Cromwell’s house, though later Cromwell pretending that it was without his concurrence.”

This move coincided with a sudden development in the army; the rise of the “Levelers” and “Rationalists”. Their doctrines were those of the French revolutionaries; in fact, what we know today as Communism. These were the regicides, who four times “purged” Parliament, till there was left finally 50 members, Communist-like themselves, known later as the Rump.

To return to the letter from Mulheim Synagogue of the 12th June, 1647, and its cunning suggestion that attempted escape should be used as a pretext for execution. Just such an event took place, on 12th November of that year. Hollis and Ludlow consider the flight as a stratagem of Cromwell’s. Isaac Disraeli states:

“Contemporary historians have decided that the King from the day of his deportation from [16] Holmby to his escape to the Isle of Wight was throughout the dupe of Cromwell.”

Little more remains to be said. Cromwell had carried out the orders from the Synagogue, and now it only remained to stage the mock trial.

Maneuvering for position continued for some time. And it became apparent that the House of Commons, even in their partially “purged” condition, were in favour of coming to an agreement with the King. On 5th December, 1648, the House sat all night; and finally carried the question, “That the King’s concessions were satisfactory to a settlement.”

Should such agreement have been reached, of course, Cromwell would not have received the large sums of money which he was hoping to get from the Jews. He struck again. On the night of December 6th, Colonel Pryde, on his instructions, carried out the last and most famous “purge” of the House of Commons, known as “Pryde’s Purge.” On 4th January, the Communist remnant of 50 members, the Rump, invested themselves with “the supreme authority.”

On 9th January “a High Court of Justice” to try the King was proclaimed.

Two-thirds of its members were Levelers from the Army.

Algernon Sidney warned Cromwell: “First, the King can be tried by no court. Second, no man can be tried by this court.” So writes Hugh Ross Williamson in his Charles and Cromwell; and he adds a finishing touch to the effect that “no English lawyer could be found to draw up the charge, which was eventually entrusted to an accommodating alien, Isaac Dorislaus.”

Needless to say, Isaac Dorislaus was exactly the same sort of alien as Carvajal and Manasseh Ben Israel and the other financiers who paid the “Protector” his blood money.

The Jews were once again permitted to land freely in England in spite of strong protests by the sub-committee of the Council of State, which declared that they would be a [17] grave menace to the State and the Christian religion.

Perhaps it is due to their protests that the actual act of banishment has never to this day been repealed.

“The English Revolution under Charles I,” writes Isaac Disraeli, “was unlike any preceding one … From that time and event we contemplate in our history the phases of revolution.” There were many more to follow on similar lines, notably in France. In 1897 a further important clue to these mysterious happenings fell into Gentile hands in the shape of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. In that document we read this remarkable sentence: “Remember the French Revolution, the secrets of its preparation are well known to us for it was entirely the work of our hands.”[Protocol No.3, 14.]

The Elders might have made the passage even fuller, and written,

“Remember the British and French revolutions, the secrets of which are well known to us for they were entirely the work of our hands.”

The difficult problem of the subjugation of both Kingdoms was still however unsolved. Scotland was Royalist before everything else; and she had proclaimed Charles II King. Cromwell’s armies marched round Scotland, aided by their Geneva sympathizers, dispensing Judaic barbarity; but Scotland still called Charles II King. He moreover accepted the Presbyterian form of Christianity for Scotland; and slowly but steadily the feeling in England began to come round to the Scottish point of view. Finally upon the death of Cromwell, all Britain welcomed the King’s restoration to the throne of England.

In 1660 Charles II returned; but there was an important difference between the Kingdom he had fled from as a boy, and the one to which he returned as King. The enemies of Kingship were entrenched within his kingdom now, and as soon as the stage should be set for renewing the propaganda against the papacy and so, dividing once more persons, all of whom considered themselves as part of Christ’s Church, [18] the next attack would develop. The next attack would aim at placing the control of the finances of both Kingdoms in the hands of the Jews, who were now firmly ensconced within.

Charles evidently had no consciousness of the Jewish problem or plans, or the menace they held for his peoples. The wisdom and experience of Edward I had become lost in the centuries of segregation from the Jewish virus. A consciousness of the danger to the Crown in placing his enemies in possession of the weapon of a “Popish Plot” cry he did retain.

