Skip to comments.Russian Lawmaker: 'Jews Destroyed Russia'
Posted on 02/14/2014 5:13:40 AM PST by Impala64ssa
A Russian Member of Parliament (MP) burst out in an anti-Semitic tirade last Thursday, attacking other Russian lawmakers as "Jews" responsible for the 1917 Communist revolution and the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.
Oleg Bolychev, an MP from the ruling United Russia party, called his opponents "Jews, mired in opposition," during a debate at the regional parliament in Kaliningrad, reports AFP.
"At the start of the 1990s foreign spies were infiltrated into our government who oversaw the destruction of our state," claimed Bolychev. "You destroyed our country in 1917 and you destroyed our country in 1991."
The Russian Jewish Congress said it was "indignant" over the anti-Semitic blaming of Jews for Russian failures, and called for an investigation.
Alexander Khinstein, a fellow United Russia MP, also spoke out against his party member, saying "it is incredible that a public figure can make such extremist statements."
Meanwhile Bolychev struck back, saying labels of extremism were "ravings and provocations." He also claimed his blaming of the Jews for "destroying Russia" was not anti-Semitic, saying "I was not talking about Jews but about the situation in the country. I was speaking about traitors who destroyed a great state twice."
According to Alexander Verkhovsky of the NGO Sova, which studies racism in Russia, "xenophobia is such in Russia that it now appears in the official discourse which was controlled up until now."
Russia has also embraced the enemies of the Jewish state, sealing a $1 billion energy deal with the Palestinian Authority (PA) in late January. During his visit to Russia during which the deal was signed, PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas called on Russia to play a greater role in peace talks between Israel and the PA.
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
Conservative Christians to a lesser extent.
“You destroyed our country in 1917 and you destroyed our country in 1991.”
Wouldn’t that mean they just fixed what they messed up in 1917?
Bolychev has an Amen Chorus right here on FR.
I guess if your only criteria for call a state GREAT is size Russia in 1917 and 1991 could be considered great.
From any other criteria Russia at those times would hardly be considered great.
What really brought down Russia both times was weak and indecisive leaders and years of government bloat and excessive taxes. Sounds familiar doesnt it.
Who knew the goings on at the regional parliament in Kaliningrad were so important to American conservatives...
I think he minimizes the role of Vodka.
The Bolsheviks merely destroyed Christian Russia, built a horrific police state, and killed tens of millions of Christians. It was the US and Europe, with generous transfers of wealth, equipment, and technology, that built up the Soviet Union into a superpower.
That is unfair and untrue. Conservative Christians are the most likely to support Israel and consider themselves part of the Biblical understanding of "Israel" as a definition for "God's chosen people," with whom Christians were "grafted in."
It is liberal "Christians" who don't believe in Biblical truth, who doubt the divinity of Jesus or the divinity of his conception, who turn their churches into country clubs or extensions of the Democrat Party, and who hold Bible-believing Christians in contempt.
Some leadership of new world order are technically Jewish, though by their actions, such as defying God, they’re not Jewish in any religious sense of the word.
Some leadership of new world order is not Jewish.
The business “ancestry” of new world order as we see it today goes back to the most powerful banking families which mostly originated in Italy.
Of course, are not just in banking, per se, but they own or control many different businesses. As investment bankers, once they dominate a nation’s investment banking community, they are then also dominating it’s financial regulatory regime as well as controlling the boards of publicly-held companies. We find the financial elites of a nation also, of course, controlling its business schools, which means they train every business school graduate to the way of thinking that they want to see. For example, this is why corporate America supports the global warming agenda.
New world order seeks to pervert every religion - every organization for that matter - and use it for their own purposes.
Part of new world order’s clever strategy is to divide and conquer, to pit every group against every other group.
Since new world order occasionally has need of a war or revolution, they need to keep “stock in trade” of agitprop going on constantly. They need to keep groups of people hating each other, so when they want to conduct a war or revolution (or terrorist attack), they have a network of people at high levels in all these groups, which they have the most secret ties with, to which they can quietly give the orders to make it happen.
It’s like that nasty little instigator kid who gets other kids to fight with each other, but stays quietly out of the fray himself. Except in this case, the instigator is a) building the weapons both sides fight with and selling them to the combatants and b) lending both combatants the money to buy the weapons with and c) building the equipment to rebuild with after the fight, d) running the companies that actually do the rebuilding and e) lending the money to the combatants to buy the rebuilding services and products from them to rebuild after the fight and f) placing even more of their minions as high-level advisors to both combatants after the fight, g) redrawing borders where both combatants live after the fight according to what benefits the instigator and h) using the conflicts to justify creating international (read “not under the control of any national government) “peace” or “diplomatic” organizations that enable them to have even more control, both overtly and covertly, of international diplomacy and espionage, as well as have an organization by which their business interests can be foisted upon smaller nations under the guise of “progress”.
