Will Kenneth Clarke act upon this treason, or hide.Letter to Ken Clark!!!

Will Kenneth Clarke act upon this treason, or hide.

Posted on September 8, 2011 by ianpj

I thought you good folks should see this letter from Albert Burgess to Ken Clarke in his position as Lord Chancellor.

Albert knows his onions. So should Kenneth Clarke. Any bets on the man doing as he must, in law?


Kenneth Clarke
Lord Chancellor
The House of Lords

My Lord

Each house of parliament has a common law cognisance to run its own business, in its own way; neither house can by Common Law interfere in the internal working of the other house.

This is the constitutional settlement placed upon parliament by our forefathers, and described in the Prerogatives of the King by Sir Mathew Hale 1713 Chief Justice of the Kings Bench. And F W Maitland Late Downing Professor of the Laws of England in the University of Cambridge. At the university press 1908.

Sir Edward Coke Chief Justice of the Kings Bench 1628 ruled that parliament may some times pass a law which is repugnant or impossible to perform in which case the common law will intercede and strike it down. Giving the Common Law the status of higher law than statute law.

There are a number of cases of the cognisance of the commons to conduct its own business its own way, but I have not been able to find one case which deals with either house interfering in the running of the other house. Yet this is exactly what the House of Commons has done to the House of Lords, they started this process in 1661 after the restoration of King Charles II when the Commons told the Lords they could not amend a money bill only accept it or reject it, the commons were claiming without any legal authority, complete autonomy in all things financial. This was the commons interfering with the cognisance of the upper house to do its job of scrutinising legislation. For some inexplicable reason the Lords accepted this state of affairs. This was the precursor to all the subsequent parliament acts.

In 1910 Asquith put forward a money bill and the upper house being erroneously of the opinion that they had no authority to amend this bill rejected it. In fact the upper house had the common law right to amend it and return the amended bill to the commons for approval.

As a result Asquith put forward the first parliament act which limited the authority of the upper house, Asquith told the upper house if they did not consent to this bill he would put 500 new Peers into the hose who would vote for its abolition, when this bill to restrict the upper house was submitted to King Edward VII he refused the assent on the grounds it was unconstitutional and removed a protection from his subjects. In fact it interfered with the cognisance of the upper house to perform its duties in the manor laid down by the constitutional and common laws of England, these laws are so good they have travelled to every common law jurisdiction in the world. Even Talleyrand our sworn enemy said when the English Constitution goes freedom goes.

King Edward VII fell ill and died, and on coming to the Throne King George V was told by a government minister he keeps all his prerogatives but may not use any of
them unless he has the backing of a government minister. This principle is unknown to our constitutional or common law. The assent was given to the 1911 Parliament Act which effectively weakened the authority of the upper house but with no constitutional or common law authority for the commons to even contemplate such a move. The mere fact they are the elected house does not authorise their actions. Because at no time have the public been put in the constitutional picture, which would allow them to make an informed decision. As to whether they wish to weaken the upper house in this or any other way. In fact Asquith toured the country slanting the true position so much as to be an outright lie.

The 1948 Parliament Act was yet another interference with the cognisance of the upper house to perform its constitutional duties, as our forefathers set it up. Once again this was done without the benefit of law, nor is there any justifiable legal principle which can be quoted to justify the unjustifiable.

The 1998 House of Lords Act by the same token interferes with the cognisance of the upper house to determine itself who does or does not sit in the upper house. This is a clear breach of the constitutional arrangements of parliament and is contrary to constitutional and common law.

Each of the above acts has subverted the constitutional arrangements of parliament; this is the major crime of Sedition at Common Law, and at this level of Sedition an act of High Treason.

The letters patent as granted to a Baron of the realm are such as to be a clear and lawful order from the King, to the recipient of the letter patent to undertake certain duties on the Kings behalf, it is clear that the King can not possibly know or understand every thing put before him, he should have a good general understanding of his Kingdom, his subjects, and world affairs. But there will always be occasions when his knowledge or understanding will fall short of allowing him without assistance from reaching the right decision. In order that he has a ready source of advisors who are good and capable men, he uses those peers of the realm that he or his ancestors have appointed to Baronetcies, and the letters patent represent a lawful order from the King to the holder of the Letters Patent to undertake this work. They instruct the holder of the Letters Patent that he must sit in the upper house of parliament and scrutinise legislation passing through the parliament to ensure it is in the best interests of the country and his subjects, it further gives a lawful order to the holder of the letters Patent that he is to act as an advisor to the King. In short the King requires those with the best available knowledge and experience to advise him as to the best course of action under any circumstances.

