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 70^th 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 Occupation, 1944-1950, 2^nd 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.

Behind Rammstein's New Song: "Deutschland"

The German hard rock band Rammstein recently released its first new material since its 2009 album "Liebe ist für alle da". The self-titled album will launch on May 17, with the band marking the announcement with a hard-hitting video for the first single titled simply "Deutschland", which was directed by Specter Berlin and can be watched below.

The full-length video shows Rammstein assume different roles during famous eras of German history and features scenes from Weimar, Nazi and communist East Germany. Throughout, they sing about a love-hate relationship with their German identity.

The band stirred some controversy among the Jewish community for posting a shorter promotional clip that showed band members dressed up as Nazi concentration camp prisoners.

[caption id="attachment_16883" align="aligncenter" width="391"] The cover for Rammstein's new single "Deutschland", displaying an African female actor (Rubey Commey) as "Germania".[/caption]

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeQM1c-XCDc

The music video itself, as well as the song's lyrics are, suffice to say, cryptic and packed with double meanings.

[Verse 1]
You (You have, you have, you have, you have)
Have cried a lot (Cried, cried, cried, cried)
Separated in spirit (Separated, separated, separated, separated)
United in heart (United, united, united, united)
We (We are, we are, we are, we are)
Have been together for a very long time (You are, you are, you are, you are)
Your breath is cold (So cold, so cold, so cold, so cold)
The heart in flames (So hot, so hot, so hot, so hot)
You (You can, you can, you can, you can)
I (I know, I know, I know, I know)
We (We are, we are, we are, we are)
You (You stay, you stay, you stay, you stay)

[Chorus]
Germany – my heart in flames
Want to love and damn you
Germany – your breath is cold
So young, and yet so old
Germany!

[Verse 2]
I (You have, you have, you have, you have)
I never want to leave you (You cry, you cry, you cry, you cry)
One can love you (You love, you love, you love, you love)
And want to hate you (You hate, you hate, you hate, you hate)
Presumptuous, superior
Take over, hand over/puke
Surprise, assault
Germany, Germany over all

[Chorus]
Germany – my heart in flames
Want to love and damn you
Germany – your breath is cold
So young, and yet so old
Germany – your love
Is a curse and a blessing
Germany – my love
I can't give you
Germany!
Germany!

[Bridge]
You
I
We
You
You (Overwhelming, redundant)
I (Supermen, weary)
We (Who climbs high will fall deeply)
You (Germany, Germany over all)

[Chorus]
Germany – my heart in flames
Want to love and damn you
Germany – your breath is cold
So young, and yet so old
Germany – your love
Is a curse and blessing
Germany – my love
I can't give you
Germany!

---

A right-wing interpretation?

That, or at least a protestation against the deconstruction of the German and wider European identity. Lead singer, Till Lindemann, finds that "de-traditionalisation" is disturbing, and stated there is also no authenticity anymore.

The material doesn't give much away to the untrained eye. At a glance, I would say it looks like another propaganda piece for cultural Marxism - an African in historic European regalia is a red flag - but several other interpretations of the material may possibly suggest otherwise:

The black woman represents Germania (black(skin), red(eyes), gold(armour).

She's overtaken by:
- Greed (the business/banking scene),
- Lust (making out with Till's head)
- Gluttony of the elites (priests eating from her on the table)
and on of top of that she isn't even white anymore.

Everything is falling apart:
- their economy (banking scene)
- their society (police scene)
- their beliefs (Auschwitz book burning scene)
and in the end everything falls into chaos.

Germany is both ill and sterile and can't even give birth to a child (childbirth scene where they pull out a puppy, this may represent white people having pets instead of children). This scene is emphasized by the hazmat suit wearers surrounding Germania.

Germany is soon after dead, they send her in a coffin to space.

Other interpretations:

• At the start an African "Germania" is seemingly beamed into a Germanic forest by a sophisticated civilization, and is depicted in ancient history in an encounter with the Romans, she is seen with the head of a German man. This could demonstrate the denial of white European/German history by Marxist academics.


• We see the modern Catholic Church turn its back on Germans, eating from the body of liberal multicultural Germany as a balkanized and divided electorate. Under the table we see subjugated gimp-masked people flailing; possibly the disregarded German people. Eating from a woman's body is also an erotic thing to do, suggesting both the gluttony and sexual transgressions of the fallen Catholic Church. Rats are seen to congregate around them too.


