Assassination of Pyotr Stolypin - September, 2012

Couple of years ago the legendary leader of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin asked Russian MPs to approve state funds for a monument to one of his favorite heroes. The hero to be honored was Pyotr Stolypin, one of Czar Nicholas II's highest officials. A statue in Stolypin's honor was soon put up in Krasnodar, Russia. A couple of years before this monument was erected, Pyotr Stolypin finished second in a nation-wide poll asking "who was the greatest Russian?" Who was this Pyotr Stolypin that Russians seem to have such a high regard for and why do the rest of us know so little about him?

Pyotr Stolypin was a great Czarist reformer. He was assassinated one hundred one years ago this month.

Who killed Pyotr Stolypin?

While attending an opera with the Czar's family in Kiev on September 1911, Stolypin was assassinated by a Bolshevik-Jew activist named Mordekhai Gershkovich.

Why was Pyotr Stolypin killed by Jewish activists?

Basically because he was a Czarist reformer!

Allow me to explain: Had Pyotr Stolypin's reform policies (which were fully backed by Czar Nicholas II) were given enough time and state support to take effect, and a middle class had began to emerge inside the Russian Empire as a result, it could have deprived the Jewish-led Bolshevik movement at the time of the popular support they desperately needed to foment a bloody revolution inside the vulnerable empire. In other words, Marxists/socialists at the time were not genuinely interested in socioeconomic reform, they simply needed the Russian Empire in dire straits so that they could more easily exploit large numbers of Russia's landless peasantry to realize their long-term political agenda.

Fast forward to today. This is yet another example in history of how activists and revolutionaries that are supposedly seeking reform do not want it in reality. Today's Washington-led reformers and revolutionaries around the world, similar to their Bolshevik forefathers a century ago, care less about genuine reform, they are merely after power and control. Their call-to-arms back then was "land reform!" Today, their call-to-arms is "democracy!"

The off-springs of Bolsheviks in Russia then suddenly discovered democracy (and of course capitalism) in the 1990s. This time under the populist banner of "democracy", the grandchildren of Bolsheviks once again plundered Russia's immense wealth and once again destroyed the lives of tens-of-millions of people. According to some official Western accounts, between the years of 1990 and 1995, the sociopolitical chaos that plagued the Russian Federation was so severe that it had caused several million surplus deaths (i.e. several million more than normal projected deaths rates for that time period). Here is a little look at the "democratizers" of Russia during the 1990s -

Corruption, crony capitalism, and Russia's near-demise: http://theriseofrussia.blogspot.com/2009/02/lets-place-vladimir-putin-in-proper.html

Although Vladimir Putin's government has drastically curbed their subversive activities in recent years by jailing and exiling some of the nation's criminal oligarchs, Russia's neo-Bolshevik democratizers are still at it. Former world chess champion turned world class clown, Garry Kasparov is unfortunately one of the manifestations of this Western-instigated and funded movement inside Russia. Naturally, their ideological comrades in Armenia are at it as well. As we all unfortunately know, Armenia wasn't spared the black fate of the 1990s. In fact, most of what we hate about the Armenia of today has its roots in the 1990s.

And very similar to their comrades in places like Russia, the Western-led activists in Armenia's political opposition needs an Armenia that is unstable, weak and hurting in order to put pressure on the Russian-backed government in Yerevan and to foment political unrest in the young republic. This is part of the reason why not a single "opposition" figure and not a single Western funded "think tank" or "media" outlet has been willing to accurately assess Armenia's real predicament in the Caucasus and propose logical solutions for it. For years, all they have done is sow fear, anger, hate and hopelessness throughout Armenian society. All they do is engage in fearmongering and predicting doom&gloom.

A perfect example of their modus operandi has been their rabid reaction to the prospect of Armenia joining the Eurasian Union. Although the Moscow-led economic pact in question may be Armenia's only hope for economic recovery and national development, Armenia's Western-led political activists and propaganda outlets such as Richard Giragosian, Ara Papyan, Raffi Hovanissian's Heritage Party, the staff at Policy Forum Armenia, Lragir and Hetq, to name only a few, are describing it as returning back to the Soviet Union!

Like I said, their main objective, as always, is to gain power and control by exploiting the young republic's growing pains and by manipulating the emotions/sentiments of the nation's ignorant masses. And their main strategic target, as always, is Russia. Therefore, in the big geostrategic context within which senior Washingtonian policymakers see the world, the problem with Armenia is not "corruption" or the lack of "gay rights" in the young republic, the problem in Armenia is the presence of 'Russia' in Armenia!

Have no doubt, had Armenia been a whorehouse for Western oil/gas interests instead, Armenia's government could be as dictatorial as Azerbaijan's, as genocidal as Turkey's, as reckless as Georgia's, as oppressive as Israel's and as Medieval as Saudi Arabia's and Armenia's leadership would still be the darlings of well-dressed reptiles in Washington. Had Armenia been fully subdued by the Anglo-American-Zionist global order and its regional Turkic and Islamic allies, Armenia's leaders would do no wrong. But because Armenia has cleverly chosen to remain under the protective umbrella of Moscow, there is nothing Armenia's leaders can do today (short of capitulating) that would be deemed positive in the eyes of Washington. This is ultimately why they are unleashing their banksters, democratizers and doomsayers in Armenia to drive a wedge between Yerevan and Moscow.

The organizational, financial and spiritual power behind so-called democratic movements today are essentially the same as those that were behind the Socialist/Marxist movements inside the Russian Empire one hundred years ago, and the geostrategic reasons behind their activities are also more-or-less the same. And speaking of diehard Leftists and Socialists, just know that their revolutionary spirit is live and well. No, I am not talking about Cuba, Vietnam or China.... I am actually talking about our very own ARF!

Armenians and the Left: http://www.armeniansandtheleft.com/

Armenians and Progressive Politics Conference: http://www.armenianweekly.com/2012/08/14/armenians-and-progressive-politics-conference-new-york/

You would think these people would wait for better, less tumultuous times to begin flirting with this kind of stupidity. As you can see, these so-called Armenians of the "Left" are enthusiastically preparing a new round of propaganda assault against the Armenian state. As usual, in their pursuit of dangerous political concoctions, ego-driven ambitions and childish fantasies, our self-destructive peasantry seems to have again forgotten about the very serious problems facing the Armenian nation in the volatile Caucasus. And the funny/ironic part here is that unlike the "Left" in rest of the world, this particular "Left" is indirectly working for the "Right". By pushing their stupidity inside Armenian society, they are in effect empowering Western imperial powers. When it comes to politics Armenians will never cease to amaze me.

Incidentally, it was this kind of Leftist/Socialist/Bolshevik activism at the time that soured relations between Armenians and the Russian Empire a little over a century ago. Our "Dashnak" and "Hnchak" activists, who were Socialists and Marxists respectively, as well as Armenian Bolsheviks at the time, had begun towing a very dangerous sociopolitical agenda within the very borders of the empire. This type of activism inside Armenian society in the Caucasus began occurring in the late 19th century. I would like to remind the reader that this was a time period that was seeing such movements causing serious sociopolitical unrest inside the Russian Empire, and this was also a time period when Armenians still had the full might of the Ottoman empire to contend with.