England is a Monarchy and we all owe a duty of loyalty and obedience to our lawfully anointed sovereign, the letters patent are by our laws to be obeyed. For any one who ever they may be, whatever position they hold within the Kingdom be they farm labour or Prime Minister to come between the King and the holder of the letters patent so as to prevent the holder from carrying out the lawful commands of the King is for that person to set himself above the King. That by our law is an act of High Treason contrary to the Common Law of England and the 1351 Treason Act.

I respectfully submit that is just what Anthony Blair did when he put through the 1998 House of Lords Act. He in effect set Her Majesty’s lawful order to those hereditary peers sat in the upper house at nought thereby imagining the death of Her Majesty as a Sovereign Queen. Contrary to Common Law and the 1351 Treason Act.

He also removed Her Majesty’s honour as a Sovereign Queen by assuming he had a greater authority in this Kingdom than Her Majesty. Contrary to Common Law and the 1848 Treason Felony Act.

I would like you to explain to me why I should comply with any law passed in Parliament since 1911 because since that day parliament has not been properly constructed according to the tripartite agreement set in place by our forefathers, and as such it has no mandate to pass any legislation.

I would further request that for every hereditary peer removed from the upper house, under the 1998 House of Lords Act. A warrant should be issued for the arrest of Anthony Linton Blair one time Prime Minister of the United Kingdom on a charge of High Treason for imagining the death of the Anointed Queen of England Queen Elizabeth II Contrary to Common Law and the 1351 Treason Act.

Respectfully submitted

Albert Burgess

I won’t be holding my breath. The law is not for the elites. They can, and do, act with impunity.

H/T Capt Ranty (I thought this was so important it is copied in full)



9 responses to “Will Kenneth Clarke act upon this treason, or hide.Letter to Ken Clark!!!

  1. http://thy-weapon-of-war.blogspot.com/2010/07/douglas-reed-hitler-as-jewish-messiah.html

    Douglas Reed: Hitler as the “Jewish Messiah”, an accomplice of Communism and Political Zionism

    May 7, 2010

    (Compiled by Steve Campbell)

    Douglas Reed was a Londoon Times corrspondent in Europe during the rise of Hitler. He detected something fishy about the Hitler phenomenon.

    From Douglas Reed’s Somewhere South of Suez, 1951, pages 179-181:

    I must for clarity recapitulate this fascinating story as far as it now goes. Early in his twelve years of might, I began to suspect that Hitler was not what he professed to be: merely an arch anti-Communist and anti-Jew. His actions, I thought, would clearly help Communism and Political Zionism (and the outcome of the second war proved this.) I was at first puzzled that he did not see so plain a consequence. Later I thought he did perceive it and was the accomplice of these two powerful forces. Twenty years ago the theory might have been beyond credence. Today, in this century of masks and secret allegiances, it is reasonable.

    The man of one sworn loyalty, and a different, hidden one, is now a familiar figure in all countries; he has appeared in the trials of [Soviet spies] Dr. Alan Nunn May and Dr. Fuchs in England, of an M.P., officers and officials in Canada, and of certain persons in America.

    I thought Hitler a man of this type, but risen to the highest place instead of just to a high one. It seemed to me that, for great successes, which they could not otherwise achieve, Soviet Communism and Political Zionism needed an apparent antithesis, as a heavyweight champion needs a sparring partner. I believed Hitler played this part, and think the results of the last war uphold this reading of his part in our affairs.

    For one thing, his appearance was as mysterious as his disappearance. Although the British and Americans, when they reached Berlin and Vienna, were able to put their hands on a mass of documents one would have expected to be destroyed, the Viennese police dossier of Hitler’s formative years before 1914 has never been published.

    Chancellor Dollfuss is supposed to have been killed, in 1934, because he knew of it. His successor, Chancellor Schuschnigg, may also know of it; he was present at the Nuremberg Trial but was not put in the witness-box, although the invasion of Austria and his own treatment were matters in the indictment.

    At every turn a blank wall opposes those who try to find out what manner of man Hitler was, what he did and with whom he consorted in those significant years. Who enabled him, then, an obscure nobody apparently without a past, to spring into the central limelight of affairs in 1919, like the demon king in pantomime?

    I never learned an answer to these questions, but by 1938 I thought the Rabbi of Prague (see Disgrace Abounding, 1939) might be proved correct, who said: ‘Hitler is the Jewish Messiah.’ Not all rabbis agree that Political Zionism is Messianic, but this one thought so and by that standard could today claim to be right.

