* la critique de la privatisation du pouvoir de création monétaire existait bien avant les récentes discussions sur les blogs ; Etienne Chouard y travaille depuis 2006 ; avant lui, de très grands économistes ont traité le sujet (André-Jacques Holbecq, Philippe Derudder, Maurice Allais) ; les premiers écrits de Maurice Allais contre le pouvoir de création monétaire des banques privées datent de…1946, dans Économie et Intérêt (p 273 et s. par ex.).
* la loi de 1973 ne fait que parachever une longue évolution, en accordant enfin le monopole de la création monétaire aux banques privées (par la confiscation totale à l’État de ce droit pour son propre usage).
* « Un livre écrit par un auteur devenu antisémite n’est pas automatiquement antisémite. En l’occurrence, le livre de Mullins n’est pas antisémite, pas du tout : c’est le travail d’une vie de recherche, autour d’un enjeu sociétal crucial, avec des preuves innombrables des faits allégués… »
* « L’affirmation que le Président de la République Pompidou a été préalablement le Directeur de la banque Rothschild correspond à UN FAIT, parfaitement incontestable. »
* « L’affirmation que cette mesure est contraire à l’intérêt général (puisque tous les emprunts d’État sont devenus mécaniquement coûteux) et favorable à l’intérêt des banques privées (qui perçoivent précisément ces intérêts, et dont fait partie, à plus d’un titre, la banque Rothschild elle-même) est encore UN FAIT, parfaitement incontestable. »
* « La constatation que la dette publique française s’est progressivement envolée depuis cette année 1973, et que la charge de cette dette s’est envolée dans le même mouvement, cette constatation est encore UN FAIT, parfaitement incontestable. »
* L’article 25 de la loi de 1973, bien que formellement abrogé, a été repris presque mot à mot à l’article 104 du traité de Maastricht ; ce remplacement a aggravé la situation en gravant le texte scélérat dans le marbre des traités et en empêchant le peuple français de l’abroger aisément, comme on peut abroger toute loi.
Source: Chapitres 1 (extrait) et 4 à 9 de The New Babylon(Michael Collins Piper, 2009)…
This period cartoon illustrates the crowned heads of Europe — the ostensible rulers of the day — bowing before Lionel Rothschild on his throne of mortgages, loans and cash. In fact, this was the reality of the day, the effective fruition of the age-old Jewish dream of a New World Order — a Jewish Utopia — in which all other peoples of the planet would bow down and worship the Jewish people, the new rulers of the Earth. For good reason, indeed, Rothschild was known as the « king of kings. »
(…) we find that — through the ages — there was a long-standing Jewish dream for the establishment of a global order — a new imperium — a New World Order, if you will. And at the top of that New World Order pyramid we find the name Rothschild. The House of Rothschild and its empire are the foundation for that New World Order.
There were many Jewish bankers and Jewish usurers in those many years that preceded the rise of the Rothschild Empire at the end of the 18th Century, but it was not until the rise of the Rothschild dynasty that this International Money Power emerged as the force that it did evolve to be.
There were Jewish bankers and usurers, active in many places throughout Western Civilization and reaching into the Middle East, Africa, Asia and Latin America — but it was not until the rise of the Rothschild dynasty that this power achieved a unity it had never seen before.
And, in fact, it might be said — quite correctly — that the rise of the Rothschilds set in place a “royal family” of international Jewry, indeed a royal family of international finance.
And in the years, decades, centuries that followed, the Rothschild fortune, popularly known in Europe as “The Fortune,” did become a central force in the international conduct of monetary policy and, as a consequence, in the conduct of the international policies of the various nation states, the various royal families and even indeed the various “democracies” that were in place and which evolved during that time frame in which the Rothschild Empire remained a constant, ever-present force operating, not just behind the scenes, but quite overtly in its influence upon the governments and peoples, not only in the “civilized” world, but, ultimately, throughout the entire world as the British Empire — in particular — reached across the globe with, in many respects, the British Foreign Office a virtual arm of the Rothschild dynasty.
Likewise in other European nations — rivals to Britain — they began to extend their reach onto other continents. The various branches of the Rothschild family in Vienna, Paris, Frankfurt, Naples, along with satellite influences in Hong Kong, Shanghai, even in Australia, began to flex their power.
Thus, in this respect, the term “the Jews” has often been applied to the International Money Power and this International Money Power, for a combination of reasons — religious, philosophical, economic, all combined together in a geopolitical force — did indeed lay the groundwork for what is popularly known today as “The NewWorld Order.”
This New World Order — which revolves around the operations of the Rothschild Empire as it has instituted itself as a predatory force within the affairs of the nations, most especially today the United States — has, in fact, been intertwined with long-standing Jewish philosophy going back to the days of the Babylonian Talmud which is the guiding force behind Jewish religious thinking today. So in this respect we do have before us a New Babylon.
Ultimately it is not a coincidence that the charge of “anti-Semitism” is leveled at individuals and institutions that have dared to raise criticisms of the role of the International Money Power in world affairs, even those that have not specifically referenced its Jewish influences and antecedents. This has been a common phenomenon over the centuries.
In more recent times those who have dared, for example, to criticize the privately-owned and controlled money monopoly known as the Federal Reserve System — which, in fact, as we shall see, was a creation of Rothschild-connected international banking forces operating on American soil — have, at the very least, been “suspected” of anti-Semitism or perceived to be “potential” anti-Semites, by daring even to raise the issue of the propriety of the existence of this system. Any discussion of the International Money Power, any discussion of what is referred to as “the New World Order,” is considered “anti-Semitism” or potential “anti-Semitism” precisely because any discussion of or research into these topics, if carried out to its ultimate conclusion, would point in the direction of the Rothschild family, the princes of the Jewish world elite.
In 1777, Maria Theresa, the Empress of Austria, said, “I know of no more troublesome pest to the State than that nation which brings people to a state of poverty by fraud, usury and financial contracts, and which carries out all kinds of evil practices which an honorable man would abominate.”
The nature of this plutocratic edifice, its predatory structure, was pinpointed in a provocative and detailed report issued by the German government in 1940, a study which focused on the Rothschild (and before that, primarily Jewish) financial stranglehold over the British Empire. Entitled How Jewry Turned England into a Plutocratic State,” the study asserted:
By plutocracy one understands a form of government in which the election of its members rest upon their possessing wealth. The word plutocracy is derived from the Greek roots = riches and kratein = to rule. Plutocracy therefore means: the rule of moneypower, or more freely expressed: the government of Jewish gold.
The historical example of a state ruled by riches and possession is Carthage, in which the Jewish element was also represented. It was governed by the rich merchants, who were represented by a kind of “lower house” named “the Council of the Three Hundred” and a “upper house” named “the Council of the Thirty”. The people were barred from exercising any influence on the government.
For Jewry plutocracy is the most suitable form of government. Through plutocracy the immense Jewish capitalism, without respect to the number of Jews represented, of necessity procures a governing, political position, for a plutocratic state, as history teaches us, a small Jewish clique can dictate to a great state, if it is in possession of the necessary amount of capital.
The recognition of this plutocracy, in many respects, came to be what many critics referred to as “the Jewish Problem,” resulting in the rise of anti- Jewish feelings that even many Jewish writers themselves, in turn, likewise referred to as “the Jewish Problem.” And it is a problem that remains to this day — as even Jewish writers have repeatedly acknowledged.
Pope Clement VIII (who reigned from 1592 to 1605) said, in no uncertain
terms, “All the world suffers from the usury of the Jews, their monopolies and deceit. They have brought many unfortunate people into a state of poverty, especially farmers [and] working class people. . . .”
In regard to this plutocratic domination, the words of German Jewish industrialist and political figure Walter Rathenau (1867-1922) will be recalled. Writing in 1909 in Vienna’s Neue Freie Presse, Rathenau said: “Three hundred men, all of whom know one another, guide the economic destinies of the continent and seek their successors among their followers.”
Although apologists have claimed that in this provocative statement Rathenau did not suggest that those 300 were Jews or that they ruled over the heads of the national governments, nonetheless he did say what he said. Theodore Fritsch, the German writer who was well known for his criticisms of Jewish power and who was the author of the best-selling work, Handbook of the Jewish Question, reflected upon Rathenau’s remarks. Fritsch noted in his 1922 essay, « The Desperate Act of a Desperate People” (which, in fact, was written upon the assassination of Rathenau) that Rathenau’s words were “a remarkable avowal” that had not been fully understand in all of its consequences. Fritsch assessed the matter:
From the consequences in which it was said, it was clear that [Rathenau] was not talking about ruling princes and statesmen but rather a power group standing outside government which possesses the means to enforce its will upon the world, including the governments. Furthermore, since he spoke of the naming of successors, it is obvious that there is a firmly structured organization operating according to definite principles and a division of offices and systematically pursuing its goals.
This, said Fritsch,“substantiates nothing less than the fact that a closed society, a shadow government or a super government, has existed for a long time and that it directs economic and political events over the heads of nations and governments.”
What was the source of this shadow government, asked Fritsch? He provided the answer: “Jewish high finance and its paid lackeys, allied and spread throughout the entire world.”
Fritsch pointed out that many people failed to draw proper conclusions from the facts put forth by Rathenau. Reflecting upon the destructive tragedy ofWorld War I, Fritsch said:
If the 300 men of the secret world government directed the destiny of the world, what was [that] world war all about? Would the 300 have been unable to prevent it? Since they did not prevent [the war] they must have wanted it. If the 300 money powers made world policy for decades, they therefore also made the world war. Perhaps [they did so] in order finally to erect their mastery in the open and to drive out the princes.
“It is time,” wrote Fritsch, “that the nations finally recognize this and bring the guilty to account.” He noted that the works of Henry Ford, published in The International Jew, delivered “exhaustive proof” as to how the Jewish financial interests set the first world war in motion. Of the Jewish plutocrats, Fritsch wrote that “He who boasts even secretly that he directs the destiny of the world ought now to possess the courage and decency to take the responsibility for the political events of the world.”
Ironically, Fritsch died in 1933, just at the time when his native land of Germany began working to dismantle the power of the Rothschild Empire on European soil, even as the groundwork was in place for the rise of the Zionist state in the years that followed World War II, not long afterward.
In fact, the plutocratic elite — the Jewish aristocracy in the whirl of the Rothschild dynasty — in fact, the Rothschilds most especially — made the rise of political Zionism possible. Zionism was an outgrowth of the global Imperialism that arose in the swath of expanding plutocratic wealth and power across the planet.
The late Palestinian-American philosopher Edward Said noted the synchronicity between Zionism and Imperialism, writing that: “When we talk about Zionism and Imperialism, we are talking about a family of ideas, belonging to the same dynasty, springing out of the same seed.” Said referred to the Zionist-Imperialist construct (in the context of the Zionist occupation of Palestine) as “a whole system of confinement, dispossession, exploitation and oppression that still holds us down and denies us our inalienable rights as human beings,” and yet the truth is that Zionist occupation of Palestine is only but a microcosm, to speak, reflecting the Zionist occupation of the entire globe — the establishment of the Jewish Power Elite as the would-be arbiters of the course of world affairs, bar none.(…)
The Rise of the International Jewish Money Power
Although it is politically incorrect to quote Adolf Hitler—perhaps history’s most infamous critic of the Jews—in the context of any discussion whatsoever, Hitler—writing in Mein Kampf—assessed the nature of Jewish financial power and its consequences. So precisely because Hitler is such a controversial figure (one whose role in global affairs continues to reverberate today), it is important to consider what he had to say:
Jews first enter communities as importers and exporters. They then become middlemen for internal production. They tend to monopolize trade and finance. They become bankers to the monarchy. They lure monarchs into extravagances in order to make them dependent on Jewish money lenders. They seek popularity by a show of philanthropy and political liberalism. They promote the development of joint stock companies, stock speculation and trade unions. By control of the press they create turmoil. Both international finance and international communism are Jewish tricks to weaken the national spirit.
Lest anyone dismiss this as “Nazi propaganda” note the similar nature of what Leon Poliakov, the famed Jewish historian, once wrote:
With the start of modern history, Jews found that a reverence for money [was] a source of all life. Increasingly, each action in the Jews’ daily life was subject to the payment of a tax. He must pay to come and go, pay for the right to pray with his co-religionists, pay to marry, pay for the birth of his child, even pay for taking a corpse to the cemetery.
Without money, Jewry was inevitably doomed to extinction. Thus, the rabbis henceforth viewed financial oppressions, for example, the moratorium on repayment of debts to Jews . . . as on a par with massacres and expulsions,seeing in them a divine curse, a merited punishment from on high.
As early as September 27, 1712, London’s Spectator wrote of the Jews:
They are so disseminated throughout all the trading parts of the world that they have become the Instruments by which the most distant Nations converse with one another and by which mankind are knit together in a general correspondence.
In The Jews and Modern Capitalism, Werner Sombart wrote that exclusion from public life was of benefit to not only the economic position of the Jews but also their political situation:
It freed the Jews from political partisanship. Their attitude toward the state and the particular government of the day was wholly unprejudiced. Thanks to this, their capacity to become the standard bearers of the international capitalistic system was superior to that of other people, for they supplied the different states with money, and national conflicts were among the chief sources from which Jews derived their profit. Moreover, the political colorlessness of their position made it possible for them to serve successive dynasties or governments in countries which, like France,were subjected to many political changes. The history of the Rothschilds illustrates this point.
In his provocatively titled 1982 book, Jews and Money: The Myths and the Reality, published by Ticknor and Fields, American Jewish author Gerald Krefetz said forthrightly:
The acquisition of money [by Jews] has become a reflexive action instinctive as blinking when a hand menaces the eye and as sure a response as the flight of an antelope on the Serengeti plain. For the Jew, money does not represent security, for he seems constitutionally insecure,nor is it a form of camouflage, [for] Jews often choose to stand aside and stand out.
For the Jew, money is safety, a tool of survival. Over the years, the manipulation, the earning, creation, and saving of money has been raised to a fine art—the result of defensive social conduct which has passed from generation to generation.
Describing the Jews as “a wonderful example” for the new science of ethology—which Krefetz noted is the biological study of paradigms, patterns and gestures as a clue to understanding character, in other words, the study of animal behavior—Krefetz said, in candor, that “Any review of the social evolution of Jews in recent times must concentrate on the mightiest defense mechanism—the acquisition of money—since it is so central to their existence and survival.”
Referring to Werner Sombart’s aforementioned The Jews and Modern Capitalism, Krefetz noted that Sombart had concluded that Judaism was a religion favorable to capitalistic development: “Not only was Judaism a stimulant to economic growth,in some areas, Jews were originators of neccesary first steps, indeed, they made capitalism possible. He credited Jews with a significant role in international trade.” Sombart said that the Jews were “the first to place on the world’s markets the staples of modern commerce.”
Jewish traders specialized in luxury items such as precious stones and bullion and were especially pivotal in the colonization of Latin America.
Sombart also noted some of the economic institutions that Jews had been instrumental in creating, including stock exchanges, negotiable instruments, public bonds and bank notes.In addition, Jews were active in promoting free trade, advertising and competition. These were all factors new in the world of what has come to be called “capitalism.”
Sombart traced Jewish traditions in these realms of capitalism back to the Pentateuch and the Talmud (and other Jewish religious sources) which featured commentaries on interest, usury, commercial law, legal transactions and property. Sombart asserted that this “Jewish genius” for capitalism transpired from the Jewish “contract with God”—a bilateral covenant.
In exploring the history of “Jews and Money” in his book by that title, Gerald Krefetz acknowledges with candor that “Historically, Jews have shown remarkable talent for manipulating money. Over the years this proclivity has led them to the world of banking and finance and nowhere have they so brilliantly exercised their financial talents as in America. Free enterprise and political emancipation allowed them to exercise and sharpen these skills—skills that have been evolving for a thousand years.”
For most of those thousand years, Krefetz noted, Jews were not bankers in the modern sense. They were, he wrote, “money lenders more akin to pawn brokers and foreign exchange dealers.” Krefetz described the evolution of the the Jews into the modern day kings of finance leading to the rise of the Rothschild Empire as the foremost force among them:
At first they lent money when no one else could or would, because either of a lack of liquid funds or injunctions [by the church] against [Christians] lending money at interest.
Later, when money became more plentiful and Christian prohibitions were ignored by some, lending became popular and Jewish money lenders were left with only poor clients. By then Jews were restricted from almost every livelihood that had any appeal to Gentiles. The injunctions were enforced by either deportation or by restriction to ghettoes.
A few Jews who became rich and powerful as adjuncts or administrators for rulers—the Court Jews—were precursors to modern financiers. Their jobs included raising revenues by tax farming, negotiating loans, and supplying the military as one-man quartermaster corps.
Modern banking started in the 19th Century with the rise of the House of Rothschild. They were not the only important Jewish bankers in Europe: indeed a surprising number of continental banks were founded by Jews.
The old Court Jew had primarily raised money for local rulers to cover his expenses, his personal diplomacy and his extravagances. The new bankers floated state loans to finance emerging industries and railroads.
Prior to the modern Jewish banks in the Rothschild sphere, there was also a considerable Jewish presence in the world of money. The Economic History of the Jews noted:
Medieval princes used the commercial and financial services of individual Jews.However, as an institution,the Court Jew is a feature of the Absolutist State, especially in Central Europe, from the end of the 16th Century onward.
Trying as far as possible to extend his power over the whole of his territory, the ruler set up a centralized administration as part of his court, which at the same time became the power center, presenting a lavish display of luxury. Economically, a Jew could be of great service to such a ruler.
In Poland many landed estates were administered by Jews and a large part of the trade in agricultural products was in their hands.
This, combined with the emergence of early Jewish capitalist commercial activity by Sephardim in the Netherlands, with their connections with Levantine trade through Jews in the Ottoman Empire, made the Jew in central Europe particularly suited to be an agent for provisioning armies with grain, timber and cattle, as well as a supplier of diamonds and other goods for conspicuous consumption.
As tax collecting and enlargement of the scope of taxation often lagged considerably behind the growing expenditure of court, army and bureaucracy, this type of regime developed an almost chronic financial deficit.
Here the Jews with their organizational skill and their far-reaching connections could help, through the frequent supply of commercial credit or ready cash, as also through the supply of food stuffs, cloth, and weapons for the army, the most important instrument of the prince’s power.
All of this laid the groundwork for the rise of banking families such as, most notably, the Rothschilds:
In all their varied activities, the Court Jews played a remarkable part in the development of international credit facilities, especially in the central European states, and to some degree in northern Europe also, from the mid-17th to the late 18th Centuries.
Generally, they were agents who arranged transfers of credit rather than possessors of vast capital in their own right; through their far-reaching commercial relationships and their organizing skill, they were able to provide funds more swiftly than most Christian bankers.
Because of their specialization in the money business, they were able to furnish the silver for the mints more easily, and could more easily act as army purveyors, once more because of their ability to organize and their network of family relationships.With their entrepreneurial spirit, they contributed in part to the process of industrialization within the frame of mercantilist policies.
There is no doubt that they were instrumental in the growth of the modern absolute state, and at the end of the era there emerged a group of several important Jewish private bankers who exemplify the transition to modern methods of economy and government, primarily the Rothschilds, the Goldsmids, the Oppenheimers, and the Seligmans.
The authors added, almost as an afterthought, “However, it should not be forgotten that the courts had their Christian bankers, entrepreneurs and army agents, too, who also played a part in this development.” How kind of these Judeo-centric authors, writing for a Judeo-centric publishing house, to give credit to the Christians!
Great Britain’s emergence—as the preeminent center of Jewish finance—is vital for us to consider. During the early years of World War II, Germany’s news agency,World-Service, assessed this little-known history.
Jewry’s rise to power in England took place in three sharply defined stages, which are separated by intervals of about 100 years.
Under Cromwell’s rule and during the first half of the Revolution period, under Charles II, the Jews, after having been banned from England for a period of more than 350 years, again swarmed into England.
Cromwell’s rule is characterized by an outspoken British imperial policy. With regard to his financial as well as his political policy Cromwell depended upon the Jews to be the backbone of his colonial expansion. Jewish agents carried on economic and political espionage for Cromwell, availing themselves of the Jewish business houses in foreign countries.
In Cromwell’s time, exactly as 100 and 200 years later, a small ruling Jewish clique was formed, at whose head one Jew appeared as the backbone of the new colonial economic policy. In Cromwell’s time it was the enormously rich Sephardic Jew Antony Fernandez Carvajal who occupied this position.
A hundred years later the second stage of the Jew’s rise to power in England commences. The Jewish clique in England was then led by the exceedingly rich Sephardic Jew, Sampson Gideon, who also greatly influenced the English cabinet ministers. At that time the influence of the Jews on finance-capital in England was already so great, that without exaggeration one may say, that English Jews were controlling the English money market.
Under the leading of Sampson Gideon the Jews sought to break down the barrier-erected by the time-approved laws against the influx of foreign Jews. The English nation, aroused to anger, strenuously opposed this Jewish effort. The Jews therefore could accomplish nothing by constitutional means, but already their power was so great, and by working from behind the scenes the influential English Jews saw to it, that these time-approved laws were evaded and set at nought.