Therefore, as you can see, our հետամնած Քաջ Նազարներ of our "revolutionary" movements were picking a fight with not one but two empires, one of which was actually the only source of real support for Armenians. It was foolish activism inside the Russian Empire, under a Socialist banner nonetheless, that prompted the Russian Czar to angrily crackdown on our revolutionaries in 1905. Simply put, the Russian Czar saw Armenians treacherously biting the hand that fed them. After being given an opportunity by the Russian Empire to form a nation within the Caucasus starting in the 18th century, Armenians basically thanked the Czar by becoming Socialists, Marxists and Bolsheviks. Anyway, getting back to the main topic of discussion. The following two blog pages delves into the topic of Bolshevism and Russia. Please revisit them -

Stalin's Jews & the Bolshevik Revolution: http://theriseofrussia.blogspot.com/2010/11/im-glad-that-gruesome-story-of-katyn.html

Medvedev Condemns Stalin's Russia, Russians may finally bury Lenin: http://theriseofrussia.blogspot.com/2011/05/medvedev-condemns-stalins-russia.html

Bolshevism in Russia was a Jewish-led movement whose purpose was to destroy the Russian Empire. Even the money trail, i.e. those who financed Bolshevism, leads to Jewish bankers/financiers in the West. Unless these facts about Bolshevism are widely known, the Bolshevik revolution will never be fully understood. In fact, knowing men like Jacob Schiff is key to understanding Zionism, Wall Street, the Federal Reserve, Jewish power and influence in the western world, the Bolshevik revolution, the fall of the Russian empire, the rise of Nazi Germany, problems in the Middle East, the decline of America and everything in between. Please read the two articles about Schiff at the bottom of this page.

Like I have said on many previous occasions, those who blame Russians for the crimes of Bolsheviks are either Western/Zionist agents or idiots. Christian Slavs, ethnic Russians and Ukrainians in particular, suffered by-far the worst fate under Bolshevik rule. Tens of millions of ethnic Slavs are said to have perished directly as a result of the Bolshevik upheaval. It is a well established fact that a vast majority of the Bolshevik leadership (perhaps 90%) were of Jewish ancestry. Although the Bolsheviks succeeded in bringing large numbers of Russian's peasantry into their fighting ranks (i.e. as foot soldiers), very few ethic Russians were found in any leadership roles and not a single high ranking Bolshevik could claim Russian ancestry. In fact, there were probably more Armenians within the mid-to-high ranks of Bolsheviks than ethnic Russians.

Bolshevism was a destructive sociopolitical movement imported into the Russian Empire by foreign interests seeking to destroy it. The immense blood letting and the historic plunder that occurred after the violent Bolshevik takeover of the Russian Empire has no precedent in world history. Moreover, the rise of Bolshevism was indirectly responsible for the Armenian Genocide because by causing havoc inside the Russian Empire, it forced the Czar to pull back its troops from liberated portions of Western Armenia, thereby allowing Ottoman Turks to realize their dreams of ethnically cleansing native Armenians living in the area. Moreover, it was Bolsheviks that gifted Turks and Azeris historic Armenian lands. For reasons that should be obvious to us all, the real story of what happened back then remains one of the least understood periods in modern history.

But times are changing.

In 2008 a major televised poll was conducted throughout the Russian Federation. The poll's intent was to select "the greatest Russian". Amazingly, Pyotr Stolypin, the great Czarist reformer that was assassinated by Bolshevik Jews placed second, right behind Alexander Nevsky, a medieval nationalist hero. Finishing third was Joseph Stalin, the man many in Russia continue to credit for saving the Soviet Union from Nazi occupation. Incidentally, Stalin was also the man ultimately responsible for weakening Jewish control inside the Soviet Union. Nevertheless, Vladimir Putin's taste in heroes (which is in itself very revealing of the mindset of the great Russian ruler) and the nation-wide poll results are very good indicators of just how far the Russian government and the Russian people have come in recent years.

Ethnic Russians are finally rediscovering their true national history, a glorious history that has seen Russians fight and defeat Turks for hundreds of years. These two major regional peoples have been and continue to be natural competitors and rivals. In fact, of the nearly two dozen major battles or wars fought between the Russian Empire and the Ottoman Empire, Russian forces were victorious every single time. Turks (and Western-backed Islamists in the region today) continue to have an almost instinctual fear and hate of Russia to this day. Needless to say, Russian history is also very rich in traditional/classical European cultural values as well as Orthodox Christianity. In short, the more Russians rediscover their true national history and their true national culture, the better it will be for Armenia.

Arevordi
September, 2012

***

Who Killed Pyotr Stolypin?

On September 14 [O.S. September 1] 1911, while he was attending a performance at the Kiev Opera House in the presence of the Tsar and his two eldest daughters, the Grand Duchesses Olga and Tatiana, Pyotr Stolypin was shot twice, by Dmitri Bogrov (born Mordekhai Gershkovich), a Jewish leftist radical. 

Another of those curious 911 moments that seem to reoccur in the story of Zionism was the murder of Count Stolypin by a Jewish assassin in September 1911. Stolypin was a central part of the attempted reforming of Czarist Russia, in concert with the Czar Nicholas himself, giving three million landless Russian peasants the land they worked on.

Improving conditions in Russia were not fertile ground for the Talmudic extremists undermining it, and from there the rest of the world, and so in September 1911 yet another Jewish assassin played a crucial part in swaying world history towards their cause by murdering a reformer, as they have murdered many over the decades in order to arrive at the astonishing power they currently wield over most of mankind, though eventually they will wield utter and total control over every last person on this planet, that being the long game.

Count Stolypin's daughter was summarily executed in 1917 by a Jewish commissar (so called Bolshevik commissar), when he discovered she was Stolypin's daughter, a savage act that heralded the vicious reign of these creatures, and the subsequent murder of over sixty million real Russians, though this atrocity itself may be overshadowed in the future if these terrorists have their way.

Source: http://suspiciousdeaths.blogspot.com/2010/10/pyotr-arkadyevich-stolypin.html

Vladimir Putin tells Russian MPs they must pay for a monument to his hero

Vladimir Putin has told cabinet ministers they must pay out of their own pockets for a monument to his political guru, a tough Tsarist-era reformer who hanged revolutionaries. The Russian prime minister told ministers to cough up "at least a month's wages" each to fund a statue of Pyotr Stolypin, who was himself prime minister of the country from 1906 to 1911.

Stolypin launched important agrarian reforms but brooked no dissent and introduced a faster process for prosecuting opponents of Tsar Nicholas II. As a result, the hangman's noose became known as "Stolypin's necktie". Speaking in Moscow, Putin praised Stolypin for his "unbending will" in striving to ensure economic growth at a troubled moment in the country's history, while recognising the threat of radicalism.

He suggested the current leadership had to demonstrate its own sacrifice in promoting Stolypin's desire to "put Russia on a healthy path". Stolypin was assassinated by a leftist radical at a theatre in Kiev in 1911, in the turbulent years before the Bolshevik revolution. Analysts say Putin sees himself as a successful analogue to the former PM who will survive, suppress any protests by foreign-backed wreckers and ensure Russia is the glorious, strong state his mentor.

Putin said: "Members of the government must give a minimum of one month's wages for the Stolypin monument, and, I think, not only the government." He said MPs should also contribute to the memorial, which will be erected outside the White House, the Russian government building, to coincide with events celebrating the 150th anniversary of Stolypin's birth in April.

Ministers appeared to raise no objection to being told how to spend their cash. Commentators said that in the speech on Wednesday 13 July, the Russian prime minister's eulogising of his hero almost completely coincided with his image of himself. Putin said Stolypin was a "real patriot and a wise politician" who displayed "personal courage and a willingness to load himself with the entire burden of responsibility for the state of the country".

Stanislav Belkovsky, a political analyst, said: "Recalling Stolypin helps Putin justify his own deeds, such as limiting democracy and certain liberties." He added: "It was the rejection of Stolypin's ideas and reform projects by the so-called progressive part of society at the beginning of the 20th century that led Russia to the [1917] revolution.

"In Putin's mind he has become a successful Stolypin who avoided any uprising and ensured a level of stability and a strong state. "But that interpretation ignores the fact that monstrous corruption has flourished under Putin, and the state machine has run out of control."

