Showing posts with label New World Order. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New World Order. Show all posts

Saturday, 8 June 2019

Iodine Increases Testosterone and Leydig Cell Functionality


By Robert Clark of iTestosterone.

I’m a big believer in iodine and its ability to increase testosterone, improve Leydig cell functionality and rid the body of toxic chemicals.

While going extremely in-depth about iodine is out of the scope of this article, I am going to try and cover all of the basics so you can decide for yourself if supplementing with iodine is something you should look further into.

I will tell you upfront that supplementation is a bit controversial and as always, you should consult with your doctor or trusted medical professional before deciding to take it.

How Iodine Affects Your Hormones and Thyroid

Before we get into the real nuts and bolts of how iodine affects testosterone we need to discuss what exactly iodine is and its role in the body.

Iodine, is a trace mineral and crucial to proper functioning of your thyroid and its hormones, triiodothyronine (T3) and thyroxine (T4).

The human body can hold about 1,500 mg of iodine. Around 20% of that is held in your skin, 32% in your muscles and most of the rest in your glands (thyroid, testicles, pituitary, etc…)

Without enough iodine in your body your thyroid cannot function properly which can lead to a condition known as hypothyroidism.

Hypothyroidism can cause elevated prolactin levels. Prolactin is a protein best known for enabling females to produce milk.

This in and of itself can decrease your testosterone but it actually gets worse.

Men suffering with hypothyroidism actually tend to see an increase in total testosterone but the problem is that they also see a significant rise estradiol (estrogen).

The rise in estrogen frequently causes a condition in men known as gynecomastia (bitch tits). (1)

In fact, according to Dr. Flechas, hypothyroidism is associated with a near doubling of free estrogen levels. (2)

Hypothyroidism also causes a big increase in and Sex Hormone Binding Globulin (SHBG). (1)

As testosterone is transported through your blood it binds to SHBG, which means it becomes “locked up” and is essentially useless. You can have all the testosterone in the world but if it’s all bound to SHBG, its as if your body has extremely low T.

Side Note: Boron has proven highly effective at reducing SHBG.

A Bit of Iodine History

At one point in time, iodine was considered “the universal medicine” and has been prescribed by doctors since at least as far back as 1820 to cure a variety of ailments. (3)

Modern science knows that iodine has some kind of affect on almost every element of human health from proper brain development and functioning, to nervous system health, to sexual well being, to a working immune system and on and on.

In the 1920’s iodized salt was introduced and has now been credited with increased height and IQ of the general populations of both the U.S. and Switzerland during that time. (4)

But over the last several decades, something has changed.

Iodine Deficiency

According to world renowned expert on iodine Dr. David Brownstein, in over 6,000 patients tested to date, 96% have shown to be low on iodine! (5)

That’s pretty extreme so what the hell is going on here? The problem is twofold.

Rampant Soil Degradation 

Iodine comes from our soil and intensive farming results in large scale removal of biomass from the soil and use of alkaline fertilizers strips the soil of its iodine content.

In short, modern farming practices and deforestation cause soil erosion which removes a lot of minerals from our foods, especially iodine.

Chemicals Known as Halogens

There are compounds called halogens, some of which are highly toxic. Chiefly among them, fluorine, chlorine and bromine run rampant in our water supply, are used in many disinfectants and are used to dye clothing and furniture. They compete with iodine in the body and take its place. Iodine is supposed to be in the body as a good halogen - the toxic halogens are not.

Basically, in our modern world of chemical based everything, we are under a constant bombardment from toxic halogens in our water, our food supply, in direct contact with it on our skin from our clothes and they even infest the air we breath. (6)

Bad halogens are everywhere, and iodine is seemingly nowhere to be seen. No wonder there is a testosterone deficiency crisis in men (although there are many other factors too).

Iodine Removes Toxic Halogens and Heavy Metals

Iodine is a non-toxic halogen which is essential to our health. All halogens use the same receptors in the body whether they are toxic or not. Because iodine has the highest atomic weight of all halogens, it can actually flush the toxic halogens and some metals such as mercury out of your body.

In fact, it is the only known substance which can force excretion of some toxic halogens such as bromide and fluorine from your body, as it binds to and flushes them out via your urine. (7)

Side Note: The United States, as well as several other countries, have stockpiles of potassium iodide, which can protect the body against radiation poisoning, to give out to its citizens in the event of a nuclear attack.

Iodine Increases Testosterone and Improves Leydig Cell Functionality

As we have already discussed, iodine is crucial to your thyroid and a properly functioning thyroid is critical to producing healthy testosterone levels and keeping free testosterone elevated within your body so it can do what its supposed to do.

It goes deeper than that though.

One of the receptors that stores halogens in your body is the “leydig cells” in your testicles.

Leydig cells are responsible for producing testosterone and because iodine and toxic halogens fight for these same receptors and our bodies are under constant attack from toxic halogens, your leydig cells may be compromised and corrupted. (8)

Because iodine can bind to and force excretion of these toxic halogens and in some cases, is the only way to flush them out, iodine may directly improve your leydig cell functionality, therefore increasing your testosterone production.

How Much Iodine Should You Take

There is some controversy over how much iodine you should get. The daily recommended intake (RDA) is a paltry 150 micrograms (mcg) for adult men.

However, this recommendation was set to prevent goiter alone and is extremely insufficient based upon all of my research.

Due to the desperate need to flush out toxins, some doctors have recommended supplementation with as much as 200 – 300 milligrams per day. That’s the equivalent of 200,000 – 300,000 micrograms.

I have read through hundreds of personal testimonies of people taking such high amounts and swearing by its effectiveness in improving their health.

However, just as not having enough iodine can cause thyroid issues, so can having too much of it. Just about everything, no matter how healthy it is, turns unhealthy at too high of a dosage.

Japan consumes more iodine (generally speaking) than probably any other nation. This is because their diet consists of a lot of iodine rich sea vegetables and seaweed.

As they tend to live longer, healthier lives, it’s good to note how much iodine they are consuming on average.

Of course it depends on the region and age group, younger japanese living in the city tend to eat more like the typical Westerner, but its been estimated they consume on average between 1 – 3 mgs per day with some regions and age groups getting as much 13 mgs per day. (9)

1 mg is equal to 1,000 micograms and the 1 – 3 mgs per day suddenly feels like a much safer range to me. Compare this to the average American diet which consumes on average about 240 micrograms per day. (10)

With that said, a typical Western diet still provides upwards of 240 mcg per day so how much do you really need to be supplementing with in addition to what is already in your food source?

Iodine Supplementation

Even doctors who agree that our iodine intake is too low cannot all agree on whether or not we should supplement with it. The reasons for this are too complicated and would take to long to properly cover for the scope of this article.

With that said I will tell you that Dr. Flechas, who is very respected in the thyroid community, recommends  supplementing with 12.5 mgs per day via a tablet called Iodoral from Optimox. (11)

At one point in time I tried experimenting myself with a rather high dose by taking 1 – 2 drops of Lugol’s 5%, 3 – 5 times per week.

This 1 drop provides: Iodine 2.5 mg, Potassium Iodide (a stable form of iodine) 3.75 mg = 6.25 mgs total.

In a recent study, the bioavailability (how much was actually absorbed) of potassium iodide was 96.4% compared to pure organic iodine which was only about 80%. (12)

However I also make a concentrated effort to purify my water of all chemicals and use natural health care products from soaps and shampoos, to laundry detergent and natural clothing fabrics so I do not believe I have a chemical overload at which to battle back from.

Now I take 252 mcg every day.

I consider this both to be extremely safe (as I am skeptical of the ultra high dose recommendations) and beneficial for ridding my body of unwanted toxins.

Iodine Painting

Reading through several dozen forums I found one seemingly popular method of trying to get more iodine into the testicles to flush out toxins was to paint it directly on the scrotum (ball sack). No, I am not making this up.

Iodine, does not absorb particularly well through the skin but the idea is, if you are trying to raise your testosterone, to put it right on top of the testicles so what does gets absorbed has a straight shot to the leydig cells.

How effective this is I don’t really know as there are no scientific case studies on it. A lot of men seem to swear by it though.

I personally tried it out of curiosity and I would swear that my urge to have sex a few hours later, did in fact go up, which is supposedly one of the positive side effects. Was it real or just a placebo effect, I could not say.

More Education

If you want to read more on iodine, the amount of information and misinformation out there can become overwhelming in a hurry.

This, however, is a great place to start The Guide to Supplementing with I by Stephanie Burst ND. While far from being conclusive (the more you read, the more questions you will end up having rather than answers) it’s still a good place to continue learning more if you are interested.