Again, a hundred years later, in the 19th Century, we encountered the last and most decisive period, during which the Jews attempted their emancipation. Jewish personalities such as Rothschild, Montefiore, Bernal, Montagu, Ricardo and Disraeli at the beginning of theVictorian age, fought for and gained equal rights for Jewry within English law.
Once the Jews had been received at court and had been granted citizenship, the English nobility no longer felt degraded by intermarriage with Jews. Uninterrupted, the penetration and disintegration of the English nobility by Jewry now continued. Uninterrupted, the Jewish invasion of the ruling class, whose national opposition was broken down,was now continued on a broad basis.After Jewry had in this way succeeded in worming its way into the nobility, it could from this strong position carry on its campaign against the English nation.
It now began the third stage of its conquest of England. In a period of about 100 years it had accomplished this. In the reign of Queen Victoria the last resistance of the English nation was broken down. Judah had conquered England. Jewish-English Plutocracy was stabilized by the Jews and by sections of the ruling class,which was connected with it by ties of blood, and which was to be still further extended in the 20th Century. Jewish interest and the interest of the Jewish-English aristocracy were now identical.
Through this plutocratic system of government Jewish and British Imperialism were firmly welded together.The strong hands by which the Jews had bound the English nobility to themselves were those of blood relationship and finance-capital. Jewish gold now became the undeniable ruler of England. Jewish unscrupulousness and aggressiveness, shady Jewish avarice and greed from now on become the characteristics and the stamp of the ruling classes, now to be counted in with the Jews.
These were the cornerstones that were used in building up the British Empire in its present form.These are the foundations upon which it rests.
While the Rothschild family held sway through their banks in London, Paris, Frankfurt,Vienna and Naples,there were also such big names in Jewish finance as Bleichroder in Berlin, Warburg in Hamburg, Oppenheim in Cologne and Speyer in Frankfurt who were also emerging as powerful lords of money who worked in conjunction with one another and with the Rothschilds, competing often to be sure, but all tied together by their Jewish heritage and traditions. There were also the Hambros of London, the Sassoons of Bombay and the Guinzberg house in St. Petersburg.
Although these banking empires were equivalent to what are called “merchant banks” or “investment banks” today, there was also a significant Jewish role in setting up so-called “commercial” banks (more akin to the “average” bank with which the average commoner would deal for financial services) such as the Deutsche Bank and the Dresdner Bank—two of Germany’s “Big Three,” Credit Mobilier and the Banque de Paris et des Pays-Bas in France, along with Banca Commerciale Italiana and Credito Italiano in Italy, and Creditanstalt-Bankverein and Banque de Bruxelles, among others.
In the United States, there were Jewish bankers rising: Haim Solomon of Revolutionary War fame (although there are those who dispute the claim that Solomon was “The Jewish Patriot Who Financed the American Revolution”) and Isaac Moses who—along with Alexander Hamilton—founded the Bank of NewYork in 1784.
Krefetz cited such Jewish banking houses that rose in America from the period of 1840 onward: Bache, Goldman, Sachs, J.W. Seligman, Kuhn Loeb, Ladenburg, Thalmann, Lazard Freres, Lehman Brothers, Speyer, and Wertheim. And Krefetz notes that these American-based Jewish banking houses had a tendency to intermarry and often acted in concert and thus projected “an image of concentrated power.”
And needless to say, in the midst of this, the Rothschilds were indeed already operating on American soil through their American agent, August Belmont, who worked with many of these other Jewish capitalist forces.
What is interesting is that Krefetz suggested that these Jewish banks were unable to compete with what he calls “Protestant” banks among which Morgan, Drexel, Gould, Fiske, Harriman and Hill were the most prominent. But, as we shall see later in these pages, many of these elements were, in fact, under the sway of Rothschild and other Jewish influence.
For the record, Krefetz added, that, in his opinion, there is no real evidence of an international conspiracy of Jewish bankers, but that“some Jews in banking have conspired.”
The money game, he said,“holds a fascination for Jews that some might say is equivalent to sex to the French, food to the Chinese, and power to the politician. And since the Diaspora [the scattering of Jewish communities], their financial concerns have always had an international flavor.”
As early as 1879, the anti-Jewish German essayistWilhelm Marr said candidly that Jewish Money Power had assembled a predominant influence, in Germany in particular, but he recognized that this money power was international in scope. Marr described his own writings as “less a polemic against Jewry than confirmation of a cultural and historical fact.” He said that any intemperate language he may have used “must be understood as no more than a cry of pain from one of the oppressed.”
By the “oppressed,” Marr was referring to the rest of the many Europeans and peoples worldwide who were, as one English writer put it, some years later, “under the heel of the Jew,”—referring, indeed, to the Jewish Money Power.
Pointing out that many people had written unpleasant things about Jews and the organized Jewish community, Marr noted that, nonetheless, “our self conceit still keeps us from the open and honest admission that Israel has become a world power of the very first rank.”
He emphasized that there was no religious prejudice in his writings. He was, he noted, simply enabling his readers to peer into what he called “the mirror” of cultural and historical facts. He advised readers of his pessimistic works to not blame him if that mirror showed those readers to be slaves.
“Without a shred of irony,” he wrote,“I publicly proclaim the world-historical triumph of Jewry, the news of a lost battle, the victory of the enemy without a single excuse for the stricken army.” He referred to his stark (and dark) conclusions as nothing more than “candor.”
Marr noted that “throughout history the Jews have been hated by all peoples without exception.” He emphasized that much of this hatred and enmity did not come as a consequence of the Jewish religion and its teachings (particularly its disdain for non-Jews)—although he acknowledged this did play some part—but rather, Marr said, the Jewish people had been able to adapt themselves to what Marr called the “idolatry of other peoples.”
Of the historical conflict between Rome and Jerusalem, Marr noted that “When one people subjugates another, one of two situations usually [occurs]: either the conquerer merges into the culture of the conquered and loses its special nature or the conquerer succeeds in impressing his special nature on the conquered.” Marr cited the Mongols who conquered China under Genghis Khan and then became Chinese. He wrote:
As imposing as these two possible phenomena might be, they lose significance when confronted by the cultural history of Jewry, for in this case a wholly new force enters.A completely Semitic race has been torn loose from its homeland in Palestine, led into captivity, and finally scattered.
As far as the Babylonian captivity is concerned,it seems that the Babylonians soon wearied of their Jewish captives, for they were let loose again. The bulk of the Jews returned to Palestine, but the bankers and the wealthy stayed in Babylon, despite the angry thundering of the ancient Jewish prophets.
In some respects, Marr showed great sympathy toward the Jewish situation. He pointed out that “the Jews let themselves be used by the great ones of the land so that they [could] conduct their money transactions at the cost of the common people.” Marr added: “Highly gifted, highly talented in this direction, the Jews dominated the wholesale trade and the retail trade in the Middle Ages. They soon outstripped those who earned their bread by the sweat of their brow.”
What was interesting, said Marr, were the dynamics of the situation. Although the common people saw that because of religious differences the Jews did not share the ethical considerations of the non-Jews, the Jews, so long as they made money, tolerated anything: “Oppressed from above according to official policy, the Jews could carry on below with impunity. The people,” however, he said,“were not permitted to grumble about their exploitation by the powerful and their agents—the Jews.”
As a consequence of this, Marr pointed out,there was an introduction of religion into the equation by those who were angry at being exploited by the Jews and those for whom the Jews acted as agents.And so there were occasional pogroms. However, amazingly, the Jews did not demand their own emancipation since they feared that it might interfere with their money dealings. Although the Jews “were ridiculed by the educated, mishandled by the mob, persecuted by the zealots of the medieval church,” the Jews nonetheless “conquered the world with [their] Jewish spirit,” Marr said.
Another German critic of Jewish financial power, Adolf Stoecker, was not content with simply pinpointing the problems. He put forth a number of solutions that he hoped would be utilized:
The social maladies that Jewry brought with it must be cured by wise legislation. It will not be easy to place Jewish capital under the necessary limitations.
Only organic legislation can achieve this.Abolition of the mortgage system in real estate . . . a change in the credit system that frees the businessman from the arbitrary power of big capital; change in the stock market system; . . . limitation of the appointment of Jewish judges to their proportion of the total population.
Addressing the International Money Power of the Rothschild Empire, in particular,Henry Ford, the great industrialist, said Rothschild power as it was once known, “had been so broadened by the entry of other banking families into governmental finance, that it must now be known not by the name of one family of Jews, but by the name of the race.” Thus, Ford said, this combine was now being called “International Jewish Finance.” He wrote:
Much of the veil of secrecy which contributed so greatly to the Rothschild power has been stripped away; war finance has been labeled for all time as“blood money”; and the mysterious magic surrounding large transactions between governments and individuals, by which individual controllers of large wealth remain the real rulers of people, has been largely stripped away and the plain facts disclosed. The Rothschild method still holds good, however, in that Jewish institutions are affiliated with their racial institutions in all foreign countries.
Thus, having reviewed the rise of the Jews as the kings of global finance, we will now dissect the history of the greatest of all names in the International Jewish Money Power: the House of Rothschild, indisputably the preeminent force in the drive for a New World Order . . .
The Reign of the House of Rothschild:
The Framework for a Global Jewish Imperium
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.
The Economic History of the Jews, by Jewish writers Salo W. Baron, Arcadius Kahan and others (issued by Schocken Books, a Jewish–oriented publisher, in 1975), summarized the early history of the Rothschild family during the time frame in which they emerged as the predominant Jewish banking empire. Although family founder Meyer Amschel Rothschild (1744-1812) had been in business as a money lender as far back as 1763, it was in the early 1800s that the Rothschild empire—now in the hands of his five sons—consolidated its position as the preeminent force in International Jewish Finance. Here is the capsule assessment of the rise of the Rothschilds in Schocken’s Economic History of the Jews:
Jewish banking begins in the 19th Century with the rise of the House of Rothschild in Frankfurt, a city which became the new banking center of Europe as a result of the political upheaval caused by the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars.
The founder of the house, which became the symbol of the 19th Century type of merchant banking, Meyer Amschel Rothschild, started as a banker to the Elector of Hesse-Kassel. His sons rose to prominence as major European bankers: Amschel Meyer in Frankfurt, Salomon Meyer in Vienna, Karl Meyer in Naples, James Meyer in Paris, and Nathan Meyer in London.
After the death of Abraham Goldsmid and Francis Baring in 1810, Nathan Rothschild became the dominant figure in the London money market. The majority of the English financial dealings with the continent went through the Rothschilds’ offices.
After the Congress of Vienna in 1815, the Rothschilds extended their business into most European states, specializing in the liquidation of inflated paper currencies and in the foundation of floating public debts.
In 1818 they made loans to European governments, beginning with Prussia, and following with issues to England, Austria, Naples, Russia and other states, partly in collaboration with Baring, Reid, Irving & Company.
Between 1815 and 1828 the total capital of the Rothschilds rose from 3,332,000 to 118,400,000 francs.
Chaim Bermant’s monumental study, The Cousinhood: A Vivid Account of the English-Jewish Aristocracy—an aristocracy whom he referred to as “the Cohens, Rothschilds, Goldsmids, Montefiores, Samuels and Sassoons”—and which was published in 1971 by MacMillan, noted that the founder of the Rothschild dynasty, Meyer (sometimes rendered as “Maier” and as “Mayer”) Rothschild,was trained as a rabbi and that Meyer “cherished every Jewish tradition.” His wife, Guttele, was the classic Jewish matriarch of legend, as all accounts of the Rothschild family attest.
And as we noted at the outset—and which bears repeating—an early admiring Rothschild biographer, said of Rothschild that he was “a zealous believer in the Talmud and chose it alone as the guiding principle of all his actions. Likewise, Chaim Bermant was quick to assert that the interplay between Jewish religious, social, academic—and economic—life was a longstanding aspect of the Jewish life that so enveloped the Rothschild family and other great Jewish banking families, indeed all Jews.
And this is important to recognize in considering the role that the Talmudic religious philosophy, going back to the glory days of Jewish life in Babylon, played in shaping the rise of the House of Rothschild and its role in advancing what we now call the NewWorld Order. Bermant wrote:
A synagogue is neither a temple nor a Jewish church. It evolved as an institution in Babylon, in the marketplace, where Jews, having assembled for trade, were encouraged to remain for prayer. In the ghettoes of Europe it was the meeting point of the community where they could gather to pray, chant, study, talk, pass the time of day, mourn the sad times, celebrate the glad ones.
Of the“Cousinhood”—the elite Jewish families based in Britain but with tentacles all across the globe—Bermant wrote that “The Cousinhood were not merely a cluster of relatives. In many ways they functioned as an organic unit and while their own rights [as Jews] were not yet wholly assured, they threw in their wealth and influence on behalf of persecuted co-religionists in other parts of the world. Wherever Jews were oppressed, emissaries hurried to England, to the Rothschilds, to Montefiore, to the Cousinhood.” These elite Jews were those who reigned supreme.
Ironically, in his personal physical appearance, Nathan Rothschild—leader of the British branch of the House of Rothschild—was hardly the image of a global titan. An American traveler in Britain in 1835 said Rothschild was “a very common looking person, with heavy features, flabby pendant lips and projected fish eye. His figure, which was stout, awkward and ungainly,was enveloped in the loose folds of an ample surtout.”
However, the American added,“there was something commanding in his air and manner, and the deferential respect which seems voluntarily rendered him showed that he was no ordinary person.‘Who is that?’ was the natural question.‘The King of the Jews,’was the reply.”
This ungainly King of the Jews and his family proceeded in the century that followed to accumulate a mighty empire that was unrivaled then as it remains unrivaled today.
In 1878, Major Osman Bey wrote “an historical and ethnical essay” entitled The Conquest of the World By the Jews.The work examined how what he called “the Principle of Material Interests” enslaved the people of the world by financial oppression. He described this “Principle of Material Interests” as a “secret power” that the Jewish people, as a united force, discovered. He focused on the concept of Jewish solidarity, suggesting that if one attacked a Jew in one place, all of the Jews of the five continents arose as one man against the attacker. This concept of Jewish solidarity was at the foundation of his writings in this realm.
He said that the petty medieval usurers had changed into modern bankers or stock-brokers. “ThoseWandering Jews of long ago,” he said, “have become crafty speculators and the old clothes men and peddlers have opened elegant warehouses and industrial halls.” However, he added a critical point that must be understood:
There was a time still lacking the crown of the edifice; that is, the embodiment of the mode of principle and a concrete and tangible power, which is inborn in every human enterprise; for, as the ecclesiastical or raw military rule ultimately incorporated into a pope or an emperor, thus the Jewish money supremacy must necessarily induce the formation of a dynasty, which derived its origin and its permanent justification from the Principle of Material Interests.
Osman was referring, of course, to the Rothschild Empire.
It was Rothschild, he said,who rose“more by the force of circumstances than by the consequences of his own exertions, to the high and powerful position of a visible head of the Jewish supremacy.” Osman noted:
All the Jews bowed down before this new ruler and do so bow down ever since his rule has been recognized from one end of the world to the other.
As the king of finances, Rothschild commands the rolling masses of the Jewish capital as completely as the German or Russian emperor commands the moveable masses of his armies.
The power of this “self-constituted ruler of all the Jews,” Osman said, was “not to be calculated by the thousands of millions which he can call his own, but by that far greater, and really fabulous, mass of gold, the circulation whereof is dependent upon the orders issued by his cabinet.”
Osman was clear to note that the “rolling masses of the Jewish capital” were international in scope:
Each Jewish millionaire who carries on financial operations in Paris,Vienna, Berlin or in the United States [and note his 1878 reference to the United States—Ed.] is insofar a lieutenant general of Rothschild as it were, always governing his actions by the indications of that financial barometer.
He noted that the wealth of three branches of the Rothschild family were estimated at about 3,000 millions of dollars and he pointed out that “this is pretty nearly the amount which the French government was at some trouble to raise for [a] war indemnity.” So, he concluded,“one family is as wealthy as a whole nation.” He added: “When one reflects that this immense wealth is the fruit of the labor of millions of unfortunates, one might doubt one’s sanity.” Osman summarized it all:
So long as the world existed, such an unnatural state of things has never before been known. The head of the Rothschild family is therefore a potentate, a ruler within the full meaning of the word, and his subjects are the millions of human beings who incessantly labor to support his power and his splendor.
The Rothschilds possess a dozen of castles, truly royal residences, situated in the most magnificent and cultured countries. There these rulers unfold a gorgeous splendor and receive the adulations of the magnates of this earth, not excluding emperors and kings, and yet the head of the Rothschild family places little value in being called a king. His Jewish majesty is evidently content with being a king and enjoying the power which immense riches procure for him. But in all other respects Rothschild plays literally the role of a ruler and does not neglect the duties which his royal dignity imposes upon him.
It is he who represents the Jewish people with splendor as other rulers represent the power of their respective nations. The Jewish ruler, for instance, never shrinks from taking part in all subscriptions which fashion or report has invested with a certain importance [that is, the Jews insert their money and influence in highly public—one might say “flashy”—ways in order to make their presence and names well known and “respected”—Ed.].
Rothschild always takes care when visiting a particular locality to leave a memento of his presence, either by founding some philanthropic institution or by a princely donation.
Besides this, the Rothschilds, as the visible head of the Jewish nationality, have in recent times made it their duty to lay the cornerstone whenever some benevolent institution, devoted exclusively to the Jews, is to be erected. The power of this Jewish autocrat is so immeasurable and unlimited that it far outshines the power of all other kings and emperors.
When, but a few years ago, two great empires—France and Prussia—carried on a bloody war, each country putting forth many hundreds of thousands of soldiers, it was nevertheless necessary to call in a third potentate to establish quiet in Europe.
This third potentate was called Rothschild—that “King by the Grace of God”—whose signature was indispensible for the definite conclusion of [the war].
Although some modern-day writers, largely Rothschild publicists, have tried to diminish the role of the Rothschild influence on American soil, Osman wrote that in the United States,“their power in the United States is well known and felt.”
It was stated on good authority, he pointed out, that the demonetizing of the American silver dollar in 1873 was achieved by an agent of the Rothschilds named Earnest Seagel who went to Washington for that purpose and who was believed “by corrupt means” to have effected that change as so desired by the Rothschild Empire. “So cleverly was the matter done,” he noted, “that it was some time before the change was generally known.”
Osman noted, too, that the Rothschild forces “longed also for a monopoly of the liberal arts and sciences which are open only to the higher ranks of society. Knowing well that they could acquire honor, regard and political power only by those means, they engaged in literature, medicine and public education and flooded the professions of law and journalism.
“Jewish newspaper writers form in every state,” he added, “a closely connected and all powerful combination composed of minds as clever and industrious as they are unscrupulous and that having in a certain way appropriated a right of intervention in all [form of] affairs in order to levy tribute on the credulity of the public.
“This combination,” he said, “having such means at its disposal, far more powerful than church or feudal state is in possession of a vast and terrible power in the hands of which we are nothing but abject slaves.”
Of the Jewish power plays in the political arena, he wrote:
There are two fundamental principles: that the Jews as an organized group have endeavored to concentrate their influence, scattered as it is all over the world at any given moment, at the point to be conquered in the most effective manner in order to suppress all local opposition tendencies. They endeavor at all times to derive advantage from the disunion of others.
In order to achieve that, they place their money power at the disposal [of both parties which may be in dispute with one another] while they take care, at the same time, to have representatives in every part.
Thanks to this policy, the Jews are always on hand to turn every party victory to their advantage.
Such a distribution of power is like a good hand of cards, wherein all four colors are represented so that some points are always sure, no matter which color is turned up.
As an example, he noted:
For instance, we see in France: Imperialistic, Republican, even Socialistic Jews. If Imperialism gains a day, [Jewish finance] would be there to represent the Jewish interest.
If, on the other hand, the Republic or even the Commune chances to be victorious [Jewish Socialists are] at hand to change into the trump color, as it were, of the Jewish hand of cards.
“In short,” he said, “the Jews preserve their prestige independently of all changes of government and approach their ultimate object—the conquest of the world—an approach, more and more as time goes by their ultimate object—no matter how circumstances may change. They have discovered the secret of winning with all parties and losing with none.”
The Rothschilds and their satellites likewise played this game on the international stage.“All nations,” he wrote, “are manipulated as necessary as part of this grand international game.”
Osman wrote of how the Jewish money power was able to manipulate the press.He said there were three classes of journals: journals in the pay of the Jews; journals bearing the banner of a specific nationality or ideology, but, in fact, being fronts for Jewish interests; and thirdly, journals openly bearing the Jewish banner.
The first class, those in the pay of the Jews, were those that had been essentially bought off.The second class of journals were those he described as the proverbial“wolves in sheep’s clothing”—pretending to represent the interests of other groups but, in fact, were “serving an excellent purpose under their mask by effecting changes in public opinion since their readers rarely perceived that the articles appearing in them . . . [lead the public to believe] that these papers reflect the drift of public opinion in [the country in which they are published] and yet they mirror only the reflection of the Jewish devil who tries to lead us astray at his pleasure and bewitches us with the doctrines and sophisms of the modern school.”