With James II’s accession, the crisis could not be long delayed. The most unscrupulous pamphleteering and propaganda was soon in full swing against him, and it is no surprise to find that many of the vilest pamphlets were actually printed in Holland. This country was now quite openly the focus for all disaffected persons; and considerable comings and goings took place during these years.

Stories were brought to the King that his own brother-in-law had joined those who plotted against him; but he utterly refused to credit them, or take any action till news came that the expedition against himself was actually under way.

The chief figure amongst those who deserted James at that crucial juncture was John Churchill, first Duke of Marlborough. It is interesting to read in the Jewish Encyclopedia that this Duke for many years received not less than 6,000 pounds a year from the Dutch Jew Solomon Medina.

The real objective of the “Glorious Revolution” was achieved a few years later in 1694, when the Royal consent was given for the setting up of the “Bank of England” and the institution of the National Debt. This charter handed over to an anonymous committee the Royal prerogative of minting money; converted the basis of wealth to gold; and enabled the international money lenders to secure their loans [19] on the taxes of the country, instead of the doubtful undertaking of some ruler or potentate which was all the security they could previously obtain.

From that time economic machinery was set in motion which ultimately reduced all wealth to the fictitious terms of gold which the Jews control; and drained away the life blood of the land, the real wealth which was the birthright of the British peoples.

The political and economic union of England and Scotland was shortly afterwards forced upon Scotland with wholesale corruption, and in defiance of formal protests from every county and borough. The main objects of the Union were to suppress the Royal Mint in Scotland, and to force upon her, too, responsibility for the “National Debt.” The grip of the moneylender was now complete throughout Britain. The danger was that the members of the new joint Parliament would sooner or later, in the spirit of their ancestors, challenge this state of affairs.

To provide against this, therefore, the party system was now brought into being, frustrating true national reaction and enabling the wire-pullers to divide and rule ; using their newly-established financial power to ensure that their own men and their own policies should secure the limelight, and sufficient support from their newspapers, pamphlets, and banking accounts to carry the day.

Gold was soon to become the basis of loans, ten times the size of the amount deposited. In other words, 100 pounds in gold would be legal security for 1,000 pounds of loan; at 3% therefore 100 pounds in gold could earn 30 pounds interest annually with no more trouble to the lender than the keeping of a few ledger entries.

The owner of 100 pounds of land, however, still must work every hour of daylight in order to make perhaps 4%. The end of the process must only be a matter of time. The moneylenders must become millionaires; those who own [20] and work the land, the Englishman and the Scotsman, must be ruined.

The process has continued inexorably till now, when it is nearly completed.

It has been hypocritically camouflaged by clever propaganda as helping the poor by mulcting the rich. It has been in reality nothing of the kind. It has been in the main the deliberate ruination of the landed classes, the leaders among the Gentiles, and their supplanting by the Jew financiers and their hangers-on.

End of quote.

Remember, this man was imprisoned without charge or trial, in a cell in Brixton Prison until the 26th September, 1944. Ramsay knew too much.

He goes on to document the French and Russian takeovers in a similar manner, along with others that followed.

And so, what has this to do with the Sykes-Picot agreement?

Simply, everything. Britain and France were both controlled by the Jewish elite at the time of this agreement.

Unless we understand this, and it is well and truly hidden and never written about or discussed in the mainstream media, we do not understand that the hidden hand behind the Sykes-Picot agreement is that of the elite international Jewish fraternity that run our world. Further, if you understand the history of the creation of Israel, which in truth got underway in earnest with the Balfour Declaration of 1917, then you realise that the Sykes-Picot agreement was really a mechanism for breaking up the traditional boundaries of the Middle East prior to the creation of Israel after World War II.

Remember, the so-called Young Turks that drove the breakup of the Ottoman Empire were Jewish.

And so, as we mark the centenary of the Sykes-Picot Agreement, it is useful to strip away the bullshit and recognise the true intent of that agreement.

This article gets a little closer to the reality of things as it reflects upon the consequences of this agreement on the ground today, and this cartoon gets it very well.

Again, it is important to recognise that Israel is simply a tool of the Jewish elite, and most of the Jews that have moved there as a result of the horrific deception known as the Holocaust are simply pawns in the global game of this elite, as were their forebears who were jockeyed in a not dissimilar manner to emigrate to the United States in the late 19th and early 20th century. This manipulation is very old and goes largely unrecognised today, as these Jewish pawns are told that it’s really the goyim who are the threat – remember the Holocaust…

May a few more take this centenary to wake up.

