666 DCLXVI -DO IT KIT FOR ISLAMIC STATE'S UND SO WEITER - HOW TO MAKE A BOMB NASTY ENOUGH FOR KAFFIR SAKE Nuclear Physics: An Introduction by S.B. Patel The book bridges the gap between a course on modern physics and an advanced formal treatise on nuclear physics. The treatment of topics is simple and direct. Physical ideas are given prominence and this has been done by informal discussions and many analogies. It starts with the tools of nuclear physics, both experimental and mathematical. The author has taken special care in treating the nuclear shell model throughout the analogy with atomic and molecular physics.

Deadlier Than The H-Bomb Part H - Chapters I-XXL

By

Wing Commander

LEONARD YOUNG

Copyright July 1956

First Edition (1956) and Second Edition (1957)
published by The Britons Publishing Company, London.

Third Edition published in December 1992 by
Inter-City Research Press
31 Eastvale, Acton Vale, London W3 7RU.
Telephone: 081-749 0629

Having fought against tyranny for thousands of years and having been sustained by a strong faith throughout, first the Druidic and then the Christian, are we now going to let our Christian and British faith and traditions go by default and tamely submit to the worst tyranny the world has ever known?

The author claims that we are in the process of destruction by something deadlier than the H-bomb; something which in our blindness, we are allowing to corrode the props of our culture and civilisation.

Is there a secret plan for the destruction of the Western way of life? Many famous sailors and soldiers have written on this theme. Here a retired Air Force officer comes to similar conclusions. He quotes from a confidential document of the Political and Economic Planning Organisation:

"You may use, without acknowledgement, anything which appears in this broadsheet on the understanding that the broadsheet and the group are not publicly mentioned, either in writing or otherwise. This strict anon­ymity is essential in order that the group may prove effective."

He describes this work of P.E.P. as "Sovietism by stealth". He quotes many famous statesmen in support of his contention. Thus Lloyd George, writing about the inter-national bankers' part in the Versailles Conference:

"They swept statesmen, politicians, jurists and jour­nalists all on one side and issued their orders with an imperiousness of absolute monarchs who knew there was no appeal from their ruthless decrees."

Of the New York Stock Exchange collapse between the wars he quotes Senator L. T. McFadden, Chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives Currency Commission, who declared:-

“It was not accidental. It was a carefully contrived occurrence . . . the international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they might emerge as the rulers of us all."

Whether you agree with all the author's conclusions you will certainly have to admit that there are forces behind the political scene which are  DEADLIER THAN THE H-BOMB

INTER-CITY RESEARCH PRESS

LONDON

1992

ORIGINAL PUBLISHER'S NOTE

In presenting this outspoken book by a patriotic ex-serviceman we do so because we are in agreement with his conclusions on political, economic and agri­cultural problems. The author's views on religious matters are, of course, entirely his own and not necessarily the view of the publishers.

June, 1956 Briton's Publishing Society

NOTE FROM THE PUBLISHER
OF THIS EDITION

I am very grateful to Wing Commander Young for allowing me to republish this most important work. When it is remembered that this book first appeared in 1956, it will be acknowledged that its author displayed considerable prescience.

For the benefit of scholars, I include the author's original Bibliography even though many of the titles itemised in it are out of print. I have, however, added a supplementary list of currently available English-language periodicals.

Jane Birdwood

December, 1992 Inter-City Research Press

---

PREFACE

After the Second World War and twenty-nine years in the Services, I retired to civil life. Instead of being able to settle down peacefully, I have found myself in a world in turmoil and in constant dread of the H-Bomb. This dread is being used to terrorise people into all sorts of courses. Like many others, I do not think that atomic war is inevitable. In trying to assess the situation I have come to realise that we are in the process of actual destruction by something deadlier than the H-Bomb; something which in our blindness, we are allowing to corrode the props of our culture and civilisation; insidiously and relentlessly.

In this book I have tried to show the development of the main lines of attack, to sound the alarm and to introduce the reader to a number of other works on the subject which expound various necessary truths and remedies.

Leonard Young - May 1956 Winscombe, Somerset.

INTRODUCTION

THE events of the last half-century, and particularly the last decade, give us every cause to pause and think where we are going. The transformation which has taken place is stupendous and very much for the worse. The greatest mistake that can be made is to regard events as episodic and that it is just the mistake which our polit­icians, press, historians, economists, etc., persist in making, although it does not require much investigation to realise that there is a design behind events and that we are in the culminating period of a long and carefully prepared plot, which has been carried out with diabolical cunning and remarkable efficiency.

In this booklet an attempt will be made to give an outline of history sufficient to support the above statement. It must be realised that an immense amount of history has been written with the intention of hiding the truth. So a great deal of what is said here may come as a surprise to most people. Also, to cover so much ground in such a small space is very difficult and only an outline can be given. But to enable any reader who may wish to verify what is said or pursue the subject further, a bibliography is given at the end.

EARLY BRITISH HISTORY

FROM some time after the Flood, probably about 2000 B.C. onwards, Nordic peoples, such as Phoenicians, Trojans and Israelites (it always seems to be taken for granted that the Nordic people are descendants of Japheth, but while admitting to not having made any extensive investigation into the subject, the only evidence the writer has come across suggests that they are descendants of Shem) had been sailing west from the eastern Mediterranean and both settling in and trading with the other Mediterranean coastal areas; Spain, the British Isles, Western and North-Western Europe. During the last centuries B.C. quite a number of Jews settled in Spain and they were probably the main ancestors of the "Spanish" or Sephardim Jews.

Now let us turn to British history. In about 1800 B.C., Hu Gadarn is said to have led the first colony of Cymri to Britain from Defrobane, where Constantin­ople stands. In the Welsh Triads he is said to have mnemonically systematised the wisdom of the ancestors of the people he led west. This is the educational system adopted by the Druids. The members of the order were statesmen, legislators, priests, physicians, lawyers, teachers, and poets of the country. Britain became the headquarters of the Druid religion which appears to have been similar to the old patriarchal religion of the East. The motto of the Druidic world was: "The Truth against the World".

Hu Gadarn was regarded as the personification of intellectual culture and to him has been attributed the founding of Stonehenge and the introduction of several arts, including glass-making and writing Ogham characters. On his standard was depicted the Ox and this may have been the origin of John Bull.

In 1185 B.C. Troy fell and most of the survivors joined their kinsmen who were already in this country, but it was not until 1136 B.C. that Brutus set out for Britain and landed in Totnes, the oldest seaport in Devon.

Brutus codified the laws of Britain and Lord Chief Justice Coke says: "The original laws of this land were composed of such elements as Brutus first selected from the ancient Greek and Trojan institutions". In passing it may be of interest to note that a Trojan law of Brutus is that the sceptre of this isle may be held by a queen as well as a king. We do not have the Salic Law prohibiting women from ruling.

The next king who left his mark upon our history was Molmutius, about 450 B.C., who was famous for his road-making and his laws. Lord Chief Justice Coke, in his Origin of the Common Law of England, says that "the Molmutius laws have been always regarded as the foundation and bulwark of British liberties".

At the time of the Roman invasion there were forty Druidic centres of learning, which were also the capitals of the forty tribes. The students at these colleges numbered at times as many as sixty thousand of the youth and young nobility of Britain and Gaul. It required twenty years to master the complete circle of Druidic knowledge, which included natural philosophy, astronomy, mathematics, geometry, medicine, jurisprudence, poetry and oratory. In those days Britain was thickly populated.

In 55 B.C., and again in 54 B.C., Caesar tried to occupy Britain because he found that in all the wars with the Gauls they were receiving assistance from Britain, which country seems to have been regarded among the Celtic nations as a sort of Holy Land. But he was so roughly handled that, when, in the following century Rome again decided to invade, the memory of it caused a mutiny of the legions gathered for the purpose. This was an event unparalleled in the annals of Roman obedience, just as the decisive double expulsion of Caesar is still without parallel in British history.

Claudius, the Emperor, sent his favourite freedman and minister, a eunuch called Narcissus, to the scene and his taunts stung the legions into embarking. There now ensued a tremendous war lasting many years, in which the Britons were fighting the whole might of the Roman Empire, under its finest generals.

By this time Britain was becoming Christian. There are grounds for believing that our Lord spent some time in Britain, including a couple of years at Glaston­bury, before taking up his ministry. But after the Crucifixion, Joseph of Arima­thea led a party to Britain and, in about 37 A.D. started a Christian church at Glastonbury. The Druid religion was one which naturally merged with Christ­ianity and the Christian faith received a ready response here. From the start members of the royal families set an example in embracing the faith and in missionary work.

The British had some remarkable leaders, notably the King Caradoc or Carac­tacus. He was eventually handed over to the Romans in fetters, due to the treachery of the Queen of the Brigantes in Yorkshire, and taken to Rome with his family, but such was the reputation he had acquired in seven years of fighting that, when he entered Rome, he did so amidst the excitement of the three million inhabitants who blocked up the line of the procession to obtain a view of the formidable and illustrious captive and:-

". . . . . . . . . Rome trembled when she saw the Briton, though fast in chains."

The preservation of Caradoc forms a solitary exception to the policy of the Romans of casting captive kings and queens into the Tarpeian dungeons to be done to death. Instead he was spared on condition that he never bore arms against Rome again and a residence of seven years in Rome, in free custody, was imposed on him. He lived in the British Palace with his family, some of whom were already Christians, and thus the British Palace became the centre of Christianity in Rome. So, when St. Paul arrived in Rome, there was already a Christian Church there in which St. Paul ministered.

In II Timothy iv, 21, St. Paul mentions Pudens, Linus and Claudia. Linus was Caradoc's second son and he became the first Bishop of Rome. Claudia was the daughter of Caradoc and Pudens, a Roman, was her husband.

After the capture of Caradoc, the Britons carried on the war under the leader-ship of his cousin, Arviragus. Eventually, in 120 A.D., Britain was incorporated with the Roman dominions, but, by treaty not by conquest. The British retained their kings, land, laws and rights but accepted a Roman nucleus of the army for the defence of the realm. Finally, in 410 A.D., the Romans abandoned Britain altogether. Professor Huxley says that, during the occupation of Britain by the Romans, the British led a life as separate as possible from the invaders and that, when the Romans left, the population was as substantially Celtic as when they came.

From the start at Glastonbury the Christian faith spread and endured in the British Isles and, in the second century A.D., the British became the first officially Christian nation. It is significant that the Romans were not in the habit of inter­fering with the religions they found about the empire but they went to great lengths at times to try and stamp out Druidism and Christianity. A Druidic triad familiar to the Greeks and Romans was: "Three duties for every man: Worship God; be just to all men; die for your country". It was this last duty which caused Rome to mark Druidism for destruction because it ran counter to the Roman idea of universal dominion and the merging of all nationalities into their conception of one world.