Stolypin came second after the 13th-century warrior prince Alexander Nevsky in a state-sponsored nationwide poll to find Russia's greatest historical figure in 2008. The organisers later admitted in private that Joseph Stalin had won, but the results were fixed to avoid the embarrassment of having a dictator in first place. "I doubt Stolypin would have even come in the top 10 in a real poll," said Belkovsky. "He's not well known outside the elite."

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/14/vladimir-putin-statue-of-pyotr-stolypin

Solzhenitsyn Breaks Taboo: The Role Of Jews In Soviet-era Repression

Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who first exposed the horrors of the Stalinist gulag, is now attempting to tackle one of the most sensitive topics of his writing career - the role of the Jews in the Bolshevik revolution and Soviet purges. In his latest book Solzhenitsyn, 84, deals with one of the last taboos of the communist revolution: that Jews were as much perpetrators of the repression as its victims. Two Hundred Years Together - a reference to the 1772 partial annexation of Poland and Russia which greatly increased the Russian Jewish population - contains three chapters discussing the Jewish role in the revolutionary genocide and secret police purges of Soviet Russia. But Jewish leaders and some historians have reacted furiously to the book, and questioned Solzhenitsyn's motives in writing it, accusing him of factual inaccuracies and of fanning the flames of anti-semitism in Russia.

Solzhenitsyn argues that some Jewish satire of the revolutionary period "consciously or unconsciously descends on the Russians" as being behind the genocide. But he states that all the nation's ethnic groups must share the blame, and that people shy away from speaking the truth about the Jewish experience. In one remark which infuriated Russian Jews, he wrote: "If I would care to generalise, and to say that the life of the Jews in the camps was especially hard, I could, and would not face reproach for an unjust national generalisation. But in the camps where I was kept, it was different. The Jews whose experience I saw - their life was softer than that of others." Yet he added: "But it is impossible to find the answer to the eternal question: who is to be blamed, who led us to our death? To explain the actions of the Kiev cheka [secret police] only by the fact that two thirds were Jews, is certainly incorrect." 

Solzhenitsyn, awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1970, spent much of his life in Soviet prison camps, enduring persecution when he wrote about his experiences. He is currently in frail health, but in an interview given last month he said that Russia must come to terms with the Stalinist and revolutionary genocides - and that its Jewish population should be as offended at their own role in the purges as they are at the Soviet power that also persecuted them. "My book was directed to empathise with the thoughts, feelings and the psychology of the Jews - their spiritual component," he said. "I have never made general conclusions about a people. I will always differentiate between layers of Jews. One layer rushed headfirst to the revolution. Another, to the contrary, was trying to stand back. The Jewish subject for a long time was considered prohibited. Zhabotinsky [a Jewish writer] once said that the best service our Russian friends give to us is never to speak aloud about us."

But Solzhenitsyn's book has caused controversy in Russia, where one Jewish leader said it was "not of any merit". "This is a mistake, but even geniuses make mistakes," said Yevgeny Satanovsky, president of the Russian Jewish Congress. "Richard Wagner did not like the Jews, but was a great composer. Dostoyevsky was a great Russian writer, but had a very sceptical attitude towards the Jews. "This is not a book about how the Jews and Russians lived together for 200 years, but one about how they lived apart after finding themselves on the same territory. This book is a weak one professionally. Factually, it is so bad as to be beyond criticism. As literature, it is not of any merit."

But DM Thomas, one of Solzhenitsyn's biographers, said that he did not think the book was fuelled by anti-semitism. "I would not doubt his sincerity. He says that he firmly supports the state of Israel. In his fiction and factual writing there are Jewish characters that he writes about who are bright, decent, anti-Stalinist people." Professor Robert Service of Oxford University, an expert on 20th century Russian history, said that from what he had read about the book, Solzhenitsyn was "absolutely right". Researching a book on Lenin, Prof Service came across details of how Trotsky, who was of Jewish origin, asked the politburo in 1919 to ensure that Jews were enrolled in the Red army.

Trotsky said that Jews were disproportionately represented in the Soviet civil bureaucracy, including the cheka. "Trotsky's idea was that the spread of anti-semitism was [partly down to] objections about their entrance into the civil service. There is something in this; that they were not just passive spectators of the revolution. They were part-victims and part-perpetrators. "It is not a question that anyone can write about without a huge amount of bravery, and [it] needs doing in Russia because the Jews are quite often written about by fanatics. Mr Solzhenitsyn's book seems much more measured than that." 

Yet others failed to see the need for Solzhenitsyn's pursuit of this particular subject at present. Vassili Berezhkov, a retired KGB colonel and historian of the secret services and the NKVD (the precursor of the KGB), said: "The question of ethnicity did not have any importance either in the revolution or the story of the NKVD. This was a social revolution and those who served in the NKVD and cheka were serving ideas of social change. "If Solzhenitsyn writes that there were many Jews in the NKVD, it will increase the passions of anti-semitism, which has deep roots in Russian history. I think it is better not to discuss such a question now."

Source: http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/7033-1.cfm

The Jewish Role in the Bolshevik Revolution and Russia's Early Soviet Regime

Recent research and investigation by Radzinsky and others also corroborates the account provided years earlier by Robert Wilton, correspondent of the London Times in Russia for 17 years. His account, The Last Days of the Romanovs -- originally published in 1920, and recently reissued by the Institute for Historical Review -- is based in large part on the findings of a detailed investigation carried out in 1919 by Nikolai Sokolov under the authority of "White" (anti-Communist) leader Alexander Kolchak. Wilton's book remains one of the most accurate and complete accounts of the murder of Russia's imperial family.

A solid understanding of history has long been the best guide to comprehending the present and anticipating the future. Accordingly, people are most interested in historical questions during times of crisis, when the future seems most uncertain. With the collapse of Communist rule in the Soviet Union, 1989-1991, and as Russians struggle to build a new order on the ruins of the old, historical issues have become very topical. For example, many ask: How did the Bolsheviks, a small movement guided by the teachings of German-Jewish social philosopher Karl Marx, succeed in taking control of Russia and imposing a cruel and despotic regime on its people?

In recent years, Jews around the world have been voicing anxious concern over the specter of anti-Semitism in the lands of the former Soviet Union. In this new and uncertain era, we are told, suppressed feelings of hatred and rage against Jews are once again being expressed. According to one public opinion survey conducted in 1991, for example, most Russians wanted all Jews to leave the country. But precisely why is anti-Jewish sentiment so widespread among the peoples of the former Soviet Union? Why do so many Russians, Ukrainians, Lithuanians and others blame "the Jews" for so much misfortune?  

A Taboo Subject

Although officially Jews have never made up more than five percent of the country's total population, they played a highly disproportionate and probably decisive role in the infant Bolshevik regime, effectively dominating the Soviet government during its early years. Soviet historians, along with most of their colleagues in the West, for decades preferred to ignore this subject. The facts, though, cannot be denied. With the notable exception of Lenin (Vladimir Ulyanov), most of the leading Communists who took control of Russia in 1917-20 were Jews. Leon Trotsky (Lev Bronstein) headed the Red Army and, for a time, was chief of Soviet foreign affairs.

Yakov Sverdlov (Solomon) was both the Bolshevik party's executive secretary and -- as chairman of the Central Executive Committee -- head of the Soviet government. Grigori Zinoviev (Radomyslsky) headed the Communist International (Comintern), the central agency for spreading revolution in foreign countries. Other prominent Jews included press commissar Karl Radek (Sobelsohn), foreign affairs commissar Maxim Litvinov (Wallach), Lev Kamenev (Rosenfeld) and Moisei Uritsky. Lenin himself was of mostly Russian and Kalmuck ancestry, but he was also one-quarter Jewish. His maternal grandfather, Israel (Alexander) Blank, was a Ukrainian Jew who was later baptized into the Russian Orthodox Church. A thorough-going internationalist, Lenin viewed ethnic or cultural loyalties with contempt. He had little regard for his own countrymen. "An intelligent Russian," he once remarked, "is almost always a Jew or someone with Jewish blood in his veins." 

