Mr. Obama! Mr. Cameron! We Must Arm The Turkish Rebels Now!

.


Recent polls show that only 48% of the country living outside Instanbul support Turkey's Prime Minister, Mr Erdogan while inside Istanbul that figure collapses to a mere and shocking 30%.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/163061/turks-grew-discontent-leaders-freedom-unrest.aspx

Similar polls in Syria as revealed by NATO sources, no less, reveal that Mr Assad enjoys 70% support from the Syrian people while only 10% oppose his rule.

http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/05/31/nato-data-assad-winning-the-war-for-syrians-hearts-and-minds/

Mr Obama! Mr. Cameron! Of course we must arm the Syrian rebels. This goes without saying......

....but let us be consistent in our principles and hold firmly to our high moral standards.

THE UNDEMOCRATIC HUMANITARIAN NIGHTMARE THAT IS MODERN TURKEY MUST BE ADDRESSED FORTHWITH.

THE TURKISH PEOPLE HAVE SUFFERED ENOUGH!

Act now.

Arm the Turkish rebels immediately in order that we may all sleep soundly at night and bestride our various narrow worlds in continuing good conscience.


.

Alex of Zion Plays a Blinder at the BBC

.


A wretched mornings viewing this Sunday on BBC1.

On 'The Daily Politics' there was, for the first time, an item on the Bilderberger Conference, held this year at 'The Grove' in Watford, UK. There were large crowds of protesters outside, if somewhat distant from, the hotel itself. BBC coverage managed to make it look like a handful of fruitcakes carrying ventriloquist's dummies, wearing clown suits and carrying  deranged-looking ( to the disinterested observer) placards about paedophilia and the like. Cut to the studio where Andrew Neil interviewed David Aaronovitch and (Blimey What's This!) Alex Jones about the Bilderbergers. Look at the clip below (to the very end please) and judge for yourselves but for once, and it is once, I have to almost agree with David Aarovitch when he said, re global criminal conspirators manipulating world events, to Jones:

"The fact you are here indicates that either that one, they don't exist or two, you are part of the conspiracy. I say the first." 

Anyone who watches the entire sorry performance below will surely go with number two.

Could Jones possibly have used this precious time more wastefully. Could he possibly have given a more discreditable performance. God help us!. He was embarrassing to watch and said nothing, in my view, that would tempt the casual government-trusting observer to change their views. Andrew Neil's gesture at the end was surely, to the average viewer, quite fitting.

Jones is the very worst kind of spokesman for those of us who try to educate people about deep manipulation of political processes, the hegemony of finance, and the breathtaking and murderous lies of all our leaders.

I admit to having learnt quite a bit from Jones myself but this 'limited hangout' artist acts like a fool, looks like a fool and, what's worse, brings down ridicule on the heads of the rest of us.

Most of us quickly grow out of admiring this Zion-funded egomaniac.

What was it Lenin said?

The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.

Looks like Alex, smells like Alex.

Must be Alex.




For more BBC1 manipulation watch 'The Big Questions' on BBC iPlayer (series 6, episode 20), aired this morning also, but not yet online.

The debate about Syria was so skewed it was sickening to watch. There were two opponents of 'our' intervention in Syria, the main guy being a decent enough military fellow but a bit dim. He pointed out the obvious dangers based on the experience of Iraq and Afghanistan but failed to also make the point out that it was US/UK/EU politicians (with the support of Qataris and Saudis) that kicked off the'Syrian Rebellion' that these same politicians now find so 'heartbreaking'. He also did not challenge the picture of a satanic government at war with its own people when NATO's own research shows that 70% of the Syrian public support Assad, 20% are neutral and only 10% support the rebels. This is a level of support that David Cameron and Barack Obama can only dream about.

The (don't laugh) 'democrats' pushing for war far outnumbered these two and were allowed to bang on about our 'humanitarian duty' ad nauseam. One also notes that whenever issues of war are debated on the BBC, the Jewish representative from the 'Henry Jackson Society' always seems to make an appearance, loathsome dissembling git that he is.

Yup, the BBC know how to create the impression they desire. Gotta be the world's most skilled and practiced liars. Increasing numbers, encouragingly, are seeing through the system. Even Tory MP's are up in arms about the prospect of our arming 'the rebels' (as their party leaders recommend) so these people are getting educated somewhere even if it is not by the BBC.



P.S. Here is a powerful report about and appeal for Syria written by Nobel Laureate, Mairead Maguire.
It's conclusion (below) contains the kind of truth you will never read in the western mainstream media,
http://www.sibialiria.org/wordpress/?p=1517%2024%20maggio%202013

AN OVERVIEW: 

Following many authorized reports in the mainstream Medias and our own evidences I can stress that the Syrian State and its population are under a proxy war led by foreign countries and directly financed and backed mainly by Qatar who has imposed its views on the Arab League. Turkey, a part of the Lebanese opposition and some of the Jordan authorities offer a safe haven to a diversity of jihadist groups, each with its own agenda, recruited from many countries. Bands of jihadists armed and financed from foreign countries invade Syria through Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon porous frontiers in an effort to destabilize Syria. There are an estimated 50,000 foreign jihadist fighters terrorizing Syria.Those death squads are destroying systematically the Syrian State infrastructures (Electricity, Oil, Gas and water plants, High Tension Pylons, hospitals, schools, public buildings, cultural heritage sites and even religious sanctuaries).  Moreover the country is submerged by snipers, bombers, agitators, bandits.  They use aggression and Sharia rules and hijack the freedom and dignity of the Syrian population.  They torture and kill those who refuse to join them. They have strange religious beliefs which make them feel comfortable even perpetrating the cruelest acts like killing and torture of their opponents. It is well documented that  many of those terrorists are permanently under stimulant like Captagon. The general lack of security unlashes the terrible phenomenon of abduction for ransoms or for political pressure.  Thousands of innocents are missing, among them the two Bishops, Youhanna Ibrahim and Paul Yazigi, many priests and Imams.

'The Protocols' by Douglas Reed

Extract from Reed's "The Controversy of Zion"

Chapter 27

The “Protocols”

While Zionism thus took shape in the Eastern ghettoes during the last century and at the start of this one emerged as a new force in international affairs (when the British Government offered it Uganda), the world-revolution, in those same Talmudic areas, prepared its third “eruption.” The two forces moved forward together in synchronization (for Zionism, as has been shown, used the threat of Communism in Europe to gain the ear of European rulers for its territorial demand outsideEurope). It was as if twin turbines began to revolve, generating what was in effect one force, from which the new century was to receive galvanic shocks.

According to Disraeli and Bakunin the world-revolution had come under Jewish leadership around the middle of the century, and its aims then changed. Bakunin's followers, who sought to abolish the State as such because they foresaw that the revolutionary State might become more despotic than any earlier despotism, were ousted and forgotten. The world-revolution therewith took the shape of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto, which aimed at the super-State founded in slave-labour and in “the confiscation of human liberty” (as de Tocqueville wrote in 1848).

This change in leadership and aims determined the course of the 20th Century. However, themethods by which the existing order was to be destroyed did not change; they continued to be those revealed by Weishaupt's papers published in 1787. Many publications of the 19th Century showed that the original Illuminist plan continued through the generations to be the textbook of the revolutionaries of all camps, as to method.

These works propagated or exposed the destructive plan in various ways, sometimes allegorical, but always recognizable if compared with the original, Weishaupt's documents. In 1859 Crétineau Joly assailed Jewish Leadership of “the secret societies.” His book reproduced documents (communicated to him by Pope Gregory XVI) of the Italian secret society, the Haute Vente Romaine; their authenticity is beyond question. The Haute Vente Romaine was headed by an Italian prince who had been initiated by one of Weishaupt's own intimates (Knigge) and was a reincarnation of the Illuminati. The outer circle of initiates, the dupes, were persuaded that “the object of the association is something high and noble, that it is the Order of those who desire a purer morality and a stronger piety, the independence and unity of their country.” Those who graduated into the inner degrees progressively learned the real aims and swore to destroy all religion and legitimate government; then they received the secrets of assassination, poison and perjury first disclosed by Weishaupt's documents.