• We see the politburo of the communist/masonic administration, the thing responsible for modern Germany's fall.


• The black woman representing Germania is seen wearing lots of jewelry/bling and walking with a band of dogs on leashes, escorted by modern riot police. Perhaps representing modern liberal Germany increasingly becoming a police state of gangster proportions. The attire seen perhaps depicts Germania as a modern, rapidly degenerating Americanized Germany. Police seen to defend this cultural and social regression (political correctness?).


• Gang of transgender/LGBT people kidnap Germania from the mentioned police. Demonstrating the failure of the German state to defend Germany from terror related incidents as well as cultural and social decay.


• Sons of futuristic (German?) civilization find memoriam of German civilization and Germania herself. Germany's history and culture is alien to the populace, hence the spacesuits.


• Nazis and liberal Germania are both killed together by Jews. One fell as much as the other. Perhaps represents the guilt of the "Holocaust" and Jewish persecution being pushed on Germany in both its conservative and liberal form, this tirade of reverse persecution is endless.


• African (multicultural) Germania is pregnant.


• Futuristic Germania gives birth to some ragged mutts (mongrels/a dog of no definable type or breed/a person of mixed descent). Demonstrates multi-ethnic and mixed race societies having no roots. The dogs could represent weak men (a dog should not be birthed by a woman), whether they are pure bred or mutts themselves. Apparently these dogs are mixed breed German Leonbergers. The Leonberger dog became popular with several European royal households, including Napoleon II, Empress Elisabeth of Austria, the Prince of Wales, Otto Von Bismarck, Emperor Napoleon III, and Umberto I of Italy. This could suggest these are purpose bred dogs (people) to satisfy the ruling aristocracy.


• Faces of disappointed & disgusted German men/medics in protective gear, when they see what the inheritors of Germania have become.


• Marxist/Freemasonic/Communist forces clash with Germany's history and identity. Cultural Marxism at war with Germany.


• Terminally ill Germania is finally put into a coffin and shot into space to be forgotten forever.


• The red heifer's (cows) shown in the birthing scene. The red heifer (Hebrew: פָרָה אֲדֻמָּה; para adumma), also known as the red cow, was a cow brought to the priests as a sacrifice according to the Torah, and its ashes were used for the ritual purification of Tum'at HaMet ("the impurity of the dead"), that is, an Israelite who had come into contact with a corpse.


• In order to purify a person who has become ritually contaminated by contact with a corpse, water from the vessel is sprinkled on him, using a bunch of hyssop, on the third and seventh day of the purification process. (Numbers 19:18-19). We see a water sprinkle overlay during the birthing scene to illustrate this. The corpse is clearly going to be Germania.


• The Temple Institute, an organization dedicated to preparing the reconstruction of a Third Temple in Jerusalem, has been attempting to identify red heifer candidates consistent with the requirements of Numbers 19:1–22 and Mishnah Tractate Parah. In recent years, the institute thought to have identified two candidates, one in 1997 and another in 2002. Some believe that the Second Coming of Jesus Christ cannot occur until the Third Temple is constructed in Jerusalem, which requires the appearance of a red heifer born in Israel.


• Susceptible and subverted Black Germania is held hostage, is eaten from at a table by gluts, leads German identity and history into conflict with the state.


• "The Germania", written by the Roman historian Publius Cornelius Tacitus around 98 ad and originally entitled On the Origin and Situation of the Germans (Latin: De Origine et situ Germanorum), was a historical and ethnographic work on the Germanic tribes outside the Roman Empire.

In the first stanza, we get some confusion of identity—you, I, we. There is mention of being different and separate. This could be a reference to the Cold War and Germany's separation. This stanza could be setting the scene for what the New Germany is today.

The first two lines of the second stanza sound like a comment on the current situation in Germany. Germany is in flames and wants to love all the immigrants. There could also be the double meaning of Germany being a burning world power, like a furnace getting the job done, so they think they can take in a bunch of refugees. When they take them in, however, the flame of Germany is cooled. Germany is so young and foolish yet so old as a country.

There is a confusion of identity again in the third stanza. The Germans have, they let crying refugees in, they love them for a short while, and then they turn on the Germans. Arrogant Germany thought they and the EU could take all these people in, but they couldn't, and now, they have been taken over. Through the Schengen Agreement, the refugees invade all.

