Entrevue avec Michael Collins Piper: The New Babylon

http://archive.org/details/TexeMarrsInterviewsMichaelCollinsPiper10-22-2009

The New Babylon: A Panoramic View of the Rothschild Empire and Its Power and Influence Over America Through President Obama and Our Congress: Texe Marrs interviews Michael Collins Piper on his powerful new book exposing the Rothschilds leadership of the New World Order conspiracy. Piper explains how over the centuries and decades the wealth of the fabulous Rothschild Dynasty has enabled these power-hungry Zionist plotters to seize more and more controlâover stock markets, banks, corporations, universities, and national governments. The henchmen of the Rothschilds have also used organized crime to accomplish their aims. Their power is also felt through the secret societies and in globalist groups such as the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund, and the Council on Foreign Relations.

La nouvelle Babylone

‘The New Babylon – Those Who Reign Supreme : A Panoramic Overview of the Historical, Religous and Economic Origins of the New World Order. Inside the Rothschild Empire – The New Pharisees’, by Michael Collins Piper (2009)

Non seulement ils l’admettent, ils le proclament!

Théories de conspiration: Ahad Ha’am (Asher Ginzberg)

La pourriture Rothschild

Nouveau désordre mondial?

 

LIRE EZRA POUND SUR BALDER EX LIBRIS

Pour en savoir plus sur le système usuraire qui nous a mené où nous en sommes, lire cette étude sur Ezra Pound. « Ezra Pound Speaking » Radio Speeches of World War II, by Ezra Pound

Disponible seulement dans les archives du web (webarchive). Cliquer sur le lien pour lire l’article complet.http://web.archive.org/web/20001213012300/http://www.barnesreview.org/ezrapound.htm

Ezra Pound

By Michael Collins Piper

American students have been taught by scandalized educators that famed American poet and philosopher Ezra Pound delivered « treasonous » English-language radio broadcasts from Italy (directed to both Americans and to the British) during World War II. However, as noted by Robert H. Walker, an editor for the Greenwood Press: « Thousands of people have heard about them, scores have been affected by them, yet but a handful has ever heard or read them. »⁽¹⁾
This ignorance of Pound’s most controversial political rhetoric is ironic, inasmuch as: « No other American–and only a few individuals throughout the world–has left such a strong mark on so many aspects of the 20th century: from poetry to economics, from theater to philosophy, from politics to pedagogy, from Provencal to Chinese. If Pound was not always totally accepted, at least he was unavoidably there. »⁽²⁾
One critic called Pound’s broadcasts a « confused mixture of fascist apologetics, economic theory, anti-Semitism, literary judgment and memory »⁽³⁾ Another described them as « an unholy mixture of ambiguity, obscurity, inappropriate subject matters [and] vituperation, »⁽⁴⁾ adding (grudgingly) there were « a few pearls of unexpected wisdom. »⁽⁵⁾
Despite all the furor over Pound’s broadcasts–which were heard between January of 1941 through July of 1943–it was not until 1978 that a full-length 465-page compendium of transcriptions of the broadcasts was assembled by Prof. Leonard Doob of Yale University in association with aforementioned Greenwood Press. Published under the title « Ezra Pound Speaking »–Radio Speeches of World War II, the volume provides the reader a comprehensive look at Pound’s philosophy as it was presented by the poet himself in what Robert Walker, who wrote the foreword to the compendium, describes as « that flair for dramatic hyperbole. »⁽⁶⁾
What follows is an attempt to synthesize Pound’s extensive verbal parries. Most of what is appears here has never been printed anywhere except in the compendium of Pound’s wartime broadcasts. Thus, for the first time ever–for a popular audience–here is what Pound really had to say, not what his critics claim he said.
When he was broadcasting from Italy during wartime, Pound evidently pondered the possibility of one day compiling transcriptions of his broadcasts (or at least expected–quite correctly–that one day the transcripts would be compiled by someone else). He hoped the broadcasts would show a consistent thread once they were committed to print.
Pound recognized relaying such a massive amount of information about so many seemingly unrelated subjects might be confusing listeners less widely read than he. However, the poet also had very firm ideas about the need of his listeners to be able to synthesize the broad range of material that appeared in his colorful lectures.
Pound was sure his remarks on radio were not seditious, but were strictly informational and dedicated to traditional principles of Americanism–including the Constitution, in particular. In response to media claims that he was a fascist propagandist, Pound had this to say:

Pound’s immediate concern was the war in Europe–« this war on youth–on a generation » ⁽⁸⁾ which he described as the natural result of the « age of the chief war pimps. »⁽⁹⁾ He hated the very idea that Americans were being primed for war, and on the very day of Pearl Harbor he denounced the idea that American boys should soon be marching off to war: « I do not want my compatriots from the ages of 20 to 40 to go get slaughtered to keep up the Sassoon and other British Jew rackets in Singapore and in Shanghai. That is not my idea of American patriotism, » he added.⁽¹⁰⁾
In Pound’s view, the American government alliance with British finance capitalism and Soviet Bolshevism was contrary to America’s tradition and heritage: « Why did you take up with those gangs? » he rhetorically asked his listeners. « Two gangs. [The] Jews’ gang in London, and [the] Jew murderous gang over in Moscow? Do you like Mr. Litvinov? [Soviet ambassador to Britain Meyer Wallach, alias Litvinov, born 1876.–Ed.]
« Do the people from Delaware and Virginia and Connecticut and Massachusetts . . . who live in painted, neat, white houses . . . do these folks really approve [of] Mr. Litvinov and his gang, and all he stands for? »⁽¹¹⁾
There was no reason for U.S. intervention abroad, he said: « The place to defend the American heritage is on the American continent. And no man who had any part in helping [Franklin] Delano Roosevelt get the United States into [the war] has enough sense to win anything . . . ⁽¹²⁾ The men who wintered at Valley Forge did not suffer those months of intense cold and hunger . . . in the hope that . . . the union of the colonies would one day be able to stir up wars between other countries in order to sell them munitions. »⁽¹³⁾
What was the American tradition? According to Pound: « The determination of our forbears to set up and maintain in the North American continent a government better than any other. The determination to govern ourselves internally, better than any other nation on earth. The idea of Washington, Jefferson, Monroe, to keep out of foreign shindies. »⁽¹⁴⁾
Of FDR’s interventionism, he declared: « To send boys from Omaha to Singapore to die for British monopoly and brutality is not the act of an American patriot. »⁽¹⁵⁾ However, Pound said: « Don’t shoot the President. I dare say he deserves worse, but . . . [a]ssassination only makes more mess. »⁽¹⁶⁾
Pound saw the American national tradition being buried by the aggressive new internationalism. According to Pound’s harsh judgment: « The American gangster did not spend his time shooting women and children. he may have been misguided, but in general he spent his time fighting superior forces at considerable risk to himself . . . not in dropping booby traps for unwary infants. I therefore object to the modus in which the American troops obey their high commander. This modus is not in the spirit of Washington or of Stephen Decatur. »⁽¹⁷⁾
Pound hated war and detected a particular undercurrent in the previous wars of history. Wars, he said, were destructive to nation-states, but profitable for the special interests. Pound said international bankers–Jewish bankers, in particular–were those who were the primary beneficiaries of the profits of from war. He pulled no punches when he declared:

Although World War II itself was much on Pound’s mind, the poet’s primary concern, referenced repeatedly throughout his broadcasts, was the issue of usury and the control of money and economy by private special interests. « There is no freedom without economic freedom, » he said. « Freedom that does not include freedom from debt is plain bunkum. It is fetid and foul logomachy to call such servitude freedom . . . Yes, freedom from all sorts of debt, including debt at usurious interest. »⁽¹⁹⁾
Usury, he said, was a cause of war throughout history. In Pound’s view understanding the issue of usury was central to understanding history: « Until you know who has lent what to whom, you know nothing whatever of politics, you know nothing whatever of history, you know nothing of international wrangles.⁽²⁰⁾
« The usury system does no nation . . . any good whatsoever. It is an internal peril to him who hath, and it can make no use of nations in the play of international diplomacy save to breed strife between them and use the worst as flails against the best. It is the usurer’s game to hurl the savage against the civilized opponent. The game is not pretty, it is not a very safe game. It does no one any credit. »⁽²¹⁾ Pound thus traced the history of the current war:

According to Pound, it was the money issue (above all) that united the Allies during the second 20th-century war against Germany: « Gold. Nothing else uniting the three governments, England, Russia, United States of America. That is the interest–gold, usury, debt, monopoly, class interest, and possibly gross indifference and contempt for humanity. »⁽²³⁾ Although « gold » was central to the world’s struggle, Pound still felt gold « is a coward. Gold is not the backbone of nations. It is their ruin. A coward, at the first breath of danger gold flows away, gold flows out of the country. »⁽²⁴⁾
Pound perceived Germany under Hitler as a nation that stood against the international money lenders and communist Russia under Stalin as a system that stood against humanity itself. He told his listeners:

The real enemy, said Pound, was international capitalism. All people everywhere were victims: « They’re working day and night, picking your pockets, » he said. « Every day and all day and all night picking your pockets and picking the Russian working man’s pockets. »⁽²⁶⁾ Capital, however, he said, was « not international, it is not hypernational. It is subnational. A quicksand under the nations, destroying all nations, destroying all law and government, destroying the nations, one at a time, Russian empire and Austria, 20 years past, France yesterday, England today. »⁽²⁷⁾
According to Pound, Americans had no idea why they were being expected to fight in Britain’s war with Germany: « Even Mr. Churchill hasn’t had the grass to tell the American people why he wants them to die, to save what. He is fighting for the gold standard and monopoly. Namely the power to starve the whole of mankind, and make it pay through the nose before it can eat the fruit of its own labor. » ⁽²⁸⁾
As far as the English were concerned, in Pound’s broadcasts aimed at the British Isles he warned his listeners that although Russian-style communist totalitarianism was a threat to British freedom, it was not the biggest threat Britain faced:

In the end, Pound suggested, it would be the big money interests who would really win the war–not any particular nation-state–and the foundation for future wars would be set in place: « The nomadic parasites will shift out of London and into Manhattan. And this will be presented under a camouflage of national slogans. It will be represented as an American victory. It will not be an American victory. The moment is serious. The moment is also confusing. It is confusing because there are two sets of concurrent phenomena, namely, those connected with fighting this war, and those which sow seeds for the next one. »⁽³⁰⁾
Pound believed one of the major problems of the day–which itself had contributed to war fever–was the manipulation of the press, particularly in the United States: « I naturally mistrust newspaper news from America, » he declared. « I grope in the mass of lies, knowing most of the sources are wholly untrustworthy. »⁽³¹⁾
According to Pound: « The United States has been misinformed. The United States has been led down the garden path, and may be down under the daisies. All through shutting out news. There is no end to the amount of shutting out news that the sons of blood who started this war, and wanted this war, and monkeyed around to get a war started and monkeyed around to keep the war going, and spreading. There is no end to the shutting out and perversions of news that these blighters ain’t up to, and that they haven’t, and aren’t still trying to compass. »⁽³²⁾ Pound believed press manipulation was a historic phenomenon:

Pound believed it was vital for the American people to circumvent the controlled press and to investigate current events–and history–for themselves.
Long before anyone ever conceived of C-SPAN’s daily broadcasts of congressional activity Pound suggested one way for the American people to have a better view of what was happening in official Washington: « You could put Congress on the air. Then you would know more of what your representatives are putting on you. »⁽³⁴⁾
The poet noted that the press was so controlled it was virtually impossible to express opinions contrary to those of the controllers of the media of the day: « You can’t talk it over with me; because none of you can get to a radio. You can’t print stuff like this in your papers, because the newspapers are not there to inform the people. »⁽³⁵⁾  Pound harkened back to the old Committees of Correspondence that existed in the American colonies prior to the American Revolution when he suggested: « You have got talk to each other, you have got to write letters one to another »⁽³⁶⁾   in order to be able to discuss the real issues of the day.
Pound also noted another press phenomenon: the fact that the American press had failed to tell its readers that in Europe the Masonic order was a widely discussed issue. Pound told his listeners it ought to be news in America, but it wasn’t: « Nothing will come as a greater shock to America in general, » he said, « but in particular to honest men who compose the greater part, numerically, of American Masonry, than the view held concerning that order in Europe. »⁽³⁷⁾  Regarding the Masonic order, Pound had his own questions: « What are the Masons? Where do they get their money? And who controls them?⁽³⁸⁾
As far as the all-important question of money creation was concerned, Pound also saw the controlled press–and the academic establishment–covering up the truth. He was intrigued by the fact that there was precedent, in history, for the governments of nation-states to create money rather than relying upon private, special interests to do so:

In Pound’s judgment, the American people had fallen down on the job and relied upon the greatest protection they had against the moneyed interests–the U.S. Constitution. « You have not kept the Constitution in force, » he said. « You have not developed it according to its own internal laws . . . The main protection of the whole people is in the clause about Congress issuing money . . . but you have not wanted to maintain the Constitution. You have not wanted, that is, you have not had a will, to maintain the Constitution or to maintain honest, just government.⁽⁴⁰⁾
The U.S. Constitution, Pound said, was « for more than a century, in fact for 130 years, far and away the best on earth. I had always thought we could get all the social justice we need, by a few sane reforms of money, such as Adams and Lincoln would have thought honest and Constitutional. The grafters would rather throw you into a ten years war and kill off five or ten million young men than even let the discussion of monetary reform flower on the front pages of the American papers.⁽⁴¹⁾
All of these warnings by Pound about the money system have been suppressed or ignored or forgotten.
Despite his international travel, his choice to live abroad, his fluency in foreign tongues, his cosmopolitan associations, Pound was very much an American nationalist and a patriot in the truest sense. American culture and history were the foundation of his thinking, and he was the first to proclaim it. At the same time, Pound felt the American people were badly misinformed about the realities of European history:
« The Americans are unqualified for intervention, » he said. « They are disqualified by reason for their intense, abysmal, unfathomable ignorance of the state and past facts of Europe. Even my colleagues in the Academy of Social and Political Science have no competent perception of the difference, the basic difference between the American problem and that of Europe. And most of them have not made any adequate use of even such fragmentary fragments of knowledge as they possess. »⁽⁴²⁾
As far as the Jewish question was concerned, Pound was never an advocate of mass extermination or of any program of discrimination against the Jews–contrary to what modern day « historians » might contend. Pound did perceive communism as an outgrowth of ancient Judaic teachings. He called communism « the left hand of Judah »⁽⁴³⁾  (the right hand, presumably, being international finance capitalism) and declared that « The Bolshevik anti-morale comes out of the Talmud, which is the dirtiest teaching any race ever codified. The Talmud is the one and only begetter of the Bolshevik system. »⁽⁴⁴⁾
Pound sometimes resorted to the use of ethnic slurs, but earthy expressions and salty language were integral to the poet’s style. Pound’s real target was the international banking establishment–many of whose leaders were, in fact, Jews. But he was not an enemy of the Jewish people: « Don’t start a pogrom, » he said. « That is, not an old-style killing of small Jews. That system is no good whatsoever. Of course if some man had a stroke of genius and could start a pogrom up at the top, there might be something to say for it. But on the whole legal measures are preferable. ⁽⁴⁵⁾
Pound traced many historical problems to the direct involvement of Jewish financiers. For example, he pointed out: « Nobody with any historical knowledge says that the French revolution occurred without Jewish assistance. Nor that since that somewhat bloody upset and series of subsequent upsets the Jew weren’t cock-a-hoop in the French capital. A knowledge of the French commune would have helped us to understand the Russian November revolution If we had had it. But handy and useful knowledge has an easy way of getting mislaid. Now what causes that?⁽⁴⁶⁾
Of the much-discussed Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, Pound had the following intriguing comment:

Pound saw the ongoing war as an enemy of culture and he acknowledged his goal was stopping the war, if he could: « Oh yes, I want it to stop. I didn’t start it. I should like to conserve a few art works, a few mosaics, a few printed volumes, I should like to shore, or bring to beach what is left of the world’s cultural heritage, including libraries and architectural monuments. To serve as models for new construction. »⁽⁴⁸⁾
Contrary to his modern reputation for « racism, » Pound resented racist attacks on the Japanese by the Allies. Shortly after Pearl Harbor he remarked that: « A BBC commentator somewhere about January 8 was telling his presumably music hall audience the Japs were jackals, and that they had just recently, I think he said within living men’s lifetime, emerged from barbarism. I don’t know what patriotic end you think, or he thinks, or the British authorities think is served by such fetid ignorance. »⁽⁴⁹⁾  Pound told his audience the United States had, « with unspeakable vulgarity . . . insulted the most finely tempered people on earth, threatening them with starvation, threatening them with encirclement and telling them they were too low down to fight. »⁽⁵⁰⁾  The result, he said, was Pearl Harbor and American intervention in the war.
Pound also recognized Japan’s Chinese enemies were as much victims of the international money lenders and intriguers as were the Japanese. In colorful language evoking lively imagery that only Pound could conjure up, he declared:
« There are millions of Chinamen, many of them living on very short rations in the interior and about as much interested in Chiang Kai-shek as they are in the White Socks and the Phillies, if there still are any Phillies. You could get more enthusiasm out of those Chinks for a Hot Dog Championship on the Northside than you could for Chiang’s foreign party in China. A lot of China is not pro-Kai-shek. A lot of China is not for that gang of foreign investors. »⁽⁵¹⁾
Pound was very much attuned to the nationalist instincts of other peoples. He was himself an American nationalist who knew there were nationalistic strivings all across the globe–that nationalists everywhere wanted their peoples to be free of the big money interests:

Pound also had a profound respect for the European contribution to civilization. He told his listeners: « Europe is an organic body, its life continues, its life has components and nearly every damn thing that has made your lives worth living up to this moment, has had its origins right here in Europe.⁽⁵³⁾  In Pound’s view, the rise of fascism in Italy and Germany was an exclusively European phenomenon and one that should be of no concern to America:

Pound felt there was much to be said for the social and economic achievements of Italy and Germany and that they could prove a model for the rest of the Western World: « Every social reform that has gone into effect in Germany and Italy should be defended, » he said. « And the best men in England know that as well as I do. The time of calumny is past, and its passing should be seen very clearly.⁽⁵⁵⁾
Conscious of the reforms effected in Italy and Germany, Pound saw similar possibilities for the American system. Pound believed the U.S. Constitution itself provided Americans the mechanism for change. However, he said, « You have not made use of the machinery provided in the Constitution itself, to keep the American government modern. »⁽⁵⁶⁾  Pound suggested:

« I am telling you how to oil up the machine, » he said, « and change a few gadgets so that it would work as the founders intended.⁽⁵⁷⁾
Quick and certain to draw distinctions between U.S. and European traditions, however, Pound declared: « Class war is not an American product, not from the roots of the nation. Not in our historic process. And the racial solution, which is Europe’s solution, which is IN Europe’s process, rooted deep down, un-uprootable. »⁽⁵⁸⁾  He told his listeners it was vital they study the evolution of the American system, and why the American Revolution took place to begin with–yes, it had to do with money:

Full of contempt for those whom a real historian–his friend, Dr. Harry Elmer Barnes–called the « Court Historians » of the day, Pound recognized people could not make correct decisions about the course of their future if they were being lied to about their past: « You have a half-dozen historians but not all of them, by any means, are able to take out the facts and show how they hitch together. »⁽⁶⁰⁾  He wondered, however, why people could not look at recent events that took place within their own time frame and see why things were happening as they were. To the people of war-torn England he addressed this poignant inquiry:

Pound suggested some good reading for his American listeners who might have a desire to bring back American tradition: « Two great friendships, at the base of American history. John Adams and Jefferson, Van Buren and Andy Jackson. You can pass the time reading that history. It will make the boys better citizens. Make any young man more American if he sticks to seeing American history first before swallowing exotic perversions. »⁽⁶²⁾
Knowledge–basic historical knowledge–was vital, according to Pound. That theme–that knowledge was critical–was central to all of his wartime broadcasts. He urged his listeners to know who they were and why the world was in crisis. To his listeners, Pound urged this much: « Don’t die like a beast. If you are dead set to be sunk in the mid-Atlantic or Pacific or scorched in the desert, at least know why it is done to you. To die not knowing why is to die like an animal . . . To die like a human being you have at least got to know why it is done to you. »⁽⁶³⁾
Pound’s graphic words could well be a warning to modern-day Americans in this age when American soldiers are being asked to fight and die in endless brush-fire wars around the globe–wars that enrich their real enemies–the very plutocrats Pound so fiercely condemned.
Pound’s defense attorney, who found the transcripts of the broadcasts « dreary, » later summarized them as follows:

Was Pound a traitor–or a prophet?

