Rothschilds

Dark Green XV: Goldman Sachs & Carbon Tax

By M.K. Styllinski

“Goldman Sachs, which received more subsidies and bailout-related funds than any other investment bank because the Federal Reserve permitted it to become a bank holding company under its ’emergency situation,’ has used billions in taxpayer money to enrich itself and reward its top executives. It handed its senior employees a staggering $18 billion in 2009, $16 billion in 2010 and $10 billion in 2011 in mega-bonuses. This massive transfer of wealth upwards by the Bush and Obama administrations, now estimated at $13 trillion to $14 trillion, went into the pockets of those who carried out fraud and criminal activity rather than the victims who lost their jobs, their savings and often their homes.”

– Chris Hedges, journalist and author; extract from his statement during Goldman Sacs protest


Despite the lack of empirical data this hasn’t prevented a massive campaign in favour of reducing our Carbon footprint by fusing it with Sustainable Development visions and the promise of a Global Carbon Tax. The latter bonanza has had all the usual suspects rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of yet another opportunity to fleece the global population of what little cash they have left from the last crisis. And here’s where it becomes easy to see something else is very wrong with the anthropocentric (human-influenced) global warming picture.

Lloyd_Blankfein_CEO_Goldman_Sachs

Lloyd Blankfein CEO Goldman Sachs

Why is it that major electric power utility corporations (the largest consumers of fossil fuels) and some of the biggest names in agribusiness and chemicals have suddenly jumped aboard the climate change train? A change of heart? Well there’s a green light flashing but it isn’t for an ecological conscience.

There is much in the global warming agenda that supports their cause, which is making vast amounts of money through normalised exploitation. This may be why power companies, investment banks and various hedge funds are all salivating at the prospect of the Emissions Trading commonly known as “Cap and Trade”, which is central to reducing levels of CO2. The Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and the new speculative profits to be made in carbon futures, is producing another means to exploit a system where any costs incurred for multi-nationals and utility companies are sure to be passed onto the consumer, as they always are.

If things go according to plan, coal fired power stations, gas distributor utilities and others industries will be subject to limits on the amount of CO2 emissions they can produce annually. When some companies arrive at their carbon-polluting limit then “allocations” or credits can be bought from other companies which have got gold stars for producing less emissions. The neat little twist in this eco-SMART dream is that it  exists only if the government imposes a cap which creates an artificial scarcity on the right to produce energy. Brokers or an electronic trading platform will provide sales for offsets under such a system which is exactly what has been happening in Europe, since 2005 through the Climate Exchange (ECX). What if the allowed credits exceed the corresponding tonnage of emissions, which is the case in almost every country in Europe? Then we have yet another system that not only mandates cheating, but celebrates it.

Carbon offsets provide even more opportunities. Recycling aluminium cans? Claim your credits. Planting trees? Roll on up. Despite both these activities giving no net emission reductions, the latter being long-term at best, no regulations are in place to ensure compliance because it is a eco-ponzi scheme created to make money not to protect the environment. Many people on both sides of the political and environmental divide agree. What is really driving this new market are the billions of dollars on offer for the same protagonists of financial warfare that stimulated the economic meltdown of October 2008 and beyond. These same criminals are supporting a Global Carbon Tax and Emissions Trading as another source to exploit. Estimates of $646 billion worth of carbon credits will be auctioned over the next several years, perhaps even three times that amount. [1]

Just as surely as every other bubble in the last eighty years, this new eco-commodities market can only follow the same framework of exploitation as demand rises and carbon auctions become the new source of Elite cash. As the “cap” is lowered by the government carbon credits will become scarcer and thus more valuable as every year passes. Further, it is a fail-safe framework mandated by government that will be worth almost a $trillion, all under the mantle of saving the planet – what a coup!

While the Western nations are being targeted first, Asia has some of the worst pollution in the world which is why Australasia has come under the Carbon Tax boot with a vengeance. The background is instructive since the Australian experience follows the same formula occurring in the West and indicates that it was  being used as a testing ground for a future global roll out. Some key players are pushing the Australian carbon tax and who were/are employed by the very banks that will profit from the system. How interesting then, that Dr Megan Clark, the Chief Executive and Board member of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) Australia’s national science agency, was also a former Director of NM Rothschild and Sons Australia  (Australian arm of the Rothschild Investment Bank) from 2001-03. She is also a member of the Australia Advisory Board of the Bank of America and Merrill Lynch. [2] The fact that this director is now heading the science body that is lobbying for a global carbon credit scheme that will make her and her colleagues billions has nothing to do with it … Well, it’s all just a coincidence.

Mr Simon McKeon is Chairman of the CSIRO Board is also currently the Executive Chairman of Macquarie Group’s Melbourne Office (Macquarie Bank). The Federal Government had no problem appointing a corporate banker as the CSIRO’s new chairman: “… Despite admitting he has ‘no scientific pedigree’, Mr McKeon says he wants to see the issue of climate change elevated to the top of the political and public agenda.” Sure – his investments and that of his backers depend on it. [3]

Then there is Liberal Party MP Mr. Malcolm Turnbull who as well as being extremely passionate about climate change issues and equally vocal on carbon credits, he is the former Chairman and Managing Director of Goldman Sachs Australia, 1997-2001 and a former partner of Goldman Sachs and Co. from 1998-2001. (Goldman Sac’s role in the carbon credits scam will be explored in greater detail presently). [4]  His colleague and former Liberal party leader Dr. John Hewson is another advocate for carbon credit legislation. A founding member and founding Executive Director of Macquarie Bank 1985-87 and former economist with the IMF 1973-75 he is currently a Non-Executive Director of Change Investment Management a financial investment company that invests in ‘Eco’ projects. Hewson has been a busy banker having been a former Director and Chairman of ABN AMRO Australia 1995-98 an investment bank with its own carbon trading division and still finding time to run his own investment banking business. [5]

Ross Garnaut, a key player in governments in the Asia-Pacific, is a professor in economics with no scientific qualifications which nevertheless qualified him to lead the Garnaut Climate Change Report and several other reviews. He was the former Chairman of the Board of Directors, Primary Industry Bank of Australia 1989 to 1994 and the former Chairman of the Board of Directors, Bank of Western Australia Ltd from 1988 to 1995. [6] Then we mustn’t forget former Prime Minister of Australia Paul Keating, Chairman of the Corporate Advisory International at investment banking firm Lazard and his board membership of China Development Bank: International Advisory Council. [7]

Broadly backed by environmentalists but deeply unpopular with the majority of the Australian public, The Clean Energy Legislative Package was passed by the Australian Senate in November 2011 becoming law in July 2012. With around 13 percent of the public in favour of the tax, no referendum was offered so that people could choose, no debate in Parliament and no disclosure as to who are the biggest 500 “polluters”. Reassurance came in the form of compensation to householders borrowed from the IMF already stretched to the limit with European bailouts. [8]

dreamstime_m_18893257© Avenger01 | Dreamstime.com – Carbon Tax Photo

Although the Carbon Tax in Australia was repealed in July 2014 climate change legislation overall remains in place. According to the Australian government: “The Climate Change Authority (Abolition) Bill 2013 and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (Abolition) Bill 2014, were introduced into parliament as part of the broader Carbon Tax Repeal Legislative Package and each of which will proceed separately. Policy responsibility for the Clean Energy Finance Corporation remains with the Treasury.” So, no change there. It is likely Carbon Tax will be renewed since the framework is still in place. Furthermore: “The Clean Energy Regulator will ensure that carbon tax liabilities are met in full.” along with the Direct Action Plan of June 2014 which is a bill to implement the Emissions Reduction Fund particularly focused on what’s left of the farming community. [9]

The cost of living for Australians was certainly pushed through the roof with the tax while making very little impact on environmental concerns. In the unlikely event that the science behind CO2 could have been correct, Australia’s total contribution of global emissions will only be reduced by a paltry 0.05 percent taking more than 10 years for the saving to be realised. [10] Australia’s Prime Minister Julia Gillard was a keen supporter of world government so it was natural that she oversaw a move in this direction under the cover of environmental policy.

By 2013, the liberal coalition of Tony Abbot curtailed such a plan for now. No doubt they will try again.

Over in the USA, the first mandatory Cap and Trade system was enforced in the state of New Jersey in 2010 followed by many other North-Eastern states that have sold over 729 million in CO2 credits since 2008. [11] Under the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative Inc. (RGGI) two other mandatory regional systems started in 2012, bringing cap-and-trade to 23 states in all and four Canadian provinces. [12] Though a nationwide system has yet to materialise it is only a matter of time. When insider trading and secrecy defines the political-corporate system then Congress can easily be bypassed as it has been throughout its existence. According to the RGGI corporation’s mission statement its “…exclusive purpose is to provide administrative and technical services to support the development and implementation of each RGGI State’s CO2 Budget Trading Program”.

RGGI, Inc.’s activities include:

    • Development and maintenance of a system to report data from emissions sources subject to RGGI, and to track CO2 allowances.
    • Implementation of a platform to auction CO2 allowances.
    • Monitoring the market related to the auction and trading of CO2 allowances.
    • Providing technical assistance to the participating states in reviewing applications for emissions offset projects.
    • Providing technical assistance to the participating states to evaluate proposed changes to the States’ RGGI programs.

A CO2 template ready to extract the needed dosh from the populace once Agenda 21, SD and SMART are fully operational.

Funnily enough, who should happen to be bidding their socks off on this issue? None than most of Wall St., including: Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, JPMorgan Chase, Barclays Bank and others.  Speculating on the price of permits or “allowances” ensures that these financial giants pocket big money from misplaced environmental concerns and corner the carbon market in the process. Wait awhile and the effects of these speculations will be felt on customers’ electricity bills in the same way we all bailed out banksters so they could continue living in the manner to which they had long become accustomed. Utilities which need CO2 allowances at RGGI auctions must compete against powerful private interests whose primary goal is generating money. Therefore, we are looking at another reinvention of the 2008 Ponzi scheme where US and European citizens will be duped all over again.

What’s more, bureaucrats are denying the public right to know via New Jersey Watchdog’s Open Public Record Requests for auction details. RGGI claimed it was not a “public body” and thus it could keep trade secrets, contrasting sharply with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency conducting similar auctions.  Allowances have been sold by the EPA for acid rain otherwise known as SO2. It seems that now that derivatives have been way too toxic CO2 represents a plentiful bounty that requires insider back-scratching. For that to go ahead, the secondary markets of the Chicago Climate Futures Exchange and the Green Exchange do the job.

And guess who owns these markets?

The Green Exchange is owned by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange Goldman Sachs Group Inc., MF Global Holdings Ltd. Credit Suisse Group, AG, Morgan Stanley and Newedge Group, most of whom were involved in massive fraud, insider trading, price fixing and serious financial irregularities and fined billions – not that this made any difference at all. [13] [14]

Oh, and don’t forget JPMorgan Chase & Co is also cutting a slice of the pie. (This is the corporate predator that also has a string of “murder-suicides” of its employees, the company that’s going head to head with the Dept. Of Justice over its  FX trading practices).  It is in the interest of these companies to not only take advantage of the gaping holes in the financial system but from any new social directive that lies within it, whether ecological or philanthropic. It demands that they actually create the crises that put the majority of people into dire straits economically so that they can benefit directly from the social services implemented to allow the most needy to survive.

One brief example lies in US food subsidization for the poor, the expenditure of which sits at $72 billion a year provided by food stamps, a.k.a The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAPS). Nearly half of all SNAP participants are children. Where there is regular outflow of federal cash you will find corporate parasites leeching off their share. Washington, D.C. is home to a range of political and corporate lobbyists who exert enormous pressure on Congress and other instruments of US government to keep the food that can be bought through food assistance programs of the lowest quality and price possible while banks like JP Morgan cream off billions from their payment processing agreements from electronic transactions. They profit from every sale and from every individual desperate enough to have to rely on food stamps and companies like Wal-Mart, Coca-Cola and Kraft gain a tidy some selling products for subsidisation and profiting from poverty. One journalist posed the question: “… how much were states spending to print food stamps in comparison to how much they pay JP Morgan to process transactions electronically? I’d wager it is cheaper to print the stamps.” [15]

Taking a bird’s eye view of the history of banksters and corporate predation on the public funds is absolutely necessary if we are to see the true nature of the carbon credit scheme and the global warming industry as a whole. JP Morgan-Chase has been manipulating government and the public for as long as Goldman Sachs, the latter having particular influence inside the Obama administration. As Matt Taibbi writes in the opening paragraph of his seminal Rolling Stone piece: “The Great American Bubble”: “the first thing you need to know about Goldman Sachs is that it is everywhere. The world’s most powerful investment bank is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.” [16] It is in this article that Taibbi lifts the lid on the nature of Goldman Sachs and others who have mastered the art of economic manipulation and to such a high degree that we live in a world of their design, where vast numbers of people live in abject poverty as a direct consequence of their financial terrorism.

vampiresq

World “Vampire Squid”

Cutting its teeth in the Great Depression Goldman positioned itself in thick of speculative investments with Goldman Sachs Trading Corporation, issuing a million shares priced at $100 and buying all those shares with its own money, driving the price up by its own relentless bidding and selling a percentage to the public. The sponsorship of Shenandoah Corporation and the Blue Ridge Corporation followed, where millions more shares in these funds accelerated a pyramidal investment scheme that soared into the financial stratosphere. As stated: “Goldman hiding behind Goldman hiding behind Goldman. Of the 7,250,000 initial shares of Elue Ridge, 6,250,000 were actually owned by Shenandoah – which, of course, was in large part owned by Goldman Trading.” [17] The foundation of the present casino-economy that we now found ourselves forced to play, is directly sourced from financial cartels like Goldman. The basic nature of this time-honoured scam has been labelled the global economy and operates in the following way: “You take a dollar and borrow nine against it; then you take that $10 fund and borrow $90; then you take your $100 fund and, so long as the public is still lending, borrow and invest $900. If the last fund in the line starts to lose value, you no longer have the money to pay back your investors, and everyone gets massacred.”

The economist John Kenneth Galbraith had little time for the likes of Goldman Sachs. The Great Crash of 1929 and the following aftermath of the Great Depression saw Goldman Sachs doing what they did best: creating the opportunities to make money through massive suffering. Galbraith saw:“… the Blue Ridge and Shenandoah trusts as classic examples of the insanity of leverage-based investment,” and which were a: “… major cause of the market’s historic crash; in today’s dollars, the losses the bank suffered totalled $475 billion.” As Galbraith wrote in somewhat deflated fashion: “If there must be madness, something may be said for having it on a heroic scale.’ ” [18]

About sixty-five years later and Goldman Sachs had become a fully-fledged corporate psychopath. This tenacity and primitive survival instinct that left many of its competitors sunk during the depression, just made Goldman even stronger. It became the chief underwriter for most of Wall St. and eventually unleashing its true power through deregulation under the direction of CEO Robert Rubin (and CFR member) who had hung onto the coat-tails of best buddy and President Bill Clinton to become director of the National Economic Council and eventually Treasury secretary.

In the 1990s Rubin could do no wrong and the media smoothed his path to supremacy. When the classic Establishment rag Time had Rubin and his Treasury deputy Larry Summers and Federal Reserve chief Alan Greenspan on their front cover in 1999, the economic outlook was set for speculation, exploitation and economic plunder on a scale undreamt of. The financial markets were “over-regulated” and Rubin sought to change all that. Far from being “The Committee to Save the World” as the title ran, their job was to plunge the world into economic debt that could never be repaid but profits would abound for those in the know, namely, Goldman Sachs and friends.

The second bubble created and burst by Goldman was the internet dot com bonanza. Ill-thought out and barely legal companies were sold like rock-star geeks in the media and floated on the stock market for mega millions. What the average investor didn’t know was that the banks had been hustling and changing the rules so that deals looked better than they really were. How did they do this? Taibbi explains: “… by setting up what was, in reality, a two-tiered investment system – one for the insiders who knew the real numbers and another for the lay investor who was invited to chase soaring prices the banks themselves knew were irrational. While Goldman’s later pattern would be to capitalize on changes in the regulatory environment, its key innovation in the internet years was to abandon its own industry’s standards of quality control.” [19]

It was then that financial warfare became a reality and an even bigger tool for the 4C’s net. With no regulation there were no limits to what could be achieved through financial restructuring in its widest possible sense. Goldman was able to vacuum up money in such an effective and extortionate fashion by manipulating the share price otherwise known as “laddering.”

Taibbi describes the process for us in simple terms:

Say you’re Goldman Sachs, and Bullshit.com comes to you and asks you to take their company public. You agree on the usual tennis: You’ll price the stock, determine how many shares should be released and take the Bullshit.com CEO on a “road show~ to schmooze investors, all in exchange for a substantial fee (typically six to seven percent of the amount raised). You then promise your best clients the right to buy big chunks of the IPO at the low offering price -let’s say Bullshit.com’s starting share price is $15 – in exchange for a promise that they will buy more shares later on the open market. That seemingly simple demand gives you inside knowledge of the IPO’s future, knowledge that wasn’t disclosed to the day-trader schmucks who only had the prospectus to go by: You know that certain of your clients who bought X amount of shares at $15 are also going to buy Y more shares at $20 or $25, virtually guaranteeing that the price is going to go to $25 and beyond. In this way, Goldman could artificially jack up the new company’s price, which of course was to the bank’s benefit – a six percent fee of a $500 million IPO is serious money.

Goldman was seen as one of the primary instigators of the crash as a result. Yet when their laddering operations were discovered they paid their fines and continued as if nothing had happened.

Parallel to laddering was the simple use of bribery or “spinning” where shares were offered to executives at extra-low prices in exchange for underwriting business. Banks did their part by undervaluing the initial offering price so that shares rose more rapidly thus providing greater dividends for the insider few and in the shortest possible time. The you-scratch-my-back-I’ll-scratch-yours formula worked in this way: “… instead of Bullsrul.com opening at $20, the bank would approach the Bullshit.com CEO and offer him a million shares of his own company at $18 in exchange for future business effectively robbing all of Bullshit’s new shareholders by diverting cash that should have gone to the company’s bottom line into the private bank account of the company’s CEO.” [20]

When the bubble burst it took thousands of businesses with it, wiping out more than $5 trillion of wealth on the NASDAQ market alone. Once the investment banksters had been rewarded for criminality with huge bonuses (which continues today) and had obtained a taste for how easy it was to inflate and deflate their bubble – the corruption could only get worse. Moreover, it had an ideological basis to it, where skimming off the maximum amount from a capitalist system in decline was not only profitable but necessary if a new global financial architecture was to ever come of age. Bubbles were essential to global governance to break the public spirit and to provide pots of money for new globalist visions.