In 1862 Karl Marx (whose Communist Manifesto is recognizably Illuminist) founded his First International, and Bakunin formed his Alliance Sociale Democratique (the programme of which, as Mrs. Nesta Webster has shown by

210

quoting correlative passages, was Illuminism undiluted). In the same year Maurice Joly published an attack on Napoleon III, to whom he attributed the identical methods of corrupting and ruining the social system (this book was written in allegorical form). In 1868 the German Goedsche reproduced the same ideas in the form of an attack on Jewish leadership of the revolution, and in 1869 the French Catholic and Royalist Gougenot Des Mousseaux took up the same theme. In that year Bakunin also published his Polemic Against The Jews.

In all these works, in one form or another, the continuity of the basic idea first revealed by Weishaupt's documents appears: namely, that of destroying all legitimate govemment, religion and nationhood and setting up a universal despotism to rule the enslaved masses by terror and violence.Some of them assailed the Jewish. usurpation of, or succession to the leadership of the revolution.

After that came a pause in the published literature of the conspiracy first disclosed in 1787, until in 1905 one Professor Sergyei Nilus, an official of the Department of Foreign Religions at Moscow, published a book, of which the British Museum in London has a copy bearing its date-stamp, August 10, 1906. Great interest would attach to anything that could be elicited about Nilus and his book, which has never been translated; the mystery with which he and it have been surrounded impedes research. One chapter was translated into English in 1920. This calls for mention here because the original publication occurred in 1905, although the violent uproar only began when it appeared in English in 1920.

This one chapter was published in England and America as “The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion”; I cannot learn whether this was the original chapter heading or whether it was provided during translation. No proof is given that the document is what it purports to be, a minute of a secret meeting of Jewish “Elders.” In that respect, therefore, it is valueless.

In every other respect it is of inestimable importance, for it is shown by the conclusive test (that of subsequent events) to be an authentic document of the world-conspiracy first disclosed by Weishaupt's papers. Many other documents in the same series had followed that first revelation, as I have shown, but this one transcends all of them. The others were fragmentary and gave glimpses; this one gives the entire picture of the conspiracy, motive, method and objective. It adds nothing new to what had been revealed in parts (save for the unproven, attribution to Jewish elders themselves),but it puts all the parts in place and exposes the whole. It accurately depicts all that has come about in the fifty years since it was published, and what clearly will follow in the next fifty years unless in that time the force which the conspiracy has generated produces the counter-force.

It is informed by a mass of knowledge (particularly of human weaknesses) which can only have sprung from the accumulated experience and continuing

211

study of centuries, or of ages. It is written in a tone of lofty superiority, as by beings perched on some Olympian pinnacle of sardonic and ancient wisdom, and of mocking scorn for the writhing masses far below (“the mob” … “alcoholized animals” … “cattle” … “bloodthirsty beasts”) who vainly struggle to elude the “nippers” which are closing on them; these nippers are “the power of gold” and the brute force of the mob, incited to destroy its only protectors and consequently itself.

The destructive idea is presented in the form of a scientific theory, almost of an exact science, argued with gusto and eloquence. In studying the Protocols I am constantly reminded of something that caught my eye in Disraeli's dictum, earlier quoted. Disraeli, who was careful in the choice of words, spoke of “the destructive principle” (not idea, scheme, notion, plan, plot or the like), and the Protocols elevate the theory of destruction to this status of “a fundamental truth, a primary or basic law, a governing law of conduct” (to quote various dictionary definitions of “principle”). In many passages the Protocols appear, at first sight, to recommend destruction as a thing virtuous in itself, and consequently justifying all the methods explicitly recommended to promote it (bribery, blackmail, corruption, subversion, sedition, mob-incitement, terror and violence), which thus become virtuous too.

But careful scrutiny shows that this is not the case. In fact the argument presented begins at the end, world power, and goes backward through the means, which are advocated simply as the best ones to that end. The end is that first revealed in Weishaupt's documents, and it is apparent that both spring from a much earlier source, although the Protocols, in time, stand to the Weishaupt papers as grandson to grandsire. The final aim is the destruction of all religion and nationhood and the establishment of the super State, ruling the world by ruthless terror.

When the Protocols appeared in English the minor point, who was the author of this particular document, was given a false semblance of major importance by the enraged Jewish attack on the document itself. The asseveration of Jewish leadership of the revolutionary conspiracy was not new at all; the reader has seen that Disraeli, Bakunin and many others earlier affirmed it. In this case the allegation about a specific meeting of Jewish leaders of the conspiracy was unsupported and could have been ignored (in 1913 a somewhat similar publication accused the Jesuits of instigating a world-conspiracy resembling that depicted alike in the Protocols and in Weishaupt's papers; the Jesuits quietly remarked that this was false and the matter was forgotten).

The response of official Jewry in 1920 and afterwards was different. It was aimed, with fury, at the entire substance of the Protocols; it did not stop at denying a Jewish plot, but denied that there wasany plot, which was demonstrably untrue. The existence of the conspiracy had been recognized and affirmed by a long chain of high authorities, from Edmund Burke, George

212

Washington and Alexander Hamilton to Disraeli, Bakunin and the many others mentioned in an earlier chapter. Moreover, when the Protocols appeared in English conclusive proof had been given by the event in Russia. Thus the nature of the Jewish attack could only strengthen public doubts; it protested much too much.

This attack was the repetition of the one which silenced those earlier leaders of the public demand for investigation and remedy, Robison, Barruel and Morse, but on this occasion it was a Jewish attack. Those three men made no imputation of Jewish leadership, and they were defamed solely because they drew public attention to the continuing nature of the conspiracy and to the fact that the French revolution was clearly but its first “eruption.” The attack on the Protocols in the 1920's proved above all else the truth of their contention; it showed that the standing organization for suppressing public discussion of the conspiracy had been perfected in the intervening 120 years. Probably so much money and energy were never before in history expended on the effort to suppress a single document.

It was brought to England by one of the two leading British correspondents of that day in Moscow, Victor Marsden of the Morning Post (the significant story of the other correspondent belongs to a later chapter). Marsden was an authority on Russia and was much under the enduring effect of the Terror. He was in effect its victim, for he died soon after completing what he evidently felt to be a duty, the translation of the Protocols at the British Museum.

Publication in English aroused worldwide interest. That period (1920 and onward) marks the end of the time when Jewish questions could be impartially discussed in public. The initial debate was free and vigorous, but in following years the attack succeeded in imposing the law of lese majesty in this matter and today hardly any public man or print ventures to mention the Protocols unless to declare them “forged” or “infamous” (an act of submission also foretold in them).

The first reaction was the natural one. The Protocols were received as formidable evidence of an international conspiracy against religion, nationhood, legitimate government and property. All agreed that the attribution to Jewish authorship was unsupported, but that the subject matter was so grave, and so strongly supported by events subsequent to the original publication, that full enquiry was needed. This remedy, “investigation,” was the one advocated by many leading men 120 years earlier. In this instance the attack was in effect again on the demand for investigation, not simply on the allegation against “the Elders of Zion.”

The Times (of London) on May 8, 1920 in a long article said, “An impartial investigation of these would-be documents and of their history is most desirable … Are we to dismiss the whole matter without inquiry and to let the influence of such a book as this work unchecked?” The Morning Post(then the oldest and

213

soberest British newspaper) published twenty-three articles, also calling for investigation.

In The Spectator on August 27, 1921, Lord Sydenham, a foremost authority of that day, also urgedinvestigation: “The main point is, of course, the source from which Nilus obtained the Protocols. The Russians who knew Nilus and his writings cannot all have been exterminated by the Bolsheviks. His book … has not been translated, though it would give some idea of the man … What is the most striking characteristic of the Protocols? The answer is knowledge of a rare kind, embracing the widest field. The solution of this ‘mystery,' if it is one, is to be found where this uncanny knowledge,on which prophecies now literally fulfilled are based, can be shown to reside.” In America Mr. Henry Ford, declaring that “the Protocols have fitted the world situation up to this time; they fit it now,” caused his Dearborn Independent to publish a series of articles of which a million and a half reprints were sold.

Within two years the proprietor of The Times was certified insane (by an unnamed doctor in a foreign land; a later chapter will describe this episode) and forcibly removed from control of his publications, and The Times published an article dismissing the Protocols as a plagiarism of Maurice Joly's book. The proprietor of the Morning Post became the object of sustained vituperation until he sold the newspaper, which then ceased publication. In 1927 Mr. Henry Ford published an apology addressed to a well-known Jew of America; when I was in the United States in later years I was told by credible informants that he was persuaded to do this, at a moment when a new-model Ford automobile was about to be marketed, by hostile threats from dealers on whom the fortunes of his concern depended.

