A Letter: Christian Zionism

A Letter: Christian Zionism

Thomas Allen

[Editor’s note: The following is a letter written in 2003 to Mr. Rick Wiles, American Freedom Net, Inc., about one of his radio programs where he negatively discussed British or Anglo Identity organizations. Identity folks believed that the ten lost tribes of Israel migrated to and settled in northwest Europe, primarily the British Isles.]

    I agree with you that the same people who control the U.S. government probably control many (perhaps most) of the Identity organizations — the Globalists, Elite, Establishment, Illuminati, Illuminists, etc. The Globalists also control most, if not all, mainline orthodox denominations, organizations, and churches. The mainline denominations are far larger and have much more wealth, power, and influence than the Identity crowd. So, you would get more bang for your minute by vehemently attacking the mainline churches instead of the small almost insignificant Identity crowd.
    The Christian Zionist are a much greater threat to our few remaining freedoms than the Identity crowd. Like the mainline denominations, Christian Zionists far outnumber and have much more wealth, power, and influence than the Identity folks. Furthermore, most of the Christian Zionist organizations are probably fronts for the Mossad or at least controlled by the Mossad, which, like the CIA, is merely a tool of the Globalists.
    Christian Zionists live under the delusion that today’s Jews are God’s chosen people (I always thought Christians were God’s chosen people). They seem willing to defend Israel to the last American. Many even want to rebuild the temple and reinstate the old sacrificial system — both of which God destroyed. (Is not this apostasy?) Christian Zionists are guilty of the same heresy of which you accuse the Identity crowd. The only difference between them is that Christian Zionists have substituted today’s Jews for the Identity’s Northwest Europeans.
    Based on my anti-Zionist comments, I am anti-Semitic. To add to my anti-Semitic commentary, Jewish influence in this country far exceeds their numbers — and if you deny that, you are a liar, and if you admit it you are an anti-Semite. But, then, I am in good company, for Jesus was one of the greatest anti-Semites. He harshly criticized the Jewish leaders of his day. To criticize Jews, especially Jewish leaders as a group, is by definition anti-Semitism.
    Furthermore, I am a racist and a segregationist. Again I stand in good company, for God is a racist and a segregationist.
    To prove that I am a racist, I contend that Negroes (Blacks) are superior to Aryans (Whites) at reproducing at low latitudes. Why? Because dark skin retards ultraviolet light from destroying vitamin B-12, which is essential for reproduction. To proclaim one race is superior to another race in at least one trait is by definition racism.
    To prove that God is a racist and segregationist, He told the Israelites after they left Egypt that he had separated them from other people (Lev. 20:26), which makes Him a segregationist. He told them that He put a difference between them and the Egyptians (Ex. 11:7), which makes Him a racist. Moreover, He created the races.
    Furthermore, God disdains interracial marriage and breeding so much that in Dt. 23:2 He proclaimed that “no half-breed may be admitted to the assembly of Yahweh” (The New Jerusalem Bible). The KJV uses the word “bastard” instead of “half-breed.” However, it uses “bastard” in the sense of “spurious” and “mongrel,” not in the sense of “being born out of wedlock.” (Jephthah was born of a prostitute and out of wedlock. Since he is among the list of heroes in chapter 11 of Hebrews, he is part of God’s congregation.)
    Apparently, you contend that all the races of men descended from Adam. If you believe that, then you are an EVOLUTIONIST. You have accepted the basic premise of evolution: “like beget unlike.” You reject the Biblical principle of “after his kind” or “like beget like.”
    As I reject evolution, I must accept that Adam was the father of only one race. According to his name and the descriptions given to his descendants (they were ruddy and fair: 1 Sam. 16:12, 17:47; 2 Sam. 13:1; Gen. 12:11, 14; 24:16, 26:7; Lam. 4:7), I must conclude that he was the father of the Aryan race.
    God created each race at a different time (“having determined their appointed seasons”) and place (“[having determined] the bounds of their habitation”) — Acts 17:26. To condone interracial marriages and interracial sexual relations is to condone breeding out of existence the races that God created, which is genocide.
    As for Hitler, he was an occultist, whom the Globalists, among whom were Jewish bankers, brought to power to aid them in bringing about a world war. He was also a great benefactor to the Zionists. Zionism would not have advanced nearly as far as it has without him.
    Beyond their advocation of violence with which I disagree, the Identity crowd does have some flawed teachings. The evidence refutes that salvation is available only to Aryans. (Not all Identity folks claim that only Aryans are saved.) Many of them blame all of the world’s problems on Jews. Jews are guilty of causing much of the world’s problems and of pushing the New World Order with its one-world totalitarian government and one-world Pantheistic religion. However, far more non-Jews are involved. (Most Jews are like most Freemasons, and most Democrats and Republicans, for that matter. They do not have a clue about what is going on. They are puppets being used by the New World Order puppeteers and do not even know it.)
    Although some Identity folks claim that Satan is the literal genetic father of today’s Jews, many (perhaps most) Identity folks reject this doctrine. (There is no fundamental difference in this doctrine and the orthodox doctrine that the “sons of God” who married the “daughters of man” in Genesis 6 were fallen angels. Both claim that spiritual beings can interbreed with man. [As a side note, is not it strange that the Nephilim, whom the KJV calls giants, who were supposed to be the product of this unholy union and were supposedly destroyed by the Noahic Flood, were in Palestine at the time of the Israelite invasion?])
    I am not convinced that the Northwest Europeans are the lost tribes of Israel. The lost tribes were submerged into a much larger Aryan population, most of whom now live in Europe. However, I suspect that more chromosomes of the lost tribes are in Europeans than are in today’s Jews. (Most of today’s Jews, the Ashkenazim, are descendants of Turks of the Turanian race and Armenians [and Alpines] of the Aryan race and their hybrids. A small number, the Sephardim, are descendants of the Idumeans, who were mostly of the Melanochroic race and Melanochroic-Aryan hybrids.)
    If you want to learn more about race and the true Biblical view on race mixing, you may purchase my books [Adam to Abraham: The Early History of Mankind; Species of Men: A Polygenetic Hypothesis; Integration Is Genocide; and False Biblical Teachings on the Origins of Races and Interracial Marriages] in which I explain them in some detail. Enclosed is my book list. [Editor’s note: Not unsurprisingly, he never bought a book.]

Copyright © 2003, 2022 by Thomas Coley Allen

More religious articles.