800px-GoldmanSachsHeadquarters

Goldman Sachs Headquarters, at 200 West Street, in Manhattan | photo: Quantumquark (wikipedia)

In 2000, true to the formula of sneaking unpopular or downright dangerous acts in at the last minute; when congressman are tired and want to go home to their mistresses, the Commodity Futures Modernization Act found its way into law. It had been inserted into an 11,000 page spending bill with no debate to speak of and very little interest in the implications. Banks were now given free rein to trade default swaps as they pleased. And they did so with impunity in the sub-prime housing crisis leading up to the 2008 crash.

Meanwhile, AIG asked if default swaps could fall under the category of regulatory insurance which meant that Goldman and others could pitch their wares to A-grade investors and the hobo in the street underwriting mortgage-backed securities much of which was subprime. It was the most blatant securities fraud touted as legitimate investing. Ultimately it led to the demise of many companies involved, including AIG. Goldman had the cash to pay lawsuits and fines and was free to walk away yet again with over $1.3 billion of taxpayer’s money from the bailout to AIG which meant that the bank directly profited from the housing bubble not once but twice, or as Taibbi eloquently states: “… it fucked the investors who bought their horseshit CDOs by betting against its own crappy product. Then it turned around and fucked the taxpayer by making him pay off those same bets.” [21]

After the fleecing of the housing market and the myth of housing prices being impervious to change the predators were on the lookout for the next bubble to inflate and burst. The physical-commodities market: foodstuffs, consumables, energy and oil fit the bill. The latter market reacted to this flight from the carnage of the housing crash and the plummeting value of the dollar with the price of a barrel oil shot up from around $55 in mid-2007 to $149 by the summer of 2008. This was due to Goldman and friends manipulating the markets into yet another casino run by lobbying investors and pension fund holders to invest in oil futures on condition that they buy oil at a fixed price and on a specific date of their choosing. Mike Norman, the Chief Economist at the Wall Street firm John Thomas Financial wrote in October 2011: “Total NYMEX open interest in crude is 1.4 m contracts or about 1.4 billion barrels of crude. Daily volume of crude traded on NYMEX is over 1 billion barrels per day. Total daily global demand is only 83 million barrels per day. The amount traded on one single exchange is more than 10 times total daily consumption. It’s a giant casino with prices being driven up by speculators and consumers having to pay more and more.” [22]

Author F. William Engdahl concluded that: “roughly 60-70 percent of the price of oil then was pure speculation, manipulated by the GSCI, the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index” … irrespective of supply and demand”. He observed that the “crucial ingredient” in the success of this manipulation is …“not the NYMEX for the global oil price benchmark, but the ICE Futures in London.”

Why?

He offers this narrative on ICE:

Because the ICE Futures is a daughter company of the International Commodity Exchange of Atlanta in Georgia, owned by Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan Chase etc. – the big oil banks that benefit enormously from the inside. There is absolutely no serious regulation of the ICE Futures. The British keep their hands off it, and the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the CFTC, since 2006 under the ‘Commodity Modernization Act of 2000’ allows ICE Futures to trade energy futures without disclosure to CFTC in the U.S. market through London. So, in fact, it has deregulated and taken away from any government supervisory role the entire trade in energy futures, especially oil. This is a rigged game. [23]

>As Goldman and other banks drove investors into the commodities markets speculators placed increasingly reckless bets leading directly to the oil bubble in 2008. This all took place with the same illegal secrecy that we saw in New Jersey and the Cap and Trade, the same benefits which allowed Goldman to become “the chief designer of a giant commodities betting parlor.” Once again a huge loss of wealth occurred when oil-commodities crashed. It led to worldwide chaos sending millions of people below the poverty line and creating food riots and serious unemployment.

1024px-Reflection_in_a_soap_bubble_edit

Carbon Tax supporter Goldman Sacs and others are responsible for creating and perpetuating financial bubbles. Brocken Inaglory | Alvesgaspar (wikipedia)

Finally, the crash in September 2008 after the bailout of Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the sacrifice of Lehman Bros., ( a Goldman competitor) Treasury-Secretary and ex CEO of Goldman Sachs Hank Paulson gave the go-ahead to $85 billion bailout of AIG who owed Goldman $13 billion and therefore allowed the company to pay it back. Meanwhile, industry workers’ jobs and small businesses were dying by the dozen ever hopeful for any assistance – which never came.

What did arrive however, was the notorious Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) amounting to $700 billion dollar’s worth of bailout money for the financial industry – namely the banks. Filled to the brim with ex-Goldman employees surrounding the bailout honeypot like killer bees, Goldman Sachs wanted a piece of it. Thus they managed to do just that by converting themselves from an investment bank to a bank holding company. This permitted access to $10 billion in TARP funds along with an almost infinite Federal Reserve funding, publicly backed but well under the radar. What this means in real terms, is an almost unimaginable level of money was lent or guaranteed by the Federal Reserve by the end March 2009 totalling over $8.7 trillion. The influx of new bailouts and loopholes in the law allowed the Fed to block almost all attempts at congressional auditing so that fiscal details on who received what, when and how remained secret.

More recently, as Europe suffers a depression most intense in Spain, Portugal and Greece we find Goldman’s sticky fingers all over it, most significantly in the country where democracy was born. The company willingly helped Greece conceal its budget deficit by arranging a currency swap so that it could manage $15 billion of bond sales and rack up substantial profits before Greece plunged into chaos. Bill Blain, co-head of fixed income at Matrix Corporate Capital LLP, a London-based broker and fund manager stated: “The price of bonds should reflect the reality of Greece’s finances,” therefore: “If a bank was selling them to investors on the basis of publicly available information, and they were aware that information was incorrect, then investors have been fooled.” [24]

Fooling everyone is the name of game.

In summary, Goldman Sachs is one of many powerful criminal cartels indulging its predatory whims to create the inflation and crash-deflation of four major financial bubbles over several decades. All of these disasters leave a greenback dollar-trail to Goldman and its Rothschild brothers in arms who caused untold misery to millions of people, (mostly pensioners and children) by infiltrating government and bribing spineless members of Congress to fracture society to the point that is almost irreversible. Despite all this, they remain on top while international banking law allows them to secrete their profits away in offshore accounts and claim deductions on the same untaxed income. They are free to start the lucrative financial warfare process again should the next opportunity present itself – and indeed it has.

Goldman Sachs was the leading campaign donor for Barack Obama contributing $981,000. Do we think this is because they liked his smile? Or that he would be the first “black” president? Rather, like so many puppets before him, they knew he’d be compliant having been plucked from obscurity and schooled for the job well in advance. Obama’s White House chief of staff and Zionist Rahm Emanuel whose legacy of funnelling cash contributions from Goldman to the Clinton campaign are well known. First proposed by former a Goldman CEO, Bush Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, he accepted the lead role in overseeing and guiding the ‘$700 billion’ bailout through the White House. Along with Treasury chief of staff Mark Patterson and CFTC chief Gary Gensler, both former Goldman Sachs employees – he was in good company. [25] By 2010, the Obama Administration was infested with Goldmanites just as it was in Clinton’s day.

logo

Which brings us to the Hamilton Project, a mini version of the Council on Foreign Relations with an emphasis on economics. Funded by Goldman Sachs and Robert Rubin and embedded in the Establishment’s own Brookings Institution, the think-tank is named after Alexander Hamilton who famously described people as “a great beast” and supported the imposition of a State bank and centralised government.

Ex Goldman CEO Rubin is the driving force of Hamilton and stringent economic policies that would ultimately benefit Goldman Sachs and CFR principles. According to journalist Eamon Javers: “Behind the scenes, Rubin still wields enormous influence in Barack Obama’s Washington, chatting regularly with a legion of former employees who dominate the ranks of the young administration’s policy team. He speaks regularly to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who once worked for Rubin at Treasury.” [26]

The Hamilton Project is a revolving door for Goldman employees and the US government, with the first four directors of the Hamilton Project serving in the Obama Administration. With a heavy mix of Zionist and Anglo-American Establishment groupies, the think-tank includes co-chair Robert Rubin himself; Carlyle Group CEO David Rubenstein; Sheryl Sandberg Chief Operating Officer, Facebook; ex-Goldmanite and Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers; Peter Orszag, Vice Chairman of Global Banking, Citigroup, Inc.; Suzanne Nora Johnson, Former Vice Chairman, Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. Neo-Conservative-transhumanist Peter Thiel and topped off with a heavy sprinkling of Brookings Institute staff and George Town University economics professors. Barack Obama has also given keynote speeches at the Hamilton Project giving his tacit support for both its ideology and policies. [27]

fh4eca65e4Key U.S. Government Positions held by Goldman Sachs alumni. courtesy of prof 77 at ‘Dregs of the Future’ and the post: A List of Goldman Sachs Ties to the Obama Government–including Elena Kagan

Which means the concrete has set for the foundations of Goldman’s next big casino run: cap-and-trade and carbon credits sold to the public as an on-going environmental strategy complimenting sustainable development and re-wilding. If it takes off, Goldman won’t have to do any rigging – it’s all built into the plan mandated by UN Agenda 21 and Western government push for SMART societies worldwide. Goldman has been lobbying hard for Cap and Trade for years and has poured a lot of money into climate change issues, having already invested $500 million in the Green Growth fund.

Carbon credits represent another trillion dollar bubble for Goldmanites and other corporate predators and they mean to have as big a slice of the pie as they can. As Matt Taibbi observed: “This is worse than the bailout: It allows the bank to seize taxpayer money before it’s even collected.” [28]

And that’s what the eco-economic game is all about.


See also: Goldman Sachs to pay $5 billion for misleading mortgage bond investors

 


Notes

[1] http://www.carboncreditsfaq.com/
[2] http://www.aussieinnovation.com/wiki/Megan_Clark
[3] http://www.csiro.au Simon MKeon bio | ‘Macquarie boss gets CSIRO top job’ ABC News, Jun 21, 2010.
[4] Malcolm Turnbull’s Official Australian Parliament House Biography.
[5] His biography on Equity Capital Limited’s website and his fact page at the Museum of Australian Democracy (PDF), Money Management and Australian National University.
[6] Ross Garnaut: Executive Profile & Biography – Businessweek.
[7] Lazard’s website and China Development Bank’s website.
[8] ‘Carbon tax hecklers stop Prime Minister Julia Gillard in her tracks’ by Mark Kenny, Adelaide Now July 14, 2011.

[9] (http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/repealing-carbon-tax)
[10] ‘Australia introduces controversial carbon tax’ BBC News, 1 July 2012.
[11] http://www.newjersey.watchdog.org/files/2010/09/RGGI-auction-results-thru-9-10.pdf |WesternClimate Initiative -Currently being designed, anticipated to begin January 2012 (as of 1/2011) http://www.westernclimateinitiative.org
[12] Ibid.
[13] ‘Goldman Sachs, MF Global Among Six New Clearing Members of Green Exchange’ By Mathew Carr, Oct 11, 2010 bloomberg.com
[14] ‘JPMorgan’s record fine’ Bloomberg, June 4, 2010. | ‘JPMorgan fined for wash trades in oil, gasoline’ By David Sheppard, Reuters, Jun 1, 2012. |
[15] ‘J.P. Morgan makes billions in profits from food stamps every year’ by Lou Colagiovanni, The Examiner June 21, 2012.
[16] ‘The Great American Bubble’ By Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone Magazine July 9-23 2009.
[17] Ibid. (p.54)
[18] Ibid (Taibbi quotes Galbraith from “In Goldman we Trust” (p.54)
[19] Ibid (p.56)
[20] Ibid (p.58)
[21] Ibid. (p.60)
[22] ‘A History of Rigged & Fraudulent Oil Prices (and What It Can Teach Us About Gold & Silver)’ by Lars Schall interview with F. William Engdahl 2011.
[23] Ibid.
[24] ‘Goldman Sachs, Greece Didn’t Disclose Swap Contract’ By Elisa Martinuzzi, Bloomberg, February 17, 2010.
[25] ‘Goldman Sachs Will Be Sitting Pretty With Emanuel in the Obama White House’ Washington Examiner November 20, 2008.
[26] ‘Robert Rubin returns’ By Eamon Javers, Politico, August 4, 2010.
[27] ‘Obama’s “Smoking Gun”: His Hamilton Project Speech shows his links to Goldman, Entitlement Cuts’(Part 1+2) by F. Flambeau . http://www.firedoglake.com/
[28] op. cit.Taibbi (p.101)

Advertisements

World State Policies IV: Common Purpose

Common_Purpose_logoIn tracing Corporatist-Collectivist thinking since the 1950s, it has become clear that its proponents have been very busy making sure their interests are fulfilled far from public scrutiny and if they are discovered, their agencies are cloaked in double-speak and “pro-active” corporate jargon to avoid suspicion. Common Purpose is a quasi-political, semi-secret UK organisation which appears to fall under this category and like so many of its affiliated organisations it relies on public ignorance to successfully carry out its mandate. Spawned from the Liberal, Anglo-American corner of the Three Establishment Model (3EM)  (the others being Zionist and Conservative)  it is closely associated with Fabianism, New Age beliefs, humanism, technocracy, green living and vertical collectivism.

The organisation has been tailored to infiltrate British public and private industry at the local and national level in order to head-hunt potential candidates for leadership and thus fulfil World State policies and the emergence of inverted totalitarianism. No doubt, there is much guffawing and scoffing at such an idea. Yet, this has been the nature of social engineering programs for a very considerable time.  Future leaders are groomed with a pre-disposition for authoritarianism via a fusion of Marxist and Conservative appeal. As such, movers and shakers are found within both labour and conservative ranks.

It has taken over fifteen years for the British public to even hear its name thanks to its highly secretive nature. The fact that anyone knows it exists at all is largely due to the work of Brian Gerrish a former Royal Navy Lieutenant * who, since his retirement now works full time to expose the objectives of the organisation. He discovered Common Purpose (CP) when he was involved in initiatives to help people find jobs whereby council support was withdrawn due it seems to the projects stepping on CP objectives. When Gerrish tried to continue alone without council support it quickly led to a threatening situation:

“When we started to explore why we were being threatened we were absolutely staggered to find a very strange organisation called Common Purpose operating in the city. And we were absolutely amazed that there were so many people involved but they were not declaring themselves …”'[Common Purpose] was operating throughout the structure of the city, in the city council, in the government offices, in the police, in the judiciary. Essentially we discovered what is effectively, at best, a quasi secret society which doesn’t declare itself to ordinary people.’ [1]

Common Purpose  has increasingly come under fire thanks to the work of Gerrish and other concerned members of the public. The accusations have been rather unsuccessfully fielded by the board trustee member Sir David bell who dismisses the concerns as unfounded. The charges are numerous and include:

  • Undue secrecy and zero transparency.
  • A pervasive, undemocratic influence with social engineering at its core.
  • Change based around principles of collectivism or its sub-category of New Age glossed “communitarianism”.
  • Masquerading as an ‘educational charity’ when it is in fact a political organisation.
  • Many of its activities are funded by tax payers money.
  • Undue and unaccountable influence in all societal domains.
  • One of its core principles is to eventually merge the private and public sectors by deceitful means.
  • To bypass democratic accountability and replace current legitimately elected or chosen posts in favour of CP graduates who have unfair advantage.
  • Working to affect change so that Britain is irrevocably changed towards EU-directives and Fabian beliefs by stealth.
  • Closely associated with Bilderberg beliefs and associated pet projects such as Agenda 21, technocratic SMART-city initiatives which includes merging sustainable development frameworks without due consultation and beyond civic consultation. In other words, collectivist, World State policies.

At first glance, rather like most political think tanks and organisations that we have looked at on this blog so far, CP has taken the mask of an educational charity founded in 1989 registered in the UK under number 1023384. According to its website: “… to date, more than 30,000 people have participated in our leadership development courses internationally. The idea spread and Common Purpose programmes are currently run in France, Germany, Ghana, India, Sweden, Turkey, Ireland, Hungary and South Africa.”

It ostensibly provides leadership and networking development training for potential high flyers within the police, judiciary, civil service, social services, education, media and politics. Remaining true to the “scientific technique” and philosophy of the Fabians and humanist education it has become a well-placed organisation of “change agents” at the heart of the British Establishment.

commonpurpose.org.uk states further:

“… the advancement of education for the public benefit and in particular but without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing to educate men and women an young people of school age, from a broad range of geographical, political, ethnic, institutional, social and economic backgrounds in constitutional, civic, economic and social studies with special emphasis on civil and social awareness and responsibility in the United Kingdom and elsewhere.”

The statement sounds as bland and innocuous as we’ve come to expect from such Euro-led outfits.

Evidence suggests that the notorious Tavistock Institute had a part to play in the formation of Common Purpose training courses. The CP concept was started there, fine-tuned at Oxford University and then ‘exported’ to the US joining together with Harvard’s Advanced and General Management Programmes which:

“… brings together members of the executive committee, heads of business units and functional areas, as well as leaders of governmental agencies and non-profit organizations.” (www.exed.hbs.edu/programs) GMP follows exactly the same formula as CP and “is designed primarily for executives with recently acquired or significantly expanded general management responsibilities, and for senior functional managers who need a broader perspective on company operations or who will soon become business-unit, division, or regional leaders.” [2]

On his website literature Brian Gerrish states: “It was then re-imported to UK via Julia Middleton Chief Executive of CP, who was miraculously given £500,000 to start CP programmes throughout UK.” A former editor for Marxism Today, civic society campaigner, co-founder of think-tank Demos and Deputy Chair of the Media Standards Trust Board, Middleton has been its CEO since its inception but it is unlikely that she was the sole creator of such a complex social engineering program. She had a bit of help from Stephen Heintz who acted as President of CP. Once his job was done he assumed his position as President of … surprise, surprise…the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. Demos is also an Establishment arm advocating Fabian-driven principles akin to Council on Foreign Relations and the Bilderberg group. In a BBC News report by Catrin Nye from September 30 2011, entitled: ‘Is the internet rewriting history?’ the think-tank recently warned against the dangers of free speech and “conspiracy theories” which “rewrite history” on the internet. DEMOS was founded in 1993 by another former Marxism Today editor Martin Jacques, and Geoff Mulgan in response to what they saw as a crisis in British politics and the social fabric. It remains a key link to CP as a whole.