    Therefore I conjectured that this man-from-nowhere might in truth be the accomplice of Communism and Political Zionism, two forces which have always supported each other. His ‘Fascism’ thus seemed to me to be merely the third prong of one trident, with which the cauldron of our century is kept stirred.



    Therefore I conjectured that this man-from-nowhere might in truth be the accomplice of Communism and Political Zionism, two forces which have always supported each other. His ‘Fascism’ thus seemed to me to be merely the third prong of one trident, with which the cauldron of our century is kept stirred.





    In the weeks that followed, my English newspapers, every day, were filled with outraged cries about the maltreatment of the Jews, with appeals to help them. You would have thought, to read these papers, that Jews everywhere were on the run, being beaten up, robbed, murdered. Here in Prague, an hour from Hitler, I saw them every day and every night, dancing in the more expensive bars, lolling in the arm-chairs of the more expensive hotels, thronging the cafés, enjoying life, no wit less aggressive, monopolistic, loudly self-important, than they had ever been. Is London different? It was not when I was there.

    The contrast between these two pictures, the one I saw with my own eyes and the one my newspapers gave me, was very great. My English newspapers hardly spared a crumb of compassion for the Czech and German refugees from the Sudeten lands, whose numbers were twenty times as great as those of the Jews, and showed little concern for the continued murder of women and children in Spain and China.

    I began to suspect the motives for the outcry about the Jews. Here, it seemed to me, was the fellow-feeling of privileged classes at work again. I was glad when, as one still small voice in all this deafening chorus of generous but ill-apportioned indignation, The Times published a letter from a man who had been its Special Correspondent in China under the heading ‘Brutality and Suffering – The Inconsistencies of Compassion’.

    This letter said that the German Government’s measures against the Jews had ‘revolted the world’. This time, added the letter, the world, so often revolted, had expressed its feelings in action – for once. The British Government was finding territorial asylum for refugees, the American Government had recalled its Ambassador from Berlin, and so on and so on.

    But, said the letter, this made it difficult for people who looked farther afield than Europe to keep a sense of proportion. The sufferings which Hitler had inflicted on half a million people were terrible; but they were negligible compared with the sufferings which the Japanese army was inflicting on the Chinese people. In China nearly a million men had been killed or disabled — killed or disabled, nearly a million men — and the Japanese had butchered several tens of thousands of civilians, and had rendered destitute and homeless some 30,000,000 more. It would be surprising if 2,000,000 or 3,000,000, mostly old people and children, did not die in the winter of 1938-39. The cases of rape and beating were scarcely worth mentioning in this holocaust.

    The obligations of the British Government, by the written word and in the name of humanity, were the same in the one case as the other, said the writer, and he found the world’s conscience ‘a puzzling organism’.

    Does it regard [he asked] 100 dead or destitute Chinese as equivalent to one persecuted Jew, and may we then expect, when Japan’s victims top the 50,000,000 mark, to see Ambassadors withdrawn from Tokyo and international action taken to make life possible for the refugees? Or is it simply that the Jews are near at hand and the Chinese far off and yellow at that?’

    That is the question asked by this man, who knew his subject, on behalf of millions of Chinese, and it is the question I ask on behalf of hundreds of thousands of Czechs, Germans, and Spaniards.

    Just as the Jews tend to monopolize the callings and professions into which they penetrate, when there is no anti-Semitism, so did I find them monopolizing compassion and succour when there was anti-Semitism, and as their numbers are small compared with the great mass of non-Jews who are suffering from brutality and persecution in our times, I thought this to be the old evil, the squeeze-out of non-Jews, breaking out in a new place.

    The organized Jewish communities in the countries where anti-Semitism exists, or which it is approaching, have complete command of the technique of enlisting foreign help and sympathy. They understand it; this looking across the frontiers is in their blood. If a group of twenty Jews is put into no-man’s-land, the British and American Legations and Consulates in the nearest capital are stormed, the British newspaper offices too, the next day the entire British and American Press rings with the story, photographs appear, bishops write letters, committees get busy, soon the Jews are released and are on their way to a new land.

    Not far away 300 or 400 non-Jewish refugees may be starving in a hut. They have no organized community to care for them, to raid the Legations and newspaper offices on their behalf, nobody visits them, nobody knows that they are there or cares about them. They may rot.