References
  1. The interrelationships between thyroid dysfunction and hypogonadism in men and boys. Meikle AW – Link
  2. How I Deficiency May Affect Your Child’s Brain Function and IQ. Dr Mercola – Link
  3. The History of Iodine in Medicine Part I: From Discovery to Essentiality Guy E. Abraham, M.D. – Link
  4. Introduction of iodized salt in the 1920’s linked to increased IQ and growth in the U.S. and Switzerland. IDD Newsletter – Link
  5. What Does an I Deficiency Have to Do with Cancer? By Dr. David Brownstein – Link
  6. Bromine-containing dyes dwarf flame retardants in house dust. Janet Pelley – Link
  7. Iodine Protects Against Fluoride Toxicity. Dr. Sircus – Link
  8. The toxic effects of polychlorinated biphenyl (Aroclor 1242) on Tm3 Leydig cells. Aydin Y, Erkan M. – Link
  9. Assessment of Japanese iodine intake based on seaweed consumption in Japan: A literature-based analysis Theodore T Zava and David T Zava – Link
  10. Young for Life: The Easy No-Diet, No-Sweat Plan to Look and Feel 15 Years. Dr. Donald “Rock” Schnell – Link
  11. Help My Thyroid. Dr. Jorge Flechas – Link
  12. Bioavailability of seaweed iodine in human beings. Aquaron R, Delange F, Marchal P, Lognoné V, Ninane L. – Link

Wednesday, 15 May 2019

How to Save Your Toxic Brain

From Myers Detox.

41 million IQ points.

That’s what Harvard Medical School professor, Dr. David Bellinger, estimates Americans have collectively lost because of exposure to lead, mercury, and organophosphates, the most common pesticides used in agriculture.

Today I want to talk to you about how to save your toxic brain.

When toxins are allowed to enter the brain and central nervous system, they can cause a whole host of symptoms.

Many of you suffer from brain fog, brain fatigue, trouble staying focused, forgetfulness, mood swings, or you fear dementia as you age.

  • Anxiety

  • Slow processing of new ideas

  • Sadness

  • Impatience

  • Irritability

  • Lack of motivation

  • Cognitive decline


I guarantee many problems incorrectly attributed to a host of other things are in most cases actually caused by body burden toxicity.

I want to explain the exact mechanisms of how toxins enter the brain.

The blood-brain barrier tries to protect our central nervous system from exposures to compounds that may be inflammatory and interfere with homeostatic mechanisms that maintain neurotransmitter balance and nervous system functioning.

But when we are chronically exposed to toxins and contaminants, like we are in today’s modern world, the usually tight and very selective blood-brain-barrier begins to warp under the pressure of these inflammatory compounds and becomes a bit “leaky” so that it allows molecules through that would have otherwise been prevented from entering the compartment that encases our brain.

This is what’s called Leaky Brain.

Metals that poison our mitochondria are also contributing to leaky brain.

Our brain uses 20% of the energy produced by our bodies.

In fact, another Harvard professor, Dr. Philippe Grandjean, warns of a “silent pandemic” of neurotoxins destroying our brains.

Your brain may be polluted with mercury, arsenic, chlorpyrifos, PCBs, ethanol, and other neurotoxins that stop it from performing at its best.

Mercury 

  •  Deposits in the pituitary – the master gland controlling all your hormones

  •  Inhibits nerve cell formation

  •  Block melatonin receptors needed to have a good night’s sleep

  •  Contributes to dementia like Alzheimer’s and developmental disorders like Autism


Lead

  • Impairs learning and memory

  • Associated with chronic fatigue, depression and cognitive impairment

  • Destroys energy production, needed for brain function


Aluminum

  • Kills brain cells

  • Causes brain inflammation


These neurotoxins and thousands more are poisoning our brains.

They’re lowering our IQs.

They’re causing an explosion in ADHD and autism spectrum disorders in our children.

And because of widespread environmental toxins we’re ALL at risk.

My life’s work is dedicated to helping people remove toxins from their body.

I developed a powerful new way to detox your brain, bones, fat, and central nervous system. Click here to learn more.

dsada




Further notes:

  • Alternatively, I would recommend the Andy Cutler Chelation Protocol for mercury, once the mercury is removed, aluminium tends to leave the body too. The ACC protocol accounts for the dangers of heavy metal redistribution in tissues during the excretion process.

  • I'd also recommend high silica water to help remove aluminium during the ACC protocol.

  • Carbon 60 (C60) is also a viable option for safely removing metals from the body and brain.

Tuesday, 14 May 2019

Have The British Royal Family Interbred With Jews?

From Inspire Change World & Alma.

For the last few years, I have been telling people that the British “Royal Family” are absolutely not as they seem. […] I have said that these people are absolutely not British in any aspect, but are criminals, frauds, and have absolutely no rights to the British throne at all..

Now, I want to reveal through an article from my friend, Whitewraithe, who writes the blog: Pragmatic Witness, that amazing article, entitled: “Britain’s Jewish Royal Family” right here for everyone to see for themselves, and I do, of course, have some additional thoughts and comments to follow:

Britain’s Jewish Royal Family


What we have been sold is no less than the groundwork for the imposition of a future Jewish Monarchy in Great Britain. And engineered by the House of Rothschild, whose relations and puppets on Wall Street and in the City of London are responsible for a deliberately created international financial crisis aimed at creating a one world currency system, a one world bank and a New World Order, one world government.

As one Royal insider commented “An insecure immigrant Royal family who have never felt at ease with the British people, and always more secure with immigrants and outsiders, and an alliance with the richest Jewish family in the world, heads of what is increasingly being re-Christened “The Jew World Order, who also seek to raise their status, is perceived by the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh as the best guarantor of their family’s future and safety. In short, we will one day see a Rothschild Royal family.”

Many people still cannot get Kate Middleton or why she, a supposed ‘commoner’ would marry Prince William. But hidden right under our noses is the truth the controlled mainstream media is hiding. Kate Middleton is a Jew from a maternal line of non-practicing, assimilated and poor Sephardic Jews aligned to the Church of England. Her mother whose maiden name is Goldsmith, practicing or not, is Jewish and under Jewish law if the mother is Jewish then the children are Jewish, therefore the children of Prince William will be legally Jewish….especially as William, under Judaic law, is also a Jew!
Under Jewish law if William and Kate have children their children will be Jews!

Princess Diana was a Jew because her mother was a Jew therefore Princes William and Harry:  See also: Huffington Post — A Jewish King And Queen Of England? It’s Possible

PRINCESS DIANA’S PARENTAL JEWISH LINEAGE:


In Tina Brown’s book ‘The Diana Chronicles’, the author claims that Princess Diana’s Jewish mother Frances Shand Kydd had a long-running affair with Sir James Goldsmith during her marriage to Earl Spencer. She suggests that Diana, who was born in 1961, was Goldsmith’s love child and not Spencer’s daughter. Even so the father’s line is irrelevant as Jewishness travels down the matriarchal line and Diana’s mother was a Jew. See also:  The Times of Israel —  Will the Future King of England Be Jewish?

The Goldschmidts, like their neighbors and relatives, the Rothschilds, had been prosperous merchant bankers in Frankfurt, Germany since the 16th century.(Wikipedia). In 1773, Mayer Rothschild invited Goldschmidt, (Goldsmith), Schiff, Oppenheimer, Warburg and eight other ambitious Jewish businessmen to his goldsmith shop. Together they formulated a long term plan […].

PRINCESS DIANA’S JEWISH SON AND FUTURE KING WILLIAM.

The original and current Jewish definition of a “born Jew” is a person whose mother is Jewish. Judaism is passed down in a matriarchal lineage. Prince William’s mother, Princess Diana, had a Jewish mother (Frances Ruth Burke Roche; a Rothschild) and she likely had a Jewish father (though his lineage would be irrelevant under Jewish law). That would make William – Jewish.

PRINCESS DIANA’S JEWISH HALF-BROTHERS


Diana shares a striking physical resemblance to the children of Sir James Goldsmith – Zak Goldsmith, Ben Goldsmith and Jemima Goldsmith. They are allegedly Diana’s half brothers and sister.

Following the Rothschild protocol of interbreeding to keep the power and wealth all-in-the-family, Diana’s alleged half brother Ben Goldsmith wed Kate Rothschild in 2003.

Princess Diana’s other alleged half brother, Zac Goldsmith, divorced his wife after he was elected British MP. He is now living with Alice Rothschild. This Rothschild-Goldsmith couple is also expected to marry.

Many people were perplexed why parliament should — recently, during one of it’s most busy sessions since the war –, have enacted a law allowing Catholics to ascend to the throne. What perplexed them was that the issue was not even on the horizon and there was simply no justification at that stage to use valuable parliamentary time dealing with it. In the light of this theory we can better speculate what was going on.  This was an ‘en Passant’ means of allowing Jews to take the throne on the basis of the ‘equality’ and ‘diversity’ our cultural Marxist Queen so greatly cherishes.

People have also always been mystified why Charles married Diana in the first place given that he was deeply in love with and had a long-standing relationship with Camilla Parker-Bowles. But that marriage made perfect sense if the family simply wanted Jewish children for a future Jewish monarchy. Whether the relationship lasted or not was of little importance once the the children were born and how convenient that Diana went the way of a wife of Henry the Eighth.