Flashback: 1869 Plan for Jewish World Domination

The goyim have been brainwashed to think they’re irrational bigots for noticing that organized Jewry has been engaged in a satanic, hate-filled plot against Christian civilization for centuries.  This plot explains the daily headlines: endless war, state sponsored terror, gun confiscation and mass surveillance; multiculturalism and migration; homosexuality & the war on gender, marriage and family.

The plot is confirmed by the devastation suffered by both Jews and Gentiles.

Most Jews are not privy to this plot while many goyim (Freemasons, our “leaders”) are willing to join it.  Below is a suppressed 1869 document, “In the Jewish Cemetery of Prague” which reveals that the Jewish leadership hated Christianity for preventing them from “reigning over the whole world” as God supposedly promised Abraham.

End of quote.

If you want to understand why our world is the way it is, you may want to read this article. Of course, this 1869 document has been subject to the same discrediting as the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.

But as Henry Ford showed us in 1920, you just have to refer to their own words to reveal their horrific agenda. Ford was masterful in doing this, yet there are those who still can’t hear what he was telling us.

And it’s getting very late in the game. If enough of humanity fails to wake up or there is not some form of intervention, life on Earth as we have known it will soon end.

Captured Israeli Flag Officer Confirms the Zionist plan for the world

There have been many pieces of evidence that the Zionists have long planned for non-Jews to be largely removed from the planet in whatever way. Wars between them has been a good strategy, such as WWI and WWII. Those who dismiss the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion will not so readily dismiss the reality of the Talmud, and it contains plenty of evidence to support this notion. Almost everyone not involved thinks such a notion is beyond the possibility of human behaviour, either because they can’t believe a group could be so dark, or if they are Jewish, they still believe the Jewish victimhood story.

(And then we have the refugee crisis in Europe. As Henry Makow pointed out, this war has been going on for four years. Who suddenly turned on the refugee tap?)

And so, most will find a way to dismiss the evidence of this that has come forth the recently captured Jewish Brigadier General or Colonel (depending who you wish to believe), who was advising the ISIL forces, because it doesn’t fit with their beliefs. Nevertheless, let me share the information gleaned from this captured Israeli, translated by Gordon Duff from the Arabic and shared in the irrepressible Veterans Today:

Captured Israeli Colonel Yossi Elon Shahak from the Golani Brigade exposed Israel’s conspiratorial role in the Middle East Region by citing that ISIS and other terror organizations are enslaved to its orders. Israel was behind the abolishment of the precious historic monuments and the theft of masterpieces in Iraq and Syria.

Moreover, it runs sleeper cells with the cooperation of the treachery coalition to bring to ground what is left from the Middle East. The final goal is total destruction for the emergence of the Satan from the black hole that will rule the world.

Obama-Putin Road map 

In the same context, the Vienna accord draws a new Sikis-Pico map as the main players entered the game directly. All countries will have to make painful concessions, and division of Syria and/or Iraq is the worst scenario that will be awaiting the victim and the victimizer.

Further notes from the Shahak interrogation:           

Information Office of Foreign Affairs Commissioner in the USA Parliament (international) and European Department for Security and information Secretary General Ambassador Dr. Haitham Abu Said confirmed  that the Israeli prisoner captured by the popular army in Iraq on Oct. 19, 2015 Colonel Yossi Elon Shahak, whose military  NO is (AZ 231434)  with sequence (RE34356578765) from the Golani Brigade.

Shahak has been removed from his detention few days ago and moved sequestered .  US International Parliament private sources say that a regional power which is coordinating with the Iraqi popular army in Iraq stood in on the details of Shahak ‘s case before being transferred and has listened to the statements that he made.

[ Editor’s note:  We are assuming that Iranian military intelligence handled the interrogation of Shahak.]

In his statements, Shahak pointed out that Israeli security agents monitored and developed plans for ISIS field operations in order to ensure that the organization would stick to the larger plan designed for the Middle East. 

He added that part of the plan was the bombing of all monuments and religious sites, and if the plan was botched, then it could be resorted to ruins theft, in order to eliminate all Arab and Islamic cultural inheritance.