    I have seen a great deal of the 250,000 refugees in Czechoslovakia, of whom about 15,000 are Jews, and have been dismayed by the way the small Jewish group, containing a fair proportion of comfortably situated people, contrived almost to monopolize foreign attention, while the outer world never heard a word about the young non-Jews, skilled workers and craftsmen, whom I would have paid to go to our colonies, but who were stagnating in hopeless desperation, without any prospect of emigration to a new country or chance of beginning a new life.

    I thought of these things on the evening I spent with Benno Israelovitchsky, in that dance-bar where all the young Jews were enjoying themselves. A very strange thing happened there. These young men were of the type which, as Benno Israelovitchsky had said, had helped to cause anti-Semitism in Berlin. Because he had said that, I wondered that he himself spent so much time and money in these places, behaved so ostentatiously. Was he any different, I thought?

    By chance I was able to answer that question. Benno Israelovitchsky, having a little drink taken, was in high good humour, danced with his friend, and, as he passed the violinist, slipped into his hand what seemed to be money, a twenty or fifty kronen note. The man bowed his thanks, unrolled it – and found a blank piece of paper. It was Benno Israelovitchsky’s little joke. As he came waltzing round again the young man said quietly to him, ‘Only a Jew would do that’.

    Immediately there was a fierce altercation. The manager came and separated the two men. Benno Israelovitchsky went off with him to his office. When he returned he said triumphantly, ‘I’ll show him. His contract is going to be terminated at the end of the month. “Only a Jew would do that.” And how often have I given that fiddler fifty crowns?’

    With the synagogues burning an hour away!

    Benno Israelovitchsky often telephoned to me after that. I was never at home. He may have wondered why.


    As you approached the area an implacable funnel took hold of you and led you straight to the Jewish refugees.

    On this occasion I was led at once to the Jewish refugees. There were thirteen of them. They were in a miserable plight, but their number was thirteen. In that same town were thousands of Czech, hundreds of German refugees. Their plight was in many cases worse, because nobody cared about them. Nobody ever went to see them. No foreign newspapers raised a clamour of protest and appeal in their behalf. No bishops prayed for them. They and their children were left to almost-starvation, to tuberculosis and scrofula, to death. Only with diligence and perseverance did I succeed in finding them.






    Freedom to express opinion is a basic right of our society, as long as it does not invoke persecution of others of course. What we are seeing is a large part of our society, those with faith, now being actively persecuted and their lives degraded. Smith is a prime example of the PC power-brokers ruining lives. Yes, this is like a communist state.
    – Mick, Chelmsford Essex, 23/10/2011 10:50
    Click to rate Rating 12Report abuse
    The level of wickedness in docking his pay over £10K because he believes in Jesus is shocking. What next?
    – NickM, London, UK, 23/10/2011 10:48
    Click to rate Rating 22Report abuse
    So much for “free speech”. It is “free speach” provided that the powers to be agree. He has only voiced his and many others opinion. Disgracefull.Take his employers to court, he will win hands down.
    – robert, portsmouth, 23/10/2011 10:47
    Click to rate Rating 18Report abuse

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2052319/Demoted-backing-gay-marriage-housing-managers-pay-slashed-criticising-new-law-Facebook.html#ixzz1bbBgz1g5

    Demoted for not backing gay marriage: housing manager’s pay slashed for criticising new law on Facebook
    By Jonathan Petre

    Last updated at 10:18 PM on 22nd October 2011

    Comments (491) Add to My Stories Share A housing manager has been demoted, and his salary slashed, after he criticised a controversial new gay rights law.

    Adrian Smith, a Christian, was found guilty of gross misconduct by his publicly funded housing association for saying that allowing gay weddings in churches was ‘an equality too far’.

    He posted the comment in his own time, on his personal page on the Facebook website, which could not be read by the general public.
    But after a disciplinary hearing, he was downgraded from his £35,000-a-year managerial job to a much less senior £21,000 post – and avoided the sack only because of his long service.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2052319/Demoted-backing-gay-marriage-housing-managers-pay-slashed-criticising-new-law-Facebook.html#ixzz1bbA3f1tR


    Angus Hanton, pictured, and his Labour-backed think-tank launched a report saying that ’empty nesters’ should be ‘encouraged’ through a new land tax to downsize. Not surprisingly, the proposals caused anger and concern among older people. The Mail on Sunday has discovered that Mr Hanton’s parents live alone in the five-bedroom red house, right, while he lives in the £850,000 white property, left. …read