In fact, CP likes to say that there is no CEO, which begs the question: Where does CP get its directives?

Delving a bit deeper into the roots of CP we find that the board of the Media Standards Trust are Sir David Bell who sits on various other influential media boards, Goldman Sacs member Charles Manby and Anthony Salz of another usual suspect: NM Rothschild. CP observes the same rules of secrecy observed by the Trilateral Commission, Bilderbergers, Council on Foreign Relations and the Royal Institute of International Affairs. This convention is defined as the “Chatham House Rule” where members must not reveal the details of individuals who attend nor the subjects under discussion. This camouflage is maintained by the Common Purpose Charitable Trust (CPCT) who carries out its activities through the subsidiary charities of: Common Purpose International, Common Purpose UK and its trading arm Civilia Ltd.

Improving society so that it is more “efficient” is underpinned by the use of Neuro-Linguistic Programming, elements of the Delphi Technique and strains of political correctness across all issues which, alongside a lack of transparency, are extremely difficult to counter without appearing reactionary and “old school.” Common Purpose is modernising society for a “New Order” which – if we are to read their benign messages on their websites – is all for our benefit. So much so, that it must be carried out with minimal participation from the public – unless of course you are ambitious, well-placed and harbour a mind-set that is amenable to CP aims.

Clearly, to re-engineer society you need the funds to do it which is why CP charges considerable sums for their candidates whom they head-hunt and entice with promises of advancement should they decide to embark on this particular gravy train. Blog journalist Ken Craggs’ tells us: “Over 120,000 leaders have contributed to or participated in a Common Purpose programme and this grows by at least 3,000 people each year. Common Purpose charge substantial figures for their courses. Matrix costs £3,950 plus VAT, a course for a high-flying leader can be as much as £9,950 plus VAT.” [3]The key motivation behind these training courses appears to be to groom potential leaders according to Common purpose principles so that when they are placed in suitable positions by virtue of being CP “graduates” they will carry out their allotted tasks.

So, what are these principles?

The usual elitist beliefs to which the reader will by now be accustomed such as reducing national sovereignty, the erosion of national identity, the destruction of democracy, undermining of traditional beliefs and values in order to replace them with one world, technocratic and collectivist visions. More elitism by those who consider they know best. Which is why such people use Orwellian double-speak and NLP to “train” its members towards a singular view so that they think and act according to their own objectives. Key issues such as education, immigration, European policy, NHS, climate change and local and regional councils are similarly changed by indoctrinated CP agents, most of whom probably consider they are working for the greater good. Thus, multiculturalism and progressive modalities are applied to funnel critical thinking on these complex issues into beliefs which always conform to the much anticipated technocratic World State. Once this vast network is embedded in every sector of society – which is well on the way to being realised – the Establishment can sleep in their beds safe in the knowledge that their dutiful minions are carrying out their wishes. Such a program starts early and compliance is rewarded with career advancement. Conversely, signs of independent thinking and questioning is met with closed doors and a rapid descent.

Common Purpose shows signs of being a cult along the lines of Scientology according to website www.eutruth.org.uk/. For example, while using psychology and mind games to seduce and entrain would-be graduates, a classification is used: – ‘Suns’ (people of established power and influence), as ‘Stars’ (those of rapid but unpredictable rise to power and influence), and ‘Moons’ (those individuals whose power is diminishing). Those who will not help Common Purpose, or who challenge it, are called ‘Black Holes’.

For an avowed educational charity it appears to benefit everyone but those in most need. CP has been receiving money from local authorities and government agencies for training which has been paid for by the tax payer. As mentioned, these training courses do not come cheap. This unlawful allocation of money spent on CP training has nothing to do with benefiting communities but everything to do with increasing the CP agenda outside the democratic process.

The organisation is clearly political and is thus in breach of the Charity Commission rules which states: “An organisation will not be charitable if its purposes are political.” Yet, local councils and authorities CP operates outside the law but actively seeks to influence law enforcement, the judiciary and the politicians across all parties. In fact, all CP members who should be acting as public servants breach the seven principles of Public Life as set out by the Committee. If we are suspicious about the rising surveillance state and the easy purloining of our bio-metric data then we should also be concerned about the Common Purpose penchant for secrecy and data collection. Indeed, CP has been reported to the Information Commissioner’s Office for alleged breaches of data protection law:

“Leadership training charity Common Purpose has been reported to the Information Commissioner’s Office for alleged breaches of data protection law.

The Northwest Regional Development Agency, which made the complaint, has also apologised to a person whose name it inadvertently passed on to Common Purpose after he made a request under the Freedom of Information Act about its dealings with the charity.

The name was then included by Common Purpose in a list of previous FOI requests about the charity that it distributed to public authorities receiving new requests. The charity said it distributed the list to illustrate the high number of FOI requests being made about it and to help authorities decide whether to treat new requests as vexatious.” [4]

Common Purpose revealed the name of a legitimate enquirer under the Freedom of Information Act in an apparent fit of pique. And it wonders why so many inquiries arrive at its door? No action was taken.

The idea of acting beyond and outside established authority is ironically a large part of Fabian, Marxist and Common Purpose ideology. CEO Julia Middleton’s book Beyond Authority (1982) conforms to the ethos of change through Fabian or Marxist gradualism. As Brian Gerrish informs us, it is a text book for CP’s leadership philosophy, with some interesting tit-bits on the kind of manipulation that is required to make sure CP agendas are listened to and acted upon. On one occasion we read in the book that some helpful UK Parliamentary peers took her aside and told her all that was required was a: “… small committed and coordinated group of people producing pressure from the outside. Two or three determined fifth columnists on the inside. And the stamina from both groups to keep on and on and on putting them on the agenda until they eventually had to be discussed …”

Another passage in the book reveals:

‘I spoke to a friend recently who described how she had set someone up. Using all her charm and flattery, she had drawn him in and then installed him as a convenient useful idiot … My friend’s intention was to get him to produce a report which she knew full well would be a perfect smokescreen for her own activities …’

‘Have I ever done this? Yes … it was certainly useful to produce the distraction of creating a sub-committee, led by someone who did not really understand the big picture, to look into an issue in depth, with no timetable, so we could get on with what we saw as important issues.’ ” [5]

There is the evidence that CP routinely flouts British laws in favour of their own authority. The webmaster of Stop Common Purpose.org had this to say on the legal concept of Ultra Vire, latin for ‘Beyond the powers.’:

A Common Purpose quote: “People who lead beyond their authority can produce change beyond their direct circle of control”.

Leading beyond authority can mean acting ultra vires. Ultra vires a legal concept. It is Latin for ‘beyond the powers’. It can apply to any body which has rules, such as a charity or a local authority. An ultra vires act is one that is outside the specified and/or implied constitutional objects and powers of the body in question. It is ‘beyond the powers’ and therefore illegal.

Also, what are the implications of ‘leading beyond authority’ for services which require a hierarchical management structure to ensure discipline and cohesion, like the armed forces and police which can be manipulated from within for political purposes? ” [6]

Meshed with other Establishment think-tanks, NGOs and government agencies the symptoms of CP influence has been plain to see over the last fifteen years which has directly led to cultural disintegration; constant surveillance; the rise of Orwellian double-speak; House repossessions; Rapidly falling incomes; widening gap between the rich and the poor; high unemployment; unregulated immigration; social fragmentation; destructive policies within the NHS, rampant political correctness; trenchant bureaucracy in line with SMART technology; erosion of the middle class and economic enslavement. Is it all down to CP training? Unlikely. But as one factor in a many-headed hydra of social engineering, it is potentially significant.

Like the New Group of World Servers triangulating their occult influence throughout corridors of power, so too we have the same mind-set targeting business and politics with the same goals this time through programs such as the Global Leader Experience (GLE) which is designed for university students in order to: “… develop … leadership skills to help influence the future of the world, as well as establish a genuinely global network.” [7] All packaged carefully along CP lines of course. And what better examples of “leadership do we have waiting in the wings? CP’s Corporate partners such as:

  • BP
  • Foreign and Commonwealth Office
  • HSBC
  • Goldman Sachs
  • Oxfam
  • DLA Piper
  • BBC
  • International Red Cross
  • Siemens
  • London Fire Brigade
  • Santander
  • Brunswick Group LLP

They even have programmes for new African leader so that a Round Table tradition can continue with well-placed nodes at their disposal.

Common Purpose is effectively the United Kingdom equivalent of organisations tied into SMART growth and Agenda 21 over in the US which are ideologically, exactly the same but appealing to young business leaders. (See UN Agenda 21 and Land Grab)We have discussed how capitalism, communism and Zionism have been embraced by the 3EM. Communitarianism is a further belief that cements the building blocks of inverted totalitarianism of the past and forms the local and national strategies of Common Purpose. Also known as the “Third Way” It can lie at the centre of many beliefs but is most at home in socialist, Neo-Conservative, Green and New Age activism as the primary tools of the Liberal Establishment ideologues.

Alaskan Journalist Niki Raapana summed up the belief succinctly by stating: “Communitarianism is a Dictatorship of the Community. Unlike communism, which established a Dictatorship of the Proletariat, communitarianism is the more advanced stage of human social evolution.” [8] And it seems CP requires the full compliance of every corner of society to achieve its communitarian ends, without any public interference. In order that a comprehensive network of what amounts to “soft” social control has been implemented with the same happy, smiling faces of mediocrity. Nothing wrong with communitarianism but it depends entirely on who is initiating such a new social divergence and whether this plan is genuinely benevolent. And so far, it is easy to discern that it is not.

As we know, the best of intentions can just as easily lead to the highest expression of evil when the concept of social evolution is gravely misunderstood by allowing psychopathy to distort and co-opt the benign. As journalist James Corbett recently asked:

“Even if Common Purpose by itself were the most benign organization imaginable, though, it is difficult to justify the secretive nature of this public charity which receives funding and support from various public agencies. The question once again becomes: to what extent is the public comfortable having an organization of questionable aims and means training the next generation of world leaders in secretive seminars, largely at taxpayer’s expense. And, to the extent that the public is uncomfortable with the influence that groups like this have over the political and business world, what precisely can they do about it?” 

The first step is to dispense with the kind of secrecy favoured by CP and introduce genuine transparency partnered with the kind of organisations and board members which historically advocate the same rather than institutional protection.Until that time, to suggest that Common Purpose is just a non-political charity is not only false it is a blatant deception.

We’ll leave the last word on Common Purpose from Brian Gerrish:

Common Purpose promotes the ’empowerment of individuals’, except where individuals challenge the activities of CP, and public spending on CP. These people are branded vexatious, extremist, right wing or mentally unsound. Mrs Julia Middleton, the Chief Executive of Common Purpose, praises the work of German bankers. Deutsche Bank is, of course, a major power behind Common Purpose. Mrs Middleton, earning circa £80,000 p.a. from her charity, is also very happy to promote the term ‘Useful Idiots’ in her book ‘Beyond Authority’. Are we, the General Public the USEFUL IDIOTS, or are the Elite Common Purpose Graduates? You decide.

 


* Brain Gerrish has done great work in outing the methods of Common Purpose. However, it always pays to be careful about certain whistleblowers and Gerrish falls into this category for a number of reasons. He is staunchly conservative and is on a rather right wing and identified with his mission, as he sees it, to purge Britain of communism and Marxism. This is hardly an objective view rather a very simplistic one. He also has a military background  hailing from the Navy no less, who have a particular tradition for military intelligence shills and PSYOPS. Gerrish may well be one of those sent out to counter elite factions. i.e. Pan-European Synarchy blowing the whistle on the Liberal arm of the 3EM. It does not mean common purpose is suddenly smelling of roses, only that Gerrish may have an agenda of his own which is not all that it seems. Anyone that excludes too much information in favour of a pushing a narrow belief needs to be watched closely. Always keep the bigger picture.


Notes

[1] http://www.cpexposed.com/
[2] http://www.exed.hbs.edu/programs/gmp/
[3] ‘Leaders with a Common Purpose’ By Ken Craggs, May 20th, 2011.
[4]‘Charity reported over data protection issues’ by Paul Jump Third Sector, January 20, 2009.
[5] op.cit Gerrish
[6]http://www.stopcp.com/
[7] http://commonpurpose.org/leadership/programmes/students/global-leader-experiences/london/
[8] ‘Niki Raapana talks to herself about communitarianism’ October 2010 | http://nikiraapana.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/niki-raapana-talks-to-herself-about.html
[9] The Corbett Report – Charity or Change Agent February 5 2013. | https://www.corbettreport.com/common-purpose-charity-or-change-agent/

World Revolution V: The House of Rothschild (2)

“In the United States today, of course, we find the journals of what we might call “Kosher Liberals” and “Kosher Conservatives” who—while angrily disagreeing on all other issues—still nonetheless fall into place in endorsing Jewish interests and the concerns of the state of Israel.”

– Michael Collins Piper


rothschild-empire-red-shield-clan_thumb.gifBy the 1820’s religion and freemasonry were coming together to hatch a plot to create cells of freemasonic influence in the Middle East. The Anglican Church Oxford University, Kings College of London University, the British Royal Family, Lord Palmerston’s freemasonic offshoot the Palladian Rite and Rosicrucian leader Edward Bullwer-Lytton were all guided by Scottish Rite freemasonry and the formation of terrorism for their Illuminati masters. Whether or not they were conscious of this fact is highly unlikely. Each to his own belief thinking himself a lion amongst men with his own spectacular roar.[1]

Benjamin Disraeli was a unique individual in that he was both the only Jewish Prime Minister to attend the Houses of Parliament while also being a Grand Master Freemason. It is a safe bet that when he wrote Coningsby, he was revealing the laws and manipulations of the Rothschilds to whom he was beholden. In the classic he warns: “the world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.” Disraeli also reiterated this point in a Parliamentary debate when he said:

“lt is useless to deny … a great part of Europe the whole of Italy and France, and a great portion of Germany, to say nothing of other countries are 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 do not want provincial councils nor the recording of votes; they want … an end to ecclesiastical establishments …” [2]

The mid-19th Century saw US President Andrew Jackson do battle with the Rothschilds and perhaps the only American President to do so. He knew precisely what the Rothschilds and other banking cartels were up to and sought to re-design the US financial architecture so that bankers would be bound by democratic regulations rather than autocratic rules visited upon the populace and where the money system could actually work for the American people. Yet this was easier said than done when the emerging bankers and industrialists held the power. President Jackson had no doubt that his attempted assassination was conceived and paid for by the Rothschilds though he had no direct evidence to prove it. Despite this, their charter was not renewed and by 1836 the Rothschilds were ousted. It would be this event that would prepare the ground on which a perfect financial and economic plan could grow and would ensure total control over not only the money supply of the United States but the world. As Congressman Charles A. Lindberg Sr. would state more than 70 years later “From now on depressions will be scientifically created.” In 1913, the central bank of the Federal Reserve was created with the help of banking relatives the Schiffs and the Warburgs where the introduction of a fiat currency and prison of credit and debt would define global economics to the present day. We’ll return to this period of history later on.

by W. & D. Downey,photograph,1863

Lord Henry John Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston. Big on Title but very low on values (by W. & D. Downey,photograph,1863)

By the time President Abraham Lincoln came on the scene, the Rothschilds’ financial operations were entwined with the slave trade. For this reason and a legion of others, Lincoln was to be a fly in the ointment of their growing financial empire.  Scottish Rite Grand Master Freemason Lord Palmerston was the British Empire’s black operations Tsar. Palmerston’s long experience of freemasonic privilege and wealth allowed him to quickly ascend the ladder of political power including posts as Lord of the Admiralty, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and finally Prime Minister by 1830. Palmerston was a Cecil Rhodes clone and believed: “… the main objective of the government’s foreign policy should be to increase Britain’s power in the world.” [3]He had been tasked with the furthering the Illuminist model of intelligence whose main objective was dirty tricks and assassinations to maintain the iron clad grip on illegal dope trafficking and international opium trade, a particularly British monopoly.  Criminal connections were essential to this underworld economy on which the Empire depended, thus, a “fifth column” existed in the British government with Palmerston as its operational head overseeing a carefully managed cluster of criminal organisations at his disposal.

These comprised:

  • The Chinese “Triads,” or Societies of Heaven;
  • The Order of Zion and its American spinoff, the B’nai B’rith;
  • “Young Italy,” whose Sicilian law enforcement arm became known as the Mafia; [Originally a freemasonic youth organization]
  • The Jesuit Order based in decaying Hapsburg Austria;
  • Mikhail Bakunin’s bomb-throwing anarchist gangs;
  • Nearly every other inhabitant of Britain’s political netherworld. [4]

All of which: “… followed a chain of command that led through the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry directly to Lord Palmerston and his successors.” [5]

The Order of Zion was the most useful and accessible of the agencies under the British Board of Deputies. The activities of the Order of Zion were run by House of Rothschild and other Jewish, Ashkenazi families connected to British oligarchy and the Bank of England such as the Mocattas, Goldsmids and the Montefiores.