NOTE: The dates cited in the following footnotes refer to the dates of radio broadcasts by Ezra Pound excerpted from the volume, « Ezra Pound Speaking »–Radio Speeches of World War II, the singular source for the information appearing in this article. The page numbers which follow refer to the location of the broadcast in the published compendium.
1″Ezra Pound Speaking »–Radio Speeches of World War II. Edited by Leonard Doob. (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1978). p. ix.
2. .Ibid.
3. .Ibid. 427.
4. .Ibid.
5. .Ibid.
6. .Ibid., p. ix.
7. .1942 (undated script), p. 393.
8. .November 6, 1941, pp. 16-17.
9. .Ibid.
10. .December 7, 1941, p. 21.
11. .March 6, 1942, p. 54.
12. .March 30, 1942, p. 80.
13. .February 26, 1942, p. 44.
14. .February 3, 1942, p. 30.
15. .February 19, 1942, pp. 42-43.
16. .February 18, 1943, p. 221.
17. .July 20, 1943, p. 370.
18. .April 30, 1942, p. 113.
19. .February 19, 1943, p. 226.
20. .Early 1941 (undated script), p. 382.
21. .May 23, 1943, p. 319.
22. .March 25, 1943, p. 259.
23. .March 2, 1942, pp. 48-49.
24. .March 8, 1942
25. .Ibid.
26. .March 8, 1942, p. 55.
27. .Ibid.
28. .October 26, 1941, p. 7.
29. .May 23, 1943, p. 318.
30. .May 23, 1943, p. 319.
31. .April 30, 1942, p.113.
32. .January 29, 1942, p. 24.
33. .February 17, 1942, p. 39.
34. .July 13, 1942, p. 203.
35. .Ibid.
36. .Ibid.
37. .April 30, 1942, pp. 114-115.
38. .Ibid.
39. .1941 (undated script), p. 390.
40. .June 1, 1943, p. 331.
41. .November 6, 1941, p. 19.
42. .June 14, 1942, p. 170.
43. .May 31, 1942, p. 155
44. .May 4, 1942, p. 117.
45. .April 30, 1942, p. 115.
46. .July 17, 1942, p. 207.
47. .April 20, 1943, p. 283.
48. .Ibid.
49. .January 29, 1942, p. 26
50. .February 3, 1942, p. 30.
51. .October 2, 1941, p. 5.
52. .July 17, 1943, p. 369.
53. .October 26, 1941, p. 9.
54. .November 6, 1941, p. 19.
55. .May 23, 1943, p. 319.
56. .June 1, 1943, p. 331.
57. .July 13, 1942, pp. 204-205.
58. .May 28, 1942, p. 153.
59. .May 28, 1942, p. 153.
60. .February 3, 1942, p. 30.
61. .May 28, 1942, p. 151.
62. .May 9, 1942, p. 121.
63. .1943 (undated script), p. 409.
64. .Doob, p. 427.

The great American iconoclast, the poet Ezra Pound,was, as we’ve noted previously, very much concerned with the power of International Jewish Finance and its treacherous and devastating policy of usury, the tactics that brought governments and peoples—economies across the planet—under the sway of the Jewish elite.

Pound emphasized that it was foolish for people to preach anti-Semitism without specifically addressing—and seeking to curtail—the financial construct through which the Jews had risen to reign supreme.Writing in Gold and Work, published in 1944, he put it bluntly: “It is, of course, useless to indulge in anti-Semitism, leaving intact the Hebraic monetary system which is their most tremendous instrument of usury.”

In fact, in the end, after centuries, it was the House of Rothschild that had come to dominate this global “Hebraic monetary system” of which Pound was writing and lecturing about so fearlessly and relentlessly.
(Read the rest…)