Most of the significant events and results of a war seem like boring details - and most people are completely unaware of them.
All the major terrorists and criminals of the world, since they need to stay protected from law enforcement and need fairly large sums of cash in order to operate, have a need to make use of high-level connections within government and banking. Therefore, all such organizations only exist at the pleasure of their high-level connections, who very quietly hold back the normal course of government and banking investigative apparatus. If you’d like to test this idea yourself, just try to start moving millions of dollars of cash around, you’ll find that you very quickly attract the attention of regulators.
So the groups of the world, religions, races, etc. - they are just hapless stooges who are used and abused by new world order and have no clue as to who the instigator truly is, they’re so caught up in hatred, fear, anger, etc.
The biggest godfather of new world order in America is John D. Rockefeller Sr., who was a Baptist. The growth of his financial empire was financed by UK-based new world order financial elites, which turned his empire into the US subsidiary of those same elites, and the de facto financial backbone behind Wall Street. The Wall Street of Rockefeller-Morgan, in turn, enthusiastically aided the Bolshevik revolution with funding and investment. But make no mistake, the communism “project” was developed by the financial elites of the UK and Europe going back to the 1800s and late 1700s. The banking families of the world sought to dislodge any monarchies that would not cede enough financial control, and they especially detested the Romanov family going back to the early 1800s. Part of the purpose of WWI was a destabilization of the Russian Empire that would weaken the government enough to allow the overthrow of the Tsar. The Romanov fortune within Russia’s borders was confiscated by the revolution. The balances in Romanov accounts in banks held outside of Russia were never returned, i.e., the bankers very quietly looted that part of the wealth, since no one cared to stop them.
National politicians and heads of state are simply plying their trade, and they are subject to the same personal shortcomings we all are. They therefore listen to their bankers and advisors (of course their advisors work for the bankers), but perhaps few really understand that though they have “their” bankers, and their adversary nations have “their own” bankers - the bankers ALL talk to each other ! Duh.
By knowing which nations have which capabilities (since they finance and build those capabilities), and knowing - and creating - the financial situation each nation is in, the bankers can easily predetermine the outcome of wars.
“Gee, country A had a good go of it, but they ran out of natural resources, and country B kicked their butt. What a surprise.”
or “wow, country A had that fantastic technology that trumped everything country B had. What a shocker.”
Meanwhile, countless millions of people die in wars.
Countless millions are impoverished and for all intents and purposes enslaved as a result of a “revolution” where their government was overthrown. Oh, and their national wealth looted.
Sounds like a game that I’m tired of playing.
I think many people are getting very tired of it.
>> Bolychev has an Amen Chorus right here on FR.
My point was a follow-on to Impala64ssa’s post—Similar to Jews, Conservative Christians are a favorite target of the Left in fixing blame when things don’t comport 100% with liberal views.
Don’t be so quick to take offense when none is intended.
Oh, ok, I get it. Your comment was crystal clear, and I am in the wrong because it was so perfectly well-stated. Got it.
[ I think he minimizes the role of Vodka. ]
Socialism encourages drinking because it destroys self worth and give the victims of it a sense of total helplessness... Which leads to a lot more alcoholics, I mean just look at the alcoholism and drug usage in the inner city ghettos poisoned by American socialism.
[ Bolychev has an Amen Chorus right here on FR. ]
Go choke on your own vomit you troll, that’s right I said it.
6. The KGB plot to turn the Arab World against the Jews In 1972, during a breakfast in his office, KGB chairman Andropov told me that our disinformation machinery should ignite a campaign aimed at transforming Arab anti-Semitism into an anti-American doctrine for the whole Muslim world. The idea was to portray the United States as a war-mongering, Zionist country financed by Jewish money and run by a rapacious Council of the Elders of Zion (the KGBs derisive epithet for the U.S. Congress), the aim of which was to transform the rest of the world into a Jewish fiefdom. Andropov made the point that one billion adversaries could cause far greater damage than could a mere 150 million.
Interesting that it was the Soviets that worked to foster Antisemitism in order to weaken the United States.
If the Soviets were supposedly ran by the Jews, why would they attach such a large obvious bulls-eye to their OWN backs?