(In the United States today, of course, we find the journals of what we might call “Kosher Liberals” and “Kosher Conservatives” who—while angrily disagreeing on all other issues—still nonetheless fall into place in endorsing Jewish interests and the concerns of the state of Israel.)
Then,of course,Osman noted there were those journals that were openly proclaiming themselves as reflecting the interests of the Jewish community and geared toward the Jews themselves, designed, wrote Osman,“to lead Israel [the Jewish people] in its aggressive movement upon the wealth of the heathens”—that is, the non-Jews of the planet.
“This press utters the war cry,” he said,“and directs and leads the Jews onward. Without these journals, the Jewish movement would not form a whole and its activity would necessarily lack inner force.”
Osman described all of this as evidence of “the existence of a secret but fearful power.” This combination,he said,“forms an appalling battery, to fight against which appears next to impossible.”
Referring to independent journals outside the Rothschild (and Jewish) sphere of influence, Osman said,“The Jews have ready at all times a bullet shower of scoff and calumny vomited forth from the lying mouths of hundreds of journalists: every person who does not allow himself to be plundered by the Jews is a ‘reactionary’ and if he takes a cowhide in his hand [for self defense against Jewish attacks] he is a ‘barbarian.’”
Osman concluded—so long ago in 1878—that the conquest of the world by the Jews was henceforth what he called“a fixed fact that could not be disputed.”
What assisted in the conquest of the world was usury, what he described as a “pernicious habit of issuing bonds, not just the issuance of bonds by nations, but municipalities which thereby mortgaged the wealth of nations and communities all over the world.”The interest on those bonds “went on continuously by day as well as by night” he noted. “Its course sweeps like a tornado over fair fields, destroying everything in its path.”
What Osman called“the secret power of accumulative interest”enslaved mankind, he said, and became the “primary weapon” by the Jewish interests for setting in place what we today call a New World Order. The only answer was for nations and individuals to keep out of debt and he said that this would break the back of the International Money Power as soon as all debts were liquidated on a basis that was both just and equitable.
The irony of it all, Osman said,was that while people considered themselves “free” and boasted of high culture within their natures, no one yet dared to rise against those who had effected their conquest of the world only by means of cheating and usury:
The only way to restore social equilibrium is to take hold of the tree by the root and direct the attacks against the cause of this cosmopolitan and fundamental evil. That way and only then could true statesmen succeed in freeing mankind from the greatest plague from which it ever suffered.
And the source of that plague was indeed the global construct of International Jewish Finance dominated by the Rothschild Dynasty.
In 1913 Professor Roland G. Usher, writing in his book Pan-Germanism, reflected on the worldwide tentacles of the Rothschilds:
Russia,Turkey, Egypt, India, China, Japan and South America are probably owned, so far as any vast nation can be owned, in London or Paris. Payment of interest on these vast sums is secured by the public revenues of these countries, and, in the case of the weaker nations, by the actual delivery of the perception into the hands of the agents of the English and French bankers.
And, of course, those “English and French bankers” were the Rothschilds. Usher added that:
In addition, a very large share, if not the major part, of the stocks and industrial securities of the world are owned by those two nations and the policies of many of the world’s enterprises dictated by their financial heads.
In short, he was saying that the financial heads of England and France—that is, the Rothschilds and those in their sphere of influence—were, in fact, those who controlled the substantial portion of the stocks and industrial securities of the planet itself.
“The world itself, in fact, pays them tribute,” wrote Usher. “It actually rises in the morning to earn its living by utilizing their capital and occupies its days in making the money to pay them interest, which is to make them still wealthier.”
The vast growth of the Rothschild Empire was extraordinary. The Annual Encyclopedia of 1868 noted that Jacob Rothschild in Paris, launched by his father, Maier Rothschild with a capital of $200,000, died in 1868 with a fortune which was, by that time, worth over $300,000,000 in American dollars [at that time]. His yearly income alone was about $40,000,000.
Writing in 1913 in his book, The Romance of the Rothschilds, Ignatius Balla pointed out that, at that time, there was no fortune inAmerica at all that equaled one year’s income of that of Jacob Rothschild. In 1913, according to Balla, the Rothschild fortune was worth over $2,000,000,000.
Then, of course, we have to consider that the various branches of the Rothschild Empire in the great cities of Europe found a way to maintain their influence through the intermarriage of their progeny with other members of their own extended family. For example, Jacob Rothschild married the daughter of his brother, Baron Salomon Rothschild of Vienna.
The further institutionalization of the Rothschild Empire involved the intermarriage of Rothschild family members with members of other Jewish banking dynasties such as the Montefiores of England and the Sassoons who, in particular, built their own gigantic fortune in Asia. Originally opium traders from Baghdad, the Sassoons later entered into banking, and they had extraordinary influence in China, Japan and throughout the entire Orient—even including Australia.
The international loans to the nations of the world by the Rothschild dynasty were a live factor then—when American author E. C. Knuth was writing in the early 1940s—as they are today. Knuth described the oft-documented intrigues of the Rothschilds saying that “one of the most effective devices employed by the House of Rothschild through the years to destroy their competitors and to discipline recalcitrant statesmen has been that of artificially creating an over-extended inflation by extended speculation, then to cash in and let others hold the bag.” This trick,he said,was worked by the Rothschilds at intervals throughout the years.
The Rothschilds had a global grip: Belgium, Egypt, Portugal, among many,many other nations. In Chile, the Rothschilds controlled nitrates. Brazil was so weighted down with loans from the Rothschilds that one writer said that this Latin colossus might have been described as “a Rothschild state.”
Rothschild influence extended into Asia through their ties with the Sassoon family, into Australia through the Montefiores, and into South Africa through Rothschild control over diamonds and gold, an influence extended through Cecil Rhodes and through the Oppenheimer family which dominated the diamond industry.
Reaching into the modern day, the Rothschilds, the Oppenheimers, the Bronfmans of the Americas, and the late Armand Hammer whose intrigues reached into the Soviet Union, were known by insiders as “The Billionaire Gang of Four” and they were the patrons responsible for the international media empire of Australian-born Rupert Murdoch who is part Jewish (through at least one line of descent) on his mother’s side.
Later, prior to the collapse of the Soviet regime, following the years after the death of Josef Stalin—who was working to break Jewish influence inside Russia—these Rothschild influences saw fit to begin maneuvering to maintain a grip inside Russia as it veered toward its ultimate collapse.
Although one might be inclined to think of the Rothschild Empire as being one primarily concerned with finance, the truth is that their billions were invested in many industries.
The Rothschilds controlled mercury, through gathering up mercury mines in Spain and through their manipulation of political affairs in Spain. Likewise in the realm of nickel, which is used for hardening steel and for which there was no known substitute.
The Rothschilds gained control of nickel resources in Canada, New Caledonia and Norway. The Rothschilds’ nickel interests also ensured that they were also major players in arms manufacturing because of the fact that the famed Krupp firm of Germany was inter-connected through its representatives with the French Rothschild concern, Le Nickel.
The copper industry was also a source of Rothschild wealth: they held shares in the Rio Tinto mines in Spain, which also produced sulphur. Likewise with lead and oil. Although one associates the name “Rockefeller” with oil, in the Caucasian region, site of the famed Baku oil reserves, the Rothschilds held control of vast oil deposits.
It should be noted that as part of the Rothschild interest in oil, this led to hostility by the Rothschilds toward the Czars of Russia who were the only European royals who consistently resisted the intrigues of the Rothschilds. And thus it is no coincidence that Rothschild interests ultimately played the pivotal role in financing the Jewish-led Bolshevik Revolution that destroyed the House of Romanov.
Although it is well known that the Rothschilds controlled the diamond industry in South Africa, they were likewise preeminent in South Africa’s lucrative gold-mining enterprises.
All gold bullion passed through the hands of three Jewish firms which controlled the price of gold: Mocatta and Goldsmid, Samuel Montagu & Company, and, of course, N. M. Rothschild and Sons.
It was President Henrik Krueger of South Africa who said, famously,“If it were possible to eject the Jew monopolists from this country, neck and crop, without incurring war with Great Britain, then the problem of everlasting peace would be solved.”
(Ironically, Krueger is memorialized on the famous South African gold coin known as the Kruegerrand.)
English writer Arnold Leese said that there was a definite moral to the events surrounding the history of the Rothschild dynasty.He said it was this:
Only a minority of men and women in any community of any race and of any rank and of any religion are strong enough to stand absolutely the influence exercised upon them by those who wield money power which becomes without much effort the real ruler of “democratic” governments. When that Money Power is wielded by Jews it follows that democracy is condemned by its very nature to rule by alien Jews of the country which adopts it.
Leese said that “The influence of money is generally exerted in a far more subtle manner than that of raw bribery. Even good men and women, if they are not also strong, find it difficult to resist favors given under circumstances which make refusal difficult. . . .” He described some of the means by which this subtle form of bribery is accomplished:
Tips as to the likely future fluctuations in stocks and shares, introductions to influential people afforded by the rich to the needy, residential accommodations supplied at a cost considerably below that which is usual for such accommodation, early news to politicians, etc.
Leese pointed out that “Under such influences people who could not be bribed by any direct means find themselves placed sooner or later in circumstances where it is no longer possible for them to refuse some sort of return of the favors, a return which perhaps the official position of the individual concerned affords them the opportunity to make.”
Georgetown University Professor Carroll Quigley, writing in Tragedy and Hope, referred to the influence of the Jewish banking houses in Europe. He noted that often times the Rothschilds and other Jewish banks collaborated with non-Jewish interests and that they “frequently cooperated together even when their groups as a whole were in competition.”
In France, during the 19th Century, Quigley noted, “a largely Jewish group” that was allied with Protestant banking interests, such as those exercised by the Mirabaud group.
(It is interesting, here, as a digression, to point out that this distinguished Georgetown University professor—who was, by former President Bill Clinton’s own public acknowledgement, an admired intellectual mentor to Clinton—would, in his premier work, actually distinguish between “Jewish” and “Protestant” banking interests. The average American has been assured that it is quite politically incorrect and absolutely beyond the pale, thoroughly unacceptable, to broach the matter of one’s religion outside the direct discussion of religion itself. That is, to specify someone’s religious persuasion, is—at its worst—bigotry. At the least, it is impolite and improper.
So despite that which has been pawned off on the average American, in an attempt to scare him away from discussing Jewish power and influence, the fact that Dr. Quigley dares to casually and candidly refer to Jewish banking interests should be instructive to those average Americans.
However, according to Dr. Quigley, the Mirabaud and Rothschild interests “together dominated the whole financial system, being richer and more powerful than all other private banks combined.”
In 1902, English liberal, J.A. Hobson, in his famous Imperialism: A Study noted the power of the Rothschild dynasty in its stark political context:
Does anyone seriously suppose that a great war could be undertaken by any European state, or a great state loan subscribed, if the House of Rothschild and its connections set their face against it? Every great political act, involving a new flow of capital, or a large fluctuation in the values of existing investments, must receive the sanction and the practical aid of this little group of financial kings. . . . Finance manipulates the patriotic forces which politicians, soldiers, philanthropists, and traders generate. . .The financial interest has those qualities of concentration and clear-sighted calculation which are needed to set Imperialism to work.
An ambitious statesman, a frontier soldier, an over-zealous missionary, a pushing trader, may suggest or even initiate a step of imperial expansion,may assist in educating patriotic public opinion to the urgent need of some fresh advance, but the final determination rests with the financial power.
The direct influence exercised by great financial houses in “high politics” is supported by the control which they exercise over the body of public opinion through the Press, which, in every “civilized” country is becoming more and more their obedient instrument. . . .
In 1911, Werner Sombart, writing in his famous, previously-cited work, The Jews and Modern Capitalism, said: “The name Rothschild meant more than the firm which bears the name.” He referred to all of the Jews who were involved in international finance and pointed out that: “For only with their help were the Rothschilds able to achieve that position of supreme power; indeed, one can justly say the sole mastery of the bond market—which we see them possessing for half a century.” He added:
It is certainly no exaggeration that one used to be able to say that . . . a finance minister, who alienated this world house and refused to cooperate with it, more or less had to shut his office up. . . [Not] only in quantitative terms but also in qualitative terms, the modern bourse [stock exchange] is Rothschildian (and thus Jewish).
There was an infamous novel entitled L’argent, written by Emil Zola. In that novel there was a character—one Gundermann—who was a Jewish banker (modeled, of course, after no less than the French Rothschild). Gundermann was described by Zola:
The banker king, the master of the bourse and of the world . . .the man who knew [all] secrets, who made at his beck and call the markets rise and fall as God makes the thunder . . . the king of gold . . . Gundermann was the true master, the all-powerful king, feared and obeyed by Paris and the world . . .One could already see that in Paris that Gundermann reigned on a more solid and more respected throne than the emperor.
Another character in Zola’s book, one Saccard—an anti-Semite—was forced to seek Gundermann’s help, and, at the same time, foresaw “the final conquest of all the peoples by the Jews.” Saccard referred to the Jews as:
That accursed race which no longer has its own country, no longer has its own prince, which lives parasitically in the home of nations, feigning to obey the law, but in reality only obeying its god of theft, of blood, of anger . . . fulfilling everywhere its mission of ferocious conquest, to lie in wait for its prey, to suck the blood out of everyone [and] grow fat on the life of others.
Sensitive folks, politically aware and politically correct, were no doubt shocked to read these remarks about Jewish people and Jewish financial interests coming from the pen of Emile Zola, for, of course, he was best known (and is remembered today) for his defense of the French Jew, Alfred Dreyfuss, accused—falsely, it is said—of treason.
And then, there was French financier Paul Eugene Bontoux, who referred to “La Banque Juive”—that is, “The Jewish Bank”—which he said was “not content with the billions which had come into its coffers for fifty years . . . not content with the monopoly which it exercises on nine-tenths, at least, of all Europe’s financial affairs.”
Bontoux knew whereof he spoke. He had been head of the Union General bank and blamed “Jewish finance and its ally, governmental Freemasonry” for the collapse of the firm. And needless to say, the Rothschilds were at the center of the Union General affair.
In his famous 1899 book, The Jews Against France, the great essayist Edouard Drumont wrote:“The God Rothschild is the real master of France. Neither emperor nor czar nor king nor sultan nor president of the republic . . . he has none of the responsibilities of power and all of the advantages; he disposes over all the governmental forces all the resources of France for his private purposes.”
Even Britain’s Labor Leader newspaper denounced the Rothschilds as “the bloodsucking screw [which] has been the cause of untold mischief and misery in Europe during the present century and has piled up its prodigious wealth chiefly through fomenting wars between states which ought never to have quarreled.Wherever there is trouble in Europe, wherever rumors of wars circulate and men’s minds are distraught with fear of change and calamity, you may be sure that a hook-nosed Rothschild is at his games, somewhere near the region of the disturbance.”
Ezra Pound, writing in Gold and Work, published in 1944, declared: “War is the highest form of sabotage, the most atrocious form of sabotage. Usurers provoke wars to impose monopolies in their own interests so they can get the world by the throat. Usurers provoke wars to create debts, so that they can extort the interest and rake in the profits resulting from changes in the values of monetary units.”
British liberal writer J.A.Hobson referred to the BoerWar as having been “engineered by a small group of international financiers, chiefly German in origin and Jewish in race.” He said they were “prepared to fasten on any . . .spot on the globe . . . taking their gains not out of the genuine fruits and industry, even the industry of others, but out of the construction, promotion, and financial manipulations of companies.”
While it has been remarked that Hobson avoided “an anti-Semitic line” of argument in advancing a socialist-oriented argument against capitalism, his critics contended that Hobson laid the groundwork for much of the thinking among many who were considered “anti-Semitic.”
In regard to anti-Semitism, Meyer Karl Rothschild himself said in 1875, in a conversation with Otto von Bismarck, “As for anti-Semitic feeling, the Jews themselves are to blame and the present agitation must be ascribed to their arrogance and vanity and unspeakable insolence.”
Upon the death of Lord Nathan Rothschild in 1915, the Western Morning News of Britain said:
The death of Lord Rothschild is an event that not even the war can overshadow. This prince of financiers and friend of King Edward probably knew more of the inner history of European wars and diplomacy in general than the greatest statesmen we have ever had. Every great stroke of policy by the nation in the last half century has been preceded by the brief but all-significant announcement: “Lord Rothschild visited the prime minister yesterday.” It was one of the signs which those behind the scenes looked when big decisions were pending.
It is one of the great myths of history that the European Rothschilds were not touched by the rise and expansion of National Socialist Germany. Rothschild property was confiscated in Austria and France and in Germany. Many Rothschilds left German-occupied Europe, obviously able to do so. Yet, many American “patriot” writers and Internet commentators continue to promote the falsehood that “Hitler never touched the Rothschilds.” Not true. But a lot of these “patriots” don’t mind ignoring the facts.
As early as 1841, Alexandre Weill, wrote an essay entitled “Rothschild and the Finances of Europe.” He said:
There is but one power in Europe and that is Rothschild. His satellites are a dozen other banking firms; his soldiers, squires, all respectable men of business and merchants, and his sword is speculation. Rothschild is a consequence that was bound to appear; and, if it had not been Rothschild, it would have been someone else. He is, however, by no means an accidental consequence, but a primary consequence, called into existence by the principles which have guided the European states since 1815. Rothschild had need of the states to become a Rothschild, while the states on their side required Rothschild. Now, however, he no longer needs the State, but the State still has want of him.
Freidrich von Scherb, a German author, in his History of the House of Rothschild, published in 1893, wrote:“The House of Rothschild has arisen from the quarrels between states, has become great and mighty from wars [and] the misfortune of states and peoples has been its fortune.”
Even the great figures of Europe were entangled with the Rothschilds—including, not incidentally, the Grand Duke Metternich whose name today is synonymous with international intrigue and power politics.
Metternich was interwoven with the Rothschild Empire, using their private courier service for his personal correspondence and putting his finances in the hands of Salomon Rothschild. In regard to this, modern-day Rothschild-supported biographer Niall Ferguson wrote: “The evidence that the Rothschilds established a network of private financial relationships with key public figures in restoration Europe is compelling.” However, Ferguson explained, as if to dismiss it:
Yet, the conspiracy theorists of this and later periods misunderstood the role of such relationships when they portrayed them as the key to Rothschild power. The image of the Rothschilds at the center of a web of “corruption”would become a current one in the years after 1830.
However, it was not, in reality, the bribes, the loans and other favors they bestowed on men like Metternich which made them the dominant force in international finance after 1815. No, it was the sheer scale—and sophistication—of their operations.
Although aristocrats and business leaders eagerly accepted invitations to Rothschild galas, known for what Niall Ferguson described as their “sheer extravagance,” it could not be said that the Rothschild brothers were liked. For example, Nathan Rothschild was, he said, “found by many to be coarse to the point of downright rudeness in manner.”
The fact that the Rothschilds were so powerful caused many to comment on their brute force. Ludwig Borne said, “Rothschild is the high priest of fear, the [god] on whose altar liberty, patriotism, and honor and all civic virtues are sacrificed.” A Jewish convert to Christianity, Borne wrote:
Would it not be a good thing for the world if the crowns were placed on [the Rothschilds’] heads, instead of lying at their feet as they do now? . . . Although the Rothschilds do not yet occupy thrones, they are, at all events, asked their advice as to the choice of the ruler when the throne falls vacant.
Would it not be a great blessing for the world if all the kings were dismissed and the Rothschild family put on their thrones? Think of the advantages. The new dynasty would never contract a loan, as it would know better than anybody how dear such things are, and on this account alone the burden on their subjects would be alleviated by several millions a year.
Heinrich Heine, the poet and journalist—also a Jewish convert to Christianity—maintained a relationship with the Rothschild family. He said what he called “the Rothschild system” was revolutionary in and of itself.
The system, he said, possessed “the moral force or power which religion has lost, it can act as a surrogate for religion—indeed, it is a new religion—and when the old religion finally goes under it will provide substitutes for its practical blessings. “Strangely enough,” Heine added,“it is once again the Jews who invented this new religion . . . .”
Heine said: “No one does more to further the revolution than the Rothschilds themselves . . . And, though it may sound even more strange, these Rothschilds, the bankers of kings, these princely pursestring-holders, whose existence might be placed in the gravest danger by the collapse of the European state system, nevertheless carry in their minds the consciousness of their revolutionary mission.”
What of this revolutionary mission? Heine described Rothschild as “one of the greatest revolutionaries”—to have founded modern democracy. Along with Robespierre and Richelieu, Heine said that Rothschild was among “terroristic names” that signified “the gradual annihilation of the old aristocracy.” They were, he said,“Europe’s three most fearful levellers.” Heine wrote:
Richelieu destroyed the sovereignty of the feudal nobility and subjected it to that royal despotism that either relegated it to court service or let it rot in bumpkin-like inactivity in the provinces.
Robespierre decapitated this subjugated and idle nobility but the land remained and its new master, the new landowner, became another aristocrat just like his predecessor whose pretensions he continued under another name.
Then came Rothschild [who] destroyed the predominance of land, by raising the system of state bonds to supreme power, thereby mobilizing property and income and at the same time endowing money with the previous privileges of the land.