Critical Meetings

In the Communist seizure of power in Russia, the Jewish role was probably critical. Two weeks prior to the Bolshevik "October Revolution" of 1917, Lenin convened a top secret meeting in St. Petersburg (Petrograd) at which the key leaders of the Bolshevik party's Central Committee made the fateful decision to seize power in a violent takeover. Of the twelve persons who took part in this decisive gathering, there were four Russians (including Lenin), one Georgian (Stalin), one Pole (Dzerzhinsky), and six Jews. To direct the takeover, a seven-man "Political Bureau" was chosen. It consisted of two Russians (Lenin and Bubnov), one Georgian (Stalin), and four Jews (Trotsky, Sokolnikov, Zinoviev, and Kamenev).

Meanwhile, the Petersburg (Petrograd) Soviet -- whose chairman was Trotsky -- established an 18-member "Military Revolutionary Committee" to actually carry out the seizure of power. It included eight (or nine) Russians, one Ukrainian, one Pole, one Caucasian, and six Jews. Finally, to supervise the organization of the uprising, the Bolshevik Central Committee established a five-man "Revolutionary Military Center" as the Party's operations command. It consisted of one Russian (Bubnov), one Georgian (Stalin), one Pole (Dzerzhinsky), and two Jews (Sverdlov and Uritsky). 

Contemporary Voices of Warning 

Well-informed observers, both inside and outside of Russia, took note at the time of the crucial Jewish role in Bolshevism. Winston Churchill, for one, warned in an article published in the February 8, 1920, issue of the London Illustrated Sunday Herald that Bolshevism is a "worldwide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality." The eminent British political leader and historian went on to write:

There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. Thus Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordinate, Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky, or of Zinovieff, the Dictator of the Red Citadel (Petrograd), or of Krassin or Radek -- all Jews. In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combatting Counter-Revolution [the Cheka] has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses Needless to say, the most intense passions of revenge have been excited in the breasts of the Russian people.

David R. Francis, United States ambassador in Russia, warned in a January 1918 dispatch to Washington: "The Bolshevik leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90 percent of whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country but are internationalists and they are trying to start a worldwide social revolution." The Netherlands' ambassador in Russia, Oudendyke, made much the same point a few months later: "Unless Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to spread in one form or another over Europe and the whole world as it is organized and worked by Jews who have no nationality, and whose one object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things." "The Bolshevik Revolution," declared a leading American Jewish community paper in 1920, "was largely the product of Jewish thinking, Jewish discontent, Jewish effort to reconstruct."

As an expression of its radically anti-nationalist character, the fledgling Soviet government issued a decree a few months after taking power that made anti-Semitism a crime in Russia. The new Communist regime thus became the first in the world to severely punish all expressions of anti-Jewish sentiment. Soviet officials apparently regarded such measures as indispensable. Based on careful observation during a lengthy stay in Russia, American-Jewish scholar Frank Golder reported in 1925 that "because so many of the Soviet leaders are Jews anti-Semitism is gaining [in Russia], particularly in the army [and] among the old and new intelligentsia who are being crowded for positions by the sons of Israel." 

Historians' Views

Summing up the situation at that time, Israeli historian Louis Rapoport writes:

Immediately after the [Bolshevik] Revolution, many Jews were euphoric over their high representation in the new government. Lenin's first Politburo was dominated by men of Jewish origins. Under Lenin, Jews became involved in all aspects of the Revolution, including its dirtiest work. Despite the Communists' vows to eradicate anti-Semitism, it spread rapidly after the Revolution -- partly because of the prominence of so many Jews in the Soviet administration, as well as in the traumatic, inhuman Sovietization drives that followed. Historian Salo Baron has noted that an immensely disproportionate number of Jews joined the new Bolshevik secret police, the Cheka. And many of those who fell afoul of the Cheka would be shot by Jewish investigators. The collective leadership that emerged in Lenin's dying days was headed by the Jew Zinoviev, a loquacious, mean-spirited, curly-haired Adonis whose vanity knew no bounds.

"Anyone who had the misfortune to fall into the hands of the Cheka," wrote Jewish historian Leonard Schapiro, "stood a very good chance of finding himself confronted with, and possibly shot by, a Jewish investigator." In Ukraine, "Jews made up nearly 80 percent of the rank-and-file Cheka agents," reports W. Bruce Lincoln, an American professor of Russian history. (Beginning as the Cheka, or Vecheka the Soviet secret police was later known as the GPU, OGPU, NKVD, MVD and KGB.) In light of all this, it should not be surprising that Yakov M. Yurovksy, the leader of the Bolshevik squad that carried out the murder of the Tsar and his family, was Jewish, as was Sverdlov, the Soviet chief who co-signed Lenin's execution order.

Igor Shafarevich, a Russian mathematician of world stature, has sharply criticized the Jewish role in bringing down the Romanov monarchy and establishing Communist rule in his country. Shafarevich was a leading dissident during the final decades of Soviet rule. A prominent human rights activist, he was a founding member of the Committee on the Defense of Human Rights in the USSR. In Russophobia, a book written ten years before the collapse of Communist rule, he noted that Jews were "amazingly" numerous among the personnel of the Bolshevik secret police. The characteristic Jewishness of the Bolshevik executioners, Shafarevich went on, is most conspicuous in the execution of Nicholas II:

This ritual action symbolized the end of centuries of Russian history, so that it can be compared only to the execution of Charles I in England or Louis XVI in France. It would seem that representatives of an insignificant ethnic minority should keep as far as possible from this painful action, which would reverberate in all history. Yet what names do we meet? The execution was personally overseen by Yakov Yurovsky who shot the Tsar; the president of the local Soviet was Beloborodov (Vaisbart); the person responsible for the general administration in Ekaterinburg was Shaya Goloshchekin. To round out the picture, on the wall of the room where the execution took place was a distich from a poem by Heine (written in German) about King Balthazar, who offended Jehovah and was killed for the offense.

In his 1920 book, British veteran journalist Robert Wilton offered a similarly harsh assessment:

The whole record of Bolshevism in Russia is indelibly impressed with the stamp of alien invasion. The murder of the Tsar, deliberately planned by the Jew Sverdlov (who came to Russia as a paid agent of Germany) and carried out by the Jews Goloshchekin, Syromolotov, Safarov, Voikov and Yurovsky, is the act not of the Russian people, but of this hostile invader.

In the struggle for power that followed Lenin's death in 1924, Stalin emerged victorious over his rivals, eventually succeeding in putting to death nearly every one of the most prominent early Bolshevik leaders -- including Trotsky, Zinoviev, Radek, and Kamenev. With the passage of time, and particularly after 1928, the Jewish role in the top leadership of the Soviet state and its Communist party diminished markedly.

Source: http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v14/v14n1p-4_Weber.html

Bolshevism and the Jews

The unprecedented catastrophe of the Russian revolution required an explanation… For very many this lay in the coming to power of the Jews, and their hatred for the Russian people. For after the revolution of February, 1917 the Jews acquired full rights with the rest of the population, and the (already very porous) barriers set up by the Pale of Settlement were destroyed. Jews poured from the western regions into the major cities of European Russia and soon acquired prominent executive positions in all major sectors of government and the economy.