The campaign against the Protocols has never ceased since then. In communized Russia all copies discoverable had been destroyed at the revolution and possession of the book became a capital crime under the law against “anti-semitism.” In the direct sequence to that, though twenty-five years later, the American and British authorities in occupied Germany after the Second World War constrained the Western German government to enact laws against “anti-semitism” on the Bolshevik model; and in 1955 a Munich printer who reproduced the Protocols had his business confiscated. In England at the time of publication the sale of the book was temporarily stopped by authority, under the pressure described, and in the course of the years the attack on it continued so violent that publishers feared it and only small local firms ever ventured to print it. In Switzerland, between the wars, a Jewish suit was brought against the book as “improper literature”; the case was won, but the verdict was set aside by a higher court.

The state of affairs thus brought about after 1920, and continuing today, was foretold by the Protocols in 1905: “Through the press we have gained the power to influence while remaining ourselves in the shade … The principal factor of

214

success in the political” (field) “ is the secrecy of its undertaking; the word should not agree with the deeds of the diplomat … We must compel the governments … to take action in the direction favoured by our widely-conceived plan, already approaching the desired consummation, by what we shall represent as public opinion, secretly prompted by us through the means of that so-called ‘Great Power,' the press, which, with a few exceptions that may be disregarded, is already entirely in our hands … We shall deal with the press in the following way: … we shall saddle and bridle it with a tight curb; we shall do the same also with all productions of the printingpress, for where would be the sense of getting rid of the attacks of the press if we remain targets for pamphlets and books? … No one shall with impunity lay a finger on the aureole of our government infallibility. The pretext for stopping any publication will be the alleged plea that it is agitating the public mind without occasion or justification … We shall have a sure triumph over our opponents since they will not have at their disposition organs of the press in which they can give full and final expression to their views owing to the aforesaid methods of dealing with the press …”

Such is the history of the Protocols thus far. Their attribution to Jewish “Elders” is unsupported and should be rejected, without prejudice to any other evidence about Jewish leadership of the world-revolution as such. The Jewish attack on them was bent, not on exculpating Jewry, but on stopping the publication on the plea that it was “agitating the public mind without occasion or justification.” The arguments advanced were bogus; they were that the Protocols closely resembled several earlier publications and thus were “plagiaries” or “forgeries,” whereas what this in truth showed was the obvious thing: that they were part of the continuing literature of the conspiracy. They might equally well be the product of non-Jewish or of anti-Jewish revolutionaries, and that is of secondary importance. What they proved is that the organization first revealed by Weishaupt's documents was in existence 120 years later, and was still using the methods and pursuing the aim then exposed; and when they were published in English the Bolshevik revolution had given the proof.

In my opinion the Protocols provide the essential handbook for students of the time and subject. If Lord Sydenham, in 1921, was arrested by the “uncanny knowledge” they displayed, “on which prophecies now literally fulfilled are based,” how much more would he be impressed today, in 1956, when much more of them has been as literally fulfilled. Through this book any man can see how the upheavals of the past 150 years were, and how those of the next fifty years will be brought about; he will know in advance just how “the deeds” of his elected representatives will differ from their “word.”

In one point I am able from my own experience to test Lord Sydenham's dictum about fulfilled prophecies. The Protocols, speaking of control of published information, say: “Not a single announcement will reach the public

215

without our control. Even now this is already being attained by us inasmuch as all news items are received by a few agencies, in whose offices they are focused from all parts of the world. These agencies will then be entirely ours and will give publicity only to what we dictate to them.” That was not the situation in 1905, or in Lord Sydenham's day, or in 1926, when I became a journalist, but it was developing and today is the situation. The stream of “news” which pours into the public mind through the newspapers comes from a few agencies, as if from half a dozen taps. Any hand that can control those valves can control “the news,” and the reader may observe for himself the filtered form in which the news reaches him. As to the editorial views, based on this supply of news, the transformation that has been brought about may be comprehended by referring to the impartially critical articles published in The Times, Morning Post, Spectator, Dearborn Independent and thousands of other journals some twenty-five years ago. This could not happen today. The subjugation of the press has been accomplished as the Protocols foretold, and by the accident of my generation and calling I saw it come about.

Comparative study of the Protocols and of the Weishaupt papers leads to the strong deduction that both derive from a common and much older source. They cannot have been the product of any one man or one group of men in the period when they were published; the “uncanny knowledge” displayed in them obviously rests on the cumulative experience of eras. In particular, this applies (in Weishaupt's papers and the Protocols alike) to the knowledge of human weaknesses, which are singled out with analytical exactitude, the method of exploiting each of them being described with disdainful glee.

The instrument to be used for the destruction of the Christian nation-states and their religion is “the mob.” The word is used throughout with searing contempt to denote the masses, (who in public are flattered by being called “the people”). “Men with bad instincts are more in number than the good, and therefore the best results in governing them are attained by violence and terrorization … The might of a mob is blind, senseless and unreasoning force ever at the mercy of a suggestion from any side.” From this the argument is developed that “an absolute despotism” is necessary to govern “the mob,” which is “a savage,” and that “our State” will employ “the terror which tends to produce blind submission.” The “literal fulfilment” of these precepts in communized Russia must be obvious to all today).

This “absolute despotism” is to be vested in the international super-State at the end of the road. In the meanwhile regional puppet-despots are depicted as essential to the process of breaking down the structure of states and the defences of peoples: “From the premier-dictators of the present day the peoples suffer patiently and bear such abuses as for the least of them they would have beheaded twenty kings. What is the explanation …? It is explained by the fact that these dictators whisper to the peoples through their agents that through these abuses

216

they are inflicting injury on the States with the highest purpose - to secure the welfare of the peoples, the international brotherhood of them all, their solidarity and equality of rights. Naturally they do not tell the peoples that this unification must be accomplished only under our sovereign rule.”

This passage is of especial interest. The term “premier-dictator” would not generally have been understood in 1905, when the peoples of the West believed their elected representatives to express and depend on their approval. However, it became applicable during the First and Second World Wars, when American presidents and British prime ministers made themselves, in fact, “premier-dictators” and used emergency powers in the name of “the welfare of peoples … international brotherhood … equality of rights.” Moreover, these premier-dictators, in both wars, did tell the peoples that the ultimate end of all this would be “unification” under a world government of some kind. The question, who would govern this world government, was one which never received straightforward answer; so much else of the Protocols has been fulfilled that their assertion that it would be the instrument of the conspiracy for governing the world “by violence and terrorization” deserves much thought.

The especial characteristic of the two 20th Century wars is the disappointment which each brought to the peoples who appeared to be victorious. “Uncanny knowledge,” therefore, again seems to have inspired the statement, made in 1905 or earlier, “Ever since that time” (the French Revolution) “we have been leading the peoples from one disenchantment to another,” followed later by this: “By these acts all States are in torture; they exhort to tranquillity, are ready to sacrifice everything for peace; but. we will not give them peace until they openly acknowledge our international Super-Government, and with submissiveness.” The words, written before 1905, seem accurately to depict the course of the 20th Century.

Again, the document says “it is indispensable for our purpose that wars, so far as possible, should not result in territorial gains.” This very phrase, of 1905 or earlier, was made the chief slogan, or apparent moral principle, proclaimed by the political leaders of America and Britain in both world wars, and in this case the difference between “the word” and “the deed” of “the diplomat” has been shown by results. The chief result of the First War was to establish revolutionary-Zionism and revolutionary-Communism as new forces in international affairs, the first with a promised “homeland” and the second with a resident State. The chief result of the Second War was that further “territorial gains” accrued to, and only to, Zionism and Communism; Zionism received its resident State and Communism received half of Europe. The “deadly accuracy” (Lord Sydenham's words) of the Protocol's forecasts seems apparent in this case, where a specious phrase used in the Protocols of 1905 became the daily language of American presidents and British prime ministers in 1914-1918 and 1939-1945.