Mencken on the Popular Will

Mencken on the Popular Will

Thomas Allen

    In 1926, H. L. Mencken (1880-1956) wrote Notes on Democracy in which he expressed his views on democracy and related issues. He was a journalist, satirist, and critic and a libertarian and one of the leaders of the Old Right. In his book, he describes the popular will, pages 85-97. Below is an overview of his discussion of the popular will; my comments are in brackets.
    No distinction can be made between representative democracy and pure democracy in practice with the “constant conflicts between what is assumed to be the popular will and the self-interest of small but articulate and efficient groups, and that theoretical variety which would liberate and energize the popular will completely. The latter must remain purely theoretical for all time.” Moreover, an energized and liberated popular will is unlikely to change the “main outlines of the democratic process.”
    “What is genuinely important is not that the will of mankind in the mass should be formulated and made effective at all times and in every case, but simply that means should be provided for ascertaining and executing it in capital cases — that there shall be no immovable impediment to its execution when, by some prodigy of nature, it takes a coherent and apposite form. If, over and beyond that, a sufficient sense of its immanent and imminent potency remains to make politicians walk a bit warily, if the threat always hangs in the air that under x circumstances and on y day it may be heard from suddenly and devastatingly, then democracy is actually in being.” Mencken believes this is the case in the United States and Northwest Europe.
    Mencken notes that the people and the Pope checked the monarch’s power. If he oppressed his people too much, they could rise against him. Although a king, he was still “biologically only a man, with but one gullet to slit; and if the people were feeble or too craven to be dangerous, then there was always His Holiness of Rome to fear or other agents of the King of Kings; and if these ghostly mentors, too, were silent, then he had to reckon with his ministers, his courtiers, his soldiers, his doctors, and his women.” Thus, the power of the most despotic autocrat is limited. [Stalin probably died at the hands of his doctors while he was planning another purge. Hitler’s generals almost assassinated him.] Mencken remarks that the “Merovingian kings were certainly absolute, if absolutism has ever existed outside the dreams of historians; nevertheless, . . . their sovereignty was gradually undermined by the mayors of the palace, and finally taken from them altogether.” Likewise, the emperor of Japan “succumbed to the shoguns, who succumbed in their turn to a combination of territorial nobles and city capitalists.”
    Mencken comments “that the common people, under such a democracy as that which now prevails in the United States, are more completely sovereign in fact as well as in law, than any of these ancient despots. They may be seduced and enchained by a great variety of prehensile soothsayers, just as Henry VIII was seduced and enchained by his wives, but, like Henry again, they are quite free to throw off their chains whenever they please, and to chop off the heads of their seducers.” They can throw off their chains merely by “intimidating Congress, which never fails to leap when their growl is palpably in earnest. And if Congress stood out against them, they could do it anyhow, under protection of the jury system. The executioners, once acquitted, could not be molested more, save by illegal processes.” [Nearly all the common people underestimate the power that they have as a juror. A juror is accountable to no one — not the judge, the Supreme Court of the State or the United States, and certainly not the governor or president. If a juror finds that a law is repugnant or that it is being used unlawfully, he merely finds the accused not guilty — and if he has the courage, no power on earth can legally or lawfully force him to change his mind.]
    Next, Mencken comments on a paradox of democracy. Democrats often argue that democracy is incomplete if certain classes of people are not allowed to vote. Mencken remarks, “To argue thus is to argue against democracy itself, for if the majority has not the right to decide what qualifications shall be necessary to participate in its sovereignty, then it has no sovereignty at all.” Usually, the disfranchised class “is not actively eager, as a whole, for the ballot, and that its lack of interest in the matter is at least presumptive evidence of its general political incompetence.” Democracy came into existence by being “forced upon its beneficiaries by a small group of visionaries, all of them standing outside the class benefited.”
    As an example, Mencken uses giving women the vote. “The great masses of women in all countries were indifferent to the boon, and there was a considerable body that was cynically hostile. Perhaps a majority of the more ardent suffragists belonged biologically to neither sex.” He continues, “Giving women the ballot . . . has brought in none of the great reforms promised by the suffragists. It has substituted adultery for drunkenness as the principal divertissement at political conventions, but it has accomplished little else.” Moreover, “[t]he majority of women, when they vote at all, seem to vote unwillingly and without clear purpose; they are, perhaps, relatively too intelligent to have any faith in purely political remedies for the sorrows of the world. The minorities that show partisan keenness are chiefly made up of fat women with inattentive husbands; they are victimized easily by the male politicians, especially those who dress well, and are thus swallowed up by the great parties and lose all separate effectiveness. . . . The extension of the franchise has not changed the general nature of the political clown-show in the slightest. Campaigns are still made upon the same old issues, and offices go to the same old mountebanks, with a few Jezebels added to the corps to give it refinement.” [Little has changed since Mencken wrote this. What change that has occurred has been mostly for the worse. Often fear and security sells slightly better to women than to men, but probably not enough to make any real difference.]
    Mencken adds, “There is little reason for believing that the extension of the franchise to the classes that still remain in the dark would make government more delicately responsive to the general will. Such classes, as a matter of fact, are now so few and so small in numbers in all of the Western nations that they may be very conveniently disregarded.”
    Next, Mencken discusses the Black voter. Blacks who are actually disfranchised “may remove their disability by the simple device of moving away, as, in fact, hundreds of thousands have done. Their disfranchisement is thus not intrinsic and complete, but merely a function of their residence.” [For most Blacks that meant moving North since most Blacks lived in the South. However, the Yankee did not want them to move North; they wanted them to stay in their place.] Moreover, “the theory of the fundamental law is that the coloured folk may and do vote. This theory they could convert into a fact at any time by determined mass action.” [This was done in the 1960s through the fronts of the Communist party as part of the Second Reconstruction, when the United States again reminded the Southern States that they were merely conquered provinces of the United States.] If Blacks were not willing to fight for the vote, they did not deserve it. Not fighting for the vote, “convicts them of unfitness for citizenship in a democratic state, for the loftiest of all the rights of the citizen, by the democratic dogma, is that of the franchise, and whoever is not willing to fight for it, even at the cost of his last drop of gore, is surely not likely to exercise it with a proper sense of consecration after getting it.”
    No one argues that democracy in the United States is destroyed when millions of White citizens who are eligible to vote fail to do so. “The difference between these negligent whites and the disfranchised Negroes is only superficial.” For example, he writes, “In New York City thousands of freeborn Caucasians surrender it in order to avoid jury duty; in the South thousands of Negroes surrender it in order to avoid having their homes burned and their heads broken. The two motives are fundamentally identical; in each case the potential voter values his peace and security more than he values the boon for which the Fathers bled. He certainly has a right to choose.” [If one wants to avoid jury duty, he can accomplish that without giving up his vote. He merely lets the judge or prosecutor know that he believes in jury nullification. That belief will get him removed from the jury pool. However, this tactic may not work for civil suits as the violation of a law is usually not involved.]

Copyright © 2017 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles.

Some Thoughts on Gun Control

Some Thoughts on Gun Control

Thomas Allen

    The following appeared as a letter-to-the-editor:
    A friend of mine told me that when he was in school, the boys carried their rifles and shotguns to school so that they could hunt after school. Also, he said that a girl in his class brought her pistol to school for him to repair and gave it to him in the classroom. Several days later, he returned it to her in the classroom. There were no shootings in the school. Thus, the problem is not guns; it is people.
    Could prescribed psychiatric drugs be behind most of these mass shootings? Nearly all, if not all, the mass shooters were or had recently been taking these drugs. These drugs are known to cause violent behavior. However, since big pharma controls the old media (look at how the old media pimps vaccines), the old media ignores the drug issue. Besides, drugs do not fix the antigun agenda of the old media.
    Because of previous gun control laws, most schools are now gun-free zones. Gun controllers promised that no one would carry a gun into a gun-free zone. However, gun-free zones are safe places for killers to hunt because no one can shoot back.
    Many antigun progressives believe that President Trump is Hitler incarnated. Still, they want him to disarm them. Disarmed Jews did not fare well under Hitler. Why do disarmed progressives believe that they will do any better under Trump? If every Jew were heavily armed, Hitler would not and could not have sent them to concentration camps. To protect themselves from Trump, progressives should be demanding that gun laws be relaxed so that they can more easily arm themselves to defend themselves from Trump.
    There was a time when mass shootings were unheard of. What has changed between then and now? We need to find out and eliminate the change. The difference is not the availability of guns. Guns were much easier to obtain then than they are now.

✽✽✽✽✽✽✽

    The following is a summary of “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?” (Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, Vol. 30, No. 2, pages 649-694) by Don B. Kates and Gary Mauser. They show that the antigun, gun-controller dogma of “fewer guns, fewer homicides, suicides, and violent crimes” is false — a propaganda lie. Fewer guns are associated with more homicides and violent crimes.
    According to Kates and Mauser, the murder rate in the 1960s and 1970s of the gunless Soviet Union equal or exceeded that of the gun-ridden United States. While the murder rate in the United States declined, the murder rate in the Soviet Union rose. By 1998-2004, the murder rate in Russia was nearly four times higher than it was in the United States. Furthermore, the suicide rate in Russia was about four times higher than in the United States.
    In Europe, countries with relatively high gun ownership have relatively low murder rates. Generally, where guns are more concentrated, violent crime rates are lower.
    Studies done by the U.S. National Academy of Science and the U.S. Center for Disease Control show that gun control laws did not reduce violent crimes, suicides, or gun accidents. If anything, the strict gun control laws may have contributed to the rising crime rate.
    Before gun control laws were enacted in Great Britain, little violent crime occurred there. Now with extremely strict gun control laws, violent crime have grown. Even violence using firearms has increased. Although handguns are banned, criminals have no problem in obtaining them and are more willing to use them. With handguns and many types of long guns banned, violent crime in England and Wales is the highest in Europe and even exceeds that of the United States.
    Since 1990, in the United States, as gun ownership has risen, violent crimes have declined. In Great Britain, gun ownership declined drastically and violent crimes soared. Thus, overall, more guns equal less crime. (Other contributors to the decline in the United States are the large number of Black babies aborted, more executions, and a drastically growing prison population.)
    Criminologist Hans Toch, who once favored the prohibition of handguns, but later recanted, notes that “it is hard to explain that where firearms are most dense, violent crime rates are lowest and where guns are least dense, violent crime rates are highest” (p. 675).
    As for demographics, Kates and Mauser write:

Contrary to what should be the case if more guns equal more death, there are no “consistent indications of a link between gun ownership and criminal or violent behavior by owners;” in fact, gun ownership is “higher among whites than among blacks, higher among middle-aged people than among young people, higher among married than among unmarried people, higher among richer people than poor” — all “patterns that are the reverse of the way in which criminal behavior is distributed” (p. 676).

    Historically, in England, as firearms became more efficient and more widely owned, the murder rate seemed to have fallen sharply until gun control laws began restricting ownership. Then gun violence began to rise.
    In colonial America, nearly every household was required to own guns. During this time, murders were few. The homicide rate only began to rise when the universal ownership of guns disappeared. In the decades following the War for Southern Independence, guns glutted the market, and homicides fell sharply.
    Areas in the United States, Canada, England, and Switzerland where gun ownership is the highest have the lowest rate of violence. Thus, fewer guns in private hands equal more violent crime and more violent deaths.