Here thereby [came] a new aristocracy, it is true, but this, resting as it does on the most unreliable of elements, on money, can never play as enduringly regressive a role as the former aristocracy which was rooted in the land, in the earth itself.
For money is more fluid than water, more elusive than the air, and one can gladly forgive the impertinences of the new nobility in consideration of its ephemerality. In the twinkling of an eye, it will dissolve and evaporate.
Heine concluded—all too correctly: “Money is the God of our Time, and Rothschild is his Prophet.”
Prince Albert and Queen Victoria—like Metternich before them—relied on the Rothschilds’ private courier service as their own postal service. Niall Ferguson said that this meant that the Rothschilds were able to provide a “unique” news service to the European elite. Major political events and confidential information could be relayed well ahead of information passing through official channels.
What this meant, also, although Ferguson didn’t say it, was that the Rothschilds were thus privy to all “secret” communications from the British royals and any other European power brokers who permitted the Rothschilds to be the official—although officially unofficial—channels through which they communicated.
Nathan Rothschild’s famous early news about the outcome of the Battle of Waterloo (the defeat of Napoleon) was just one example of the proficiency of their private courier service—and that is the stuff of legend.All of this permitted the Rothschilds to be well versed in world affairs.
James Rothschild said in 1834,“As far as I’m concerned, Russia can go to the Devil and we can do quite happily without them.” He told his brother, “Don’t give [the Russian Czar] another opportunity to embarrass you.” The Rothschilds apparently felt that they were not being accorded the respect due “the bankers of kings.”
“Do you ever think,” James asked his brother,“that we will ever be on friendly terms with Russia?” In friendly Rothschild biographer Niall Ferguson’s assessment: “He evidently felt not.”
In regard to the Rothschild contretemps with Russia under the Czar, Ferguson commented that “it [is] hard to find a better illustration of the limits of Rothschild financial power.” Thus, although Ferguson doesn’t say this, it should be no surprise, of course, that the Rothschilds and their agents played such a major part in destroying the House of Romanov in Russia.
Although, as we’ve noted, it is certainly politically incorrect to quote Adolf Hitler, it is nonetheless appropriate to do so, particularly when examining the fact that the nations of Germany and Russia, which were hurled against one another in two world wars, were, in fact, two nations in which Jewish influence reigned supreme (at least during the period between those two world wars).
In a speech on April 13, 1923 Hitler said that Jewry “hated above all others the two states, Germany and Russia, that until 1914 foiled the realization of its goal: world domination.” In these two countries, said Hitler, the Jews were denied what he asserted had already fallen to Jewish hands in the Western democracies:
They were not yet the sole rulers in intellectual and economic life. Neither were the parliaments yet the exclusive instruments of Jewish capital and will. The German man and the genuine Russian had maintained a certain distance from the Jew. [Emphasis in the original]
“There still lived in both people the healthy instinct of scorn for the Jews. And it was still possible that in these monarchies there could arise once again a Frederick the Great or a William I, who might send democracy and parliamentary chicanery to the devil.
Thus, the Jews became revolutionaries! The republic was supposed to lead them to enrichment and power.They disguised this objective [with this rhetoric]: “Down with the monarchies! Empowerment of “the sovereign people”!
Hitler added: “Thus Germany and Russia had to be brought down in order that the old prophecy be fulfilled. Thus the whole world was turned upside down. Thus the lies and propaganda were brutally employed against the state with the last remaining idealists—Germany! [Emphasis in the original] And thus Judah won the world war [i.e.World War I]!
“Or will you maintain,” he asked,“that the French, English or American ‘people’ won the war? All of us,” he concluded, “victors and vanquished, are the defeated. One stands over all others: the world stock market, which has become lord of the nations,” he said. [Emphasis in the original]
Thomas Raikes, an English diarist of note, observed that the Rothschilds had become what he called “the metallic sovereigns of Europe” and that: “They have obtained the control over the European exchanges which no party before could accomplish and they now seem to hold the strings of the public purse. No Sovereign without their assistance now could raise a loan.”
Friendly Rothschild biographer Niall Ferguson said that if there was indeed a single “secret” of Rothschild success, it was the system of cooperation between the five brothers’ houses of finance, when taken together, the largest bank in the world, while still they spread their influence, individually, through five major financial centers spread across Europe.This multinational system was governed by contractual agreements that were periodically revised and which, according to Ferguson, was effectively “the constitution of a financial federation.”
According to Ferguson,“The rate of growth and size of their capital in the period before 1850 were unprecedented in banking history.” In 1818, the grand total of combined Rothschild capital (among the five houses) was 500,000 pounds. By 1828, it was 4,330,333 pounds—14 times the size of their nearest longtime close competitor, Barings. Ferguson said that “the sheer scale of the Rothschild’s resources can hardly be over emphasized.”
So while Ferguson, a financial writer, is comfortable throwing around such gigantic figures,the actual numbers today—so many years later—are so staggering they would craze the mind of the average person to even begin to consider the depth and breadth of the Rothschilds’ accumulated wealth.
In that period, it appears that James Rothschild was apparently the richest man in France, whereas Amschel, Salomon and Karl were ahead of their continental rivals; thus, together—between the brothers—according to Ferguson,“the Rothschilds were the richest family in the world.”
And this was before 1840. Imagine the accumulation of interest that has piled upon interest since that time.
Ferguson noted that,“by the mid-1830s each of the five Rothschild houses had secured itself as a preeminent force in the public finances of its respective base country.”
Although the Rothschilds were identified, in a national sense, with each of the countries in which they held sway, Ferguson noted, “such national identifications did not greatly matter if peace prevailed in Europe.” However, “when the interests of the great powers clashed, as they periodically did, it was less and less easy for the Rothschilds to remain neutral.”
He added, though, that “there were few regions of the world in which the European powers had no interests, and no regions in which their interests coincided perfectly.” In four areas—Iberia, America, the Low Countries, and the Near East—the Rothschilds faced the challenge of coming up with policies that were in the collective interest of the five houses of the five brothers and their respective heirs, even when “the national interests of their local governments” were in conflict, noted Ferguson.
So the Rothschilds were indeed “international”—with no loyalty to any nation but Judah of whom they were the princes.
The aforementioned Niall Ferguson, has candidly written of how “international tension” could be “beneficial to the Rothschilds.” He noted that:
The Rothschilds had consistently used their financial power to promote peace throughout the 1830s, but when the great powers had been completely restrained in their foreign policies . . . the stream of new loan business had begun to dry up.
In contrast, when they embarked on policies of re-armament, as they did from 1840 onwards, this was not necessarily detrimental to Rothschild interests.
The Rothschilds entered into a partnership with the Bank of the United States in roughly 1837. As a consequence they found themselves, according to Ferguson, on the receiving end of large quantities of American state bonds, from not only New York but also newer states such as Indiana, Alabama, Missouri and Michigan, as well as shares in a number of new banks and even a canal company. And in a forthcoming chapter we will explore the little-known role of the Rothschild family in American affairs in much further detail. We will confirm, beyond any question, that the claim that the Rothschilds played very little—if any role—in the United States is simply not true. In fact, they—and their satellites—rule America today. It is the primary enterprise in the drive for a New World Order.
So today do the Rothschilds have a modern equivalent?
Their friendly biographer Ferguson says “no.”
Ferguson proclaims that “not even the Saudi royal family has a comparable share of the world’s resources in its possession today.Nor can even the richest businessmen in the world claim without qualification to be as rich in relative terms as Nathan Rothschild was when he died at the height of his fortune.” Not even Bill Gates, apparently, is as wealthy as Rothschild.
Georgetown University’s Professor Carroll Quigley referred to the names of the banking families: Baring, Lazard, Erlanger,Warburg, Schroeder, Seligman, the Speyers, Mirabaud, Mallet, Fould, and, in his turn of phrase, “above all” the Rothschilds and the Morgans. Quigley wrote:
Even after these banking families became fully involved in domestic industry, by the emergence of financial capitalism, they remained different from ordinary bankers in distinctive ways.
1) They were cosmopolitan and international;
2) They were close to governments and were particularly concerned with questions of government debts, including foreign government debts, even in areas which seemed at first glance, poor risks, like Egypt, Persia, Ottoman Turkey, Imperial China, and Latin America;
3) Their interests were almost exclusively in bonds and very rarely in goods, since they admired liquidity, and regarded commitments in commodities or even in real estate as the first step toward bankruptcy;
4) They were, accordingly, fanatical devotees of deflation (which they called “sound money” from its close associations with high interest rates and high value of money) and of the gold standard, which in their eyes symbolized and ensured these values;
5) They were almost equally devoted to secrecy and the secret use of financial influence in political life.
These bankers came to be called “international bankers,” and were more particularly known as “merchant bankers” in England, “private bankers” in France, and “investment bankers” in the U.S.
In all countries they carried on various kinds of banking and exchange activities, but everywhere they were sharply distinguishable from other, more obvious, kinds of banks such as savings banks or commercial banks.
“The influence of financial capitalism and of the international bankers who created it,” Quigley said,“was exercised both on business and on governments, but could have done neither if it had not been able to persuade both these to accept two axioms of its own ideology.” Of these two axioms of the ideology of the International Money Power, Quigley wrote:
Both of these were based on the assumption that politicians were too weak and too subject to temporary popular pressures to be trusted with control of the money system; accordingly the sanctity of all values and the soundness of money must be protected in two ways: by basing the value of money on gold and by allowing bankers to control the supply of money. To do this, it was necessary to conceal or even to mislead, both governments and people, about the nature of money and its methods of operation.
In a little-known work, A World Problem, first published in Poland and then in the United States in English in 1920, Stephanie Laudyn referred to International Jewish Finance as “a nation of traders and speculators” who held “a deep and exalated faith in their royal mission, which is to make them lords over all the nations.”
The profound force of Laudyn’s elegant writing is so pertinent it must be memorialized here for the historical record, particularly since in the 88 years that have passed since Laudyn first put these thoughts in print, the power of the Rothschild Empire has expanded beyond comprehension. Laudyn declared:
The gold they garner so greedily is but a palpable means to the attainment of their fantastic aspirations. Concealed under its cover is the burning desire to subject the world and to wrest the moral dominion over humanity. They follow it out logically and are conscious of every step they take.
Have they not made an enormous headway in this regard? Have they not reached a high round of the huge ladder which is to lead them to the aggression they have dreamt of in the clouded regions of their historic soul? Have they not taken control of the world’s press today? Do they not infuse their spirit into the thought and the moral atmosphere of the time? . . .
This ancient race, which had given birth to priests and prophets and had ever been imbued with a sad mysticism and high aspirations, is not ignorant of the vanities of commercial pursuits—gold and money. Their ambitions reach higher, indefinitely higher.
In ancient times, Jews themselves held in scorn the Phoenicians—the first traders in the world—because they gave themselves up to commerce, and—today? Have not the blackest annals been associated with Jewish traders? Does not their golden calf stand in threatening posture, stretching forth his black wings of shame, the one, usury, the other—white slavery?
Terrible indeed! Will there be enough clear water in the Euphrates to wash out the blood stains from their pitiless and greedcrazy hands? Can the rust be taken off their soul by some regenerating strength. . . .
They never tilled the soil they occupied, nor shed their blood in its defense.The spiritual, cultural, and intellectual progress of the people among which they lived was no part of their care and labor. On the contrary, they only bartered and traded, enhancing even mankind’s highest ideals for gold, in order to increase capital and upbuild the autocracy of the Jews. Although scattered over the entire world, they formed, nevertheless, a united body of middlemen who manipulated the products of other nations. . . .
Through long centuries a new worldly Nameless power has gradually been arising, and its roots are striking into every crevice of human effort and today, it rules the enterprise of every nation.
However mysterious, this power is real, merciless in its action and detrimental to the welfare and the ideals of any people in whose midst it develops. Herder, in his work on The Ideals of the History of Mankind, brands the Jews as a “nation of parasites and middlemen,” depraving the world by their usury.
Even Kant condemned their practices, and Bismarck spoke with horror of the rural population’s misery, which was exploited most unmercifully by the Jews. Voltaire, Goethe, Schiller all branded them as destroyers. Martin Luther, Schopenhaur and Napoleon warned the people against them.
While the altars of force and abuse have fallen and the gods of tyranny and slavery are lying in the dust, Israel has arisen, and with an added power, dominates the affairs of the world. It leads a servile army of anarchism, and its influence reaches even the leaders of the world’s greatest democracies.
The upper classes in the nations—the diplomats, the learned, the writers, the legislators, the people of thought and reflection—protect the Jews and submit to the hypnotism of the Jewish spirit.
But the plain people—the very life and brawn of the nation—the masses that cannot argue, but feel upon their backs the burdensome iniquities [and] arise more and more in despondent revolt.They undertake their own retribution . . . .
That the intrigues of the Rothschild Empire have contributed immensely to the rising global phenomenon of anti-Semitism is undoubted. Famed French writer Edouard Drumont, author of La France Juive, one of the foremost 19th Century analyses of Jewish financial power, said satirically that he was going to write a book entitled The Victory of the Jews, recalling an earlier work by another writer on the French Revolution entitled The Victory of the Jacobins. Drumont said:
We are dealing here with nothing less than a conquest, by a tiny but cohesive minority. . . .This is the characteristic of this conquest: a whole people is working for another, a people who appropriates, by a vast system of financial exploitation, the benefits of others’ labor.The immense Jewish fortunes, the castles, the mansions, are not the fruit of real labor, or any production. They are the tribute taken by a dominant race from an enslaved one.
It is certain that the Rothschild family, which in its French branch alone is worth three billion francs, did not have this money when they came to France. This family has made no great inventions, discovered no mines, plowed no earth.
They have simply taken three billion from the French without giving anything in return.
Some of their businesses,whose stocks are worthless today, and which can only have been launched by fraud, are pure and simple swindles. This enormous embezzlement of the money accumulated by the workers is accomplished without anyone’s lifting a finger to stop it. . . .
Today, thanks to the Jews, money, which the Christian world in the past attached little importance to, has now become all-powerful.
The power of capital,concentrated in the hand of a few, governs the economic lives of whole populations, enslaves the workers, and feeds upon evil gains acquired without work….
Now, since almost all the newspapers and all the organs of publicity in France belong to Jews, either directly or indirectly, it is not surprising that they carefully hid from us the significance and extent of the immense antisemitic movement which is beginning to rise up all over.
In any case it has seemed useful to me to describe the successive phases of the Jewish conquest and to show how, bit by bit, because of the Jews, the old France is falling apart, how this highprincipled happy and loving people has become hate-filled, goldmad and is gradually being starved to death. Everyone has the premonition that the end is near. . . .
What no one is talking about is the part played by the Jewish element in the death agony of this generous nation, the role in the destruction of France of the introduction of this foreign body into an organism which up to now was in perfect health.
But France was not the only nation falling into the hands of the Rothschild Dynasty. The tentacles of these “Kings of Kings” reached worldwide. And the key to understanding the growth of Rothschild power is to recognize the particular role of the Rothschild family in nurturing the British Empire. In fact, Rothschild dominance in Britain—the British royal family notwithstanding—is something which has been long recognized.
As recently as June 2008, Iranian television broadcast a documentary series entitled Armageddon Secret featuring Iranian scholars who asserted that the Jews were striving for global rule by destroying all other nations on the planet. An Iranian university professor in the documentary, Ali-Reza Karimi, charged that Israel’s goal is to “take over the world and hold its central position” and that “the Jews aspire to rule the world. They encourage destruction and ruin, and we can witness such actions around us.”
Karimi asserted the Jews not only believe in the promise to rule from the Nile to the Euphrates, but also that “God gave them the entire world.” The documentary cited the Rothschild family directing what was described as a “secret political cult” which “over hundreds of years distributed a secret network throughout the world.”
The documentary noted that the Rothschild family “implanted in the minds of the Jewish wealthy the idea that Palestine is the Promised Land,” noting that “The British government, controlled by the Zionist empire headed by the Rothschild family,was committed to realize the Zionist goal.”
Should anyone dismiss this as a “conspiracy theory by Muslim fanatics,” note that in 1896 American populist leader Mary Ellen Lease said frankly: « Redemption money and interest-bearing bonds are the curse of civilization. We are paying tribute to the Rothschilds of England, who are but the agentof the Jews. » She was not the only voice making such charges.
Another influential American populist,William “Coin” Harvey wrote a then-popular work, A Tale of Two Nations, the story of a wealthy London banker, Baron Rothe—a thinly veiled character based on Rothschild—who engineered a plot to grab control of the American economic system.
In our forthcoming chapter we will examine the historic role of Jewish finance and the rise of the Rothschild Empire as the primary force in guiding the fortunes of what is called the “British” Empire, but which some wags refer to as the “Yiddish” Empire.Whatever the case, the record shows that a “Rothschild” empire is what Britain truly is.
Right, Winston Churchill, long in the pay of Jewish interests: a Rothschild gunman.
“John Bull”—symbol of Britain—is shown (correctly) on the leash of Jewish plutocrats.
The “City of London”
The Jewel of Rothschild’s Imperial Crown
1.) The “OneWorld” Ideology;
2) The Pan-Slavic Ideology;
3) “Asia for the Asiatics”;
4) Pan-Germanism; and
5) Pan-American Isolationism.
Knuth’s concept of Pan-Americanism—an ideology he said was “America for the Americans”—was expressed in the famed Monroe Doctrine.This was, he pointed out correctly, the established foreign policy of the United States from 1823 to its abandonment by the adherence by the United States to the ideology of world rule by international finance. He said that the United States had indeed abandoned its own traditions to align its policy with that secret ideology of international finance, the purpose of which, ultimately, was to crush the Pan-Slavic Ideology (of Russia), of “Asia for the Asiatics” (the Japanese ideology) and, of course, Pan-Germanism.
And, in fact, in World War I we saw the United States move against Germany and in World War II we saw the war against Germany again (and this time Japan). Yet, despite the previous temporary alliance by the United States with Russia in World War II, we saw the emergence of the Cold War.
Now, in our modern day,we see a new Russia—under Vladimir Putin—which moved to break the chains of international Jewish oligarchs, now facing the enmity of that secret ideology of international finance which is firmly in control of the United States. Yet, at the same time, as Knuth pointed out, there has been this interlocking power between the British Empire—the so-called “Empire of ‘The City’” with the United States now, however, many years after Knuth wrote, being a major base of operations (at least militarily, in any case) of the secret ideology of international finance.
In fact, when Knuth was writing—even before the end of World War II—he predicted a conflict between the secret ideology of international finance and the ideology of Russia.He pointed out that this impending possible duel to the death would come as a consequence of those whom he referred to as “such subjugated peoples as [each force] could wheedle or compel to joinits forces.” Such a duel, he said, seemed inevitable in view of the deep animosities and explosive economic pressures that were already existing at the time he was writing.
Knuth pointed out that the American partners of the international money forces surrounding “The City of London” who had entered into the “new secret ideology” were renouncing and abandoning the long-standing established isolationism of “America for the Americans.”
At the same time, of course, there were those in the United States who recognized the dangers of this new ideology. The Rev. Henry Van Dyke—a well-known name in his era—said, so eloquently and so appropriately (particularly in our modern era of American ventures in “globalism”):
If Americans do not thirst for garrison duty in the tropics, they must be bought or compelled to serve. To wilfully increase our need of military force by an immense and unnecessary extension of our frontier of danger is to bind a heavy burden and lay it on the unconscious backs of future generations of toiling men.If we go in among them,we must fight when they blow the trumpet.
We should say, up front, that the term “The City of London” does not refer to the geographic city of London, the capital of England. Rather, as the better informed know, the term “The City of London” refers to a specific section of the British capital city (that is, a particular part of town) wherein the major national and international banking houses are located.
The “City” was—and today still is—an area of some 677 acres which, although part of metropolitan London, is not even under the jurisdiction of the official police department of the actual geographic city of London. Instead, it had its own private police force of some 2,000 men. Here, of course, is the headquarters of the Bank of England which, like the Federal Reserve System in the United States, is, despite its name, a privately-owned institution. In England, the Bank of England is not even subject to regulation by the British parliament (!) and has always been therefore, for all intents and purposes, a sovereign world power on its own.
Within “The City” are also located the stock exchange and other institutions of global scope—all, of course, under the domination, if not the direct control, of the Rothschild Empire. And this “City” is, in fact, the public face of the heart of the Rothschild Dynasty, if not worldwide, at least certainly inasmuch as it is the center of what we commonly referred to as “The British Empire,” for the truth is that the “British” Empire was no more than the geographic base of the International Money Power: the Rothschild Empire.
The Money Power—the “Sixth Great Power of Europe” as they once called it—was indeed the power of the Rothschild family or, as the Rothschild’s assembly of power was known: “The Fortune.”
The public face of “The Fortune” was “The City” and Knuth said that it was probably “the most arbitrary and most absolute form of government in the world.” He pointed out that so many people living under the control of the British Empire—some 80% of whom were “colored people”—were “the voiceless subjects” of the international financial oligarchy of “The City.”
And, pointedly, he noted, “The City” used the allegory of the British “Crown”—the royal family—as its symbol of power, but, in fact, the financial oligarchy had then—as it still does today—its headquarters in the ancient financial center of London: that is, “The City.”