As Alexander Solzhenitsyn has written, February brought only harm and destruction to the Russian population. However, “Jewish society in Russia received in full from the February revolution everything that it had fought for, and the October coup was really not needed by it, except by that cutthroat part of the Jewish secular youth that with its Russian brother-internationalists had stacked up a charge of hatred for the Russian state structure and was straining to ‘deepen’ the revolution.” It was they who through their control of the Executive Committee of the Soviet – over half of its members were Jewish socialists – assumed the real power after February, and propelled it on – contrary to the interests, not only of the Russian, but also of the majority of the Jewish population, - to the October revolution. 

Nevertheless, at the time of the October revolution only a minority of the Bolsheviks were Jews (in the early 1900s they constituted 19% of the party). “At the elections to the Constituent Assembly ‘more than 80% of the Jewish population of Russia voted’ for Zionist parties. Lenin wrote that 550,000 were for Jewish nationalists. ‘The majority of the Jewish parties formed a single national list, in accordance with which seven deputies were elected – six Zionists’ and Gruzenberg. ‘The success of the Zionists’ was also aided by the Declaration of the English Foreign Minister Balfour [on the creation of a ‘national centre’ of the Jews in Palestine], ‘which was met by the majority of the Russian Jewish population with enthusiasm [in Moscow, Petrograd, Odessa, Kiev and many other cities there were festive manifestations, meetings and religious services]’.”

The simultaneous triumph of the Jews in Russia and Palestine was indeed an extraordinary “coincidence”: Divine Providence drew the attention of all those with eyes to see this sign of the times when, in one column of newsprint in the London Times for November 9, 1917, there appeared two articles, the one announcing the outbreak of revolution in Petrograd, and the other – the promise of a homeland for the Jews in Palestine (the Balfour declaration). 

This coincidence was reinforced by the fact that the theist Jews who triumphed in Israel in 1917, and especially in 1948 after the foundation of the State of Israel, came from the same region and social background – the Pale of Settlement in Western Russia – as the atheist Jews who triumphed in Moscow in 1917. Sometimes they even came from the same families. Thus Chaim Weitzmann, the first president of Israel, points out in his Autobiography that his brothers and sisters were all either Zionists or Bolsheviks. M. Heifetz also points to the coincidence in time between the October revolution and the Balfour declaration. “A part of the Jewish generation goes along the path of Herzl and Zhabotinsky. The other part, unable to withstand the temptation, fills up the band of Lenin and Trotsky and Stalin.” “The path of Herzl and Bagritsky allowed the Jews to stand tall and immediately become not simply an equal nation with Russia, but a privileged one.”

Indeed, the Russian revolution may be regarded as one branch of that general triumph of Jewish power which we observe in the twentieth century in both East and West, in both Russia and America and Israel. The mainly Jewish nature of the Bolshevik leadership – and of the world revolution in general – cannot be doubted. Such a view was not confined to “anti-Semites”. 

Thus Winston Churchill wrote: “It would almost seem as if the Gospel of Christ and the gospel of anti-Christ were designed to originate among the same people; and that this mystic and mysterious race had been chosen for the supreme manifestations, both of the Divine and the diabolical… 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 civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Nesta Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the nineteenth 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. There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others.”

Douglas Reed writes: “The Central Committee of the Bolshevik Party, which wielded the supreme power, contained 3 Russians (including Lenin) and 9 Jews. The next body in importance, the Central Committee of the Executive Commission (or secret police) comprised 42 Jews and 19 Russians, Letts, Georgians and others. The Council of People’s Commissars consisted of 17 Jews and five others. The Moscow Che-ka (secret police) was formed of 23 Jews and 13 others. Among the names of 556 high officials of the Bolshevik state officially published in 1918-1919 were 458 Jews and 108 others. Among the central committees of small, supposedly ‘Socialist’ or other non-Communist parties… were 55 Jews and 6 others.” 

Richard Pipes admits: “Jews undeniably played in the Bolshevik Party and the early Soviet apparatus a role disproportionate to their share of the population. The number of Jews active in Communism in Russia and abroad was striking: in Hungary, for example, they furnished 95 percent of the leading figures in Bela Kun’s dictatorship. They also were disproportionately represented among Communists in Germany and Austria during the revolutionary upheavals there in 1918-23, and in the apparatus of the Communist International.”

According to Donald Rayfield, in 1922, the Jews “reached their maximum representation in the party (not that they formed a coherent group) when, at 15 per cent, they were second only to ethnic Russians with 65 per cent.” The London Times correspondent in Russia, Robert Wilton, reported: ”Taken according to numbers of population, the Jews represented one in ten; among the commissars that rule Bolshevik Russia they are nine in ten; if anything the proportion of Jews is still greater.”

On June 9, 1919 Captain Montgomery Shuyler of the American Expeditionary Forces telegrammed from Vladivostok on the makeup of the presiding Soviet government: “… (T)here were 384 ‘commissars’ including 2 negroes, 13 Russians, 15 Chinamen, 22 Armenians, and more than 300 Jews. Of the latter number, 264 had come to Russia from the United States since the downfall of the Imperial Government.”

The Jews were especially dominant in the most feared and blood-thirsty part of the Bolshevik State apparatus, the Cheka, which, writes Brendon, “consisted of 250,000 officers (including 100,000 border guards), a remarkable adjunct to a State which was supposed to be withering away. In the first 6 years of Bolshevik rule it had executed at least 200,000. Moreover, the Cheka was empowered to act as ‘policeman, gaoler, investigator, prosecutor, judge and executioner’. It also employed barbaric forms of torture.”

So complete was the Jewish domination of Russia as a result of the revolution that it is a misnomer to speak about the “Russian” revolution; it should more accurately be called the Russian-Jewish revolution. 

That the Russian revolution was actually a Jewish revolution, but at the same time part of an international revolution of Jewry against the Christian and Muslim worlds, is indicated by an article by Jacob de Haas entitled “The Jewish Revolution” and published in the London Zionist journal Maccabee in November, 1905: “The Revolution in Russia is a Jewish revolution, for it is a turning point in Jewish history. This situation flows from the fact that Russia is the fatherland of approximately half of the general number of Jews inhabiting the world… The overthrow of the despotic government must exert a huge influence on the destinies of millions of Jews (both in Russia and abroad). Besides, the revolution in Russia is a Jewish revolution also because the Jews are the most active revolutionaries in the tsarist Empire.”

But why were the Jews the most active revolutionaries? What was it in their upbringing and history that led them to adopt the atheist revolutionary teachings and actions of Russia’s “superfluous young men” more ardently than the Russians themselves? Hatred of Christ and the Christians was, of course, deeply imbedded in the Talmud and Jewish ritual – but the angry young men that began killing thousands of the Tsar’s servants even before the revolution of 1905 had rejected the Talmud as well as the Gospel, and even all religion in general. 

Donald Rayfield writes: “The motivation of those Jews who worked for the Cheka was not Zionist or ethnic. The war between the Cheka and the Russian bourgeoisie was not even purely a war of classes or political factions. It can be seen as being between Jewish internationalism and the remnants of a Russian national culture…

“…What was Jewish except lineage about Bolsheviks like Zinoviev, Trotsky, Kamenev or Sverdlov? Some were second- or even third-generation renegades; few even spoke Yiddish, let alone knew Hebrew. They were by upbringing Russians accustomed to a European way of life and values, Jewish only in the superficial sense that, say, Karl Marx was. Jews in anti-Semitic Tsarist Russia had few ways out of the ghetto except emigration, education or revolution, and the latter two courses meant denying their Judaism by joining often anti-Jewish institutions and groups.”