They failed in Britain and eventually the Christian faith was carried all over Europe, including Rome, largely by the missionary efforts of the British. Constan­tine the Great was born and educated in Britain. His mother was Helena, a devout British Christian and daughter of King Coel of Eastern Britain. At one time Constantine served with St. George under Galerius in the Egyptian and Persian campaigns and, between the two young Christian soldiers, a lasting friendship was formed. Later, Constantine was proclaimed Emperor in Britain, at York in 306 A.D. and set out, supported by native British troops, to conquer and Christ­ianise the Roman Empire and "plant the Cross of Christ on the throne of the Caesars". (See George of Lydda.)

Later Britain was invaded by the Jutes and the Angles. The Angles, being the most numerous, gave their name, in this country, to the whole group which was known on the Continent as the Saxons. The Anglo-Saxons were not Christians but neither were they pagans. They believed in a divine or infinite being and had a religion derived, it may be concluded, from the same patriarchal source as the Druids, because the Druidic religion had not yet died out in Britain and the Saxons appear to have found enough similarity between their own form of worship and that of ancient Britain to allow them to unite under the ministrations of a Druidic hierarchy. The Saxons were Nordic like the British, the Danes, the Vikings and the Normans.

The Saxons looked with suspicion on the efforts of the people they were trying to subjugate, to convert them to Christianity and so they were still non-Christian when, in 597, Pope Gregory sent the Augustinian mission here to introduce the Latin form of Christianity. It is possible that, the civil power of Rome being dead, the ambitious Romans were anxious to exercise the universal dominion to which they had been accustomed, through the ecclesiastical power which began to rise on its ruins.

It is interesting and important to note that, under the Druidic system, the British people had become the most civilised people in the world and the most tolerant and humane. Greek and Roman writers acknowledge the British Druids as world leaders in the study of astronomy and science.

The British Church developed directly from the ministrations of the Apostles, Joseph of Arimathea, Simon Zelotes, Aristobulus, St. Paul and possibly St. Peter, and consequently owed nothing to Rome. The British clergy, or Culdees, based their ministry on the Scriptures or Word of God, to which they adhered closely, and strongly objected to Romish ritual, superstitions and wealth-and-power gathering hierarchical system. This opposition to the Roman system never ceased and was the main cause of Britain being the first country to throw off the Roman stranglehold at the time of the Reformation and to open up the Word of God to the people again.

When Augustine arrived, the British Church was strongly represented in the province of the Angles by an archbishopric, seven bishoprics and a great number of abbeys with most devout prelates. The British Church strongly resented the intrusion of an emissary of the Pope and, at a Council held shortly after his arrival, they told Augustine that "they knew no other Master than Christ", and that "they liked not his new-fangled customs" and refused submission. They were as good as their word and maintained the liberty of their Church for five hundred years after his time, being the last of the Churches of Europe to give up their power to Rome.

But Augustine met with some success among the Saxons and, by favour of the Saxon king, Ethelbert, the Roman Church was set up at Canterbury. It was the origin of the Church known today as the Church of England and it will be noted that it is quite distinct from the origin of the British Church, which was 560 years earlier.

Under Alfred the Great the Gospels had been issued in the native tongue but as the Roman Church gained dominance it took all possible steps to confine the Scriptures to the Latin tongue and to destroy all British manuscripts that fell into its hands.

The kings, people and ordinary clergy, or Culdees, of Britain, however, never fully accepted the spiritual suzerainty of Rome and altogether refused to acknow­ledge political ascendancy. The gradual build up of this resistance ended in the Reformation. Also it was the struggle for religious rights which opened men's eyes to all their rights and led them to withstand political oppression.

2 THE JEWS

IT Is Now time to turn our attention to the Jews for a while.

Throughout the Bible story is to be found an age-long struggle between Jacob and Esau and their descendants. Even before birth there appears to have been a pre-natal struggle. Esau lost his birthright to Jacob and went off and took unto himself wives of alien stock, Hittites. From him, by these women, were descended the Edomites, or Idumeans and the Amalekites. These people were in continual conflict with the Israelites and, later, the remnant which returned to rebuild the Temple after the captivity.

From Josephus we learn that the Jews under Judas Maccabeus temporarily subdued many enemies, including the Idumeans and then, in 125 B.C., when the Jews, under John Hyrcanus were again faced with the hostility of the Idumeans, he reduced their chief cities and compelled them to be circumcised and to be incor­porated into the Jewish State in order to be able to stay in the land. So that from that time onwards the Idumeans came also to be known as Jews. Yet true Israelites were reluctant to admit the Idumeans to their community, for the latter were known not to be really converted and, in fact, from then on this seed of Esau-Edom continued to take advantage of all the opportunities to pollute and destroy the Jewish race and faith.

The Herods were Idumeans and were responsible for the destruction of the priestly line, the murder of the infants in an attempt to prevent the coming of the Messiah, the slaying of John the Baptist; and the Herodian party played no small part in the bringing of Our Lord to the Cross.

From 66 A.D. onwards the Idumeans were largely responsible, with the Jewish Zealots, for bringing about the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. It would appear that the infiltration by the Idumeans into the Jewish nation had been such that the subsequent dispersion of the Jews included Idumean and other proselytes.

John viii, verses 33, 37 and 44, suggest that Our Lord was addressing the Idumean members of the nation because the Jews had been in captivity.

The Jewish faith, under the priests, had been based on the Old Testament Scriptures and the Temple, but with the destruction of the priestly line the Jews came under the rule of the Kahal, based on the Talmud and the synagogue which had been developed in Palestine after the captivity. The Kahal was a development from the political clubs which existed during the time of the Pharisees and Sadducees and it concealed, under a religious masque, the grasping aims of a clique.

By secret society techniques the Kahal obtained complete control over the daily life of the Jews and, with the dispersion and the formation of Jewish com­munities or fraternities about the world, each community became a miniature Kahal whose aims were intimately related with those of the central body upon which their existence depended.

The ruling clique which had started by grinding down its own race, now saw that, by drafting them into its own organisation, it could exploit the Gentiles on a far grander scale. It developed and perfected the system of espionage which it still maintains in order to strengthen its control and advance the interests of the Jews as a whole. For, although the individual Jew is the slave of the Kahal, he is rewarded for his submission by its support in his struggle with non-Jewish competitors.

The teaching in the synagogue incited Jews to a thorough exploitation of their Gentile neighbours and the doctrine was eventually embodied in a book, called the Shulchan Aruk. A few quotations will suffice to show its character:

"When a Jew has a Gentile in his clutches another Jew may go to the same Gentile, lend him money and, in his turn, deceive him so that the Gentile shall be ruined. For the property of a Gentile (according to our law) belongs to no-one, and the first Jew that passes has the full right to seize it."

"When a Jew makes a deal with a Gentile and another Jew comes up and deceives the Gentile no matter in what manner, whether he give him false measure or overcharge him, then both Jews must share between them the profits thus sent by Jehova."

"Although it is not a direct obligation for a Jew to kill a Gentile with whom he lives in peace yet, in no case is he allowed to save a Gentile's life."

"It is always a meritorious deed to get hold of a Gentile's possessions."

"Marriages taking place among Gentiles have no binding strength, i.e. their cohabitation is just as the coupling of horses, therefore their children do not stand as humanly related to their parents."

For success a Jewish community depended upon absolute subordination of its members and the secrecy of its proceedings.

The Kahal concealed its activities from the outside world under the guise of religion and, in order to guard against traitors and renegades, shrouded itself in mystery and mysticism, even from its members. Through the ages the Jewish fraternities have kept their typical character of a secret government disguised under the form of synagogue and schools. They have a heavy heritage, a Jewish conscientiousness, a hatred of non-Jews, a love of deceiving; all this they cannot easily shake off and, with it, the yoke of the Kahal.

After the dispersion the Jews, with many Edomites and other proselytes, settled around the Mediterranean and the Black Sea and Caspian areas. During the 8th century A.D. the Khazars of Russia, an unpleasantly aggressive people, adopted Judaism and the result has been large numbers of Jews in Central Europe. These Jews, or more properly Khazars, known as the Ashkenazim or "Polish" Jews, contain very few Israelites being nearly all descendants of various proselytes and possibly including some Edomite descendants.

Throughout the ages the Jews have been great secret society adepts and have infiltrated governmental, financial, secret society and other organisations until they have obtained control behind the scenes but they take great care to try to hide the fact as, if it became known, their ability to retain control would probably be lost.

It seems possible, according to the records of secret Jewish Zionism, that Solomon and other learned Jews had, as far back as 929 B.C., thought out a scheme, in theory, for a peaceful conquest of the whole world by Zion and that, as time passed, this scheme was worked out in detail and completed by men who were subsequently initiated into the subject. But these plans were always kept secret even from the Jewish nation itself. The idea was to subdue other countries by economic conquest.

(See Waters Flowing Eastwards, by L. Fry and A Short Study of Esau-Edom in Jewry, by C. F. Parker.)

3 THE KHAZARS

MUCH OF the sympathy which many people feel for the people they look upon as Jews is probably due to their thinking of them as descendants of Israel, having no idea that they are, in fact, mostly of pagan and aggressive Tartar-Khazar race. Perhaps it is worth giving the following information about these people from B. Jensen's The Palestine Plot.

"Authorities agree that persons of the Jewish Faith in eastern Europe are descendants largely of a non-Semitic Turkish-Finnish race which came into Europe from Asia about the 1st century A.D. by a land route north of the Caspian Sea. These people are known in history as Khazars. The Khazars had always been a pagan people. They settled in Eastern Europe and there established the Khazar kingdom. By continuous and successful conquests for which the Khazars became famous in history, their kingdom increased in size until, by the 8th century A.D., it occupied the greater part of eastern Europe located west of the Urals and north of the Black Sea and extending far westwards into Europe. The Khazar nation was converted to Judaism at about the end of the 7th century A.D. The Khazar king (circa) 692 selected Judaism rather than either the Christian or Moslem religions which were striving to convert him and the Khazar nation to Christianity or Mohammedanism.

"After the conversion of the Khazars to Judaism, only a Jewish king could occupy the Khazar throne. Conversion of the Khazars to Judaism was very successful. Judaism became the state religion. Synagogues and schools for teaching Judaism to the Khazars and peoples conquered by them were built throughout the kingdom. Rabbis to officiate in syna­gogues and teachers for schools were imported from Spain. These non-Semitic Turkish-Finnish people from Asia, now converted to Judaism, formed the Khazar kingdom which dominated eastern Europe: this great and powerful Jewish kingdom at the peak of its power, was collecting tribute from no less than twenty-five conquered peoples. Conquest was their vocation.

"This great and powerful Jewish kingdom flourished for almost five hundred years without a setback. Even the neighbouring mighty Byzantine and Persian empires feared the Khazars and eagerly sought military alliances with them. Towards the end of the 10th century A.D., the Khazars were defeated in a war with the Russians (Varangians) who came down on them from the north. For the first time in their history this Jewish kingdom was defeated and the Khazars were conquered. This conquest of the Khazars was completed in the middle of the 13th century A.D. The Khazar population and former Khazar territory were thus incorporated into the expanded Russian state.