    Village hall told it could lose funding if it lets BNP leader Nick Griffin’s speech go ahead
    Organisers told to repay rate subsidy if Griffin’s speech goes ahead
    Party accuse authority of trying to ‘blackmail’ village hall
    Council says event could undermine community harmony
    By Kerry Mcqueeney

    Last updated at 1:59 AM on 23rd October 2011

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2052212/Village-hall-told-lose-funding-lets-BNP-leader-Nick-Griffins-speech-ahead.html#ixzz1bbDJjk2p


    The former Mayor of London (pictured centre with wife Emma Beal) said the pair, including Janet Woolf (pictured right), wanted to start families but had not found Mr Right. And the 66-year-old hinted they did not use artificial insemination – suggesting he slept with the women while living with his then partner, Kate Allen (pictured left). In a further bizarre twist, he said he regularly went on holiday with the two women, his wife and all of their children at once. …read

    Everyone here seems to have a great deal of knowledge about ‘Gadaffi’s heinous crimes’ etc but I – an avid reader with a thirst for news – have never read or seen much suggestive of a blood-thirsty, tyrannical dictator. Was he really that bad?
    – Esox Lucius, Essex, 23/10/2011 1:56

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2052178/GADDAFI-DEATH-VIDEO-Moment-Libyan-dictator-killed-bullet-head.html#ixzz1bbGJWuez



    Within two years, the unemployment problem had been solved, and Germany was back on its feet. It had a solid, stable currency, with no debt, and no inflation, at a time when millions of people in the United States and other Western countries (controlled by international bankers) were still out of work. Within five years, Germany went from the poorest nation in Europe to the richest.

    Germany even managed to restore foreign trade, despite the international bankers’ denial of foreign credit to Germany, and despite the global boycott by Jewish-owned industries. Germany succeeded in this by exchanging equipment and commodities directly with other countries, using a barter system that cut the bankers out of the picture. Germany flourished, since barter eliminates national debt and trade deficits. (Venezuela does the same thing today when it trades oil for commodities, plus medical help, and so on. Hence the bankers are trying to squeeze Venezuela.)

    Germany’s economic freedom was short-lived; but it left several monuments, including the famous Autobahn, the world’s first extensive superhighway.


    Why Wall Street, Israel and D.C. need the illegal drug trade



    By Henry Makow Ph.D

    The ink wasn’t dry on the Versailles Peace Treaty before the Illuminati started work on World War Two by building Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party.

    Before 1919, Hitler had been a political “gun for hire” who had many Jewish friends and had flirted with both Communism and Socialism. Overnight he became a virulent anti-Communist and anti-Semite. What happened? He had become an army intelligence officer. Throughout the 1920’s the Reichswehr secretly funded his party and trained his SA “Brownshirts.”

    I suspect General Kurt Von Schleicher was the point man for Illuminati bankers like Max Warburg, whose Frankfurt I.G. Farben HQ was spared by Allied bombers, and whose Jewish mother lived in comfort in Hamburg throughout the war.

    In the Protocols of Zion, the author, an Illuminati banker, boasts they create or sanction anti-Semitism when it serves their purpose. “Anti-Semitism is indispensible to us for the management of our lesser brethren…this matter has been the subject of repeated discussions amongst us.” (Protocol 9). Hitler is an example of how anti-Semitism was created. The author continues:

    “It is from us that the all engulfing terror proceeds. We have in our service persons of all opinions, of all doctrines, monarchists, demagogues, socialists, communists and utopian dreamers of every kind…striving to overthrow all established forms of order. All states are in torture… but we will not give them peace until they openly acknowledge our international Super government…”

    There, in black and white, is the blueprint behind the NWO, UN, the EU and NAU, and every war until today. But the bankers have made us think it “racist” to pay heed. As if more than 1% of Jews were/are a conscious part of their heinous, diabolical conspiracy.

    Modern history consists of this long-term plan to foment needless wars in order to enslave mankind by destroying nation, religion, race and family. Most historians are paid to obscure the horrible fact that the people ultimately responsible for Auschwitz, the Gulag, Hiroshima and Verdun, still run the world. They are responsible for 9-11 and Iraq.

    Our leaders are chosen by their ability to lie and follow orders. Conflicts are charades between “antagonists” who actually serve the same masters.

    (For newcomers, the Illuminati consist of selected members of dynastic Jewish central banking families intermarried with Euro-American aristocracy, along with Jesuits, who have reached the highest degrees of Kabalistic Freemasonry.)