✽✽✽✽✽✽✽

    The following are some random thoughts, in no particular order, about gun controllers and anti gunners.
    – Alcohol is responsible for more deaths than guns, even among school children. If saving lives is the real objective, then outlawing alcohol will save more lives — assuming that prohibition works this time.
    – One should beware of the mental health issue in the gun control debate. President Obama wanted to declare all veterans de facto mentally ill and by that deny them of their inalienable, God-given right to own the means of defending themselves. Nevertheless, he did succeed in declaring everyone on social security mentally ill if he had someone else manage his money and, therefore, ineligible to own a gun. Fortunately, for liberty, President Trump revoked this order. For this action, liberals, progressives, and other gun controllers and anti gunners accused him of allowing all mentally ill people to own guns.
    – One should always remember cui bono. Who ultimately benefits from a disarmed America? The beneficiaries are the statists: The Puritans who want to micromanage everyone’s life. The losers are those who love and cherish liberty.
    – Chicago proves the idiocy of gun-free zones. In Chicago, only people with the political influence can legally possess a firearm. Yet, Chicago has the highest murder rate in the country.
    – If eighteen-year-olds are old enough to vote for their enslavement and to go to war and kill people, they are old enough to buy and own handguns, rifles, and  other firearms, including real assault weapons.
    – Gun control is nothing more than people control, which is why liberals and progressives adore it. Liberals and progressives are Puritans who have an uncontrollable, nay, a necessity, to micromanage the lives of others. Naturally, they believe that such control is for the benefit of the enslaved victim.
    – Why do celebrities who preach disarming the American people surround themselves with armed bodyguards? Obviously, they are hypocrites who know that firearms save lives. When in the hands of civilians, firearms save more lives by orders of magnitude than they take.
    – Gun control is really people control. Inanimate objects that cannot move unless someone moves them cannot be controlled. However, people can be controlled and denied their God-given inalienable right of possessing the means of defending themselves.
    – Before people start their irrational ranting to ban assault rifles, which are extremely difficult to acquire legally, they should know what an assault rifle is. The Free Dictionary by Farles defines “assault rifle” as “a rifle that has a detachable magazine and is capable of both automatic and semiautomatic fire, designed for individual use in combat” (emphasis added).
    – Why do the old matrix media only present one side of the gun debate — the antigun side? If they do have anyone to speak for the other side, the speaker is usually a stereotypical, inarticulate red neck who speaks like he has marbles in his mouth with tobacco juice dripping down his chin and who has difficulty in speaking in sentences of more than three words. Moreover, why do the old matrix media hate liberty, including freedom of the press, so much that they lead the charge to destroy the only liberty that can guarantee freedom of the press and all other freedoms?
    – If people really want to reduce death by firearms in the broadest sense, they would disarm governments. Since 1900 governmentally owned or controlled firearms have killed around a half billion people — probably more. Stalin and Mao Zedong account for about a fourth of this number by themselves.
    – When a policeman shoots someone, the policeman is blamed — not the gun. However, when someone else shoots several people, the gun is blamed — not the shooter. Why the difference? Should not the blame be placed on the shooter in both incidents?
    – Why do liberals and progressives want to give young, strong males a decisive advantage over women, old men, children, and the handicap? Outlawing firearms, or even restricting their availability, gives the criminal a great advantage.
    – Liberals and progressives claim that they are for the little man. Yet, they do the bidding of billionaires like Soros and Bloomberg by pushing their disarmament agenda. Why do these billionaires want to disarm the American people? Is it because armed Americans thwart the agenda of these billionaires to establish a one world government that they plan to control and use to transfer ever more wealth and power to themselves?
    – These few notables have favored gun control and a disarmed citizenry: King George III, V.I. Lenin, Leon Trotsky, Josef Stalin, Mao Zedong, Gorbachev, and Castro. They are the philosophical brethren of the anti gunners and other who clamor for gun control. They all agree with the criminal who said, “Any gun in the hands of citizens is a menace as far as I am concerned.” All of them agree with this criminal because they themselves are criminals in their heart. They want to steal, and the gun owner and the presence of guns hinder their theft. Otherwise, they are dupes, stooges, ignoramuses, useful idiots, lackeys, and the likes.
    – According to Jesus, peace and safety exists in a household of a fully armed man (Luke 11:21-22). Jesus also notes that the first thing an enemy seeks to do is to disarm the household. Furthermore, Jesus commanded his followers to arm themselves with military weapons (Luke 22:36).
    – Whenever the communists take over a country, the first order of business is to disarm the people so that they cannot resist the tyranny, theft, and slaughter that follow.
    – Anti gunners imply that guns kill people and, therefore, people do not kill people. Thus, they imply that if people did not have guns, they would not kill others or themselves. The first murder recorded in the Bible was done without a gun. Moreover, of all the killings recorded in the Bible, a firearm was used in none of them. Until a few hundred years ago, no one ever used a gun to kill another. Therefore, people kill people.
    – Progressivism is a mental disorder and, therefore, progressives should be denied the ownership and use of firearms. Progressivism is merely a political version of Puritanism. Progressives have an uncontrollable desire to force other people under the penalty of death to live the way that progressives want them to live.
    – More guns are in the United States than are cars, yet cars kill more people than guns. Moreover, drivers are required to have a license, and cars are required to be registered.
    – If the objective is to save lives, then beaches, pools, streams, lakes, and bathtubs should be outlawed. Outside war zones, more people die of drowning than of gunshots. Moreover, if it will save one life, vaccines should be outlawed,using the gun controllers reasoning.
    – Gun controllers should disown and condemn the Clintons. Even with the elimination of Bill’s killing of thousands in Serbia and Hillary’s killings of thousands in Lybia and the Middle East, the number of people whom they have murdered may well exceed several dozen.
    – Why do not the anti gunners disarm themselves and then post a sign in their yards that their home is not defended by firearms?
    – Those who advocate banning guns need to reflect on how well prohibition worked and how well the war on drugs has worked. The prohibition of guns will fare no better.
    – Nearly all murders have a history of violent crime. Why do liberals and progressives believe that these people will obey gun laws when they are already disobeying laws against violent crimes?
    – If no one less than 21 is allowed to own or use a firearm, then on one less than 21 should be allowed in the armed forces. Moreover, no one less than 21 should be allowed to drive because one hundred times more teenagers die of automobiles than of gun. Further, no child should be allowed in a motor vehicle of any kind — if it will save one life. Such are the logic and reasoning of progressives, anti gunners, and gun controllers.
    – Nothing exceeds a firearm as an equalizer.
    – A government that cannot trust a heavily armed citizenry is a government that cannot be trusted.

Copyright © 2018 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More social articles.


                         

Soviet Union Part 3

Soviet Union Part 3
Soviet Union Becomes a World Power
Thomas Allen

[Editor’s note: Footnotes in original are omitted.]

An important result of World War II was the rise of the Soviet Union as a world power. The conflict between autocratic fascism and Communism ended and was replaced with the Cold War, conflict between democratic fascism and Communism.

World War II gave the United States an excellent opportunity and excuse to build up the Soviet Union. The United States gave the Soviet Union top priority in receiving supplies. “One-third of Lend-Lease shipments to Russia comprised industrial supplies for postwar reconstruction.”[1] Supplies under Lend-Lease program continued to flow into the Soviet Union until the end of 1946. (If the primary purpose of supplying the Soviet Union had been the defeat of Hitler instead of expanding the power base of Communism, little or none of the supplies would have been for post war reconstruction, and the shipments would have ended by early 1945 when the defeat of Germany was certain.) More than $11 billion (about $105 billion in 2000 dollars) in aid were given the Soviet Union under the Lend-Lease program. In spite of damages caused by the war, the Soviet Union ended World War II with greater industrial capacity than it had in 1940—primarily due to Lend-Lease, reparations, and conquest.

The Lend-Lease Plan had greatly increased the wealth of the Soviet Union and its ability to manufacture war-related materiels. Lend-Lease built the Soviet war machine. The United States also gave the Soviet Union the material necessary to build an atomic bomb. President Roosevelt’s close advisor, Harry Hopkins, who was in charge of Lend-Lease and a Soviet agent, approved the shipment. “Before the United States had itself assembled the first atomic bomb, half of all American uranium and the technical information needed to construct a bomb were sent to Russia.”[2] Toward the end of the war, Harry Dexter White, Assistant Secretary of the United States Treasury, gave the Soviet Union plates to print United States German occupation money, which was redeemable by the United States Treasury, to pay for its occupation of East Germany.

To continue aiding the Soviet Union following the war, David Rockefeller for the Council on Foreign Relations conceived what became the Marshall Plan to reconstruct Europe. It was promoted as a plan to save democracy in Europe. John J. McCloy (CFR member) was its chief architect. W. Averell Harriman (CFR member) was appointed head of the Marshall Plan. Furthermore, the Soviet Union was a benefactor of American foreign aid, having received more than $186 million between 1947 and 1970.

Communism and the Soviet Union came out of the war more powerful than ever. Roosevelt and Churchill, both of whom were Freemasons, gave Stalin, a Freemason, and the Communists most of eastern Europe, including Poland. (The war was started ostensibly to free Poland.) In addition to annexing a large portion of Poland, the Soviet Union had annexed Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, part of Finland, and Bessarabia from Rumania. It had puppet governments in East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania, Bulgaria, and Albania. In Asia, Manchuria and North Korea were turned over to the Communists.