In the final stanza, we get more confusion of identity, meaning multikulti, if you haven't picked up on that by now. "You (overpowering superfluous) / I (Superman, tired)."

Understanding the Christchurch Shooting & Manifesto

The Australian man Brenton Tarrant's racially and politically motivated shooting in Christchurch New Zealand coincided with the Roman Ides of March (15th March), a day used by the Romans as a deadline for settling debts.

It was the day Julius Caesar was assassinated in 44 BC, and was a pivotal moment in the Roman Empire's history — Tarrant's "debt collection" was attributed mainly to avenging the 2017 death of 11-year-old Ebba Åkerlund, who was plowed down by a HGV at the hands of an Islamic terrorist.

"...That difference was Ebba Åkerlund. Young, innocent and dead Ebba."

— Tarrant's Manifesto "The Great Replacement", on why he committed the acts.

The Christchurch shooting left 50 dead, and many injured. The bought-out media - of course - has plastered every outlet with condemnation for the eminent threat of far-right "white supremacist" extremism - such coverage being many magnitudes greater than coverage of similar, and far more numerous Islamic fundamentalist atrocities against Europeans.

Most recently, the Hillary Clinton & Barack Obama among others, covered up the massive attack on Christians by using the vague term "Easter worshippers". Both Hillary and Obama identified Muslim victims directly and honestly in similar attacks.

The so far 359-death Sri Lanka attack was carried out by ISIS on 21st April 2019 - the Islamic terrorists that claimed to be ISIS, "carried out (the attack) in retaliation for a March attack on two mosques in New Zealand".

Racial and national determinism is celebrated in more or less all non-Western countries. Jews can practice ethnic and national determinism, as seen in modern Israel as the "homeland" for the Jewish people, China can do the same for the ethnic Chinese, there was no media outcry for the racially motivated pogroms against whites in South Africa. Minority groups in the West are acknowledged by the Marxist leftist institutions as groups with identities - the whites are, for the most part, not.

This is sinister and deliberate cultural Marxism. This is the great blatant hypocrisy of our time.

The targeted Mosque had links to radical Islam.

A previous investigation revealed that the Mosque that was targeted had hosted speakers which encouraged active engagement of violence in the struggle of jihad against the infidels.

Stuff.co.nz:

Jones was killed alongside Australian Christopher Havard, whose parents said he was introduced to radical Islam at the Al-Noor mosque in Christchurch.

Mosque leaders confirmed Havard stayed there and studied in 2011, but denied radical teaching took place. But a man who attended a converts’ weekend at the mosque 10 years ago said a visiting speaker from Indonesia talked about violent jihad and plenty shared his views. “Most of the men were angry with the moral weakness of New Zealand. I would say they were radical.”

British political activist and the author of The Fall of Western Man, Mark Collett posted on Twitter:

"When 22 people, mainly young girls, were killed by a Muslim suicide bomber at Manchester Arena, people sang 'Don't Look Back in Anger' & were told not to blame 'groups' for the actions of one. Will people be singing that song today, or will the media be singing a different tune?"

European advocacy think tank VertigoPolitix tweeted:

"According to many sources, including the UN, some 90,000+ Christians were murdered last year worldwide by Muslim fundamentalists. Not a single report on CNN, nor a brief newscast on the subject by any entity in the media. That's 250 Christians murdered every day. Just silence..."

The mainstream media has failed to present balanced coverage of the fact that this is clearly a one-sided conflict in terms of numbers — according to the "What makes Islam so different?" website; 859 people were killed and 844 injured in "killings in the name of Islam" in the past 30 days alone. Can the same be said for Christians? That doesn't even account for the huge death toll of European innocents at the hands of Islamic terror in the past bloody decade.

It also doesn't account for the astronomical figures of shady "collateral" civilian Muslim deaths in the middle east at the hands of neoconservative foreign policies seeking to wrest control of the region - using mass displacement, starvation & disease (as seen in Yemen), and the bombing of civilian buildings to pressure the administrations of target regimes to buckle and break.

The Tarrant Manifesto.

The shooter, besides recording the entire event with a GoPro, also wrote a short, albeit compelling manifesto - which he uploaded with the video, titled "The Great Replacement" - likely inspired by the writings of French writer, Renaud Camus, who first coined the term.