American industrialist Andrew Carnegie (born in Scotland) once pointed out in reflecting upon the power of“The City”(with which his own operations were connected) that, as a consequence of its power, “six or seven men can plunge the nation into war” or “commit it to entangling alliances without consulting parliament at all.”
Carnegie said that this was “the most pernicious palpable effect flowing from the monarchical theory” since these power brokers carried out these policies “in the king’s name,” but, he said, although the king was still a real monarch,“in reality [he was] only a convenient puppet to be used by the cabinet to suit their own ends.”
The amazing words of Andrew Carnegie were echoed years later, in some respects, by the German information agency, World-Service, which pointed out that the “English” government hardly represented the interests of the average Englishman:
The English government is only the British facade for the Jew in the background. The English statesmen are the well-paid dummies of the Jewish-English finance-capitalism.
The British Empire is the highest capitalistic concern which exists. It is an enormous corporation, whose principal shareholders are Jews.The aim of this company is the exploitation of the people who live within the British Empire and in the states under British hegemony, and the ever-increasing accumulation of untold wealth, which only benefits, and is enjoyed by, the ruling Jewish-English plutocratic clique.
In England we therefore find on the one hand excessive riches and on the other hand dire poverty and destitution of millions of the English people. The Jewish-English capitalism, the Jewish-English plutocracy is not satisfied with merely exploiting the inhabitants of the colonies in the most shameless way; in its insatiable greed it in no way shows a sense of responsibility towards its own nation.Because the British government is only the deputy of Jewish-English finance-capital, therefore British interests are the interests of the English ruling classes to-day in England are identical; but neither of them in any way is identical with the interest of the English nation.On the contrary: their interest is directly against those of the English nation.
Great Britain, the richest country in the world, presents a picture of the greatest and most powerful poverty in the midst of enormous wealth. A state—whose government tests every matter from the standpoint of “Is it advantageous for finance, or not?”—has therefore brought a sixth of its population so low that they live in hovels unfit for human habitation.
[In] England,13 million people, that means a quarter of the total population, suffer from malnutrition. Before the outbreak of the present war England had 2 million unemployed. At present there are still one million unemployed.
Tens of thousands of people yearly migrate from the country to the towns, there to eke out a meager proletarian life or go under. Yearly thousands of acres of farmland are withdrawn from cultivation. Yearly increasing numbers of cotton mills close down and throw their workers on the streets.
All this happens because it is in the interest of finance, for the enormous profits of the Jewish-English plutocratic clique are only to a limited degree the results of the productive powers of the English worker.
The profits result principally from the sweat of the poorly paid natives of the Far East; they result from the continual stream of imported Argentine meat and foreign foodstuffs, while every English farmer must battle to save his farm from bankruptcy. While British workers from the shoe and leather factories are walking the streets of Northampton and Leicester in search of employment, millions of pairs of shoes are being imported from overseas.
While in Yorkshire and Lancaster the factories are being closed down, millions of yards of cotton goods and material are being imported from the Far East and the enormous shortage of material for export is made up by the creation of similar industries in the colonies and by the rigorous exploitation of natives in the Far East, to the detriment of the mother-industry and thereby to the detriment of the English nation, which becomes more and more improvised and is more and more thrown into unemployment.
While the farmer is faced with absolute ruin, millions of tons of foreign meat, vegetables,and fruit are thrown on the English market and all this only because the Jewish-English plutocratic clique receives bigger profits. In this way international “robber”economics is carried out at the expense of the English nation.
This is the curse of plutocracy. In this Jewish-English plutocratic swamp all manner of corruption naturally flourishes.
It was the late Cecil Rhodes who dreamed of a planet ruled by Britain, with the former American colonies reunited as an integral part of that empire: in many respects, quite parallel to the concept of a Jewish Utopia.
While Rhodes talked of Anglo-Saxon domination of the globe, he was referring to the power elite of the British Empire but we do know well now that the British Empire was hardly in the hands of the Anglo-Saxon people of England. Rather, it was held firmly in the grip of the Rothschild Empire.
And Cecil Rhodes himself was, in reality, only a very highly influential and well-paid asset and agent of the Rothschild interests.
While Rhodes is recalled today as the eminence grise of the British imperial dream, British historian Niall Ferguson’s book The House of Rothschild: The World’s Banker 1849-1999 provides the reader with the specific data that demonstrates, beyond any question, that, as Ferguson put it, the Rothschilds had “a substantial financial hold over Rhodes,” who was indubitably a creature of their making.
The late Dr. Carroll Quigley of Georgetown University, in his mammoth Tragedy & Hope, and more directly, in his subsequent work, The Anglo-American Establishment, focused on Rhodes’ ties to Britain’s non-Jewish elite, but he ignored the Rothshild dynasty’s dominance over Rhodes.
Ferguson’s book delineates the Rothschild predominance in the world of Cecil Rhodes and that elite, perhaps suggesting that the use of the term “Anglo” is not strictly accurate from an ethnic sense of the word, not only because the Rothschilds were Jewish by faith and culture, but also because their influence was international in scope.
In regard to the “British” elite, it should be noted again, at this juncture, that—in fact—many of the ancient aristocratic families of Britain had increasingly begun to mix with members of the Jewish banking elite. As English writer Hillaire Belloc noted:
Marriages began to take place, wholesale, between what had once been the aristocratic territorial families of this country and the Jewish commercial fortunes. After two generations of this, with the opening of the twentieth century those of the great territorial English families in which there was no Jewish blood were the exception. In nearly all of them was the strain more or less marked, in some of them so strong that though the name was still an English name and the traditions those of a purely English lineage of the long past, the physique and character had become wholly Jewish and the members of the family were taken for Jews whenever they traveled to countries where the gentry had not yet [intermarried with Jews].
But matters went much deeper than familial relationships.
Jewish—and, of course, most especially Rothschild Empire influence—was well-entrenched even in the great global corporate institutions that were synonymous with the “British” Empire, quite notably even the famed British East India Company.
American author L. B.Woolfolk, in his classic (but today little-known) work, The Great Red Dragon, published in 1890, described the fall of the East India Company into the hands of International Jewish Finance:
In 1764, the British East India Company was the grandest and richest corporation in the world.
It was the only corporation which ruled a territorial empire. It was enriched by traffic, by the extension of its trade through the conquest of the trading stations of its Continental rivals and by the wholesale plunder of India.
It had been from the first the best investment of capital to be found in the British Islands. Its stock was eagerly taken by all who had the means.
The mercantile class took as much stock as they could afford; but, as we know, merchants usually have little more capital than they need for their regular business.
The British Landed Aristocracy had large incomes from their estates; and being under a necessity of seeking the best investments, in order to portion their younger children, they made large investments in the East India Company.
But the great Capitalists of that age were the Jews. They were the money holders.
They subscribed largely to the stock;and as, in each generation, the stock of the Aristocracy was sold to portion younger children, the Jews—always economical, always full of money, and always in search of the best investments— bought the stock thrown upon the market.
Thus it came to pass that the greater part of the stock of the East India Company, and of the other companies afterwards organized out of the dividends of that great company, fell into the hands of the Jews. The Jews became the great Money Kings of the world.
In any case, as E.C. Knuth pointed out, this grand dream of what we now refer to as the NewWorld Order had one problem: its advocates failed to see that there were going to be gigantic wars of the future stemming from what he called“the opposition of powerful races who would decline to recognize a fantastic doctrine of the racial superiority of the Anglo-Saxon [people] and of its preordained destiny to rule all the races of the earth.”
In fact, this doctrine was an integral part of the “secret ideology of international finance.” But, if truth be told, this secret ideology—masked in some ways by Rhodes’s dream of Anglo-Saxon rule—was, of course, the age-old Talmudic dream of a global imperium.
In this instance, the agenda of achieving The Jewish Utopia was hiding behind the image of Anglo-Saxon England which, by the time of the 20th Century, was an integral (perhaps the central) mechanism by which the Rothschild Empire (as the royal house of the ruling Jewish elite) was working through the City of London to establish its New World Order. Of these operations, the late Vincent Cartwright Vickers—a former governor of the Bank of England and a major arms manufacturer in whose company the Rothschilds held a major share—wrote:
Financiers took upon themselves perhaps not the responsibility but certainly the power of controlling the markets of the world and therefore the numerous relationships between one nation and another involving international friendships or mistrusts.
Loans to foreign countries are organized and arranged by The City of London with no thought whatsoever of [those] nations’ welfare but solely in order to increase indebtedness upon which The City thrives and grows rich.
This national—and mainly international—dictatorship of money which plays off one country against another and which, through ownership of a large portion of the press, converts the advertisement of its own private opinion into a semblance of general public opinion, cannot for much longer be permitted to render democratic government a mere nickname.
Today we see through a glass darkly, for there is so much which “it would not be in the public interest to divulge.”
E. C. Knuth pointed out that the power of the financial oligarchy lay in what he called its “ageless and self-perpetuating nature, its long-range planning and prescience, its facility to outwait and break the patience of its opponents, those who,” as Knuth put it, “have attempted to curb this monstrosity,” that is, those populist and nationalist politicians who saw the dangers of the International Money Power.
Those critics of this powerful force, Knuth noted, had all been defeated because they had been obliged by those who supported their efforts “to show action and results in too short a span of years.”
Those real patriots who opposed the International Money Power had been “outwitted and out-waited, deluged with irritants and difficulties, eventually obliged to temporize and retreat.”
Those in the United States and Britain who dared to take on international finance, said Knuth, often came to what he called “a disgraceful end.”
Quite in contrast, those who had served well the forces of big money had profited immensely.
The Rothschild-controlled Bank of England, Knuth reminds us, was, in effect, a sovereign world power not subject to regulation or control, in the slightest degree, by the British parliament.
This institution—in the hands of the Rothschild Empire—acted, according to Knuth, as “the great balance wheel of the credit of the world, able to expand or contract credit at will,” subject only to the orders of “The City”—in short, the Rothschild dynasty.
Knuth was not the first writer to recognize the Rothschild grip on Britain. Of the special relationship which existed between the International Money Power of the Rothschild dynasty and the British Empire, Major Osman Bey, writing in 1878 in The Conquest of the World by the Jews, (cited earlier) described it as a consequence of mutual concessions:
A sort of friendly understanding has been arrived at on the basis of common interest between these two commercial powers, by virtue of which the British Empire lends its political influence and material assistance to Judaism while the latter places its financial influence at the disposal of England and supports British commerce. The English and the Jews both derive advantage from this tacit understanding, the former since it enables them to make use of the immense Jewish capital in disposing of their articles of commerce by means of Jewish middle men.
The American critic of Jewish finance, Ezra Pound, writing in Gold and Work, published in 1944, put it succinctly: “After the assassination of President Lincoln, no serious measures against the usurocracy were attempted until the formation of the Berlin-Rome Axis.”
(In the following chapter we will examine Lincoln’s conflict with the Rothschild Empire as it made its advances on American soil.)
It is thus no accident that in 1940, the German government, as part of itsWorld-Service publicity division, candidly put forth the proposition, in no uncertain terms, that it was precisely because of the Jewish domination of Britain, through the plutocratic forces of the Rothschild Empire, that the English people were hurled into war against National Socialist Germany, which, as Ezra Pound said, had attempted “serious measures” against the International Money Power.World-Service wrote:
In the plutocratic system of government in England we find the real reason for England having today declared war against National-Socialist, anti-Jewish Germany.
The English government did not declare war against Germany in the interest of the English people, nor to eventually protect British subjects from possible German acts of aggression, but she declared war solely in the interest of the Jews who control England and in the interest of Jewish-English finance-capital which was looking for the first opportunity to break lose, both of which are the acknowledged enemies of every form of national Socialism.
England cannot wage any war in the interest of the English nation, for the English government cannot be considered the representative of its own people, nor does it possess the confidence of the nation.
On the contrary, it merely fulfills the task of protecting the immense wealth, which is in the hands of the small circle: the Jewish-English ruling class; it further guarantees the small Jewish-English clique shall increase its enormous capital unhindered.
To-day the Jews, as well as the English press, wish to make us believe, that the Jewish-English alliance only came into being during the present war, and that it finds its natural cause in the Jewish persecution in Germany and that, the anti-Jewish laws of the Third Reich, forcibly drove the Jews to side with England in this war. This, as we have seen, is not true.
The Jewish-English alliance originated solely and simply through the inseparable bond between Jewish Imperialism and British Imperialism, and in the fact that Jewish finance-capital is identical with British finance-capital.
It has its origin solely and simply in the blood-ties between the Jews and the English nobility and the fact that the Jews succeeded in turning England into a plutocratic state.
The Jews did not come into the war as allies of England because Germany had persecuted them, but England declared war against Germany because the English government is the blind obedient servant of Jewish commands,exactly as England is the sworn enemy of all anti-Jewish states and, according to its plutocratic structure, of necessity must be.
The English government declared war against Germany because it is a Jew-controlled government and as such represents the Sword of Judah against anti-Judaism and against any form of National Socialism.
The English government declared war against Germany because Englishmen are not the rulers of England, but because Jewish finance-capital rules and because England is a plutocratic state.
Although there have been many books written on the topic of international finance generally over the years, there has been little public understanding or recognition of the bigger picture.
However, as E. C. Knuth noted, going through those many volumes that have touched on these subjects, there are to be found what he called “amazing nuggets of information” coming to light which, put together,“unfold the stunning history and the legal structure of a sovereign world state.” This world state, of course, is governed by “The City” of London which, Knuth said,“operates as a super government of the world and no incident occurs in any part of the world without its participation in some form.”
“The grand plan of this ‘one world’ order decrees that it is necessary,” wrote Knuth, “to limit the political and territorial expansion of Russia promptly and peremptorily.”
And that, of course, is what Knuth was writing in the closing days of WorldWar II, while the United States and Britain were still allied with Russia, but it was soon after the war that the so-called ColdWar emerged and now, in the opening years of the 21st Century a “Second ColdWar”—a “New Cold War”—is being constructed against Russia in its new incarnation as a nationalist state which has challenged the international Jewish money interests.
Today, the great colossus known as Russia—free of the grip of Communism and Capitalism, two heads of the same dragon—stands in the way of the New World Order.
Even as this is written, in 2009,we see agitation for confrontation with Russia arising in the Rothschild-connected spheres of influence in the West, particularly in the United States, with the Zionist “neo-conservatives” effectively banging the drum for war against Russia. (This author’s works, The Golem and The Judas Goats, explore this phenomenon in some detail.)
Knuth asked, sarcastically, whether it was in the public interest to expose the grand plan of what he called the “one world camarilla” (that is, a conspiratorial group) when they were so close to achieving their goal of establishing a global imperium. How many more lives would have to be sacrificed, he asked, for the creation of “the great dream . . . of a world ruled by a benevolent despotic intelligentsia and so to create ‘peace for all eternity.’”?
Knuth reflected on the control of the mass media by this internationalist power elite, raising these questions:
How has it been possible to erect this Internationalistic structure of misrepresentation and deception in our midst and to protect it from exposure for nearly [then] half a century?Why have not our professors of history, our college presidents and educators or our crusading newspapers exposed this monstrosity?
He said that there were “some evident and very practical reasons” for the fact that those responsible for informing and educating the public had not done so in regard to the International Money Power, and one of the primary reasons, was that “our newspapers are absolutely dependent for their existence on the advertising of great business interests” and, he added, a bit cynically, that “the principal function of college presidents is to collect the funds upon which the existence of their institutions depends, to be on the right terms with the right people.”
Those who have made attempts to expose the Rothschild Empire and the NewWorld Order and its Talmudic origins—or even simply portions of the big story—have met with little success for, as Knuth acknowledged, works of this type have received little recognition and “because they are considered ‘controversial’ [are] treated with the contempt of silence.”
Quite in contrast,pointed out Knuth, note the massive,multi-million dollar circulations of what Knuth described as “the highly acclaimed and widely publicized products of the proponents of Internationalism; with the complete domination of the radio [and now, today, television] by Internationalist propagandists. . . .”
So the influence of the Rothschild Empire had captured imperial Britain—long ago—infiltrating its aristocratic families and financial institutions and Rothschild influence reached worldwide.
In the meantime, across the Atlantic, the Rothschild Dynasty was already moving forward to capture control of the New World and ensure that the new United States was firmly in its grip.
In the chapters which follow we will begin our examination of the role of the Rothschild Empire in American affairs, culminating—ultimately—in the emergence of the United States in the 20th Century as the engine of Imperial Power in the hands of the Rothschild Dynasty.
Remember: these were not the ravings of Adolf Hitler nor of some anti-Semitic right-wing street agitator. These words were not penned by a “Jew-baiting conspiracy theorist” or by a “Muslim terrorist.” They were not the mutterings of a bitter misanthrope.They were the private musings of a beloved American president, the down-to-earth “Man from Independence,” none other than “Give ‘Em Hell Harry.” Was he wrong?
The Rothschilds and America:
First a Colony, Then the Engine of Imperial Power
No one is such a fool as to let someone else have the run of his own private bank account;yet nations,individuals,industrialists, and businessmen have all been quite prepared—almost eager—to leave the control of their national currencies, and of international money, in the hands of the most stinking dregs of humanity.
The American author E. C. Knuth (writing in the closing days of World War II) recognized that the American system had now become part of the Rothschild web. Assessing the fashion in which the global money power had—during the 20th Century—been intertwined with the American system, he concluded—with dismay—that what had occurred was that the United States had become “a subject of the laws of England.”
In short, the United States had fallen into the hands of the Rothschild Dynasty—the primary force behind the “British” Empire.
And despite the fact that during the closing decades of the 19th Century—and then in the earliest years of the 20th Century—the matters of money and finance, gold and silver, the issues of debt,war and imperialism, were subjects of common discussion in American political affairs, Americans, however, remained largely ignorant of the existence of the Rothschild Empire.
While there was—as we noted in the previous chapter—some recognition of the role of the Rothschild Dynasty and their predatory practices of international finance capitalism, Knuth wrote:
To a large extent,most of theAmerican public knew little of the Rothschilds, at any given time in history. The Rothschilds were generally considered in a class of myth or legend.
However, he said, and this is certainly an understatement: “It should be quite obvious that the gigantic fortune of this family is still a very formidable factor in the affairs of the world.” And that fortune has grown since. In fact, as we shall see, as we explore further, the rise of Rothschild influence in the United States was not a 20th Century phenomenon as many tend to believe. Rather, Rothschild intrigues on American soil reached back well into the early years of the 19th Century.
The Economic History of the Jews, by Salo W. Baron, Arcadius Kahan and others (published by Schocken Books in 1975), summarized the early rise of International Jewish Finance in the United States:
It was not until the middle of the 19th Century, however, with the arrival in America of the large German Jewish immigration, that Jewish banking houses on the European model came to exist in the United States . . . .
All of these firms functioned essentially as investment bankers—the more established field of commercial banking offered relatively few opportunities to the German Jewish immigrant—a capacity in which they helped to finance large numbers of American utilities and corporations whose rapid growth throughout the latter half of the 19th Century created an insatiable demand for capital.
To raise such funds, these Jewish houses not only utilized their widespread European connections, particularly in France, England, and Germany, but created a chain of interlocking associations and directorates among themselves which enabled them quickly to mobilize sums many times larger than their individual holdings and
to compete successfully with Gentile firms several times their size.
Not only was it common for the children and relatives of a given firm to marry each other, but marital alliances frequently occurred as well among different Jewish banking families, as was the case with the Kuhns, the Loebs, the Schiffs, and the Warburgs.
Frequently, too, the children of such families married into families of large German Jewish companies in a variety of other fields and the latter would then proceed to raise capital through the banking houses which they had joined.
Socially, the result of such commercial and kinship ties was the creation of a German Jewish banking and business aristocracy based in New York City, whose descendants continued for over a century to play a dominant role in the financial, cultural, and political life of the American Jewish community, and to a lesser extent, of the nation at large.
The contribution of such Jewish banking houses to the process of capital formation in the United States in the late 19th and early 20th Century was considerable by any standard.
Students of American history are familiar—or should be—with the historic battles of President Andrew Jackson and other American nationalists with the intrigues of the financial interests who were determined to set up a “central bank” on American shores.
And although, during this time—in the first decades of the 19th Century—the Rothschilds themselves were not formally ensconced in the United States (although they were certainly, by this point, the preeminent finance force in Europe), there were American bankers and their political allies—notably Alexander Hamilton (who was perhaps,although it is not certain, of partial Jewish descent) who were effectively advancing the interests of the Rothschild Dynasty insofar as the Rothschilds sought to expand their tentacles into the financial affairs of the new republic.
While the First Bank of the United States (established in 1791) and then the subsequent Second Bank of the United States (established in 1816) were ostensibly “American” institutions, history shows that critics of the bank were frequently heard to express their concerns that “British” bankers—in particular—were meddling in American affairs through their investments in—and dealings with—these financial institutions.