Shahak further noted that Israel directed ISIS to commit crimes under the slogans of Islam in order to eliminate calls for peaceful dialogue between the religions. According to Shahak, ISIS’ acts of theatrical terror were intended to panic the European Union, already deeply stressed by Islamic expansion in the West.

The contrived refugee crisis was, as Shahak continued, simply another step in the planned “clash of civilizations” with Israel as “last man standing.”

The detainee said that there was a plan for instigating a sectarian sedition in some areas in order to stoke Sunni-Shiite civil strife.  This is done to facilitate the Region Division Plan that falls within the three stages, starting from Syria, but it was derailed in Iraq by the popular army during the presence of the US military in Baghdad.

Also, in order to bring the project into activation, The Yemeni front was opened, taking advantage of the various religious doctrines there, where there are sleeper cells working for Israel, in coordination with an Arab country, to facilitate the movement of entry and exit of those cells and the supply of fighters with all the necessary devices and military equipment.

In a separate context , MFA Bou-Said pointed out that the “YINON” plan is still workable for the Middle East and the Vienna agreement has not brought anything new in this regard, but there are very dangerous points that serve as the project foundation stone, such as the rights of the ethnic and religious sects are reserved without addressing their political freedom.

In addition, the plan will leave ISIS as the only source of “official” terrorism while inviting other parties, all covertly controlled, to start a political dialogue with the Syrian government, for the future of Syria and the region, noting that many of these parties belong to internationally banned groups and their programs are religious extremist.

End of quote.

What will it take for humanity to wake up to the satanic plan we are inside of? And it’s not just military. It has a thousand threads.

How many Christians have been persuaded that the Jews are God’s blessed people

I have read of in several places of how many Christians today believe the Jews are God’s blessed people.

This article explains how this has largely come to be. I quote:

The acceptance of the Scofield Reference Bible by the Evangelical Christians with its many false doctrines was the dominant force in leading these churches astray.

According to the Wikipedia Encyclopedia:

“The Scofield Reference Bible is a widely circulated annotated study Bible edited and annotated by the American Bible student Cyrus I. Scofield. Published by Oxford University Press and containing the traditional King James Version text, it first appeared in 1909 and was revised by the author in 1917.

The Scofield Bible had several innovative features. Most important, it printed what amounted to a commentary around the text of the Bible itself instead of in a separate volume. It also contained a cross-referencing system that tied together related verses of Scripture and allowed a reader to follow biblical themes from one chapter and book to another. Finally, the 1917 edition also attempted to date events of the Bible. It was in the pages of the Scofield Reference Bible that many Christians first encountered Archbishop James Ussher‘s calculation of the date of Creation as 4004 BC; and through discussion of Scofield’s notes–which advocated the “gap theory“–fundamentalists began a serious internal debate about the nature and chronology of creation.

The Scofield Bible was published only a few years before World War I destroyed the cultural optimism that had viewed the world as entering a new era of peace and prosperity. Thus, Scofield’s premilliennialism itself seemed almost prophetic, and sales of his Reference Bible exceeded two million copies by the end of World War II.[1]

The Scofield Reference Bible promoted dispensationalism, the belief that between creation and the final judgment there were seven distinct eras of God’s dealing with man and that these eras were a framework for synthesizing the message of the Bible. It was largely through the influence of Scofield’s notes that dispensationalism grew in influence among fundamentalist Christians in the United States. Scofield’s notes on Revelation are a major source for the various timetables, judgments, and plagues elaborated by such popular religious writers as Hal Lindsey; and in part because of the success of the Scofield Reference Bible, twentieth-century American fundamentalists placed greater stress on eschatological speculation. Opponents of biblical fundamentalism have criticized the Scofield Bible for its air of total authority in biblical interpretation, for what they consider its glossing over of biblical contradictions, and for its focus on eschatology.”

There is significant evidence that Cyrus Scofield, a man of extremely dubious morality, was paid by Jewish sources to bring in this new theology promoting the idea that the present-day Jews are God’s “Chosen People” irrespective of what they do or how they behave, that the Jews have a right to rule the world, and that every “Gentile” should support the nation of Israel and the Jews of the world, no matter how wicked their personal behaviors or their international policies may be.  (My emphasis)

Dispensationalsim really means that since the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in A.D. 70, the non-Jews (“Gentiles”) have been allowed by God to rule the world.  But this is just an interruption, a blip on the screen – an intermediate “dispensation” – which is now ending, making way for the Jews to rule the world – all nations – forever.