The reason why the authors of the Protocols held this slogan to be so important, in beguiling the peoples, is also explained. If the nations embroiled in

217

wars are denied “territorial gains,” the only victors will then be “our international agentur … our international rights will then wipe out national rights, in the proper sense of right, and will rule the nations precisely as the civil law of States rules the relations of their subjects among themselves.” To bring about this state of affairs compliant politicians are needed, and of them the Protocols say: “The administrators whom we shall choose from among the public, with strict regard to their capacities for servile obedience, will not be persons trained in the arts of government, and will therefore easily become pawns in our game in the hands of men of learning and genius who will be their advisers, specialists bred and reared from early childhood to rule the affairs of the whole world.”

The reader may judge for himself whether this description fits some of “the administrators” of the West in the last five decades; the test is their attitude towards Zionism, the world-revolution and world-government, and subsequent chapters will offer information in these three respects. But “deadly accuracy” appears to reside even more in the allusion to “advisers.”

Here again is “uncanny knowledge,” displayed more than fifty years ago. In 1905 the non-elected but powerful “adviser” was publicly unknown. True, the enlightened few, men like Disraeli, knew that “the world is governed by very different persons from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes,” but to the general public the passage would have been meaningless.

In the First and Second World Wars, however, the non-elected, unofficial but imperious “adviser” became a familiar public figure. He emerged into the open (under “emergency powers”) and became known to and was passively accepted by the public masses; possibly the contempt which the Protocols display for “the mob” was justified by this submission to behind-the-scenes rule even when it was openly exercised. In the United States, for instance, “advisers on Jewish affairs” became resident at the White House and at the headquarters of American armies of occupation. One financier (who publicly recommended drastic measures for “ruling the affairs of the world”) was adviser to so many presidents that he was permanently dubbed “Elder Statesman” by the press, and visiting prime ministers from England also repaired to him as if to a supreme seat of authority.

The Protocols foretold this regime of the “advisers” when none understood what was meant and few would have credited that they would openly appear in the high places.

The Protocols repeatedly affirm that the first objective is the destruction of the existing ruling class (“the aristocracy,” the term employed, was still applicable in 1905) and the seizure of property through the incitement of the insensate, brutish “mob.” Once again, subsequent events give the “forecast” its “deadly accuracy”:

“In politics one must know how to seize the property of others without hesitation if by it we secure submission and sovereignty … The words, ‘Liberty, Equality, Fraternity,' brought to our ranks, thanks to our blind agents, whole

218

legions who bore our banners with enthusiasm. And all the time these words were canker-worms boring into the wellbeing of the people, putting an end everywhere to peace, quiet, solidarity and destroying all the foundations of the States … This helped us to our greatest triumph; it gave us the possibility, among other things, of getting into our hands the master card, the destruction of privileges, or in other words the very existence of the aristocracy … that class which was the only defence peoples and countries had against us. On the ruins of the natural and genealogical aristocracy … we have set up the aristocracy of our educated class headed by the aristocracy of money. The qualifications of this aristocracy we have established in wealth, which is dependent upon us, and in knowledge … It is this possibility of replacing the representatives of the people which has placed them at our disposal, and, as it were, given us the power of appointment …. . We appear on the scene as alleged saviours of the worker from this oppression when we propose to him to enter the ranks of our fighting forces; Socialists, Anarchists, Communists … By want and the envy and hatred which it engenders we shall move the mobs and with their hands we shall wipe out all those who hinder us on our way … The people, blindly believing things in print, cherishes … a blind hatred towards all conditions which it considers above itself, for it has no understanding of the meaning of class and condition … These mobs will rush delightedly to shed the blood of those whom, in the simplicity of their ignorance, they have envied from their cradles, and whose property they will then be able to loot. ‘Ours' they will not touch, because the moment of attack will be known to us and we shall take measures to protect our own … The word ‘freedom' brings out the communities of men to fight against every kind of force, against every kind of authority, even against God and the laws of nature. For this reason we, when we come into our kingdom, shall have to erase this word from the lexicon of life as implying a principle of brute force which turns mobs into bloodthirsty beasts … But even freedom might be harmless and have its place in the State economy without injury to the wellbeing of the peoples if it rested upon the foundation of faith in God … This is the reason why it is indispensable for us to undermine all faith, to tear out of the minds of the masses the very principle of Godhead and the spirit, and to put in its place arithmetical calculations and material needs …”

“ … We have set one against another the personal and national reckonings of the peoples, religious and race hatreds, which we have fostered into a huge growth in the course of the past twenty centuries. This is the reason why there is not one State which would anywhere receive support if it were to raise its arm, for every one of them must bear in mind that any agreement against us would be unprofitable to itself. We are too strong, there is no evading our power. The nations cannot come to even an inconsiderable private agreement without our secretly having a hand in it … In order to put public opinion into our hands we must bring it into a state of bewilderment by giving expression from all sides to so many contradictory opinions and for such length of time as will suffice to make

219

the peoples lose their heads in the labyrinth and come to see that the best thing is to have no opinion of any kind in matters political, which it is not given to the public to understand, because they are understood only by him who guides the public. This is the first secret. The second secret requisite for the success of our government is comprised in the following: to multiply to such an extent national failings, habits, passions, conditions of civil life, that it will be impossible for anyone to know where he is in the resulting chaos, so that the people in consequence will fail to understand one another … By all these means we shall so wear down the peoples that they will be compelled to offer us international power of a nature that by its possession will enable us without any violence gradually to absorb all the State forces of the world and to form a Super-Government. In place of the rulers of today we shall set up a bogey which will be called the Super-Government administration. Its hands will reach out in all directions like nippers and its organization will be of such colossal dimensions that it cannot fail to subdue all the nations of the world.”

That the Protocols reveal the common source of inspiration of Zionism and Communism is shown by significant parallels that can be drawn between the two chief methods laid down in them and the chief methods pursued by Dr. Herzl and Karl Marx:

The Protocols repeatedly lay emphasis on the incitement of “the mob” against the ruling class as the most effective means of destroying States and nations and achieving world dominion. Dr. Herzl, as was shown in the preceding chapter, used precisely this method to gain the ear of European rulers.

Next, Karl Marx. The Protocols say, “The aristocracy of the peoples, as a political force, is dead … but as landed proprietors they can still be harmful to us from the fact that they are self-sufficing in the resources upon which they live. It is essential therefore for us at whatever cost to deprive them of their land … At the same time we must intensively patronize trade and industry … what we want is that industry should drain off from the land both labour and capital and by means of speculation transfer into our hands all the money of the world.. ...”

Karl Marx in his Communist Manifesto exactly followed this formula. True he declared that Communism might be summed up in one sentence, “abolition of private property,” but subsequently he qualified this dictum by restricting actual confiscation to land and implying that other types of private property were to remain intact. (In the later Marxist event, of course, all private property was confiscated, but I speak here of the strict parallel between the strategy laid down before the event alike by the Protocols and Marx).

A passage of particular interest in the present, though it was written before 1905, says, “Nowadays if any States raise a protest against us, it is only proforma at our discretion and by our direction, for their anti-semitism is indispensable to us for the management of our lesser brethren.” A distinctive feature of our era is the way the charge of “anti-semitism” is continually transferred from one

220

country to another, the country so accused becoming automatically the specified enemy in the next war. This passage might cause the prudent to turn a sceptical eye on today's periodical reports of sudden “anti-semitic” turns in communized Russia, or elsewhere.

The resemblance to Weishaupt's documents is very strong in the passages which relate to the infiltration of public departments, professions and parties, for instance: “It is from us that the all-engulfing terror proceeds. We have in our service persons of all opinions, of all doctrines, restorating monarchists, demagogues, socialists, communists, and utopian dreamers of every kind. We have harnessed them all to the task: each one of them on his own account is boring away at the last remnants of authority, is striving to overthrow all established form of order. By these acts all States are in torture; they exhort to tranquillity, are ready to sacrifice everything for peace; but we will not give them peace until they openly acknowledge our international Super-Government, and with submissiveness.”

The allusions to the permeation of universities in particular, and of education in general, also spring directly from Weishaupt, or from whatever earlier source he received them: “… We shall emasculate the universities … Their officials and professors will be prepared for their business by detailed secret programmes of action from which they will not with immunity diverge, not by one iota. They will be appointed with especial precaution, and will be so placed as to be wholly dependent upon the Government.” This secret permeation of universities (which was successful in the German ones in Weishaupt's day, as his documents show) was very largely effective in our generation. The two British government officials who after their flight to Moscow were paraded before the international press in 1956 to state that they had been captured by Communism at their universities, were typical products of this method, described by the Protocols early in this century and by Weishaupt in 1787.

