Judeo-masonry allied with British Imperialists, Anglo-Saxon culture

By Jude Duffy
July 25, 2017

Some white nationalists, especially those of the Anglo variety, portray the British Empire as a noble victim of unjust calumny by Zionists. In fact, much more often than not, modern Zionists wax enthusiastic about the Empire. Why not? Unlike the white nats, they know that the Rothschilds and other Jewish moneybags sponsored it, and that it served Jewish supremacist interests rather than those of the British people, much less the foreign subjects of the Empire.

Hardcore British Neocons—Michael Gove, Niall Ferguson, Melanie Philips, Andrew Roberts, and so on—use precisely the same arguments in favour of the British Empire that the likes of David Duke use, but then go a step further and posit the Empire as an early exponent of Neocon moral interventionism—the thrust of their message being, if you liked the British Empire, you’ll love Neocon creative destruction.

In an essay, The Very British Roots Of Neoconservatism and Its Lessons For British Conservatives, Gove even argued that, far from being minted in post-war America, Neoconservatism’s origins lay in the imperialist philosophy of 19th century British statesmen like George Canning and Lord Palmerston.

Even on the left of British politics, the more Zionist the pundit or politician, the more likely he or she is to champion British imperial rule in Ireland and elsewhere. Non-Zionist British leftists—Ken Livingstone, Jeremy Corbyn, the late Tony Benn, et al.—tend to condemn British imperialism, albeit from a debased cultural Marxist perspective, but Zionist progressives—e.g., David Aaronovitch, Peter Mandelson, and the lesbian feminist Julie Burchill—eulogise the Empire as an agent of progress and modernity.

In the 1980s and 1990s, Burchill was the highest paid columnist in Britain—her journalism invariably combining vitriolic attacks on the Irish, the Palestinians, the Germans, and continental Europeans generally, with slavish devotion to the Soviet Union and the state of Israel. Clearly, her blend of selective xenophobia and ultra-Zionist leftism found favour with the Rothschilds, since the Murdoch press empire (a Rothschild front) employed her as a star columnist, first in the Sunday Times, and later with the Sun newspaper. She’s also written for the Masonic soft-porn sheet, the Daily Mail, and for the left liberal Guardian.

Britain is one of the most PC nations on earth when it comes to racism. Making even mildly disparaging remarks about non-whites, Jews, or Muslims can land you in jail, but conversely, mocking the Germans as humourless sadists, the French as cowards, or the Irish as stupid feckless drunks, is positively encouraged by the Zio-cultural commissars.

Virulently anti-Catholic TV shows like “Father Ted” (still running on primetime on mainstream TV channels in Britain and Ireland 20 years after ceasing production) reflect the intense ethnic and religious hatred at the heart of the British cultural establishment (and its MI5 controlled “Irish” counterpart).

“Zio-Hollywood” makes a Catholic bashing blockbuster film on average once every two or three years—”Philomena”, “Spotlight”, “The Magdalen Sisters” etc.,—and garlands these productions with Oscars and Oscar nominations galore.

Even films with no ostensible religious theme are often thinly disguised vehicles for anti-Catholic propaganda, e.g., “The Legend Of Tarzan”, “Elizabeth”, “Pirates Of The Caribbean”, etc.

The ostensible paradox of the Anglo-Saxonist jingoist as “anti-racist” PC zealot is not really a paradox at all, but reflects the anti-western, anti-Christian hatred at the heart of Anglo-masonry.

In the centuries since the Reformation, Anglo-Protestant imperialism and Jewish supremacism, far from opposing each other, formed an enduring alliance, which found organised expression in occult societies like the Skull and Bones, the Round Table, Bohemian Grove, and the daddy of them all, the Freemasons (not to mention Masonry’s numerous offshoots, the Know Nothings, the Orange Order, Purple Arch, etc.).

It is no coincidence that the rabidly anti-Catholic Know Nothing movement, which terrorised Irish and German Catholics in 19th century America, was led by Jewish supremacists, Charles Lewis Levin and Samuel Kramer, or that Lord George Gordon, the instigator of the anti-Catholic Gordon Riots in 18th century London, later converted to Orthodox Judaism.

George Benjamin, the first Canadian Jewish Member of Parliament, belonged to the anti-Catholic Anglo-Israelist Orange Order.