The Evangelical Christians are in opposition to the coming total control of the New World Order.  They believe it is evil.  But they are in such darkness that they do not realize that the very group they are supporting with their finances and their false doctrines – the Israeli state and the Jews of the world – IS the force behind the New World Order, a force whose goal is the destruction of ALL governments and ALL religions.

End of quote.

Surely this wouldn’t have been perpetrated by the devilish Zionists? Couldn’t be…

I’m drawn to quote the relevant section of the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion:

From Protocol 17:

We have long past taken care to discredit the priesthood of the goyim, and thereby to ruin their mission on earth which in these days might still be a great hindrance to us. Day by day its influence on the peoples of the world is falling lower. Freedom of conscience has been declared everywhere, so that now only years divide us from the moment of the complete wrecking of that Christian religion, as to other religions we shall have still less difficulty in dealing with them, but it would be premature to speak of this now. We shall set clericalism and clericals into such narrow frames as to make their influence move in retrogressive proportion to its former progress.

When the time comes finally to destroy the papal court the finger of an invisible hand will point the nations towards this court. When, however, the nations fling themselves upon it, we shall come forward in the guise of its defenders as if to save excessive bloodshed. By this diversion we shall penetrate to its very bowels and be sure we shall never come out again until we have gnawed through the entire strength of this place.

The King of the Jews will be the real Pope of the Universe, the patriarch of an international Church.

But, in the meantime, while we are re-educating youth in new traditional religions and afterwards in ours, we shall not overtly lay a finger on existing churches, but we shall fight against them by criticism calculated to produce schism…

In general, then, our contemporary press will continue to convict State affairs, religions, incapacities of the goyim, always using the most unprincipled expressions in order by every means to lower their prestige in the manner which can only be practiced by the genius of our gifted tribe.

End of quote.

I am also drawn to remind you of the wildly denied Jesuit Fourth Vow, given we have a Jesuit Pope about to address the UN.

Little of our world is as it is presented to us.

The reason that Darwinism was thrust upon us

I was reading this engaging review of David Livingstone’s Transhumanism: How the Illuminati Depose God by Henry Makow and found an interesting comment at the bottom. Here is part of that comment:

The biggest leg on this “transhumanist chair” that I haven’t seen discussed yet is Darwinism. There’s not enough room here to debate the failings, frauds, or otherwise of Darwinism, but suffice to say that between Piltdown man, Java man, and dozens if not hundreds of other hoaxes and frauds, Darwinism is at best on some very shaky ground. But in transhumanism, we can now finally begin to see the real raison d’etre behind why Darwinism was sold to the public in the first place.

In Darwinism you have a belief structure which claims man began as slime, and over billions of years slowly worked his up, first to pond scum, then to monkeys, and then to a tool-using primate, who — (you have to cue up “Thus Spake Zarathustra” from 2001 Space Odyssey as you’re reading what I’m writing here) — now is able to invent a computer, to program a computer, and now — (music climaxing) — is ready to merge with the computer!! Evolution has been perfected!! Man has become the machine!! All is once again good in the Cosmos!!

In my opinion, Darwinism is nothing more than a fake “theory” that was sold to the public for the purpose of warping the minds of the scientific elite (who, previously, had generally been of a Christian persuasion) to get them to more readily accept and fall in line w/ this transhumanist agenda (which, I think, has been in the works for a very long time).

End of quote.

I have commented before that Darwin himself never believed his theory could explain all life.

But I am drawn to share what the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, specifically Protocol No. 2, has to say:

The goyim are not guided by practical use of unprejudiced historical observation, but by theoretical routine without any critical regard for consequent results. We need not, therefore, take any account of them—let them amuse themselves until the hour strikes, or live on hopes of new forms of enterprising pastime, or on the memories of all they have enjoyed. For them let that play the principal part which we have persuaded them to accept as the dictates of science (theory). It is with this object in view that we are constantly, by means of our press, arousing a blind confidence in these theories. The intellectuals of the goyim will puff themselves up with their knowledge and without any logical verification of them will put into effect all the information available from science, which our agentur specialists have cunningly pieced together for the purpose of educating their minds in the direction we want.