"The Khazar kingdom disappears at this time from the history of the world. The conquest of the Khazar kingdom by the Russians accounts for the presence in southern Russia of the large and concentrated popula­tion of the Jewish faith. During the next few centuries, large parts of this concentrated Jewish population were included in the newly formed Polish, Lithuanian, Galician, Rumanian and other states which, through conquests were carved out of the former greater Russia. These new states were, in their turn, reconquered by Russia and these large Jewish popu­lations were reunited again as Russians. From the 13th century A.D. to the outbreak of World War II the eastern European area of southern Russian underwent very little ethnic change and continued to include the descendants of the former Khazar Jewish Kingdom."

Ever since that day Russia has been invading and occupying neighbouring territory: "Conquest is their vocation". Disraeli remarked about the "mysterious Russian diplomacy" which was controlled by his co-racialists. With the 1917 Revolution the Khazars wiped out the Czar and the Russian aristocracy and completely reconquered Russia which they have kept in subjugation ever since with the most appalling cruelty. They are also now well on the way to world domination by a combination of cool cheek and the use of all the dirtiest means which are effective for their purpose.

4 THE JEWS IN BRITAIN

THE JEWS now come into the British story. In 1066 when William of Normandy came to England he had Jews in his train. It is pretty certain that these Jews would have been responsible for the idea of compiling the Doomsday Book in order to acquire a complete inventory of the country to give information to guide them in exploiting it by means of usurious money-lending.

They became unpopular with the English but appear to have stayed in the country under the protection of successive kings who probably found them useful for revenue purposes until, in 1290, that great king and man of vision, Edward I, decided that it was necessary to expel them from the country for many grave offences endangering the safety of his realm and lieges. Twenty years later, Edward II suppressed the Knights Templar who were the bankers of the period and also the ancestors of Freemasonry. As a result England was prosperous during the 14th, 15th and 16th centuries and was known as `Merrie England'.

Later the Jews were also expelled from France, the Knights Templar having also been suppressed, as in England. The result in France was also great prosper­ity until the end of the 18th century when the secret societies and Ashkenazim Jews ruined it with the French Revolution. After that the Jews got a grip on the country and it has been in trouble ever since. A study of Nesta Webster's books on Secret Societies and Subversive Movements and The French Revolution are of the greatest importance in connection with this. They are a most exhaustive study of the subject and one which is essential to our understanding of what is going on in the world. One slight criticism of Mrs. Webster's work is that she does not seem to have realised the anti-Christian significance of British Masonry or its real connec­tion behind the scenes with other secret societies, such as Grand Orient.

It would probably astonish at least 99 per cent of British Freemasons to be told that it is anti-Christian and, in essence, Judaic. The vast majority just become Masons and leave it at that. They have no understanding of fundamental values and do not think of investigating. Most of them join because they have been told it is a good thing and that it will help them in their trade or profession. But, unlike all other secret societies it is, in the final resort, under Jewish control and can therefore be used to exert influence on men in all walks of life and usually in leading positions, to take courses which are designed to lead, in the long run, to the destruction of Gentile and, in particular, of British and Nordic power and prestige and the eventual complete domination of the world by the Sanhedrin, or the inner ring of international financiers, or the Elders of Zion — or whatever you like to call the body of about 300 men referred to by Disraeli and Walter Rathenau.

Investigation shows that movements like Theosophy, Grand Orient, Free-masonry, Illuminism, The Templars, Rosicrucians, etc., derive their ideas from the Jewish Cabala. It is true that many of the leading lights in these movements have been Gentiles. In fact Adam Weishaupt, the Bavarian Illuminist, seems to have been the chief architect of the modern secret society movements, but the control in all cases eventually passes into the hands of the Sanhedrin. In fact, in the final analysis, it all comes from Satan, as is proved by the black magic basis although, normally, this is only known to the most secret and advanced adepts. It is to be noted that the works of these secret societies never advance but are always detrimental to the Nordic peoples. They are always against individual and national sovereignty. On the other hand they always work to further destructive purposes by means of Nihilism, Socialism or Communism. Also, they are always in favour of World Jewry purposes and were, for some time, of Pan-Germanism, because Germany was the base of the Jew financiers and Pan-Germanism was a means of greatly weakening the Nordic peoples and of spreading the chaos neces­sary for the breeding of Communism.

It has been stated above that the Reformation was really the result in England of the age-long resistance of the British Church to Roman domination but this does not mean that Britain was not influenced in any way by the Continental movements of Luther and Calvin. Calvin went to Geneva from France where his name was spelt Cauin, possibly a French effort to spell Cohen. The Jews claim that he was of Jewish extraction. An unfortunate result of his efforts, as far as Britain was concerned, was that he organised great numbers of revolutionary orators who were spread about western Europe, with a good sprinkling in England and Scotland. These men laid the ground-work for revolution under a cloak of religious fervour.

It should be noted that this religious fervour did not show much of the love of Christ. It was much more inclined to display the rigid legalism of Mosaic Law and of the influence of The Talmud and to contract all religion into rigid observance of the "Sabbath", a Jewish ordinance and regarded as such by Calvin. In fact it was more like Judaism than Christianity. And Judaism, be it remembered, was based on The Talmud and the Shulchan Aruch and inculcated a spirit teaching that all non-Jews are animals.

Although they had been expelled, it is clear that the Jews retained, or in time regained, contacts in England because, during the reign of Charles I, they organ­ised the English Revolution by similar methods to those used later to organise the French Revolution. In both cases the revolutions were brought about by the activ­ities of secret societies and the use of "mobs", organised and paid from behind-the-scenes in London and Paris respectively. In the case of Paris, at least, the men who made up the ruffian crowd were definitely imported into Paris for the purpose.

Cromwell was financed by the Amsterdam Jewish Rabbi Manasseh Ben Israel and Fernandez Carvajal, "The Great Jew" as he was called, was the chief contrac­tor of the New Model Army. It was the Jews who insisted upon and had the power to bring about, through the control of money, the `execution' — in fact, murder — of Charles I, in order then to be able to regain admission to England which they did, illegally, under Cromwell.

The "Levellers" and the "Rationalists" in the army had the same doctrines as the French Revolutionaries and they were what we, today, know as Communists. The evidence for all this is available from Jewish sources, e.g.: the writing of Isaac Disraeli (father of Benjamin, Earl of Beaconsfield); the writings of Benjamin himself and in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion which fell into Gentile hands in 1897 and in which is the sentence: "Remember the French Revolution, the secrets of its preparation are well known to us for it was entirely the work of our hands."

But Cromwell, even with the assistance of his Geneva sympathisers, dispen­sing Judaic barbarity, failed to subdue Scotland where Charles II was still called King. It is of interest that Charles accepted the Presbyterian form of Christianity for Scotland and that this form is probably more like the old British Church than that of any other kind in modern times. Steadily the feeling in England came round to the Scottish point of view and, on Cromwell's death, all Britain welcomed the restoration of Charles II.

Unfortunately, Charles had no idea of the Jewish problem or plans. The wisdom and experience of Edward I had become lost in centuries of segregation from the Jewish poison. And the enemies of kingship were now entrenched within his kingdom. Charles was, however, aware of the dangers of a "Popish Plot" cry and worked against it but, with the accession of James II the Jews developed propaganda against the Papacy and got the people divided on it, while, under cover of it, plans were prepared for placing the control of finances of both England and Scotland in their hands.

The chief figure amongst those who deserted James at the crucial moment was John Churchill, first Duke of Marlborough. According to the Jewish Encyclo­paedia, this duke, for many years, received not less than £6,000 a year from the Dutch Jew Solomon Medina.

For further evidence on what is said above, reference should be made to The Nameless War by the late Capt. A.H.M. Ramsay M.P., Nesta Webster's books and Isaac Disraeli's two volume Life of Charles I, published in 1851, and referred to by Ramsay.

After the Amsterdam Jews had successfully financed the rebellion against James II in 1689, the chief of them, Solomon Medina, followed William of Orange to England. The result was to bring about a closer connection between the London and Amsterdam Jewish communities and the transfer of the centre of finance from the Dutch to the English capital. According to Benjamin Disraeli its practice in England has been equally injurious. (Sybil, Book 1.)

The real objective of the "Glorious Revolution" was achieved in 1694 when the Royal consent was given for the setting up of the Bank of "England" and the institution of the National Debt. This Charter handed over to an anonymous and private committee the Royal prerogative of creating money and converted the basis of wealth to gold. The money thus created was "negative money", a book entry, a debt which, by virtue of the mechanism itself could never be repaid. The Charter enabled the international money-lenders to secure their loans on the taxes of the country instead of on the doubtful undertaking of some ruler or potentate which was all the security they could previously obtain.

From then on economic machinery was set in motion which ultimately reduced all wealth to the fictitious terms of gold which the Jews control and drained away the life-blood of the land which was the birthright of the British peoples.

Shortly afterwards the political and economic union of England and Scotland was forced on Scotland with wholesale corruption and, in defiance of the adverse vote of every county and borough. The main objects of the Union, suppression of the Royal Mint in Scotland and Scottish responsibility, too, for the National "Debt", were then achieved. The grip of the money-lenders was now complete throughout Great Britain but there was a danger that the members of the new Joint Parliament might, in time, in the spirit of their ancestors, challenge this.

So, to provide against this, the party system was brought into being, thus frus­trating true national reaction and enabling the wire-pullers to divide and rule. The financiers used their newly-established power to ensure that their own men and their own policies should secure the limelight and that they should have sufficient support from their newspapers, pamphlets and banking accounts to carry the day. This state of affairs is still in full blast today.

As Capt. Ramsay points out, gold was soon to become the basis of loans, ten times the size of the amount deposited. That is £100 in gold would be legal security for £1,000 of loans. At 3 per cent therefore, £100 in gold could earn £30 interest annually with no more trouble to the lender than the keeping of a few ledger entries. The owner of £ 100 of land, however, must still work every hour of the day-light in order to make perhaps 4 per cent. It is inevitable that money-lenders must become millionaires and those who own and work the land, the Englishman and Scotsman, must be ruined. The process has continued inexorably till now, when it is nearly completed. It has been hypocritically camouflaged by clever propaganda as `helping the poor by mulching the rich'. In reality it is nothing of the kind. In the main it has been the deliberate ruination of the landed classes, the leaders among the Gentiles and their supplanting by the Jew financiers and their hangers-on.

The Whig philosophy, descended from Calvinism and other Puritan move­ments, is always the attack of the black-coated theorist on the practical man, such as the farmer, the sailor, the engineer and the pioneer. Basically it denies personal initiative and judgements and substitutes a set of transcendental values incapable of and, indeed, almost resenting any attempt at proof. Once this is understood, it becomes clear how the philosophy is essential to the supremacy of the financial system and those who control it. What appear to be failures of policy are really the greatest successes. Words become reversed. Stealing is a crime but unnecessary taxation is statesmanship.