In this manifesto, its contents informed "over a great deal of time, from a great deal of places", Tarrant expresses support for the conservative policies of the People's Republic of China (PRC). He criticizes the "milquetoast", cosmopolitan leaders of Europe, also discussing the leftist's "long march through the institutions" among many other topics.

Tarrant's principal goal was accelerationist; to trigger conflict along racial, political, and social lines - especially through inflaming the gun debate in the United States, possibly triggering conflict. He states that "only in times of radical change and social discomfort can great and terrific change occur", opposing the ineffective due processes that have been hijacked by the Jewish moneylender plutocracy.

"Democracy is mob rule and the mob itself is ruled by our enemies. The global and corporate run press controls them, the education system (long since fallen to the long march through the institutions carried out by the Marxists) controls them, the state (long since heavily lost to its corporate backers) controls them and the anti-white media machine controls them. Do not suffer under the delusion of an effortless, riskless democratic victory. Prepare for war, prepare for violence and prepare for risk, loss, struggle, death. Force is the only path to power and the only path to true victory."

Tarrant presented his actionable aims in bold subheadings with thought-provoking titles such as "destabilization and accelerationism: tactics for victory", "globalized capitalist markets are the enemy of racial autonomists", "NGOs are directly involved in the genocide of the European people", the harbinger's "it is never wise to become a minority group", the anti-democratic "there is no democratic solution", and the fiscally-minded "no taxes to anti-white States", among others.

"This solution of a Democratic salvation is nothing but a pipe dream, and as our enemies increase within our lands, driven by mass immigration and the invaders own higher birth rate it will be pushed further and further into the realms of impossibility."

His position as an "eco-fascist" in agreement with Sir Oswald Mosley’s views, seeks to abolish the laissez-faire nature of modern money-centric globalist economics and social order in turn for more morally, culturally, racially and environmentally conscious and autonomous European nation states.

"In the end human greed and the need for increasing profit margins of capital owners needs to be fought against and broken."

His proposed method is hyper-protectionism, distantly akin to the protectionism of the European Union, although far less globally-minded still, calling to "break the back of cheap labour", calling it "slave labour" and a force for denigrating meaningful advanced human societies:

"An environmentally conscious and moral society will never be able to economically compete with a society based on ever increasing industrialization, urbanization, industrial output and population increase. The cheaper labour and ignorance of environmental health will always result in cheaper goods produced with less effort and inevitably result in control of the market."

Tarrant also addresses the issues of the mass-proliferation of foreign populations in relation to the environment and world stability, positing an argument for white advocacy and ethno-nationalism, as opposed to seeing demographics as a purely financial tool in a race to seize the global markets.

Tarrant argues against modernity, arguing human stock ought to live meaningful lives guided by environmental consideration and social and moral principles of higher thought. Tarrant believed whites have demonstrated this capacity better than other groups:

"The environment is being destroyed by over population, we Europeans are one of the groups that are not over populating the world. The invaders are the ones over populating the world. Kill the invaders, kill the overpopulation and by doing so save the environment."

A more satirical side emerged in the manifesto, as Tarrant highlighted the fact Nelson Mandela had emerged a celebrated leader, politician and an icon of African ethnic and national identity following his similar acts of terrorism:

"I do not just expected to be released, but I also expect an eventual Nobel Peace prize. As was awarded to the Terrorist Nelson Mandela once his own people achieved victory and took power. I expect to be freed in 27 years from my incarceration, the same number of years as Mandela, for the same crime."

Italy & Hungary: Taking Back Control

Recent populist moves by Hungary's Viktor Orbán and Italy's Matteo Salvini have widened the rift between their nations and transnational EU policies.

• Orbán has passed a law permitting families with four or more children to be exempt from income tax for life:

This new tax incentive is a clear pro-white move to boost the native Hungarian population, such a powerful incentive is proof that mass migration is not necessary to replenish a declining population.

Orbán stated that “they (the EU) want as many migrants to enter as there are missing kids, so that the numbers will add up. We Hungarians have a different way of thinking. Instead of just numbers, we want Hungarian children. Migration for us is surrender.” Orbán also called for anti-migration politicians to take over the EU, as he recently hailed a new partnership between Poland’s right wing government and Italy’s populist interior minister, Matteo Salvini.