Do not suppose for a moment that these statements are empty words: think carefully of the successes we arranged for Darwinism, Marxism, Nietzsche-ism. (My emphasis) To us Jews, at any rate, it should be plain to see what a disintegrating importance these directives have had upon the minds of the goyim.

It is indispensable for us to take account of the thoughts, characters, tendencies of the nations in order to avoid making slips in the political and in the direction of administrative affairs. The triumph of our system, of which the component parts of the machinery may be variously disposed according to the temperament of the peoples met on our way, will fail of success if the practical application of it be not based upon a summing up of the lessons of the past in the light of the present.

In the hands of the States of today there is a great force that creates the movement of thought in the people, and that is the Press. The part played by the Press is to keep pointing out requirements supposed to be indispensable, to give voice to the complaints of the people, to express and create discontent. It is in the Press that the triumph of freedom of speech finds its incarnation. But the goyim States have not known how to make use of this force; and it has fallen into our hands. Through the Press we have gained the power to influence while remain exist. It proves that Dr. Weizmann knows all about the gold in our hands, notwithstanding that we have had to gather it out of oceans of blood and tears. But it has paid us, though we have sacrificed many of our people. Each victim on our side is worth in the sight of God a thousand goyim.

End of quote.

So, I agree that “Darwinism is nothing more than a fake “theory” that was sold to the public for the purpose of warping the minds of the scientific elite”. Anyone who has any understanding of consciousness knows it is the context for life, not vice versa. It is this fundamental truth that is revealed by the rigorous application of the scientific method to the paranormal by the likes of Rupert Sheldrake and Dean Radin, and why those mired in the scientific worldview cannot bring themselves to seriously consider their work and its implications, believing they can find a way to squeeze it back inside the box called their strictly temporal view of life. Consciousness is the context for their temporal box, not vice versa, and that temporal worldview was created in part for the reasons outlined above. It also contains the model of allopathic medicine, which focusses on treating the symptoms, not locating and healing the true cause.

Was Hitler REALLY the demon we are taught he was? – Update

I had not watched the last few episodes of this documentary when I put together the post below, and it gets into some of the areas I addressed, in quite a bit of detail. It acknowledges the role of the Zionists in destroying Germany under Hitler and after the end of WWII, and recognised that ALL of the major allies – United States, Britain and Russia – were under the control and direction of the Zionists, as I documented below.

But the striking item for me was the time it took Hitler to turn Germany around, once he freed it from the Zionist bankers’ yoke. Five years. In just five years, in a time when the global economy was struggling through the banking induced depression of the 30’s, Hitler’s use of Labor Treasury Certificates in lieu of borrowing from the global Zionist bankers turned Germany from the total basket case it had been under the strictures of the Treaty of Versailles to being the economic powerhouse of Europe.

Think about it. This can happen in any country which takes back its power to print its own money for the purposes of exchange rather than for the purpose of accumulation and usury. Except it’s unlikely any country will do it. Not even Greece, unless there’s a revolution. But they know the Zionist bankers will unleash war upon them, for whatever excuse, as they did against Hitler, against Abraham Lincoln with the American Civil War, against the Czar of Russia because he refused to accept their overtures, and I believe it is why they dropped the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Yes, it was the Zionists who dropped the atomic bombs on Japan. Remember, the United States had been doing their bidding since at least 1913. If you doubt this, check out Baruch’s testimony to the Congressional Committee examining his role in WWI, and examine the make-up of the team that Woodrow Wilson took with him to the Paris Peace Conference after WWI – it was headed by Paul Warburg, a recent immigrant, a recognised representative of the Rothschild and Warburg banking interests and father of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and whose brother was head of security for Germany during WWI, along with a string of other Jewish bankers and Colonel House, who was their minder for Wilson. Were no other Americans qualified?

So, we know that the decision to drop the atomic bombs on Japan was a Zionist one, along with the decision to develop them and share the technology with the Russians (another of their other assets) via the back door as the development was occurring (documented in “From Major Jordan’s Diaries”, written by George Racey Jordan from his WWII notes and published in 1952). Ever wondered why the development of the atomic bomb was called “The Manhattan Project”?

And be in no doubt that the decision to use it was driven by these satanists. But why? It’s eminently clear that it was not needed to end the war with Japan. As we are currently marking the 70 year anniversary of these horrific events, I will offer my speculation on this in another post.