Underscoring the unspoken alliance between Zionist sponsored multiculturalism and Anglo-Masonry, British Orange terrorist groups such as the Ulster Defence Association and the Ulster Volunteer Force, have a 25-year history of  trafficking illegal immigrants to the Irish Republic.

Faustus conjures up fallen angel Mephistophilis. The Faustus character, from whom we get “Faustian bargain”, is believed to have been based on John Dee. (1620 printing of Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus.

John Dee, the occult magician at the court of Elizabeth I, was apparently the first person to coin the term “British Empire”, so from the very get go the Empire was an occult cabalist project—all its main propagandists, and indeed actors, being occultists of one sort or another.

According to Stuart Piggot’s book The Druids, Dee “grew up surrounded by the controversy and currents” of what became known as the British Empire—and “sought to merge the Arthurian Imperial tradition with cabalistic interpretations of Hebrew scripture”.

“Dee created the concept of British Israel, which gave the British and the Jews a common racial identity, and invoked biblical prophecy to show the inevitable triumph of British imperialism, the British as Abraham’s seed were to inherit the earth.”

Far from being simply an ethnocentric take on Biblical Christianity, Dee’s pseudo-genealogical supremacist theory was steeped in pagan druidism, being “Christian” only in the sense that New Age pantheism is “Christian”, i.e., it co-opted elements of Christian doctrine and ritual, the better to insinuate itself almost effortlessly into the mainstream of British Christian life.

Dee’s contemporary, the celebrated Elizabethan poet Edmund Spenser, laid out a manifesto for British occult imperialism in his epic poem The Faerie Queene, which called for the ruthless crushing of Irish Catholics, the forcible imposition of the English language in Ireland, and the practice of incest among the English.

Two centuries later, another mouthpiece for Anglo-Judaeo Masonry, Marx’s sidekick, Friedrich Engels, gleefully predicted the wiping out of “whole races of reactionaries”—e.g., the Gaels, the Basques, the Slavs etc.,—in the cause of “progress”.

Zionists talk endlessly of the Holocaust, and Anglo white nats counter by invoking the genocidal Ukrainian Holodomor, but neither side dare mention the deliberate forcible starvation of Irish Catholics in the mid 19th century by the Masonic British government—an act of genocide that a Times of London editorial of 1848 gloated would make “the Celt as rare on the banks of the Shannon as the Redman on the banks of the Manhattan”.

Despite its occult Masonic origins and genocidal policies, Anglo-Israelism gained many adherents among British and American Protestants, who promoted the theory of the British Royal Family as the House of David, and Britain and the United States as the modern tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh respectively.

One might have expected that the Jews, the original self-designated “chosen”, would have resented the Johnny come lately Anglo pretenders to chosenness, but far from it: Jewish supremacists welcomed the claims of Anglo-Freemasonry to tribal co-ethnicity precisely because they understood that wherever it took root, Freemasonry laid waste the surrounding Christian civilization.

However, when, in the 20th century, some mostly American Anglo-Israelists rejected the Anglo-Israelist alliance with organised Jewry and embraced Christian Identitarianism, Jewish supremacists, in the shape of the Anti-Defamation League, denounced Christian Identity as an “ugly turn” away from the original noble tenets of Anglo-Israelism.

So, the avowed anti-racists of the ADL had no quarrel with Anglo-Israelists’ ultra-racist claim to be the rightful rulers of the whole world but objected when some of the Anglos sought to shut Jews out of the exclusive supremacist party. Straining at gnats indeed.

Like Zionism, Anglo-Israelism based its claims on an incoherent mixture of cod genealogy and self-fulfilling prophecy. Initially, the Anglo-Israelists touted the ancient Britons as the source of Britain’s supposed Jewish connection, but once Protestantism became associated with the nordic nations, they changed tack and refashioned the English lost tribe as Anglo-Saxon to the core .

Most reliable evidence indicates that the English share considerably more genetic heritage with the French than with the Germans, but when did facts ever get in the way of racial supremacist theories?

Benjamin Disraeli, the Jewish supremacist British Prime Minister of the mid-Victorian era, eagerly promoted Anglo-Israelism as the semi-official ideology of the British Empire—which, thanks to Jewish sponsorship, was then reaching the zenith of its power and prestige.