• Salvini has called for central banking in Italy to be audited and "reduced to zero":

Salvini has called for wresting control of Italy's sizeable gold reserves away from the country's central bank in a series of threats to the independence of the Bank of Italy by Rome's populist coalition.

He said the Bank of Italy and Consob, the country’s stock market regulator, should be "reduced to zero, more than changing one or two people, reduced to zero" or in other words eliminated, and that “fraudsters” who inflicted losses on Italian savers should "end up in prison for a long time."

Meanwhile, ECB head Mario Draghi, an Italian and former former governor of the Bank of Italy, last year warned that central bank independence was under threat by populist governments, while not making a direct reference to Italy. Should Salvini cement his de facto Italian leadership in upcoming elections, it would make life for the local central bank especially complicated.

Recently, the government nominated Paolo Savona, a veteran economist and prominent Eurosceptic who had previously served as minister for European affairs, as the new president of Consob. Savona was last year been blocked as the coalition’s first choice as economy minister by Italian president Sergio Mattarella, following strong pressure from Brussels and a revolt in the Italian bond market.

DNA Co-Discoverer James Watson's Honours Stripped Over His Factual Comments On Race

The Nobel Prize winning co-discoverer of DNA, molecular biologist, geneticist and zoologist James Watson has been stripped of his honours over his scientifically informed comments on the genetic IQ differences between the races.

In January 2019, following the broadcast of a PBS television documentary which was filmed last summer in which Watson repeated his long-held views on race and genetics, the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory revoked honorary titles that it had awarded to him, and cut all remaining ties with him.

This is the state of science in the Western world.

The now 90-year-old, who was conveniently targeted in a smear campaign at an opportune moment; is currently in a nursing home recovering from a car accident that happened last October, and is sadly said to have "very minimal" awareness of his surroundings.

His family stated that he is unable to reply due to his condition. This is not a man who can readily defend himself and the scientific basis of his views, he is physically not able to fulfill his right of reply. 

Therefore, it is the responsibility of other intellectuals and other public figures and the public alike to come forward and defend Mr. Watson's reputation in the face of the liberal "scientific" establishment and ongoing media campaign to discredit him — despite his monumental achievements and utter credibility in the field of genetics, from which his comments stemmed.

In the new documentary on PBS celebrating his life, an interviewer asks the 90-year-old scientist if, given the backlash he suffered after his comments about race and intelligence, his views had changed.

His answer leaves no room for uncertainty:

“No, not at all,” Watson says. 

"There’s a difference on the average between blacks and whites on IQ tests. I would say the difference is genetic.”

He has also previously said that stereotypes associated with racial and ethnic groups have a genetic basis: Jews being intelligent, Chinese being intelligent but not creative because of selection for conformity, and Indians being servile.

His informed stance is unwavering, Watson won't budge, stating that his intention was to promote science, not racism:

"I have never thought of myself as a racist. I don't see myself as a racist. I am mortified by it. It was the worst thing in my life."

Despite his protestations, which fell on deaf ears — they want Watson and his public profile scrubbed from all scientific literature and thoroughly vilified, in the midst of a car crash incident, they have gone for the jugular.

On "Anti-Semitism"

Watson has also brilliantly opposed the idea of Jewish exceptionalism. No group ought to be immune to the rigor of open discourse. Another likely reason why the Jewish dominated establishment has decided to discredit him; he dared to be epistemic.

In another interview in 2007, this time with the magazine Esquire, Dr Watson said that “some anti-Semitism is justified”.

“Just like some anti-Irish feeling is justified. If you can’t be criticized, that’s very dangerous. You lose the concept of a free society,” he said.

In the same interview he praised Ashkenazi Jews, suggesting they are more intelligent than other ethnic groups.

Watson is factually correct. But not "politically correct". This is another chapter in the dystopian censorship of our time.

Terraforming has begun: “Global dimming” is a plot to exterminate humanity by terraforming the atmosphere with smog pollution, killing Earth’s food crops and unleashing ecological collapse

Article from Mike Adams at Natural News.

Now we come to the end game for humanity. This is it, folks: They have a plan to collapse global food production, kill off over 90% of the human race, devastate natural ecosystems and pollute the Earth’s atmosphere… and it’s all being sold to you under the banner of “environmentalism.”