With the return of the Jews, Freemasonry also started and developed to such an extent that the country is now riddled with it, particularly in the higher grades of Government Service and the Church of England.

5 MONEYLENDING

THE BANKING system which was foisted on this country in 1694 and during the succeeding years over most of the world, has been the main means whereby the Jews have brought misery and impoverishment everywhere. By their manipula­tion of finance, they have been the cause of most wars and economic and social troubles. They have been able to obtain control of governments and of the means of publicity (Press, T.V., Radio, Films, Publishing Houses, News Services, etc.) and so have been able to suppress the truth and propagate the lie. This has enabled them to fool and bully the people of the world into following the most suicidal courses until they are now in the position of expecting to clamp final dom­inion upon the world by means of a supranational organisation and some form of irresistible world police force which they would control.

To understand how the banking system has been the main means of enslaving us, it is essential to grasp one or two elementary and all-important facts which have been successfully hidden from the public and even, apparently, from an over­whelming proportion of bank officials and economists.

Contrary to general belief, banks by their own actions create and destroy money. In his Elements of Banking, H.D. McLeod, the Victorian economist wrote: "When it is said that a great London Joint Stock Bank has perhaps 25 mill-ions of deposits, it is almost universally believed that it has 25 millions of actual money to `lend out' as it is called. It is a complete and entire delusion. These `deposits' are not deposits in cash at all — they are nothing but an enormous superstructure of credit".

More than fifty years later, in 1931, this was confirmed by paragraph 74 of the Report of the Macmillan Committee, set up by the Government to enquire into Finance and Industry. This said: "It is not unnatural to think of deposits of a bank as being created by the people through the deposit of cash representing either savings or amounts which are not, for the time being, required to meet ex­penditure. But the bulk of the deposits arise out of the actions of the banks themselves, for, by granting loans, allowing money to be drawn on an overdraft or purchasing securities, a bank creates a credit on its books, which is the equivalent of a deposit".

When a bank grants a loan, the borrower has to provide a guarantee of its re-payment. But what does the bank do when it makes its so-called loan, or when it allows an overdraft or buys securities? It does not touch any depositor's account; in general it parts with nothing and at most, it only parts with some promissory notes — promises to pay — and some coin, usually only a small fraction of the "loan". So the total of what the banks are said to loan is far in excess of anything with which they part. Financially, debts pile up to them, while they part with very little. The difference between that with which the banks part and that which they "loan" is called bank credit, because the public believe in their promises to pay and are willing to give goods and services in exchange for them, although the banks could never honour them all. It is only legal, now, to demand of banks another promissory note or coin which is cumbersome and, therefore, compara­tively little used.

But the passage of coin complicates the whole thing to the average person as, in ordinary affairs, this means gain or loss to him. Our coin is issued originally by the Treasury to the Bank of "England"; but offset against our continuously grow­ing debt it is infinitesimal. It can be disregarded in the bankers' balances because, overall, the amount of coin which goes into banks balances the coin which passes out of them and makes little difference to them or their debts. So, in making a loan, a bank only parts with pieces of paper but, in doing so, it confers the power of drawing on a third party's goods. In reality, i.e., in goods and services, such loans are made by anyone but the banker. He only parts with the costless symbols of the reality. But financially — by the above means, which the Encyclopaedia Brit­annica (14th Edition) summarised as "Banks lend credit. They create the means of payment out of nothing" — mounting debts become due to the banker.

When a bank debtor has collected enough money in any form to repay the bank loan, the repayment wipes out the debt; and that amount of the banker's permits-to-use, which function as money, goes out of existence. The total money remains diminished to this extent if the banks do not wish to lend or buy for any reason.

"Thus all money is bank indebtedness and it is this cardinal fact that gives the banking system the power to expand or contract the quantity of money by increas­ing or diminishing the quantity of bank debts." (Midland Bank Review, Feb.-March, 1934).

The late Rt. Hon. Reginald McKenna, one-time Chancellor of the Exchequer and for long the Chairman of the Midland Bank, said on January 25th, 1924, to a meeting of the bank's shareholders: "I am afraid that the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that banks can, and do, create and destroy money". But the ordinary citizen should know so that he may come to understand the immense power the banks receive from the function, because, whilst the banks' power and gain from the issuing of money is vast, that from the prerogative of withdrawing it is even greater. This gives them the power to reduce monetary demand and thus to lower all prices and to wreck the whole business world. Then, with the equivalent power to create credits in their books, which are the equivalent of deposits, they can buy up industrial securities at slump prices and increase their control of industry, the wheels of which are set turning again by the very credits which have gained them the increased control.

"There are enough substantial quotations in existence to prove to the uninitia­ted that the banks do create credit without restraint and that they do create within themselves the means of repayment", said an editorial in Branch Banking (July, 1938). But while authorities inform us about bankers' methods, they never refer to the bankers' ends. Thus they tell us only half the truth. Pre-war investigation showed that an average of 60 per cent of the receipts of large organisations ultim­ately go to the banker as debt-charges, but the majority of the debentures of the large industrial concerns have already gone to him.

Money is said to be a means of distribution, but it has become, above all else, a means of centralisation; a means that, with minor alterations, has remained unchanged since the days of Greece and Babylon. The end — centralisation — is almost complete. And, be it noted, the centralisation is that of all power and property into the hands of the inner ring of international financiers who, in fact, control the financial and banking systems of the world, including the Soviet part. After the Communists grabbed power in Russia, the country was brought under an orthodox financial system, i.e. the Russian Government bases its currency, as far as possible, on gold and creates bank deposit money or other credit as a debt at interest just as does every other country that has elected to remain within the ambit of the international money system. Russia, in spite of its "Socialist" theories, became a "super-capitalist" country. The banking system was fastened on to it and the system is still controlled by a Jew, V. Ashberg, the opposite number to Bernard Baruch in the Western World. It is important to notice that these Jew financiers, whether they be superficially "Dutch", "German", or "American", etc., have always been working for the same end — world dominion. They use nations in turn as best suits their purpose, under the condit­ions applying at any given time.

William Cobbett wrote in The Political Register XVIII, July 14th, 1810:

"I set to work to read the Act of Parliament by which the bank of England was created (in 1694). The investors knew well what they were about. Their design was to mortgage by degrees the whole of the country... land... houses... property... labour, the scheme... has produced what the world never saw before — starvation in the midst of abundance."

How right he was! The British people, by means of the banking system, have been practically robbed of their country and reduced to the position of being wage or salary slaves in it, entirely at the mercy of the international financiers for sus­tenance in return for their labour. The object of "full employment" is slavery, i.e., to keep everyone toiling for existence with no time to observe and think.

The financial system has been thoroughly exposed in books by a number of authors, but it is noticeable that they do not seem to be in general use for educa­tional purposes or even to been have heard of by the general public, or by the people who should be familiar with them, such as bankers, economists, business-men, Treasury officials, Chancellors of the Exchequer and politicians. A remark-ably good book on the subject is Human Ecology, by Dr. Thomas Robertson, of Glasgow. It is difficult to get hold of because the publishers, William Maclellan, went bankrupt soon after publishing it and the author has not been able to get a publisher to take on the job since. There can be little doubt that the Money Power is responsible for this suppression. There are also books by C.H. Douglas, Vincent C. Vickers, Maurice Colbourne, C. Marshall Hattersley, the late Duke of Bedford, etc., which cover the subject adequately.

The money the British Government spends comes from the Bank of "England" and not from taxation. It is money created for the specific purpose of financing government expenditure and it is claimed by the Bank as a repayable loan. Ever since the system started our Governments have acceded to this fraud­ulent claim — fraudulent because it cannot be a loan unless the Bank gives up or goes without something, which it does not. In an attempt to repay this fictitious loan, the Government taxes the people and the money thus extracted from the people is an arbitrary amount fixed by the Government, as agent for the bank, just as the Income Tax officials fix the amount of tax on any doubtful income. The amount is just as much as the public will hand over without too much protest. The rest of this "debt" to the Bank "of England", which has not been repaid out of taxation, is added to the National "Debt", which is mostly the accumulation of unpaid bank loans.

As the National "Debt" ranks as a first class security it is almost entirely owned by, that is owed to, banks. Its repayment to them, as was explained earlier, would cause this amount of money to go out of existence and so would create, absurdly, a national financial crisis. While this unreal debt is represented in the national balance sheet, which the budget is supposed to be, our real national assets are not.

The Budget is, therefore, a deception, as is all monetary taxation. Taxation reflected truth when, in a primitive society, without money or a banking system, a tithe of the production was collected to give a non-productive servant of society the means to live. It deviated from the truth firstly when it became payable in money which was not issued by the owner of the goods. The issuer of the money received a claim on the society's production equal to the difference in the value of the money taken over the cost of its making. Another error arose when the rise in power production enabled enough for all to be produced without taxing society's physical resources to the full.

Since the coming of mechanised production, there has been no justification for anyone to be impoverished because this great source of power could be fully exploited for man's benefit if money served to facilitate production and distribu­tion, instead of being used, as it is at present, for building up "debt" to the few, who have acquired the sole monopoly of money creation and manipulation for the satisfaction of their lust for power.

Taxation has been supported by the Socialist theory that "the poor are poor because the rich are rich", leading to an attempt to tax the rich for the benefit of the poor, but it has only led to the deprivation of the rich without real benefit to the poor. In fact, it has led to the real harm of all classes and is designed to do so by the hidden powers. All classes would have benefited if the real wealth had been produced abundantly as it could be and its distribution by a satisfactory mech­anism, devised to this end, had been permitted. But when workers demand more in wages, financial costs — and therefore prices — are increased. For them to abstain from work in order to get more money increases financial costs in two ways and harms all, even including themselves, when others follow their example, for it sets up a vicious spiral of price, which operates against them. Whatever gain they may have received is negligible in comparison to the wealth which the realities could have bestowed upon them. Had they demanded that prices should drop with new invention while wages remained constant, it would have reflected facts more and been better for all.

The Socialist concept is that "Capital" obtains its profits from giving "Labour" less than it is worth; but such words as "Capital" and "Labour", abstracted from reality and used in the vague way they are, lead to misunderstand­ing. The real position can only be grasped by imagining ourselves deprived of all knowledge of power and production which we have inherited, except our physical strength. The return from the last alone would almost be negligible; and that would be the return from our labour so that "labour" is seen to receive far more than it’s due. In contradistinction to this, however, we have inherited enormous assets of power, the result of past labour, which goes unrecognised and in respect of this inheritance we are all due for some form of dividend.