Soviet agents Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White and Owen Lattimore lobbied heavily and successfully for Stalin’s goals in both the Roosevelt and Truman administrations. White and Hiss gained control of the positions that controlled the United State’s foreign policy. They had access to top secret documents. They also gave Stalin intelligence.

Fortunately for Germany, Roosevelt balked at implementing the Morgenthau-White Plan, which Stalin favored. Baruch, a spokesman for Jewry, thought the Plan was too soft. Roosevelt blocked the Plan, which he had favored, not because he cared for the Germans or abhorred Communism, but because he feared a public backlash. Furthermore, Truman, who did not like the Plan, became president just before Germany surrendered. Truman was part of the faction of the Roosevelt administration that wanted to rebuild Germany as a check against the Soviet Union. The major backers of the Plan, Morgenthau, resigned after Truman became president.

The purpose of the Morgenthau-White Plan was to destroy Germany’s industrial base and turn Germany into a pastoral communist country. Germany would be made an agricultural country with much of its population starving to death. It required Germany to pay reparation by surrendering “German material resources, German human resources and German territory.”[3] Three essential components of the Plan were (1) the arresting and executing of many Germans without trial, (2) giving millions of Germans who had collaborated with Hitler’s regime to the Soviet Union for unconditional use as slave labor, and (3) returning to the Soviet Union all refugees who had fled the Soviet Union.

Although the Morgenthau-White Plan had been rejected, it was, nevertheless, partially implemented. The Soviets dismantled and carried to Russia much of Germany’s industrial equipment. Much that was not taken was destroyed. The Soviets also transported a large number of Germans to the Soviet Union to perish in slave labor camps.

General Dwight Eisenhower did his part to carry out the Morgenthau-White Plan for Stalin. He ordered forced repatriation of thousands of people who had fled Stalin’s regime. These people faced certain death by execution or in slave labor camps.

The Morgenthau-White Plan, which Communists and Soviet agents in the United States Treasury Department had drawn up, achieved two goals. First, it satisfied unrelenting Jewish vengeance against the German people, whom Jews held guilty for Hitler’s crimes against Jews. (Jews imposed collective guilt on the Germans while opposing fervently imposing collective guilt on Jews.) Second, it enabled the Soviet Union to bring Communism to the heart of Europe.

With the aid of Eisenhower, the Illuminists created a situation that turned Berlin into a foreign policy distraction that would last for decades. Eisenhower stopped the United States Army from taking Berlin. At the Tehran Conference in 1943, Roosevelt, Stalin, and Churchill seemed to have agreed to let the United States capture and occupy Berlin. Yet 17 months later, the Soviet Union was allowed to occupy Berlin. In the closing days of the war, the U.S. Ninth Army could have easily captured Berlin, probably without firing a shoot. (The only impediment that it faced was German refugees fleeing the Soviets.) When the Ninth Army was within hours of taking Berlin, Eisenhower ordered it to halt. Furthermore, when Patton was on the verge of taking Prague and the last remnant of the Germany army, Eisenhower ordered him not to accept the surrender of the Germany army but to contain it until the Soviets arrived. When the Germans surrendered to the Soviets, Eisenhower ordered Patton to withdraw from Czechoslovakia, thus, giving it to the Soviets.

Initially, Eisenhower took credit for these decisions before the public learned the horrible consequences of them and before he decided to run for President. He later denied responsibility and blamed Roosevelt and Truman. (He was merely a soldier obeying the orders of his superiors.) Nevertheless, Eisenhower seemed to be more responsible for these decisions than either President. According to Field-Marshal Lord Alanbrooke, Eisenhower frequently communicated with Stalin in the closing days of the war. He often informed Stalin of his decisions and actions before he told his own superiors.

Another important actor behind the decision to place Berlin in the Soviet Union’s zone of occupation without a guaranteed access route was George F. Kennan (CFR member). He had persuaded Roosevelt to accept this arrangement. (Roosevelt initially wanted Berlin placed in the zone controlled by the United State.)

Smoot gives three possible explanations for this crazy Berlin arrangement:

(1) the Americans who set up the Berlin arrangement—which means, specifically George F. Kennan and Philip E. Mosely, representing the Council on Foreign Relations—were ignorant fools; or
(2) they wanted to make Berlin a powder keg which the Soviets could use, at will, to intimidate the West; or
(3) they wanted a permanent, ready source of war which the United States government could use, at any time, to salvage its own international policies from criticism at home, by scaring the American people into “buckling down” and “tightening up” for “unity” behind our “courageous President” who is “calling the Kremlin bluff” by spending to prepare this nation for all-out war, if necessary, to “defend the interests of the free-world” in Berlin.[4]

As the members of the Council on Foreign Relations are not ignorant fools, explanation one can be eliminated. As the Council on Foreign Relations does not serve the interests of the Soviet Union, except to the extent those interests serve the Council on Foreign Relations, explanation two can be eliminated. The answer is explanation three. Illuminists could now use Berlin to gain control over the American people.

“Long, long ago, King Henry of England told Prince Hal that the way to run a country and keep the people from being too critical of how you run it, is to busy giddy minds with foreign quarrels.”[5]

[Editor’s note: Appendix on the Hungarian Communist Revolution and list of References in original are omitted.]

Endnotes
1. Antony C. Sutton, National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union (New Rochelle, New York: Arlington House, 1973), p. 24.

2. John A. Stormer, None Dare Call It Treason (Florissant, Missouri: Liberty Bell Press, 1964), p. 29.

3. Comte Leon de Poncins, State Secrets: A Documentation of the Secret Revolutionary Mainspring Governing Anglo-American Politics (Translator Timothy Tindal-Robertson. 1975), p. 103.

4. Dan Smoot, The Invisible Government (Dallas, Texas: The Dan Smoot Report, Inc., 1962), pp. 32-33.

5. Ibid., p. 33.


Copyright © 2009 by Thomas Coley Allen.

Part 2 

 More articles on history. 

World War II

World War II
Thomas Allen

[Editor’s note: Footnotes in the original are omitted.]

Through their international banks and multinational corporations, the Illuminists had prepared Germany and Hitler for the upcoming war. The Illuminists wanted a world war among the Aryan people, and they wanted it to last long enough to slaughter tens of millions as sacrifices to Lucifer. They wanted war to scare the American people into accepting world government to prevent such a war from occurring in the future. They had brought Hitler to power in Germany so that he would lead Germany to war and bring about another world war that would lead to the establishment of world government. Consequently, British and American bankers, industrials, and politicians supported Hitter up to and, in some cases, through World War II.

To provide Germany with funds necessary for war, the Illuminists had to end the crippling debt that they had forced on Germany. To end the debt payments, they got Hoover elected President. Paul and Felix Warburg financed much of Hoover’s campaign for the presidency. They were acting on behalf of Kuhn, Loeb and Co., J&W Seligman Co., and J. Henry Schroder Banking Co. They put Hoover in office so that he could place a moratorium on German war debts, which he did in 1931. The purpose of the debt moratorium was to intend not to help Germany, but to provide Germany money for rearming.

After Hitler became Chancellor of Germany, Illuminists in the British government began pushing for war with Germany. Jewish Illuminists also began planning a war against Germany. (Jews saw war as the means to achieve two of their goals, which Emil Ludwig, a German Jewish writer, described as “socialism as the national expedient, and the United States of Europe as the international policy.”[1])

To entice Hitler into war, he was allowed to occupy the Rhineland and Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia. (The illuministic Round Table Group prevented the British government from stopping Hitler’s annexation of the Rhineland and Sudetenland.) France had provoked Hitler into occupying the Rhineland. Under the Treaty of Locarno, the Rhineland was to remain free of Germany troops. By remilitarizing the Rhineland in 1936, Hitler violated the treaty. However, France had violated the treaty earlier in 1936 when it ratified a military pact with the Soviet Union. This pact violated the Treaty of Locarno. Czechoslovakia also violated the Treaty of Locarno when it entered into a military pact with the Soviet Union. After this violation, Hitler occupied the Sudetenland while the British Round Table Group supported and encouraged his occupation. His occupation of the Rhineland and Sudetenland were unopposed. Neville Chamberlain went as far as to sign a pact with Hitler in 1938. So, Hitler thought that he would receive no opposition to his invasion of Poland.

Hitler believed that Communism was a conspiracy of the Jewish international bankers to enslave mankind to maintain their credit monopoly. He saw Communism as a great threat to mankind and wanted an alliance with Great Britain to oppose the Soviet Union. Apparently, he failed to realize that Great Britain and the Soviet Union were controlled by the same people—who were the same people that had brought him to power. When Great Britain refused an alliance with Germany against the Soviet Union, Hitler made a pact with Stalin.