So although an eminent non-Jewish American such as Nicholas Biddle—founder of one of the “Great American Families”—served as president of the Second Bank of the United States,he was, for all intents and purposes, acting as an agent of the foreign—that is,“British” (actually, that is, Rothschild)—financial interests operating behind the scenes. And it has likewise been noted by Eustace Mullins, writing in his pivotal work, The Secrets of the Federal Reserve, that another Rothschild—James of Paris—was a key figure profiting from the machinations of the Second Bank of the United States. In short, the Rothschild presence in America was a very real phenomenon, even in those earliest years of our history.
In regard to the rise of Rothschild influence on American soil, we are indebted to the late Arnold Spencer Leese, a self-trained, independent-minded English historian and advocate of English nationalism—a veterinarian, a self-dubbed “camel doctor” by training (in fact, it is said, one of the best known authorities on the health of camels)—who produced one of the most forthright monographs on the intrigues of the Rothschilds. It was entitled Gentile Folly: The Rothschilds and published in 1940.
The assessment by Leese of Rothschild influence in the United States, contrary to many “standard” works, confirms that the Rothschilds were, in fact, long influential in American affairs. Leese noted that as far as our recorded history is concerned, the Rothschilds sent an agent by the name of Schoenberg to New York in 1837, but Schoenberg changed his name to August Belmont and put himself forth as a disciple of the Christian faith, although he—like the Rothschilds—was a Jew. Belmont cut his teeth in finance in the Frankfurt and Naples branches of the House of Rothschild. In that regard, American historian Stephen Birmingham, writing in his famous society chronicle,Our Crowd:The Great Jewish Families of New York:
The first thing New York society noticed about August Belmont was that he had lots of money. It was Rothschild money, to be sure, but he used it lavishly.
As a financier with the funds of the world’s largest private bank at his fingertips, he was immediately important not only to American companies but to the United States government which was always running out of cash and whose credit needed constant infusions from bankers.
When there was a great panic in 1837, Rothschild agent Belmont negotiated large loans from the Rothschilds on behalf of the U.S. debtor banks.“ In other words” according to Birmingham, “he was able, thanks to the hugeness of the Rothschild reservoir of capital, to start out in America operating his own Federal Reserve System.” (And this long before the official establishment of the Federal Reserve System in 1913!) (*)
(*) During this period that there was extensive emigration by Roman Catholics into the United States—particularly from Ireland—and the truth is that well-settled Jewish interests saw this as a danger. In fact, one of the leading bigots inAmerica leading the fight against immigration into the United States—particularly Irish Catholic immigration—was a prominent Jewish American, Lewis Charles Levin. Although history often tells us that the “Know Nothing” movement—the Native American Party—was “led by Protestants” and “aimed at Catholics and Jews,” the truth is that Levin—a Jew—was not only one of the party’s founders but also an editor of its national organ and one of the first Know Nothing members elected to Congress! In fact, Levin was the first Jew elected to the U.S. Congress.Yet, Jewish literature today never mentions Levin’s preeminent role in the anti-Catholic agitation of America’s early years. Born in 1808 in Charleston, South Carolina, which—as students of the Jewishcontrolled slave trade know—was the Jewish population center of the United States for many years, long before NewYork City emerged as such, Levin later moved north, as an attorney, to Philadelphia where he published and edited the Philadelphia Daily Sun. In 1844 he was elected to Congress from Pennsylvania on the American (“Know Nothing”ticket) and held that post for three terms until defeated for re-election in 1850. Levin died ten years later. The fact that Levin was one of the pioneering anti-Catholic agitators on American soil is interesting, to say the least, since history books have been careful to “edit” the record as far as Levin’s role in the Know Nothing movement is concerned. Levin’s career has been consigned to the Orwellian “Memory Hole.” Instead we always hear how both “the Protestants” and “the Catholics” have been so hostile to “the poor Jewish immigrants fleeing persecution.”
During the time that Belmont was consolidating the Rothschild Empire’s place on American soil, the Rothschilds were establishing offices throughout the American South for the purpose of wool purchases that were then shipped on to France and marketed. Likewise, the Rothschild family were buying up tobacco harvests. Rothschild-controlled ships carried enormous cargoes between the United States and France.
And, not surprisingly, Rothschild interests were deeply involved in the behind-the-scenes intrigues in finance and politics that led to the American Civil War. America’s famed poet Ezra Pound noted:
Nations are shoved into wars in order to destroy themselves, to break up their structure, to destroy their social order, to destroy their populations. And no more flaming and flagrant case appears in history than our own American CivilWar, said to be an Occidental record for size of armies employed and only surpassed by the more recent triumphs of [the Rothschild Empire:] the wars of 1914 and the present one [World War II].
Arnold Leese wrote that the Rothschilds were then in conflict with Napoleon III of France who had designs on the Americas—as did the Rothschilds. Napoleon III had dreams of expanding his power by seizing control of Mexico and portions of the southern United States and he wanted Britain to join him by compelling the North to abandon its blockade of the Southern ports. However, the Confederate States, seeking to assuage Napoleon,offered him some territory, specifically Louisiana and Texas. It was a very real possibility that the British and the French were about to intervene in the American CivilWar on behalf of the Confederacy.
However, Czar Alexander of Russia —who had consistently stood against the efforts of the Rothschilds to interfere in the affairs of the Russian Empire—sent his fleet across the Atlantic and put it at President Lincoln’s disposal in the event Rothschild intrigues were able to push the British and the French forces into the war on behalf of the Confederacy. And this is not something that the Rothschilds would forget.
Ultimately what did the Rothschilds want? Long-time Rothschild ally Benjamin Disraeli, later prime minister of England, wrote of the future of the United States after the Civil War. It would, he said, be an America “of armies, of diplomacy, of rival states and maneuvering cabinets, of frequent turbulence and probably of frequent wars.” In short, as Arnold Leese said, “The Rothschilds wished to reproduce in America the chaotic conditions in Europe whereby they ruled all states. A united America would be too powerful for them. It must be split and now was the time to do it.”
However, Napoleon of France would not work with them. What were the Rothschilds to do? Their response was to support both the North and the South and work to prevent an outright win by either side and so force apart the two regions, with the possibility that the British Empire—controlled by the Rothschilds—could annex the Northern states to Canada, a British dominion. In practice this meant helping the weak South rather than the more powerful North and that is precisely what the British did.
In spite of much English sentiment in favor of the North,which opposed slavery, the Rothschild-directed British government followed polices supporting the South. The British recognized the Confederacy and allowed Southern ships to be built, manned and serviced in British ports, although, ironically, in New York, the Rothschild agent, August Belmont, ostensibly supported the Northern cause. But this, of course,was all part of the Rothschild purpose of putting the North in full aggression against the South in order to force the divisive war that did indeed come about.
However, it should be noted that Lionel Rothschild felt the North would win and exerted his influence on financiers in England and France in support of the North. So, as Leese said, the Rothschild Empire ultimately had material interests on both sides.
The evidence is also very clear that August Belmont was closely collaborating with Judah Benjamin, the Jewish attorney general, then secretary of war and then, finally, secretary of state for the Confederacy. Belmont’s wife, a Gentile, was the niece of John Slidell, one of Benjamin’s law partners. Slidell’s own daughter married Baron Frederick Emil d’Erlanger, head of a major Jewish banking firm in Paris, whose father, Baron Rafael d’Erlanger of Frankfurt, had been a confidential representative of the Rothschilds!
Meanwhile, President Abraham Lincoln had his own intentions vis-a-vis the International Money Power and sought to introduce state loans to free the American people from the Rothschild Empire. It was, of course, no surprise that Belmont had strongly opposed Lincoln’s nomination and election as president in 1860. Lincoln circumvented the Rothschild’s intrigues during the Civil War by financing the war on state credit, thereby working to avoid dependence upon the Jewish banking houses under the thumb of the Rothschild Empire.
It is thus no coincidence that when John Wilkes Booth’s conspiracy to assassinate Lincoln was taking place that there was also an attempt on the life of Secretary of State William Seward who, in fact, had extended the invitation to the Czar of Russia, Alexander II, to send his fleet to come to the United States in an effort to stop the Rothschild’s effort to partition the United States. In 1881 the Czar himself was assassinated.
In 2004 author Charles Higham (who is otherwise a fervent promoter of Jewish concerns) published his book, Murdering Mr. Lincoln,which actually outlines in some detail the role of the Rothschild interests (and those of allied secret societies in the Rothschild sphere of influence) in the assassination of President Lincoln—a point that almost officially, it seems, goes unmentioned by the vast number of “mainstream” writers who have devoted millions of words to the murder of the 16th president.
(And, considering the fact that President James Garfield, who came to office in 1881, was likewise assassinated, it is probably no coincidence that Garfield was an outspoken critic of the International Money Power and its American assets seeking to control American credit.)
In those years following the Civil War, Belmont and other Rothschild agents supplied the United States with 3.2 million ounces of gold in exchange for bonds carrying four percent interest and at a price far below the then-current market price of such securities. However, this proved unpopular within the United States for the reason that the relief to the nation’s finances was of only ten months duration and the nation’s economy became far worse. But the United States floated a loan selling its bonds to the American public and brought relief to the citizenry.
Belmont himself became the boss of the famed Tammany Society—popularly known as Tammany Hall—which ran the political machine in the city of New York which emerged, of course, as the seat of Rothschild finance in America. Arnold Leese described Tammany Hall as “a sort of Gentile front for the Jewish Kehillah”—that is, the Jewish secret government.
Although Belmont died in 1890, his sons Perry and August carried on for the interests of the Rothschild Empire. August’s son, Morgan, and then Morgan’s son, John Mason, carried on for the Rothschilds until his death.
August Belmont was aligned with J. P. Morgan who, according to author Stephen Birmingham, joined with the Rothschilds in “an axis of financial power,” that even the great Seligman banking house had difficulty contending with. Ultimately, though, the Seligmans joined with the Rothschilds in what was described by Birmingham as “the most powerful combination in the history of banking . . . The Seligman-Belmont-Morgan-Rothschild alliance was so successful that [within a decade] there were complaints on Wall Street that ‘London [and] Germany-based bankers’ had a monopoly on the sale of United States bonds in Europe—which they virtually did.”
The Seligman family, it will be recalled,were at the center of the first and still famous scandal surrounding “anti-Semitism in America” involving a family member having been barred from the Grand Union Hotel due to his Jewish background. However, interestingly, according to Birmingham, rather than extinguishing anti-Semitism, the incident actually kindled it.
The Seligmans were once said to be the richest Jewish family in America and for good reason they were thus known as “The American Rothschilds.” However, there were other great Jewish banking families emerging during this period—all satellites of the Rothschild Dynasty.
According to Stephen Birmingham, writing in Our Crowd: The Great Jewish Families of NewYork: “If Joseph Seligman had virtually invented international banking in America, it was Jacob Schiff who took the invention, refined it, and made it an art . . .” In his heyday, Schiff “would tower above every financial figure in Wall Street.”
Schiff—who in 1875 married a daughter of one of the founders of the Kuhn-Loeb banking house—soon assumed control of the powerful empire. Schiff’s marriage made him part of an elite that was not only economically intertwined, but maritally intertwined as well. As one wag commented, referring to the Warburg banking family—another of the “Our Crowd” group of Jewish banking families: “The Warburgs weren’t anybody until they married into the Schiffs, and Schiff wasn’t anybody until he married into the Loebs.”
Today, this combine includes the family of former Vice President Al Gore whose daughter, Karenna,married Drew Schiff, a scion of the Schiff family. So although, at the 2000 Democratic National Convention which nominated him for president, Gore declared, “I’m my own man,” the fact of his relationship with the Schiff clan—and thus to the Rothschild Empire—suggests otherwise.
By 1881,noted Birmingham, “American finance had entered the great Age of Schiff.” However, the Schiff family, on its own, had far-reaching connections into previous generations linking them with the Rothschilds. According to Birmingham:
In the 18th Century, the Schiffs and Rothschilds shared a double house . . . until one of the Schiffs, already prosperous enough to move to London, sold the balance of the house to the first rich Rothschild. If pressed, Schiffs usually admitted that, though not so collectively wealthy as the Rothschilds, theirs was the more august family.The Rothschilds were known only as big money bankers.
The Schiff family tree contained not only successful bankers but distinguished scholars and members of the rabbinate. There was, for instance, the seventeenth-century Meir ben Jacob Schiff, composer of notable commentaries on the Talmud, and David Tevele Schiff,who in the late 18th century became chief rabbi of the Great Synagogue of England.
The Schiffs can also demonstrate that they are a much older family than the upstart Rothschilds. The Schiff pedigree, carefully worked out in the Jewish Encyclopedia, shows the longest continuous record of any Jewish family in exi s tence, with Schiffs in Frankfurt going back to the fourteenth century.
Jacob Schiff actually traced his ancestry even further back than that—to the 10th Century BC no less—and to none other than . . . King Solomon and, thence, to David and Bathsheba, where he chose to stop tracing. Jacob Schiff took his descent from the King of Israel seriously. . . .
American industrialist Henry Ford, for his part, noted that Schiff—in his early years—had actually passed his apprenticeship in the office of his father who was an agent of the Rothschilds. As Ford noted, Schiff became “one of the principal channels through which German-Jewish capital flowed into American undertakings, and his agency in these matters gave him a place in many important departments of American business, especially railroads, banks, insurance companies, and telegraph companies.”
Writing in Truth magazine on Dec. 16, 1912, George R. Conroy revealed that the Rothschild-Schiff connection extended into the 20th century:
Mr. Schiff is head of the great private banking house of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., which represents the Rothschild interests on this side of the Atlantic. He has been described as a financial strategist and has been for years the financial minister of the great impersonal power known as Standard Oil [which, of course, was publicly identified with the Rockefeller family].He was hand-in-glove with the Harrimans, the Goulds and the Rockefellers in all their railroad enterprises and has become the dominant power in the railroad and financial world of America.
Actually, in 1912, there was a Senate committee, known as the Pujo Committee, after its chairman, which investigated the monetary trusts of the time. The committee disclosed that Kuhn, Loeb—despite its alliance with J. P. Morgan—had been primarily allied with the Rockefeller-controlled National City Bank.However, Jacob Schiff had still likewise long been a director of this Rockefeller entity, and that therefore Schiff was involved in bothmajor financial blocs operating on American soil which were thus not so “independent” as the public might otherwise have thought. There were indeed “Jewish” interests involved in both influences.
According to Stephen Birmingham, the Pujo Committee discovered Jacob Schiff was steering both of the major financial interests: “The Morgan-Baker-First National Bank group and the Rockefeller-Stillman-National City Bank group formed the inner circle.The powers were steel and oil,each with its massive bank. Contrary to what everyone had supposed, there was no ‘rivalry’ revealed between these [factions]. Kuhn, Loeb, the committee decided, somewhat vaguely, was ‘qualifiedly allied only with the inner group.’ While some people wondered what [that] meant, others, particularly some members of the press took it to mean that Jacob Schiff had an inside track to both of the leading powers of Wall Street [and] even [Schiff] admitted that he did.”
So the old legend, among many American “patriot” writers that there was a “struggle” between the Rockefellers and the Jewish banking elite, falls flat. The Rockefellers, for all intents and purposes, were hardly more than well-paid henchmen, satellites, of the Rothschild Empire!
As far as the Rockefeller family is concerned, it should be noted that there is no solid information in the public arena indicating that they are of Jewish extraction, although there has been much speculation for over a century. Contrary to widespread perception, the often-touted “proof” that “the Rockefellers are Jewish” is not proof at all.
The rumor about the Rockefellers being Jewish largely stems from the fact that the aforementioned Stephen Birmingham—in his 1971 Harper & Row book, The Grandees, a profile of the history of America’s Sephardic Jewish elite (descended from Spanish and Portugese Jewish families)—mentioned that the name “Rockefeller” can be found in a rare 1960 genealogical study, Americans of Jewish Descent by Malcolm H. Stern.
While some jumped on that information and began circulating the story that this was “proof” that “the Rockefellers are Jewish,” a careful reading of the entire book demonstrates that—as far as is documented in that book—the Rockefellers who do have Jewish blood stem from the line of Godfrey Rockefeller who married one Helen Gratz, who was Jewish. Their childrenb and heirs were raised in the Episcopal Church and have had little—if anything—to do with Jewish or Israeli affairs.
Godfrey Rockefeller, in fact,was from a separate line of the Rockefeller family, descended from one of the brothers of John D. Rockefeller, Sr., and was a second cousin to the famed Rockefeller brothers—Nelson, David, Laurence, and John D. III. Thus, the famous story about the Rockefellers being Jewish—at least this one so often cited—is based on a misreading of what actually appeared in Birmingham’s much-cited book.
It is no great pleasure to sink the popular myth that “the Rockefellers are Jewish” that has been circulated by many well-meaning people, but the facts about the origin of this rumor speak for themselves. This, of course, is not to suggest that there is not any Jewish blood in the veins of the Rockefeller family (going back generations), but any charges to that effect should be based on facts, not misinterpretation of a passing reference in a book.
Yet, in spite of these facts—which can be found by referring to Birmingham’s book, from which the most recent version of the rumor that “The Rockefellers Are Jewish” emerged—few people actually check out the book themselves and prefer, instead, to pass on the legend.
But there have been many eminent American families who are not Jewish (so far as is known) who have become intertwined with the New Pharisees of the Rothschild Empire on American shores.
Considering,as mentioned earlier,that formerVice PresidentAl Gore’s own family had long close ties to Armand Hammer, the American Jewish industrialist known for his dealings with the Bolshevik elite—and who was the son of a founding father of the Communist Party USA—it is fitting that Gore’s in-laws, the Schiff family (and their associates, the Rothschilds), played a major part in financing the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917. Initially, according to Prof. Albert S. Lindemann,writing in Esau’s Tears:
A most tenacious enemy of Czarist Russia was Jacob H.Schiff [who] played a crucial role not only in denying the Russians the bonds they sought in the international market to finance the [Russo-Japanese war] but also even more decisively in providing financial support for Japan, which then so humiliatingly defeated Russia . . . Schiff delighted in the way that he and other Jews had been able to contribute to the humbling of the great Russian Empire. He boasted that after its humiliation in the Russo-Japanese war, Russia had come to understand that “international Jewry is a power after all.”
Later—in concert with the Rothschilds and other Jewish banking interests—Schiff personally bankrolled the Bolshevik takeover of Christian Russia and the murder of millions of Christians, funding Leon Trotsky and the other butchers who seized power and established themselves in the Kremlin.
The full story of the Schiff role in this tragedy that helped set the stage for World War II, Korea,Vietnam and all the other crises that arose from the so-called “Cold War” is known only to a handful, but it is part of the legend of the Rothschild Empire and its role in manipulating global affairs. In the end, although the Schiff Dynasty has been a major force on its own, the fact is that they have been part of the Rothschild Empire.
At this juncture—having considered the role of the Rothschild Empire’s intrigue in America—it is vital to recognize the Rothschild role in the establishment of the Federal Reserve System in the United States.
While there has been much written on the Federal Reserve and the reality of what it constitutes—a privately-owned and privately-controlled money monopoly in the hands of banking institutions—the fact that the Rothschild family was, ultimately, the primary force behind the establishment of the system on American soil, is not something that is fully understood.
For example, because there were no people named “Rothschild” at the famous meeting off the coast of Georgia at Jekyll Island where the framework for the Federal Reserve was established, there are those who would divorce the Rothschild family altogether from the circumstances. However, the fine hand of Rothschild was indeed on the scene, represented by Paul Warburg of the Kuhn, Loeb Company which, as we’ve noted,was under the control of longtime Rothschild associate Jacob Schiff.
Scion of another great German Jewish banking family, Warburg was the principal architect of the Federal Reserve System, brought into being in 1913, which consolidated control over the American monetary system by the Rothschild Empire and International Jewish Finance.
Henry Ford’s discussion of what he called “the Jewish Idea of a Central Bank for America” addressed the Federal Reserve. Ford wrote:
What the people of the United States do not understand and never have understood is that while the Federal Reserve Act was governmental, the whole Federal Reserve System is private. It is an officially-created private banking system.
Examine the first 1000 people you meet on the street, and 999 of them will tell you that the Federal Reserve System is a device whereby the United States government went into the banking business for the benefit of the people. They have an idea that like the Post Office and the Custom House the Federal Reserve is part of the government’s official machinery. . . .
Take up the standard encyclopedias and while you will find no misstatements of fact in them, you will find no statement that the Federal Reserve System is a private banking system; the impression carried away by the lay reader is that it is a part of the Government.
The Federal Reserve System is a system of private banks, the creation of a banking aristocracy within an already existing system of aristocracy, whereby a great proportion of banking independence was lost,and whereby it was made possible for speculative financiers to centralize great sums of money for their own purposes, beneficial [to the people of the United States] or not.
Discussing the matter of the Federal Reserve’s interlocking ties with what Ford referred to as “the Economic Plans of International Jews,” Ford asserted, quite correctly: “The strength of Jewish Money is in its internationalism.
It stretches a chain of banks and centers of financial control across the world and plays them on the side of the game that favors Judah.”
Ford said that single Jewish banking houses in any given country would be no menace.As mere bankers in their own countries they would not, Ford said, occasion alarm. Ford noted that in conventional commercial banking, the Jews had not predominated and that traditional deposit banks were hardly a part of the Jewish financial network.