When, as a result of our labour and inheritance, goods and services have been produced, the nation needs to bring enough claims on them — money— into exis­tence and to ensure that they are distributed in a manner reasonably representa­tive of the mode of production; wage reflecting the labour and dividend the inher­itance. Otherwise, neither the production will be fully employed nor the heritage fully enjoyed. Wages plus this dividend should be sufficient to enable the price of all goods and services produced for sale to be met. The producer, assured of his costs, could then produce to the full or to sufficiency and inventions would not need to be suppressed and their would be no point in having restrictive practices.

Abraham Lincoln, U.S. President, 1861-65, in Senate Document No. 23, 76th Congress, page 91, said: "The Government should create, issue and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the consumers. The privilege of creating and issuing money is the supreme prerogative of Government, the Government's greatest creative opportunity". During the Civil War, Lincoln made the following statement to Congress: "I have two enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the financial institutions in the rear. Of the two, the one in my rear is my greatest foe".

Thomas Jefferson, the third President of the U.S., about 1800, said: "I believe that Banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a money aristocracy that has set the Government at defiance. The issuing power (of money) should be taken from the banks and restored to the Government and to the people to whom it belongs. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their cur­rency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the corporation that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property, until their children will wake up homeless on the land their fathers conquered".

It will be seen that both William Cobbett (1763-1835) in England and Jeffer­son in America, at about the same time, fully grasped the evil purpose of the bank­ing system and that, as in each case the system has been allowed to pursue its course, their prophecies have now come to pass and the British and Americans have been dispossessed in favour of the banking system, behind which are the international financiers.

Most of the above section on finance has been taken from an essay on the sub­ject by a friend, Mr. R.L. Duck, because it appeared to be very suitable for the purpose, but the whole subject is dealt with exhaustively in the books by Robertson, Douglas, etc., to which reference should be made by anyone anxious to study it. Robertson explains that a study of history shows that the world is an organism suffering from a disease with a wide variety of symptoms which always appear in a definitive order. They appear in every part of the globe, except its "uncivilised" parts and, irrespective of race, nationality, climate or position. The symptoms are the whole range of social disorders, the main ones being poverty amidst plenty, civil and political disorder, frustration, loss of liberty and strife of every kind, finally ending in war. They appear under every condition except one, being found in countries on the gold standard or off it; in ones with blocked currencies, managed currencies or on barter; in countries with free trade or on tariffs; in countries full of gold or those with none; in those with access to all raw materials and those with very little; in industrial and in agricultural societies and in countries which chiefly export and those which do not. Also they appear with equal indifference under all political systems, in monarchies (constitutional or not) in plutocracies and democracies, under dictatorships of race or proletariat, under Conservatism, Liberalism, Socialism or Communism, or any other kind of polit­ics so far tried; and also under every religion or none. They also appear under Federal Union.

An examination of the factors present in these various cases shows that there is only one which is common to all and that is financial credit — the international money system, which has almost escaped notice. The money system must there-fore be the basic cause of all the troubles. This is proved to be true by the fact that where the money system is the most powerful the disease is worst and by the fact that the only communities free from the symptoms are the "uncivilised" ones which have not been fully corrupted by the money system.

History shows how disastrous have been the effects on all peasant societies when a usurious money system has been introduced, whether in ancient Rome or, of more recent times, under the British in India, Fiji and Tanganyika, etc.

It will be noted that in the Bible and in the Koran, usury is strongly con­demned as an evil thing. By usury is meant, not merely the charging of an inordin­ately high rate of interest, but the charging of any interest at all. If a usurious money system is introduced into a community, it is inevitable that the value of the money must continually depreciate and that the public must come into irredeem­able "debt" to the people who have the power of creating and destroying the money.

It must then be realised that, as Douglas puts it, "power comes not from charging interest but in creating new claims and appropriating them". When the usurer lent the original gold coinage, he created a debt claim and appropriated the interest. When, however, he began to create and lend money, he appropriated both interest and capital. The bankers' wealth and power finally derived from this credit creation and we are now reaching the stage where the bankers can view the disappearance of interest with composure so long as they are left in sovereign control of money creation. So it would be no use just stopping the charging of interest while allowing money only to be made by being lent into existence.

History shows that all societies with a usurious money system have collapsed in time. Do not forget that banks operated as long ago as in ancient Greece and Babylon. Rome was destroyed by the same means as those by which we are now being destroyed. Will we never learn? See Guglielmo Ferrero's The Greatness and the Decline of Rome and Dr. G.T. Wrench's The Restoration of the Peasantries and Reconstruction by Way of the Soil. The system always has the effect of destroying the sturdy peasantry, the aristocracy and agriculture and of breeding rootless urban mobs who are ultimately at the disposal of unscrupulous financiers because of their control of the sources of information, propaganda and bribery.

6 SOME EFFECTS OF THE USURY SYSTEM

A STUDY of the facts shows that nearly all war and civil strife from the internecine struggles of the Greek City States, through the rise and fall of Athens and Rome, to the wars of Napoleon were really all misdirected efforts to escape the bondage of the usurers. The American War of Independence was caused by the oppressive legislation necessary to sustain the debt structure of the Bank "of England".

The Napoleonic Wars were the direct outcome of the growing might of the international moneylenders and of Napoleon's realisation of it and of his attempts to break its grip to as to be able to develop France in prosperity and free of the foul debt system. He was beaten because Rothschild, through his control of the City of London, was able to use the British people against him.

But the part of Freemasonry in this must not be overlooked. Napoleon was a Mason and had the assistance of the sect in his rise to power. Robespierre, another Mason like nearly all the French Revolutionary leaders, was his earliest patron. Although he remained in spirit and, in effect, a Freemason all his life, Napoleon was eventually betrayed, hoodwinked and led to his ruin by Masonry. An extremely interesting book on the subject is Grand Orient Freemasonry Unmasked as the Secret Power Behind Communism. It is a reprint of lectures delivered by Monsignor George F. Dillon, D.D., in Edinburgh in October, 1884. It contains a review of the rise and progress of atheism; its extension through Voltaire; its use of Freemasonry and kindred societies for Ant-Christian War; the union and "Illu­minism" of Masonry by Weishaupt; its progress under the leaders of the first French Revolution and under Nubius, Palmerston and Mazzini; the control of its hidden "Inner Circle" over all revolutionary organisations; its influence over British Freemasonry; its attempts upon Ireland; oaths, signs and passwords of the three degrees, etc., etc. From it we find that:

"In his earlier days, Masonry was on Napoleon's side and, as now, the secret resources of the Order, its powers of hidden influence and espionage were placed at the disposal of the cause which was serving the purpose of its conspiracy. But when Masonry had reason to fear that Napoleon's power might be perpetuated, when his alliance with the Imperial Family of Austria and, above all, when the consequences of that alliance , an heir to his throne, caused danger to the universal republic, it could otherwise assure itself of at his death; when, too, he began to show a coldness for the sect, and sought means to prevent it from the propa­gandism of its diabolical aims, then it became his enemy and his end was not far off. Distracting councils prevailed in is cabinet. His opponents began to get that information of his movements which he had obtained previously of theirs. Members of the sect urged on his mad expedition to Moscow. His resources were paralysed and he was sold by secret and invisible foes into the hands of his enemies. Weishaupt and his party, in Germany, prepared secretly for his downfall. And so he died on the rock of St. Helena, abandoned and persecuted by the dark sect which had used, abused and betrayed him as it has done with every usurper and despot whom it has lured into its toils."

Possibly Mgr. Dillon's estimate of Napoleon was slightly biased by the latter's opposition to the Pope and the Roman Church and by the former's apparent failure to realise the significance of Napoleon's opposition to the international money lenders.

The opposition of the people in Ireland to English rule has always been caused by the depredations of the London usurer.

In considering the American Civil War it was necessary to remember that American society, particularly in the Southern States, had developed on lines similar to those that obtained in England before the American Revolution, i.e. a cultured society of landed gentry, more-or-less self-supporting and free of the moneylender's grip. The war was really brought about by the desire of the northern moneylenders, who were Jews, or tools of the Jewish Money Power, to get control of the country and to destroy the aristocratic Southerners. The slavery issue was propaganda put out to raise feeling against the South. Abraham Lincoln fought the war to preserve the Union but he would have pursued a policy of reconciliation after it had been won. The Jews knew this and they also knew his ideas on currency. He had financed the war by the issue of Government debt-free money, known as "Greenbacks" and, on the evening of his announcement that he intended in future to finance U.S. loans on a similar debt-free basis and introduce a policy of reconciliation, he was assassinated by the Jew, Booth, obviously acting on the instructions and with the assistance of the secret powers. (See Douglas Reed's Far and Wide.) Lincoln, having been murdered, a policy of the utmost repression was carried out in the Southern States for the next dozen years, in order completely to ruin them but it did not entirely succeed in its object. And, of course, America remained in the grip of the moneylenders.

By the time of the Revolutions of 1848, the Jews were in control of the system of the Illuminati and we know from Jewish sources that they organised the revolu­tions. It will be noted that the aim of Masonry and kindred secret societies is to work for the destruction of the Christian faith and the spread of atheism, socialism, internationalism, the destruction of royalty and aristocracy and the eventual setting up of World Government and the rule of Anti-Christ. The same aims as those of the Sanhedrin.

It is significant that the "Glorious Revolution" of 1689 in England resulted in the Bank "of England"; the French Revolution converted France from a Monarchy into a Bankers' State and the revolutions of 1848 fastened a central banking system on Germany.

7 TWO JEWISH PLANS

DURING the last half of the 19th century, there grew up side by side among the Jews or Khazars of Russia, two rival schools of thought about how to achieve world dominion. There were those who favoured the Communist revolution method in Russia, to be followed by the spread of Communism about the rest of the world, and those who favoured the Political Zionist method, i.e. the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine which should rule the world through the medium of Jews at the control of affairs in every nation. The protagonists of the two schools were apt to be in bitter opposition but both produced men of energy who met with remarkably good conditions for furthering their purposes.

Asher Ginzberg became the leader of the fanatically nationalist Zionists. He met with, but overcame, opposition from the much more assimilated Jews further west who were divided into the two camps of the Rothschilds and the German-Jews in Germany and America. The German-Jews had invested a large part of their capital in German industry and shared, or pretended to share, in the the plans of Pan-Germanism.

It was at this time that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion came to light. They detail in very direct, forceful language the appalling plan of the Jews for obtaining complete mastery over the Gentiles. The remarkable thing is that they have continued to the present day to be carried out with complete fidelity and dia­bolical efficiency and all our politicians do about it is to vie with one another in currying favour with the international financiers by doing all they can to help them destroy us. The Protocols should be studied by everyone and it is helpful to read them in conjunction with such books as Waters Flowing Eastwards, by L. Fry, and Hidden Government, by Lt.-Col. Creagh Scott, and B. Jensen's books, listed in the bibliography.