I think the Russian moron who blames the Jews is just another disaffected commie who can’t reflect on their own ideologies failings and so has to find a convenient Jewish scapegoat in his own vodka soaked ramblings.
“If the Soviets were supposedly ran by the Jews, why would they attach such a large obvious bulls-eye to their OWN backs?”
You obviously have not had a run in with a Soviet Jew. Many of the communist Jews in America are from the Russian communist machine.
[ My point was a follow-on to Impala64ssas postSimilar to Jews, Conservative Christians are a favorite target of the Left in fixing blame when things dont comport 100% with liberal views. ]
The whole world could be a “Communist Atheist Utopia” save for a small island in the south pacific with one Christian and one Jew on it and the commies would pin all their own troubles on this tiny tropical island.
[ You obviously have not had a run in with a Soviet Jew. Many of the communist Jews in America are from the Russian communist machine. ]
And why is this? It is this way because of the Jewish work and study ethic ingrained in them by their well meaning parents. This is a good thing by the way. However where it goes bad is that higher percentage of Jews go through the institutions of academia, where they are poisoned by the Socialist filth.
They turn their back on their Jewish Faith, they become atheists and communists, they are no longer Jewish. They no longer observe their own holidays but the Holidays of the state. They no longer deserve cultural identifier of being a Jew because they have sold their own birthright down the river like Esau for the promise of communist “Stew”.
Is this because of something wrong with the Jewish faith? No.
Is this because of something wrong with the Jewish Genetics? No.
Is this because of something wrong with the Jewish Culture? No.
It is a problem of Academia being poisoned by Socialist/communist agenda.
Why are There a lot of Communist FORMER Jews? Because of the Good Cultural work ethic that Is ingrained in Jews lend to a higher percentage of them passing THROUGH academia. In a way Jews are more a victim of Communism BECAUSE of this fact.
This is WHY we need to kill the monster that is Commie-Core in our schools, the first ones hit will be cultures that Push their kids to get a higher education.
“Why are There a lot of Communist FORMER Jews? Because of the Good Cultural work ethic that Is ingrained in Jews lend to a higher percentage of them passing THROUGH academia. In a way Jews are more a victim of Communism BECAUSE of this fact.”
No. Because the Russian Jews were central to the Communist revolution and many Russian Jews came to America to spread communism.
Their initial goal was to take over NYC radio and press but failed to take over the radio. They then saw the opportunity of movies and moved to Hollywood gaining control of the movies and the unions.
Read about Walt Disney and Ronald Reagan and their fight against the communists in Hollywood.
Pieter, please take me off your ping list.
Im very tired of playing this game because I have no say in who will win.
Ok, I removed you.
I disagree with your interpretation of what I have written. It is true many confuse the nation of Israel as a current political entity with the Biblical concept of Israel as a people under the God of Abraham. I do not make that mistake; however, it is a separate issue from the reason for my post, which was in response to an earlier post blaming "conservative" Christians for despising Jews. It just isn't so, regardless of the profit-seeking machinations of the New World Order.
Well said, my FRiend. Well said.
Your posts are very thoughtful. Mine are rushed because I should be shoveling snow before the sun gets lower!
Thanks for an interesting exchange...
1. Jews did not Destroy Russia.
2. Men are not capable of such planning. God laughs at their ambitions to “rule the world”. He has since before the tower of Babel.
3. The “New World Order” guys are a legend in their own minds.
“Obviously new world order knew the Bible when they were setting up the 20th century middle eastern chaos,..”
Historians refer to the Middle East as the Graveyard of Empires. No one can set up chaos like the people who live there; they are the only ones who can change how they believe and the resultant actions on those beliefs.
Have western intelligence agencies actions over the past 50-60 years have an impact on today’s events? Yes. But they haven’t exactly had great controllable results.
Two Washington, D.C., sources stated in 2008 that BHO2 had worked for the CIA in south Asia. Later, a third source in 2009 popped up to make the same claim. I haven’t read anything about such activities on the part of BHO2 since then. BHO2’s personality has made him the perfect puppet, and the New World Order isn’t made up solely of western elites.
So yes, we are reaping the crop of our interfering in other nation’s operations. But what you’ve said is a bit much, as it is difficult to control third world political situations to the extent you’ve described.
“Socialism encourages drinking because it destroys self worth and give the victims of it a sense of total helplessness”
That gets complicated. It’s much easier just to blame the Jews. Double blame goes to Jewish Bartenders.
>>The creation of the modern state of Israel was engineered by new world order financial elites originating mostly in the UK.<<
Probably, but following Kissinger and Meir official British position was just opposite.