Borrowing heavily from Protestant theories of wealth and success as a sign of divine favour, Anglo-Israelists argued that Britain’s great power in the world proved the English were part of God’s chosen race. The logic was circular—the belief in chosenness impelled  the supremacist drive to be “top nation”: the ensuing top nation status then being cited as evidence of chosen-ness.

Anglo-Israelism in the 19th century made huge inroads in the Church of England; the de facto takeover of Anglicanism by Masonic Israelists prompted Cardinal Newman to desert the English state church and convert to Catholicism.

According to The Union Jack, a 1970 book on Anglo-Israelism by ‘Helen Peters’, Anglo-Israelist Freemasonry controls all the major ‘right-wing’ Protestant churches in the United States. This helps explain why such churches have become slavish mouthpieces for Zionism and the endless war agenda of the Anglo-American Neocons on left and right.

The Union Jack argues that Anglo-Israelism and Freemasonry are synonymous, and embody the Kingdom-of-Heaven-on-Earth heresy, i.e., the idea of materialistic worldly “progress” as the ultimate goal of existence.

Though steeped in Protestant Freemasonry, Anglo-Israelism has a constituency even within the Catholic fold. The late Catholic modernist left liberal-turned Atlanticist Neocon Michael Novak touted liberal capitalism as the flower of “the English genius”, and condemned traditional Catholic teaching on usury, contraception, subsidiarity, and just war. A few years before his death, he wrote a book celebrating the New Atheism entitled No One Sees God.

Arguing, as many Ku Klux Klan types do, that the Jews have waged war against so called White Anglo Saxon Protestant culture, renders modern history utterly incomprehensible. Far from seeking to destroy Anglo-Masonic culture, the Anglo Israelist Jewish alliance strives to impose it as a one-size-fits-all model on the  whole world.

Otherwise, how can one explain the triumph of English language throughout the globe? Or the rapid spread, via Masonic lodges, of the Anglo-Masonic sports of soccer (the founding meeting of the English Football Association took place in the Freemasons Arms hotel), cricket, rugby, and their derivatives, baseball and gridiron football?

By the same token, the global Zio-media’s exhaustive and largely fawning coverage of the not especially charismatic or interesting Masonic British royal family doesn’t suggest any notable Zionist antipathy towards Anglo-Masonry or its institutions.

Almost all the major currents of modernity at least partly originated in Masonic Britain: political liberalism, usurious capitalism, Fabianism, Darwinism, even Marxism.

Throughout the 20th century, the Anglo-American alliance instigated devastating wars that wiped out the last vestiges of Christendom and paved the way for the current cultural Marxist wage-slave ultra-surveilled police states of the West.

In the 21st century, the same alliance has joined forces with Islamic Wahabists and the state of Israel to overthrow Christian-friendly governments in Yugoslavia, Syria, and Iraq.

Anti-globalists like Paul Craig Roberts tend to interpret all of this as proof that Britain is America’s poodle, but the evidence suggests something closer to the opposite: that the U.S. is in fact the City of London’s muscle-bound global enforcer.

One must be careful to distinguish between the City of London (the Crown) and the United Kingdom. The Crown is not the British Windsor monarchy but rather the cabalist Masonic force which controls both the British monarchy and the British government.

Just in case British Members of British Parliament run away with the foolish idea that their deliberations matter a jot, the City of London’s representative (or “remembrancer”) sits behind the Speaker in the Westminster House of Commons to remind them who really calls the shots in the U.K.

Nevertheless, the Crown has used Anglo- Israelism—a species of gentile Zionist supremacism—to impose its homogenized globalist Anglo-centric cultural and political model on the world.

Again, it is necessary to distinguish between Anglo-Israelism and common or garden British nationalism. Not every British or English nationalist is an Anglo-Israelist, just as not every Chinese nationalist supports the Chinese Communist Party. What distinguishes Anglo-Israelism from nationalism is its relentless drive to eradicate all other national cultures. Like Zionism, it is the enemy of nationalism—even English and British nationalism, properly understood.

If every nation in Europe still spoke its own language and maintained its own traditions and economic independence, it is impossible to imagine the current immigration tsunami now overwhelming Europe ever having taken place. The British people, it should be noted, have not been spared this tsunami or the other ravages of globalism, in spite of their country being the HQ of global masonry.