According to Dope Inc. written and meticulously researched by Jewish authors Konstandinos Kalimtgis, David Goldman and Jeffrey Steinberg as part of a US Labour Party investigative team, it was Sir Moses Montefiore described in many historical accounts as “Queen Victoria’s favourite Jew,” who was heading the dirty tricks division of the Order of Zion. It was preparing to launch a: “… covert campaign that would lead to both the Lincoln assassination, and the founding of organized crime in the United States. Through the efforts of Montefiore, later Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli (the Earl of Beaconsfield), and the then nouveau riche Rothschilds, the Order of Zion nursed into being the leadership of the Confederacy.” [6]

Moses_Montefiore

Rothschild agent and yet another “dirty tricks” agent provocateur Moses Montefiore

The Order of Zion was closely followed in 1843 by its American Counterpart the B’nai B’rith, also called the Constitutional Grand Lodge of the Order of the Sons of the Covenant, located at 450 Grand Street in Manhattan. It was designed to be an official branch of the Scottish Rite for American Jews. In truth, it was a cover for the Montefiores and Rothschilds and just another mechanism in a criminal network:

Its American house organ, the Menorah, could not disguise its relationship to the Rothschilds. It chose to flaunt it: ‘The name Rothschild, in all countries is a synonym for honor and generosity, and no name in Europe has a popularity so great and so well merited. The Rothschilds in France occupy a social position even higher than that of the English branch of the family.’

The Menorah was also frank on the subject of the B’nai B’rith’s relationship to the Scottish Rite Freemasons: ‘Their reunions were frequent and several of them being members of then existing secret benevolent societies and especially of the Order of the Free Masons, and Odd Fellows, they finally concluded that a somewhat similar organization, but based upon the Jewish idea, would best obtain their object.’

Once in operation, the B’nai B’rith effectively merged its operations with another branch of the Scottish Rite, based in the Midwest and South — the Knights of the Golden Circle, the fore-runner of the Ku Klux Klan, the training ground for the entire Confederate military and political leadership. Its most important American operative was Judah P. Benjamin, a British subject and leader of the B’nai B’rith, whose amazing career included a brief term as Confederate Secretary of War and then Secretary of State, during the closing phases of the Civil War.

Another British subversive agent later worked together with Benjamin to found the Ku Klux Klan. He was Dr. Kuttner Baruch, B’nai B’rith leader and grandfather of Bernard Baruch, a leading Wall Street Anglophile. Their colleagues in that venture included Confederate General Albert Pike, a Grand Commander of the Scottish Rite, and a Jesuit priest. The same group carried out the Lincoln assassination — which raises questions concerning the Defense Department’s refusal to release secret files concerning that assassination. Are they afraid to embarrass the now politically powerful B’nai B’rith?

The B’nai B’rith and its Confederate opposite numbers, the Knights of the Golden Circle and the Ku Klux Klan, were only three of the many parallel operations that Palmerston brought to life during the 1860s.

[…]

Disraeli, Moses Montefiore, and other leading British Hofjuden founded a new masonic-style order called, in the original French, the “Alliance Universelle Israelite.” It became known — and feared — under the name of its elite secret arm, the Order of Zion. Most of the Order of Zion’s funding was provided through the London and Paris banking houses of Rothschild, Montefiore, and de Hirsch. In crucial respects, the Order of Zion and Palmerston’s Scottish Rite of Freemasonry were indistinguishable. [7] [Emphasis mine]

Executive Intelligence Review’s US Labour Party team discovered substantial evidence that Order of Zion was behind Lincoln’s assassination acting in concert with Anglo-American intelligence. Much like the Kennedy assassination, there were many parties who wanted him removed for multiple reasons, thus causing the investigations and commissions to be compromised from the start. For the Rothschilds, it was an obvious answer to a financial dilemma. Lincoln, a friend to the democratic process and the people as well as the Tsar of Russia, was against the Rothschilds’ dream of a central bank and a believer in debt-free money – just like Kennedy.

In 1881, President James A. Garfield would die at the hands of an assassin in much the same way and likely for the same reasons. He said: “Whoever controls the volume of money in our country is absolute master of all industry and commerce and when you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.”  How right he was.

When President Lincoln was unable to obtain finance from the Rothschilds-controlled US banks to support the American Civil War he knew then that bankers had ultimate control. In 1862 almost $500,000 of debt free money was printed and distributed by Lincoln effectively signing his own death warrant. In April of that year he stated: “We gave the people of this republic the greatest blessing they ever had, their own paper money to pay their own debts.”

As the end of the 19th Century came, Russia, who had given so much to the growth of the Rothschild dynasty without compromising its own assets now became the target. Ideological principles of Zionism/Communism and financial needs of Wall St. corporatism contributed to shaping the destiny of nations backed by vast amounts of Rothschild capital. After widespread pogroms both in Russia, Poland, Bulgaria and Romania many thousands of Jews were killed most of whom were corralled into a max exodus to American cities and integrated into a useful Zionist network. Although the family power grew beyond the late 19th Century it was undoubtedly “The Age of the Rothschilds” which set the seal for Anglo-American relations across the whole spectrum of economic and socio-political activities.

According to Niall Ferguson and his recent – and slightly too friendly – biography of the Rothschild dynasty: The House of Rothschild: Money’s Prophet: “The rate of growth and size of their capital in the period before 1850 were unprecedented in banking history.” By 1818, the combined capital of all the five Rothschild houses was 500,000 pounds. Just ten years later it had reached 4,330,333 pounds. The figures for the time were truly staggering. And it obviously makes one wonder what kind of wealth we are talking about almost 200 years later. The British Empire itself could never have existed without the financial assistance of the Rothschilds. To all intents and purposes this family was the Empire and the imperialism that followed. Equally, the presence of the Rockefellers, Harrimans, Carnegies and Morgans would have been substantially slower without their backing. [8] The same could be said for many of the destructive events of the last one hundred years which had the House of Rothschild continually seeking leverage for monetary control. And it was the following succession of wars during this early period – all of which were financed to some degree by the various Houses – that helped to provide the family with their extraordinary rise to power:

  • War of 1812 1812
  • Hundred Days 1815 The return of Napoleon
  • Gurkha War 1813–1816
  • Third Anglo-Maratha War 1817–1818
  • First Ashanti War 1823–1831
  • First Anglo-Burmese War 1824–1826

With their Round Table movement and Cecil Rhodes carrying their instructions to finance the Kimberley diamond mines in South Africa this eventually allowed the Rothschilds to become the biggest shareholders of the De Beers Corporation and a permanent fixture in the exploitation of Africa already tenderised by the British Empire. Parallel to this new era of colonialism was an historic event which would change the face of the Middle East and the world.

The 1897 World Zionist Congress took place with the backing of the family and the placement of its agent Theodor Herzl, as Chairman. It is not a coincidence that the Rothschild Red Hexagram as the Zionist flag became the flag of Israel more than 50 years later. Once Israel was in place, the socio-political landscape of America was next. Not long after, Jacob Schiff blood relative of the Rothschilds would set up the Anti-Deformation League (ADL) in order to enforce the “anti-Semitic” reflex which would be used to great effect in protecting Zionist interests and most notably as a firewall against Rothschilds’ various international manipulations.

660px-Flag_of_the_First_Zionist_Congress_1897.svgThe flag of the First Zionist Congress

Long-time family friend Jacob Schiff, B’nai B’rith agent, and president of Kuhn Loeb Bank in New York was to be an important intermediary between a Wall Street cartel made up of the Rockefellers, Morgans and Carnegies: some of the most powerful industrialists of the time who were financed by the Rothschilds to stimulate a communist revolution in Russia. Jacob Schiff was the intermediary and financial handler of one Leon Trotsky who was given a warm welcome when in the arrived in the United States. He was given a US passport and enjoyed free travel back and forth from Russia and the US.

Trotsky’s Revolutionary fighters were given financial, organisational and logistical support by the Rockefellers and Schiffs. Once they had been sufficiently trained in terror tactics they were shipped off to start their Bolshevik Revolution with twenty million dollars’ worth of Jacob Schiff’s gold in hand. After the revenge killing of the whole Russian Royal family who had refused to play all with the Rothschilds decades before, the corporatists moved in and set their sights on the Caucasus oil fields. By 1927, the Rothschilds – via their Rockefeller Standard Oil – had monopolized the Russian oil market. You can see much the same process going in the 21st Century whether it be the KLA in Kosovo or Al-Qaeda in Syria.

By the end of the 19th Century just as the British Empire’s monetary power was effectively in the hands of the House of Rothschild. The wresting of the United States monetary policy followed suit when the family finally got their wish for a central bank known ironically as the “Federal” Reserve Bank of America. Backed by the guiding force of the Rothschilds, just about every major industrialist set about establishing their grand plan. They started by creating economic panic in 1907 via the Federal Reserve which would offer stability.” The Bank of England and the Rothschilds would ultimately control the Federal Reserve Banks through their stock holdings and subsidiary firms in New York. handled by J. P. Morgan Co. and Kuhn, Loeb & Co.  All roads led back to London and Baron Alfred Rothschild’s Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the result of a secret meeting at Jekyll Island Georgia, owned by J.P. Morgan. If there was ever an archetypal, smoke-filled room full of plotting men greedy for power – that was it. Government and industrialist members included Paul Warburg, Partner in Kuhn Loeb and Co; Frank Vanderlip, President of Kuhn Loeb and Co., Henry Davidson, Senior Partner of J.P. Morgan Bank, Charles Norton, President of Morgan’s First National of New York, and Benjamin Strong, President of Morgan’s Bankers Trust Co., A. Piatt Andrew, Assistant secretary of the Treasury and Senator Nelson Aldrich.While there were undoubtedly pragmatic and viable reasons for altering the financial system at the time, to suggest, as some commentators have, that there was nothing nefarious going on here and that it it was simply standard and inevitable banking evolution is nonsense.

The Yales secret society of the Order of Skull and Bones offered up one of their “Bonesman” Pierre jay to be the first Chairman of the New York Federal Reserve Bank. This marked the beginning of the erosion of US constitution and one of the root causes of the present descent into a soft dictatorship. Debit-based economy had arrived introducing the dollar as fiat currency. It would irrevocably change the face of society allowing the first step to a capitalism based on unregulated and immoral consumerism partnered with a steady erosion of normal human values.

After a clever campaign of propaganda the act was pushed through Congress when most were on vacation. Bribes and coercion did the rest. The Rothschilds purchased the controlling amounts of stock in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in 1914 whilst J.P. Morgan, Warburg and Kuhn, Loeb & Co set about appointing their agents to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the Federal Advisory Council. It was a mere formality that by the start of the War a handful of families all beholden to this powerful family would not only control the U.S. domestic banking system but the expansion of international banking and the ability to benefit from supporting both sides of those in war, whilst creating the bubbles leading to economic depressions that made those international and civil wars more probable.

1280px-Marriner_S._Eccles_Federal_Reserve_Board_Building

The Eccles Building in Washington, D.C., which serves as the Federal Reserve System’s headquarters. (wikipedia)

***

The Rothschilds’ headquarters for further financial warfare would operate out of the district in England known as “The City”, or the “Square Mile.” In fact, there are three cities that belong to no nation and pay no taxes. The first is the United States’ Washington’s district of Colombia which is not part of the city of Washington or the United States. The second is the inner city of London which is not part of London or England and finally, Vatican City, which is not part of Rome or Italy. These city states have their own independent flag and separate laws. The Vatican for example, has its own Swiss Guard and prison. The incredible wealth of the Vatican includes investments and gold bullion from the House of Rothschild’s banks in Britain, France and the Federal Reserve in United States, as well as from oil and weapons corporations.

London’s inner city (now renamed “City of London Corporation is a privately owned corporation or a city state created in 1694 when King William of Orange delivered the Bank of England into the control of bankers. By 1812 Nathan Rothschild was ideally placed to manipulate the English stock market and wrest control of the Bank of England later to become its head. It is no surprise that the corporation of London is the most important and richest financial centre in the world.

The Bank of England is still under Rothschilds’ control, Lloyds of London, the London Stock Exchange as well as the branch offices of 385 foreign banks including 70 US banking firms. Like Vatican City, it is not part of Greater London, England or the British Commonwealth. It has its own courts, laws and police force and pays no taxes. The Crown Corporation of London is essentially an International money cartel and does not symbolise the Royal family crest. The Crown signifies the private, corporate city state of London. The Lord Mayor and his 12 member councils act as representatives for the world’s richest and most powerful banking families with the Rothschilds at the top of the throne. Warburg, Oppenhiemer, Schiff and other Elite families run the Corporation of London which extends to the Crown colonies of Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The British Cabinet and the Prime Minister are merely figureheads for these banking families.

City_of_London_logo.svg

City of London logo based on City of London website logo

Although geographically separate, the city states of the Vatican, London and the District of Colombia are an unknown international union of economic, military, religio-occult power that keeps the world locked into a singular economic pathway. The private City state of the Crown Corporation of London is the economic hub; the City State of the District of Colombia is the military-corporate hub and Vatican City is the occult-spiritual centre that is rooted in the Roman law, otherwise known as Lex Fori which is entirely outside the US constitution and totalitarian in concept.

Many believe that the British Empire gradually declined and disappeared but this is not the case. It simply went underground, its pathology adapting and become stronger. The Charter of Virginia signed by King James I in 1606 allowed future Kings and Queens and their subjects to colonise America and have authority over all US citizens. Just after America declared its Independence from Britain a treaty signed in 1783 specifically identified the King of England as the Crown Prince of the United States of America. Even though America won the war of independence on the battle fields, on paper, it was quite a different story. Despite this victory, King George III continued receiving debt and reparation payments for his initial colonising of America. The US president was subservient to the King of England under the 13th amendment in the US constitution better known as the “Title of nobility amendment.” The United States – economically at least – is still a Crown colony.

The dominance of the British Military-intelligence apparatus would be further cemented hundreds of years later. Officially formed in 1940 the British World War II Special Operations Executive (SOE) was the organization by which U.S. sovereignty was ceded to England under secret agreement between F.D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill in 1938. This was partly from pressure from the Tavistock Institute psychologists who wanted to gather data from the civilian bombings raids initiated by the two leaders under the guise of crowd psychology experimentation. [9]

Dr. John Coleman a former British Intelligence officer wrote extensively on three world power groups which he loosely termed the Wicca-Masons allied to a form of Communism, Maltese-Jesuits and their Catholic belief system and a “Black-Nobility” all of whom work under the Bavarian “Illuminati” or a global occult body which uses this off-shoot as a convenient namesake. (See the Three Establishment Model) Families who are plugged into this hub of delusion earnestly believe they are fated to fulfil an ancient lineage of world domination because they have been given the occult fairy-tale of colourful emperors of the Holy Roman Empires consisting of 13-15 ‘blue blood’ families. These descendants include Rothschild; Kuhn; Loeb; Lehman; Rockefeller; Sach; Warburg; Oppenheimer, Lazard; Seaf; Goldman; Schiff; Morgan; Schroeder; Bush and Harriman, all of which conform to psychopathic principles in their actions on the world stage. [10]


“not even the Saudi royal family has a comparable share of the world’s resources in its possession today.Nor can even the richest businessmen in the world claim without qualification to be as rich in relative terms as Nathan Rothschild was when he died at the height of his fortune.”

Niall Ferguson, The House of Rothschild: Money’s Prophet


Nothing to see here…

The Rothschild’s influence has not waned in the 20th and 21st centuries. From financing the Duke of Wellington’s defeat of Napoleon at Waterloo to the financial aid to Prince Metternich of Prussia, the Rothschilds have had a hand in every major European seismic shift for the last 200 years. They were the first to build the European railway network, the first to comprehensively monopolise the stock markets, gold trade, and the manipulation of foreign nations into debt. As any great Empire builder obsessed with power and control the Rothschild family name has long been associated with philanthropy as a buffer to criticism and public exposure, which is why they are not listed in Forbes or any other fortune 500 hundred listing. Yet they remain – despite accusations that there fortune has dwindled – possibly the richest family dynasties in the world.

Baron Edmund de Rothschild until his death in 1997 focused on ‘debt for equity’ schemes “… whereby Third World countries gave up ‘environmentally sensitive’ land as a payment for debts.” Evelyn de Rothschild is the current chairman of N.M. Rothschild and is a member of the board of the Daily Telegraph, owned by the Hollinger Group.[11]In the United States, Rothschilds Inc. in New York worked through Kuhn, Loeb and Co with the aforementioned financial leverage operating through the Morgan Empire via London and the Peabody and Co. “Control passed to J.S. Morgan’s son, John Pierpont Morgan, and the company acquired its present name of J.P. Morgan. The Morgan Empire now includes General Electric and all its subsidiaries, Morgan Guaranty Trust, National Bank of Commerce…” [12] The German Warburg banking family who were instrumental in setting up the credit and debt system of world banking and the US Federal Reserve are also strongly connected to the House of Rothschild. Their influence today extends to Bank of England, Bank of France, the U.S. Federal Reserve, the IMF and possibly the World Bank.

In summary, their power to adjust the world’s monetary policy is unprecedented.

Quoting from one of the few quality investigations available from Frederick Morton’s biography The Rothschilds (1962) the vast wealth accumulation in the hands of the Rothschilds family is at almost unimaginable levels. If the wealth was estimated at over $6 billion by 1850 representing an almost supernatural and exponential rise in tangible assets and  compounding that wealth after different returns on investment at around 4 percent – 8 percent, imagine the estimated riches over 162 years later:

  • $1.9 trillion (@ 4 %)
  • $7.8 trillion (@ 5 %)
  • $31.5 trillion (@ 6 %)
  • $125,189.1 trillion (@ 7 %)
  • $491,409.0 trillion (@ 8 %)

When we consider that US debt ceiling is currently over $16 trillion (without including other liabilities) this gives a level of wealth that is difficult to visualise let alone spend. It suggests that perception management to ensure that the channels by which such wealth remains viable becomes a necessity rather than a choice. What has allowed the Rothschilds dynasty to endure has been its ability to exercise its power by proxy, building up (or destroying) and employing families, corporations and international organisations that extract wealth that must by default, run through its hands. J.P Morgan, The Rockefellers, Warburgs and others have taken on the imagery at one time of another that they are the true movers and shakers when in fact camouflaged behind it all are the Rothschilds. And with this kind of wealth projection, you can see why.

Records from the National Archives have shown that J.P Morgan, Wachovia Bank, Yale University, Brown University, The Royal Bank of Scotland and James William Freshfield, founder of Freshfields, the top City law firm, all benefited financially from slavery, showing just how pervasive the practice was under the British Empire of the 18th and 19th Centuries. The Rothschilds claimed innocence and even cultivated the myth that they campaigned against slavery, yet in a 2009 report published in the Financial Times it was revealed how Nathan Mayer Rothschild made personal gains by using slaves as collateral in banking dealings with a slave owner. With such an unprecedented rise in financial power pre and post Industrial Revolution it is absurd to think that the Rothschilds were not involved in every possible avenue for making money as quickly and therefore as ruthlessly as possible.