“The Rothschilds,”said Ford,“were never bankers in a proper sense; they were money lenders to nations whose representatives they had corrupted to seek the loans. They did business precisely on the plain of the money lender on the side street who seduces the rich man’s son to borrow a large sum, knowing that the father will pay. That is scarcely banking. Brains of that sort may ‘get’ money but will not ‘make’ money.”
Thus, said Ford, it was necessary to look at the international scope of Jewish banking power. This system, he said, did not require that a Jewish banking house be the most important financial power in any particular country. It was not the wealth and importance of any single such banking house, but, instead, he said, the wealth and importance of the world chain of the various Jewish banking houses that gave the strength to the International Money Power.
For example, Ford cited the aforementioned Paul Warburg of the Kuhn, Loeb & Company who was a prime mover behind the establishment of the Federal Reserve System in the United States. Warburg’s enterprise was far from being the most powerful bank in the United States, but because of its international connections—which were, as Ford said, “all Jewish”—it took on a new aspect in terms of its impact on American life.
The record shows that it was indeed the establishment of the Federal Reserve in 1913 that set in place the framework for further expansion of Rothschild control over American finance and industry.
Americans, of course, had little understanding of all of this. American author E. C.Knuth noted that in 1945 in his work, The Empire of “The City” that Senator Edward Hall Moore of Oklahoma had made public the fact that “the British government” owned vast holdings in 80 of the largest American industrial corporations, including General Motors and Standard Oil of Indiana. That Standard should be among them might come as a surprise to those naive Americans who have long believed that the Rockefeller family, which appeared to dominate Standard Oil,were somehow a“royal” family in American terms, when, in fact, the Rothschild influence extended even here into the ranks of such a famous “American” corporation.
In fact, the Rockefeller empire, in more respects than many ever realized, has always effectively been a subsidiary of the Rothschild Empire, wealthy and powerful on its own to be sure, but a Rothschild subsidiary nonetheless. And as we shall see later in these pages, many institutions traditionally perceived to be in the “Rockefeller” sphere of influence are now, today, falling firmly into the hands of agents of the Rothschild Empire.
Knuth put it correctly: “The American public was blindly led to the slaughter then like so many sheep being driven up the ramp at the abattoir, with endless years of ruin and fear to follow for the millions.” He referred to the fact that “the smart money of Europe” had, in fact, ruthlessly engineered the Great Crash of the stock market in 1929 and through that process had gained absolute power over the American economy.
But the American people did have some nationalist leaders who stood up in opposition. For example, James J. Hill, the great American railroad builder, warned of increasing national debt, of the dangers of the nation falling into the hands of the usurers:
I need not remind you that public credit, though vast, is not inexhaustable. . . . Of all of resources, this one should be guarded with most jealous care; first, because we can never know in advance where exhaustion begins.
The earth and its products tell us plainly about what we may expect of them in the future, but credit is apparently unlimited at one moment and in collapse at the next.
The only safe rule is to place no burdens upon it that may be avoided; to save it for days of dire need.
Hill issued a warning to his fellow Americans: “Search history and see what has been the fate of every nation that has abused its credit. . . It will profit us nothing to conserve what we have remaining of the great national resources that were the dower of this continent unless we preserve the national credit as more precious than them all. When it shall be exhausted, the heart of the nation will cease to beat.”
During the years preceding World War II—and in the early days of the war that followed—there were others who did speak out.However, most of those nationalist leaders were ultimately forced out of office or otherwise silenced. As Knuth put it: “the lot of the transgressor against the plans of the ‘one-worlders’ [had] been a hard and unhappy one since then.”
With the new international system that was imposed after WorldWar II through theWorld Bank and the International Monetary Fund—all projects of the International Money Power of the Rothschild Empire—Knuth said, the United States had been “tricked into a position of boundless peril and foreign nations [would] continue to take advantage of its fallacious position by shameless and insolent demands for huge subsidies in the guise of loans, actually little more than blackmail of American power politicians certain to lose their voice in world politics [as did] Woodrow Wilson after WorldWar I unless they continue to give.”
Of course, in his writings, Knuth pointed out that the American system, ostensibly independent as a consequence of the American Revolution, was, in fact, dominated from afar since so many American fortunes were intertwined with those of the Rothschilds and their confreres in the International Money Power swirling around “The City” of London. Knuth said:
Men of millions [in the United States] sway the destiny and the life or death of their fellow citizens with an organization which is subversive to the spirit and the letter of the Constitution of the United States, an organization of which not one in one thousand of their fellow citizens has ever heard.
The purpose of these men is completely interwoven with the dependence of their own invariably great fortunes on the operations of “The City,” citadel of international finance. Not only do these men collectively exert a planned influence of immense weight in utter secrecy, but they operate with the support of the immense funds provided by Cecil Rhodes and Andrew Carnegie.
And as we have noted, Rhodes was an instrument of the Rothschild Empire from his very entree into the world of global finance and industry. And the same can be said for Carnegie, titanic figure though he was.
The “organization” to which Knuth specifically referred, in this particular instance, was the so-called Pilgrim Society which promoted British-American fellowship. The Pilgrim Society was founded in London in 1902 four months after the death of Cecil Rhodes and, of course, as noted, the Rhodes concept was to return the United States to the direct and open control of the British Empire. And there were many Americans of wealth and influence who were active in this organization.
The New York-based Council on Foreign Relations (which interlocked closely with the Pilgrim Society) was, as we’ve pointed out before, nothing more than an American off-shoot, a junior cousin, so to speak, of the Londonbased Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA), itself the foreign policy arm of the Rothschild Empire which used the RIIA as its base of operations for directing the official foreign ventures of the “British” Empire. And the RIIA was based in “The City” of London.
Pointing out that “British” [read Jewish, read Rothschild] capital had played a major part in instigating the Great Crash of 1929 and noting that the extended inflation that brought on the crash could have been controlled and halted at any point in its rise by what Knuth referred to as that “great balance wheel of the world’s credit” dominated by the Rothschilds, Knuth described the consequences:
That the immense crash and loss of American securities served not only to damage and cripple Britain’s then-greatest competitor but also to discipline a recalcitrant and unfriendly administration seems beyond question. That billions of dollars in foreign gold was moved out of the United States in the election year of 1932 to bring further discredit to the Hoover administration and thus to influence that election is also beyond question.
Likewise that a similar massive amount in foreign gold, totaling $1,139,672,000,was moved into the United States in 1935 in order to influence [the forthcoming 1936] election and recreate “confidence” and to prepare the American investor for a further milking in 1937 also seemed beyond question.
In summary, the fact that the House of Rothschild made its money in the great crashes of history and the great wars of history, the very periods when others lost their money, IS beyond question.
In sum, as one of the Rothschild henchmen, Viscount Reginald Esher said, “The Rothschilds’ position, vis-a-vis the world’s affairs, the affairs of countries worldwide, is indispensible to them all, not responsible to any.”
Looking at all of this from an American perspective, examining the way in which the International Money Power affected the course of world affairs, Knuth said of the Americans:
Many people realize that this mystifying situation, in which an alleged democratic and self-governing nation, is actually controlled against the will of its people in its foreign affairs is a clear indication that there must be a very powerful and well-financed secret organization which plans and directs American foreign affairs, and, for lack of a more specific identification, this suspected secret organization is popularly referred to as “the International Financiers.”
But, of course, as Knuth made it abundantly clear, these “International Financiers” were, in fact, the members of the Rothschild family and their carefully-placed agents throughout Europe and elsewhere and, indeed, on American soil.And as Rothschild influence rose across the planet,there were growing numbers of patriots who recognized the dangers that their nations faced in the hands of these predatory plutocratic vultures.
Georgetown University’s Professor Carroll Quigley wrote in Tragedy and Hope of what he considered the desirability of the international financial interests to dominate American political life. He said candidly:
The chief problem of American political life for a long time has been how to make the two [parties in Congress] more national and international. The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps,of the right, and the other of the left, is a foolish idea except only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.
Quigley said that the policies of the international elite that he considered“ vital and necessary for America”were no longer a subject of significant disagreement, but that they were “disputable only in details of procedure, priority, or method.” He wrote glowingly of internationalist policies and says that “these things any national American party hoping to win a presidential election must accept.”
However, he added, “either party in office becomes, in time, corrupt, tired, un-enterprising, and vigorless.Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary,by the other party, which will be none of these things but which will still pursue with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.”
Clearly, with the rise of the Rothschild Empire as a major power in American affairs, elected officials in the United States soon became largely nothing more than tools of these predatory interests. Democrats and Republicans alike fell into place, advocating policies that advanced the agenda of the global elite—pushing further the goal of a NewWorld Order.
The advent of the rise of Adolf Hitler in Europe, challenging the Rothschilds and International Jewish Finance, set the stage for what became World War II, and in the United States there emerged Franklin Delano Roosevelt who worked relentlessly to bring the United States into war against Germany. Suffice it to say,FDR’s role in that tragedy has been the subject of numerous formidable works by such eminent revisionist historians as Harry Elmer Barnes, Charles Beard, Charles Callan Tansill and others.
No honest student of that era can help but conclude that World War II was a war America need not and should not have fought.And that it was a war that did not bring “good” to the planet or to America. Instead, it laid the groundwork for future wars and set in place a post-war framework upon which the drive for a New World Order was advanced to a greater degree than ever before.
As far as the Roosevelt family is concerned, there has been widely published information suggesting that the Roosevelt family did have Jewish forebears, that the original family name was “Rossocampo,” a name borne by Sephardic Jews who were among those expelled from Spain in 1620. The name, it is said, was ultimately changed as various family branches settled elsewhere in Europe. But there is no firm evidence proving this oft-cited story to be absolute fact.
We do know that descendants of the Dutch-based members of the family — evidently named Rosenvelt — emigrated to the United States and ultimately the name evolved into the name“Roosevelt”that we know today. And there are those who say that the Rosenvelts were originally Jewish, whether of Sephardic origin of not.
In the meantime,we do know that within several generations, there was intermarriage by the Roosevelts with others who were most definitely not Jewish and by the time Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt—cousins later to become husband and wife—were wealthy young members of the American elite they were not known to be engaged in Jewish religious practices.
During the Roosevelt era, a Roosevelt family genealogical chart, which was circulated both in Europe and the United States, charged that another Jewish family strain—namely that of the “Samuels” line—was introduced into the ensuing Roosevelt bloodline.
However exciting this information may have been at the time to FDR’s critics, the provenance of this information is murky at best. However much many may have wanted to believe it, the name “Samuels” is often a Jewish name, but we do not know for a fact that they were Jewish.
Yet, for perhaps a more immediate source of data in regard to possible Jewish heritage in the Roosevelt family — according to a Jewish source — we may turn to the February 5, 1982 issue of The London Jewish Chronicle which featured an article entitled “FDR ‘had Jewish great-grandmother.’” The article, by Leon Hadar, read as follows:
The late American President Franklin Delano Roosevelt had a Jewish great-grandmother, it was stated last week by Mr. Philip Slomovitz, the editor of The Detroit Jewish News, who released a letter sent to him 45 years ago by the late Rabbi Dr. Steven Wise, a former chairman of the World Jewish Congress.
In his letter, RabbiWise described a luncheon his wife had with Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, the late president’s wife (and a distant cousin of his) who said: “Often cousin Alice and I say that the brains in the Roosevelt family come from our Jewish great-grandmother,” whose name was Esther Levy.
The letter added that Mrs. Roosevelt had told [Mrs.Wise] that “whenever mention is made of our Jewish great-grandmother by cousin Alice or myself, Franklin’s mother gets very angry and says, “You know that is not so. Why do you say it?” According to Rabbi Wise, Mrs. Roosevelt also told his wife,“You must make no use of this. I think it is best to let the matter lie down now.”
In a separate letter to Mr. Slomovitz, Franklin Roosevelt, the hundredth anniversary of whose birth is being celebrated this year, wrote that his ancestors “may have been Jews, Catholics or Protestants.”Rabbi Wise, who was very close to President Roosevelt, marked his letter to Mr. Slomovitz “strictly private and confidential.”
Ironically, it should be pointed out that both Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt were known to make private anti-Jewish utterances even though they were perhaps of Jewish extraction. Despite this, both became icons in the Jewish world view. However, this phenomenon has seemed to fade during the last years of the 20th century and the opening years of the 21st as aggressive Jewish writers are now contending that FDR — despite his bloody worldwide war against Hitler — “didn’t do enough to stop the Holocaust.”
In any case, it should be noted for the record that this author does recall reading, many years ago, in American Heritage magazine that a researcher had found information demonstrating that FDR’s maternal forebears in the Delano family were of Jewish origin, an interesting detail considering that FDR’s mother herself was known to make anti-Jewish remarks.
So whether FDR was Jewish (or part Jewish) is largely irrelevant in the bigger picture.The fact remains that many,many American non-Jewish politicians were—or now are—advocates for the Jewish agenda, furthering the push for a NewWorld Order, the Jewish Utopia.
The bottom line is this: During the 20th Century the United States of America emerged as the foremost mechanism of control in the hands of the Rothschild Empire. American blood and treasure became the means whereby which the NewWorld Order moved fastforward.
Jewish control of the mass media—and virtually all forms of education and communication—expanded exponentially and this brought further political control of American affairs into the hands of the Rothschilds and the modern-day Jewish dynasties operating in their sphere of influence.
In the chapters that follow,we will examine the nature of Jewish power in America, reviewing its parameters, and unveiling the names and the intrigues of the New Pharisees who are advancing the Rothschild agenda: the establishment of a global Jewish Imperium.
The anti-Jewish image (left)—“Such a Bisiness”—mocking Jewish business acumen, could rightly be applied to the modern-day media industry as well as to the corruption-ridden predatory intrigues of Jewish elements on Wall Street who have brought America’s once-great economy to the brink of destruction.
Yes, the Jews Do Control the Media:
Rothschild’s Mechanism for Political Domination
Writing in 1993 in Tribes, Jewish author Joel Kotkin asserted that although, in his position, Jews were“not in control of the media and the arts, as some anti-Semites suggest” the fact was that:
Jews clearly possess a disproportionate influence in movies, publishing, advertising and theater. In the media, according to one survey in the 1970s, one quarter of the leading figures were Jewish, more than ten times their percentage in the general population.
Jewish writer Dr. Norman Cantor, writing in The Sacred Chain, put it thus, regarding Jewish media influence in the United States:
As in Berlin and Vienna before Hitler, the Jewish role in publishing was an important one. By 1950 Jewish families owned two of the three most influential newspapers in the United States, The New York Times and The Washington Post. Furthermore, both families were directly involved in the daily operation of the papers and in setting their editorial policies.
J. J. Goldberg—yet another Jewish writer—in his 1996 book, Jewish Power: Inside the American Jewish Establishment, acknowledged:
It is true that Jews are represented in the media business in numbers far out of proportion to their share of the population. Studies have shown that while Jews make up little more than 5 percent of the working press nationwide—hardly more than their share of the population—they make up one fourth or more of the writers, editors, and producers in America’s “elite media,” including network news divisions, the top newsweeklies and the four leading daily papers (New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal).
In the fast-evolving world of media megacorporations, Jews are even more numerous. In an October 1994 Vanity Fair feature profiling the kingpins of the new media elite, titled “The New Establishment,” just under half of the two dozen entrepreneurs profiled were Jews.
In the view of the magazine’s editors, these are America’s true power elite,“men and women from the entertainment, communications and computer industries, whose ambitions and influence have made America the one true superpower of the Information Age.”
And in a few key sectors of the media, notably among Hollywood studio executives, Jews are so numerically dominant that calling these businesses Jewish-controlled is little more than a statistical observation.
“If there is Jewish power, it’s the power of the word, the power of Jewish columnists and Jewish opinion makers,” says Eugene Fisher, director of Catholic-Jewish relations at the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, and one of the Jewish community’s staunchest defenders in religious Christian circles. “The Jewish community is a very literate community, and it has a lot to say.And if you can shape opinion, you can shape events.”
Goldberg adds further:
The combined weight of so many Jews in one of America’s most lucrative and important industries gives the Jews of Hollywood a great deal of political power. . . .
But the same could be said, to a much greater degree, of other industries with significant concentrations of Jews:Wall Street, New York real estate, or the garment industry.
In each of those industries, Jews make up a significant bloc—an important minority on Wall Street, near majorities in clothing and commercial real estate—and have translated their clout into a visible presence on the political scene.
Jewish writer Steven Silbiger, writing in 2000 in his book, The Jewish Phenomenon, which is a virtual catalogue of Jewish clout, said:
The Jewish influence is just as pronounced in television as it is in the movies. On the TV news desk, Jews have been very visible in front of the camera. As journalists, their personal religious and cultural beliefs are not made an issue in their reporting, but their power is significant because they influence how we as Americans view the world and shape our opinions. . . . Even more influential than reporters are the television news producers, since they decide which stories will go on air, in which order and how long they will run.A disproportionate number of these are Jewish as well. . . .
At one point in the 1980s, the executive producers of all three evening news shows were Jewish.
Furthermore, as Jewish Power [by J. J. Goldberg, cited elsewhere—Ed.] points out, while Jews make up “5% of the working press nationwide—hardly more than their share of the population—they make up one-fourth of the writers, editors and producers in America’s ‘elite media,’ including network news divisions, the top newsweeklies and the four leading papers.”
The remarkably high percentage of Jewish people in television has lasted for generations, perhaps because it is a relatively small and close-knit community.
In a poll of TV’s creative leaders, 59 percent said they were raised in the Jewish faith, while 38 percent [of that group] still identified themselves as Jews.
In his work, The Sacred Chain, Jewish writer Dr. Norman Kantor has also noted the predominance of Jewish influence in the lucrative world of professional sports.Although Cantor doesn’t enunciate the point per se, the fact is that Jewish control of the sports arena relates directly to Jewish media power, inasmuch as sports broadcasting has become an integral part of the mass media, leading in great part—due to the American obsession with sports— to Americans being misdirected and thereby unable to focus on the real issues that face them:
Jewish billionaires in the 1990s demonstrated that they had arrived at the pinnacle of social prowess and cultural importance by buying professional sports teams, hitherto the proud preserve of WASP and Irish magnates. By 1993 the New York football Giants—the most honored name in professional sports—two other National Football League teams, and two of the major league baseball franchises were in Jewish hands.
One of these Jewish owners carried so much weight with the other owners that he engineered the firing of the baseball commissioner and took over as acting commissioner, representing the owners before a congressional committee.
In the 1930s American Jews had thought they were doing well when they produced a couple of boxing champions.
The Jews did not have to show their sweaty bodies anymore; they owned the teams.
Jewish writer Charles Silberman, writing in 1985 in A Certain People, enunciated his own assessment of Jewish media power, particularly in journalism and news management in both print and broadcast media:
All told, the once-scruffy vocation [of journalism] has become an intellectually exciting, reasonably well-paid, prestigious profession in which Jews play an increasingly important role.
In 1982, for example, Jews made up a little less than 6 percent of the national press corps as a whole but 25 to 30 percent of the “media elite”—those working for The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal; for Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News & World Report; and for the news divisions of CBS, NBC, ABC, and the Public Broadcasting System and its leading stations. (A 1971 study put the number of Jews in the media elite at 25 percent.) When one looks at the key decision-making positions, the Jewish role appears to be even larger.
Jews are equally influential, if less well known, in the management of television news. It is the network correspondents, of course, who have become household names, among them Jews . . .
The greatest concentration of Jews, however, is at the producer level—and it is the producers who decide which stories will go on the air, and how long, and in what order they will run.
In 1982, before a shift in assignments, the executive producers of all three evening newscasts were Jewish, as were the executive producers of CBS’s 60 Minutes and ABC’s 20/20.
And Jews are almost equally prominent at the “senior producer” and “broadcast producer” levels as well as in senior management.
And yet another Jewish writer, Barry Rubin,writing in Assimilation and Its Discontents, noted just one example of how Jewish-oriented “news” and “information” is constantly being featured in the mainstream press:
[The October 18, 1992 reviews section of The Washington Post] is full of books by or about Jews: on sports and the American Jewish experience; a biography of Bill Graham, a Holocaust survivor and leading rock & roll impresario; the story of an upper-class New York family infected by antisemitism; a South African woman’s group portrait of her set of Jewish friends; a Jewish couple’s volume on foreign investments in America, analyzing problems of multiple loyalties and foreign influence parallel issues in assimilation; and a Jewish author’s book on politics in higher education, discussing multiculturalism in terms drawn from the integration of Jews into American society.
All of this is not to mention the amazing array of Jewish (usually virulently pro-Israel) editors and writers contributing to a vast array of “independent” journals of various political stripes—ranging from the “conservative” Weekly Standard to the ostensibly “liberal” New Republic—along with a wide range of other publications in between, all of which fall into line as far as promoting the global demands of the Rothschild Empire and its drive for a New World Order. Likewise with the Internet, such influence hardly needs mentioning.The truth of Jewish media influence cannot be denied.
To republish a list of so many names and publications would belabor the point, but the fact remains that those journalists and publications that seek to challenge the International Jewish Money Power and attempt to throw roadblocks in the path of the intended Jewish Utopia are marginalized and forced to seek independent means to challenge this looming disaster.