Far from regarding other European races as brethren, Anglo-Israelist Masons always viewed them as enemies of the Masonic liberal Anglo-international. The Masonic British Empire sided with the Turks against Christendom, with Pagan Japan against Orthodox Christian Russia, and with radical atheist revolutionaries against Catholic European governments and their possessions in the Americas and elsewhere.

Similarly, as the late British researcher Anthony Sutton has shown, Anglo-America not only aided the Bolshevik regime in Russia but ensured its survival through huge economic, military, and technological aid.

In modern times, Anglo-Israelist Neocons in Britain extoll the idea of the multi-cultural, multi-ethnic Commonwealth over the ancient Christian nations of Europe.

Many jingoistic Masonically inclined Brexiteers absurdly tout a German/Jesuit/Vatican conspiracy as the true power behind the E.U. but never get around to explaining why, if this is so, Europe has, since the start of E.U. integration in the 1950s, been rapidly Anglicized linguistically, politically, economically, and culturally, and why Anglo-Zio-Masonic militarism—and the disastrous migration that flows from it—define modern E.U. history.

David Duke has done sterling work exposing the ludicrous hypocrisy of Zionist “anti-racists”, but framing the debate about immigration and globalism as a struggle between old-fashioned noble imperialists and evil lefty multiculturalists completely misses the point. The Masonic imperialists and the leftists were on the same side in the 19th century and they still are today.

 

Philo-Protestant lies about usury; paedophilic hypocrisy

By Northsider
December 7, 2015 Anno Domini

Michael Hoffman’s infatuation with Protestantism – Part II

Protestant usuryOne of the most celebrated Puritans in history, the 17th century English poet John Milton, advocated no-fault divorce, one of many historical facts that completely refute the notion that radical Protestant liberalism is a purely 20th or 21st century phenomenon. C.S. Lewis, no philo-Catholic, acknowledged that in so far as the Reformation was a struggle between rigour and laxity, the Catholics were the rigorists, the Protestants the liberals.

Calvin’s own radical departure from traditional Christian views on economic and financial matters couldn’t be clearer: he explicitly endorsed usury and thus broke completely with the traditional Christian teaching on money (9). Hoffman attempts, quite absurdly, to muddy the waters by citing the Catholic Fuggers’ usurious activities, and certain Catholic theologians’ partial endorsement of usury. In so doing he ignores the crucial fact that neither the Fuggers nor such theologians formed the Magisterium of the Catholic Church – whereas Calvin very obviously defined the spirit and letter of Calvinism. The clue is surely in the name.

Hoffman argues that the Pope Leo X bull permitting limited interest on loans for charitable purposes, not Calvin’s teaching, was what really opened the floodgates to usury (10), though he never gets around to explaining why, if this is so, it was the great Protestant powers, Britain, Holland, Geneva, and latterly the U.S., where usurious capitalism really took off.

John Calvin

John Calvin

Regardless, of how one, with hindsight, views Leo’s bull on a prudential level, it was anything but a ringing endorsement of usury, but rather a partial and very tentative derogation in response to special circumstances. It may have been a foolish compromise with the usurious spirit, but the unpleasant truth is that most of us compromise in some way or other with the usurious spirit every day. Hoffman himself accepts donations through usurious financial institutions – in fairness he might not be able to carry on his work if he did not.

Hoffman argues that the failure of Cromwell’s effort to allow Jews en masse back into England proves that the conventional old-school Catholic critique of Cromwellian Puritanism is unfair. But again this is to engage in facile historical reductionism, whereby the context of history is ignored in favour of extracting isolated facts for use as debating points. Thus, while it is true that Cromwell didn’t succeed in allowing the Jews into England, it cannot be seriously argued that he did not plan to do so (11) or that the Puritans were not, in general, extremely philo-Judaic by the standards of the time (12).

In fact, the rise of “Anglo-Saxon Protestant” supremacism resembled Jewish racial supremacism in many ways – the very term White Anglo-Saxon Protestant” having its roots in crypto-Judaic national exceptionalism. The “Anglo-Saxons” were not especially Anglo-Saxon – recent DNA studies of the indigenous English population confirm what many serious historians and genealogists have known for years: that the English share more genetic heritage with the French than with the Germans (13). But like Zionists and German National Socialists, British Protestants invented an ersatz form of racial jingoism to justify genocide, enslavement, and persecution.