Stalin has promised a Jewish state as part of a deal negotiated with certain NYC and Hollywood circles who lobbied for aid to Soviet Union from US government and businesses and also helped to create positive Soviet image in America.
In mid1930s Stalin established a Jewish Republic within Soviet Union near Korea but said circles said he was cheating and they wanted it in Palestine.
He has ignored them through late 1930s until WWII when he badly needed said lobby to pull for Soviet cause in US again. His position was that if they’ll do their best for him this time, he won’t ever screw them again.
Said people has trusted the old beast again and pushed for lend-lease, D-day etc. It is believed they also helped Soviets with a good press and assisted in stealing a Manhattan project.
This time Stalin could not ignore them and had to return a favor. In talks with FDR and Churchill he stressed that Jews in Europe has suffered enough and deserve to have their nation-state in Palestine (a part of a British Empire at the time). Churchill was furious and told FDR it was a communist plot. FDR initially backed an ally against Stalin but caved very soon.
By 1944 KGB special forces was all around Palestine training Jewish militias. Shiploads of captured German weapons were funneled there as well. British authority was under huge pressure dealing with Jewish ‘terrorists’ and their Soviet ‘advisors’. Later there was a huge risk that Soviet forces could move there through Iran to kick Brits along with Arabs into a sea and set a shop the way it was in Central Europe and North Korea.
Thanks for the ping/posts. Fascinating, educational, informative discussion. Thanks to every poster. BTTT!
I’ve heard of Afghanistan referred to as the graveyard of empires, not the entire middle east.
The Ottoman Empire lasted for centuries,
though the area is normally fairly contentious, but we can’t see the reality of outside the influence of financial elites because that influence is very sparsely reported if at all. We see a revolution in the news media and it’s simply presented as a homegrown domestic revolution, with no mention of any outsiders.
On the other hand, one only has to study American and European history to also see arguably similar contentiousness. We simply tend to forget the outrageous behavior of our own supposedly “civilized” part of the world. Corruption, immorality, political assassinations, wars, etc. - we have our rose-colored history that is taught in our government schools, but if you go through the whole thing, it’s loaded with turbulence, even though various European empires also lasted for centuries.
Government-school-taught history completely omits the behind-the-scenes actions of financial elites - even when those actions are a) reported in contemporaneous news accounts and b) key factors in the unfolding of events.
FWIW, a few links of interest, just skimming the surface, and missing much key information - but already there are lines in these articles that should set off warning bells in the mind of the logical reader:
You can search the web for a lot of information on MB interaction with Western operatives. It’s fairly widely known that the UK is a haven for Muslim Brotherhood and various Islamic terrorism operations, and, of course, the US has, as usual, its freewheeling open-door policy towards Islamic terrorists as they do with all sorts of criminals and revolutionaries. Of course, the governments of both the US and UK are officially “against” terrorism, but that’s only in a public relations messaging sense.
MB is supposedly a radical anti-imperialist group. And the rulers of most middle east nations are doing business with outside “imperialist” interests.
We have an apparent contradiction then, if elite financial interests that are outsiders to the middle east would a) be chummy with middle eastern national governments and do business with them yet at the same time b) facilitate fanatical opposition groups within those same nations.
Of course, it’s only a contradiction until you realize that controlling the fanatical opposition is perhaps the best control over the rulers of these nations.
I stumbled over the idea that new world order was controlling “everything”. It’s not every detail of daily life that’s controlled. It’s control of a few key people at the top, so, from time to time new world order can make some key moves to implement large-scale operations at the national level, things like creating central banks, getting certain laws passed, etc. They seek to control the framework and let the “little people” operate within that framework and get a “cut” off of everything they do, because they are getting their national and local governments to pay them interest out of taxes collected. The frameworks they create also allow them pretty much free rein in the financial realm to reap profits as they please, and through their business control and political influence to shape society how they want to.
Regarding Zionism, some links.
were introducing Zionism in the first half of the 19th century.
The Kalischer article omits that around 1836, Rabbi Kalischer wrote a letter to Anselm Mayer Rothschild, head of the Frankfurt branch of the family / business, explaining what he believed to be significant regarding the year 1840 in terms of messianic prophecy, and asking for Rothschild’s financial help in purchasing land in order to bring about the establishment of Israel as a modern nation.
I found this information in the book “American Aliya: Portrait of an Innovative Migration Movement”, by Chaim Isaac Waxman, pg. 40-41.