It will be noted that the wars and revolutions of this century have all led steadily to the furthering of the Jewish purposes of Communism and Political Zionism. During the last fifty years this comparative handful of Jews has met with astounding success and has completely transformed the world. Probably the most astonishing thing has been the way in which politicians, particularly the British ones, have hastened to help them destroy western civilisation and Christ­endom. It only does to show the astonishing control of affairs the Jews have obtained by means of finance, Freemasonry and control of all the means of publicity.

Strange to say, the only real opposition these Jews have met with has been from individual Jews, probably mainly Sephardim, who have objected to the foul policy and have seen that it must inevitably end in great harm to the Jews, as being contrary to God's purpose for the return of the Jews to Israel, which they awaited Him to bring about in His own good time.

It has been calculated that no more than 8 per cent of the Jews now living, and known as Jews, can be descendants of Judah or Israel. Consequently, the great mass of those who have gone to Palestine and evicted the Arabs, with the connivance of the United Nations, have not even got in their support the very feeble argu­ment that they are descendants of the original Israelites. Possibly this explains Revelation ii, 9 and iii, 9.

The writer is in no way "Anti-Semitic", whatever is meant by that term. Neither is he "Anti-Jew". He is only opposed to the vile circle of power-lusting men who are working for the creation of an Anti-Christian World Government. This Sanhedrin, which has existed throughout the ages, has become remarkably cunning in subverting and using leading Gentiles to serve its purposes and it is quite happy to allow them to enjoy great wealth and power so long as they toe the line. Foul and atheistic Gentiles have been leading lights in the development of Masonry and other secret societies. International Finance is not entirely com­posed of Jews. In these days, the majority of Gentiles who rise to high position, particularly in the English-speaking world, do so because they are considered suit-able by the Sanhedrin and they are soon removed if they show any signs of getting awkward from the Sanhedrin point of view.

While it is ridiculous to suppose that all the Jews in the world spend their time plotting wars, etc., it is probable that most of them are tools of the Sanhedrin to a greater or lesser extent. And the Sanhedrin would be quite callous and unscrupu­lous in using them as might be expedient. For example, a large number of Jews, or rather Khazars, who entered Palestine after the war were almost certainly driven there for fear of the Sanhedrin.

The basic purpose of the Sanhedrin being to destroy the Christian faith and set up an atheistic world order, it obviously includes the pollution, perversion and destruction of any truly religious elements in Jewry which might therefore in time turn to the Christian faith and also, probably, the destruction of Nordic-type Jews along with other Nordic peoples, as it is in the remnant of the Nordic des­cendants of Shem via Abraham and Israel that the earthly part of God's purpose is to be worked out, assuming that it is correct that the Israelites were originally Nordic.

The situation is covered by our Lord in brief, in Matthew, Chapter xiii, verses 24-30 and 36-43. The "Kingdom of Heaven" in the parable refers to the Jewish nation.

The stupendous development of recent generations is well covered by a study of the books by Frances E. Newton, C.H. Douglas, A.K. Chesterton, B. Jensen, Douglas Reed, Colin Jordan, etc., in the Bibliography at the end of this book. [See the `Note from the Publisher of this Edition' concerning the replacement of the author's 1956 Bibliography with our 1992 Recommended Reading List.]

8 THE POISON IN BRITAIN

VERY BRIEFLY it should be noted that in Britain we received, during the latter half of the 19th and earlier part of the 20th centuries, an influx of German and Russian Jews, including Ludwig Mond, Sir Ernest Cassel and Chaim Weitzmann. Mond and his son, Sir Alfred (1st Lord Melchett) were leading lights in the process of foisting upon this country the policy of monopoly of key industries together with the transference of information and control to so-called international bodies, the focus of which was then German, e.g. Imperial Chemical Industries and I.G. Farben. The Germans received information of our processes, but it was largely a "one-way street". These large monopolistic firms like I.C.I. are a source of great weakness to us. They are under international financial control working for Zion­ist purposes of procuring a world government for "Israel". In the past, the control of money, gold and credit has been the primary weapon of the Zionist, but as the money myth has been exploded, as shown earlier in this paper (although not as yet as far as the general public is concerned), legal control of raw materials is essential to the pursuit of the policy to a final and successful issue. Genuine and unfettered private property of any description whatever is absolutely fatal to it; and the liberal financing of any movement, "Commonwealth", "Liberal", "Socialist", "Henry Georgite", "Single Tax", or "Communist" which attacks the very idea of private ownership in anything whatever, can be traced, without difficulty, to Zionist bankers. That is why the richest body of individuals in the world subsid­ises attacks on wealth. Not a single one of the movements mentioned has ever attacked the Money Power or the Jews. But as it was impossible entirely to ignore the subject of finance, after the publicity given it by such events as the election of a Social Credit Government in Alberta, Canada, all the Left Wing parties have incl­uded the "nationalisation", i.e. central control of banking in their programmes. The objective is similar to that involved in the "nationalisation" of coal. The object of the nationalisation of industries is to provide the international loan-mongers with control of assets, rather than the mere taxing power of the country. Nationalisation robs the people of their assets, besides being very inefficient and destructive of individual freedom.

The real conflict in the economic world is not between cartels, monopolies and nationalised industries and property, but between all three and small businesses and privately-owned property. The three are merely different forms of monopoly. Socialism is monopoly. Monopoly is the policy of the Sanhedrin and it is expres­sed in the various forms of cartel "public corporation" like the "British" Broad-casting Corporation, the London Transport Board, the Tennessee Valley Author­ity, or outright state ownership of the Russian type. They all lead up through the stages to "nationalisation" in the individual states and on through various national groupings, where national sovereignty is surrendered, e.g. European Union, NATO, the Soviet bloc, Anzus pact, United Nations, to the ultimate object of World Government. All the stages, as they are achieved, have the effect of bringing the organisations concerned more firmly under the control of the Sanhedrin.

In the process all individual sovereignty is wiped out, because all the people are brought into the position of being "wage" or "salary slaves" of the monopoly control. We are well on the way to that state of affairs in this country. The whole of the taxation system has been deliberately designed to produce the result by means of death duties, graduated income tax, etc. The object is to destroy the real aristocracy and its inherited memory of tradition and policy and all individual independence and by an issue of bribery in the form of "social services" corres­ponding to "bread and circuses" of Roman days, to persuade the numerous mob to vote for measures which they do not understand and which amount to signing a death warrant of the whole nation.

Since the cynically insincere opportunist Disraeli injected his Liberal and Radical Jewish poison into the Tory Party, it has become less and less Tory and more and more Socialist and Internationalist in effect until it is now for all prac­tical purposes, as completely under the control of the Sanhedrin as is the Socialist Party.

The parties are merely used by the Sanhedrin to keep the people divided over unreal issues while all the time they are, in their blindness, being led into complete subjection. No party attacks the Sanhedrin or Dollar Barons. No party mentions, let alone advocates, monetary reform. No party will give heed to any suggestion than an investigation be made into secret societies and subversive movements. It makes no real difference which party is in office, the Sanhedrin is always in power. They all pursue what is fundamentally the same policy of destroying Great Britain and the British Empire. Look at the way we have been running away from our responsibilities of Empire all over the world during the last ten years under the hidden forces working on the lamentable figureheads in office. It appears to be impossible to rise in any party without making suitable obeisance to Judæo-Masonry.

It is significant that such organisations as the Fabian Society, the London School of Economics, P.E.P., and the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House) were richly endowed by Jewish finance and have been largely guided by Jewish influence instilling the Fifth Column doctrines of Socialism and Internationalism into our body politic.

The Fabian Society, with its associated organisations, is the fountainhead of Socialist ideas in English-speaking countries. Socialist movements all over the world were dominated by the influence of the Jew Fabian Harold Laski. After dis­cussions with Stalin, late in 1946, Laski made the very important statement that the English Socialists and the Russian Socialists were approaching the same objec­tive by different roads. Lenin said: "The British are too conservative to make their own revolution — in Britain the revolution will have to be imported". But the horde of German and Russian-speaking Jews who poured into this country for the purpose have managed to find a large number of Gentile dupes to work for them. The Society had been formed under the leadership of Professor Thomas Davidson, "an ethical Anarchist Communist", in the winter of 1883-84. But he was superseded by the Webbs and George Bernard Shaw.

As indicated by Laski, the policy adopted was not the violent revolution one used in Russia, but a silent revolution based on undermining the nation's institu­tions from within. The idea was to influence all other political groups by permeation and infiltration: Sovietisation by stealth. These infiltrators met with astonish­ing success, particularly in the Liberal Party and later in the Labour Party which they took over and converted into a Socialist party; the unfortunate Labour rep­resentatives having completely failed to see that Socialism was diametrically opposed to true Labour interests.

H.G. Wells described the Fabian leaders as pedants who believe that fair ends may be reached by foul means, and said that Sidney Webb was an "incessant little intriguer". Writing of Webb, the Jew historian Elie Halevey wrote: "I can still hear Sidney Webb explaining to me that the future belonged to the great adminis­trative nations, where the officials govern and the police keep order". He also mentions Shaw arguing that: "The world is to the big and powerful states of neces­sity and the little ones must come within their borders or be crushed out of existence".

As an example of what happened, George Lansbury relates how the Internat­ional Financier, Sir Samuel Montagu (Lord Swaythling), gave him financial support to keep strikes going until their partnership was broken by Lansbury becoming a definite Socialist. Montagu wanted Lansbury to stay in the Liberal party and preach his Socialism inside it.

The Fabians understood the weakness of most politicians, of all parties, to tend to centralise political power and set to work to get them to support legisla­tion which would so centralise power that a process of delegation of power to a growing bureaucracy became inevitable. Once the bureaucracy was empowered to make regulations and decrees having the force of law, responsible government was undermined. That is, they deliberately set out to pervert the Parliamentary system and to use it to reach the same objective which the Communists wanted to reach by force.

It is worth noting that the introduction of universal suffrage, combined with the secret ballot, inevitably leads to irresponsible voting and to irresponsible polit­icians who will plead mandates for their actions.

The London School of Economics was, according to Mrs Webb, financed with the help of the Rothschilds, Sir Julius Wernher and similar financial magnates. Lord Rothschild is the "British" head of the most powerful family money trust in the world. He joined the "British" Labour Party in 1945. During the war he was closely connected with the policy of interning British patriots (Gentiles) under Regulation 18b. In 1920, Sir Ernest Cassel gave the School £472,000, when it was in serious financial difficulties, in order make it a place "to raise and train the bureaucracy of the future Socialist State".

Cassel's favourite grand-daughter was Lady Mountbatten, whose Leftist views are supposed to have had a big influence on her husband. We have seen the part they played in the scuttle from India, to say no more.

The influence of the School has been world-wide. The "key" members of the bureaucracies in all English-speaking countries have been tainted there and its teachings have permeated the universities. The School was much under the influ­ence of Laski, whose philosophy was summed up as follows: "Christianity has failed, and the Russian ideal is taking its place as the inspiration of mankind, and as the standard of public morality". Sir William Beveridge, advocate of a "half-way to Moscow policy" was director of the School from 1919-1937. The influence of the School has been evil wherever it has permeated.