Further to entice Germany into war, Stalin signed a nonaggression pact with Hitler. A week later Hitler invaded Poland, and World War II began. Two days later Stalin also invaded Poland. Yet Great Britain, which had a treaty with Poland to defend it from all European aggressors, only declared war on Germany in the name of defending Poland. (If Great Britain and France went to war to defend the integrity of Poland, would they have not also declared war on the Soviet Union? Since they did not declare war on the Soviet Union, they must have gone to war for some reason other than defending Poland.) Playing on Hitler’s lust for power and territory, Illuminist maneuvered him into war. Provoking Hitler to war was easy, for he glorified war.

A necessary ingredient in the war was to convince France to carry the brunt of the war against Germany. To trick France into war for which it was ill prepared, the Illuminists employed enormous deceit. France was convinced that a highly armed Great Britain and the United States backed it and that Hitler’s regime would collapse within days of a war. All the time, the Illuminists knew that France would suffer great losses in the war and might even be conquered by Germany for a while.

Moreover, to encourage Germany to go to war, Polish troops fired on German border guards, and the Polish government claimed that it was marching on Berlin. As a result, Hitler attacked Poland. After invading Poland, Hitler offered peace to Great Britain and France. His only condition was that they not interfere with his expansion to the east. The Illuminists that controlled them wanted war, so they chose war over peace. Mandel, Paul Reynaud, and Maurice de Rothschild led the war faction in France. In Great Britain the principal leaders of the war faction included Winston Churchill and Rothschild.

When war broke out, the Illuminists protected their beloved communist state, the Soviet Union. They made sure that Hitler sent his army west against the Christian countries instead of east against the Soviet Union. (Hitler did not attack the Soviet Union until the war was well under way—and then only after Stalin was massing his troops along his western border in preparation to invade Germany.) They prevented the West from declaring war on the Soviet Union, which was Hitler’s ally at the beginning of the war. The Illuminists also ensured that the Soviet Union was well supplied. Their objective was the advancement of Communism (Illuminism), which was controlled from New York, not Moscow. After World War II broke out in Europe, the next step was to bring the United States into the war against Germany. To accomplish this goal, the British Secret Intelligence Service set up an illegal unit, the British Security Coordination, in the United States to bring Americans into the war against Germany. In charge was Sir William Stephenson. Assisting the British in this project was John D. Rockefeller, Jr.

Through front groups, such as Fight for Freedom, and newspapers and radio networks that it subsidized, the British Security Coordination smeared and demonized people who wanted the United States to stay out of the war and praised and supported people who wanted the United States to enter the war. It collaborated with Franklin Roosevelt and the Jewish community to bring the United States into the war. Working with Fight for Freedom and British Security Coordination to push the United States into the war were the New York Post (owned by Dorothy Schiff, a Jew), New York Times (owned by A.H. Sulzberger, a Jew, CFR member), PM (a New York Communist paper), Baltimore Sun, and the Jewish Telegraph Agency. Columnists who support the British Security Coordination by smearing Americans who opposed the United States going to war included Walter Lippman, Drew Pearson, Dorothy Thompson, and Walter Winchell (a Jew).

To ensure that a Republican president would not interfere with the British plans for the United States warring against Germany, British Security Coordination rigged the Republican convention and got Wendell Willkie nominated as the Republican presidential candidate for the 1940 election. As late as 1939, Willkie had been a Democrat. As Willkie was a pro-war candidate, he ensured that many antiwar electors would not vote. Thus, Roosevelt would win his third term. After he lost the election, Willkie became an executive for Fight for Freedom and an unofficial envoy for Roosevelt.

However, Hitler had no intentions of involving the United States in the war, and a vast majority (80 to 88 percent) of Americans opposed the United States entering the war—although most Jews wanted war with Germany. Try as they may, the Illuminists could not provoke Germany into attacking the United States or inflame the American people with the desire to war against Germany. (When in the summer of 1941 President Roosevelt ordered United States destroyers to attack German submarines, Hitler ordered his submarines not to fight back.) The solution was to provoke Japan to attack the United States.

To provoke Japan to attack, Roosevelt froze Japanese assets. He refused a visit from the Japanese Prime Minister, Prince Konoye. (This rebuff led to the fall of Prince Konoye, who wanted peace with the United States, and his cabinet and the rise of General Tojo and his military dictatorship.) He closed the Panama Canal to Japanese ships. An oil embargo was placed on Japan (the United States provided more than 90 percent of Japan’s oil) while United States ships violated Japanese waters transporting oil to the Soviet Union. The government seized major Japanese assets in the United States. He approved the recruitment of American “volunteers” (the “Flying Tigers”) to fight for Chiang Kai-Shek against Japan. To dare Japan to attack, Roosevelt ordered United States warships into Japanese territorial waters. He even threatened military action if Japan did not change its Pacific policy.

To entice Japan to attack, Roosevelt moved the United States fleet from the West Coast to Hawaii. Pearl Harbor was difficult to defend because it could be effectively attacked from any direction. (Several days before the attack, the aircraft carriers and the most modern ships were ordered to leave Pearl Harbor. Thus, most modern ships were saved, and the old World War I vintage ships that remained were left even more vulnerable to attack.) With the fleet in Pearl Harbor and a large number of troops in the Philippines, Roosevelt boxed in Japan. If Japan wanted the oil fields in Indonesia, which it needed to fuel its armed forces and industry, it had no choice but to attack Pearl Harbor.

To reduce the chances of the commanders at Pearl Harbor discovering the Japanese fleet, they were provided only a third of the aircraft needed for adequate reconnaissance.
Furthermore, intelligence directed them to concentrate to the southwest, away from the actual direction of the attack. To ensure further that the planned surprise attack would not be discovered and Pearl Harbor warned, the United States Navy forbade United States and allied shipping in the North Pacific about an hour after the Japanese fleet left port for Hawaii.

President Roosevelt, Bernard Baruch (presidential advisor), Cordell Hull (Secretary of State), Henry Stimson (Secretary of War, a member of Skull and Bones and CFR), General George Marshall (Chief of Staff and a Freemason), and Admiral Harold Stark (Chief of Naval Operations and CFR member) knew of the Japanese plan to attack Pearl Harbor. Yet they did nothing to warn the American commanders at Pearl Harbor. They feared that if they sent a warning, Japan would cancel the attack and war would be averted. War was the goal. So Roosevelt deliberately sacrificed American soldiers, sailors, and marines to force the United States into a war that most Americans did not want. The conspiracy worked. The United States entered World War II. (Roosevelt had worked closely with and had relied heavily on the British Secret Intelligence Service to bring the United States into World War II.)

(In 1940, the United States government had broken the Japanese code. It knew about the intelligence that the Japanese consulate in Honolulu was sending Japan. It also knew about the Japanese fleet movement toward Hawaii. [At a secret press briefing held on November 25, 1941, General Marshall told selected news reporters that “the United States is on the brink of war with the Japanese”[2] He predicted an attack sometime during the first ten days of December.] Furthermore, shortly before Japan hit Pearl Harbor, Churchill informed Roosevelt that the Japanese fleet was heading to Pearl Harbor with the intent of attacking it on December 7. Churchill’s information came from British agents in the Japanese military and foreign services and from Japanese messages that the British had decoded. Later Churchill wrote that Roosevelt and his top advisors “knew the full and immediate purpose of their enemy,”[3] i.e., Japan’s intent to attack Pearl Harbor. Likewise, the Soviet Union had learned of the forth coming attack from its spy in Japan and gave this information to the United States government. The Dutch also warned Marshal a few days before the attack that the Japanese fleet was close to Pearl Harbor. The day before the attack, the United States Naval Intelligence had spotted the Japanese fleet 400 miles northwest of Honolulu; Pearl Harbor was not notified of the sighting.)

Four days after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, Germany declared war on the United States. Probably the deciding factor for Hitler’s declaration of war was “Rainbow Five.” Rainbow Five was the United States’ plan for war against Germany, which leaked out just before the Battle of Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt had arranged for this plan to leak out in hope that it would provoke Hitler to declare war against the United States.

Like all major, and most minor, conflicts, the Illuminists supported, and thereby had a great deal of control over, both sides in the conflict. Many major United States corporations, of which nearly all were (and still are) controlled by Illuminists, supplied both sides at the beginning of World War II.

Finally, the Allies invaded Italy. They quickly conquered most of Italy, but Roosevelt stopped the Allied advancement within a few hundred miles of Germany’s southern border. The Allied army in Italy was broken up and redeployed. The official reason was to prepare for the Normandy invasion, which would not happen for another nine months. The actual result was prolonging the war. Prolonging the war cost millions more Aryans their lives, and transferred billions more to the coffers of the international bankers and corporations supplying the war machine. It also gave the Soviet Union time to drive the Germans from Russia, which it needed to do before it could occupy Eastern Europe. (Churchill wanted to continue the southern invasion and move into the Balkans, which would have kept those countries out of Stalin’s hands. Roosevelt wanted to invade Normandy. Stalin also advocated an invasion of northern France.) Once the Allies invaded Normandy, Eisenhower held back the Western front as much as he could to give Stalin time to consolidate his position in the east. More often than not, military decisions were made to give long-range political advantage to the Communists and the Soviet Union instead of making them based on tactical needs or to take advantage of the enemy’s weaknesses.