    Dr. E. J. Dillon of the London Daily Telegraph wrote in his book “The Inside Story of the Peace Conference,” (1920): Many delegates deduced that “henceforth the world will be governed by the Anglo-Saxon people, who in turn are swayed by their Jewish elements…” (i.e. the central bankers and their factotums) p 497.

    Germany was the major obstacle to using England and the U.S. to impose Illuminati rule upon the world . Thus, onerous reparations were imposed to prompt another much more devastating world war. Once it begin, the British vetoed attempts to assassinate or replace Hitler, and insisted on “unconditional surrender.”

    Hitler didn’t come to power until 1933 but Germany started rearming in 1919 in contravention of Versailles provisions. The Allies turned a blind eye to a program that saw Communist and German soldiers train in Russia with the latest weaponry, including whole bases devoted to air force, armor and chemical warfare. When Hitler came to power in 1933, Germany already had an advanced air force.

    Another way to evade Versailles was for the Reichswehr to fund and train paramilitary organizations like the Nazi SA which later could be incorporated into the regular army.
    General Kurt Von Schleicher and Captains Karl Mayr and Ernst Roehm were in charge of this “Black Werhmacht” program.

    Sefton Delmer, who was the Daily Express correspondent in Berlin, describes all this in his autobiography “Trail Sinister” (1961). He cites documents showing that Hitler was “acting under Mayr’s orders when he joined the tiny German Workers Party and began to build it up…” (64) Delmer says Mayr also funded mass meetings and pamphlets in which Hitler railed against the Jews. “This anti-Jewish campaign …was being promoted by no less a power than the Staff Officers of the Reichswehr.” (63)

    The Reichwehr’s purpose was to create popular political support for WW2. According to Delmer, “Schleicher paid out no less than two million pounds from the Reichswehr’s secret funds for the Nazi storm troopers…” (120) They were also funded by Illuminati industrialists and bankers.

    (Born and raised in Berlin, Sefton Delmer knew Hitler personally, and had a wide range of confidential sources. During the war, he took charge of British “black propaganda” running a range of radio stations aimed at German soldiers.)


    Communism, Nazism and Zionism are triplets, movements conceived and nurtured by the Illuminati to dupe and manipulate humanity.

    In his book “The Hidden Hitler” Lothar Machtan, a Professor of History at Bremen University says Hitler almost joined the Communists in 1918. He demanded a senior party post that would have exempted him from work but they refused. “Hitler did not set foot in the extreme right wing camp until he had been rejected by left wing groups,” Machtan writes. (71)

    This book asserts that Hitler was an active homosexual with a thick police file of molestation complaints both in Vienna and Munich.

    According to Ian Kershaw, Hitler took part in pro Socialist and Communist demonstrations in 1918-1919 and served as a Socialist Soldiers’ Council representative. (“Hitler: 1889-1936 Hubris, p 118-120.)

    According to Brigitte Hamann, Hitler’s best friends in pre-war Vienna were Jewish. He benefited from Jewish charities and hospitality. Jews bought most of his artwork. For this reason, real anti-Semites shunned him. (“Hitler’s Vienna: A Dictator’s Apprenticeship, pp.347-352)

    Hamann suggests that Hitler’s ideas of Aryan racial purity and superiority were based on the Jews. She quotes Hitler:

    “Through Moses the Jewish people received a rule for life and living one’s life that was elevated to a religion which was entirely tailored toward the essence of one’s race, and simply and clearly without dogmas and dubious rules of faith…contains what served the …well being of one’s people, nothing toward consideration of others.” (351)


    There is nostalgia for Hitler, in the belief that he represented resistance to the New World Order. In fact, he was created by the Illuminati to start another war. It is possible that he broke with them at some point. On the other hand, he may have deliberately sabotaged the Nazi cause by not promising to liberate the people under Communist yoke.

    Similarly, Hitler’s crusade against ordinary Jews was gratuitous and self-defeating, costing Germany international support and the atomic bomb. The anti-Semitic campaign seems tailored by the Illuminati to create racial strife and traumatize Jews into advancing the Zionist agenda. The intermarriage rate in Germany was 60%; in another generation German Jews would have been of little value as Illuminati pawns.

    People pin their hopes on leaders like Putin and Ahmadinejad but like Hitler, they were obscure figures who were raised to power by an unseen hand. We don’t have real political (or cultural) leaders, just Illuminati pawns.

    Human history is always the same: A minority wants to monopolize all power and wealth, at the expense of the many.

    Mass serial killers are in charge. No matter how they make nice, they will always revert to form. Iraq and 9-11 are examples.