P.E.P. (Political and Economic Planning) is a semi-secret Socialist organisa­tion developed by the Fabians as part of their conspiratorial technique. Lord Mel­chett of I.C.I. was associated with it. He was a leading advocate of "rationalisa­tion", which Trade Union leaders accepted as a step towards nationalisation. In 1920, H.G. Wells said: "Big business is by no means antipathetic to Communism. The larger big business grows, the more it approximates to Collectivism. It is the upper road of the few instead of the lower road of the masses to Collectivism".

Fabians and other Socialists are keen supporters of economic centralisation and the crushing of large numbers of small and medium-sized businesses. The most prominent in P.E.P. has been Mr. Israel Moses Sieff of Marks & Spencer. He is also one of the leading Zionists and a Russian-speaking Jew. P.E.P.'s typically Fabian conspiratorial methods are shown by the instructions issued on April 25th, 1933, with a broadsheet outlining what can best be called Sovietisation by stealth: "You may use, without acknowledgement, anything which appears in this broadsheet on the understanding that the broadsheet and the group are not pub­licly mentioned, either in writing or otherwise. This strict condition of anonym­ity... is essential in order that the group may prove effective.." The broadsheet then went on to outline how farmers and manufacturers should be controlled by "duly constituted authority" and that small traders should be eliminated. The broadsheet showed beyond all doubt the totalitarian nature of the policy being pursued by P.E.P.

It is hardly surprising that, in connection with the policy of gradual Sovietisa­tion put forward by P.E.P., Mr. Sieff made the claim that: "The only rival world political and economic system which puts forward a comparable claim is that of the Union of Soviet Republics".

On October 14th, 1938, Planning, the journal of P.E.P. stated that: "We have started from the position that it is only in war, or under the threat of war, that a British Government will embark on large-scale planning..", and went on to say that... emergency measures should, as far as possible, be framed in accord with the long-term needs of social and economic reconstruction". It will be seen that the Fabians welcome war conditions to further their ideas, as do their masters of the Sanhedrin. It is significant that the Socialists kept working to embroil us in war and, at the same time, voted for disarmament.

P.E.P. also infiltrated the "Conservative organisations and it is of interest that Churchill has made great use of Lord Woolton, of Lewis Ltd., and one-time fervent Fabian. Churchill himself, of course, has been a lifelong intimate friend of leading Jew financiers like Bernard Baruch, Sir Ernest Cassel and Sir Abe Bailey. He is also a hereditary Whig-Liberal, a life-long Zionist and a worker for World Government, notwithstanding his oath of allegiance to the British Crown.

The ideas of P.E.P. have had considerable influence in America, particularly during the Roosevelt regime. In 1934, Mr. Louis T. McFadden, an American Con­gressman and recognised authority on banking matters, exposed the connection between the New Dealers in America and the English Fabians when he said: "Many serious people in England feel that this Fabian organisation (P.E.P.) prac­tically controls the British Government and that this Government will soon be known as `His Majesty's Soviet Government'... ". About three months after the National Recovery Act (the first of the New Deal Socialist measures) of the United States, when Israel Moses Sieff was urged by members of his Committee to show more activity, he said: "Let us go slowly for a while, and wait and see how our plan carries out in America".

On March 15th, 1934, in an address criticising the New Deal Socialist legisla­tion for controlling cotton acreage in the USA, Mr. McFadden said: "Their action the New Deal Planners” in this matter is also assisted and aided through the agency of the Foreign Policy Association of the United States, which is directly connected with the Fabian Society, or a branch of it, in England, which at the present time is attempting to take over control of agriculture and its operation in England... I call your especial attention to the recent article America Must Choose by Secretary of Agriculture Wallace, a syndicated article put out under the auspices of the Foreign Policy Association of New York and copyrighted by them. This article is quite in keeping with the plan of the British offspring of the Fabian Group".

Note that the Foreign policy Association was sponsored by Paul M. Warburg of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., and by Bernard Baruch, the continuing "unofficial Pres­ident" of the USA. Also Mr. James Warburg has openly expressed himself in favour of some nationalisation. It is inescapable that Socialism is the policy of the International Financiers.

George Bernard Shaw said: "Lenin owed a great deal of his eminence to the fact that, in his younger days, he studied the works of Sidney Webb... The success of the Russian experiment means that old words, like Fabianism and Socialism, are all out of date. There is nothing now but Communism".

One of the basic features of the Soviet economy is economic conscription. Irrespective of how it is introduced, Socialism in practice inevitably leads to man-power control. Shaw was quite clear about this when he said, in the October issue, 1921, of The Labour Monthly: "Compulsory labour, with death as the final penalty... is the keystone of Socialism".

It is clear that the ends of the Socialists and the Communists are the same: the Monopoly State. The only quarrel between them is as to the means of attaining it. The Socialists prefer the "democratic" method of the ballot box, and the Parlia­mentary system, by which slavery can be introduced just as effectively as by direct violence. What is the difference to an individual between having his property taken away from him by Act of Parliament (as in nationalisation) or at the point of a bayonet?

Socialists may argue that their "democratic" methods ensure financial com­pensation to all persons who have property taken from them by legislation, but Fabians have made it clear that such compensation will also be taken back from them by crippling taxation. The Scotsman of January 7th, 1946, reported Profes­sor Laski as follows: "Professor Laski said he had never been worried about com­pensation so long as there was a Labour Chancellor of the Exchequer who could fix the levels of taxation, especially Death Duties, Estate Duties and Legacy Duties. Compensation was a book-keeping transaction".

There is ample evidence that the Fabian-trained Socialists are working for the eventual overthrowing of the parliamentary system in favour of rule by officials on the lines of the Russian plan of Commissars. Also, in the words of Mr. Attlee, they are deliberately putting world order before loyalty to the country.

The Fabian Socialists, in common with the Communists and Zionists, are agents of the Sanhedrin for destroying the power of the British peoples to resist the Satanic plot of world dominion, whether they are conscious of it or not. They have been so successful in poisoning the minds of all classes in the country that even the "Conservatives" have become a dead loss so far as defending and preser­ving our institutions and liberties are concerned. Their actions, if not always their words, serve the purposes of the Sanhedrin just about as effectively as do those of the Socialists.

Chatham House was also richly endowed by the leading Jewish industrial trusts and banking houses, such as N.M. Rothschild and Sons, Reuters Ltd., J.M. Schroeder & Co., and their Gentile fellow-travelling associates, The Rockefeller Foundation, the Carnegie Trust and the Prudential Assurance Co. It has proved to be one of the chief centres of the insidious, stealthy propaganda aimed at under-mining our National Sovereignty, and its director, Professor Toynbee, is the class­ical exponent of the sinister Fifth Column doctrines of "Internationalism".

In 1931 he delivered a speech at Copenhagen which offered further glimpses of the workings of the international conspiracy to deprive countries of their political frontiers, and individual rights. In the course of it he said: "In plain terms we have to re-transfer the prestige and the prerogatives of sovereignty from the fifty or sixty fragments of contemporary society. I will merely repeat that we are at present working, discreetly, but with all our might, to wrest this mysterious politi­cal force called Sovereignty out of the clutches of the local nation states of our world. And all the time we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands".

Chaim Weitzmann, a Jew from Russia, came to this country and, within a few years, he had successive British governments carrying out his plans for setting up a Jewish State in Palestine, such was the powerful influence of Jewry in the country. In fact, the Socialists supported Zionism so strongly that he has stated that he often had to go down on his knees to implore British "Labour" politicians to moderate their demands on behalf of Zionism.

The real objective of the Sanhe­drin in supporting the Zionists can be imagined from a paragraph in a letter from Mr. Louis Marshall, the legal officer of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., and a leading attacker of Gentiles who have attempted to disclose the Jewish World Plot. The letter was written to a fellow Jew, Max Senior (September 26th, 1918) and this was the paragraph: "The Balfour declaration, with its acceptance by the Powers, is an act of the highest diplomacy. It means both more and less than appears on the surface. Zionism is but an incident of a far-reaching plan; it is merely a convenient peg on which to hang a power weapon".

The Sanhedrin is working for complete world dominion and a Jew State in Palestine would be useful because Palestine is the most important strategic centre in the world. Also the mineral wealth of the Dead Sea has been estimated at 5,000,000,000,000 dollars. So one can understand why the British and the Arabs have been ejected with United Nations assistance. B. Jensen's books are a mine of information on these subjects.

Most British politicians, from Lloyd George onwards, have been protégés of the Jew financiers or in some way under their influence. For many years the con­trol of our financial policy was in the hands of the Jew-descended and Jew-inspired Montagu Norman.

Deadlier Than The H-Bomb Part 2 - Chapters 9-20, Bibliography

DEADLIER THAN THE H-BOMB - Young  -  Part 2 - Chapters 9-20, Bibliography

9 THE POISON IN AMERICA
IN AMERICA we have seen that men like Jefferson and Lincoln saw the menace of the financial system but were unable to prevent its being clamped on the country. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries an outstanding American was William Jennings Bryan, a champion of monetary reform. He w as a friend and collabor­ator of Arthur Kitson, the great Anglo-American engineer who was the pioneer of the modern assault on the bankers. In one of his speeches, Bryan said that human­ity was crucified on a cross of gold and also made the following statement:

"The money power preys upon the nation in times of peace and conspires against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces, as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes."

By now it should be agreed that the first big move in obtaining financial control over a country's destiny is to gain control of the issue of currency, which involves two main principles: a single, controllable currency basis, such as gold, and a monopoly of the right to circulate notes and otherwise issue credit on that foundation. In the United States, the bankers attained these objectives by causing Stock Exchange panics that brought ruin to thousands of honest producers. In 1890, there was a monetary stringency and in 1893 the Government introduced the Sherman Silver Purchase Act to provide the means, by Government purchase of silver, of preventing currency contraction. This was a threat to gold, the chosen medium of the bankers and so to sabotage the Government's plan, the American banking Association circulated the following instructions to members:

"Silver, certificates and treasury notes must be retired and national bank notes upon a gold basis made the only money. This will require the authorisation of 500 millions to 1,000 millions of new bonds as the basis of circulation. You will at once retire one-third of your circulation and call in one half of your loans. Be careful to make a money stringency among your patrons, especially among influential businessmen. Advocate an extra session of Congress to repeal the purchasing clause of the Sherman Law."

Owing to the power of the Sanhedrin, India was brought in to help the cam­paign by stopping the minting of silver and this, with the panic deliberately caused by the New York Bankers, led to the closing down of the silver mines, the shutting of factories, the crashing of banks, widespread ruin — and, of course, the repeal of the offending Act. Gold was to the sole basis of currency in future, as the bankers planned.