A Rothschild spokesman said: “… against this background, these allegations appear inconsistent and misrepresent the ethos of the man and his business”. [13] Inconsistent they maybe, misrepresenting the facts they do not. What it does show is a fairly normal example of how banking and corporate families play the philanthropic card in order to act as a cover for the funding and promotion of weapons, slavery, smuggling and wars. It may have been a part of the fabric of the emerging industrialisation and corporate class but to say these institutions have changed is to say that the nature of the Wolf has transformed into Little Bo Beep – it can’t be done, but it can adapt to a new awareness in order to keep its empire safe.

In 2012, two pathocratic dynasties joined forces to exact a text book example of the consolidation of power. Lord Jacob Rothschild’s listed investment trust and Rockefeller Financial Services finally tied the knot. A Financial Times report read: “The partnership with RIT will focus on setting up investment funds, eyeing joint acquisitions of wealth and asset managers and granting each other non-executive directorships.” [14] The report is abject nonsense, since the Financial Times has ever been the arm of the oligarchy on economic matters large and small. The fact of the matter is the Rockefellers have been at the beck and call of the Rothschilds since they were in dynastic diapers. As such, a consolidation is merely an official rendering of what has been taking place for many, many decades.

Finally, from their website we read in dewy-eyed pride for over 200 years of financial warfare and debt slavery which has brought the world to its knees:

“As brokers and financiers, as bankers to royal houses and governments, as railway magnates, politicians, personalities, patrons and philantropists, the Rothschilds have never forgotten how to “walk with Kings – nor lost the common touch”.

erothschild

LCF Rothschild Group, Established By Edmond de Rothschild and run by his son, Benjamin. www.edmond-de-rothschild.co.uk/

Clearly, with such a “common touch” from the Kings of Judah, we can take comfort in the above and conclude that the world has been safe in their hands rather than brought to extinction with unbridled greed.

 


Notes

[1] op. cit. Dreyfuss (p.113)
[2] Benjamin Disraeli in the House of Commons, July 14, 1856; quoted in Nesta Webster’s Secret Societies and Subversive Movements (Preface).
[3] Dope Inc.By Konstandinos Kalimtgis, David Goldman and Jeffrey Steinberg Published by Executive Intelligence Review 1981.
[4] op.cit; Kalimtgis; Goldman; Steinberg (p.26)
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid.
[7] op.cit; Kalimtgis; Goldman; Steinberg (pp.27-29)
[8] From Werner Sombart, The Jews and Modern Capitalism stated that from 1820 on, it was the “Age of the Rothschild,” with “Only one power in Europe, and that is Rothschild.”
[9] ‘Tavistock: The Best Kept Secret in America’ By Dr. Byron T. Weeks, MD. July 31, 2001.
[10]  The Committee of 300 are supposedly descendants of this Venetian Black Nobility. Also known as The Olympians, it is said to be an international council which determines the political, economic, banking, media and the military policy for a global strategy of centralisation. Its origins are said to have started in 1727 from the ranks of those involved with the creation of the British East India Company and its hugely successful spread of British Empire imperialism. The committee is drawn from the Round Table Group, and oversees The Club of Rome, Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Group (all of whom we’ll look at presently).
Dr. John Coleman, a former MI6 British Intelligence agent, has written ten books focusing on or related to the Committee of 300, his most popular granddaddy of conspiracy theory being Conspirators Hierarchy: The Story of the Committee of 300 from which some of the above information was taken. His research is allegedly sourced from direct encounters with the group from his work in intelligence. Coleman describes the Committee in these terms:
“The Committee of 300 is the ultimate secret society made up of an untouchable ruling class, which includes the Queen of England, the Queen of the Netherlands, the Queen of Denmark and the royal families of Europe. These aristocrats decided at the death of Queen Victoria, the matriarch of the Venetian Black Guelphs that, in order to gain world-wide control, it would be necessary for its aristocratic members to ‘go into business’ with the non-aristocratic but extremely powerful leaders of corporate business on a global scale, and so the doors to ultimate power were opened to what the Queen of England likes to refer to as ‘the commoners.’”
This will be on account of one of the Queen’s illustrious ancestors being none other than Vlad the Impaler. Vlad the Impaler: How is Prince Charles, Queen Elizabeth related to him?’ CBS News, October 28, 2011.]  (Instead of impaling “the commoners” on stakes, she has carried on the tradition in purely economic terms).  [ op. cit. Quigley (p.61)] According to Coleman, the number “300” was derived from the 1909 article ‘Geschäftlicher Nachwuchs’ by Walter Rathenau of General Electric. Professor Carroll Quigley also mentions Rathenau as an influential member of the banking elite: “… a relatively small number of bankers were in positions of immense influence in European and American economic life. As early as 1909, Walter Rathenau said: “Three hundred men, all of whom know one another, direct the economic destiny of Europe and choose their successors from among themselves.” He was in a position to know since he had inherited from his father control of the German General Electric Company and held scores of directorships himself.
Other families who claim to be descendants of this nobility include the Giustiniani family who trace their lineage to the Emperor Justianian; Sir Jocelyn Hambro of Hambros (Merchant) Bank; Pierpaolo Luzzatti Fequiz, whose lineage dates back 600 years to the Luzzatos of Venice and Umberto Ortolani of the ancient Black Nobility family of the same name. The Doria family, the financiers of the Spanish Hapsburgs; Elie de Rothschild of the French Rothschild family; the late Baron August von Finck; Franco Orsini Bonacassi (who trace their lineage to an ancient Roman senator of the same name) and the Alba family whose lineage goes back to the Duke of Alba and Baron Pierre Lambert, a cousin of the Belgian Rothschild family.
Knowledge of the Committee is from Dr. John Coleman, and ex-MI6 intelligence officer. There are three reasons why this should be treated with caution: 1) He is the sole source. 2) He has a background in intelligence which is in the business of deception and perception management 3) the existence of the Committee of 300 cannot be verified nor can much of the history that is circumstantially compelling. What is worse is that for such an influential book there is are no footnotes or bibliography. Their lies the problem with the nature of our conspiratorial world. That is not to say that there is not much truth within Dr. Coleman’s books on the Committee but it is improbable that such knowledge would be given out if above a certain level of accuracy that could interfere with its working methods. Persons have been disposed of for much less. So, it is likely that it is supplies cover for an organization that does exist but must remain secret not so much due to the nature of its objectives which are probably quite similar to the Committee of 300 hypotheses, but from where those objectives derive. Nonetheless, in conjunction with other sources it can prove a useful yardstick for measurement.
[11] ‘The Rothschilds, LBMA, and Gold’ by Gold Eagle Digest http://www.goldeagle.com
[12] Ibid.
[13] ‘Rothschild and Freshfields founders linked to slavery’ By Carola Hoyos, The Financial Times 26 June 2009.
[14] ‘Rockefellers and Rothschilds unite’By Daniel Schäfer, The Financial Times, May 2012.

The Z Factor XIV: ZIONISM Rules

By M.K. Styllinski

“Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist … There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.”

Moshe Dayan, address to the Technion, Haifa, reported in Haaretz, April 4, 1969.

***

“It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonialization or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands.”

Yoram Bar Porath, Yediot Aahronot, of 14 July 1972.


Zionists and apologists for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians believe that Arabs have no rights on the land before it was stamped “Israel” and that there was no indigenous Arab population there in the first place. This may serve to buffer crimes against Palestinians and the continuing spread of illegal Jewish settlements but it has no place in objective fact.

According to the latest in cultural, anthropological and genetic research the Palestinian people are: “the modern descendants of people who have lived in Palestine over the centuries and today are largely culturally and linguistically Arab.” The evidence further shows that: “Genetic analysis suggests that a majority of the Muslims of Palestine, inclusive of the Arab citizens of Israel, are descendants of Christians, Jews and other inhabitants of the southern Levant whose core reaches back to prehistoric times.” And where: “a study of high-resolution haplotypes [DNA sequences] demonstrated that a substantial portion of Y chromosomes of Israeli Jews (70 per cent) and of Palestinian Muslim Arabs (82 per cent) belong to the same chromosome pool.” [1]

The outrageous irony in the face of all this carnage is that Palestinians and Jews are drawn from the same genes – they have the same Semitic origins. The ancestors of modern-day Palestinians have been present in Palestine for thousands of years. The idea that Palestinians migrated there in the last couple of centuries is a persistent myth which has been comprehensively debunked by many academics who haven’t been intimidated by Zionist threats . The evidence also suggests that many of the most vociferous Zionists may not be from what we perceive as traditional Jewish origins at all, but descended from the Khazars but that’s for another post.

Perhaps the most convincing is Norman Finkelstein’s Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict (1995) which presents and open-and-shut case of the true history of Israeli-Palestinian origins and conflict and why these myths seem so intractable. [2] (His latest book: Old Wine, Broken Bottle addresses the toxic influences of Zionism and is a valuable companion). In truth, regardless of historical fictions, it should be obvious to anyone that what happened over two thousand years ago takes on less relevance when ethnic cleansing, dispossession, human rights abuses and an apartheid environment for modern Palestinians is any way to behave, most especially given Jewish history?

palestine-israel© infrakshun

We have taken a very brief look at the myths and propaganda that underpin the Zionist cause. While personally, I certainly have a problem with organised religion as a whole – including Judaism – it is important to reiterate that many Ultra-Orthodox and non-practicing Jews alike do not support Zionism. There are many forms of Zionism including Revisionist, General, Religious, Labour, and Green. The form of Zionism referred to on this blog includes religious and revisionist. It is these forms which are most closely tied to the intelligence apparatus, messianic cults and the Anglo-American establishment and therefore of most interest.

The overriding and common theme of all strains of Zionism is a claim to the land of Israel as a national, self-determined homeland for Jewish people based on the interpretation of religious tradition. These interpretations were riddled with historical inaccuracies at their inception both intentional and belief-based, along with empire-driven, fallacious arguments to justify the expulsion of Palestinians. The result is the Arab-Israeli conflict and the geo-political strategies that have intermingled with Jewish determinism ever since.

There is also the question of Israel as a democracy, which given its record of human rights and religious intolerance falls very short of being the only democratic country in the Middle East. Zionists like to sabre-rattle the importance of maintaining their security against Arab nations while sowing enormous seeds of destabilisation in the world. Israel does not confirm or deny obtaining nuclear weapons but is widely believed to possess them (Ask Israeli whistleblower Mordechi Vanunu [3]

It also harbours chemical and biological weapons which, as we will see, have been routinely used against Palestinian and Arabic peoples despite the international ban on their usage. This is all packaged within the buffer-zone of righteous indignation and moral certitude of Holocaust victimhood. Accusations of anti-Semitism allow Zionists to justify and enforce an apartheid state and the continuance of Palestinian oppression. But we must go back in time a little further to remind ourselves exactly why Zionism is such an important and influential tool of political ponerology in the 21st century.

The aim of the early 19th century Zionist movements was to colonise Palestine hand in hand with the imperial and corporate interests of the German, American, French, Russian interests. The British and Ottoman empires were perhaps the most important parties vying for control. But Revisionist Zionism was growing teeth by returning to Old Testament values and Leninist strategies to make it all happen. After ALL, emancipation meant integration and assimilation which could never be allowed under the old Mosaic Law of separatism.

With the Amaleks in mind, the objectives behind Zionism saw nothing less than the tools of ethnic cleansing and gradual genocide to achieve their aims. Even the Labour branch of Zionism with its “socialist” tint to invasion sought out: “… every tree and every bush to be planted by Jewish ’pioneers’ ” and “… to hire Jews and only Jews” thus helping to break the spirit and the long disenfranchisement and disconnection of Palestine to their land. [4]

Socialism became inverted as it rooted out undesirable workers. Haifa, Gaza, Jaffa, Nablus, Acre, Jericho, Ramle, Hebron, Jerusalem, and Nazareth were successful towns integrating Jews into a culturally diverse society. Foundation builders of modern Zionism such as the Hovevei, or Hibbat Zion (“Those who are Lovers of Zion”) had already established 20 new Jewish settlements in Palestine between 1870 and 1897. By the late 19th century tolerance turned to fear and resistance to both the Feudalist Ottoman Empire, Turkish dominance and the encroaching colonisation of Jewish settlers. By 1905 the World Zionist Congress had formerly acknowledged this resistance to Zionist designs.

herzl

“Spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment… Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly.” – Theodore Herzl, founder of the World Zionist Organization, speaking of the Arabs of Palestine,Complete Diaries, June 12, 1895 entry.

By the time the first Congress was held in Vienna, 1897, the rich Talmudic communities of Zionists in Russia ensured Dr. Theodore Herzl had embarked on a PR exercise that would span the globe bringing Zionism to fruition as an organized political force. By this time the Kabbalah was already doing its work by offering up a mysticism that appealed to the fizzling romantic aspirations of the British Establishment and glitterati. No better indication of the nature of this political movement would be understood than from a passage in Herzl’s diaries: “It is essential that the sufferings of Jews become worse, this will assist in realization of our plans. I have an excellent idea. I shall induce anti-Semites to liquidate Jewish wealth. The anti-Semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-Semites shall be our best friends.” [5]

Herzl was used and summarily cast aside after suggesting Jewish emancipation for those in Russia.

Although the source of eventual support, there was initially strong resistance to revisionist Zionism in England where many rank and file Jews had no interest in moving from their respective homes. In 1915, as World War I progressed Jews came down firmly against the Zionist cause seeing it for what it was: an “enemy movement that did not have the vast majority of Jews’ best interests at heart:

“… the Anglo-Jewish Association, through its Conjoint Committee, declared that ‘the Zionists do not consider civil and political emancipation as a sufficiently important factor for victory over the persecution and oppression of Jews and think that such a victory can only be achieved by establishing a legally secured home for the Jewish people. The Conjoint Committee considers as dangerous and provoking anti-Semitism the ‘national’ postulate of the Zionists, as well as special privileges for Jews in Palestine. The Committee could not discuss the question of a British Protectorate with an international organization which included different, even enemy elements.’ ” [6]

By 1917, Zionists had cut a deal with German imperialist interests in the region which fit perfectly with the game-changing 1917 Balfour Declaration form the British who were rubbing their hands with glee. There is no question that Britain wanted the gateway into the Ottoman Empire and Africa which Israel could provide. Of equal importance was the part played by American and English Religious movement of millennialism or dispensationalists who saw the creation of Israel as integral to the manifestation of Biblical prophecy.

Author Gershom Gorenberg writes:

“On November 2, 1917, two days after General Edmund Allenby’s Egyptian Expeditionary Force took Beersheba from the Ottoman Turks and prepared to march north toward Jerusalem, the British government announced an entirely different rationale for the campaign: Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour sent a letter to British Zionist leader Lord Rothschild, informing him that the cabinet had approved “a declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations: His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people…

Five weeks later, Allenby’s army took Jerusalem. For two days after the actual conquest, the general’s arrival was meticulously planned. … Christian armies were returning to the city for the first time since the Crusades. Allenby arrived at Jaffa Gate riding a white horse, with the pomp of a king. Then, before he entered the Old City, he dismounted and walked. A standard account of the general’s reason: His Savior had entered this city on foot, and so would he. [7]

A pomp and ceremony fusion of freemasonry and “End Times” fervour was fizzing away amid the imperialist desires. Or as Gorenberg observed: “Conquering Jerusalem had to not only be considered strategically, it had to be accomplished ‘according to prophecy.’ ” Which is why the Jewish people and Zionists have much to be suspicious about when it comes to so called Christian Zionists presently involved in smoothing the path to the promised land. Though many English politicians and strategists were not caught up in Christian Dominionism enough passengers were aboard this particular juggernaut of mutual interest who cared little about the occasional jostle in beliefs. There was money to be made whether or not souls were destined to be damned or saved.

A future president of the World Zionist Organisation had this comment to make regarding British involvement: “We can reasonably say that should Palestine fall within the British sphere of influence, and should Britain encourage Jewish settlement there, as a British dependency, we could have in twenty to thirty years a million Jews out there, perhaps more; they would develop the country, bring back civilization to it and form a very effective guard for the Suez Canal.” [8] British and US and banking interests aligned against Germany as well the aforementioned seeding of occult-romanticism harboured by the Establishment ensured that Arthur Balfour delivered a blueprint for Arab exclusion. Despite platitudes and placatory noises sent forth to shocked Arab nations, Balfour’s true sentiments were summed up in the following missive: “Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad is rooted in present needs, in future hopes of far profounder import than the desires of the 700,000-plus Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land.” [9]

This has been the raison d’être for British foreign policy ever since.

800px-Balfour_portrait_and_declarationArthur Balfour’s letter to Lord Rothschild


In the 1920s, Zionism grew into its more militantly “Mosaic” expression with Vladimir Jabotinsky as leader and founder of the revisionist branch. As a thuggish spellbinder his oratory and unyielding declaration of an “Iron Wall” created a new directive to wrest Palestine from its Arab owners “by force or not at all.” [10]Inspired by Benito Mussolini, Jabotinsky’s vision appropriated the Nazi symbolism of steel and iron to forge an aggressive and pro-active form of Zionism which appealed to the more pugnacious and brutal proponents of the movement from Likud to the present-day Zio-Conservatives. Jabotinsky brought forth the undercurrents of Jewish fascism and its obsession with racial purity to stir the blood of the new invaders where he claimed:

Zev_Vladimir_Jabotinsky_uniform“The source of national feeling … lies in a man’s blood …in his racio-physico type and in that alone. … A man’s spiritual outlook is primarily determined by his physical structure. For that reason we do not believe in spiritual assimilation. It is inconceivable, from the physical point of view, that a Jew born to a family of pure Jewish blood can become adapted to the spiritual outlook of a German or a Frenchman. He may be wholly imbued with that German fluid, but the nucleus of his spiritual structure will always remain Jewish.” [11]

True to the tried and tested British Empire policy of breaking nations that continues to this day, the economic destabilisation of the indigenous Palestinian economy began in earnest, where Jewish investment and capital took precedence, effectively handing over the economic infrastructure to Jewish settlers. The settler community needed not only to displace and remove Palestinians but to extinguish their existence from Greater Israel and indeed from any map at all and the British helped them do it.