But the Kate-William marriage also perhaps explains Prince Charles’s dictum that, should he be ruler, he would seek a constitutional change that would remove him from sole governance of the Church of England to become the leader “Of all faiths.” Such a constitutional move would give Judaism parity with Christianity allowing a Jewish member of the Royal Family, for example, even if it were a woman, to ascend to the throne […].

And so the Rothschilds attended the royal wedding in more ways than one!

THE PLAN WAS THERE ALL ALONG, IN FRONT OF OUR UNCRITICAL, BRAINWASHED EYES

COMING OF THE MESSIAH.


However, the Talmud states that the leader of the world Jewish takeover would be a King, meaning that, should a male Jew ascend to the throne, such a King would then himself not only be the senior Elder of Zion but also the long awaited Messiah; The King of the Jews. As there are no remnants of the ancient Jewish royalty, and in order to fulfill the prophesy, Jewish royalty must be re-established, and it appears from this evidence that the current British Royal family has become the vehicle of choice.

At last, we come to understand the old Masonic claim that “Jerusalem will be rebuilded here, in England’s green and pleasant land.” The King of the Jews will rule the world from London where the ‘square mile’ of London City no longer belongs to the English people but was long ago sold to the Jews. His castle may well sit on the site of the last Olympic games; an area stolen by the state from the East Londoners who lived and worked there, perhaps in the long term for this very purpose.

Could the New Jerusalem be built in the ‘square-mile’ or could it be built on the Olympic site which was surrounded during the event by the Jewish and Masonic symbol of triangular, pyramid floodlights? Could the arena of the Olympic stadium become the site for the rebuilding of the temple? […]

On a related point, Royal rumour has it that Prince Harry was under great pressure, especially from the Queen, to marry Meghan Markle to help promote the racial genocide of the indigenous British people through mass immigration, cultural Marxism and Zioncorp promoted miscegenation.

A series of Jewish and far-left MPs such as Margaret Hodge, using mass third world immigration and fixed housing lists in the East End, have already succeeded in almost wiping out the Cockneys in this effort.

The Queen famously threatened in her 2010 Christmas Speech “The future face of Britain is the face of the Commonwealth.”

i.e.: The end of the white race in the United Kingdom!

Monday, 29 April 2019

MMR Vaccine’s Poison Pill: Mumps After Puberty, Reduced Testosterone and Sperm Counts


From Children's Health Defense





This article represents Part I of a two-part series on mumps. Part II will delve further into the mumps vaccine’s spillover effects on fertility.





By Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Chairman of the Board, Children’s Health Defense





Across the country, frenzied legislators are responding to the pharmaceutical industry’s orchestrated fear campaign around measles by seeking to impose further mandating of Merck’s measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine. Although ongoing mumps outbreaks involving thousands of at-risk adolescents and young adults completely dwarf the number of measles cases, no one is covering the mumps story—because it will expose the fact that Merck has been in court for over eight years due to scientists blowing the whistle on Merck’s fabrication and falsification of the effectiveness of the mumps component of its MMR vaccine. Instead of punishing Merck for its chicanery, legislatures are rewarding the company by making it impossible to refuse Merck’s profitable vaccine, subjecting a generation of American children to the risk of serious complications from mumps infection at an age that nature never intended.





When younger children experience mumps, the virus is relatively harmless; infected children often exhibit no symptoms. When mumps strikes adolescents or adults, on the other hand, the infection can cause far more serious adverse effects, including inflammation of various organs (brain, pancreas, ovaries and testicles)—as well as damage to male fertility.





Inflammation of one or both testicles (a condition called orchitis) occurs in approximately one in three post-pubertal men who get mumps and can contribute to sperm defects and subfertility as well as impairing the function of cells that produce testosterone. An estimated 30% to 87% of men with bilateral orchitis induced by mumps experience full-blown infertility—a major cause for concern given the significant declines in male fertility observed over the past several decades. Thus, it appears that Merck’s vaccine, instead of protecting children, not only delays onset of disease to later age cohorts but has the potential to cause serious and permanent injury.





Merck and mumps vaccines





Let’s look at a quick history of mumps and MMR vaccination in the United States. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) licensed Merck’s initial mumps-only vaccine in 1967. In 1971, Merckintroduced its first combination MMR vaccine, followed by the MMR-II vaccine in 1978 (which repurposed the rubella component) and the MMR-plus-varicella (MMRV) ProQuad vaccine in 2005. Since the initial 1967 vaccine, Merck has enjoyed a unique monopoly position in the U.S. market for mumps and MMR vaccines, with combined sales of MMR-II and ProQuad bringing in over $720 million in 2014 alone. Merck consistently places in the top five pharmaceutical companies globally, and the market valued its stocks at a seven-year high as of late 2018.… Merck has willfully and illegally maintained its monopoly through ongoing manipulation and by representing to the public and government agencies a falsely inflated efficacy rate for its Mumps Vaccine.





In order to score the lucrative MMR monopoly, Merck needed to satisfy the FDA that all three components of the combination vaccine could achieve 95% efficacy, but the mumps portion was bedeviling. In fact, as alleged in a lawsuit filed by two senior Merck scientists in 2010 under the False Claims Act, the company has known since the late 1990s that the mumps component of the MMR is “far less” than 95% effective. A 2005 study published in Vaccine estimated the effectiveness of mumps vaccination to be closer to 69%, and the authors noted that their results were consistent with other studies.





The two whistleblowers assert in the lawsuit—which is reportedly headed to trial sometime this year—that Merck has “willfully and illegally maintained its monopoly” through “ongoing manipulation” and by “representing to the public and government agencies a falsely inflated efficacy rate for its Mumps Vaccine.” Specifically, the two scientists claim that Merck executives ordered them to use “rigged” methodologies, including taking antibodies from rabbits and adding them to human blood vials, in order to gull regulators into assuming an antibody response robust and durable enough to merit licensing. When those “enhanced” tactics did not achieve Merck’s “fabricated [95%] efficacy rate,” the whistleblowers allege, the company resorted to simply falsifying the test data and engaging in other fraudulent activities.The fact that we have mumps showing up in highly immunized populations likely reflects something about the effectiveness of the vaccine.





Unprotected adolescents and young adults





The poor performance of the MMR’s mumps component and the doubtful “durability” of mumps-specific immunity following vaccination are of concern. In fact, we are already living with the legacy of this badly flawed vaccine. Rather than protecting a generation of American children from mumps infection in childhood, the vaccine has merely postponed the onset of the virus to older age groups, putting them at much greater risk. Researchers confirm an increase in the median age of mumps patients, a surge in the size and number of mumps outbreaks in highly vaccinated populations and higher rates of complications—including orchitis.





Across the country, galloping mumps epidemics have been ravishing an older generation of vaccinated individuals. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported 150 outbreaks (9,200 cases) in the year and a half from January 2016 to June 2017, affecting “schools, universities, athletics teams and facilities, church groups, workplaces, and large parties and events.”





Over the past several years, the number of college campuses reporting mumps outbreaks has exploded—at institutions ranging from Harvard and Temple to SyracuseLouisiana State and Indiana universities. At the University of Missouri, which in 2016 reported 193 mumps cases on campus, the health center director reported not having seen anything like it “in her 31 years at the school.” Commenting on the fact that all of the afflicted students had had the requisite two doses of MMR, she noted,





“The fact that we have mumps showing up in highly immunized populations likely reflects something about the effectiveness of the vaccine.”





The mumps virus has also made a “comeback” in other settings where younger adults congregate. For example, a naval ship deployed to the Persian Gulf, the USS Fort McHenry, has been unable to come ashore since early January because of a mumps contagion that has devastated its crew—even though the military vaccinates all personnel against the virus and despite the Navy having immediately subjected the crew in question to another MMR booster. News accounts have declined to comment on mumps complications but describe the quarantine as “a morale killer” for crew members who are accustomed to having monthly port calls. Infection control protocols stipulate that the Navy cannot declare the situation “under control” until “50 days after the last affected service member recovers.”





Endangering rather than protecting youth





All of these cohorts are part of an age group that should never get mumps. As Children’s Health Defense recently noted, whereas “flares of illness in vaccinated groups should prompt some serious questions about vaccine failure,” legislators and government agencies “are displaying a dangerous indifference to vaccination’s unintended consequences.” Dancing to puppet strings manipulated by Merck, legislators across the country are trying to foist even harsher MMR mandates on unwilling Americans, dooming a generation of children to the serious risks of late-onset mumps infections.










Part II





It has been about five decades since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Merck’s first mumps vaccine. The company began launching combination MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccines in the 1970s. Coincidentally—or not—an infertility crisis has been brewing over roughly the same time period, with dramatic declines in sperm counts and record-lowfertility levels. However, few investigators seem interested in assessing whether mumps outbreaks in highly vaccinated populations of teens and young adults could be having long-termeffects on fertility or other health indicators.





As described in Part I, childhood MMR vaccination has been an unmitigated disaster where mumps is concerned, deferring mumps infection to older ages and leaving adolescents and young adults vulnerable to serious reproductive complications. Public health reports show that the vast majority of mumps cases and outbreaks occur in youth who have been fully vaccinatedwith the prescribed two-dose MMR series, supporting a hypothesis of “waning immunity after the second dose.” FDA and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) officials even admitthat mumps outbreaks in the post-vaccination era “typically involve young adults,” and that vaccination is failing to protect those who are college-age and above.