The scheme is called “global dimming,” and it’s a dangerous geoengineering plot to spray billions of tons of smog into the atmosphere so that pollution levels would block sunlight and halt global warming. This is literally what the mad environmental scientists are now proposing — the very same people who have, for years, claimed that “chemtrails” are a conspiracy theory and don’t exist. Now, all of a sudden, they want to chemtrail the entire planet in order to “save” us all from global warming.

“Stratospheric aerosol injection” now the new name for chemtrails / geoengineering

The global dimming scheme is, of course, based on spraying chemtrails into the upper atmosphere using thousands of high-altitude flights that release pollution to dim the sun. The very idea of “chemtrails” has, until now, been mocked by the media and the science establishment, who have for years claimed the very idea of chemtrails is a lunatic conspiracy theory. So they’ve changed the name to “stratospheric aerosol injection,” and they now have a science paper that outlines all the costs involved.

“We lay out a future solar geoengineering deployment scenario of halving the increase in anthropogenic radiative forcing,” writes Wake Smith and Gernot Wagner in their paper, “Stratospheric aerosol injection tactics and costs in the first 15 years of deployment.” Published in Environmental Research Letters, you can view the full text of the study at this link.

Geoengineering is another term that many people use synonymously with “chemtrails.” And now it’s a strategy being openly advocated by scientists to halt so-called “climate change,” a fake science hoax that has been perpetrated on the world by power-hungry globalists who want humanity to surrender to global rule in the name of “saving the planet.”

The study cites the specific aircraft that would be needed to achieve chemtrails pollution. “[P]urpose-built high-altitude tanker with substantial payload capabilities” would be deployed to spray sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere. The paper proposes 4000 flights a year, costing $2.25 billion per year, continuing over 15 years to make sure the atmosphere is significantly polluted to dim the sun and achieve the terraforming goals of globalists (see more details, below).

In the conclusion of their abstract, the study authors explain the program would require, “thousands of flights annually by airliner-sized aircraft operating from an international array of bases,” making it almost impossible to keep secret.

Of course, this very program has already begun, and secrecy isn’t necessary when you have the entire media and science establishment condemning any belief in chemtrails as a form of mental illness. So just remember: As they pollute the skies and dim the sun, if you point out that they’re polluting the skies and dimming the sun, you’re a “conspiracy theorist.”

And there’s no such thing as chemtrails, you see. Nope, it’s “stratospheric aerosol injection” now, which sounds almost sciency. That’s how this program is already being perpetrated right under our noses, right now, even while the media runs a global cover-up to dismiss such ideas as bizarre theories.

The global controllers hope you never read the science papers, of course, because there, geoengineering is routinely cited and even advocated as the “solution” to climate change.

Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) explained… and yeah, it’s just another name for chemtrails

“Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) would require lofting hundreds of thousands to millions of tons of material each year to altitudes up to ~20 km,” explain study authors. They also ask, “Could it be done in secret?”

The study offers heavy discussion on the design and costs of aircraft that could deliver the planned pollution to the upper atmosphere:

IPCC (2018) states that ‘there is high agreement that aircrafts after some modifications could inject millions of tons of SO2 in the lower stratosphere (~20 km)’.

The overall goal of the geoengineering program is to inject 5 million tons of SO2 (sulfur dioxide, otherwise known as “smog”) into the atmosphere. Achieving that goal, “assumes a rational actor seeking to implement a scientifically sensible SAI program,” write the study authors, somehow claiming it is “rational” to disperse mass pollution across the atmosphere of your own planet. The same authors also claim this program must be conducted, “purely out of humanitarian and environmental considerations.”

Shocking realization: This is terraforming planet Earth to collapse the global food supply and kill off humans

In considering the sheer lunacy of the “Stratospheric Aerosol Injection” plan, I feel compelled to state that these climate change / global warming scientists are dangerously insane sociopaths and they must be stopped before they murder us all. These lunatics, if given enough government funding, will literally murder our planet and destroy human civilization. Such is the cost of the decades of false propaganda in our public schools that has brainwashed children into believing “climate change” is real and must be halted. The schemes now being proposed to halt this non-existent problem will, themselves, bring about the global destruction that children are being warned about with global warming.