A serious uprising by indigenous Palestinians lasted from 1936 – 1939 with brutal attempts by the British military to quell it. Mass demolitions of homes ensued with the inevitable shadow of martial law following in its wake. Zionism in fact, sought to eradicate the farming, artisan and town communities of Palestinians and forcibly replace it with an entirely new workforce composed of the settler population. It was to be an ethnic cleansing based on Old Testament/Torah teachings. And true to form, much propaganda began to re-write history in favour of Jewish pre-eminence with Revisionist Zionism acting as the crusading sword.

By 1938, many thousands of Palestinians were assassinated, imprisoned, almost 150 executed and thousands of homes demolished and burned. Haganah was the name given to Zionist forces integrated with British intelligence and Jabotinsky’s National Military Organization or the Irgun. This pseudo-police force effectively acted as a mercenary unit in the pay of British interests, much like the private security firms trained by the CIA, MOSSAD and MI6 in what is now left of Iraq. [12]

After the United Nations partition of Palestine in 1947 and by the end of the Arab-Israeli war of the following year, the first Prime Minister of Israel David Ben-Gurion showed the impetus behind the creation of the State and ambitions of Zionists as he addressed his General Staff prior to the last offensive:  “Our aim is to smash Lebanon, Trans-Jordan, and Syria. The weak point is Lebanon, for the Moslem regime is artificial and easy for us to undermine. We shall establish a Christian state there, and then we will smash the Arab Legion, eliminate Trans-Jordan; Syria will fall to us. We then bomb and move on and take Port Said, Alexandria and Sinai.” [13]

This was merely a military realisation of his aspirations expressed on a number of occasions to the Zionist faithful, one of which was voiced back in 1938 where he told the World Council of Poale Zion in Tel Aviv: “The boundaries of Zionist aspiration include southern Lebanon, southern Syria, today’s Jordan, all of Cis-Jordan [West Bank] and the Sinai.” [14]

Zionists have been using governments to slice up Palestine and the world ever since.


 “… it has become an open secret in our world today that there is a 300 pound gorilla in the room—the role of the Organized Jewish Community—generally, though not always correctly, known as “the Zionist movement”—that is a preeminent power in our modern society, not only in the United States but in most of the West and elsewhere across the planet.”

– Michael Collins Piper


The Yesha Rabbinical Counsel made an announcement in response to an IDF attack in Kfar Qanna, Lebanon, in 2006: “according to Jewish law, during a time of battle and war, there is no such thing as ‘innocence’ among the enemy.” [15]

Such cold hatred is nothing new.

In 1947, when the United Nations partitioned Palestine, and May 15, 1948, when the State was formally proclaimed, the Zionist army and militia had seized 75 per cent of Palestine, forcing 780,000 Palestinians out of the country. By the time the Israeli-Arab war of 48’ had finished, several notorious massacres had reached international attention though they were not the only ones. The Zionist terror groups in the shape of IZL, the Irgun and the Lehi or Lohamei Herut (otherwise known as the Stern Gang) descended on the village of Deir Yassin on April 9, 1948, murdering over 100 men, women and children. [16]

Labour Zionist Israeli army and Israel Defence Forces or ZAHAL carried out a massacre at Dueima in the same year, an account of which by a soldier and participant in the atrocity was published in Davar, the official Hebrew daily newspaper:

… They killed between eighty to one hundred Arab men, women and children. To kill the children they [soldiers] fractured their heads with sticks. There was not one home without corpses. The men and women of the villages were pushed into houses without food or water. Then the saboteurs came to dynamite them.

One commander ordered a soldier to bring two women into a building he was about to blow up … Another soldier prided himself upon having raped an Arab woman before shooting her to death. Another Arab woman with her newborn baby was made to clean the place for a couple of days, and then they shot her and the baby. Educated and well-mannered commanders who were considered “good guys” … became base murderers, and this not in the storm of battle, but as a method of expulsion and extermination. The fewer the Arabs who remain, the better. [17]

In the 1950s massacres were part of the program of total expulsion and eradication of Palestinians from their land and continued in isolated pockets and larger scale attacks throughout the refugee camps and villages of Gaza. Once such massacre was carried out at the village of Kibya in October 1953 where once again, men women and children were murdered this time under the command of Ariel Sharon. The massacre at Kafr Qasim followed the same pattern in October 1956. There were even massacres that were lauded as especially valuable in strategic terms becoming part of the Israeli folklore of ethnic cleansing: “I have always said that if the deepest and profoundest hope symbolizing redemption is the rebuilding of the [Jewish] Temple … then it is obvious that those mosques [al-Haram al-Sharif and al-Aqsa] will have, one way or another, to disappear one of these days … Had it not been for Deir Yassin, half a million Arabs would be living in the state of Israel [in 1948]. The state of Israel would not have existed.” [18]

Deir-YasinDeir Yassin massacre April 9th 1948

In the 1960s the true agenda was beginning to reach the press. David Ben Gurion’s special adviser on Arab Affairs expressed his desire to: “… reduce the Arab population to a community of woodcutters and waiters, [19] and by the 1970s, when an Israeli government memorandum entitled “The Koenig report” was leaked by Israeli newspaper Al-Hamishmar it laid bare the policy of systemic expulsion of Palestinian people though somewhat euphemistically expressed. Regarding the Palestinian minority the only thing needed was the: “…objective thought that ensures the long-term Jewish national interests”… while stressing the examination of “… the possibility of diluting existing Arab population concentrations.” [20]

Indeed, the same Zionist policies and principles have expanded and developed under Jewish fundamentalism and extremist cults presently focused within the United States government. It is worth repeating the fact that many of the original Zionist settlers did not agree with this policy of expulsion and were not adverse to the idea of living with their Palestinian neighbours. It is this principle of Judaism that is also rising up to resist pathological takeover of those who have right human relations at heart, regardless of their religious or ideological affiliations. It is here that the hope for Israeli-Arab destiny lies. [21] 

In the 1980s on the American television show 60 Minutes, Mike Wallace interviewed the late Meir Kahane, the controversial Brooklyn rabbi and Israeli Knesset member. This Rabbi was an advocate for the expulsion of all Arabs from all of Palestine which included “Israeli Arabs” and Arabs living in the occupied territories:

Wallace : “You proposed a law for the Knesset to pass against Arabs that’s really astonishingly identical to the Nuremberg laws of the Nazis under Adolf Hitler.”

Kahane: “Mr. Wallace, one of the problems of Jews is that they wouldn’t know a Jewish concept if they tripped over one. I merely quoted from the Talmud. Most Jews think Judaism is Thomas Jefferson. It’s not.” [22]

And Kahane is correct. There are those Jewish men and women who call themselves Zionist yet appear to know nothing of its history and its true nature. Rather, they prefer to see Arabs as the cause of all their ills past and present thus rationalising and condoning the atrocious conditions that Palestinians live under every day of their lives. A lost generation of children suffering deprivation, abuse and poverty is the result of this acquiescence and support of oppression. Only further embitterment and anger can result.

A major player in the economic and ideological expansion of Zionism was Wall Street Banking cartels overseen by the Rothschilds dynasty. By the late 19th century, “almost two hundred Rothschild refineries were at work in Baku,” Russia’s oil rich region making the Rothschilds the richest family in the world, their five international banking houses comprising “one of the first multinational corporations.” [23]Indeed, as author Herbert Loffman mentions in Return of the Rothschilds, they: “… had long been involved in developing Czarist Russia’s nascent industry and banking system, while that country’s growing network of railroads was largely financed by Rothschild-managed loans.” [24]

With the monopoly on oil supply to Europe and the Far East established there was only one problem: another transportation route was needed in order to cope with the volume and the demand for oil. The Suez Canal proved more than economically viable and made Palestine vital to the Rothschilds and their corporate expansionism. Having enormous power in International banking and principle shareholders in most of the important banks of the time, it was easy to buy shares in the Suez Canal Company.

Edmond James de Rothschild began to push for a Jewish homeland in Palestine for two reasons:

edmond-james-de-rothschild

Edmond James de Rothschild

1) to take the heat of the growing socialist dispensation in reaction to the Czar Nicholas II, who had instituted anti-Semitic pogroms against Jews, prompting a huge emigration of Jews Russia into Western Europe. The Rothschild’s oil interests were threatened by Russian Jewish émigrés’ strikes and disruptions to Russian business and thus Rothschilds’ profits. By channelling the political passion towards emigration to the new homeland this acted to release the pressure on their business interests until such time it would be safe to openly resume activate corporate ties in Russia.

2) His enthusiastic push to promote and fund the new Jewish State served to kill two birds with one stone: a new economic venture and leverage for the dynasty and offering further clout and manoeuvrability for short and long-term British interests.

It was preceding the war that a group of prominent Zionists wrote a letter to Hitler detailing their belief that there was no need for any disagreements between the Zionist-revisionists and the Nazis. After all, they only wished to be left alone to set up a “nationalist and totalitarian state” for the Jewish people, in the same way Hitler was busy creating the same for the German people. [25]

Why would the 1933 World Zionist Organization Congress defeat a resolution calling for action against Hitler by a vote of 240 to 43? In fact, the principle distributor of goods to the Nazi regime was the World Zionist Organization throughout the Middle East and Northern Europe. With the help of Wall Street finance, Ha’avara Bank was established in Palestine in order to cater for the wealthy elite of industrialists in Germany, Britain and the US. An indication of this ideological and business relationship between Nazis and Zionists was never more apparent than when Baron Von Mildenstein of the S.S. Security Service was invited to Palestine for a six-month visit:

This visit led to a twelve-part report by Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda, in Der Angriff (The Assault) in 1934 praising Zionism. Goebbels ordered a medallion struck with the Swastika on one side, and on the other, the Zionist Star of David. In May 1935, Reinhardt Heydrich, the chief of the S.S. Security Service, wrote an article in which he separated Jews into ‘two categories.’ The Jews he favored were the Zionists: ‘Our good wishes together with our official good will go with them.’ In 1937, the Labor ‘socialist’ Zionist militia, the Haganah (founded by Jabotinsky) sent an agent (Feivel Polkes) to Berlin offering to spy for the S.S. Security Service in exchange for the release of Jewish wealth for Zionist colonization. Adolf Eichmann was invited to Palestine as the guest of the Haganah. [26]

Wall Street paved the way for Hitler by heavily investing in the Germany economy, building up a cartel system as part of an overall long term strategy for international banking control. Germany was key stage in this process and allowed the crucial directives of The Dawes Plan and The Young Plan to be implemented. Author Anthony C. Sutton describes the background deals which took place:

The Treaty of Versailles after World War I imposed a heavy reparations burden on defeated Germany. This financial burden — a real cause of the German discontent that led to acceptance of Hitlerism — was utilized by the international bankers for their own benefit. The opportunity to float profitable loans for German cartels in the United States was presented by the Dawes Plan and later the Young Plan. Both plans were engineered by these central bankers, who manned the committees for their own pecuniary advantages, and although technically the committees were not appointed by the U.S. Government, the plans were in fact approved and sponsored by the Government. [27]

The German cartel system proved vital in manipulating politicians and their idea of economics whilst allowing Hitler and the Nazis to gain power:

“American financiers were directly represented on the boards of two of these three German cartels. This American assistance to German cartels has been described by James Martin as follows: ‘These loans for reconstruction became a vehicle for arrangements that did more to promote World War II than to establish peace after World War I.’”  [28]

Zionism had an extraordinary influence on geo-politics during this tumultuous period. Jewish thought and Zionist lobbying exerted pressure not just on governments but through the media and social networking of the day. Indeed, as noted psychology professor at the California State University Kevin Macdonald mentions in his 2001 book: Culture of Critique:

During World War II they engaged in “loud diplomacy”…organizing thousands of rallies, dinners with celebrity speakers (including prominent roles for sympathetic non-Jews), letter campaigns, meetings, lobbying, threats to newspapers for publishing unfavorable items, insertion of propaganda as news items in newspapers, giving money to politicians and non-Jewish celebrities like Will Rogers in return for their support. By 1944, “thousands of non-Jewish associations would pass pro-Zionist resolutions” … In 1944 both Republican and Democratic platforms included strong pro-Zionist planks even though the creation of a Jewish state was strongly opposed by the Departments of State and War. […]

Jews not only had a prominent position in the U.S. media, they had seized the intellectual and moral high ground via their control of the intellectual and political movements… Not only were Jewish interests beyond the bounds of civilized political discussion, assertions of European ethnic interest became impermissible as well. Such assertions conflicted with the Boasian dogma that genetic differences between peoples were trivial and irrelevant; they conflicted with the Marxist belief in the equality of all peoples and the Marxist belief that nationalism and assertions of ethnic interests were reactionary; such assertions were deemed a sure sign of psychopathology within the frameworks of psychoanalysis and the Frankfurt School;and they would soon be regarded as the babblings of country bumpkins by the New York Intellectuals and by the Neo-Conservatives who spouted variants of all of these ideologies from the most prestigious academic and media institutions in the society. [29] [Emphasis mine]

MacDonald emphasises there are obviously other forces that “relegated the nativist mind-set to the political and intellectual fringe…” as well as the “… liberal Protestantism and the rise of the managerial state, but it is impossible to understand the effectiveness of either of these influences in the absence of the Jewish movements …” [30] Moreover, how ironic and revealing – especially from the bastions of psychoanalysis – that psychopathy should be used as a bludgeoning tool against those that question ethnic preeminence and political control which has produced innumerable instances of psychologically compromised individuals at the fulcrum of many Zionist-inspired operations.

PAL_palestine_land_theft_2_jpg

Palestinian Loss of Land 1946-2008 / Source: “The Maps Tell the True Story” from What Really Happened


The very nature of ethnic diversity means that there are necessarily differences which shouldn’t automatically present a problem. However, MacDonald reiterates the contention that the presence of a comprehensive Jewish ethnocentricity in intellectual and political life has ensured the rise of a “de-ethnicized non-Jewish elite … “… interwoven with a critical mass of ethnically conscious Jews and other ethnic minorities … unique to European and European derived societies.” [31]This activism has concentrated primarily on the social sciences and humanities, politics with a policy focus on immigration and ethnic and mass media. To that end, a paradox is seen in that while advocating separatism and superiority of the Jewish race, certain Jewish intellectual groupings of power established by Zionism within America sought to limit the Social Darwinism of the Anglo-American mind-set and promote the idea of the United States: “… as a set of abstract principles rather than an ethnocultural civilization.” He states further: “At the level of politics, Jewish organizations spearheaded the drive to open up immigration to all of the peoples of the world. Jewish organizations also played a key role in furthering the interests of other racial and ethnic minorities, and they led the legal and legislative effort to remove Christianity from public places.” [32]

But there were other reasons for this move, or it devolved into something entirely different under the general ponerogenesis of American culture. Either way, the Establishment was on the move and the domination of East coast Elite, European fascism and the emerging American Zionists were moving forward in their respective fields but largely aligned to the dream of a “New World Order” which had a distinctly homogenous undertow to its principles; a hybrid blend of collectivist and capitalist perceptions that advocate One World, One religion, a global army and global governance underpinned by a global financial architecture.

In point of fact, post-war history alone shows us that the rise of Jewish power has ensured that such principles hold sway to ensure a particularly Zionist flavour to this emerging Order, or, as MacDonald states:

“Since the 1960s a hostile, adversary elite has emerged to dominate intellectual and political debate. It is an elite that almost instinctively loathes the traditional institutions of European-American culture: its religion, its customs, its manners, and its sexual attitudes. […] This “hostile elite” is fundamentally a Jewish-dominated elite…. The emergence of this hostile elite is an aspect of ethnic competition between Jews and non-Jews and its effect will be a long-term decline in the hegemony of European peoples in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world.” [33]

And this hegemony is characterised by a particular cross fertilisation with Jewish Cultural Marxism and the Liberal Establishment programming of Fabian-led collectivism. The professor paints a vivid picture of Judeo-centric preoccupations as fertile ground for ponerisation. It is through inherent qualities missing from Judaism though present in European culture which he explains as “individualism, a lack of ethnocentrism, and concomitant moral universalism.” [34] The intellectual and political movements initiated by Jewish culture and Zionism thus exposed a weakness in the cultural and ethnic integrity of the West which allowed a minority to override it. This is not a problem for Jewish people as a whole when integrating into a new society in its pluralistic sense and without the dictates of Zionism to underpin it. Yet, sadly this is not the case.

To reiterate, MacDonald’s primary reasoning for this state of affairs derives from the idea that:

Europeans are relatively less ethnocentric than other peoples and relatively more prone to individualism as opposed to the ethnocentric collectivist social structures historically far more characteristic of other human groups, including—relevant to this discussion—Jewish groups. …The basic idea is that European groups are highly vulnerable to invasion by strongly collectivist, ethnocentric groups because individualists have less powerful defenses against such groups. The competitive advantage of cohesive, cooperating groups is obvious… This scenario implies that European peoples are more prone to individualism. […] Individualists form mild attachments to many groups, while collectivists have an intense attachment and identification to a few in groups …Individualists are therefore relatively ill-prepared for between-group competition so characteristic of the history of Judaism.

Historically Judaism has been far more ethnocentric and collectivist than typical Western societies…. I suggest that over the course of their recent evolution, Europeans were less subjected to between-group natural selection than Jews and other Middle Eastern populations. This perspective is consistent with ecological theory. [35]

So, from this monotheistic and separative background while turning European culture and values on their heads by claiming the opposite, this means that according to MacDonald: “America had entered into an era when it had become morally unacceptable to discuss Jewish interests at all. We are still in that era.” [36]

Whether criticising the undue influence of Zionism in national or international politics, pushing for US involvement in the Second World War, the creation of a Jewish State or the invasion of Iraq, Libya or Syria – the truth seldom matters when it comes to Zionist interests.