Myopically, many vaccine experts have called for a third MMR dose—or even “booster dosing throughout adulthood”—even though the FDA’s and CDC’s own research shows that MMR boosters in college-age youth barely last one year. As alleged in whistleblower lawsuits wending their way through the courts over the past eight years, Merck presented the FDA with a “falsely inflated efficacy rate” for the MMR’s mumps component, using animal antibodies and other fraudulent tactics to fool FDA—and the public—into believing that the vaccine was effective.





When infection arises after puberty, however, mumps is no laughing matter, presenting an increased risk of complications such as hearing loss, encephalitis and inflammation of the reproductive organs.





Mumps after puberty is no laughing matter





Around the time that the first mumps vaccine came on the market, the 1967 children’s classic The Great Brain humorously depicted mumps infection in childhood as a mere nuisance. The book’s young protagonist goes out of his way to intentionally infect himself with mumps so that he can beat his two brothers to the recovery finish line—and he experiences no adverse consequences other than his siblings’ annoyance.





When infection arises after puberty, however, mumps is no laughing matter, presenting an increased risk of complications such as hearing loss, encephalitis and inflammation of the reproductive organs. About one in three postpubertal men with mumps develops orchitis(inflammation of the testes), which can damage sperm, affect testosterone production and contribute to subfertility and infertility. During a mumps outbreak in England in the mid-2000s, mumps orchitis accounted for 42% of all hospitalized mumps cases; the researchers attributed this outcome—which was the most common reason for hospitalization—to “the high attack rates in adolescents and young adults” that occurred “despite high coverage with two-dose MMR.” An analysis of a 2006 mumps outbreak in the U.S. reported that male patients were over three times more likely than female patients to experience complications, “due primarily to orchitis.”





An estimated 5% to 10% of postpubertal women will develop oophoritis (swelling of the ovaries) following mumps infection. Oophoritis is associated with premature menopause and infertility, but mumps-related oophoritis has garnered little notice.





Mumps infections are often asymptomatic or produce nonspecific symptoms such as fever, while cases of orchitis may present with no other mumps symptoms. Nonetheless, public health officials advise clinicians that orchitis is an instant cue to test for mumps virus, and testing often reveals elevated mumps antibodies. In a case report of MMR failure, British clinicians isolated a novel genetic strain of mumps virus from the patient’s semen two weeks after the onset of orchitis and found mumps RNA in the semen 40 days later; they also noted “the appearance of anti-sperm antibodies,” with “potential long-term adverse effects on the patient’s fertility.”





In 2017, researchers who reviewed 185 studies conducted in Western nations found that sperm counts had plummeted by 50% to 60% between 1973 and 2011—an average decrease of 1.4% annually. Commenting on this work, one analyst estimated that 20% to 30% of young men in Europe and North America have sperm concentrations associated with a reduced ability to father a child. Given estimates that as much as 40% of reproductive problems have to do with the male partner, there is agreement on the importance of “finding and eliminating [the] hidden culprits in the environment” that most researchers believe are to blame.





An estimated 5% to 10% of postpubertal women will develop oophoritis (swelling of the ovaries) following mumps infection. Oophoritis is associated with premature menopause and infertility, but mumps-related oophoritis has garnered little notice.





MMR’s and MMRV’s potential to impair fertility never studied





Merck has not evaluated either of its two MMR vaccines—the MMR-II and the MMR-plus-varicella (MMRV) vaccine—for their potential to impair fertility. Whether such testing would unearth direct effects on fertility (as appears to be possible with HPV vaccination in women) is thus unknown. However, mumps vaccination undeniably increases reproductive-age individuals’ risk of mumps infection and, in the process, increases the risk of fertility-altering complications. These facts alone should be attracting far more attention.





Unfortunately, because clinicians already tend to underdiagnose mumps infection and underestimate mumps complications, it is likely that they are failing to recognize possible vaccine-induced reproductive health consequences of mumps infection in their adolescent and young adult patients. In one university outbreak, “most physicians…did not suspect mumps,” and even when they became aware of the outbreak, “diagnosing mumps was not always straightforward.” Moreover, although differentiating between vaccine strains of mumps virus and wild types could provide valuable information, few clinicians have the capacity or inclination to perform testing of this type. A Japanese study of cerebrospinal fluid and saliva from patients with mumps complications found vaccine strain in nearly all of the samples and noted the information’s importance in helping determine whether the complications were vaccine-related.





Those who have sought to understand mumps vaccines’ poor performance point to a mixture of explanatory factors. These include waning immunity, the high population density and close quarters encountered in settings such as college campuses, incomplete vaccine-induced immunity to wild virus as well as viral evolution such that “the vaccine triggers a less potent reaction against today’s mumps viruses than those of 50 years ago.” However, some also quietly admit that individuals with “mild vaccine-modified disease” could be perpetuating the chain of transmission. This latter point ought to be raising questions about the logic and wisdom of administering further rounds of MMR boosters during outbreaks while ignoring the problems created by the doses already given.





… some individuals respond poorly to mumps vaccination and vaccine-induced antibody levels correlate poorly with protection from mumps infection, irrespective of the number of additional doses of mumps-containing vaccine they receive.







Most scientists appear to be either resigned to ongoing mumps outbreaks in vaccinated populations or actually accept periodic outbreaks as the cost of doing business. Publications by FDA and CDC researchers reveal these agencies’ awareness that some individuals respond poorly to mumps vaccination and that vaccine-induced antibody levels correlate poorly with protection from mumps infection, “irrespective of the number of additional doses of mumps-containing vaccine they receive.” Considering the effects on fertility, the generally abysmal track record of mumps vaccination and Merck’s fraudulent claims about efficacy, it is hard to fathom medical and public health experts’ complacency about current mumps vaccines and vaccine policies.


Saturday, 20 April 2019

Why the Holocaust Story Was Invented


TBR writer John Wear has been asked the questions: “Why was the Holocaust story invented? Who benefits from this falsification of history?” This article will answer these questions.





By John Wear





The first reason the Holocaust was invented was for justification for the war with Germany. World War II was by far the bloodiest and most destructive war in human history. Many people wondered whether all of the death and destruction caused by the war had been necessary.





The so-called Holocaust (alleged genocide of Jews) was used by the Allies to demonize Germany and prove that their war effort was necessary to defeat such an evil nation.





With the liberation of Ohrdruf, Buchenwald and Dachau by the American Army and the liberation of Bergen-Belsen by British troops, large groups of Western observers confronted the horrors of the German camps for the first time.





The gruesome scenes of huge piles of dead bodies and emaciated and diseased surviving inmates were filmed and photographed for posterity by the U.S. Army Signal Corps. Prominent newsmen and politicians were flown in to formerly German-occupied territory to see the harrowing evidence at the camps for themselves. The horrific scenes in the German-run camps were used by the Allies to justify their participation in the war.1





Jewish historian Robert Jan van Pelt writes:





To the Allies, the discovery of the camps proved a final justification of their war effort. In 1940, Churchill had proclaimed that a Nazi victory would bring “a new dark age made more sinister by perverted science.” The liberation of the camps proved that Churchill had not exaggerated the danger. And even though Auschwitz had been liberated by the Russians, the English and Americans heard many stories about that camp.2





Establishment of Israel





The Holocaust story has also been used to justify the creation of the nation-state of Israel. Simon Wiesenthal writes: “The creation of Israel was the only possible and the only correct reaction to Auschwitz. There had to be a country in the world where the Jews were the landlords instead of tolerated guests, a place of refuge in the truest meaning of the word, even for Jews who live in other countries.”3





David Ben-Gurion stated at the beginning of World War II that the war should end by giving the Zionists their own state. After the war, Ben-Gurion and other Israeli leaders said that the Holocaust had proven once again that the only solution to the Jewish problem was an independent state in Palestine. Ben-Gurion again mentioned during Adolf Eichmann’s trial that the Holocaust happened because Jews did not live in their own country.4





Israeli historian Tom Segev explains why the Holocaust story is so important to Israel:





Israel differs from other countries in its need to justify—to the rest of the world, and to itself—its very right to exist. Most countries need no such ideological justifications. But Israel does—because most of its Arab neighbors have not recognized it and because most of the Jews of the world prefer to live in other countries. So long as these factors remain true, Zionism will be on the defensive. As a justification for the state of Israel, the Holocaust is comparable only to the divine promise contained in the Bible: It seems to be definitive proof of the Zionist argument that Jews can live in security and with full equal rights only in their own country and that they therefore must have an autonomous and sovereign state, strong enough to defend its existence.5





Tom Segev further writes, “The demonization of Nazism and its mythologizing, in general, were also necessary since the Holocaust served as the main justification for the creation and existence of the state of Israel.”6