This is one bit of a very large amount of discussion regarding the topic during the 19th century. So Zionism is not new, it’s not even dating back to the Balfour Declaration and the WWI era, it’s at least almost a century before that.
is considered the “father” of modern Zionism, this article notes the now generally accepted influence of the much earlier Rabbi Alkalai on his thinking, as he was the rabbi of Herzl’s grandfather.
What logically stands out then, is that financial elites all throughout the 19th century were well aware of Zionism, and the movement did garner support and various organizations were founded. However it was not until the WWI era that we see the Balfour Declaration and the financial elites beginning to use their wealth and influence to really make things happen in the middle east.
If we bear in mind the influence of the financial elites in engineering WWI, and their desire to break up the Ottoman Empire as part of the spoils of war, what stands out is that that the elites knew that map-redrawing in Palestine would be possible at the close of the war. Thus, before war’s end was the time to get the Balfour Declaration made public to set the direction of the Palestine area in the war’s aftermath. Once Palestine was made a British mandate after the war, it was effectively held in reserve for future use by the elites, since they had effective control over British foreign policy.
Of course for decades prior to 1917 the importance of oil had been obvious (Rockefeller’s Standard Oil wealth had, in relative terms, by then easily surpassed that of, say, Bill Gates of today). Between the wars oil discoveries were popping up in the middle east, as European, UK and US companies (new world order controlled firms) were strategically working to be able to get at these natural resources cheaply, in nations without well-developed governments, politics or legal systems; a monopolist’s “wild west”.
Thus between the wars we see the MB being set up for use down the road, as a fanatical, anti-British, anti-Western, anti-Zionist Islamic fundamentalist group, one side of a middle east conundrum. We see Zionism moving forward as well, which provides the other side of the conundrum. The conundrum is pretty much a guarantee of strife. Al-Husayni, freewheeling provocateur that he was, went ahead and bonded with the Axis powers during WWII, cementing his “street cred” as truly opposed to all things Jewish.
From the time the United States failed to enter the League of Nations after WWI, the financial elites resolved to create yet another world war, as world war was the only way they could envision the United States joining an international governmental body of their making.
Thus the aftermath of WWII wold be the time to set up the actual modern nation of Israel, since during WWII winning the support of what muslim nations they could would be a top priority of the Allies, and introducing the nation of Israel before WWII would have interfered with that.
Of course, in American politics there seems to be no end to flogging this issue, even though historic anti-Semitism in the US has largely faded away. Somehow WASPs are typically characterized by the left as being “evil” for both supporting the nation of Israel and yet at the same time being anti-Semitic. And American financial and political elites of course support both sides lavishly with taxpayer dollars, and use the chaos to embark on trillions of dollars worth of military expenditures, NGO funding, Americans killed and wounded in wars, etc., to make sure global elites are happy with the business they do in each middle eastern country.
American trading and investment firms were heavily invested with both sides in World War 1. Those invested with the Triple Entente tried to get America into the war and to destabilize Central Powers. Those invested with the Central Powers tried to get America to stay out of the war and to destabilize Central Powers. They were backed by Irish and German Americans. These pro-Central Power financial interests supported revolutionary movements against the British (IRA..., Jihad) and Russia (Bolsheviks). This was no different that pro-Entente Financial interests using ethnic tensions and revolutionary movements against the Central Powers. Antisemitic untermench blame Jews for both when this is expedient. And they ignore the other players, factors, and what was going on. The biggest supporters of the Bolsheviks were the German high command, who brought the Soviet leaders in to Russia by train, armed and funded them. After the war, Germans hid their communist complicity by blaming the Jews, just as the untermensch in the German military spread the lies that Germany was never defeated.
Zionists did not make the Ottomans enter WWI.
Also, Zionists are not the financial elites of new world order.
The financial elites of new world order have their own plans and strategies.
As I said, Zionists approached Amschel Rothschild in 1836 and he rebuffed them.
When the elites saw that the Ottoman Empire would be no more, then obviously the old requests from Zionism made great sense to them.
My point was that the Bolsheviks were supported by the US and European governments and you just confirmed it. They were to continue to receive that support between WWI and WWII, during WWII, and during the Cold War. If the Communists didn't receive that support at anytime during those years they would have folded like a cheap suit.
It is far more complex. Remember that the US, Britain, and Japan all intervened in the Russian Civil War ostensibly to protect war materials from the Reds, who were deemed pro-German.
World War 2 was even more complex. For 18 months the Axis and the USSR were functionally allied, until June 1941. Aid was provided because Hitler was deemed the greater threat. Churchill made it clear, comparing Stalin to the Devil. The story was different in the FDR administration, which was rife with communists.