This can be illustrated from the deathbed confession of Yurovsky, the murderer of the Tsar: “Our family suffered less from the constant hunger than from my father’s religious fanaticism… On holidays and regular days the children were forced to pray, and it is not surprising that my first active protest was against religious and nationalistic traditions. I came to hate God and prayer as I hated poverty and the bosses.”

At the same time, the Bolshevik Jews did appear to sympathize with Talmudism more than with any other religion. Thus in 1905 the Jewish revolutionaries in Kiev boasted that they would turn St. Sophia cathedral into a synagogue. Again, in 1918 they erected a monument to Judas Iscariot in Sviazhsk, and in 1919 - in Tambov! Perhaps the strongest evidence of the continued religiosity of the Bolshevik Jews was the fact that when the Whites re-conquered Perm in 1918 they found many Jewish religious inscriptions in the former Bolshevik headquarters – as well as on the walls of the basement of the Ipatiev House in Yekaterinburg where the Tsar and his family were shot. 

While officially rejecting the Talmud and all religion in general, the revolutionaries did not reject the unconscious emotional energy of Talmudic Judaism. This energy was concentrated in a fiercely proud nationalism, a nationalism older and more passionately felt by virtue of the fact that the Jews had once truly been the chosen people of God. Having fallen away from that chosen status, and been scattered all over the world by the wrath of God, they resented their replacement by the Christian peoples with an especially intense resentment. Roma delenda est – Christian Rome had to be destroyed, and Russia as “The Third Rome”, the Rome that now reigned, had to be destroyed first of all. The atheist revolutionaries of the younger generation took over this resentment and hatred even while rejecting its religious-nationalist-historical basis.

L.A. Tikhomirov wrote: “It is now already for nineteen centuries that we have been hearing from Jewish thinkers that the religious essence of Israel consists not in a concept about God, but in the fulfilment of the Law. Above were cited such witnesses from Judas Galevy. The very authoritative Ilya del Medigo (15^th century) in his notable Test of Faith says that ‘Judaism is founded not on religious dogma, but on religious acts’.

“But religious acts are, in essence, those that are prescribed by the Law. That means: if you want to be moral, carry out the Law. M. Mendelsohn formulates the idea of Jewry in the same way: ‘Judaism is not a revealed religion, but a revealed Law. It does not say ‘you must believe’, but ‘you must act’. In this constitution given by God the State and religion are one. The relationships of man to God and society are merged. It is not lack of faith or heresy that attracts punishment, but the violation of the civil order. Judaism gives no obligatory dogmas and recognizes the freedom of inner conviction.’

“Christianity says: you must believe in such-and-such a truth and on the basis of that you must do such-and-such. New Judaism says: you can believe as you like, but you have to do such-and-such. But this is a point of view that annihilates man as a moral personality…”

Thus Talmudism creates a personality that subjects faith and truth to the imperative of action. That is, it is the action that is first proclaimed as necessary – the reasons for doing it can be thought up later. And this corresponds exactly both to the philosophy of Marx, for whom “the truth, i.e. the reality and power, of thought must be demonstrated in action”, and to the psychological type of the Marxist revolutionary, who first proclaims that Rome (i.e. Russia) must be destroyed, and then looks for an ideology that will justify destruction. Talmudic Law is useful, indeed necessary, not because it proclaims God’s truth, but in order to secure the solidarity of the Jewish people and their subjection to their rabbinic leaders. In the same way, Marxist theory is necessary in order to unite adherents, expel dissidents and in general justify the violent overthrow of the old system.

So the Russian revolution was Jewish not so much because of the ethnic composition of its leaders as because the Satanic hatred of God, Christ and all Christians that is characteristic of the Talmudic religion throughout its history was transferred – by spiritual rather than genetic heredity – from the nationalist Talmudic fathers to their internationalist atheist sons.

Source: http://www.orthodoxchristianbooks.com/articles/371/bolshevism-jews/

Who Financed Lenin and Trotsky?

The top Communist leaders have never been as hostile to their counterparts in the West, as the rhetoric suggests. They are quite friendly to the world's leading financiers and have worked closely with them, when it suits their purposes. As we shall see in the following section, the Bolshevik revolution actually was financed by wealthy financiers in London and New York. Lenin and Trotsky were on the closest of terms with these moneyed interests both before and after the Revolution. Those hidden liaisons have continued to this day and occasionally pop to the surface, when we discover a David Rockefeller holding confidential meetings with a Mikhail Gorbachev in the absence of government sponsorship or diplomatic purpose.

Pages 263-267:
Chapter 13 - MASQUERADE IN MOSCOW

One of the greatest myths of contemporary history is that the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia was a popular uprising of the downtrodden masses against the hated ruling class of the Tsars. As we shall see, however, the planning, the leadership and especially the financing came entirely from outside Russia, mostly from financiers in Germany, Britain and the United States. Furthermore we shall see, that the Rothschild Formula played a major role in shaping these events.

This amazing story begins with the war between Russia and Japan in 1904. Jacob Schiff, who was head of the New York investment firm Kuhn, Loeb and Company, had raised the capital for large war loans (200 million USD) to Japan. It was due to this funding that the Japanese were able to launch a stunning attack against the Russians at Port Arthur and the following year to virtually decimate the Russian fleet. In 1905 the Mikado awarded Jacob Schiff a medal, the Second Order of the Treasure of Japan, in recognition of his important role in that campaign.

During the two years of hostilities thousands of Russian soldiers and sailors were taken as prisoners. Sources outside of Russia, which were hostile to the Tsarist regime, paid for the printing of Marxist propaganda and had it delivered to the prison camps. Russian-speaking revolutionaries were trained in New York and sent to distribute the pamphlets among the prisoners and to indoctrinate them into rebellion against their own government. When the war was ended, these officers and enlisted men returned home to become virtual seeds of treason against the Tsar. They were to play a major role a few years later in creating mutiny among the military during the Communist takeover of Russia.

TROTSKY WAS A MULTIPLE AGENT

One of the best known Russian revolutionaries at that time was Leon Trotsky. In January of 1916 Trotsky was expelled from France and came to the United States. It has been claimed that his expenses were paid by Jacob Schiff. There is no documentation to substantiate that claim, but the circumstantial evidence does point to a wealthy donor in New York. He remained for several months, while writing for a Russian socialist paper, the Novy Mir (New World) and giving revolutionary speeches at mass meetings in New York City. According to Trotsky himself, on many occasions a chauffeured limousine was placed at his service by a wealthy friend, identified as Dr. M. In his book, My Life, Trotsky wrote:

The doctor's wife took my wife and the boys out driving and was very kind to them. But she was a mere mortal, whereas the chauffeur was a magician, a titan, a superman! With the wave of his hand he made the machine obey his slightest command. To sit beside him was the supreme delight. When they went into a tea room, the boys would anxiously demand of their mother, "Why doesn't the chauffeur come in?" (Leon Trotsky: My Life, New York publisher: Scribner's, 1930, p. 277)

It must have been a curious sight to see the family of the great socialist radical, defender of the working class, enemy of capitalism, enjoying the pleasures of tea rooms and chauffeurs, the very symbols of capitalist luxury.

On March 23, 1917 a mass meeting was held at Carnegie Hall to celebrate the abdication of Nicolas II, which meant the overthrow of Tsarist rule in Russia. Thousands of socialists, Marxists, nihilists nand anarchists attended to cheer the event. The following day there was published on page two of the New York Times a telegram from Jacob Schiff, which had been read to this audience. He expressed regrets, that he could not attend and then described the successful Russian revolution as "...what we had hoped and striven for these long years". (Mayor Calls Pacifists Traitors, The New York Times, March 24, 1917, p. 2)

In the February 3, 1949 issue of the New York Journal American Schiff's grandson, John, was quoted by columnist Cholly Knickerbocker as saying that his grandfather had given about $20 million for the triumph of Communism in Russia. (To appraise Schiff's motives for supporting the Bolsheviks, we must remember, that he was a Jew and that Russian Jews had been persecuted under the Tsarist regime. Consequently the Jewish community in America was inclined to support any movement, which sought to topple the Russian government and the Bolsheviks were excellent candidates for the task. As we shall see further along, however, there were also strong financial incentives for Wall Street firms, such as Kuhn, Loeb and Company, of which Schiff was a senior partner, to see the old regime fall into the hands of revolutionaries, who would agree to grant lucrative business concessions in the future in return for financial support today.)