But crashes of this diabolical kind, which often had a political motive, also enabled those in the centre of the conspiracy to turn the chaos to their own advan­tage. One result of the 1893 panic was that the Union Pacific Railroad came into the hands of Jacob Schiff, head of the banking firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Co. A few years later, Schiff brought the Great Northern Pacific Railway crashing to the ground, and from the ensuing panic his firm emerged as the complete masters of American railway finance and became an acknowledged member of the Money Trust which dominated the entire field of American Capitalism.

At this period, the main leaders of international finance were the German-Jew bankers and notably the Warburgs. As they thought William Jennings Bryan and his bi-metallist campaign in America more menacing to the money-power than anything in Europe, Felix and Paul Warburg crossed to Chicago and New York to become "Americans" and Paul joined Jacob Schiff in Kuhn, Loeb & Co. Steps were now taken to gain control of all currency through a central banking system. In 1907 there was another great crisis when the Knickerbocker Trust failed because manipulators of the millionaire class wilfully created a run on the banks, from which they emerged incomparably more powerful, having bought up the stock of the ruined victims which they held to resell at par. At the same time, the Steel Trust was able to complete its absolute monopoly. Solomon Loeb, of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., was a member of the Knickerbocker Trust.

Appalled at the ducks and drakes being played with the money system, genuine idealists like Woodrow Wilson and Bryan determined upon large-scale reforms to create order. Unfortunately they were lacking in technical understand­ing of the problem and when Paul Warburg assured them that he knew just how to attain their aim of securing stability in the price level by means of a Federal Res­erve System, they fell in with his plan. The idea was to hold reserves centrally and despatch supplies of credit to any necessitous bank in the system that might call for them. At the end of 1913, the Federal Reserve Act was passed. When intro­duced, the vital clause was a provision for fixing the discount rate to promote stab­ility of the price level. When the bill emerged the words "to promote stability in the price level" were surreptitiously dropped. At subsequent investigations, officials of the Federal Reserve Board even denied that such had ever been its function!

The attainment of this Act had taken five years of skilful propaganda, backed by unlimited funds and the full influence of the Masonic Lodges. And Paul Warburg was head of the Federal Reserve Board so that he and his friends now had ex­clusive power of note-issue to the reserve banks and the power to fix the discount rate, meaning the power to determine the amount of money in existence. They had conquered America and were now ready to conquer the world.

In order to account for the emigration of the immensely wealthy and success­ful Warburgs to America, it was necessary to understand first that the "City of London" was a very large creditor both of the United States and of Russia, and so Great Britain was in a position to make representations on foreign policy to both of them and was interested in constantly improving relations with her debtors, and second, that war with Great Britain had, for some time, been the settled policy of those who controlled Germany. It was therefore most important to minimise the importance of Great Britain's creditor position and to paralyse Russia, the ever-present threat to Germany's eastern flank.

Warburg was in control of American credit when the war started in 1914. War
has great advantages for the financiers. It places the nations at war in urgent need
of credits which the financiers can bestow on their own terms. It also unsettles
things, making it easier to change the masters of a people. These Jew financiers
wished to get rid of monarchs, particularly the Czar, and set up a Bankers' State.
Under Warburg's influence, the United States was a serious handicap to the

Allies until Jewish influence and bribery brought about the downfall of the Russian Empire and the withdrawal of the Russian Army from the conflict. The Bolsheviks were directly subsidised by Messrs. Schiff, Paul Warburg, Max War-burg and the rest of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., and they were led by Lenin and a bunch of Jews, mostly from New York. The Communist leaders were, always have been, and still are, nearly all Jews or married to Jewesses. (See Fraudulent Conversion, etc.)

The financiers gained their first objective with the fall of Imperial Russia. At the same time they succeeded in getting Great Britain hopelessly and inextricably into their debt, largely by guarantees on behalf of other belligerents. The 1st Lord Reading (Rufus Isaacs), a Jew, went to America in 1917 and, on behalf of Great Britain, negotiated a loan of £1,000,000,000, on the quite impossible terms that we should repay on demand, and in gold. This deal was concluded with his fellow Jews of New York and the terms have never been disclosed other than that ment­ioned above. Isaacs later became Viceroy of India and he and his fellow Jews and their Socialist stooges were responsible for the chain of events ending in our scuttle from that sub-Continent. After the Isaac's deal, Britain was safely "in the bag".

The Jew control of finance was now centred in New York. The defeat of Germany and Austria would mean two more crowned heads out of the way of a bankers' world state. So America entered the war and took part in the "Peace" Conference in Paris in 1919, which made the resumption of war inevitable, owing to the financial clauses which were passed.

At this conference the chief financial adviser to the German delegation was Dr. Carl Melchior, partner of Max Warburg, whose brothers Paul and Felix were partners of Jacob Schiff in Kuhn, Loeb & Co. The chief economic adviser to the American delegation was another Jew, Bernard M. Baruch, the dictator of the all-powerful War Industries Board in America during the war and an associate in business of Jacob Schiff. The British economic delegation was headed by Lord Cunliffe, a former Governor of the Bank of "England" and a partner in the inter-national Jewish banking house of Goschen (ancestral city: Leipzig, Germany). In connection with this conference, Lloyd George wrote: "They [the international bankers] swept statesmen, politicians, jurists and journalists all on one side and issued their orders with an imperiousness of absolute monarchs who knew that there was no appeal from their ruthless decrees".

The 1st world war ended in a great victory for the Wall Street financiers and they began to gather the fruits by extending their power to Britain and the Domin­ions, forcing us to surrender our command of the seas, to break our alliance with Japan and to return to the gold standard. Then their associated concerns, such as General Electric, began to acquire our capital assets. They penetrated into every part of Europe and Africa. In China they were supreme in the financial consort­ium formed to exploit that country. They were active in India and conquered all South America, except the Argentine. In the United States, they went from strength to strength by using the mechanism of the Federal Reserve Board for purposes diametrically opposed to that for which it had supposedly been formed; that is, instead of forwarding supplies of credit when necessary to avoid a panic, they used the opportunity again and again to cut off credit supplies altogether. By such means, in the early twenties, they encouraged the farmers under boom conditions to borrow and expand their enterprises, and then promptly called in the loans, delivering thousands into bankruptcy.

The same technique caused the panic in 1929, which led to the great crash of 1931. Orthodox economists attribute this to the failure of the Creditanstalt in Vienna, arguing that it set in motion the whole succession of breakdowns which followed throughout the world. That, however, is a very incomplete picture of the actual situation.

Mr. Louis T. McFadden, Chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives Banking and Currency Committee, referring to the New York Stock Exchange collapse which began the American experience of the slump, declared:

"It was not accidental. It was a carefully contrived occurrence ... the internat­ional bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they might emerge as the rulers of us all."

Nothing could be less equivocal than that.

What cannot be denied is that in 1928 the Federal Reserve Board was fever­ishly expanding credit to create a boom and next year as feverishly restricting credit to create a slump. (See A.K. Chesterton's writings and those of C.H. Douglas, B. Jensen, etc., in whose works are an immense amount of information and penetrating observations on what has been happening.)

After World War I, during the Weimar regime in Germany, the "American" financiers, with their associates in Germany, had been conducting a colossal fraud at the expense of the American people. Enormous advances, in return for more or less worthless German script, poured into Germany, and through Germany into Russia. Steps were taken to re-arm Germany and Russia, while the British were weakened in every possible way, by calling in loans, credit squeeze, returning to the gold standard and disarmament. Central Banks were set up all over South America and in the British Dominions, following visits by Sir Otto Niemeyer, a friend of Professor Guggenheim, who was a Sir Ernest Cassel Reader of Economics in the University of London.

In 1930 the keystone of the financial system was set in place. The Bank of International Settlements was founded. This was a world central bank to control the "national" central banks.

10 THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS

OSTENSIBLY the League of Nations had been sponsored by President Wilson, of America, a high mason and nominee of Kuhn, Loeb & Co. It was, in fact, an entirely Jew conception for leading up to World Government.

A few days before the Paris Treaty was signed, Jacob Schiff, who had continuously urged a speedy ratification of the Covenant of the League wrote to a friend:

"Unless we all get together . . . and co-ordinate requirements, both in materials, etc., and credits, in a large way with a view to properly control-ling European requirements as well as the resources of our own country, we shall have become impotent and be no longer in a position to adapt our great resources to the need of Europe."

This contained the policy carried out ever since by International Finance. The League served the double purpose of training the international bureaucrats needed for the final implementation of the policy (the Cecils, Toynbees, Noel-Bakers, Zilliacuses, etc.) and served as a smoke-screen behind which suitable arrangements could be made for the continuation of the world war.

Mr. Henry Morgenthau Snr. (ancestral city: Mannheim, Germany) was attached to the U.S. Peace Delegation "in a capacity suited to his versatile accom­plishments" and the German-American Jewish diplomat, Mr. Oscar Strauss "was among the unofficial delegates . . . he was chiefly active in connection with the Covenant of the League of Nations which bears the impress in all its main provisions of his rich political experience and his wise spirit of conciliation". — (Wolf: Essays in Jewish History)

All important decisions were taken by the "Big Four". President Wilson's "alter ego" was Colonel Edward Mandell House and his secretary was the Jew Brandeis. Clemenceau's omniscient secretary was the Jew M. George Mandel-Rothschild, now known as Mandel; Lloyd George's private secretary was the Jew Sir Phillip Sassoon, whose mother was Aline de Rothschild of Paris. The Military adviser was a Jew called Kish and a Jew, Professor Mantoux, was head of the political department of the League and was also the interpreter and only outside person present at the meetings of the "Big Four".

Lloyd George and others were hazy about geography but the Jew secretaries most certainly were not. These Jews met at 6 p.m. in the evening and mapped out the decisions for the following day's conference of the "Big Four". The results were disastrous for humanity, and designedly so.

A Jew, Lord Levy-Burnham, owner of the Daily Telegraph, etc., was in charge
of the Press Bureau of the League, and another Jew was President of the Council.
The Rothschilds controlled the price of gold in the City of London, and the
first act of the League was to hold the Brussels Finance Conference which drew up
the principles of financial recovery and stabilisation according to the tenets of
capitalist statesmanship of those days by budgets balanced by retrenchment,
return to the gold standard, etc. There was a Rothschild connected with the
League of Nations Commission responsible for the financial stabilisation of Austria, an operation from which that unhappy country never recovered.

11 HITLER A FAIRY TALE

THE WORLD-WIDE crashes produced by the policy of the Federal Reserve Board group had strengthened the power of the big combines everywhere and greatly increased bank holdings of industrial stock while ruining small businesses and farmers in enormous numbers, but the financiers over-reached themselves. The slump went much further than it was meant to go and led to reactions. For one thing, Great Britain, in a desperate attempt to extricate herself, was forced off gold, in common with a sterling area and a system of Imperial Preference. Ever since, the financiers of Wall street have been trying to smash the sterling area and destroy the policy of Imperial Preference.