Its not complex. Its a plain as the nose on your face and again, you make the point yourself. The Communists were not just spies in the FDR Administration, they his most trusted advisers and making policy. Same thing with Wilson. Same thing with this creep currently in the White House.
I don't know how Hitler was worse than the Communists. The Communists had already slaughtered tens of millions of Christians, openly boasted of their determination to overthrow Christianity and Western Civilization and to that end spent the previous fifty years bombing and assassinating Western leaders and instigating bloody revolts the world over, including in the USA.
My hated conspiracy, huh? What did Winston Churchill say about this "conspiracy theory"-
"This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States)... this worldwide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the 19th century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire." Writing on 'Zionism versus Bolshevism' in the Illustrated Sunday Herald, February 1920
Churchill must have been one of those tin-foil hat wearing anti-Semites that lived in his mothers basement.
Your view of conspiracies is childish. There is no single conspiracy. There are competing conspiracies such as the Transnational Corporatist conspiracy (managed neoliberalism), communism, Sunni Islamists, Shia Islamists. These groups will work with each other towards common short term ends. The Nazis were their own conspiracy.
The banking families from the early renaissance through today are the power behind national governments.
During that time they have always had deep ties with espionage, and information in general, such as obtaining the concession to run early post office systems in Europe (since at the time that was a key way of getting information) and have always been intimiate advisors to governments.
They migrated from Spain and Italy northward into Europe, and changed their family names to local names. Eventually the most powerful groups selected the City of London as the leading center of international banking. Continued efforts throughout the centuries at melding into the aristocracy of the UK (and Europe) and gaining greater control over its government and industry had, by the mid-19th century, effectively turned the UK government into little more than a front for the bankers.
A study of the British East India Company and other major corporations of the day, for instance, railroads, reveals the patterns of control that mirror America today.
The bankers, first of all, do not use only their own capital. In fact, only a small percentage of the total capital (both debt and equity instruments) is actually owned by them. The EIC had many investors, all of which, of course, were wealthy, and many were politicians. It had many bondholders, with EIC bond debt well into the millions of pounds.
The EIC project starts out with great promises to the government as to the gains that it can make for the Empire, and in return wins powerful concessions, some of which make it a de facto sovereign. As the aristocracy and government and wealthy persons are allowed to buy in, there develops an enormous political desire to see the firm do well, and it does remarkably well for quite some time for its investors. This gives the board of directors and key executives tremendous political clout, given the relationship of the investors, i.e., what’s good for EIC is good for the Empire. The international bankers simply maintain close control over the board and senior executives; a relatively small set of people. They simply choose new members from amongst trusted associates who will work on the same goals as they have.
There are fascinating connections all over the place that point to the UK being a “small world” for these financial elites. One of the key players in EIC was Jeremy Bentham. A key part of the economy at the time, sort of the “internet” of the day, was the burgeoning textile industry. As cotton plantations grew in the US, later on, largely financed by the UK financial elites, the British textile industry was one leg of the slave trade “triangle” (the slave trade was not so much an “American” institution but an institution of the financial elites who financed and profited from it, but I digress). The largest company of its kind were the textile mills at New Lanark, owned by a David Dale. Robert Owen, the supposed “socialist”, married Dale’s daughter and organized a buyout of the mills from Dale, who accepted a note from Dale. In 1806, Dale died, and Owen then continued to pay back Dale’s trustees. Owen was a bit shafty with one of his bankers, and he was fired from his position as manager of the mill. The mill struggled financially and was put up for auction on the last day of 1813. Owen craftily organized a partnership which bought it at auction, and he was back to running the mill. One of the key partners in the buyout - Jeremy Bentham.
If you read up on Jeremy Bentham, you’ll find all the perverted and immoral thinking, the pride and delusion of today’s new world order. Further reading on EIC will reveal that the leadership of the enormous firm started their own universities to have people trained in their secular-humanist ideas, avoiding entirely the established universities which were under the auspices of Churches. Thus the students they turned out were “freed” from any and all Biblical morality, and could readily accept the suggestion that man could be his own “god”. All one has to do to verify this is research the history of each university and find out who its founders were; who financed it and who the first presidents/provosts were - and who they worked for prior to that job. The trails for many leading universities lead back to the same financial elites and their minions.
There were many economic ties within the UK economy to EIC, as it imported a tremenous amount of goods for various UK industries, it issued a lot of securities and paid returns to the owners of them, and it required a large amount of products and services that it purchased from UK companies. Being a supplier to EIC was practically an industry in and of itself.
