As the structural foundations of Christendom were
weakened by unsound practices aimed at making Mammon and immorality alluring,
the anti-Christ side of the equation began to strengthen in an inverse,
grotesque parallel. The devolutionary character and trajectory of Christendom’s
character and influence were matched almost perfectly by the ascent of the
anti-Christic collective.
The reawakening of secret societies throughout Europe
and their waxing power to affect national policies there and subsequently in
European colonies recreated the threat posed by the banksterism of the Knights
Templar to the Christian moral order.
Since the Garden of Eden, Evil has always painted
itself as reasonable and, often as not, fun, while the Good was implicated in meannesss,
especially in keeping people from doing “what comes naturally.” Evil inquired,
“If it feels good, how can it be bad?” “Good question!” replied the
increasingly fun-loving people.
While the people increasingly gathered in the pubs and
“nunneries,” members of clandestine organizations met sub rosa to set forth their plans for a “New Order.” One key to
organizational success was control of money and trade. This understanding was
undoubtedly prominent in the creation of the first central bank in Europe since
the crude but powerful system of the Knights Templar.
The Bank of England was specifically started to let the
owners of the bank lend non-existent money which nevertheless had royal
approval. The bank proposal had been fronted by a man named “Patterson,” who
enticed some royal and aristocratic participation with the instant wealth it
promised them. They in turn provided the banking institution with the most
respectable of credentials from which to start their business venture.
Later, the royalty of England provided its cachet to
Freemasonry, becoming its “patron.” They also provided the titular head of the
Church of England. The three most important legs of England stood intimately
together. The fourth, the British military, took orders from, firstly, the
sovereign and subsequently from Parliament.
However, control of money provided its master(s) with a
magnet so powerful that the iron of royalty, archbishops, party leaders, and
military brass found themselves captured by its force.
In point of fact the City of London, the historic site
of British finance, became an autonomous jurisdiction within greater London and
the United Kingdom.
Although the clandestine financiers behind the Bank of
England were mostly from Amsterdam and, at least in one prominent case, Iberia
– either Spain or Portugal, the City of London became the domain of the
greatest merchant banking family the world had ever known. This was the
Rothschild merchant banking family, which came to dominate British and European
financial matters. Not since the Knights Templar had there been such a single,
dominant banking group.
Further, the Rothschild merchant banking family had
competition from the Speyers, Warburgs, Seifs, Davids, and many other Jewish
merchant banking houses. Hence, the requirements of money for national
operations tended to have the alarming side effect of disproportionate numbers
of high Jewish advisers surrounding the sovereigns and their leading ministers
of Europe.
As an example, consider: “…He [King George V] also had
a Privy Council who refused to let him make an appeal to the Bolsheviks to
spare the Czar. This Privy Council in 1919 was composed only of Jews. It was
headed by Lord Rothschild and consisted of Edwin Montagu, Sir Edgar Speyer, a
Jewish banker born in Frankfurt, Germany, and inexplicably raised to the
highest council in England, Sir Matthew Nathan, Sir Alfred Moritz Mond, head of
Imperial Chemicals Ltd., Sir Harry Samuel, owner of Shell Oil, Sir Ernest Cassel,
and Earl Reading, Rufus Isaacs. The King’s fortune was entirely in the hands of
these Jewish bankers. He dared not open his mouth, even to save his blood
relatives….” [Eustace Mullins, MULLINS’
NEW HISTORY OF THE JEWS, page 106]
This was merely an isolated moment of an accruing, aggregating
political power across the United Kingdom and Europe, across America and the
Western Hemisphere, across Russia and the Communist block of nations, and their
colonies in Africa, as well as the Sub-Continent, where Jewish banking families
such as the Sassoons had developed much influence.
Although banking interests were peculiarly savory to
Jews, they were not the only interests. Jewish investors were prominent in the
“Merchants of Death” businesses. As an example, Vickers was owned by the
Rothschild family. Advising war-making, financing war-making, and selling the
war-making materiel must have seemed irrisistable.
There existed the same sort of circular profitability
that had existed for Jewish traders during the old slaves-sugar-rum racket in
the 18th Century.
In short Jewish power had grown to astonishing levels
by the mid-19th Century. Clandestinely, they exerted influence over
secret societies in Europe and elsewhere. Where would they go from here?
The Talmudic influence on rich Jews was as strong as it
was on poor Jews. Jews had typically established religious “centers” such as
those at Alexandria, Babylon, Vilna, and Cordoba, each over time and as
tolerant conditions allowed. However, when the day seemed near at hand when it
would be their tolerance, and not
that of the host country, which carried weight, Jewish leaders were caught in a
tricky conundrum. Consider:
“Moses Mendelssohn, as quoted in his Memoirs, says:
‘Our rabbis unanimously teach that the written and oral laws which form
conjointly our revealed religion are obligatory on our nation only: `Moses commanded us a law, even the inheritance
of the congregation of Jacob.` We believe that all other nations of the earth
have been directed by God to adhere to
the laws of nature… Those who regulate
their lives according to the precepts of this
religion of nature and of reason are
called virtuous men of other nations…’” [Douglas Reed, THE CONTROVERSY OF ZION,
page 140]
Further, consider:
“Moses Mendelssohn wrote this nearly two hundred years
ago and it correctly defines the Judaist attitude towards Kipling’s ‘lesser
breeds without the Law’. In our day (1955) a proposal was being bruited in
Jewry to bring the lesser breeds nominally within
the Judaist fold while perpetuating their inferiority and exclusion…
“In 1955 a young Reform rabbi, born in Germany but
living in America, suggested that the time had come for Judaism to undertake
missionary work among the Gentiles. The basis he laid down was identical with
Moses Mendelssohn’s dictum; this rabbi, Mr. Jakob Petuchowski, merely succeeded
in finding a solution to what had seemed to Mendelssohn an insoluble difficulty
(‘Pursuant to the principles of my religion, I am not to seek to convert anyone
who is not born according to our laws;…the Jewish religion is diametrically
opposed to it’ i.e. conversion).
“Mr. Petuchowski proposed, in fact, that conversions
made by his proposed mission should be on a basis which would give the convert
a status, in relation to the original Jews, rather comparable with that of the
American Negro, during the slavery era, to the white folk in the big plantation
house. The converts would be required (in other words, permitted) only to obey
the ‘Seven Laws of Noah’, (the allusion is presumably to the ninth chapter of
Genesis), and not the hundreds of commands and vetoes attributed to God by the
‘Mosaic Law’. In this way the ‘lesser breeds’ would apparently receive, at the
hands of Judaism, the ‘religion of nature and reason’ recommended for them by
Adam Weishaupt and Moses Mendelssohn alike. If they then called themselves
‘Jews’, this would be rather as the plantation Negro took his owner’s family
name.
“This ingenious proposal may have been prompted by the
reflection that Jewish power in the world is now so great that a solution to
the problem of the status of the ‘lesser breeds’ will have to be found, if ‘The
Law’ is to be literally ‘observed’.” [supra, footnote]
That Jews themselves recognize how the leaders of the
world have acted as “bell cows” for their people, leading them into the pen
areas of the world where they may graze contentedly according to the “Law of
Nature.” Such are the flocks of John Hagee and the other Noahide converts.
Since Jews themselves need not be concerned with
actions typically designated as criminal when perpetrated against “lesser
breeds,” the holocaust hate-crimes against the German people (or any other
non-Jew) must continue, for slave-owners have the right to the fruit of the
toil of their slaves.