Contrary to the claims of apologists for Roosevelt, Roosevelt did not go to war to end totalitarianism or to revenge the victims of concentration camps. His support of the Soviet Union proves these were not his reasons. Stalin’s regime was far more brutal than Hitler’s, and Stalin killed far more people. Roosevelt went to war to bring about a world government and the concomitant New World Order.

If Roosevelt, and his advisors, Baruch and Morgenthau, had accepted offers from high ranking German military officers, the war with Germany would have ended in 1943, at least on the western front, and hundreds of thousands of lives could have been saved. However, at this time Germany had not been completely destroyed, and the Soviet Union had not penetrated Central Europe. Furthermore, the United States government had not acquired enough debt to satisfied the Illuminists. The Illuminists had to prolong the war to kill more Aryans, to advance Communism, and to complete their debt enslavement of Americans.

World War II was another splendid sacrifice on the altar of Lucifer. When it ended, more than 100 million people had perished. Many of these people died of bombings of residential areas that had no real military value. Housing of workers were preferred targets because they were small and compact. Again the British led the way in barbaric warfare as strategic bombing of civilian housing became part of the British war plan months before the Germans adopted this strategy in retaliation. Among the most savoring offerings were the fire bombings of Dresden and Cologne, which sent more than a hundred thousand innocent children and women up in smoke.

The war also served the Illuminists by silencing Americans who wanted to preserve the traditional American foreign policy that began with Washington of not getting involved in foreign disputes. Anyone who spoke in favor of America’s traditional foreign policy was branded a fascist or Nazi during the war and even afterwards. (Anyone who openly supported American traditional foreign policy during the war risk prosecution for sedition.) After the war, these American traditionalists were smeared as “isolationists” and blamed for the war. (The implication being that if the United States had gone to war against Japan and Germany sooner, there would have been no war.) After World War II, the United States abandoned America’s traditional foreign policy and have since being meddling in the affairs of nearly every, if not every, country on the planet. American troops are scattered across the planet as the United States have been involved in most conflicts that have occurred since the end of World War II.

Despite what the establishment history books claimed to be the causes and purposes of the two world wars of the twentieth century, their basic goal was to destroy as much of Christendom and the Aryan race as possible. This goal they achieved remarkably well.

When the American army entered Germany after the end of the war, one of its first tasks was to reestablish the Masonic lodges. The Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and later the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) financed the reestablishment of these Masonic lodges.

What saved (postponed) the United States from entering into an illuministic one world government following World War I was knowledge of the objectives and schemes of the Illuminists. The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the Rockefeller Foundation were determined that this error would not be repeated following World War II. They were determined to prevent close examination of official statements and propaganda. Roosevelt’s war measures and policies were not to be critically analyzed. They were to remain secret. In this endeavor, the Illuminists were, and still are, highly successful.

A result of World War II was the achievement of one of the great goals of the Illuminists —the establishment of the United Nations. The charter of the United Nation embodied the essence of Illuminism. It is, as S. de Madariaga, a Spanish liberal, wrote, “in the main a translation of the Russian system into an international idiom and its adaptation to an international community.”[4] The United Nations has served as the hub around which Illuminists have been building the world government for their New World Order.

During the war, the illuministic Council on Foreign Relations gained control of the United States government. Through the Council on Foreign Relations and its control of the government, the Illuminists could now implement their program to destroy the United States. Smoot summaries this program of destruction:

(1) the redistribution to other nations of the great United States reserve of gold which made our dollar the strongest currency in the world;

(2) the building up of the industrial capacity of other nations, at our expense, thus eliminating our pre-eminent productive superiority;

(3) the taking away of world markets from the United States producers (and even much of their domestic market) until capitalistic America will no longer dominate world trade;

(4) the entwining of American affairs—economic, political, social, educational, and even religious—with those of other nations until the United States will no longer have an independent policy, either domestic or foreign. . . .[5]

These goals have been mostly accomplished.

Endnotes
1. Comte Leon de Poncins, State Secrets: A Documentation of the Secret Revolutionary Mainspring Governing Anglo-American Politics (Translator Timothy Tindal-Robertson. 1975), p. 24.

2. Cuddy, Globalists, Dennis L. Cuddy, The Globalists: The Power Elite Exposed (Oklahoma City, Oklahoma: Hearthstone Publishing, 2001), p. 73.

3. “Pearl Harbor: Mother of All Conspiracies.”

4. Billy James Hargis, Communist America Must It Be? (Tulsa, Oklahoma: Christian Crusade, 1960), p. 117.

5. Dan Smoot, The Invisible Government (Dallas, Texas: The Dan Smoot Report, Inc., 1962), p. 26.

References
Allen, Gary. None Dare Call It Conspiracy. Seal Beach, California: Concord Press, n.d.

Cuddy, Dennis L. Cover-Up: Government Spin or Truth? Connecting the Dots—September 11 . . . Iraq . . . and Our Vanishing Constitutional Rights. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma: Hearthstone Publishing, 2003.

Cuddy, Dennis L. The Globalists: The Power Elite Exposed. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma: Hearthstone Publishing, 2001.

Cuddy, Dennis L. Now Is the Dawning of the New Age New World Order. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma: Hearthstone Publishing, 2000.

Cuddy, Dennis L. Secret Records Revealed: The Men, the Money, & the Methods Behind the New World Order. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma: Hearthstone Publishing, 1999.

Davidson, Mary M. The Profound Revolution. Omaha, Nebraska: The Greater Nebraskan, n.d.

Hargis, Billy James. Communist America Must It Be? Tulsa, Oklahoma: Christian Crusade, 1960.

Hoar, William P. Architect of Conspiracy: An Intriguing History. Belmont, Massachusetts: Western Islands, 1984.

Larson, Martin A. The Federal Reserve and Our Manipulated Dollar. Old Greenwich, Connecticut: The Devin-Adair Company, 1975.

Marrs, Jim. Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History That Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, and the Great Pyramids. New York, New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 2000.

Mohr, Gordon. The Hidden Power Behind Freemasonry. Second edition. Burnsville, Minnesota: Weisman Publication, 1993.

Monteith, Stanley. Brotherhood of Darkness. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma: Hearthstone, 2000.

Mullins, Eustace. The Curse of Canaan: A Demonology of History. Staunton, Virginia: Revelation Book, 1987.

Poncins, Leon de, Comte. State Secrets: A Documentation of the Secret Revolutionary Mainspring Governing Anglo-American Politics. Translator Timothy Tindal-Robertson. 1975.

Smoot, Dan. The Invisible Government. Dallas, Texas: The Dan Smoot Report, Inc., 1962.

Still, William T. New World Order: The Ancient Plan of Secret Societies. Lafayette, Louisiana: Huntington House Publishers, 1990.

Stormer, John A. None Dare Call It Treason. Florissant, Missouri: Liberty Bell Press, 1964.

Sutton, Antony C. How the Order Creates War and Revolution. Phoenix, Arizona: Research Publications, Inc., 1984.

Sutton, Antony C. National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union. New Rochelle, New York: Arlington House, 1973.

Webster, Nesta H. The French Revolution: A Study in Democracy. Second edition. Hawthorne, California: Christian Book Club of America, 1919, reprinted 1969.

Copyright © 2010 by Thomas Coley Allen.

 More articles on history. 

The Rise of Hitler

The Rise of Hitler
Thomas Allen

[Editor’s note: Footnotes in the original are omitted.]

Out of the chaos that the Versailles Treaty brought Germany, rose Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist Party (Nazi). The National Socialist Party “was the political party of the Ashkenazim, the Germany Jews.”[1] Hitler, who was an occultist and a strict vegetarian (because he believed souls were reincarnated in animal bodies), said this about National Socialism: “Anyone who interprets National Socialism merely as a political movement knows almost nothing about it. It is more than religion; it is the determination to create a new man.”[2] National Socialism was as much, if not more, of a religious movement as a political movement, and yet it was more than either. It was a New Age religion (with the Fuhrer as god on Earth); and like all other New Age religions, it was Satanic. What distinguished it from other New Age religions, except possibly secular humanism, was that “it was a spiritual ideal translated into a political system.”[3] National Socialism grew out of the Bavarian Illuminati, Freemasonry, German Order, and Teutonic Knights and ultimately the Mysteries and Nimrod.

Hitler was deeply involved in the occult and the cult of Ostara espoused by Jorg Lanz von Liebenfels, who had combined Aryan occultism with eugenics. The cult of Ostara was based on the principles of Tibetan magic adapted to Aryan racial theories. Tibetan magic claimed to be uncontaminated with Cabalism, its chief rival. It also claimed to be the most powerful occult—even more powerful than Cabalistic, Egyptian, or Hindu magic.

Guido von List influenced Hitler. List taught that a hidden and exiled priesthood had preserved the ancient occult knowledge of the Aryan ancestors of the Germans. These ancient traditions and laws had been retained in secret and continued to live through the Freemasons, Rosicrucians, and Templars.