Justification of Israeli Violence





There were at least 33 massacres of Palestinian villages during Israel’s “war of independence.” Zionist forces were larger and better equipped than their opponents, and by the end of the war over 750,000 Palestinians were ruthlessly expelled from their homes.7





As Segev writes, “Israel was born of terror, war, and revolution, and its creation required a measure of fanaticism and of cruelty.”8





Entire cities and hundreds of villages in Israel were left empty and repopulated with new Jewish immigrants. The Jewish immigrants numbered 100,000 in April 1949, most of them survivors of the so-called Holocaust. The Palestinians lost everything they had and became destitute refugees, while the Jewish immigrants to Israel stole the Palestinians’ property and confiscated everything they needed.9





The Holocaust story has been repeatedly used to justify Israel’s aggression against its neighbors. Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin justified the demolition of an alleged Iraqi nuclear facility in June 1981 with the words, “We must protect our nation, a million and a half of whose children were murdered by the Nazis in the gas chambers.”10





Before Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in June 1982, Begin told his cabinet: “You know what I have done and what we have all done to prevent war and loss of life. But such is our fate in Israel. There is no way other than to fight selflessly. Believe me, the alternative is Treblinka, and we have decided that there will be no more Treblinkas.”11





A few weeks after Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, Begin stated that after the Holocaust the international community had lost its right to demand that Israel answer for its actions. Begin declared in the Knesset, “No one, anywhere in the world, can preach morality to our people.” A similar statement was included in the resolution adopted by Begin’s cabinet after the massacres in Palestinian refugee camps on the outskirts of Beirut.12





By the late 1980s there was hardly a day when the Holocaust story was not mentioned in one of the Israeli newspapers. Such constant exposure encouraged many Israeli soldiers to plan ways to exterminate the Arabs. According to Israeli education-corps officer Ehud Praver, “too many soldiers were deducing that the Holocaust justifies every kind of disgraceful action.”13





German Guilt





The so-called Holocaust has also been effectively used to induce guilt in the German people. As British historian Ian Kershaw writes: “Decades would not fully erase the simple but compelling sentiment: ‘I am ashamed to be German.’ ”14





Friedrich Grimm, a renowned German authority on international law, was shown samples of new leaflets printed in German soon after the war to be distributed by the Allies throughout Germany. Describing alleged German war crimes, the leaflets were the first step in the reeducation program designed for Germany. Grimm suggested to an Allied officer that since the war was over, it was time to stop the libel. The Allied officer replied:





Why no, we’re just getting started. We’ll continue this atrocity campaign, we’ll increase it till no one will want to hear a good word about the Germans anymore, till whatever sympathy there is for you in other countries is completely destroyed, and until the Germans themselves become so mixed up they won’t know what they’re doing!15





The Allied campaign to make Germans feel guilty concerning the so-called Holocaust has been highly successful.





German guilt feeling is so powerful it has caused the German government to make enormous reparations and offer humble apologies to the Allies, while ignoring the atrocities committed by the Allies against the German people during and after the war. Millions of German expellees have paid reparations to survivors of the German concentration camps even though these German expellees had their land and personal possessions stolen from them.





James Bacque writes in regard to German feelings of guilt:





Guilt pervades Germany like a religion. It is the “Canossa Republic,” penitent in pain before its judges. Guilt is so powerful that it has caused the Canossa Republic repeatedly to deny any intention of reclaiming sovereignty over the eastern lands, although it is a well-established UN principle that no government has the right to waive the claims of individuals to their property. Nor may it impede their right of return to their former homeland.16





Allied Guilt and Apathy





The Allies have also been declared guilty of not doing more to prevent the alleged genocide of European Jewry. Jewish historian Deborah Lipstadt writes:





A real antipathy toward Jews certainly affected the Allied response. While no one among the Allies or in the press wanted to see Jews killed, virtually no one was willing to advocate that steps be taken to try to stop the carnage. Many Allied officials in positions of power in London and Washington were tired of hearing about Jews and even more tired of being asked to do something about them even though there were steps that could have been taken.17





Elie Wiesel writes in regard to the Allies’ failure to rescue European Jewry, “It almost seems as if both diplomats and statesmen spent more time inventing reasons not to save the Jews than trying to find a way to save them.”18





U.S. presidents Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush have all made statements that the United States will never again fail to act to stop something as evil as the genocide of European Jewry. At the dedication of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, President Bill Clinton spoke in a similar vein: “For those of us here today representing the nations of the West, we must live forever with this knowledge: Even as our fragmentary awareness of crimes grew into indisputable facts, far too little was done.”19





Michael Goldberg says in regard to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum: “The museum stands as a grim reminder that for all its purported ideals, America nevertheless turned its back on Jews fleeing Hitler. . . . Hence, the museum’s recalling what happened to Jews in the past may move Americans and their national policymakers in Washington to support Israel in the present, lest in the future, the same fate lie in store for Jews again—and the same moral failure await Americans once more.”20





President Barack Obama affirmed on the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Dachau: “. . . we fervently vow that such atrocities will never happen again,” and, “History will not repeat itself.”21





Of course, Obama forgot to tell his audience that most of the inmates at Dachau died of natural causes. Obama also conveniently failed to mention that the single biggest atrocity that occurred at Dachau was the mass murder by American troops of 520 German guards on the day Dachau was liberated.22





Reparations to Jews





German guilt for the so-called Holocaust has resulted in massive reparations being paid to Holocaust survivors and the state of Israel. German reparations to Jews were discussed from the beginning of World War II. Segev writes:





The idea [of reparations] seems to have been in the air from the time the war started, apparently sparked by the punitive reparations payments imposed on Germany at the end of World War I. Ben-Gurion received a memorandum on the subject as early as 1940. Berl Katznelson spoke of it publicly toward the end of that year. By December 1942, there was already a private organization in Tel Aviv called Justicia that offered to help Nazi victims draft compensation demands.23





Hatred of Germans in Israel was intense after the war. Many advocated a special law barring Israelis from all social contacts with German citizens. However, since most Israelis felt that the Germans owed them massive paybacks for the so-called Holocaust, Germany and Israel began negotiating reparations on March 20, 1952. The Luxembourg Agreement was reached six months later and committed the German government to paying massive reparations to Holocaust survivors.24





Nahum Goldmann said in a 1976 interview that the Luxembourg Agreement “constituted an extraordinary innovation in the matter of international rights.” Goldmann also boasted that he had obtained 10 to 14 times more from the Bonn government than he had originally expected.25





Millions of Jews eventually received personal compensation for their pain and suffering in the so-called Holocaust. The German federal government as of 1998 had paid reparations to Israel and Third Reich victims of about $61.8 billion. In addition, Germans had paid many additional billions in private and other public funds to wartime forced laborers.26German reparations to Israel and Jews continue to this day.27





Jewish Solidarity





The Holocaust story is described by many Jewish leaders as a uniquely evil event. An example of this view was expressed by Abraham H. Foxman when he was the national director of the Anti-Defamation  League of B’nai B’rith:





The Holocaust is something different. It is a singular event. It is not simply one example of genocide but a near successful attempt on the life of God’s chosen children and, thus, on God Himself. It is an event that is the antithesis of Creation as recorded in the Bible; and like its direct opposite, which is relived weekly with the Sabbath and yearly with the Torah, it must be remembered from generation to generation.28





Michael Goldberg confirms that the Holocaust story has become a religion [sometimes called Holocaustianity—Ed.] to many Jews: “As the Holocaust has become many contemporary Jews’ master story, so, too, its perpetual observance has become their paramount Jewish practice, its veneration their religion. And as with any organized church, this Holocaust cult has its own tenets of faith, rites, and shrines.”29





Israelis are obsessed with the history and heritage of the Holocaust. A 1992 study of Israeli college students found that close to 80% of those asked identified with the statement, “We are all Holocaust survivors.” The so-called Holocaust has become a way for secular Jews to feel connected to their Jewish heritage.30





The Holocaust, commemorated ritually through the observance of Holocaust Remembrance Day, is a major means of creating solidarity among Jews. While some Jewish communities experience conflicts among Orthodox, Conservative and Reform Jews, they set aside their differences and join together to mourn the so-called Holocaust. Any truth in Judaism’s slogan of “Jews Are One” manifests itself ritually on Holocaust Remembrance Day.31





Conclusion





The alleged genocide of European Jewry has been used to justify the Allied war effort, to establish the state of Israel, to justify Israel’s violence against its neighbors, to induce guilt in both Germans and the Allied nations, to allow Jews to receive massive reparations from Germany and to create solidarity in the Jewish community. The extreme importance of the Holocaust story in advancing Zionist/Jewish interests ensures that this falsification of history will continue in the future.





ENDNOTES





 Van
Pelt, Robert Jan, The Case for Auschwitz: Evidence from the Irving Trial, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2002, p. 165.