But remember, it took but 5 years for Hitler to set Germany free of their grip. No wonder the Germans loved him and why they kill those who move to do this with no hesitation, as we have seen with several US Presidents.

As an aside, do you begin to see what a propaganda exercise the Cold War was? The Zionists owned both sides of it.


Yesterdays post:

Like all of us in the West, I was brought up on a full diet of the monster that Hitler was.

But like so many things I have questioned about the picture of the world we are given, I had begun to have my doubts.

Firstly, I recognised that the picture we are given is constructed by those who have effectively run our world and present us with a version of events and social mores that suit their purposes.

Then I came across two separate sources who reported that those who lived and worked with Hitler held him in high regard. The first was contained in the reports by Harry Cooper, from his research in Argentina where Hitler lived out his life, living in a grand house reportedly built for him by Daimler Benz. There is also a British researcher who spent some 10 years speaking with senior WWII German officials and others and reported a great deal of respect for Hitler. (If anyone knows of this, please get back to me as I can’t locate it. Someone other than David Irving.)

And something has never added up for me – something I have commented on before – who funded Hitler? How did he get Germany from a devastated country with no money, massive unemployment and horrific war reparations imposed by the Zionists at Versailles (with the terms drafted by the Dulles brothers) and turn it into the powerhouse it became? I had always figured that the Zionist bankers must have funded him behind the scenes.

It has also been clear to me that the global Zionists have controlled the media since early in the 20th century at least (not owned it all, but used the threatened withdrawal of advertising to get their way when they did not), including Hollywood (which they created), so I understood the propaganda machine that painted the picture we see in the West.

I also understood that the Rothschilds had controlled Britain’s finances since the Battle of Waterloo and the United States since at least 1913 and perhaps a long time before that, I have shared clear evidence that the Russian Revolution of 1917 was  Zionist revolution, and hence ALL of the so-called Allies were serving the global Zionist agenda during WWII. Now, you might find your beliefs challenged by this understanding, but it makes it no less true and is simply a result of what you believe to be true.

So it was in this place that I began to watch The Greatest Story Never Told.

And some pieces began to fall into place.

Hitler banned usury early on. When I saw this, I began to wonder how he’d funded the transformation of Germany, since the Zionist bankers rely on usury for their power over the world. So I went looking and found this:
Hitler and the National Socialists, who came to power in 1933, thwarted the international banking cartel by issuing their own money. In this they took their cue from Abraham Lincoln, who funded the American Civil War with government-issued paper money called “Greenbacks.” Hitler began his national credit program by devising a plan of public works. Projects earmarked for funding included flood control, repair of public buildings and private residences, and construction of new buildings, roads, bridges, canals, and port facilities. The projected cost of the various programs was fixed at one billion units of the national currency. One billion non-inflationary bills of exchange, called Labor Treasury Certificates, were then issued against this cost. Millions of people were put to work on these projects, and the workers were paid with the Treasury Certificates. This government-issued money wasn’t backed by gold, but it was backed by something of real value. It was essentially a receipt for labor and materials delivered to the government. Hitler said, “for every mark that was issued we required the equivalent of a mark’s worth of work done or goods produced.” The workers then spent the Certificates on other goods and services, creating more jobs for more people.

Within two years, the unemployment problem had been solved and the country was back on its feet. It had a solid, stable currency, no debt, and no inflation, at a time when millions of people in the United States and other Western countries were still out of work and living on welfare. Germany even managed to restore foreign trade, although it was denied foreign credit and was faced with an economic boycott abroad. It did this by using a barter system: equipment and commodities were exchanged directly with other countries, circumventing the international banks. This system of direct exchange occurred without debt and without trade deficits. Germany’s economic experiment, like Lincoln’s, was short-lived; but it left some lasting monuments to its success, including the famous Autobahn, the world’s first extensive superhighway.1
It also included this Hitler quote:
“We were not foolish enough to try to make a currency [backed by] gold of which we had none, but for every mark that was issued we required the equivalent of a mark’s worth of work done or goods produced. . . .we laugh at the time our national financiers held the view that the value of a currency is regulated by the gold and securities lying in the vaults of a state bank.”
End of quotes.
No wonder the Zionist bankers wanted to both destroy and discredit him. Their track record is clear – those who deny their right to print the money for a country and charge interest for it will be destroyed. No quarter will be given. The financial history of the US, for example, demonstrates it admirably. They know that any country that chooses to print their own money will transform their financial state dramatically and quickly, just as Germany did under Hitler. And no wonder the Germans loved him.