Weishaupt's documents speak of Freemasonry as the best “cover” to be used by the agents of the conspiracy. The Protocols allot the function of “cover” to “Liberalism”: “When we introduced into the State organism the poison of Liberalism its whole political complexion underwent a change. States have been seized with a mortal illness, blood-poisoning. All that remains is to await the end of their death agony.”

The term “utopian dreamers,” used more than once, is applied to Liberals, and its original source probably resides in the Old Testamentary allusion to “dreamers of dreams” with “false prophets,” are to be put to death. The end of Liberalism, therefore, would be apparent to the student even if the Protocols did not specify it: “We shall root out liberalism from the important strategic posts of our government on which depends the training of subordinates for our State structure.”

The “Big Brother” regimes of our century, are accurately foretold in the

221

passage, “Our government will have the appearance of a patriarchal paternal guardianship on the part of our ruler.”

Republicanism, too, is to be a “cover” for the conspiracy. The Protocols are especially contemptuous of republicanism, in which (and in liberalism) they see the weapon of self-destruction forged out of “the mob”: “… then it was that the era of republics became possible of realization; and then it was that we replaced the ruler by a caricature of a government, by a president, taken from the mob, from the midst of our puppet creatures, our slaves. This was the foundation of the mine which we have laid under the peoples.”

Then the unknown scribes of some time before 1905 describe the position to which American presidents have been reduced in our century. The passage begins, “In the near future we shall establish the responsibility of presidents.” This, as the sequence shows, means personalresponsibility, as distinct from responsibility curbed by constitutional controls; the president is to become one of the “premier-dictators” earlier foreseen, whose function is to be to break down the constitutional defences of states and thus prepare “unification under our sovereign rule.”

During the First and Second World Wars the American presidents did in fact become “premier-dictators” in this sense, claiming that “the emergency” and the need for “victory” dictated this seizure of powers of personal responsibility; powers which would be restored to “the people” when “the emergency” was past. Readers of sufficient years will recall how inconceivable this appeared before it happened and how passively it was accepted in the event. The passage then continues:

“The chamber of deputies will provide cover for, will protect, will elect presidents, but we shall take from it the right to propose new, or make changes in existing laws, for this right will be given by us to the responsible president, a puppet in our hands … Independently of this we shall invest the president with the right of declaring a state of war. We shall justify this last right on the ground that the president as chief of the whole army of the country must have it at his disposal in case of need … It is easy to understand that in these conditions the key of the shrine will lie in our hands. and that no one outside ourselves will any longer direct the force of legislation … The president will. at our discretion, interpret the sense of such of the existing laws as admit of various interpretation; he will further annul them when we indicate to him the necessity to do so, besides this, he will have the right to propose temporary laws, and even new departures in the government constitutional working, the pretext both for the one and the other being the requirements for the supreme welfare of the state. By such measures we shall obtain the power of destroying little by little, step by step, all that at the outset when we enter on our rights, we are compelled to introduce into the constitutions of states to prepare for the transition to an imperceptible abolition of every kind of constitution, and then the time is come to turn every government into our despotism.”

222

This forecast of 1905 or earlier particularly deserves Lord Sydenham's tribute of “deadly accuracy.” American presidents in the two wars of this century have acted as here shown. They did take the right of declaring and making war, and it has been used at least once (in Korea) since the Second World War ended; any attempt in Congress or outside to deprive them of this power, or curb them in the use of it meets with violently hostile attack.

So the Protocols continue. The peoples, on their progress “from one disenchantment to another,” will not be allowed “a breathing-space.” Any country “which dares to oppose us” must be met with war, and any collective opposition with “universal war.” The peoples will not be allowed “to contend with sedition” (here is the key to the furious attacks of the 1790's, 1920 and today on all demands for “investigation,” “Witch-hunting,” “McCarthyism” and the like). In the Super-State to come the obligation will fall on members of one family to denounce dissident s within the family circle (the Old Testamentary dispensation earlier mentioned). The “complete wrecking of the Christian religion” will not be long delayed. The peoples will be kept distracted by trivial amusements (“people's palaces”) from becoming troublesome and asking questions. History will be rewritten for their delusion (another precept since fulfilled in communized Russia), for “we shall erase from the memory of men all facts of previous centuries which are undesirable to us, and leave only those which depict all the errors of the national governments.” “All the wheels of the machinery of all States go by the force of the engine, which is in our hands, and that engine of the machinery of States is Gold.”

And the end of it all: “What we have to get at is that there should be in all the States of the world, beside ourselves, only the masses of the proletariat, a few millionaires devoted to our interests, police and soldiers … The recognition of our despot … will come when the peoples, utterly wearied by the irregularities and incompetence … of their rulers, will clamour: ‘Away with them and give us one king over all the earth who will unite us and annihilate the causes of discords, frontiers, nationalities, religions, State debts, who will give us peace and quiet, which we cannot find under our rulers and representatives' .”

In two or three of these passages I have substituted “people” or “masses” for “Goyim ,” because the use of that word relates to the unproven assertion contained in the book's title, and I do not want to confuse the issues; evidence about the identity of the authors of the conspiracy must be sought elsewhere than in an unsupported allegation. The authors may have been Jewish, non-Jewish or anti-Jewish. That is immaterial. When it was published this work was the typescript of a drama which had not been performed; today it has been running for fifty years and its title is The Twentieth Century. The characters depicted in it move on our contemporary stage, play the parts foretold and produce the events foreseen.

Only the denouement remains, fiasco or fulfilment. It is a grandiose plan, and

223

in my estimation cannot succeed. But it has existed for at least 180 years and probably for much longer, and the Protocols provided one more proof in a chain of proofs that has since been greatly lengthened. The conspiracy for world dominion through a world slave state exists and cannot at this stage be abruptly checked or broken off; of the momentum which it has acquired it now must go on to fulfilment or failure. Either will be destructive for a time, and hard for those of the time in which the dénouement comes.

"The Controversy of Zion" by Douglas Reed

.


This book is a masterpiece, one the very best I have read. Unpublished, because of its controversial subject matter for years, it is now available in the USA and the UK. It is also available free as a PDF.

As an introduction to this great work I can do no better than to reproduce commentaries (below) written by Dane, Knud Eriksen. 

Douglas Reed and the Jews

by Knud Eriksen

  In Dronten no. 4 (“The Dodo”) I first mentioned the once world famous foreign correspondent and author, Douglas Reed, who went from being widely known and respected before, during and after the II.nd World War to becoming an expelled and completely forgotten person. 

Why was he “forgotten”? 

It was simply because he wrote about “The Jewish Question!”  

International Jewry responded to his frank description of the problem with total censorship, so that his new books could no longer be printed and the old ones would disappear gradually from the bookstores and even from the library shelves.  

After a short period of slandering he was no longer mentioned at all in the world's media. 

As the author Ivor Benson (who has himself written a book on this subject: The Zionist Factor) says in the foreword to Douglas Reeds masterpiece The Controversy of Zion, which had to wait 22 years before it could be published, “the adversity, which Reed encountered, would have made a lesser personality give up. But not he“.  

After his expulsion from the zionist-controlled media-world, he found himself free to start this most outstanding work, which all the years as a foreign correspondent in Europe and his earlier books had only been a preparation and an education for. His vision expanded from year to year and from book to book. It was an education, which was not available in any university.” 

He spent more than three years away from his family in the early fifties in New York Central Library or in front of his typewriter in modest surroundings in New York and in Montreal. He rewrote the whole book with an epilogue i 1956, where the uprising in Hungary and the Suez-war were scrutinized as further examples of the talmudic co-operation between communism and zionism. Then, as mentioned, the book had to wait 22 years for a possibility of getting published! 

It is instructive to observe how Douglas Reed gradually penetrates deeper and deeper into the Jewish problem from  that time, when he had hardly even thought about it in 1935 (as he writes inThe controversy of Zion) until he delivers his harsh judgement in the shape of The controversy of Zion.  

The mood of gloom and doom is not his own, but due to the gloomy character of the subject, as he says in the epilogue to the book. In the cause of his work he has felt the evil as an almost physical presence in the plans, he reveals. As “forces from some dinosaur-lair projected into the twentieth century.” But, he says, it is not for him to judge, what is evil. God must have had an intention, in his wisdom, to allow this evil to exist, possibly for the progress of the soul. But in that case he, himself, feels like being also a part of God's creation, who has the duty to reveal this evil, so that human beings can be set free from it.  