Another occultist who greatly influenced Hitler was Karl Haushofer, who became Hitler’s spiritual mentor. Haushofer, who claimed to be a clairvoyant, was a disciple of Blavatsky. He introduced Hitler to her teachings. Thus, Hitler became strongly influenced by Blavatsky’s book The Secret Doctrine, which glorifies Lucifer.

More than any other person, Haushofer inspired Hitler to undertake a program of conquest. Haushofer was once an advisor to Stalin and a counselor to the Japanese militarists. (Based on astrological predictions, Haushofer convinced Hitler to ally with Japan.) During the war, Haushofer’s advice superseded that of Germany’s military leaders.

Hitler also practiced channeling and was guided by an “inner voice.” (In 1918, he heard a voice telling him that God had chosen him to be Germany’s messiah. Later an ascended master, whom he believed was Lucifer, controlled him.) He became completely demon possessed, a vassal of Lucifer. He believed that he was the reincarnation of the Norse god Odin.

Not only was Hitler heavily involved in the occult, so was Heinrich Himmler (member of the Thule Society and head of the SS, which Hitler considered the spiritual arm of his New World Order and as such Himmler was actually more powerful than Hitler), Rudolph Hess (Hitler’s Minister of State, a disciple of Haushofer, and a member of the Thule Society), and Alfred Rosenberg (a Jew, a member of the Thule Society, and the philosopher of National Socialism). Occultism was the driving force behind National Socialism.

Hitler viewed “his mission as a spiritual mission being worked out on the physical plane.”[4] He sought to establish National Socialism as the new world religion with himself as the head. His religion came complete with its own distinctive doctrine, clergy, rituals, religious symbols, hymns, and celebrations. It was a religion that stressed pride, will, and hate—and above all unquestionable obedience to the Fuhrer. Serving the Fuhrer, Hitler, was serving god, Lucifer (although most did not know that they served Lucifer).

Thus, National Socialism led to suppression of the true Christian church. Like other New Age cults, Hitler and National Socialism were inimical to true Christians and Christianity. To him, Christianity was defective and a failure. He proclaimed himself the voice of Christ Jesus and proceeded to replace the God of the Christians and his Son Christ Jesus with himself. Christianity needed to cleanse itself of its Jewish taint. To corrupt Christianity, National Socialism sought to replace true Christian understanding of the Bible with Gnostic interpretations with pagan overtones. Although most Christians and Christian churches finally succumbed to National Socialism’s religious doctrines, some did not. Those churches and Christians who opposed National Socialism, the National Socialists began purging from Germany even before they began to drive Jews from Germany.

Like other New Agers, Hitler believed that man would mutate into a new species, a higher level of mankind, a “higher level of consciousness.” This new man would be freed from “the dirty and degrading chimera called conscience and morality,” “the burden of free will,” and “personal responsibility.” All these undesirable attributes would fall upon a few, the ruling elite, the Illuminists, who would make all the decisions necessary for the good of mankind.

Behind National Socialism was the occult Thule Society, a front for the German Order. The Thule Society was nationalistic and anti-Semitic and anti-communistic. It sought to destroy physical self and moral constraints so that one could merge with the divine self in the spirit realm. This merger would result in superhuman psychic abilities. This ability would lead to the control of the world. A disciple of the Thule Society had to give unquestionable obedience to the enlightened master—the Fuhrer.

The Thule Society was founded on the philosophies of Liebenfels and his mentor Guido von List that gloried pagan occultism and the superiority of the Aryan people. It was also built on the philosophies of Blavatsky and Nietzsche. Its inner circle was Satanic and practiced black magic. Using seances, the Thule Society sought demonic guidance. It also practiced ritual murder, human mutilation, and sacrifices to Satan. Baron Rudolf von Sebottendorf, a disciple of Blavatsky, founded the Thule Society ostensibly as a literary discussion group.

Hitler’s world view developed from his occult practices. National Socialism became an expression of his world view. Thus, National Socialism grew out of the New Age occult.

When the Communist took over Bavaria in 1919 (Communist rule of Bavaria lasted less than a month), members of the Thule Society were the only ones whom the Communists arrested and executed. Members of the Thule Society were accused of kidnapping and murdering Jews and Communists as sacrifices in the rites of “Astrological Magic.” To defeat the socialist-controlled labor unions, the monarchists, industrialists, and leaders of the Thule Society knew that they needed the rank-and-file workers. So, in 1919, they formed the German Workers Party by merging the Committee of Independent Workman led by Anton Drexler, a machinist and a member of the Thule Society, and the Political Workers Circle led by Karl Harrer. Hitler was selected to lead the German Workers Party. In 1920, Hitler changed the name of the party to the National Socialist German Workers Party, better known as the Nazi party.

Dietrich Eckart, the high priest of the Thule Society and a student of Aleister Crowley, was Hitler’s primary mentor. He initiated Hitler into the inner most circle of the Thule Society and made him head of the German Workers Party.

After the war, Winston Churchill, a Freemason and Druid, sought to suppress exposing the occultism of Hitler and the National Socialists. The Nuremberg Trials refused to consider the occult aspects of National Socialism.

Once Hitler obtained power, he began imprisoning Freemasons and occultists. Apparently, he feared them and what they could do to and with him. Knowing the power of the occult, he wanted to eliminate occult competition; he wanted to prevent others from manipulating the forces that he was manipulating and using these forces against him. He also wanted to conceal his occult roots. People who knew about his occult roots, he eliminated early in his regime. Nevertheless, he continued his own occult practices and rituals.

The rise of Hitler and the National Socialists Party was a great benefit to Zionism. (Anti-Semitism, real or perceived, encourages Zionism, which is why Zionists are always encouraging anti-Semitism. The Zionists and true anti-Semitists share a common goal of preventing Jewish assimilation.) Hitler was a promoter of Zionism in that he wanted to establish a Jewish homeland. In the early years of his regime, Zionist Jews even collaborated with his anti-Semitism as it promoted segregation of and cohesion among Jews, which in turn aided Zionism.

The Illuminists brought Hitler to power to destroy the bourgeois states and to serve as a check against Stalin. (The Illuminists appeared to have been losing control Stalin as he was using the Communist Revolution for the benefit of the state instead of using the state for the benefit of the Revolution. However, by the time that World War II began, they appeared to have regained control of Stalin, but they had lost control of Hitler. He had violated a golden rule of Illuminism and had deprived the Illuminists of their monopoly to manufacture money.) The war that Hitler would bring, the Illuminists hoped would bring the death of the two of the three objects that they hated most: nationalism and Christianity—the two greatest enemies of Illuminism. (The third object of their hatred is the Aryan race; the war would kill enormous numbers of them.) If the war failed to achieve these objectives, it would at least advance Illuminism as war nearly always does.

Hitler’s principal financial backers included Max Warburg and the Oppenheimers. Warburg and the Oppenheimers were Jews. Simon Hirschland Bank in Essen was another Jewish bank that financed Hitler; it arranged loans for him through Goldman Sachs and Co., a Jewish bank. Fritz Thyssen, a German steel magnate and former head of the German steel trust, which Dillon, Reed financed, and Alfred Krupp of Krupp arms were early financial backers of Hitler. Henry Ford was another financial backer of Hitler; his money Hitler used to incite the Bavarian rebellion in 1923. Other early financial backers of Hitler included Emil Kirdorf (before aiding the National Socialists, he had sent money to the Bolsheviks) Henri Deterding (head Royal Dutch-Shell Oil), and Montagu Norman (the Bank of England).

Another important financial backer of Hitler’s regime was Baron Kurt von Schroder, a member of the Thule Society and a partner of J.H. Stein Co. in Germany. Schroder was also associated with J. Henry Schroder Banking Co. in London, which collected contribution from German industrialists for Hitler and the National Socialist Party, and J. Schroder Banking Corp. in New York. J. Henry Schroder Banking Co. was Germany’s financial agent in Great Britain. Schroder, who was on the board of directors of International Telephone and Telegraph’s (ITT) German subsidiaries, became the protector of ITT interests in Germany. Through Schroder, ITT funneled money to Himmler’s SS (Schutzstaffel) during World War II. Also, through Schroder, ITT bought a significant interest in German armament firms.[5]

By the end of 1932, Hitler was on the verge of leaving the political scene because of a lack of funds. (He had incurred an enormous debt maintaining his private army.) In early 1933, Allen Dulles, John Foster Dulles and Schroder met with Hitler to guarantee him that Kuhn, Loeb and Co., a Jewish bank, would provide him the funds that he needed to become Chancellor of Germany.[6] Other German industrialists and bankers offered to fund Hitler if he would break the power of the trade unions, which he did.

In exchange for the support of the international financiers, Hitler promised not to interfere with the bankers. Krupp, Thyssen, and others pressured President Hindenburg to appoint Hitler Chancellor. Thus, Hitler became Chancellor of Germany in 1933.