And EIC, large as it was, is of course just one company. The other large businesses of the day, rail, shipping, etc., are also controlled at the top by people cut from the same mold, having the same thinking as the EIC board and management. It’s all about “extending the Empire” on the one hand, but on the other hand, the major capital markets firms (like Wall Street of today), closely controlled by the banking families, place those families quite firmly in control of who gets capital and who does not - and makes them the go-to people for the wealthy elites of the nation, since they are analagous to the “private wealth management” sector today.
With some research, you’ll find also that the banking elites carefully corrupted politicians, reducing them in many cases to pawns, and they maintained sophisticated espionage networks so their information was, on the whole, far better than that of the governments of Europe.
The “conspiracy” element greatly magnifies when one considers that the banking families in the UK operated in concert with those on the Continent; international banking knows no national loyalty - though they frequently pander or make pleas to the citizens of particular nations on the basis of “patriotism”.
What is really amazing is that the textile industry in early “industrial revolution” UK - is essentially simply a replay of how banking families operated in Italy in the preceding centuries. It was the same: international trade, set the townsfolk busy making things for you to sell and buying things from you, and become the areas banker, finally becoming the banker to the government itself.
Of course, near its end, EIC had financial woes - and then of course made the appeal to be, in essence, bailed out by the government. This, of course, is thought of as “the Crown” - but in truth, it’s ultimately the taxpayer. Does this all not ring a bell in terms of today ?
Many of the famous “English” names of the “enlightenment” period in business and politics - were actually transplants from Spain and Italy and were born into banking families, who simply Anglicized their names. Of course, the same is true on the Continent as well. We see the same power gained through being both lendors and intimate, top-ranked advisors. The same practice of making secular-humanist schools, the very well-cloaked financial pattern of “nationalization”, the same aristocratic roots of communism and socialism, all whitewashed in history with most of they key historical revolutionary leaders cutting their documented ties with their wealthy families. Once the ideas took hold, many simply ran with them, and did not understand how the revolutions and nationalizations could be of use to the very monopolist “capitalists” that they were theoretically “revolting” against. Those at the top of the revolutions, of course, knew of the ties to banking elites, such as with the “Red Cross” mission to the Bolshevik revolution, the majority of the membership of which consisted of American bankers bringing millions of dollars to keep the revolutionary effort afloat. The elites, of course, never want this publicly acknowledged in either America or Russia.
Much as been said here of Churchill and FDR - but nothing has been said of their real ancestry, their family finances, and their relationships with the financial “powers behind the throne”. FDRs grandfather was an opium trader, for example. All the talk about politicians is really quite meaningless without talking about the underreported money and power that was the real driver of their actions. Their public statements are simply fluff for the masses to slurp up.
General Electric, Standard Oil, IBM, etc., various Wall Street banks - were intimately involved and essential to Germany getting prepared for WWII. After complete economic desolation after WWI - its quite preposterous to think that international banking was not essential to the reestablishment of relative prosperity just a decade later. It takes capital investment to make such things happen. For the German military, specifically, it took capital plus some key technology, which the American firms supplied with full knowledge of their key leadership that Germany was being prepared for another war. Not only do we know the types of technology transferred, but we also know that leaders of such large corporations with international operations were far more in the know about national strategies and capabilities than politicians were in those days, due to the information flow up the the corporate hierarchy, and the business operations going on in all the various nations and their knowledge of their own industries, i.e., who is buying what.
As a side note, international banking does indeed back all the global governance organizations, i.e., United Nations, UNESCO, etc. The Rockefellers donated the money to purchase the land the UN sits on. Without WWII, there would be no United Nations. In terms of “communism”, there are actual old NY Times articles that ran stories on how closely Wall Street was tied with communism. These ties make absolutely no sense other than if communism is simply the idea of elite banking families having an entire nation as a captive slave state. There is no rational reason why “capitalists” would support a regime that supposedly “nationalizes” industries and “confiscates” wealth. Unless the nationalized industry is financed by the elite bankers, and their wealth is never confiscated, only that of the “little people”, so ensure there is never any competition from them.
How glaringly open do the wealthy have to be in their support of “socialism” and “communism” for the sheeple to admit that those “isms” are of, by and for the elites ?