2
Ibid.





3
Wiesenthal, Simon, Justice Not Vengeance: New York: Grove Weidenfeld, 1989, p. 224.





4
Segev, Tom, The Seventh Million: The Israelis and the Holocaust, New York: Hill and Wang, pp. 82, 185, 330.





5
Ibid., p. 514.





6
Ibid., p. 480.





7
Weir, Alison, Against Our Better Judgement: The Hidden History of How the U.S. was Used to Create Israel, 2014, p. 58.





8
Segev, Tom, The Seventh Million: The Israelis and the Holocaust, New York: Hill and Wang, p. 63.





9
Ibid., pp. 161-162.





10
Ibid., p. 399.





11
Ibid.





12
Ibid.





13
Ibid., pp. 407, 412.





14
Kershaw, Ian, Hitler 1936-45: Nemesis, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2000, p. 840.





15
Tedor, Richard, Hitler’s Revolution, Chicago: 2013, p.
263.





16
Bacque, James, Crimes and Mercies: The Fate of German Civilians under Allied Occupation1944-1950, 2nd edition, Vancouver, British Columbia: Talonbooks, 2007, pp. 175-176.





17
Lippstadt, Deborah E., Beyond Belief: The American Press & the Coming of the Holocaust 1933-1945, New York: The Free Press,
1986, p. 277.





18
Wyman, David S., The Abandonment of the Jews: America and the Holocaust, 1941-1945, New York: The New Press, 2007, p. x.





19
Ibid., pp. 342-343.





20
Goldberg, Michael, Why Should Jews Survive?: Looking Past the Holocaust Toward a Jewish Future, Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1995, p. 55.





21
http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Obama-vows-never-again-on-70th-anniversary-of-liberation-of-Nazis-Dachau-camp-400570.





22
Buechner, Howard A., Dachau: The Hour of the Avenger, Metairie, LA: Thunderbird Press, Inc., 1986, pp. 5, 29, 96-97.





23
Segev, Tom, The Seventh Million: The Israelis and the Holocaust, New York: Hill and Wang, p. 104.





24
Ibid., pp. 190-191, 227, 233.





25
“West Germany’s Holocaust Payoff to Israel and World Jewry,” The Journal of Historical Review, Vol. 8, No. 2,
Summer 1988, p. 245.





26
“Germany Has Paid Out More Than $61.8 Billion in Third Reich Reparations,” The Journal of Historical Review,
Vol. 17, No. 6, Nov./Dec. 1998, p. 19.





27
See
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/18/world/europe/for-60th-year-germany-honors-duty-to-pay-holocaust-victims.html
and
http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Germany-to-pay-250-Million-to-child-Holocaust-survivors-374596.





28
ADL on the Frontline, January 1994, p. 2.





29
Goldberg, Michael, Why Should Jews Survive? Looking Past the Holocaust Toward a Jewish Future, Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1995, p. 41.





30
Segev, Tom, The Seventh Million: The Israelis and the Holocaust New York: Hill and Wang, pp. 513, 515-516.





31 Goldberg, Michael, Why Should Jews Survive? Looking Past the Holocaust Toward a Jewish Future, Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1995, p. 50.


The Hidden Origins Of The Bank Of England


BY STEPHEN GOODSON





AS THE FINANCIAL CRISIS WORSENS IN AMERICA and across the globe, people want to know: “When did it all start”? In fact, the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank in the United States is a spinoff of the Bank of England, established in the 1694. And, as the earl of Anglesey presciently observed in 1658: “It is dangerous to the peace of the kingdom when it shall be in the power of half a dozen or half a score of rich, discontented or factious persons to make [an accumulation] of our own coin and bullion beyond the seas and leave us in want of money when it shall not be in the king’s power to prevent it.”





From A.D. 757 to his death in 791, the great King Offa ruled the kingdom of Mercia, one of the seven autonomous kingdoms of the Anglo-Saxon heptarchy. Offa was a wise and able administrator and a kindhearted leader, though he could be hard on his enemies. He established the first monetary system in England (as distinguished from Romano-Keltic Britain). On account of the scarcity of gold, he used silver for coinage and as a store of wealth. The standard unit of exchange was a pound of silver, divided into 240 pennies. The pennies were stamped with a star (Old English stearra), from which the word “sterling” is derived. In 787 Offa introduced a statute prohibiting usury: charging of interest on money lent. The laws against usury were further entrenched by King Alfred (r. 865-99), who directed that the property of usurers be forfeited, while in 1050 Edward the Confessor (1042-66) decreed not only forfeiture, but that a usurer be declared an outlaw and be banished for life.





FIRST JEWISH MIGRATION AND EXPULSION





The Jews first arrived in England in 1066 in the wake of William I’s defeat of King Harold II at Hastings on October 14. These Jews came from Rouen, 75 miles from Falaise, where William was born illegitimately as William the Bastard. Although the historical record does not indicate whether they promoted the idea of a military invasion of England, these Jews had at the very least financed it. For this support they were richly rewarded by being allowed to practice usury under royal protection. The consequences for the English people were disastrous. By charging rates of interest of 33% per annum on lands mortgaged by nobles and 300% per annum on tools of trade or chattels pledged by workmen, within two generations one-quarter of all English lands was in the hands of Jewish usurers.





Furthermore these Jewish immigrants undermined the ethos of the guilds and enraged the English merchants by selling a large variety of goods under one roof. They also played a large role in the clipping of silver coins and the melting of them into bullion and the plating of tin with silver. The famous economist Dr. William Cunningham compared “the activity of the Jews in England from the 11th century onward to a sponge, which sucks up all the wealth of the land and thereby hinders all economic development. Interesting too, is the proof that even at this early period the government did everything in its power to make the Jews take up decent trades and honest work and thereby at the same time amalgamate with the rest of the population, but all to no purpose.”





In 1233 and 1275 Statutes of Jewry were passed which abolished all forms of usury. As most of these Jews could now no longer earn a “living,” a statute was passed by King Edward I (1272-1307) on July 18, 1290 compelling the entire Jewish population of 16,000 to leave England forever. Unlike the modern practice of ethnic cleansing, the Jews after paying a tax of 1/15 of the value of their movables and 1/10 of their specie were permitted to leave with all their goods and chattels. Any Jew who remained after Nov. 1, 1290 (All Saints Day) was liable to execution.





THE GLORIOUS MIDDLE AGES





With the banishment of the moneylenders and the abolition of usury, there were hardly any taxes to pay and no state debt, as the interest-free tally stick was used for government expenditures. England now enjoyed a period of unparalleled growth and prosperity. The average laborer worked only 14 weeks a year and enjoyed 160 to 180 holidays.





According to Lord Leverhulme, a writer of that time: “The men of the 15th century were very well paid,” in fact so well paid that the purchasing power of their wages and their standard of living would only be exceeded in the late 19th century. Houston Stewart Chamberlain, the Anglo-German philosopher, confirms these living conditions in The Foundations of the XIXth Century: In the 13th century, when the Teutonic races began to build their new world, the agriculturist over nearly the whole of Europe was a freer man, with a more assured existence, than he is today; copyhold was the rule, so that England, for example—today a seat of landlordism—was even in the 15th century almost entirely in the hands of thousands of farmers, who were not only legal owners of their land, but possessed in addition far-reaching free rights to common pastures and woodlands.










END OF A GOLDEN ERA





During the 17th century this golden era came to a tragic end. Large numbers of Jews, who had been expelled from Spain in 1492 by Isabella I of Castile and Ferdinand II of Aragon had settled in Holland. Although the Dutch were at that time an important maritime power, the Jewish usurers based in Amsterdam desired to return to England, where their prospects for expanding the operations of their money lending empire were far more promising. During the reign of Queen Elizabeth I (1558-1603) small numbers of Marranos—Spanish Jews, who had converted to a sham form of Christianity—settled in London. Many of them practiced as goldsmiths, accepting deposits of gold for safekeeping, and then issuing ten times the amount of gold received as gold receipts, that is loans with interest. These receipts, a forerunner of the fraudulent fractional reserve system of banking, were initially lent to the crown or treasury at 8% per annum, but according to Samuel Pepys, the diarist and Secretary to the Admiralty, the interest rate increased by as much as 20% and even 30% per annum.





The rate of interest merchants paid often exceeded 33% per annum, even though the legal rate was only 6% per annum. Workmen and poor people bore the brunt of these extortionate rates of interest by having to pay 60%, 70% or even 80% per annum. According to Michael Godfrey, the author of a pamphlet entitled A Short Account of the Bank of England, 2 to 3 million pounds had been lost through the bankruptcies of goldsmiths and the disappearance of their clerks.





Throughout most of the Middle Ages, Portuguese Jews enjoyed unparalleled freedom, wealth and power. They occupied key positions in government, academia, commerce and the professions of medicine, science and law. During the reign of Queen Elizabeth I of England, some 20-30 Portuguese Marranos (Jews who pretended to be Christians) settled in London. One of the most notable was Rodrigo Lopes, the queen’s physician. Lopes dabbled in international intrigue and was hanged, drawn and quartered in 1594 for allegedly plotting to poison the queen. His widow was allowed by the queen’s bounty to retain his estate. The frères Peyrere (Pereira) of Bordeaux and later Paris, contemporaries and associates of the Rothschilds, were Marrano descendants. The Rockefellers, it is said, also were Marranos. The original Rockefeller made his money selling narcotics (which were legal then). After acquiring a little capital, he branched out into oil. But it was the Rothschild money that made the Rockefellers so powerful.