This global pollution / terraforming program, if allowed to continue, could unleash the following devastating consequences, especially if deployed at a time when the sun is in its own dimming cycle that would accelerate global cooling.

#1) Global collapse of food crops – The reduction in solar radiation caused by geoengineering, combined with the natural cycle of global cooling from sun cycles, could produce a sharp reduction in food crop production across the globe. This would result in increased food prices and reduced food supplies, adding to vectors for civil unrest and “climate refugees” invading First World nations to escape starvation.

#2) Global rise in cancer from vitamin D deficiency – Reduction in solar radiation reaching the surface of the planet would exacerbate vitamin D deficiencies that already strongly contribute to cancer fatalities around the world. Sunlight is currently the primary source of vitamin D for billions of world citizens. Dimming the sun would be a death sentence for millions each year who would suffer the dire consequences of chronic vitamin D deficiencies.

#3) Global drop in IQs due to increased air pollution – Increases in air pollution have been scientifically found to lower children’s IQs. In addition, air pollution is scientifically documented to damage DNA in the womb, increase the risk of ventricular arrhythmia and increase the risk of bone loss in humans.

#4) Massive loss of habitat and ecosystems due to decreased sunlight and colder temperatures – Entire ecosystems — such as rainforests — could be devastated by a pollution-initiated drop in solar radiation. Marine ecosystems also rely heavily on solar radiation to power the photosynthesis of ocean plants such as seaweeds, grasses and algae, which serve as a pillar food source for the entire marine food web. Dimming the sun would have devastating consequences for all ecosystems on the planet, resulting in a catastrophic loss of life, habitat and eco-diversity.

#5) Huge increase in global acid rain that will devastate forests and food crops – The mass injection of SO2 into the atmosphere will result in SO2 being dispersed into lower levels of the atmosphere over time. There, mixed with rain storms, it will create sulfurous acid, otherwise known as acid rain. This acid rain will devastate forests and food crops and result in the acidification of crop soils, destabilizing soil microbes and leading the widespread crop losses.

#6) Decreased plant production of oxygen that’s necessary for humans, primates and mammals to survive – Nearly all plants depend on solar radiation for photosynthesis, which uses CO2 as a “fuel” and produces oxygen (O2) as a byproduct. Reducing solar radiation through chemtrails pollution would reduce the production of oxygen by plants, resulting in a global fall in atmospheric oxygen levels, ultimately leading to the mass asphyxiation of humans, primates and mammals if allowed to continue. Even the EPA (see source below) admits that SO2 interferes with human respiration and makes it difficult for people to breathe.

Even the EPA recognizes sulfur dioxide as a dangerous pollutant that makes it difficult for humans to breathe

Note carefully that the geoengineering efforts being advocated to dim the sun are based on sulfur dioxide, a known pollutant. “Short-term exposures to SO2 can harm the human respiratory system and make breathing difficult,” warns the EPA. “…[G]aseous SOx can harm trees and plants by damaging foliage and decreasing growth… SO2 and other sulfur oxides can contribute to acid rain which can harm sensitive ecosystems,” the EPA writes.

In other words, it isn’t even debated whether sulfur dioxide is a pollutant. It’s smog (or technically, it reacts to create smog), and the very idea that mass polluting the atmosphere with SO2 would somehow “save” the planet is rooted in nothing less than advanced psychosis or some other dangerous form of mental illness. That such schemes are marketed under the banner of “science” just shows how twisted the institution of science has now become.

Why would any rational institution seek to mass pollute our entire planet and destroy food crops, forests, mammals, primates and humans? The answer is even more shocking than the proposal itself, it turns out. Keep reading, as one possible explanation for all this continues below…

It wasn’t long ago that scientists warned about “global cooling” and the coming Ice Age

It was only a generation ago that young scientists were being warned that Earth was entering a “global cooling” crisis that would bring about a whole new ice age. This was the climate panic of the 1970s and early 1980s. Today’s older scientists remember the warnings quite well. We were all told that if we didn’t find a way to warm the planet, we would all perish as Earth was turned into a ball of ice.

Beginning in the 1990s, the scientists flipped the script, reversing their warning and suddenly claiming the problem was too much heat. We were all going to die from global warming if we didn’t change something, we were told. A decade or so later, when it was revealed that government science scammers were faking all the warming data, they changed the scam to “climate change,” since they couldn’t scientifically support either warming or cooling.