Once again - the financial elites do not equal “Jews”. The financial elites are a relatively tiny group; there are millions of Jews. Financial elites will throw their best friend under the bus to work one of their own plans; they view EVERYONE else as cattle for them to make use of and slaughter if they see fit. The financial elites see themselves as having the right to choose who lives and who dies; who can afford their food and who can’t; who gets medicine and who doesn’t. The true financial elites are at the very top of a very large structure of minions, like Jeremy Bentham, that work for them in one capacity or another. It may be at a Wall Street firm, it may be at one of their tax-exempt foundations, it may be at a large, publicly-held manufacturing company, it may be in the military or CIA, it may be at a university or in the government, or in some “activist” organization, etc.; in any case, it’s only a select few in top, key positions who realize that their particular organization is taking its cues from international bankers. The rest are just part of their organization, working towards its internal goals; they have no “need to know” anything other than that.
FYI, New Lanark is a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
Just to make the connection between Communism / Socialism and Robert Owen mentioned above, that is, the connection from the elites’ perspective...
Keep in mind that Owen and Bentham were close enough to be business partners.
New Lanark was not a small mom-and-pop, but an immense factory that employed much of the local population.
Owen was wealthy once his deals came to fruition, and he was rubbing elbows with executives from the enormous East India Company.
Owen was always looking for efficiences, i.e., to increase the profitability of shareholders, and was very adept at it. In business dealings he was clever to the point of pushing ethics to the limit of what was acceptable at the time.
New Lanark involved company housing for workers. When companies provide housing for employees, the portion of their pay they would spend on housing is thus paid by the company at cost; this is the lowest possible cost.
Jeremy Bentham proposed a prison system he called the Panopticon, a building designed to basically house convicts like hamsters in a work-eat-sleep circular structure, and allow a contractor to run the cage at a profit.
Viewed in this light, despite what typical biographies of Robert Owen lead one to believe, Owen’s later efforts at establishing communes take on a whole new character.
Undoubtedly the partners that lorded over the employees of the New Lanark mills, creative and “driven” as they were, continued to seek a way to stay competitive with the prices of their products while trying to come up with innovative ways to increase their margin on labor. They were already getting employees to work for as little as possible... if only they could go that little bit further, and instead of only providing housing, why not provide everything they would need. Schools for children (which they did), all food, clothing, etc. Why, they could make the mill a small village that was basically self-sufficient. Have some employees assigned to farming and food production, have company doctors, etc. If the workers could be convinced that life in the mill/commune was so promising... perhaps they would rather simply join up and work their entire life there, in exchange merely for cradle-to-grave services. If absolutely everything needed (wanted ?) was provided - like an all-inclusive cruise vacation - they would not need cash. Why bother - they could have a “wonderful-enough” life with what the forward-thinking company provided. And they’d never have to worry about saving for their own retirement; they’d simply see their workload expectations decrease as they aged, and be able to live out their life in relative comfort while the working-age folks shouldered the burden.
Employees could be paid in company scrip instead of cash; the employee salaries expense would go to zero, replaced with just the costs of providing what was needed to keep the hamsters weaving cloth.
All that nameless “rabble” of “simple workers” would have no thought of the balance sheet accounts of their factory operation that stands in as their hometown, no idea of the bonds it issues to finance its capital equipment purchases and building construction, nor interest it pays on them. Of course, they’d have no idea of the profits realized each year by the partners who owned it, since those owners would simply parade around as if they were simply high-level managers themselves.
Of course, Robert Owen’s future attempts at his own communes failed, as he misjudged the productivity and availability of such folks as would entertain giving up their personal possessions in exchange for an open-ended promise of three hots and a cot.
But alas, that same vein of thinking persisted throughout the leading “thinkers” of Europe in the 19th century, especially those in the employ of or attending the universities of the financial elites, the patriarchs of the international banking world. The mid 19th century saw communist/workers revolutions, as well as socialist views spreading rampant throughout Europe, amongst the lower classes - and the upper classes and intellectuals as well.
And when we consider the notion of the communist or socialist nation - what is it but the factory town or commune writ large ?
It solves the problem of individual citizens not wanting to join the “company” or “town” commune.
The whole nation turns into a giant commune, and the citizenry is entirely forced into the scheme.
It’s simply international banking with enough capital raising capability, enough diplomatic and espionage connections to ensure the non-interference or support of other nations, enough of a revolutionary organization inside the target nation - and enough audacity - to consider inciting a revolution to the end of placing people loyal to them as a puppet government to rule over a newly “free” and completely unsuspecting population.
You can search the web for
flag of British East India Company
Heres an interesting article from 1937...
The STRIPED FLAG of the EAST INDIA COMPANY, and its CONNEXION with the AMERICAN STARS and STRIPES
Article by Sir Charles Fawcett
Russian Lawmaker: Jews Destroyed Russia
INN | 2/14/2014, 12:13 AM | Ari Yashar
Posted on 2/13/2014 7:40:43 PM by Olog-hai