CROMWELL AND THE ENGLISH CIVIL WAR





In 1534, by the Act of Supremacy, the Church of England was established as the official religion of England by King Henry VIII (1509-47). During the 16th and 17th centuries Puritan beliefs based on the teachings of John Wycliffe and John Calvin gained an increasing number of adherents.





The Puritans considered the Bible to be the true law of God and emphasized Bible reading, prayer and preaching and the simplification of the ritual of the sacraments. The Stuart King Charles I (1625-49), who wished to maintain the pre-eminence of the Anglican Church, came into intensified conflict with the Puritans, who were making great progress in proselytizing the entire population. After the assassination of Charles’s trusted friend and adviser, the duke of Buckingham, in 1628, he gradually became more isolated. This growing religious division provided a perfect opportunity for exploitation by the Jewish conspirators.





As Israel Disraeli, the father of Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli, wrote in The Life and Reign of Charles I, "the nation was artfully divided into Sabbatarians and Sabbath Breakers.” In 1640 one of the leaders of the clandestine Jewish community Fernandez Carvajal, a merchant and spy, who was also known as “the Great Jew,” organized an armed militia of about 10,000 operatives, who were used to intimidate the people of London and sow confusion. Large numbers of pamphlets and leaflets were also distributed.





Civil war soon followed between the Royalists (Anglicans) and Roundheads (Puritans) and lasted from 1642-48. The Roundheads with their “New Model Army” were victorious and an estimated 190,000 persons or 3.8% of the population died. The leader of the Roundheads was Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658), whose New Model Army was not only outfitted and provisioned by the chief contractor and professional agitator, Fernandez Carvajal, but also bankrolled by the Jewish moneylenders in Amsterdam. The leader of the Dutch Jews, Manasseh Ben Israel, now sent begging petitions to Cromwell asking that the Jews be allowed to immigrate to England in return for the financial favors, which he had so generously arranged.





Rosicrucian Mason Oliver Cromwell: In 1642, when King Charles I of England, the son of King James, and brother to Elizabeth Stuart, wife of Frederick of the Palatinate of the Rhine, tried to arrest five members of Parliament for obstructive behavior, the English Masonic Civil War erupted, and Oliver Cromwell assumed command of the Parliamentary forces. The civil war in England ultimately toppled the Stuart dynasty with the beheading of King Charles I. There were among the Cromwellian Puritans some influential Rosicrucians who funded his revolution. Among the Rosicrucians there were powerful Kabalistic Marrano Jews, who convinced Cromwell that without the spread of Jews worldwide, the biblical millennium could not arrive. Cromwell did their bidding by allowing them to immigrate to England. Well-placed Rosicrucians gave Cromwell advance knowledge of British troop movements. Consequently he won every battle. Later, during his protectorate, Cromwell surrounded himself with Rosicrucian Masons. Cromwell promised Jewish representatives that through Freemasonry he would symbolically rebuild for them Solomon’s Temple. The Jewish document that Cromwell used to turn Freemasonry into the synagogue of Satan was the Kabala. This caused many Jews to consider the possibility that Cromwell might be their Messiah.





THE MURDER OF KING CHARLES I





The treachery to which Cromwell descended is revealed in correspondence between himself and the Synagogue of Mulheim, Germany: June 16, 1647 From O.C. (Oliver Cromwell) by Ebenezer Pratt In return for financial support will advocate admission of Jews to England: This however impossible while Charles living. Charles cannot be executed without trial, adequate grounds for which do not at present exist. Therefore advise that Charles be assassinated, but will have nothing to do with arrangements for procuring an assassin, though willing to help in his escape.





A reply was dispatched the following:





To O.C. by Ebenezer Pratt July 12, 1647 : Will grant financial aid as soon as Charles removed and Jews admitted. Assassination too dangerous. Charles shall be given an opportunity to escape: His recapture will make trial and execution possible. The support will be liberal, but useless to discuss terms until trial commences.”





King Charles was staying as a virtual prisoner in Holmby House, Northamptonshire. On June 4, 1647, 500 revolutionaries seized the king, but then allowed him to escape to the Isle of Wight, where he was subsequently arrested. On Dec. 5, 1648 the House of Commons decided “That the king’s concessions were satisfactory to a settlement.”20 Cromwell then purged the House of Commons with the assistance of Colonel Pryde until there was only a “rump” of 50 members left, who then duly voted that the king be put on trial.





Not a single English lawyer was prepared to draw up a charge sheet against the king. Eventually it was provided by a Dutch Jew, Isaac Dorislaus. The king was forced to participate in a show trial in a High Court of Justice in which two-thirds of its members were Levelers from the army. King Charles refused to plead, but was found guilty and executed anyway on Jan. 29, 1649. As the procession approached the scaffold large numbers of the crowd shouted, “God save the king!” After the deed had been done there was an enormous groan of anguish.





Parliament claimed King Charles I was responsible for all the deaths, burnings, damages and mischiefs to the nation in the civil war in England and so they brought him to trial. It was the first time a king in England had ever been put on trial. The king said the court had no jurisdiction and refused to enter a plea. Found guilty, the innocent king, a good Christian, was sentenced to death. On Jan. 30, 1649, the king is marched to the scaffold to have his head cut off with an ax. He wore two shirts to keep from shivering because people might think he was afraid to face his maker.





SECOND JEWISH MIGRATION





From Dec. 7-18, 1655 Cromwell held a conference in Whitehall, London in order to obtain approval for the large-scale immigration of Jews. In spite of the conference being packed with Cromwell’s supporters, the overwhelming consensus of the delegates, who were mainly priests, lawyers and merchants, was that the Jews should not be permitted to enter England.





In October 1656 the first Jews were surreptitiously allowed to land freely in England, in spite of strong protests having been lodged by the sub-committee of the Council of State, who declared that these Jews “would be a grave menace to the state and the Christian religion.”





“The merchants, without exception, spoke against the admission of the Jews. They declared that the proposed immigrants would be morally harmful to the State, and that their admission would enrich foreigners at the expense of the English.”





Cromwell died on Sept. 3, 1658 and was succeeded by his son, Richard, who ruled for nine months. Charles I’s son Charles II (1660-85) succeeded his executed father. Although he would be the last English monarch to issue money (notes) in his own right, he made two fatal errors of governance. On August 1, 1663 he passed the euphemistically sounding Act for the Encouragement of Trade, which enabled the “export of all foreign coins or bullion of gold or silver, free of interdict, regulation or duties of any kind.”





Three years later by means of An Act for the Encouragement of Coinage he permitted private persons i.e. bankers and goldsmiths to mint the coins of the realm at the Royal Mint and thereby acquire the considerable benefits of the seigniorage income for their own private account. His brother James II’s (1685-88) reign only lasted three years. He was a victim of unscrupulous pamphleteering and propaganda, which emanated mainly from Holland.





A military expedition undertaken by Prince William of Orange eventually dethroned him. Although James’s army was numerically superior, he was discouraged from attacking after John Churchill, first Duke of Marlborough had suddenly deserted him. According to the Jewish Encyclopaedia, Churchill subsequently received an annual stipend of 6,000 pounds from the Dutch Jew Solomon Medina in payment for his treasonous conduct.





William of Orange’s military campaign like that of the other William (the Conqueror) in 1066 had been financed by Jewish bankers. In return for their support William III (1689-1702) would surrender the royal prerogative of issuing England’s money free of debt and interest, to a consortium known as the Governor and Company of the Bank of England. A.N. Field in All these Things summarizes these momentous events as follows:





Thirty-three years after Cromwell had let the Jews into Britain, a Dutch prince arrived from Amsterdam surrounded by a whole swarm of Jews from that financial center. Driving his royal father-in-law out of the kingdom, he graciously consented to ascend the throne of Britain. A very natural result following on this event was the inauguration of the national debt by the establishment six years later of the Bank of England for the purpose of lending money to the crown. Britain had paid her way as she went until the Jews arrived. The pawnshop was then opened, and the resulting situation in which the nation finds itself today could not be better described than in the words put by Shakespeare with prophetic vision in the mouth of the dying John of Gaunt:





“This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England, . . . / This land of such dear souls, this dear, dear land / Dear for her reputation through the world, / Is now leas’d out, (I die pronouncing it,) / Like to a tenement, or pelting farm:/England, bound in with the triumphant sea, / Whose rocky shore beats back the envious siege / Of wat’ry Neptune, is now bound in with shame, / With inky blots, and rotten parchment bonds: / That England, that was wont to conquer others, / Hath made a shameful conquest of itself.” (Richard II, Act 2, Scene 1)





The history of the second Jewish settlement in Britain is one long trail of parchment bonds shackling the nation in debt. Every step in the ascent of the Jew in the nation’s affairs has been marked by the increase and multiplication of debt.”