When Trotsky returned to Petrograd in May of 1917 to organize the Bolshevik phase of the Russian Revolution, he carried $10,000 for travel expenses, a generously ample fund considering the value of the dollar at that time. Trotsky was arrested by Canadian and British naval personnel, when the ship, on which he was traveling, the S.S. Kristianiafjord, put in at Halifax. The money in his possession is now a matter of official record. The source of that money has been the focus of much speculation, but the evidence strongly suggests, that its origin was the German government. It was a sound investment.

Trotsky was not arrested on a whim. He was recognized as a threat to the best interests of England, Canada's mother country in the British Commonwealth. Russia was an ally of England in the First World War, which then was raging in Europe. Anything, that would weaken Russia - and that certainly included internal revolution - would be, in effect, to strengthen Germany and weaken England. In New York on the night before his departure Trotsky had given a speech, in which he said: "I am going back to Russia to overthrow the provisional government and stop the war with Germany." (A full report on this meeting had been submitted to the U.S. Military Intelligence. See Senate Document No. 62, 66th Congress, Report and Hearings of the Subcommittee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, 1919, Vol. II, p. 2680.) Trotsky therefore represented a real threat to England's war effort. He was arrested as a German agent and taken as a prisoner of war.

With this in mind we can appreciate the great strength of those mysterious forces both in England and the United States, that intervened on Trotsky's behalf. Immediately telegrams began to come into Halifax from such divergent sources, as an obscure attorney in New York City, from the Canadian Deputy Postmaster-General and even from a high-ranking British military officer, all inquiring into Trotsky's situation and urging his immediate release. The head of the British Secret Service in America at the time was Sir William Wiseman, who, as fate would have it, occupied the apartment directly above the apartment of Edward Mandell House and who had become fast friends with him. House advised Wiseman, that President Wilson wished to have Trotsky released. Wiseman advised his government and the British Admiralty issued orders on April 21st, that Trotsky was to be sent on his way. ("Why Did We Let Trotsky Go? How Canada Lost an Opportunity to Shorten the War", MacLeans magazine, Canada, June 1919. Also see Martin, pp. 163-164.) It was a fateful deecision, that would affect not only the outcome of the war, but the future of the entire world.

It would be a mistake to conclude, that Jacob Schiff and Germany were the only players in this drama. Trotsky could not have gone even as far as Halifax without having been granted an American passport and this was accomplished by the personal intervention of President Wilson. Professor Antony Sutton says:

President Woodrow Wilson was the fairy godmother, who provided Trotsky with a passport to return to Russia to "carry forward" the revolution... At the same time careful State Department bureaucrats, concerned about such revolutionaries entering Russia, were unilaterally attempting to tighten up passport procedures. (Antony C. Sutton, Ph. D.: Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, published by Arlington House in New Rochelle, NY, 1974, p. 25)

And there were others, as well. In 1911 the St. Louis Dispatch published a cartoon by a Bolshevik named Robert Minor. Minor was later to be arrested in Tsarist Russia for revolutionary activities and in fact was himself bankrolled by famous Wall Street financiers. Since we may safely assume, that he knew his topic well, his cartoon is of great historical importance. It portrays Karl Marx with a book entitled Socialism under his arm, standing amid a cheering crowd on Wall Street. Gathered around and greeting him with enthusiastic handshakes are characters in silk hats identified as John D. Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan, John D. Ryan of National City Bank, Morgan partner George W. Perkins and Teddy Roosevelt, leader of the Progressive Party.

What emerges from this sampling of events is a clear pattern of strong support for Bolshevism coming from the highest financial and political power centers in the United States; from men, who supposedly were "capitalists" and who according to conventional wisdom should have been the mortal enemies of socialism and communism.

Nor was this phenomenon confined to the United States. Trotsky in his book My Life tells of a British financier, who in 1907 gave him a "large loan" to be repaid after the overthrow of the Tsar. Arsene de Goulevitch, who witnessed the Bolshevik Revolution firsthand, has identified both the name of the financier and the amount of the loan. "In private interviews", he said, "I have been told that over 21 million rubles were spent by Lord [Alfred] Milner in financing the Russian Revolution... The financier just mentioned was by no means alone among the British to support the Russian revolution with large financial donations." Another name specifically mentioned by de Goulevitch was that of Sir George Buchanan, the British Ambassador to Russia at the time. (See Arsene de Goulevitch: Czarism and Revolution, published by Omni Publications in Hawthorne, California, no date; rpt. from 1962 French edition, pp. 224, 230)

It was one thing for Americans to undermine Tsarist Russia and thus indirectly help Germany in the war, because American were not then into it, but for British citizens to do so was tantamount to treason. To understand, what higher loyalty compelled these men to betray their battlefield ally and to sacrifice the blood of their own countrymen, we must take a look at the unique organization, to which they belonged.

Pages 274-277:
ROUND TABLE AGENTS IN RUSSIA

In Russia prior to and during the revolution there were many local observers, tourists and newsmen, who reported, that British and American agents were everywhere, particularly in Petrograd, providing money for insurrection. On report said, for example, that British agents were seen handing out 25-rouble notes to the men at the Pavlovski regiment just a few hours, before it mutinied against its officers and sided with the revolution. The subsequent publication of various memoirs and documents made it clear, that this funding was provided by Milner and channeled through Sir George Buchanan, who was the British Ambassador to Russia at the time. (See de Goulevitch, p. 230) It was a repeat of the ploy, that had worked so well for the cabal many times in the past. Round Table members were once again working both sides of the conflict to weaken and topple a target government. Tsar Nicholas had every reason to believe, that since the British were Russia's allies in the war against Germany, British officials would be the last persons on Earth to conspire against him. Yet the British Ambassador himself represented the hidden group, which was financing the regime's downfall.

The Round Table Agents from America did not have the advantage of using the diplomatic service as cover and therefore had to be considerably more ingenious. They came not as diplomats or even as interested businessmen, but disguised as Red Cross officials on a humanitarian mission. The group consisted almost entirely of financiers, lawyers and accountants from New York banks and investment houses. They simply had overpowered the American Red Cross organization with large contributions and in effect purchased a franchise to operate in its name. Professor Sutton tells us:

The 1910 [Red Cross] fund-raising campaign for $2 million, for example, was successful only, because it was supported by these wealthy residents of New York City. J.P. Morgan himself contributed $100,000... Henry P. Davison [a Morgan partner] was chairman of the 1910 New York Fund-Raising Committee and later became chairman of the War Council of the American Red Cross... The Red Cross was unable to cope with the demands of World War I. and in effect was taken over by these New York bankers. (Sutton: Revolution, p. 72)

For the duration of the war the Red Cross had been made nominally a part of the armed forces and subject to orders from the proper military authorities. It was not clear, who these authorities were and in fact there were never any orders, but the arrangement made it possible for the participants to receive military commissions and wear the uniform of American army officers. The entire expense of the Red Cross Mission in Russia, including the purchase of uniforms, was paid for by the man, who was appointed by President Wilson to become its head, "Colonel" William Boyce Thompson. Thompson was a classical specimen of the Round Table network. Having begun his career as a speculator in copper mines, he soon moved into the world of high finance. He -

• refinanced the American Woolen Company and the Tobacco Products Company;
• launched the Cuban Cane Sugar Company;
• purchased controlling interest in the Pierce Arrow Motor Car Company;
• organized the Submarine Boat Corporation and the Wright-Martin Aeroplane Company;
• became a director of the Chicago Rock Island & Pacific Railway, the Magma Arizona Railroad and the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company;
• was one of the heaviest stockholders in the Chase National Bank;
• was the agent for J.P. Morgan's British securities operation;
• became the first full-time director of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the most important bank in the Federal Reserve System;
• and of course contributed a quarter-million dollars to the Red Cross.