Ivor Benson follows this line of thought in the epilogue to his own book on the subject (1986) The Zionist Factor, as follows: “There is no Jewish problem per se, only a gigantic 20th century problem, in which the fate and responsibility of Jews and Christians are inseperably intertwined”. The irresponsible world power, built on money and dominated by Jews, is, in its outstretched cob-web something, that we have all allowed to grow big and strong through our irresponsibility.  

But if this power has now grown so strong, that it cannot be stopped, but must be allowed to continue its predestined course, until, finally, it devours itself like a worldwide wolf, what use is it then to us to get to know and fully understand what goes on in the world?”  

Ivor Benson answers this as follows: “a short answer is given in a christian concept with even older sources: “Thou shalt know the truth and the truth shall set you free.” 
Douglas Reed attempted to give you the best possible description of the way organized world-Jewry works and of the immense power it wielded in goading world-opinion against Germany....."I imagine anybody who has read these two books will realize that I hold Germany to be a menace to England, but that I do not identify the cause of England with that of the foreign Jews."

After he wrote Insanity Fair Reid was swamped by offers from American publishers for his next book. He signed a contract with one firm. "When I began Disgrace Abounding I did not know that it would be an anti-Semitic book. The anti-Semitic part is the result of my observation of the Jews in the last year and of my conviction that the mass influx of Jews to England is a political mistake and a national misfortune."

The American publisher, after reading Disgrace Abounding, declined to publish on the ground that the Semitic part was 'slanderous and libellous'. Read the Jewish part for yourself and see if this is true. I, for my part, declined to have the book published anywhere without the Jewish chapters. The real meaning of that decision is that, in America, you may 'slander and libel' Germany as much as you like, and be paid for it, but you must not discuss the Jewish problem, you must not assert that there is a Jewish problem. 

I see very little difference between the Jewish and the Hitlerist method, in this matter of free speech and free discussion. The Jews are for free attacks on Germany, nothing else. The same thing happened in some of the Scandinavian countries, where Insanity Fair had great success and where publishers were clamouring for the next book - until they saw the Jewish chapters. They asked to be allowed to publish the book without them. I refused. The same thing happened in France even with Insanity Fair, where a publisher contracted for the book who apparently could not read English and only realized when he saw the French translation that there was a few passages in it which he did not consider sufficiently favourable to the Jews. He demanded their excision, I refused, and he sold the contract to another firm.

The importance of this, for you, is that you should realize that what is presented to you as 'American approval' or 'American disapproval' of this or that action of British policy is not American but Jewish opinion, and that this puts quite another face on the matter. If you are to fight Germany again, you must do it for England's sake. You must not allow yourselves to be egged on by Jews masquerading to-day as 'German public opinion', to-morrow as 'Czechoslovak public opinion', the day after as 'English public opinion', and the next day as 'American public opinion'. If England suffers disaster in coming years, the Jews who have come to England in these latter years will not suffer that misfortune in like measure; they will not feel it as Englishmen will feel it, they will prosper in chaos, and when they feel that a lean time is coming for them they will make up their minds to sail away.

As I came up the Thames I wondered what my own future would be. I had promised myself to decide within a very few days whether I would continue to write about the daily European scene or whether I would cut loose [ed: altogether?] together, go to Polynesia, Patagonia or Peking, write about other things than Hitler's eternal invasions.

I have no inferiority complex, but only the most normal longings for England to be better. I have a heavy foreboding for England, whose rulers have made every mistake they could. I want to see England safe at home and abroad. Safe at home for the British Derelict Aryans, not for the Foreign Non-Aryans. Safe abroad from Germany.

Neither of these things is being done. The danger of a German ultimatum has been drawing daily nearer. What shall it profit Britain if she lose her whole Empire and gain only the Jews? Now, at the last moment, a faint hope offers that a stand will be made - over Poland. Then why not for Czecho-Slovakia? Why have we handed over the Czech Army, the Czech Air Force, the Skoda Works, the Czech gold, to Germany? If we were from the beginning prepared to make this stand, we should have made it years ago. Then you would have had none of this trouble. You could have satisfied Germany's just grievances - but you could have compelled her to keep the peace.......”

Knud Eriksen, feb. 1998

Douglas Reed

The Controversy of Zion

A Summary

by Knud Eriksen, 1998

In the foreword to the 1985-edition of Douglas Reeds book, the author Ivor Benson describes, how the intervening years from 1956, when the book was completed, until 1985, have confirmed Douglas Reeds interpretation of the past 2.000 years of history in every way. He covers the continued role of the Middle East as the tinderbox, that can become the cause of the next world war, and the continued suppression and misrepresentation, in the media, of all news and discussion.

It was only the few who knew the background of talmudic Zionism and Communism, who had a chance to understand such decisive events as the so-called “Six-days-war” and the later massive invasion of Lebanon i 1982. The invasion was supposed to do away with the PLO, it was said, but in reality it was simply a part of the old Great-Israel-plan (Eretz-Israel). Just as is todays invasion of Iraq.

The worlds pro-israeli massmedia picture of Israel as a small, innocent democracy, which was constantly in need of help, became more and more untrustworthy, so not many were surprised, when the English Institute of Strategic Studies could report, that Israel had become the worlds fourth greatest military power after The United States, Soviet and China, but way ahead of nations like England and France. After the fall of the Soviet Union, this country, with a population about the same size as the tiny danish one, may even have risen further on this top-4-list!

The change in the reactions of the Jews themselves at this time - 1982 - was significant: After the massacre of 1.500 men, women and children in two palestinian refugee-camps in Beirut, the Western media timidly withheld comments, while 350.000 inhabitants of Tel Aviv protested against their own government.

Douglas Reed seems to have foreseen this development also, for among the last words in his book – from 1956 – are the following: “I think, that the Jews of the world are beginning to realize the wrong of revolutionary Zionism, the twin of the other destructive movement, Communism, and that towards the end of this 20th Century they will finally have decided to join in the ranks of mankind.”

The book starts out with a 1789-quotation from the philosopher Edmund Burke who, in Reflections on the Revolution, directed a literary attack on the French Revolution:

“Something has happened which it is hard to speak about and impossible to keep silent about.”

World Revolution, Zionism and World Government

The World Revolution, which in this century (20th) has destroyed human civilization to an unheard of degree - so far - was only one of the two revolutionary movements, which spead like an epidemic pest over the world from the same week in October 1917. Both sprang from talmudic-lead Eastern Jews. The World Revolution has been the climax, so far, of judaic world conquest. The defeat of the Revolution is only apparent. Its destructive effect continues a bit more covertly without Soviet, but still with China as an example of this type of terror-lead slavesociety, and with judaic agents solidly placed on the most important posts in the world. All the “spiritual values” continue, as f.ex. also in the EU.

And its twin, Revolutionary Zionism, grows ever stronger towards the envisioned Eretz-Israel - Great Israel, which is to stretch from the Nile to the Eufrat in the whole “original area”, with all the”Jews” of the world brought together there, and with Jerusalem as the world capital and centre of the “World Peace of the World Government”.

Everything is supported by the Pentateuch of the Old Testament, supplemented by the Talmud, concerning the predestination of the “Chosen People” to exterminate or subjugate all other nations. Among the Zionist leaders this is taken one hundred percent seriously. Like a military operation the two groups work together with incredible synchronisation towards the all-domineering World Government. It will not be long before it becomes a reality. We see it happening every day: UN, NATO, EU, WTO, International Treaties and Conventions, International Courts with transnational jurisdiction and the hundreds- even thousands - of international mergers and take-overs in business.

Also the idea of world government has its background in The Old Testament and the Talmud. It is “The Chosen People”, which arranges matters according to the text, with the rest of the world as slaves. The greatest achievements of both movements took place in the periods of confusion close to the end of-, and right after the two worlds wars, which were started by the leaders of these two movements. Only the Revolution and Zionism came out as winners after the two global wars, with their inconcievable suffering.

Victors in the first global war

After the First World War the Revolution was fixed in Russia with terror and extermination of all “classes” down to - and including - the culac, a farmer with 3 cows. It was an almost exclusively Jewish government, which wielded this terror. It was to last for 70 years, with roughly 20 million murders on its conscience (And Communism worldwide a total of 100 million).