We hear Hitler was against the Jews, yet there were some 150,000 Jews in the German armed forces, many with high rank and a number who were awarded high honours. Moreover, there was the 1933 Transfer Agreement with the Zionists, which saw Jewish people allowed to move to Palestine from Germany, along with their assets, and this continued until around 1940. Scarcely consistent with him trying to kill them all.

This documentary not only exposes some of the Holocaust lies, it also reveals the nature and scale of the atrocities of all of the so-called allied forces during and after WWII – which are hidden us – and the fear of the Bolsheviks that was so widespread in Eastern Europe and in Germany, with good reason as this documentary explains.

It also revealed how the Germans were reacting to the corruption of morals in Germany and the Jewish takeover of films and theatre, along with producing the first pornographic films in the early part of the 20th century. This parallels EXACTLY what Henry Ford had to say about their role in the United States. Anyone spot a plan?

This and what happened in the two world wars both have their genesis in the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. For example:

From Protocol No. 1:

Behold the alcoholized animals, bemused with drink, the right to an immoderate use of which comes along with freedom. It is not for us and ours to walk that road. The peoples of the goyim are bemused with alcoholic liquors; their youth has grown stupid on classicism and from early immorality, into which it has been inducted by our special agents—by tutors, lackeys, governesses in the houses of the wealthy, by clerks and others, by our women in the places of dissipation frequented by the goyim. In the number of these last I count also the so-called “society ladies,” voluntary followers of the others in corruption and luxury.

And Protocol No. 7:

The intensification of armaments, the increase of police forces—are all essential for the completion of the aforementioned plans. What we have to get at is that there should be in all the States of the world, besides ourselves, only the masses of the proletariat, a few millionaires devoted to our interests, police and soldiers.

Throughout all Europe, and by means of relations with Europe, in other continents also, we must create ferments, discords and hostility. Therein we gain a double advantage. In the first place we keep in check all countries, for they well know that we have the power whenever we like to create disorders or to restore order. All these countries are accustomed to see in us an indispensable force of coercion. In the second place, by our intrigues we shall tangle up all the threads which we have stretched into the cabinets of all States by means of the political, by economic treaties, or loan obligations. In order to succeed in this we must use great cunning and penetration during negotiations and agreements, but, as regards what is called the “official language,” we shall keep to the opposite tactics and assume the mask of honesty and compliancy. In this way the peoples and governments of the goyim, whom we have taught to look only at the outside whatever we present to their notice, will still continue to accept us as the benefactors and saviours of the human race.

We must be in a position to respond to every act of opposition by war with the neighbours of that country which dares to oppose us: but if these neighbours should also venture to stand collectively together against us, then we must offer resistance by a universal war.

The principal factor of success in the political is the secrecy of its undertakings: the word should not agree with the deeds of the diplomat.

We must compel the governments of the goyim to take action in the direction favoured by our widely-conceived plan, already approaching the desired consummation, by what we shall represent as public opinion, secretly prompted by us through the means of that so-called “Great Power”—the Press, which, with a few exceptions that may be disregarded, is already entirely in our hands.

In a word, to sum up our system of keeping the governments of the goyim in Europe in check, we shall show our strength to one of them by terrorist attempts and to all, if we allow the possibility of a general rising against us, we shall respond with the guns of America or China or Japan.

End of quotes.

These examples are clear enough and appear to have taken this final form in the late 19th century. Now, there are those who argue the Protocols are false. I am not going to argue this here, other than to say that when it takes 22 pages to print out the Wikipedia entry aimed at refuting them, you know it is a Zionist hot button that they want to discredit if not destroy – and go way over the top in their attempt. I will present the case on their truth when I have time.

As I’ve said before, until you recognise the lens through which we view the events of the world, you cannot begin to truly understand it.

I commend The Greatest Story Never Told to you. I expect you will learn a great deal, as I did.

One final note: I am not seeking to argue Hitler was a saint. What I am saying is that we are presented with a lens of lies constructed by the Zionists through which to view him, and we need to recognise this and seek out a more accurate perspective.

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By :
Follow by Email