When Thompson arrived in Russia, he made it clear, that he was not your typical Red Cross representative. According to Hermann Hagedorn, Thompson's biographer:

He deliberately created the kind of setting, which would be expected of an American magnate: established himself in a suite in the Hotel de l'Europe, bought a French limousine, went dutifully to receptions and teas and evinced an interest in objects of art. Society and the diplomats, noting that here was a man of parts and power, began to flock about him. He was entertained at the embassies, at the houses of Kerensky's ministers. It was discovered, that he was a collector and those with antiques to sell fluttered around him offering him miniatures, Dresden china, tapestries, even a palace or two. (Hermann Hagedorn: The Magnate: William Boyce Thompson and His Time, published by Reynal & Hitchcock, New York, 1935, pp. 192-93)

When Thompson attended the opera, he was given the imperial box. People on the street called him the American Tsar. And it is not surprising, that according to George Kennan, "He was viewed by the Kerensky authorities as the 'real' ambassador of the United States." (George F. Kennan: Russia Leaves the War: Soviet-American Relations, 1917-1920 published by Princeton University Press in Princeton, NJ, 1956, p. 60)

It is now a matter of record, that Thompson syndicated the purchase on Wall Street of Russian bonds in the amount of ten million roubles. (Hagedorn, p. 192) In addition, he gave over two million roubles to Aleksandr Kerensky for propaganda purposes inside Russia and with J.P. Morgan gave the rouble equivalent of one million dollars to the Bolsheviks for the spreading of revolutionary propaganda outside of Russia, particularly in Germany and Austria. (Sutton: Revolution, pp. 83, 91.) It was the agitation made possible by this funding, that led to the abortive German Spartacus Revolt of 1918. (See article "W.B. Thompson, Red Cross Donor, Believes Party Misrepresented" in the Washington Post of Feb. 2, 1918) A photograph of the cablegram from Morgan to Thompson advising, that the money had been transferred to the National City Bank branch in Petrograd, is included in this book.

AN OBJECT LESSON IN SOUTH AFRICA

At first it may seem incongruous, that the Morgan group would provide funding for both Kerensky and Lenin. These men may have both been socialist revolutionaries, but they were miles apart in their plans for the future and in fact were bitter competitors for control of the new government. But the tactic of funding both sides in a political contest by then had been refined by members of the Round Table into a fine art. A stunning example of this occurred in South Africa during the outset of the Boer War in 1899.

Source: http://www.wildboar.net/multilingual/easterneuropean/russian/literature/articles/whofinanced/whofinancedleninandtrotsky.html

WHO STOLE AMERICA?

William E. Dannemeyer
U.S. Congressman, 1979-1992

If you want to take over a country, one of the first things you do is to seize control of the money supply.  Jacob Schiff was the son of a Jewish rabbi, born in Frankfurt, Germany.  He was sent to America in the late nineteenth century by the European Rothschild financial dynasty.  One of his assigned tasks was to seize control of the money supply of the U.S. Government.  At that time it was under the control of the U.S. Congress pursuant to Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution which states:

“The Congress shall have Power to coin Money, regulate the Value thereof.”

Baron MA Rothschild had stated this truism in the nineteenth century:

“Give me control over a nation’s currency and I care not who makes the laws.”

Jacob Schiff began his quest to take over the money supply of America by purchasing an interest in a banking concern in Indiana called Kuhn and Loeb.  He married the daughter of Loeb, bought out the interest of Kuhn and as sole owner of Kuhn and Loeb, moved the business to New York in the late 19th century.

Jacob Schiff was not exactly welcomed with open arms by the financial potentates led by the House of Morgan then controlling the financial markets in New York.  Schiff, as the Rothschild’s agent in America, gradually was able to build a working relationship with the other banking houses in New York by sharing some Rothschild bonds and stock business with them.

Schiff was so successful in being accepted as a player in the N.Y. Banking scene that in 1908 he was among a handful of NY bankers who gathered at Jekyll Island, one of the House of Morgan’s homes located in Georgia.  These financial wizards plotted to take over the money supply of America.  They had no small task before them.

They needed to get America to pass their hatched plan called the Federal Reserve System which was nothing more than a private group of bankers.  It was not then nor has it ever been a part of the U.S. government.  Some of the stockholders included: Rothchilds of London and Berlin; Lazard Brothers of Paris; Israel Moses Seif of Italy; Kuhn, Loeb and Warburg of Germany; and the Lehman Brothers, Goldman, Sachs and the Rockefeller families of New York.

 The congressional stooge present at the meeting in 1908 at Jekyll Island was Senator Nelson Aldrich of New York.  He was assigned the task of shepherding the outright theft of the U.S. money supply system called the Federal Reserve Act through Congress.

On December 23, 1913, he delivered in spades.  Two days before Christmas is a good time to have Congress debate and vote on a major piece of legislation if your desire is to minimize the desire of members of Congress to really understand what they are voting on.  The reason is not hard to find.  Members of Congress have families and want to get home for Christmas like anyone else.

The Federal Reserve Act was passed by a vote of 298 to 60 in the House of Representatives and in the Senate by a majority and was sent to the White House for the signature of President Woodrow Wilson. How President Wilson was elected in 1912 was all a part of the conspiracy organized by Jacob Schiff and his New York banking fraternity at the meeting at Jekyll Island in Georgia in 1908.

President Robert Taft, a well respected Republican, was running for re-election in the Presidential election scheduled for 1912.  He was on to the theft of our money supply organized by Jacob Schiff and his New York City banking friends.  If President Taft was re-elected in 1912, it was clear that he would veto any bill passed by Congress to create the privately owned Federal Reserve Act.

The conspirators led by Jacob Schiff enlisted the help of former President Theodore Roosevelt, a Republican and convinced him to run on the third party Bull Moose ticket and split the Republican vote.  The scheme worked and Woodrow Wilson was elected President in the 1912 election and when the Federal Reserve Act came to his desk in 1913, he rewarded his bankers and signed the act into law.

In 1913, the principle means of communicating to the people of America what Congress was doing were newspapers.  The newspapers did not report this biggest theft in the 20th Century at all. Almost a century later, 2007, we Americans are still experiencing the consequences of this theft of our money supply in 1913 by transferring control of it to private elitist banking families residing mostly in Europe and some in America.

It is not an exaggeration to say that these are the consequences of this historic event:

(1) The American people lost control of how and to what extent Congress spends our money: Example, Congressional deficits are financed by irresponsibly expanding the money supply by the privately owned Federal Reserve System which results over time in an inflationary spiral which will lead to a total collapse of the dollar and the destruction of the middle class.

(2) America disavowed the advice of George Washington to avoid entangling alliances with other countries and focus our energies on protecting the interests of the American people.

(3) The creation of Imperial America which seeks to control the world and results in perpetual war to achieve perpetual peace.  It goes by the name of the New World Order, led by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).  The CFR has over 3,000 members, over 70% of whom are Zionist Jews.

Source: http://www.takebackourrights.org/docs/StoleAmerica.htm