Although western media, especially from 1952 on, carried on about “anti-semitism” in the Soviet, this was never anything but bluff, because these Soviet Jewish leaders simply got cold feet as the reign of terror came to be known as the Empire of Evil. In reality it was only different fractions fighting each other. The most obvious “Jewish” representatives were withdrawn, but the power structure, especially in the secret police, that had the decisive power, remained “Jewish”. “Anti-semitism” was severely punished (right up until the fall of the Soviet Union, and possibly still is) and was therefore quite unthinkable.

Right after the Revolution there was a death penalty for being in possession of “The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion”, which was appearantly one of the “Jews’” plans for world conquest through revolution, and for breaking down Christian countires. 

At the same time Zionism, with the Balfour-Declaration of October 1917, had obtained a promise from Great Britain, in return for bringing The United States into the World War, to give to the Jews “a national home” in Palestine.

Slowly the pressure on the politicians of the West was increased, in order to make this a reality. Especially on the American ones, who were surrounded by Jewish “advisers”, and the immigration to the area increased enormously by the miraculous remedy of “Anti-semitism”, combined with the support of jewish tycoons and western pro-Zionist leaders in the inter-war period.

And the League of Nations became the first core of the World Government, also with Zionists on high posts, pulling strings.

And in the next global war..........

In the same way it was only these three movements – Communism, Zionism, and World Government, that profited from the suffering and destruction of the Second World War. The Western Powers helped the World Revolution to entrench itself deep in Europe.

General Eisenhower ordered the Western generals to stop at a line Vienna-Berlin. All of the Eastern European countries, the “liberation” of which had supposedly been what the whole war was all about, were sacrificed to the revolutionary terror at the Yalta-conference.

At first Zionism supported Hitler financially and with a hesitant or even obliging press. Then, in 1933, it declared Holy War on him.

Zionists obtained so much compassion for Jews after the persecution and the much-advertised extermination, that the world powers and the populations of the West accepted a division of Palestine and the “re-settling” of Jews in the area. The arabs were deliberately sacrificed, and this started one of our times’ most dangerous anti-Western hate-waves – strongly maintained ever since.

Reed gives many examples of the “special sufferings” of the Jews during the war being only media-fabricated lies. In ratio to their numbers they didn’t suffer any more or any less than other people, but this was an example of the phenomenon, that everything must focus on Jews. Other peoples have suffered far more, numerically. At the end of the war, and shortly thereafter, Zionists received enormous loads of weapons from the Soviet Union. And several hundred thousands of Jews emigrated from a country, which no-one else could get out of, so that soon they became a well-armed majority, being able to drive the original population away by Old Testament terror. The result was 600.000 miserable refugees.

The United Nations, which was originally planned and organized by Alger Hiss and and the Jew Harry Dexter White, both later exposed as communist spies, was to become a temporary climax of a judaic-dominated World Government. It’s many ramifications all had as their most important purpose to reduce the sovereign nations to municipalities, and to give unlimited power to the organisation itself. Naturally in order to “secure peace”, just like the League of Nations. For many years the organisation was communist-dominated, and its many condemnations of israeli terror were never followed up by action.

The unconditional support from Western leaders for an ever-growing Great-Israel leads towards a World Government with-, or without a Third World War. Israel’s open nationalism and racism gets no serious criticism from a Zionist-dominated “public opinion”. The West is closing down its own states as “antiquated”, and they are more and more under the control of the swelling international organisations, dominated by “Jewish” agents. The pattern of setting Western powers up against each other and letting them bleed to death, is now worked in thoroughly, and has become almost an exact science.

The “Jewish Agents” of the West, who are working for either Zionist or Communist success, are now behaving in an unrestrained, treasonable manner and quite in accordance with “The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion” for destruction of “Christian Nations”. A Third World War could be the third act, which these forces consider necessary to gain complete control in the ensuing need and confusion.

Sacrificing many of their “own people” has been acceptable, even necessary, before, in order to maintain a government based on fear, and also for populating Israel through manufactured “anti-semitism”.

And then we get the war ... unless enough people, the world over, wake up and pull the war-mongers away from the “handle for the big bang.”

The history of the previous 2.000 years

The author supports his arguments by quoting statements, writings and actions made by “Jews”. The desciption of the development of Zionism, in the last Century, for instance, focuses on Chaim Weizmann, who was a key figure in the political Zionist intrigues, and who became the first president of Israel. A special source is Weizmanns auto-biography from 1949, Trial and Error.

The Jewish background of Communism and World Revolution is a fact, and enormous amounts of money have been spent exactly to try to hide this. Probably no other secret has cost as much to maintain. But Jewish sources exist, that admit it. Both Jewish historians, communist leaders, newspaper articles and reports from the time of The Revolution are used as source material.

As to the longer historical perspective, Reed particularly supports his arguments by reference to the stongly Zionist historian, Dr. Josef Kastein, whose book, History and Destiny of the Jews, appeared in 1933. However, he also uses many other sources, all mentioned in the bibliography in the book. Kasteins book covers the same time-span as “The Controversy”, and much information in Dr. Kasteins book can be taken as direct evidence of Douglas Reeds conclusions.

The Master Race 

The misery began in the year 458 b.C., when a small tribe in the old Judea accepted a creed based on race. The tribe had previously been expelled by the Israelites for such racism. This seemingly unimportant event has probably caused more destruction for Mankind than both the existence of explosives and epidemics. The tribe adapted the creed of the Master Race as nothing less than “The Law”.

The Judeans were a small tribe under the Persian king. The creed of Judaism was not the beginning of monotheism, as has been propagated. Monotheism dates all the way back to The Egyptian Book of the Dead, 2.600 years b.C. and maybe even further. Judaism, on the contrary, was the exact anti-thesis, namely the worship of a racist tribal god.

“The Law” or “The Pact” was – and is – unique in being based on a statement from a tribal god, to the effect that his “chosen people”: “the Israelites” (in reality, the Judeans) would be set above all other peoples and settled in a “promised land”, if only they would stick to all of his rules and judgements. If Jehova, then, was to be worshipped in a certain place, it followed, that when the worshippers were not actually in that place, they were being “persecuted”, in “captivity” and had to “destroy” the “strangers” that “kept them in captivity”. Only in this way was Jehova to be a god for all other peoples – as the punishing god, who punished his own people first – by a “captivity” among the heathens for their “transgressions against the law” and then, as by an exact script, punished the strangers by a predestined extermination, when “the chosen people” had followed all the rules to the letter.

It was probably not even a pact with the Judaeans, for according to “The Holy Scripture”, the pact was made with the Israelites, who had long since mingled with the rest of Mankind, and who have never known this racist creed as far as we know. The Jewish Encyclopaedia says, that the Judeans “probably were a non-Israeli tribe”. The Israelites turned away from the racism of the Judeans. The creed has gone down in history as having been created by the Levites from Judea.

What happened before 458 b.C. is mainly mythology, unlike the later, most important events. The written record predates 458 b.C. by a couple of centuries, when the Israelites rejected the Judeans. The history of Moses was taken by the Israelites from the widespread mythology, which goes all the way back to the history of the Babylonean king, Sargon the Elder, 2.000 years earlier. The ten commandments are much like similar commandments from the Egyptians, the Babyloneans and the Assyrians. These common ideas about one god for all mankind, the Levites, the rulers of Judea, then put in reverse, when they wrote down their laws. They founded the permanent counter-movement against all universal religions and identified the names Judea and Jews, with the doctrine of self-made separation from Mankind, racial hatred, murder in the name of religion, and revenge. Also the personification of treason, a Judas, was included right from the beginning of Judea.

The stories of Moses, leading a mass-exodus from Egypt, can not be true, even according to Dr. Kastein. It was invented, as a necessity, in order to fit into the pattern of “Jehovas revenge”, the destructive basic principle of Judaism.

The Israelites had, as the larger part of a segregated group of people, settled in the northern part of Canaan. In the south, sorrounded by the original canaanites, the tribe of Judah took shape. Thus the name “Judaism” and “Jew”.

This tribe was isolated from-, and did not get along well with, the neighbours, right from the start. There is much mystery concerning it, including its beginnings. It seems more to have been expelled than chosen. And in the following editions of “The Holy Scriptures”, written by their scribes, who wrote whatever suited them arose, in the course of the centuries, and in more and more places, the commands “destroy completely”, “tear down”, “exterminate” etc.