THE BANK OF ENGLAND





The need for a privately owned central bank was fronted by a retired pirate, William Paterson, when he wrote a pamphlet in 1693 entitled A Brief Account of the Intended Bank of England. He would later boast that this bank “hath the benefit of interest on money which it creates out of nothing.”





On Thursday, June 21, 1694, subscription lists for the bank, which had a capital of 1.2 million pounds, were opened. By the following Monday, this amount had been fully subscribed. The ostensible purpose of the bank was to lend King William unlimited sums at 8% per annum to enable the prosecution of war, and in particular the conflict against Louis XIV of France.





The bank would thus receive from the crown interest of 100,000 pounds per annum, the additional 4,000 pounds being an administrative fee. The bank also acquired the right to issue 1.2 million in banknotes without any gold cover. Prior to its listing, the bylaws of the bank were carefully scrutinized by Serjeant Levinz in order to ensure that the bank complied with its hidden purpose, viz. to fleece the English people in perpetuity by allowing the creation of the nation’s money and means of exchange out of nothing, at interest. All this fake money was accompanied by compounding interest.





Levinz was a Jew from Amsterdam who practiced as an advocate. There was much opposition to the establishment of the bank. Foremost were the goldsmiths and moneylenders, who correctly foresaw that it would bring an end to their usurious racket of fractional reserve banking based on their gold receipts. Landowners and country gentry feared an escalation in interest rates, as the bank would control the nation’s money supply. There were allegations that the bank would favor certain merchants with low rates of interest. The biggest fear was that “the bank would grow too powerful and would become the keystone of the commercial world.”





Unfortunately, this is exactly what happened, as the Bank of England became the model on which all subsequent central banks were replicated. At that time the House of Commons had 512 members, consisting of 243 Tories, 241 Whigs and 28 members whose allegiance was unknown.





About two thirds of the members were country gentlemen and it is believed that of the 512 members approximately 20% were illiterate. The bill was debated in July 1694, the high point in summer, when most of the rural members were engaged in summer pursuits and the harvesting of their crops.





On that fateful Friday, July 27, 1694, when the charter of incorporation was granted, only 42 members were present, all of them Whigs as the Tories opposed the bill. All the Whigs voted for it. [This begs the question as to what a quorum consisted of in those days.] The title of the bill made no mention of the proposed Bank of England, which is only described or one might say secreted, two-thirds down in the unintelligible verbiage—to the layman that is—of the bill. The opening sentence of the bill reads as follows: “William and Mary by the grace of God, King and Queen of England, Scotland, France and Ireland, defenders of the faith etc. To all for whom these presents shall come greeting.”





The third sentence, which contains 242 words starts:





Whereas in and by a certain Act lately made in Parliament entitled an Act for granting to their majesties several rates and duties upon TONNAGE OF SHIPS AND VESSELS, and upon beer, ale, and other liquors, for securing certain recompenses and advantages in the said Act mentioned, to such persons as shall voluntarily advance the sum of fifteen hundred thousand pounds towards carrying on the war with France it is amongst other things enacted...





The gist of the first two-thirds of the bill details the necessity to levy a complicated array of new rates, duties and taxes on ships, beer, ale and other liquors. The true purpose of these taxes is that they were needed in order to fund the interest on all future government loans. Shortly thereafter further taxes were introduced including a land tax, paper tax, poll tax, salt tax, stamp tax and window tax, which replaced the hearth or chimney tax. Other taxes initiated were a tax on pedlars, a tax on hackney coaches, a tax on births, marriages and deaths and lastly a tax on bachelors. However, the most punitive tax introduced was an income tax, levied at a rate of 20%. It was applied not only on companies, but laborers too.





WAR AND DEBT SLAVERY





Henceforth a pattern would emerge where unnecessary wars would be embarked upon which simultaneously increased the national debt and the profits of the usurers. Significantly, many of these wars were started against countries, which had implemented interest-free state banking systems, as was the case in the North American Colonies and France under Napoleon. This pattern of attacking and enforcing the bankers’ system of usury has been deployed widely in the modern era and includes the defeats of Imperial Russia in World War I, Germany, Italy and Japan in World War II and most recently Libya in 2011.





These were all countries that had state banking systems, which distributed the wealth of their respective nations on an equal basis and provided their populations with a standard of living far superior to that of their rivals and contemporaries. Within two years of its establishment in 1696 the Bank of England had 1,750,000 worth of bank notes circulating with a gold reserve of only 2% or 36,000 pounds. On May 1, 1707 the union between Scotland and England was established, motivated in no small way by the necessity to seize control of the royal mint in Edinburgh, which took place in 1709. By 1720 after the conclusion of the War of the Spanish Succession (1701-14) the national debt had risen to 30 million pounds with the war itself having cost 50 million pounds.





After the American War of Independence (1775-83), which had been fought after the Colonists were forced to replace their debt-free Colonial scrip with English money that resulted in 50% unemployment, the national debt soared to 176 million pounds. In 1786 Prime Minister William Pitt the Younger tried to abolish the national debt with a sinking fund which generated interest of 1 million pounds per annum to repay the debt.





This scheme was soon abandoned by the enormous increase incurred to finance the war against Napoleon. In 1797 in order to pay for the burgeoning interest burden, a system of graduated income tax had to be introduced. The war against France lasted from 1792 until 1815. Among the principal objectives of this pointless bloodletting was to destroy Napoleon’s debt and interest-free system of finance.





On Jan. 18, 1800 Napoleon established the Banque de France as a state bank. As Napoleon detested the bankers, he made himself not only governor of the bank, but also appointed himself first minister of Treasury. During this period England waged a war against the United States from 1812 until 1814. This war was instigated by England after the United States Congress refused to renew the charter of the foreign-owned Bank of the United States, which had been the central bank of America from 1791 until 1811.





By 1815 the national debt had ballooned to 885 million pounds. This completely unnecessary and unwinnable war which resulted in approximately three million military personnel and at least one million civilians losing their lives, cost 831 million pounds 44 of which over 2.5 billion pounds were still outstanding in 1914.





The principal of 504 million pounds increased fivefold as a result of compound interest. An astute agrarian and parliamentarian, William Cobbett (1763-1835), at this time perceived what was afoot and wrote as follows: “I set to read the Act of Parliament by which the Bank of England was created. The investors knew what they were about. Their design was to mortgage by degrees the whole country . . . lands . . . houses . . . property . . . labor. The scheme has produced what the world never saw before: starvation in the midst of abundance." The affairs of the Bank of England remained secret, and it was not until 1833, 139 years later, that a sanitized version of its accounts was presented to Parliament by means of the Act of 1833.





Political Zionism—the attempt by the Jews to take over Palestine—actually did not start with the Balfour Declaration. Napoleon Bonaparte (above), founder of the Banque de France, was among the first Christian Zionists. In Paris, Le Moniteur Universal published in 1799 a short statement sent from the French forces besieging Acre, saying that: “Buonaparte a fait publier une proclamation, dans laquelle il invite les juifs de l’Asie et de l’Afrique à venir se ranger sous ses drapeaux, pour rétablir l’ancienne Jérusalem; il en a déjà armé un grand nombre, et leurs bataillons menacent Alep.” This has been translated in English as: “Bonaparte has published a proclamation in which he invites all the Jews of Asia and Africa to gather under his flag in order to re-establish the ancient Jerusalem. He has already given arms to a great number, and their battalions threaten Aleppo.” But Napoleon was defeated in Palestine, and the Zionist scheme temporarily fell through as a result. Throughout his empire, Napoleon gave the Jews equal rights with Christians. For more from Napoleon, we recommend The Maxims of Napoleon, a compilation of thought from Bonaparte himself.





In 1800 a member of Parliament, Sir William Pultney, proposed the formation of a national bank after having made “vigorous attacks” against the bank. In 1824 another member of parliament, David Ricardo, submitted a detailed plan to convert the Bank of England into a national bank. Both attempts failed.





At the start of World War I in 1914, the British national debt stood at 650 million pounds. On March 31, 1919 it had increased to 7. 434 billion pounds, of which 3 billion pounds is still outstanding after 94 years at a coupon of 3.5% per annum. In World War II the national debt rose by almost 200% from 7.1 billion pounds in 1939 to 20.1 billion pounds in 1945. Currently it stands at almost 1.2 trillion pounds.





CONCLUSION





For over 300 years England has been drawn into the thrall of a ruthless clique of international bankers, whose parasitic empire now threatens the existence of this island nation. The once proud people of yeomen and peasants, out of ignorance and indifference, has become a multicultural melting pot of debt slaves. Unless its original citizens take responsibility to familiarize themselves with the true nature of their problem, they are doomed within a few generations to irreversible enslavement and genetic destruction.





STEPHEN GOODSON: is the leader of the Abolition of Income Tax and Usury Party in South Africa. He studied economics and law at Stellenbosch University, South Africa and at the University of Ghent, Belgium. For 15 years he managed investment portfolios at various financial institutions. He is currently a director of the South African Reserve Bank. He can be contacted at abolishusury@telkomsa.net. Goodson is the author of An Illustrated Guide to Adolf Hitler, published by THE BARNES REVIEW.