 


Notes

[1] p.221; Israel/Palestine By Alan Dowty, London, UK: Polity 2008 | ISBN 978-0-7456-4243-7. “Palestinians are the descendants of all the indigenous peoples who lived in Palestine over the centuries; since the seventh century, they have been predominantly Muslim in religion and almost completely Arab in language and culture.”
Moshe Gil,’the fact that at the time of the Arab conquest, the population of Palestine was mainly Christian, and that during the Crusaders’ conquest some four hundred years later, it was mainly Muslim. As neither the Byzantines nor the Muslims carried out any large-scale population resettlement projects, the Christians were the offspring of the Jewish and Samaritan farmers who converted to Christianity in the Byzantine period; while the Muslim fellaheen in Palestine in modern times are descendants of those Christians who were the descendants of Jews, and had turned to Islam before the Crusaders’ conquest.’ Moshe Gil, A History of Palestine, 634-1099 Cambridge University Press, 1983 pp.222-3.
[2] Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict By Norman Finkelstein. Published by 1995.
[3] See: ‘The Case of Mordechai Vannunu – Preeminent Hero of the Nuclear Age’ by Mark Gaffney. Counterpunch, January 21 2003: “In September 1986, Mordechai Vanunu was illegally abducted by agents of the Mossad for revealing to the world press information that confirmed the existence of Israel’s often-denied plutonium separation plant. The plant is buried eighty feet below ground in the Negev desert, and had long escaped detection. Since the 1960s it has been used to recover plutonium from spent fuel rods from the Dimona nuclear reactor, located nearby. The plant continues to be an integral part of Israel’s ongoing nuclear weapons program. Israel is believed to possess at least 200 nukes.
Then Prime Minister Shimon Peres ordered Vanunu’ s abduction to silence the whistleblower, and to bring him to trial for allegedly jeopardizing the securi ty of the state of Israel. But Vanunu’s real ‘crime’ was speaking the truth. And for that he was made to suffer a fate worse than death: eleven years and five months in solitary confinement. Isolation in a tiny cell is a well-known form of torture, and one that can cause deep emotional scars and mental impairment. During this period Vanunu was subjected to constant harassments and humiliations: an obvious attempt by the Mossad to ‘break’ his will, or drive him over the edge. Amnesty International described the conditions of his ordeal as “cruel, inhuman, and degrading.”
Yet, the prisoner held firm as a rock. Nor has Vanunu since wavered from the position of principle he articulated in the very beginning: that the only sane path is full disclosure and abolition of nuclear weapons. From his prison cell Mordechai wrote: “It is a dangerous illusion to believe they [nuclear weapons] can be defensive….Only peace between states can promise security.” / See also: ‘Israel’s Nuclear Programme’ BBC News, December 22, 2003: The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency recently urged Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and surrender its nuclear weapons in order to further peace in the Middle East.”
[4] History of Zionism By Walter Laqueur, London, 1972. “Later that year, he was jailed for 18 years after a trial for treason that was held in secret. Viewed as a traitor and a spy by most Israelis, Vanunu remains in prison to this day and has spent most of his sentence in solitary confinement. Israel’s former Prime Minister Shimon Peres, widely regarded as the architect of Israel’s nuclear weapons programme, testified at the trial that Vanunu had done serious damage to Israel’s security. Mr Peres subsequently said: ‘A certain amount of secrecy must be maintained in some fields. The suspicion and fog surrounding this question are constructive, because they strengthen our deterrent.’”
[5] Part I, pp. 16; The complete diaries of Theodor Herzl Volume 1 Published by Herzl Press and Thomas Yoseloff, 1960 – 1961. Raphael Patai (editor) Translated by Harry Zohn.
[6] p.267; The Controversy of Zion by Douglas Reed (1956) New edition published by Veritas Publishing Co Pty Ltd. 2004 | ISBN-10: 0958760225
[7] op. cit Gorenberg (p.84)
[8] Trial and Error: The Autobiography of Chaim Weizmann Published by Harpers, 1949. (p.149).
[9] p.96; The King Crane Commission: An American Inquiry in the Middle East by Harry N. Howard Kayhat, University of Michegan 1963 | Digitized August 2007.
[10] First published in Russian under the title O Zheleznoi Stene in Rassvyet, November 4, 1923. Published in English in Jewish Herald (South Africa), 26 November 1937. Transcribed & revised by Lenni Brenner.
[11] p.29; Jabotinsky’s Letter on Autonomy, 1904. Cited in Brenner, The Iron Wall.
[12] p.96; The 1936-1939 Revolt in Palestine by Ghassan Kanafani (New York, Committee for a Democratic Palestine). Published by Tricontinental Society., 1980.
[13] Ben-Gurion: A Biography by Michael Bar Zohar. Published by Weidenfeld and Nicolson 1978.
[14] David Ben Gurion, Report to the World Council of Poale Zion (the forerunner of the Labor Party), Tel Aviv, 1938. Cited by Israel Shahak, Journal of Palestine Studies, Spring 1981.
[15] The Palestinian Fascist leader Haj Hussein Al Ameini, the Grand Mufti visited Germany and was on friendly terms with Hitler. Thus we had the perfect seeds of a ponerogenesis that would see fascist leaders on both sides courting the principle destroyer. It would be this foundation of hatred that would propel the social fires burning. However, the power ratio was clearly with Zionst sympathisers and operatives working in Russia, America, England and Israel itself and which would gradually end up brutally suppressing a whole nation.
[16] The exact figure is not known but there is a consensus that it was not below 100. “On the evening of April 9th, the Irgun leader publicly exaggerated the death toll in order to terrorize Arabs in Palestine. This was near the end of the British Mandate as Arab-Jewish fighting escalated. The 254 figure is almost certainly an exaggeration, but not an Arab exaggeration.” – Deir Yasin remembered: deiryassin.org. Rather wholly peaceful civilians there was also armed resistance.
[17] Davar, June 9, 1979. Davar, the official Hebrew daily newspaper of the Labor-Zionist-run Histadrut General Federation of Workers.
[18] Cited in Israel: An Apartheid State, Zed Books, London 1987. By Peter Myers, November 22, 2000; update May 3, 2003.p.8.
[19] The Arabs in Israel by Sabri Jiryis, New York Monthly Review Press, 1976.
[20] The Koenig report – a confidential and internal Israeli government document authored in April 1976 by Yisrael Koenig, a member of the Alignment (then the ruling party), who served as the Northern District Commissioner of the Ministry of the Interior for 26 years.
[21] This small Jewish resistance movement to Zionism continues today. But one example is Israeli-born Gilad Atzmon, from his essay: “Not In My Name: An Analysis of Jewish Righteousness” sees Zionism as “… racist, it is nationalist, and it is Biblically inspired (rather than spiritually inspired). Being a fundamentalist movement, Zionism is not categorically different from Nazism. Only when we understand Zionism in its nationalist and racist context will we begin to comprehend the depth of its atrocities.” June 13, 2004. http://www.gilad.co.uk/
[22] 60 Minutes CBS Mike Wallace interviews Meir Kahane 1983.
[23] ‘Rabbinic Council Says Dead Lebanon Kids Not Innocent’ By Rev. Ted Pike, August 8, 2006.
[24] Zionism in the Age of the Dictators, A Reappraisal, By Lenni Brenner published by Lawrence Hill & Co.; Revised edition edition Dec 1983 | ISBN-10: 1556520778.
[25] pp 21-22; Aaronsohn’s Maps: The Untold Story of the Man who Might Have Created Peace in the Middle East By Patricia Goldstone, Published by Harcourt Trade, 2007 | ISBN-10: 0151011699
[26] p.81; Return of the Rothschilds: The Great Banking Dynasty Through Two Turbulent Centuries, Herbert R. Lottman I.B. Tauris, 1995 | ISBN-10: 1850439141
[27] p.23; Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler by Anthony J. Sutton, published by ’76 press California, 1976 / New edition by Clairview Press, 2010 | ISBN-10: 1905570279
[28] Ibid. (p.28)
[29] op.cit; MacDonald (pp.16-19)
[30] Ibid. (p.19)
[31] Ibid. (p.21)
[32] Ibid.
[33] Ibid. (p.22)
[34] Ibid.
[35] Ibid. (p.25)
[36] Ibid. (p.16)

The Z Factor I

By M.K. Styllinski

 “The nature and history of the Judaic assassin was known by our civilization’s greatest artists and poets and imparted through the classics of western literature. Today however, the myriad “classical Christian” advocates … who quack their support for western civilization and its canon, have about the same fidelity to it as Donald Duck.”

Michael A. Hoffman II


zfactor1One intelligence agency renowned for its ruthless self-serving agenda is the MOSSAD. Having successfully co-opted the globe with their pre-emptive operations across all political and social domains the extraordinary influence this Israeli intelligence agency has had in the present and preceding century regarding geopolitical strategies, cannot be overstated. It has been at the centre of most of the state sponsored terrorist acts and the ensuing conflicts that have arisen from them.

Israel’s reputation as a haven for sexual slavery and Russian-Zionist mafia influence is well-documented and would suggest that the MOSSAD is involved in human trafficking, narcotics and arms as means for financing their powerful leveraging of the geopolitical scene. The enormous power of Israeli lobbyists in the United States as well as their traditional role in media and entertainment provide a reliable source for the furtherance of underworld financing of ideological objectives. The assassination of Canadian arms inventor Gerald Bull in Brussels on March 22, 1990, is instructive on this point and revealed just how cemented all three activities seem to be.

Gerald Bull was an internationally known astrophysicist, arms dealer, genius of military hardware and the inventor of the notorious “Super Gun” under Project Babylon. Bull’s friends and associates included major players within the CIA and he was not above using these contacts to secure favours in order circumnavigate legal problems or easing the passage of arms sales, though clearly, this did not always work. (His long term business dealings with South Africa landed him in jail for smuggling despite the CIA’s attempts to have his sentence quashed).

Although many of Bull’s colleagues and business associates thought his links to the agency were exaggerated, his final end suggests that this was not the case. In fact, Bull had contacts with both former CIA directors William E. Colby and Stansfield Turner, the latter dating back to the late 1960s before he became head of the agency. Colby, Like Bull, died under mysterious circumstances in 1996 while on a solo canoe outing in Maryland. What is even more interesting is that his death followed closely on from his dealings with John Decamp the Nebraska senator who came to notoriety through his determination in raising awareness of the paedophile rings thorough successive administrations, up to and including the present. (See The Franklin Cover up).

It is not by coincidence that Bull was based in Brussels, long recognized as a hub of illicit arms deals. Bull’s deal with Iraq had been bankrolled by the Société Générale, the banking arm of the Société Générale de Belgique, a holding company of the Belgian Royal Family which owns 40 percent of the country’s industry. Being the backbone behind Belgium’s financial prosperity it is a corporation that has considerable leverage in global finance said to have been established by William of Orange back in 1822 with the task of financing Belgian industry.

Aside from the Belgian Royals, the Vatican has been a faithful shareholder along with the powerful business interests of the Rothschilds, Solvays, the Boels and the Janssens. [1]Prince Bernhard of Netherlands also had a slice of the pie, having his own substantial interest in the oil industry. With such dubious friends as Joseph H. Retinger, co-creator of the Bilderberg Group in Europe, the Elite membership was early on mired in petroleum interests and corporate colonialism.

The Belgian Royal family and the Solvay family appear to be the only major shareholders in SGB apart from cross holdings within the group, which inevitably led to a “self-perpetuating oligarchy” so favoured by the rising monolith of Russian mafia expansionism. [2]Furthermore, SGB exerts considerable control over the second major arms producer, Fabrique Nationale, which produces the Browning pistol under licence from the United States. The US and Israel have had a special relationship with Belgium using it as a major supplier and broker for weapons sales. In 1989, Bull was working for Belgium’s premier arms manufacturer Poudrieres Reunies de Belgique (PRB).

There were also significant business dealings with the late billionaire and leading arms dealer Shaul Eisenberg, who had brokered a sale in Gerald Bull’s Space Research Corporation for South Africa’s state owned arms manufacturing company, Armscor. Eisenberg happened to be a high level MOSSAD operative and a key figure in Israel’s nuclear development programs, though his primary role had been to secure Israeli interests in China dating back to the Cold War. Eisenberg, (whose Wikipedia entry is periodically re-written by Israeli propagandists) also “… controlled Israel Aircraft Industries and Zim Israel Navigation Shipping Company” according to intelligence journalist Wayne Madsen, and “… was able to provide needed nuclear weapons components from Operation Phoenix to China and two of its major allies, North Korea and Pakistan.” [3]

Shaul_Eisenberg

Shaul Eisenberg

His financial enabler and fellow agent was banker Tibor Rosenbaum, head of the Geneva based Banque du Credit international (BCI) [4] which during the late fifties and sixties was actively involved in laundering money from the criminal empire of Meyer Lansky. Like Rosenbaum, Lansky was a fierce Zionist. His financial contributions to the “cause” ensured his protection from the MOSSAD. Tibor Rosenbaum funded and supported Eisenberg giving the tycoon enormous financial leverage and covert influence over global business politics. [5] The corporations and companies owned by Eisenberg and now under his son Erwin’s control include: Iron Mt Recordkeeping, Iron Mtn mining, Rotron, Wackenhut, Israel Chemicals, Eisenberg Industries of Israel, Permindex, Legacy foundation of Nevada, Eisenberg Satellite and Telecom.

What should not be forgotten is MOSSAD’s well-known tactic of using front companies within the telecommunications industry for spying and blackmail. As we saw in a previous post, private security contractors in Iraq are used extensively by the US and make up a convenient resource for black operations. As Mark Shapiro, a spokesman for Wackenhut stated: “Security officers now outnumber law enforcement by three to one.” Wackenhut’s ease in collecting telephone records for its less than legal investigations from another Eisenberg owned corporation, AT&T, fuels speculation that this is a network of corporate businesses fused with Israeli intelligence interests, a mirror image of Eisenberg own dealings.

From the moment Donald Rumsfeld shook Saddam’s hand in 1983, delivering the promised chemical weapons shipments along with the CIA-led support for his regime, Gerald Bull was being groomed for chemical weaponry work in Iraq. Meanwhile, Eisenberg was busy expanding “Israel Chemicals” now owned by a Canadian company [6] With the rise of Neo-Conservatism, the infiltration of the Bush administration from die-hard Zionists took a major leap forward. As far back as 1988, Israel was busy implementing its plan to maintain the illusion that it was the only “democracy” in the Middle East and to ensure an end to any and all possibilities for lasting peace within the region. After all, they believed that such moves would eventually mean the corrosion of its military presence and the eventual demise of the State of Israel.

Feeding into the parallel force of the extreme right in America, the phony war on terrorism was beginning to take shape. A new bogey man was required and the Likud and Neo-cons were to begin an uncomfortable and complex fusion of interests which would culminate in the attacks of September 11th, the most audacious propaganda coup since Pearl Harbour[7]and all doors for coercion, blackmail and information gathering would be open. If new doors needed to be unlocked, then new “keys” were made. Thus it came to be, that Saddam Hussein was considered a primary asset for CIA-MOSSAD tag-team and the assurance that Israel would maintain its military and ideological position in the region. Hussein was to become an integral part of the new deception to turn back the clock and prevent any emergence of “a leader who might be more palatable to the West and still be a threat to Israel.” [8]

drsaadam

Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein circa 1983 in relation to chemical weapons contract

Ex-MOSSAD agent Victor Ostrovsky outlines the background to the Iraq Invasion in his second book The Other Side of Deception (1995). He writes about the intelligence agency’s long-term project to portray Hussein as a tyrant and a “danger to the world” beginning in the late 1980’s and which was to continue right up to the Gulf war in 1990/91 and beyond. To that end: “The MOSSAD activated every asset it had, in every place possible, from volunteer agents in Amnesty International to fully bought members of the US Congress. Saddam had been killing his own people, the cry went; what could his enemies expect?”

Ostrovsky reveals the context behind the propaganda coup of the Kurdish massacre and its relation to Iraq:

The gruesome photos of dead Kurdish mothers clutching their dead babies after a gas attack by Saddam’s army were real, and the acts were horrendous. But the Kurds were entangled in an all-out guerrilla war with the regime in Baghdad and had been supported for years by the MOSSAD, who sent arms and advisers to the mountain camps of the Barazany family; this attack by the Iraqis could hardly be called an attack on their own people. But, as Uri said to me, once the orchestra starts to play, all you can do is hum along.

The media was supplied with inside information and tips from reliable sources on how the crazed leader of Iraq killed people with his bare hands and used missiles to attack Iranian cities. What they neglected to tell the media was that most of the targeting for the missiles was done by the MOSSAD with the help of American satellites. The MOSSAD was grooming Saddam for a fall, but not his own. They wanted the Americans to do the work of destroying that gigantic army in the Iraqi desert so that Israel would not have to face it one day on its own border. That in itself was a noble cause for an Israeli, but to endanger the world with the possibility of global war and the deaths of thousands of Americans was sheer madness. [9]

And it is in 2013 with Syria’s President Assad that we see the same tawdry attempts at PSYOPS with fake chemical attacks and media propaganda desperately trying to push through a new war in the Middle East. The Israeli lobby is beside themselves with frustration because at the time of writing this usually successfully tactic has failed as a direct result of public pressure in turn the exposure to alternative media exposing false flag operations for what they are. Yet, endangering the world with deception after deception is exactly what extreme elements in Israel’s government and MOSSAD operatives have continued to do from the disaster that was the Iraq invasion to the present day sabre-rattling and MOSSAD incursions into Iran – the next target on the map of a Greater Israel.

In order to follow through on their psychological operations the Israelis introduced the “Weapons of Mass Destruction” meme to the press and to further implant the idea of an imminent threat to all democracies from Saddam’s developing programs of nuclear chemical and biological weaponry. The propaganda train was set in motion, exaggerating and distorting Iraq’s true capability. The MOSSAD was about show its expertise in “false-flag” operations.