The Israelites had withdrawn, then, from the Judeans’ racist beliefs and had mingled with the rest of Mankind. They “disappeared” in this way as a separate people, while the Judeans kept to themselves by strict racial laws.

In the course of time these were further sharpened and expanded to regulate even the most trivial daily details. The punishments for breaking the laws were severe, and common “Jews” came completely under the control of the scribes. It was this spiritual ghetto, which became the forerunner for the physical ghetto and for the antagonism and exclusion by others, of the Jews, as a retribution. 

Talmud and Treason

In the Babylonean “captivity” the scribes added four “Mose”-books to the 5th, which had been the first. They expanded, in this way, further the intolerant racial religion, which would keep the Jews separated from the rest of mankind forever, if it could be enforced. And in Babylon they found the means. The religious leaders actually succeeded in keeping their congregation completely separated from the surroundings. They obtained authority with those, who kept them “in captivity” for use against “their own”, and finally, in the year 536 b.C., to show their gratitude, they destroyed the entire host-country through treason, through the help of the army of a new ruler, king Cyprus of Persia, who, in turn, they then destroyed etc……..the well-known pattern, which was later perfected and used, among many other occasions, in the two world wars in The 20th Century. “The Jews”, by the way, at least the leaders, had a fine time in Babylon, according to Dr. Kastein. They were completely free. The narrative of the destruction of Babylon created an image of an irresistible destructive power. This was another pattern, which was further expanded by the scribes.

Treason was always the return for hospitality. According to Dr. Kastein, the Jews were instrumental in the destruction of the Babyloneans, the Persians, the Egyptians, the Greeks and the Romans. Each time by “streching out open arms” to a conqueror.

This situation has continued up through the centuries. Simultaneously, the chains of the common Jews were tightened more and more, and from the time of Jesus the Talmud had been developed, as a collection of scriptures, which contain rules of conduct for everything, particularly directed against Christianity. The new religion of tolerance, which was the direct opposite of the Levitical racial hatred, constituted the worst danger for the scribes - that of loosing their grip on the congregation. If the many Jewish rules of conduct were broken, this was punished severely, even by death. The Jewish authorities held the common Jews in a grip of terror by means of an authority, given them by the “Christian” rulers. After Rome had lost its patience with the Jews, Jerusalem was destroyed in the year 70 and the Jews were scattered in the surrounding countries.

Sanhedrin

The world leadership in Judaism, which in Jerusalem was called the Sanhedrin, “the wise men of Zion”, moved around during the next centuries, as a mobile government with incredible power over the scattered congregations. After the destruction of Jerusalem the headquarters were moved to Jamnia, where it remained for about 100 years. Thereafter it was Usha in Galilea, then, as always because of “persecution”, it moved back to Sura in Babylon. For 600 years the world leadership remained in Jamnia, Usha and Galilea, in the oriental climate, where it belonged. When the world center was then moved to Spain, as a result of the moslem conquests (!) a long painful coexistence with the Christian countries began, in which the “oriental” mentality was not understood and appreciated. These sufferings are about to destroy the West in our time.

Treason in “Spanish”

In the Christian Spain treason was repeated. As in Babylon and Egypt the Jews turned against the people among whom they lived. They opened the gates of the city for the conquerors and was thereafter given custody of the raped city by the moslems ... against whom they also turned in the end. Once more they were thrown out for bad behaviour, in 1492. They obviously were identified with the moslem conquerors and thrown out together with them. Among the worst “persecutions” they had had to endure, was being forbidden to keep slaves! (prof. Graetz): “hereafter the Jews could neither buy Christians as slaves nor recieve them as presents.” 

They had, by this time, been in Spain for 800 years. Most of them went back to Northern Africa, from where they had come, or they went to Egypt, Palestine, Italy, The greek Islands and Turkey. Other colonies had arisen in France, Germany, Holland and England, and these also recieved some of the expelled. Wherever they settled down, the religious leaders always had the local prince help them retain power over their congragation. Total power. Some of these Jews became very wealthy and they particularly developed loan capitalism as their power base. They lent large sums to extravagant princes, and in return for these recieved many privileges as court Jews. The best known representative for this money-power was the Rotschild family, which in the 19th century had become the real rulers of Europe.

Then the world leadership of Judaism was then moved to Poland.

The Chazars

This is one of the central mysteries. Why Poland? There was no information about any considerable part of the Spanish Jews having moved to Poland, or information that any earlier mass-immigration of Jews into Poland had taken place. In the 15-hundreds a (Jewish) population, counting millions, suddenly arose (Dr. Kastein). But populations of millions do not suddenly arise, and Dr. Kastein evades the question. Behind this suppressed knowledge lies the key to understanding the following history of Zionism. The Jewish headquarter was established amidst these so-called Eastern Jews, of whom even the Western Jews had, until then, only heard rumors, and of which the rest of the world knew nothing. From then on they took over the leadership of World Judaism. They were descendants of the Chazars, a people of Turkish-mongoloid origin, who had converted to Judaism around the 7th Century a.C. From here an even harsher segregation was ordered by “the wise ones”. Meanwhile, the western Jews were slowly becoming “assimilated” in the Western European population, especially after the legislation that followed the French Revolution, which gradually gave them full civil rights. This eastern group gradually took over the leadership of “Judaism” to such a degree, that the Jewish “statistics” – which by the way have always been quite untrustworthy – practically let them disappear. Today eastern Jews constitute at least 90 % of all Jews, according to these statistics, both in Israel and in the rest of the world.

The western Jews who, by using fantasy and a maximum of twisting of truth, claimed to have once lived in Palestine, were slowly becoming assimilated, after having been thrown out of Spain, and almost “disappeared” as en entity. In their stead appeared the Eastern Jews, an Asian people, which had never had the slightest connection with Palestine.

And, suddenly, also the the world headquarters of the Jews disappeared. According to Dr. Kastein it “ceased to exist”.

World Government without Address

There was, however, not much indication that this was so. But it became secret after 1772, when Poland was divided, and the larger part of the Jews came under Russian rule. Such a world headquarter had existed for over 2.500 years, and now it was supposed to have suddenly disappeared. It could, nevertheless, be assembled, when Napoleon called in “The great Sanhedrin” in 1807, in order to get clarity concerning the loyalty of French Jews or lack of same. Dr. Kastein, himself, reveals joyfully, that “in the 19th Century a Jewish International took shape”.

The 19th Century belonged to the revolutionary conspiracies of both Zionism and Communism, which unfolded in the 20th Century. It was also in that Century, that the physical ghetto was replaced by a mental one: the fear of “Antisemitism”. In Jewish families, the question was whether to further Revolutionary Communism or Revolutionary Zionism (Weizmann). It ended up being both. Communism should tear down all nations. Zionism should establish one. A World Government without an address was becoming a fashion, which has been followed undeviatingly all through the 20th Century.

World Revolution and Master Race 

The British statesman, Benjamin Disraeli (a baptised Jew) said, that Jews were behind all the revolutions in the middle of the Century (from 1848), and there was significant participation by Jews also in the French Revolution. However, according to Reed, no Jewish leadership of the initial intrigues has been traced. It was secret societies, especially the Jacobins, who played the leading part, and these could be traced back to the German professor Adam Weishaupt, who in 1776 founded the Illuminati, a secret society, directed against all Christian authorities. Soon it had infiltrated all of the European freemasonry and it then went on to America. The conspiracy of the Illuminati, which was accidentally revealed by the Bavarian government in 1787, contained almost, word by word, the same text in their program as the later “Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion” (Nesta Webster) and it was clearly recognizable in the theories of the Russian Revolution. The “Russian” Revolution was the first, which was Jewish without any doubt (around 90% of the leaders were Jews) and this revolution, along with the First World War was the first clear evidence, that “The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion” were being followed literally in the major events of the world. 

Reed gives several other examples of this script being an exact prophecy for the nearest future or a frightening plan for world conquest. (See Chapter “The Protocols”, in Reeds book and the whole text of the Protocols under "Links" and "More"). It may never be proven, whether they are “Jewish” or not. More importantly, Reed frequently points out, that it has been mostly Jewish dissidents, who have warned against them. He mentions several. But the details of the World Government are being put in place day after day.

Knud Bjeld Eriksen, February 6., 1998