    If only they could devote their energy to good instead of evil, the world would be full of natural joy.

    Some sources in this article were suggested by Jim Condit’s fine documentary “The Final Solution to Adolph Hitler”

    “”Zionism was willing to sacrifice the whole of European Jewry for a Zionist State. Everything was done to create a state of Israel and that was only possible through a world war. Wall Street and Jewish large bankers aided the war effort on both sides. Zionists are also to blame for provoking the growing hatred for Jews in 1988.” (Joseph Burg, The Toronto Star, March 31, 1988).”


    Major Robert H. Williams reported in his “Williams Intelligence Summary” for February 1950 about James P. Warburg’s part in the plot against Christendom. He said: “Last November, the widow of the late General Ludendorff, on trial at Nuremberg, explained why her husband broke with Hiter, confirmed the reports in convincing detail.

    She stated that, ‘…as early as the summer of 1929 James P. Warburg had undertaken an assignment from financial circles in America, which desired to exercise solitary influence on Germany in the unleashing of a national revolution. Warburg’s task was to find the suitable man in Germany, and he entered into contract with Adolph Hitler who subequently received sums of money amounting to 27 million dollars up to January 30, 1932, and still another seven million thereafter, enabling him to finance his movement.'”

    See also Ted Lang “The Hitler Project”

    Anthony Sutton “Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler”

    and my “Was Hitler an Illuminati Agent?”




    Erol in Turkey said (March 5, 2007):

    The solutions brought by the Illuminati always come bundled with the problems planned for the future. I’m sure the World War II was planned long before the first World War ended. Adolf Hitler with a strong tendency to ideological leadership happened to be an easy puppet. I believe that the global financiers always created and controlled their anti-thesis. Hitler’s ideology, Aryanism was anti-Judaist, Jesus was anti-Pharisee, Karl Marx was anti-capitalist, Chavez is anti-imperialist, Ahmedinejad is anti-Zionist, Communist Party of China is anti-democratic. The control of the anti-thesis allowed them to launch controlled conflicts with which they kept increasing their wealth to mind-boggling levels.

    Jean from Hungary said (March 3, 2007):

    Congratulation for your latest essay Illuminati Created Hitler, Nazis to Start WW2. I would like to tell how I compare the situation prevailing during the raise of Nazism and today. You are probably right in saying that �Communism, Nazism and Zionism are triplets, movements conceived and nurtured by the Illuminati to dupe and manipulate humanity.� and I would personnally add Neoconservatism to the list.

    Christian Rakovsky (born Chaim Rakeover) is a very serious reference in the question of who and why staged WW2. He admitted that “the financial circles of Wall Street” wanted to provoke a war between Hitler and Stalin. The bankers referred to by Rakovsky accused Stalin of “Bonapartism” for he took the absolute power over the Soviet Union (SU). For memory, until (and after) Stalin, the SU was ruled by an oligarchy which was mainly composed of ethnic Jews. Rakovsky revealed also that, as a supplementary result of the WW2, the bankers expected the destruction of the European Nations and the spread of atheism. WW1 had already been affected by the same powers to make room for the Soviet communism and, thus, destroy the nationalist and Christian Russia.

    We learn also from Rakovsky that Hitler revealed himself to be more dangerous to the bankers than Stalin and this resulted in that the target point switched from Stalin to Hitler.

    Now let’s connect the dots between the pre-WW2 situation, as spotlighted by Rakovsky, and the nice realities of 2007. As in the good old days, the same banker dynasties pull the economic, media and, thus, political strings in Europe and North America. As an indirect result of the WW2, the national sovereignties of the European nations have since merged in the new Soviet empire called the European Union. There are however two things in particular which are seriously beclouding the bankers` world-control agenda: one is they lost control over Russia again and the second is they didn`t succeed in taking control of China. Obviously, our bankers are again in need of a Hitler. No need to say who plays the role of Hitler. As for the new Nazism, the Neoconservatism inspired by Leo Strauss is largely making the grade.

    The idea of the bankers, today, is not forcibly to trigger another world war because they must be aware of the risks it would imply for them. After all, had Hitler let his generals do the job instead of imagining he was a military genius, he could have changed the course of the war. In a nutshell, the idea today is to use the power of the western secret services to provoke a political regime change in Russia and to use the USA to take control of the Middle and Far Eastern oil and gas fields in order to weaken the energy dependent Chinese economy and eventually open the way to a regime change there too. Once China and Russia under control, the rest could well be a cakewalk for the bankers.