According to Ostrovsky, Gerald Bull was visited by Israeli friends from his past who were also MOSSAD officers, of which Bull was very probably aware. They had come to give him a warning having been thoroughly debriefed by MOSSAD’s psychological department and who had: “… studied the position Bull was in and analysed what was known about his character. It arrived at the conclusion that, even if threatened, he wouldn’t pull out of the program but would instead carry on his work with very little regard for his personal safety.” [10]

Ostrovsky believed that:

“Bull’s continuing with the program would play right into the MOSSAD’s hands. Through the bullet riddled body of Gerald Bull the world would be made to focus on his work: the Iraqi giant gun project. The timing had to be right though; Bull’s well publicised demise had to come right after an act of terror by the Baghdad regime, an act that could not be mistaken for an accident or a provocation. The hanging of the Observer reporter on March 15 was such an act.

After the reporter’s execution in Baghdad, a Kidon (MOSSAD assassination) team arrived in Brussels and cased the apartment building where Bull lived. It was imperative that the job be done in a place where it would not be mistaken for a robbery or an accident. At the same time, an escape route was prepared for the team and some old contacts in the Belgian police were revived to make sure they were on duty at the time of Bull’s elimination so that, if there was a need to call on a friendly police force, they’d be on call. They weren’t old of the reason for the alert, but would learn later and keep silent. [11]

Twelve years later in May 2003, a Belgian State Prosecutor considered reopening a probe into the murder having found new information that MOSSAD was indeed, involved. His consideration did not last long. In July 18, 1991, Belgian politician André Cools who had been investigating the murder of Bull a year earlier became the next high profile assassination. Two Tunisian men who carried out the murder were thought to have been employed by a Gladio group [12]which in turn led back to the CIA/MOSSAD. André Cools had not only met and interviewed Shaul Eisenberg as part of his investigations into the case, but the Iraqi banker Abdullah Zilka. Foolishly, he announced that he would shortly be providing evidence on Belgian, Canadian and American corruption in the arms industry, the latter of which extended to some very elevated names within the British arms industry and the Bush Administration including Dick Cheney, Neil Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and certainly the enigmatic Frank Carlucci. His interviews with the two men were never published. The Belgian judge presiding over the murder case issued arrest warrants for mafia bosses connected to Toto Riina, the head of the Italian mafia.

Jean-Marc Connerotte, the courageous Belgian judge found himself dismissed from the Cools murder case before he could issue indictments on leading politicians. His removal was to be repeated several years later in the Dutroux case, when another similar list of high-profile names would appear, only to disappear into the night from whence they came. Alain Van der Biest, and a one-time political ally of Andre Cools and a shareholder in Poudrieres Reunies de Belgique, along with several associates, was accused of the murder by – you guessed it – an anonymous informer. By March 2002, while waiting to hear if he would go on trial in connection with the murder, Van der Biest was found dead from a “drug overdose” and with a suicide letter to his wife.

In October 2003 only five of the nine accused stood trial the others choosing to remain in various countries in Europe rather than to acquiesce to the law. It is not hard to see why. Finally, by January 2004 two had been acquitted and six men sentenced to 20 years in prison. They included his former aide, Richard Taxquet, chauffeur Giuseppe di Mauro, and two men tried in their absence, Cosimo Solazzo, Domenico Castellino. A “former aide” and his “chauffeur” with Italian mafia connections: this was hardly a resounding victory – rather a damp squib excuse that “justice be done.”

André Cool’s murder had thrown the Walloon socialist party into chaos and the subsequent investigation revealed not only several minor league sexual scandals but the payment of more than £2 billion in bribes made by French aerospace manufacturer Dassault and Italian helicopter firm Agusta to secure equipment orders from the Belgian armed forces, via socialist politicians. This bought down the Belgian Secretary-General to NATO and certainly put the spotlight on Belgian weapons manufacturing and the vested interests involved. But has anything changed? As in the Dutroux case, those on the outer ring of corruption took the rap and those who had a little more pertinent information were taken care of. And thus the world of arms, sexploitation and paedophilia continues to spin.

As we have explored, the manufactured nature of Belgium (not dissimilar to Israel) shows that Brussels and all its military agencies enjoy a disproportionate amount of power within the European Union. The 1970s and 1980s was particularly favourable for the development of institutional corruption and the fostering of ponerogenic networks. After the decision to set up the European headquarters of NATO otherwise known as Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) the CIA, along with the fascist network Gladio became concerned by the geo-political “prostitution” of Belgium to all and sundry, including Soviet spies. Gladio has all but been merged into the Zionist mafia consortiums that sub-contract assassins and various brokers within their respective fields.

With the collapse of the USSR the underworld is flowing freely into the Balkans; into Belgian’s military-industrial Establishment and fanning out across Europe. It seems that Brussels is a nexus point in the transference and brokerage of a major number of shadowy deals which extend far beyond the daily abuse of market capitalism. Israel’s MOSSAD and its extensive networks of sayanim * are central to this trade.

 


* Sayanim – Describes persons of Jewish origin living outside Israel as foreign citizens and who volunteer to provide assistance to the Mossad. This includes medical care, financial support, research; intelligence gathering i.e. anything that can aid the Mossad in their global operations. Estimates put the number of sayanim in the thousands. This is one reason why the Mossad operates with fewer agents than other intelligence agencies.

 


Notes

[1] p. 345; The Barons Of European Industry, by Anthony Rowley, 1974.
[2] Ibid. (p.356)
[3] ‘CIA Report: Israel Guilty of Nuclear Proliferation’ By Wayne Madsen, Veterans Today, January 20th, 2013.
[4] This bank was the forerunner to the Bank of Credit and Commerce international (BCCI) which collapsed in the late 90s after being discovered as a major intelligence drug money laundering bank.
[5] Shaul Eisenberg was also a partner in Perminidex.
[6] ‘The Saddam in Rumsfeld’s Closet’ by Jeremy Scahill, Common Dreams, August 2, 2002. | http://www.CommonDreams.org
[7] For further reading see: The New Pearl Harbor – Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11 by David Ray Griffin and 911: The Ultimate Truth by Joe Quinn and Laura Knight-Jadczyk.
[8] The Other Side of Deception: A Rogue Agent Exposes the Mossad’s Secret Agenda by Victor Ostrovsky, Harpercollins, 1995.
[9]  Ibid.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid.
[12] “‘You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple: to force … the public to turn to the state to ask for greater security.’ – Gladio agent Vincenzo Vinciguerra. “Operation Gladio is a decades-long covert campaign of terrorism and deceit directed by the intelligence services of the West – against their own populations. Hundreds of innocent people were killed or maimed in terrorist attacks — on train stations, supermarkets, cafes and offices – which were then blamed on ‘leftist subversives’ or other political opponents.[…] Originally set up as a network of clandestine cells to be activated behind the lines in the event of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe, Gladio quickly expanded into a tool for political repression and manipulation, directed by NATO and Washington.” quoted from Global Eye: ‘Sword Play’ By Chris Floyd, The Moscow Times.

 

See Spanish version at La Verdad Nos Espera

 

Cartel Economics II

By M.K. Styllinski

“In the 1980s capitalism triumphed over communism. In the l990s it triumphed over democracy.”

– David Korten


Keeping in mind this “destruction of social values”, it was inevitable that such a machine – once set in motion and programmed from a clustering of pathological mind-sets, had only one trajectory possible and that was to:

become institutionalized into a restrictive system, sometimes called “mercantilism,” in which merchants sought to gain profits, not from the movements of goods but from restricting the movements of goods. Thus the pursuit of profits, which had earlier led to increased prosperity by increasing trade and production, became a restriction on both trade and production, because profit became an end in itself rather than an accessory mechanism in the economic system as a whole.” [1]

As merchants began to accumulate their wealth from these transactions they “became increasingly concerned not with the shipment and exchange of goods, but with the shipment and exchange of moneys,” which led to lending money to merchants and all the associated small print obligations that went with it. The net result meant that the breaking up of the economic process: “…had made it possible for people to concentrate on one portion of the process and, by maximizing that portion, to jeopardize the rest.”

Meanwhile, international banking operations had adopted the emerging penchant for secrecy and the fostering of esoteric banking jargon so essential to the success of any monopolistic process designed to “keep it in the family”. They became “…concealed, scattered, and abstract” where their “… activities were reflected in mysterious marks in ledgers which were never opened to the curious outsider,” a language which has continued to the present day. [2] Yet the mechanics and structure of the privileged system they had created was crystal clear to themselves. This clarity reflected the fundamental knowledge that supply was married to the demand for goods, the demand for money and the speed of exchange between money and goods.

Quigely continues:

An increase in three of these (demand for goods, supply of money, speed of circulation) would move the prices of goods up and the value of money down. This inflation was objectionable to bankers, although desirable to producers and merchants. On the other hand, a decrease in the same three items would be deflationary and would please bankers, worry producers and merchants, and delight consumers (who obtained more goods for less money). The other factors worked in the opposite direction, so that an increase in them (supply of goods, demand for money, and slowness of circulation or exchange) would be deflationary [and vice versa].

Such changes of prices, either inflationary or deflationary, have been major forces in history for the last six centuries at least. Over that long period, their power to modify men’s lives and human history has been increasing. [3]

Propaganda being the Banksters’ best friend, they put this to good use regarding the value of money. This obsession had nothing to do with maintaining stability or promoting confidence in business but everything to do with control – without it dividends cannot be secured long-term and the human resources to produce it. The famous quote from the Big Daddy of Banking mobsters Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild:  “Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes its laws,” perfectly describes why this financial system is designed for this kind of easy exploitation.

20141219_ZIRP© unknown

After all, as Quigley points out:

Rising prices benefit debtors and injure creditors, while falling prices do the opposite. A debtor called upon to pay a debt at a time when prices are higher than when he contracted the debt must yield up less goods and services than he obtained at the earlier date, on a lower price level when he borrowed the money. A creditor, such as a bank, which has lent money—equivalent to a certain quantity of goods and services—on one price level, gets back the same amount of money—but a smaller quantity of goods and services—when repayment comes at a higher price level, because the money repaid is then less valuable. [4]

With this in mind and with a firm foundation of mercantile history of networks in other countries, they set about locking in a system of credit and debt that would always favour the Elite. They used their positions at the top of the pyramid to do two things: “(1) to get all money and debts expressed in terms of a strictly limited commodity—ultimately gold; and (2) to get all monetary matters out of the control of governments and political authority, on the grounds that they would be handled better by private banking interests.”

And what a jolly time they’ve had ever since.

Their next sleight of hand would be to create money out of nothing – the beloved fiat currency so enamoured of the Federal Reserve. There was a time when the gold standard and liquid assets proved at least to be a stabilising factor in a world where abstraction and eventual deregulation would rule the day. Currency claims greater than the gold reserve meant that this was the beginning of the virus of techno-speculation in the markets today. In other words:

… creation of paper claims greater than the reserves available means that bankers were creating money out of nothing. The same thing could be done in another way, not by note-issuing banks but by deposit banks. Deposit bankers discovered that orders and checks drawn against deposits by depositors and given to third persons were often not cashed by the latter but were deposited to their own accounts. Thus there were no actual movements of funds, and payments were made simply by bookkeeping transactions on the accounts. Accordingly, it was necessary for the banker to keep on hand in actual money … no more than the fraction of deposits likely to be drawn upon and cashed; the rest could be used for loans, and if these loans were made by creating a deposit for the borrower, who in turn would draw checks upon it rather than withdraw it in money, such ‘created deposits’ or loans could also be covered adequately by retaining reserves to only a fraction of their value. [5]

The J.P. Morgans, Rockefellers, Carniegies, Harrimans, Schiffs, Warburgs and most importantly, the Rothschilds, comprised the invasive explosion of financial capitalism from about 1850 – 1931. These dynasties of international Banksters spreading out from the hub of London, extending a built first by the provincial bankers which then fed into the larger nodes based in key centres. Insurance companies and savings banks were integrated into what was envisioned as single monolith network of financial appropriation of the masses. This began to underlay every aspect of commercial life on the planet. The key to the success of this system was the manipulation of the quantity and flow of money a natural consequence of which was the ability to control government and the directly related emergence of the corporate state. Central banks varied the amount of money in circulation by “open market operations” in other words, by buying or selling government bonds in the open market thereby releasing money into the open market if it bought, or decreasing the sum of money in communities if it sold. The actual quantity of money could also be changed by central banks by influencing the credit policies of other banks.

There was limited influence of government as they were technically at least, private institutions. They did not see politicians as anything other than tools for the extension and enhancement of that financial network so that the real trust lay with “those in the know” rooted either in a literal occult knowledge and / or corporate secrecy that did not fit mechanisms of government.

The chiefs of these central banks and especially the Central Bank of England were according to Quigley and others:

…. the technicians and agents of the dominant investment bankers of their own countries, who had raised them up and were perfectly capable of throwing them down. The substantive financial powers of the world were in the hands of these investment bankers who remained largely behind the scenes in their own unincorporated private banks. These formed a system of international cooperation and national dominance which was more private, more powerful, and more secret than that of their agents in the central banks. [6]

Contrary to common belief, most of these early 20th century oligarchs were not right wing capitalists in the traditional sense. A fusion of communist and unfettered capitalism captured their vision. They invested in art, institutions and education, infusing them with their own ideas as to how reality should function. Their history and sense of superiority was rooted in the concept of feudalism and the elitism that went with it, not least the occult influence of freemasonry that immediately guided the already self-important authoritarian mould upon which many were formed. These wealthy dynasties like aristocracies, married within the family in part based on ideas of keeping the bloodlines “pure” and thus genetically superior. These fascistic tendencies would be further emboldened by the Social Darwinism * which took special root in the United States. It was all nonsense, of course. Such bloodline antics merely produced genetic anomalies and diseases as so many family monarchies showed. However, what it may have done was make the pool of psychopathic inheritance much stronger seeded as they were in such dominant expressions of control and acquisition. So, consciously or unconsciously, the pathocratic structure was also being built into that very same financial network which would reap benefits for those of the same pathology but cause intense suffering for the normal people of humanity.

By the 1930s investment bankers were firmly in control, with governments going cap in hand to their masters with the formation of irregular tax receipts and the management of treasury bills and government bonds. This meant a gradual revolving door for politicians and international bankers where both would work to create a smooth running of the banking machine between elections and other socio-cultural shifts. It matters little whether they are Democrat or Republican as long as they can be relied to dance to their economic tune for the duration of their term.

Britain happened to be the historical centre for the latest Empire and still plays a leading part in the emergence of a more comprehensive and complex Global Empire. This was based on a conglomeration of groupings with differing vested interests but the same common goal of a global totalitarian system buttressed by various corporate and religio-occult ideologies. One of the influential steerage groups Quigley mentions is the Cecil Rhodes-inspired Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) also known as Chatham House which emerged in 1891. The executive committee included corporatists and general, Messianic and Revisionist Zionists ** alike, such as: Sir Harry Johnston, Lord Rothschild, Lord Albert Grey and Lord Arthur Balfour, the latter being integral to the creation of the State of Israel and thus British interests in the region. The aforementioned Council of Foreign Relations (CFR) was formed later in the 1920s helping to establish the United States as the “First Great Creditor” delineating a future that would eventually make a monster of global consumption and debt.

The Great War and subsequent Second World War allowed the financial network and the institutions embedded within them to make drastic changes. The aftermath saw the birth of agencies, institutions and organisations wholly financed by international banking and the military–corporate complex for specific purposes that were not just for financial control. Ideologies played an equal part, the likes of which fed into the creation of centralisation as the primary future. Britain’s influenced ostensibly waned and America became the focus of intentions. It was during this period that the world saw the creation of giant monopolies the results of which were as Quigley stated: “…larger and larger aggregates of wealth f[alling] into … control of smaller and smaller groups of men.”

So, after this very brief and streamlined look at how the economic world came into being and the undeniable disasters it has wrought on the social and ecological landscapes, what is the primary mover behind these machinations?

If we tear away the jargon and look at the actions of international banking to date, what was and always has been their aim? It was as Quigley wrote:

… nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences.

 



* Social Darwinism: noun [mass noun] – the theory that individuals, groups, and peoples are subject to the same Darwinian laws of natural selection as plants and animals. Now largely discredited, social Darwinism was advocated by Herbert Spencer and others in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and was used to justify political conservatism, imperialism, and racism and to discourage intervention and reform. –  Oxford Dictionary  Unfortunately, it is still very much alive.
** Zionism: “an international movement originally for the establishment of a Jewish national or religious community in Palestine and later for the support of modern Israel.” – Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Further details from Wikipedia: “Zionism is a political movement among Jews (although supported by some non-Jews) which maintains that the Jewish people constitute a nation and are entitled to a national homeland. Formally founded in 1897, Zionism embraced a variety of opinions in its early years on where that homeland might be established. From 1917 it focused on the establishment of a Jewish national homeland or state in Palestine, the location of the ancient Kingdom of Israel. Since 1948, Zionism has been a movement to support the development and defence of the State of Israel, and to encourage Jews to settle there.Since the Six Day War of 1967, when Israel took control of the West Bank and Gaza, the objectives and methods of the Zionist movement and of Israel have come under increasing criticism. The Arab world opposed the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine from the outset, but during the course of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians since 1967, the legitimacy of Israel, and thus of Zionism, has been increasingly questioned in the wider world. Since the breakdown of the Oslo Accords in 2001, attacks on Zionism in media, intellectual and political circles, particularly in Europe, have reached new levels of intensity.

Revisionist Zionism will be the primary focus in this book due to its highly visible influence in the intelligence and geo-political strategy both in Israel and the United States. The definition of Revisionist Zionism is as follows: Revisionist Zionism is a nationalist faction within the Zionist movement. It is the founding ideology of the non-religious right in Israel, and was the chief ideological competitor to the dominant socialist Labor Zionism. Revisionism is the precursor of the Likud Party.” – Wikipedia.

 


Notes

[1] Ibid. Chapter 5—European Economic Developments; Commercial Capitalism.
[2] Ibid. The Operations of Banking and Finance Were Concealed So They Appeared Difficult to Master.
[3] Ibid. Inflationary and Deflationary Prices Have Been a Major Force in History for 600 Years.
[4] Ibid. Bankers Obsessed With Maintaining Value of Money.
[5] Ibid. The Founding of the Bank of England Is One of the Great Dates in World History.
[6] Ibid. Norman and Strong Were Mere Agents of the Powerful Bankers Who Remained Behind the Scenes and Operated in Secret.