Fortunately, there are publications such as American Free Press (americanfreepress. net) and The Barnes Review (barnesreview.com), along with independent Internet-based broadcasting outlets such as Republic Broadcasting (found at republicbroadcasting.org)—along with a host of other resources—but they are dwarfed (sadly) in influence alongside the media cacaphony directed from the highest ranks of the Rothschild Empire.
What is amazing to recognize in considering this tremendous Jewish influence on the media is the fact this is not just a 20th Century phenomenon, not something that came with the rise of the big national (and now international) broadcast companies or the big weekly newsmagazines.
As we have seen repeatedly in these pages, the fact is, as recorded history shows, Jewish influence in the mass media in the nations of the West has been a major factor behind criticisms of “the Jews” and those who did rise up in criticism of Jewish power over the media were singularly pointing in the direction of the International Money Power as personified by the Rothschild Empire in Europe in all of the great capitals.
So the problem of the media has been longstanding. The Washington-based American Free Press has candidly asserted that “The Media Is The Enemy.” It is a problem that cannot be addressed without acknowledging the substantial Jewish influence upon that media.
And as we continue in our examination of the influence of the Rothschild Empire on American shores,we will see that this power expands far beyond just the media itself. In so many ways, America truly has become the engine of the Rothschild Empire and its drive for a Jewish Imperium—The Jewish Utopia—the New World Order.
The “New Establishment”—JEWISH
Vanity Fair—the stylish monthly now owned by the billionaire Zionist Newhouse family—publishes an annual list of the 100 most powerful people in America, what Vanity Fair calls “the New Establishment.”
What this amazing list (as published for the year 2007) revealed is a reality that many will find hard to accept: America’s“New Establishment”is overwhelmingly dominated by Jewish figures or those who are on the payroll of or dependent upon Jewish families and financial interests that bankroll the powerful Israeli lobby in America. That conclusion—however “offensive” or “controversial” in the eyes of some people—is inescapable.
Vanity Fair’s 2007 list goes from 1-100, but there are actually 108 names on the entire list, with eight instances where there are two names listed (sometimes one or both names being Jewish, in other cases not).
So on that basis, although there are 62 individuals out of the total 108 listed who are Jewish (meaning that 57% of those listed are Jewish), the actual total of Jewish names actually occupy 62% of the power positions based on the list on a 1-100 basis.
And because there are at least four individuals who may be Jewish, according to some sources (not necessarily reliable, it should be noted),we could extrapolate and say the possible grand total of Jewish names on the list is actually 66—out of 108—meaning that 61% of those on the list are Jewish, occupying 65% of the power slots (on the basis of 1-100).
There are also rumors about Jewish ancestry on the part of at least one of the individuals appearing on the list, but because there is no proof one way or the other,we have not listed that individual as being Jewish.And this means, of course, that if that person is of Jewish descent that the percentage of Jewish names and influence (vis-a-vis that list) would thus increase.
In any event, considering the solid information that is available—rumors and allegations notwithstanding—no matter how one calculates there is absolutely no question that the most powerful members of “the New Establishment”—as perceived by Vanity Fair—are Jewish.
And it should be noted that Vanity Fair’s assessment of who constitutes “the New Establishment” is one critics would be hard-pressed to dispute. This magazine has never been accused of promoting “conspiracy theories” or “anti-Jewish hatemongering” in any way, shape or form. In fact, the magazine is very much considered to be “in” and a “must” read among people who want to be fashionable!
The fact that a Jewish-owned publication has published the names of these Jewish power brokers (without specifically citing their ethnic and religious heritage) is interesting, especially since Israel’s prestigious newspaper, The Jerusalem Post, on Oct. 11, 2007, heralded publication of the list, saying in a headline that “Jewish power dominates [at the] Vanity Fair [list].“ The reporter for the Post, Nathan Burstein, noted:
It’s a list of “the world’s most powerful people,” 100 of the bankers and media moguls, publishers and image makers who shape the lives of billions. It’s an exclusive, insular club, one whose influence stretches around the globe but is concentrated strategically in the highest corridors of power. More than half its members, at least by one count, are Jewish.
It’s a list, in other words, that would have made earlier generations of Jews jump out of their skins, calling attention, as it does, to their disproportionate influence in finance and the media.
Making matters worse, in the eyes of many,would no doubt be the identity of the group behind the list—not a pack of fringe anti-Semites but one of the most mainstream,glamorous publications on the newsstands. The list would seem to conform to all the traditional stereotypes about areas of Jewish over-representation.
Although the “mainstream”media in the United States failed to note the Jewish prominance on the list— which can correctly be called predominance, since Jewish people are said to be less than even 3% of the American population—the news about the list was widely commented upon in American Jewish community publications.
Joseph Aaron, editor of The Chicago Jewish News, said that his readers should “feel very, very good about” the news that their co-religionists are so powerful in America. In the Vanity Fair list, reproduced here and annotated with factual details regarding those names on the list, the Jewish names appear in italics. And although it is possible that there are other Jewish names on the list, there is no solid research available confirming it.
Also, note, for example, that media baron Rupert Murdoch—who appears at number one on the list—is listed here as being Jewish even though he “officially” is not.
This bears a word of explanation. It is often said that Murdoch traces his Jewish roots through his mother, whose maiden name was Green. Those who say that Murdoch is Jewish cite her family name as“proof”of her Jewish antecedents since the name Green is often Jewish. However, this author’s own source on the matter of Murdoch’s Jewish ancestry—an international businessmen who previously had close ties to Murdoch—has advised that Murdoch’s Jewish ancestry does come from his mother’s side, but that the Jewish blood is not from the Green name itself (as so many believe).
No matter. Whatever his ethnic antecedents, Murdoch has been a frontline supporter of Israel and the global Zionist cause,no surprise considering the fact that his primary financial backers in his rise to power were the powerful Rothschild, Bronfman and Oppenheimer families whom are all very definitely Jewish.(An account of the rise of Murdoch and his media intrigues appears in this author’s earlier work, The Judas Goats.)
Since the release of the list, several Internet sources have alleged that several other names on the list (that are not indicated here as being Jewish) are Jewish; however, our research does not indicate that this is so.The bottom line is that the preponderance of the names are indisputably Jewish, whether the disputed names are or are not.
Also significant is that the roughly 45-50% of the names on the list that are not definitely known to be Jewish or that are clearly non-Jewish are the names of individuals who are directly beholden to Jewish families and financial interests for their own power and privilege. Rupert Murdoch is perhaps the most prominent among this group.
Secondly, in this realm, is Warren Buffett—listed at No. 6. Although not Jewish, he has long been in partnership with the Rothschild Empire and is a primary force in the powerful Washington Post-Newsweek media combine. While the Post is best known as the fiefdom of the American-based Jewish Meyer-Graham family, the evidence indicates that primary behindthe-scenes investors bankrolling the influential Post empire have always operated in the sphere of Rothschild-connected banking interests operating on American soil. The Meyer/Grahams, themselves, are related to the San Francisco-based billionaire Jewish heirs of the Levi Strauss clothing kingdom, which, in turn, is a major force in global advertising revenues.
Seventeen of those listed are either actors, entertainers and television and news media personalities who—while now wealthy as a consequence of their fame—owe their fame (and wealth) to the patronage of the owners of the mass media which made these 17 figures household names: for example, individuals such as Fox News agitator Bill O’Reilly and Steven Colbert, among others.
Three listed—Pinault, listed at 29, and Gagosian and Pigosi—listed at 84 and 86—are figures in the art world, which is known to be dominated by Jewish interests.
Eight others, such as Bernard Arnault (listed at 8), Giorgio Armani (listed at 37), Miuccia Prada (at 44), Karl Lagerfeld (at 52), Martha Stewart (at 54), Oscar de la Renta (at 53) Diego Della Valle (at 63) and Donatella Versace (at 81) are figures in the fashion and perfume industries—both of which are totally dependent on garment manufacturing (dominated almost exclusively by Jewish families and financial interests) and on department store distribution and the advertising industry, both of which are likewise dominated by the same elements.
Two of those listed—Bill Clinton and his former vice president Al Gore—are only politicians—note the clarification “only”—both of whom were installed in their positions of power through the patronage of Zionist financial interests. Note, by the way, that Gore’s daughter, Karenna, has married the great-great grandson of Jewish plutocrat Jacob Schiff, a satellite of the powerful Rothschild family. Informed students of history know that Schiff was instrumental in financing the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia.
Several others are officers of media giants dominated by Jewish financial interests, acting as well-paid “fronts” for the controllers behind the scenes.
For example, Richard Parsons,an African-American, is listed at 18th place,but he is no more than a front man at Time-Warner.
And as those who know the history of Time-Warner are well aware, that media empire has been dominated since at least the late 1960s, by elements linked to the organized crime syndicate of Jewish gangster, Meyer Lansky (who worked closely with Israel’s Mossad) and to the Lansky-connected liquor empire of Sam Bronfman,longtime chief of theWorld Jewish Congress (WJC),and his son,Edgar Bronfman,who recently retired as head of the WJC. It has been widely asserted that the idea that Jewish families and financial interests were very powerful was “an old wives’ tale,” a “ridiculous anti-Semitic canard with no basis in reality,” said to be the product of a “discredited czarist forgery.”However, the new Vanity Fair assessment suggests otherwise
and reinforces the theme of this author’s earlier work, The New Jerusalem, which had already documented in detail what Vanity Fair has now confirmed:“Zionist power in America.”
In the list from Vanity Fair that follows, those known to be of Jewish extraction are listed in italics.The names of three individuals whose origins are unknown—but who have been said to be Jewish by some sources on the Internet that adopted this list for their use—are in boldface.Those who are definitely not known to be Jewish or of Jewish extraction are in regular type.
The descriptions of the individuals did not originally appear in the Vanity Fair list, but are, instead, annotations by this author, Michael Collins Piper.The list of the individuals follows.
1. Rupert Murdoch, billionaire global media baron financed by the Rothschild, Bronfman and Oppenheimer empires. (The controversy surrounding Murdoch’s apparent Jewish roots was examined earlier.)
2. Steve Jobs, chief executive officer of the worldwide Apple computer conglomerate.
3. Sergey Brin and Larry Page, founders of Google, the Internet giant.
4. Stephen Schwarzman and Pete Peterson, founders of the Blackstone Group, a financial investment giant, representing shadowy cliques of plutocratic predators.
5. Warren Buffett, a longtime U.S. satellite of the European Rothschild family and one of the owners of the Washington Post publishing group.
6. Bill Clinton, former president of the United States.
7. Steven Spielberg, Hollywood producer and director, perhaps the most powerful man in the movie industry.
8. Bernard Arnault, French industrialist whose growing empire produces such luxury label items as Louis Vuitton, Christian Dior and Dom Perignon, among others.
9. Michael Bloomberg, billionaire New York mayor and possible presidential candidate who made his fortune in the financial news information industry.
10. Bill and Melinda Gates, the husband-and-wife team who are the rulers of the Microsoft computer colossus.
11. Carlos Slim Helú, Fortune magazine says this Mexican billionaire of Lebanese descent is the world’s richest man,controlling 200 companies that account for 7% of Mexico’s gross domestic product.
12. H. Lee Scott, president and chief executive of Wal-Mart. (Note:some Internet versions of this list have suggested Scott is Jewish, but we have not found definitive proof of this, so we err on the side of caution by NOT listing him as Jewish.)
13. Ralph Lauren, fashion industry tycoon.
14. OprahWinfrey, widely promoted television personality.
15. Barry Diller and Diane von Furstenberg (husband and wife). Diller is a Hollywood figure who is now a major player in the television home shopping business. His wife is a major fashion designer.
16. David Geffen, Hollywood business partner of aforementioned Steven Spielberg and a major movie industry figure in his own right.
17. Howard Stringer, chief executive of the Sony corporation.
18. Richard Parsons, African-American front man was chief executive officer and chairman of the board of directors for the Zionist rulers of the Time-Warner media empire. (Recently stepped down.)
19. Al Gore, former vice president of the United States and father-in-law of an heir to the Schiff international banking fortune that financed the Bolshevik Revolution.
20. Larry Ellison, chief executive officer of Oracle, the database software giant known for his patronage of Israeli causes.
21. Herb Allen, head of the influential privately owned investment house of Allen & Co; he convenes an annual conclave of elite industrialists at Sun Valley, Idaho.
22. Jeff Bewkes, recently became CEO at the Time-Warner media empire (which has long been under the influence of the Bronfman family and other Zionist elements).
23. Jeff Bezos, the founder of the Amazon.com book and video Internet powerhouse.
24. Peter Chernin, runs Fox News for Rupert Murdoch and Murdoch’s behind-the-scenes sponsors.
25. Leslie Moonves, head of CBS, the fiefdom of the Sarnoff family.
26. Jerry Bruckheimer, Hollywood producer— major films and weekly television.
27. George Clooney, film star and supporter of liberal causes.
28. Bono, rock star and global poverty activist.
29. François Pinault, luxury brands king/art collector
30. Roman Abramovich, Russian oilman and financial wheeler dealer.
31. Ronald Perelman, billionaire cigar monopoly kingpin and head of the Revlon cosmetics giant.
32. Tom Hanks, actor/producer
33. Jacob Rothschild, global banking tycoon of the famed Zionist family and major behind-the-scenes influence in the United States through such associates as non-JewishWarren Buffett.
34. Robert DeNiro, actor/producer whose mother is Jewish.
35. Howard Schultz, founder of the Starbucks coffee shop chain.
36. Robert Iger, head of the Walt Disney media conglomerate.
37. Giorgio Armani, fashion designer and clothing tycoon.
38. Jeffrey Katzenberg, partner of aforementioned Spielberg and Geffen.
39. Ronald Lauder and Leonard Lauder, rulers of the Estee Lauder cosmetics empire; major figures in theWorld Jewish Congress.
40. George Lucas, Hollywood producer (best known for the Star Wars films and marketing gimmickry empire).
41. Harvey Weinstein and Bob Weinstein, major Hollywood producers.
42. Diane Sawyer and Mike Nichols (husband and wife). Sawyer is a television “news”figure; Nichols, an influential Hollywood producer-director.
43. Bruce Wasserstein, chief of the powerful Zionist investment house of Lazard and owner of NewYork magazine.
44. Miuccia Prada, famed fashion icon and handbag designer.
45. Steven Cohen, hedge fund manager at SAC Capital Advisers.
46.Tom Cruise, actor/producer. (It has been rumored Cruise has some Jewish blood but we do not include him here.)
47. Jay-Z, rapper/entrepreneur
48. Ron Meyer, chief of Universal Studios, now under Bronfman family
49. Frank Gehry, architect.
50. Arnold Schwarzenegger, actor-turned-governor of California, closely associated with Rothschild family associateWarren Buffett (see above).
51. Henry Kravis, leveraged buy-out king at Kohlberg, Kravis & Roberts; his wife is a major player in the Council on Foreign Relations, the New York-based adjunct of the Rothschild family’s London-based Royal Institute of International Affairs.
52. Karl Lagerfeld, head of the Chanel perfume empire.
53. Oscar and Annette de la Renta, fashion designers.
54. Martha Stewart, popular television personality and home products tycoon.
55. Mickey Drexler, chief of the J. Crew fashion company.
56. Michael Moritz, financier previously associated with Google and former journalist who was San Francisco bureau chief for Bronfman-controlled Time magazine. Holds an interest in Pay Pal and in Yahoo.
57. Brian Roberts, heads Comcast, the nation’s largest cable company and second-largest Internet provider.
58. Roger Ailes, runs Fox News channel for Murdoch and associates.
59. Vivi Nevo, Israeli-born international investment tycoon who holds large stakes in Time-Warner, Goldman Sachs and Microsoft. (One of his principal associates is Israeli arms dealer, Arnon Milchan, a major backer of Israel’s secret nuclear weapons development program.)
60. Mick Jagger, rock star.
61. Jeff Skoll, film producer.
62.Vinod Khosla, Indian-born,American-based major investor in “green” technologies such as solar, clean coal, fuel cells and cellulosic ethanol.
63. Diego Della Valle, major figure in the luxury accessories fashion industry, notably the Tod’s shoe company.
64. Stacey Snider, co-chief of DreamWorks, the Spielberg-Geffen-Katzenberg combine in Hollywood.
65. Brian Grazer and Ron Howard, major Hollywood producers.
66. John Lasseter, Disney-Pixar studios.
67. George Soros, infamous international wheeler-dealer.
68. Philippe Dauman,runsViacom media giant for Zionist mogul Sumner Redstone (who also controls CBS).
69. John Malone, runs Liberty Media (Discovery Channel, USA network etc); formerly associated with Jerrold Electronics, founded by Milton Shapp, a devout Zionist who served two terms as governor of Pennsylvania.
70. Sumner Redstone, owner of the Viacom/CBS media giant.
71. Paul Allen, head of Vulcan investment house and co-founder, with Bill Gates (see above) of the Microsoft empire.
72. Eddie Lampert, money manager for major figures in the global elite; member of the secret Skull & Bones fraternity at Yale.
73. Leon Black, major investor with controlling influence at Telemundo, Spanish-language broadcasting, Harrah’s casino empire, and Realogy, which controls real-estate companies such as Coldwell Banker and Century 21.
74. Jann Wenner, owner of Rolling Stone magazine
75. Eric Fellner and Tim Bevan Working Title Films, London. (Note: some Internet versions of this list have suggested Bevan is Jewish, so we err on the side of caution by NOT listing him as Jewish.)
76. Jerry Weintraub, Hollywood producer.
77. Donatella Versace, fashion empire head.
78. Thomas L. Friedman, NewYork Times columnist.
79. Tim Russert, NBC news commentator (now deceased).
80. Charlie Rose, PBS television news commentator and talk show host.
81. Joel Silver, Hollywood film producer.
82. Frank Rich, NewYork Times commentator/ author
83. Jonathan Ive, designer of the iPod, iMac and Iphone. (Note: some have suggested Ive is Jewish, but we have not found definitive proof of this, so we err on the side of caution by NOT listing him as Jewish.)
84. Larry Gagosian, owner of art galleries in NewYork, London and Los Angeles,closely associated with Zionist billionaires such as David Geffen and
S. I. Newhouse Jr., etc.
85. Charles Saatchi, owner of the famed Saatchi Gallery and longtime major figure in the public relations industry.
86. Jean Pigozzi, art collector and longtime close associate of the Rothschild family.
87. Stephen Colbert, television-based political satirist/host.
88. Bill O’Reilly, Fox television conservative talk show host.
89. Jon Stewart, TV personality and pundit.
90. Steve Bing, film producer.
91. Eli Broad, billionaire investor and patron of Zionist causes.
92. Michael Milken, Wall Street predator, ex-convict, and devoted supporter of Israel.
93. Arthur Sulzberger Jr., owner of the New York Times media empire.
94. Ron Burkle, supermarket and media magnate (including Motor Trend and Soap Opera Digest).
95. Scott Rudin, Hollywood producer
96. Jimmy Buffett, singer and musician, branching into investments.
98. Arianna Huffington, writer and television personality.
99. Doug Morris, runs Universal Music for its owners, the Zionist Bronfman family and its wide-ranging empire.
100. Jimmy Iovine, head of Interscope Records and closely associated with aforementioned Zionist music tycoon David Geffen. (Note: multiple Internet sources suggest Iovine is Jewish. However, there is an Italian crime network, the Iovine family. Because of the ambiguities here we have again chosen to err on the side of caution and not include Iovine as Jewish. The fact remains, though, that he is closely associated with Jewish tycoon David Geffen and, of course, it is possible Iovine is of partial Jewish extraction.)
For the record: a version of this list as originally annotated by the author, Michael Collins Piper, has been published in various places on the Internet, but versions of that list have included a number of errors.
This version, as appearing in these pages, should be considered the author’s definitive work on this topic.
Any errors here are mine and mine alone.
And it should also be noted that a subsequent version of the Vanity Fair list of“the New Establishment”—for the year 2008—was notably different in tone. Some “new” names were added—including at least one rich Muslim Arab—and others were removed.
It was apparent that Vanity Fair was clearly trying to take away the “sting” after the preponderance of definitively Jewish names appearing on the 2007 list (described above) was noted by critics of Jewish power—perhaps too often—on the Internet.
But the Vanity Fair list is—in the end—by no means absolute proof of Jewish power operating in the sphere of the Rothschild family. Rather, the totality of all of the other firm evidence of Jewish money and influence that comes from a wide variety of sources—most of them Jewish—confirms precisely the basic conclusions that could be drawn from the “fun” list compiled by the stylish monthly magazine.
America truly has emerged as the New Babylon and is the vehicle by which the dream of a Jewish Utopia—the New World Order—is being utilized to accomplish the fulfillment of that Talmudic agenda by our modern-day Pharisees. (…)
The rare French lithograph from the mid-1880s portrays the Jew as standing at the top of the French social, political and economic pyramid, outranking the king, the nobility, the clergy, the military, the beggars and the peasantry. (Lithograph from the private collection of Michael Collins Piper.)