Here’s the cover of TIME Magazine from 1977, which warns, “How To Survive The Coming Ice Age,” then urges readers to get on board to save the planet, saying, “51 Things You Can Do to Make a Difference.”



Today, we’re told the most absurd, insane things by these scientists who insist that the climate never changed at all before the year 1920, with the rise of the combustion engine and “human activity.” And now we’re constantly terrorized by the fake news media into thinking that if we don’t pollute the Earth’s atmosphere with smog, we will all somehow die from the rise of carbon dioxide, the No. 1 most important greening nutrient for plants, forests and food crops.

So now they’ve decided they have to poison the atmosphere to fight climate change, and they’ve got about a billion gullible world citizens convinced that this is somehow an amazing idea. What they would really unleash, of course, is absolutely catastrophic to all life on our world. Remember: They want to disperse billions of tons of sulfur dioxide (smog) into the atmosphere through massive government-funded chemtrailing of the planet. The question now emerges: Is the destruction of humanity deliberate? If so, who would hatch such a nefarious plan?

Geoengineering is a planet-wide weapon system being deployed to eliminate human life on Earth while terraforming the planet for some other purpose

Here’s the cosmic inconvenient truth that Al Gore doesn’t want you to consider. What we are really witnessing here is the planned terraforming of planet Earth for some other purpose. And by “other,” I mean other than human.

If you wanted humans to thrive on planet Earth, you would not unleash mass pollution, acid rain, food crop failures, oxygen depletion and global dimming. You would, instead, try to reduce pollution, support plant life, enhance food crop production and protect global ecosystems from pollution. That’s the normal, rational thing that any human being would naturally want to pursue.

Yet we are subjected to these nefarious geoengineering schemes that directly contradict every principle of sustainable life on Earth. And it’s all described as a way to “save” the planet, even as it would destroy global life support for humans.

I can’t help but be reminded of the outstanding film Oblivion, starring Tom Cruise. In the film, the Cruise character thinks he’s protecting human civilization, but he’s actually (unknowingly) working for extraterrestrials who are stealing Earth’s resources and exterminating humans. The film is one of the best science fiction films of all time, and its story sounds eerily similar to what may be happening right now with so-called “geoengineering.”

Who (or what) would want to alter the atmosphere, decimate oxygen levels, destroy the food supply and collapse human civilization? The answer should be obvious: Something that is in competition with humans and sees no further use for humanity. Human life on Earth appears to be in the process of being “cleansed” in a cosmic ethnic cleansing scheme that will produce an altered, low-oxygen atmosphere that might prove advantageous to a life form which isn’t already part of Earth’s existing ecosystem. The reduction in solar radiation reaching Earth’s surface would make the planet more hospital to a life form that originated from a planet located farther from its home sun than Earth is from our own sun.

It raises the obvious, if bizarre-sounding, question: Are Earth’s globalists preparing the planet for a post-human era? And is that plan disguised as a “climate change” emergency course of action so that the gullible people can be told the mass pollution of the skies is a bold plan to save humanity rather than exterminate it? What if “climate change” is actually a cosmic false flag hoax that was designed from the very start to convince Earthlings to support their own extermination? Given the now-planned destruction of Earth’s atmosphere in the name of “climate change,” we must now consider such possibilities, no matter how bizarre they first seem.

Why are all the globalists suddenly talking about escaping to Mars and terraforming Marsinto a habitat where humans can survive? Why are globalists now so desperate the alter Earth’s atmosphere and make the planet inhospitable to humans? Why such a recent focus on the Arctic seed vault to preserve the seeds of life in preparation for a global cataclysm? Why are so many globalist insiders building underground bunkers and living in them?

I don’t have the answers to all these questions, but I do know that the fairy tale stories we’re being told about “climate change” and how we must save the planet by polluting the skies are rooted in complete quack science fiction and brainwashing propaganda.

On the other hand, if humans are stupid enough to destroy their own planet in the name of saving the planet, perhaps they’re simply not qualified to participate in an intelligence universe after all. Natural selection, after all, is likely playing out on a cosmic scale, and Earth appears to be flunking the cosmic IQ test that wonders, “Hey, is that civilization stupid enough to commit suicide based on a fairy tale hoax?”

So far, it appears the answer for Earth and humans is a resounding “Yes!”