    Probably that, this time again, things will not work as planned. The bankers as well as the “Gentile” neoconned western elites know well that time is running out. Within a few years, if the Eurasian Nations and those in Africa and South America who follow the path of Venezuela are not enslaved, the western world will sink in the economical and social chaos and the bankers will be reduced to vainly search in their Kabalah the black magic formula to reboot the system. Because they know this, the bankers may want to follow the logic of “after me the flood” and be ready to unleash a third world war on the humankind rather than admit their defeat.

  7. http://www.redress.cc/stooges/slittlewood20090704

    Israel pisses on Britain (again) – and our craven leaders love it …
    4 Jul 2009 … Making friends with Israel: Britain appoints Judaeo-centric …


    Lord Cashpoint is laughing
    Now Levy may sue the police, and the Police Commissioner is in trouble. The British police have also just figured out that Russia is responsible for Litvinenko’s death, but why believe police who blame Arabs for 9/11 and for London’s 7-7 train bombing? The UK police are as corrupt as the US police. It is just as Harold Rosenthal describes
    George Galloway in trouble again
    The evidence shows that he is a Zionist puppet, as we explaned here and here

    Lord Brown: UK should give up UN seat to EU
    Who is in control of the EU? Is the EU designed to help Europe? Or allow Zionists to get control?


    They allow the war to continue. British troops are still dying, also. The UK and US citizens are suckers


  8. If Zionists control the media, then why would George Galloway be allowed to criticize Israel on mainstream television or radio?

    Example: have you seen Galloway criticize Israel:



    Why would Zionists allow such criticism? Because Galloway defends Israel. Here is an excerpt from his talk radio show:

    Galloway_Talksport_Saturday29thJuly_Zionist_Denier.mp3 1.3 MB
    To download, click your right mouse button and select Save Target As

    Galloway criticizes the war, which causes lots of people to admire him, but then he fools his flock of sheep into thinking Israel is a victim of the mysterious Neocons or Bush family.

    To download, click your right mouse button and select Save Target As
    Smith, August 10, 2006 3.1 MB

    • The Zionists control the media, so everybody they give publicity to — especially if it is favorable publicity — should be considered a member of the Zionist criminal network, or one of their Useful Idiots.
    Take a look at who is getting on mainstream television in regards to 9/11: Dylan Avery, the Scholars for 9/11 Truth, David Ray Griffin, Alex Jones, and 911truth.org.

    All of these people are Zionist Deniers. Don’t be fooled by their occasional critical remark about the war in Lebanon or Israel.

    If Jeffrey Dahmer criticized cannibalism, would you be fooled into trusting him?

    There is a reason some of us are never allowed to express our opinions on television. Try not to be fooled by the Zionist Deniers. Don’t become one of their suckers.

    • Galloway, at the US Senate, impressed a lot of people, but he never says anything of real substance:

    George Galloway on the Big Brother television show can make you wonder if he was told to go on the show in order to embarrass himself:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiN7xE8e4JY (This video is gone)

    Here he is acting like a cat:

    Is Galloway just a Zionist puppet?


    Note: Daryl Smith needs only a few hundred dollars a month to cover phone bills and other expenses. Please do not be embarrassed about sending only $1.

    Think of donating $1 to the French connection as buying a newspaper.

    British and American government officials often argue over who is more loyal to Israel

    “I am a Zionist!”

    “May I remind the honourable gentleman that I became a Zionist puppet when he was just a pretentious little wanker living with his mummy? Plus, I have distinguished myself as President Bush’s poodle.”

    “Excuse me, Mr. Speaker, but I have Israeli documents to prove that I am a more loyal Zionist stooge than either of those blokes. I was even willing to embarrass myself on the Big Brother television show, plus I can drink any of you English chaps under the table.”

    “As always, we Americans trump you Brits. I do more than merely kiss Zionist butt; I was Joe Lieberman’s personal Shabbos goy!”

    • Here is George Galloway acting like a cat:
    Note that Mathaba.net promotes Galloway’s complaints about the voter fraud in the UK, and claims that Zionists hate him, but listen to this excerpt from his radio show as he blames Israel’s bombing of Lebanon in 2006 on the USA:

    Can you see that Mathaba and Galloway are pretending to criticize Israel while shifting the blame over to the Bush administration?

    “We at the American Free Press are Zionist poodles also! Why are we being ignored?”

    Nazis and White Supremacists

    Are they real Nazis?
    Or Ashkenazis?
    Click here


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s