Among the financiers of Hitler were Guaranty Trust Co., Union Banking Corp. (a Harriman interest), J.P. Morgan and Co., and Chase National Bank. During the war Chase National Bank and J.P. Morgan and Co. continued to finance Hitler through their French offices.[7] Niederman, who was the manager of Chase National Bank’s Paris branch, was a Nazi collaborator. The head office in New York was aware of his collaboration and supported his good relations with the Germans. (Before and after World War II, Chase National Bank was also a major advocate of exporting United States technology to the Soviet Union.)

After Hitler became Chancellor, the Reichstag building was burned—probably by his agents. The fire was blamed on the Communists. Regardless of whom set the fire, Hitler used it to get the Reichstag to enact a law that empowered him to govern outside the constitution thus making him a dictator. When Hindenburg died in 1934, Hitler merged the office of president (head of the military) and chancellor (head of the government) and made himself an absolute leader, fuhrer.

Besides international bankers, several major United States corporations supported Hitler and his National Socialist Party and front organizations. They included General Electric, Standard Oil, International Telephone and Telegraph (ITT), General Motors Co., Ford Motor Co., International Harvester Co., Alcoa, Dow Chemical, and American I.G. Farben. American I.G. Farben, which was I.G. Farben’s wholly owned subsidiary in the United States and under the control of American directors, funded most of the pro Nazi propaganda in the United States. General Electric controlled about 40 percent of German’s heavy current industry, 60 percent of its radio, and 20 percent of its wire and cable industry. ITT controlled about 35 percent of Germany’s telephone and telegraph industry, 35 percent of its radios, and 20 percent of its wire and cable industry. These industries were never prime bombing targets. ITT also owned 28 percent of Focke-Wolfe, a manufacturer of fighter aircraft. Standard Oil of New Jersey, which the Rockefellers controlled, in partnership of I.G. Farben developed and financed the process used to manufacture synthetic rubber and gasoline from coal. With these processes in place, Hitler had a large enough domestic supply of gasoline and rubber to wage war.[8]

On the eve of World War II, I.G. Farben (Germany’s chemical cartel) and Vereinigte Stahlwerke or United Steelworks (Germany’s steel cartel) accounted for 95 percent of German explosives. American money and to some extent American technology built these two cartels. With technology obtained from Standard Oil, I.G. Farben produced most of Germany’s aviation gasoline during World War II. At the beginning of the war, it was the largest chemical manufacturer in the world. It also provided most of Germany’s plastics, gunpowder, and poison gas, and all of its synthetic rubber and lubricating oil. Moreover, it eagerly served the German army as an intelligence and research agent.

Hermann Schmitz organized I.G. Farben. He was a supporter of Hitler and an early member of the National Socialist Party. Also, he was the president of American I.G. Farben and I.G. Farben in Germany. He was a director of the Deutsche Bank and the Bank for International Settlement. In 1929 he became the president of the board of National City Bank. (An early financial backer of I.G. Farben was Rockefeller’s National City Bank.)

Max Warburg was a director of I.G. Farben in the 1920s while his brother Paul Warburg was a director of American I.G. Farben. Besides Paul Warburg (Bank of Manhattan Co.), other directors of American I.G. Farben were Henry Ford (Ford Motor Co.), Charles E. Mitchell (Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Paul Warburg’s National City Bank), Edsel Ford (Ford Motor Co.), Walter Teagle (Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Standard Oil of New Jersey), and H.A. Metz (I.G. Farben Germany, Warburg’s Bank of Manhattan Co.).

The subsidiaries of General Motor Co., which J.P. Morgan, Jr. controlled, and Ford Motor Co. were the two largest tank manufacturers for Hitler. General Motors was also a part owner of Siemens and Halske A.G., a Germany company that manufactured aircraft instruments.[9]

Even after the United States entered the war, Rockefeller’s Standard Oil continued to sell Germany petroleum products through Spain and Switzerland. Ford Motor Co. continued to produce trucks for Germany. International Telephone and Telegraph, headed by Sosthenes Behn, a director of National City Bank, continued to improve Germany’s telephone system and produce fighter planes. All this trade with Germany was legal. Any trade with the enemy approved by Henry Morgenthau, Jr., a Jew and Roosevelt’s Secretary of Treasury, was legal.

Like Mussolini’s Fascists Party, Hitler’s National Socialist Party was founded on Marxism. According to Hitler, 90 percent of the members of his party were left-wingers.


Appendix 1. Mussolini
In Italy, Benito Mussolini, who was an Illuminist of some degree, founded the Fascist Party in 1919. He was hardly a “right-winger” as the Establishment historians and political scientists betray him. He was a socialist, an orthodox Marxist.

Although he opposed Italy’s entry into World War I, he changed his mind following a French bribe.[10] He was instrumental in bringing Italy into the war whose purpose was to replace the old order with Communism.

Soon after Mussolini founded the Fascist Party, many Communists joined it. Five of the founders of the Fascist Party were Jews. The Fascists Party was to do for Italy what the Bolsheviks had done for Russia. Unlike Lenin, but like Hitler, Mussolini came to power via constitutional means. He rose to power by promising the lower and middle classes handouts from the public treasury. Once in power, like other Illuminists before and after, he ignored the constitution and made himself an absolute dictator.

Like Hitler, Mussolini also received financial support from international financiers. In 1926, Thomas Lamont, a Morgan associate and a director of Guaranty Trust Co., secured a large loan for Mussolini.

When Mussolini rose to power in Italy, he outlawed Freemasonry. As a result, Freemasonry unleashed a vicious worldwide campaign against Mussolini. (This hostility between the Italian fascists and Freemasonry could have meant several things. One, a fracture had occurred among the secret societies, and a “civil war” was occurring. Or more likely, the fascist anti-Masonic law was a ruse to distract people in other countries so that the secret societies in those countries could expand their power base with less notice and obstruction.) Once Mussolini fell, more than 500 Masonic lodges promptly emerged.

Like Mussolini, Hitler also outlawed Freemasonry. Although they outlawed these groups, the Illuminists aided and abated their rise to power. They served the purpose of the Illuminists in bringing about another world war.

Appendix 2. Franco and the Spanish Revolution
In 1936, the Soviet Union sent Rosenberg, also known as Moses Israelssohn, and 140 insurgents to the Soviet embassy in Spain. Thus, began the Spanish Revolution, which lasted until 1939. Like other communist revolutions, the Spanish Revolution was filled with atrocities and mass murders for which Communist revolutions are notorious.

Years before Rosenberg arrived, Freemasons had overthrown the monarchy. With revolutionary labor strikes, they fomented violence. They incited the peasants and workers to demand replacing the monarchy with a socialist republic. Throughout the country, they provoked bloody clashes. They exasperated the unrest and focused it against the monarchy and the Catholic Church. As a result, the king fled Spain in 1931 and a republic was established. Soon afterwards, the government confiscated the property of the king, aristocrats, and Catholic Church. After establishment of the republic, which Freemasons controlled, strife, bloodshed, and revolt continued to fill the country.

Aiding the Communists in their take over of Spain was the Abraham Lincoln Brigade. The Abraham Lincoln Brigade was a communist mercenary force. Its members were largely Americans, and according to Victor Berch of Brandeis University, 40 percent of its members were Jews.[11] The American news media also allied themselves with the Communists in Spain.

With the 1936 election, the Popular Front, which represented all the revolutionary elements of Spain including Freemasonry, gained control of the government and the Spanish Revolution began. The Popular Front was under the control of the Soviet Union. Among its first tasks was executing the Red Terror.

Francisco Franco began his opposition to the Communist controlled Popular Front by taking command of the Spanish army in Morocco. He took control of the insurgent government and rallied the monarchists, republicans, and socialists to his side. In 1939, he finally defeated the Communists and ended the civil war.

Endnotes
1. Eustace Mullins, The Curse of Canaan: A Demonology of History (Staunton, Virginia: Revelation Book, 1987), p. 206. Archibald E. Roberts, Emerging Struggle for State Sovereignty (Fort Collins, Colorado: Betsy Ross Press, 1979), p. 153.

2. Jim Marrs, Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History That Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, and the Great Pyramids (New York, New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 2000), p. 146.

3. Bob Rosio, Hitler & the New Age (Lafayette, Louisiana: Huntington House Publishers, 1993), p. 24.

4. Ibid., p. 175.

5. Eustace Mullins, The World Order: Our Secret Rulers (Second edition. Staunton, Virginia: Ezra Pound Institute of Civilization, 1992), pp. 92, 152. Antony C. Sutton, Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler (Seal Beach, California: ’76 Press, 1976), pp. 79, 80, 123.

6. Mullins, World Order, p. 153.

7. Sutton, pp. 150-151.

8. Ibid., pp. 15-16, 31, 62-63, 67, 74-75, 165.

9. Ibid., p. 31.

10. William P. Hoar, Architect of Conspiracy: An Intriguing History (Belmont, Massachusetts: Western Islands, 1984), p. 145.

11. Mullins, World Order, p. 143.

[Editor’s note: List of references in the original are omitted.]

Copyright © 2010 by Thomas Coley Allen.

 More articles on history.