Like other philo-Puritans, Hoffman acknowledges that the Puritans were much more concerned with activity in the world than with contemplation, but he fails to see the implications of this fact for his attempt to portray these radical Protestant sects as at least partial inheritors of the true spirit of medieval Christianity. No medieval Catholic would exalt work and action over contemplation. The Catholic Church has always taught that prayer and contemplation are far more vital for salvation than economic activity in the world. When that order of priorities is reversed, as it was in much of Europe and the “Anglo-sphere”, in the centuries after Reformation, the stage is set for the triumph of vulgar materialism. One of Mrs. Thatcher’s economic gurus, the former Communist Sir Alfred Sherman, poured scorn on the large number of Spaniards in monasteries and convents during the Counter-Reformation era, in contrast to the “economic dynamism” of Protestant Europe.

This notion, that Protestantism brings in its wake dynamic modern progress, and commercial and industrial enterprise – as opposed to the rural reactionary stagnation of Catholicism – has been a recurring theme of Whiggish Protestant historians for centuries (the Whiggish philo-Judaic Victorian historian, Lord Macaulay being a famous example). Some corporate media commentators have even suggested that it is not coincidence that four of the five countries at the centre of the E.U. financial “crisis” were Catholic – Ireland, Italy, Spain and Portugal (the other one being Orthodox Greece). They may have a point: it may be no accident that Catholic countries should be the first on the hit list of larcenous City of London and Wall Street bankers.

It might sound like a curious thing to say about a holocaust revisionist, but Hoffman is in some ways quite a conventional thinker, all too happy to accept corporate mainstream media versions of events if they can be made to dovetail with his own prejudices. In this, ironically enough, he resembles the Traditionalist Catholic movement – a recurring target of his ire. Just as Traditionalist Catholics in general accept the media version of the Catholic abuse scandals without investigation, Hoffman does likewise, albeit for very different reasons. Whereas “Trads” embrace the media scandal narrative because they foolishly believe it can be made to vindicate their own critique of the corruption of the post-Vatican II Chruch, Hoffman does so because he thinks this narrative vindicates his own philo-Protestant dislike of post-Renaissance Catholicism.

Significantly neither he nor the Trads seem remotely interested in independently investigating (A) the reliability of the many allegations made against Catholic priests or religious, or (B) the context of the scandals. For example, in a recent piece on his blog Hoffman cites one of the many anti-Catholic books published about Catholic clerical abuse in Ireland, and suggests that the horrific revelations contained therein “apparently drove the Irish people mad” and led them to the ignominy of being the first nation to vote for sodomitic “marriage”. This piece encapsulates Hoffman at his worst: unbalanced diatribes based on uncritical regurgitation of highly dubious “facts” from ideologically tainted sources. Moreover, like the Trads, he never seems to consider the possibility that the pattern of cause and effect he identifies is far from happenstance.

Or to put it another way: an unbiased commentator would surely recognise that it is highly far-fetched to suppose that the anti-Christian media and media class suddenly discovered a selective horror of clerical paedophilia just at the time they planned to unleash an extraordinary intensification of their onslaught on vestigial Catholic culture. There is a familiar pattern here which every reflective person should recognise. Just as western media attacks on Saddam, Milosevic, Assad, and Ghaddafi preceded massive military attacks on these regimes, the relentless media blitz against the Catholic Church preceded a cultural Marxist version of Shock and Awe, whereby rabidly anti-Christian propositions, that a few short years previously had been confined to the outer fringes of the far left, were targeted successfully at the mainstream of respectable society.

Unbiased investigation quickly reveals that that many – although by no means all – of the allegations of sexual crime made against Catholic priests and religious remain to this day completely unproven. This is because, contrary to the corporate media line that Hoffman faithfully echoes, Church authorities, for reasons best known to themselves, handed over many billions of dollars/sterling/Euros, without any proper investigations of allegations – often in cases where priests and religious had been deceased for many years, and were therefore in no position to defend their good name (18). Furthermore, both Church and State authorities deemed accusations “credible” on the very flimsiest of circumstantial evidence, e.g., an accuser having lived in the same town as the accused at the time of the alleged offences.

But in the simplistic crypto-punk outlook of Hoffman and the Trads, the undeniable corruption of the modern Church makes every allegation against a Catholic priest credible, and therefore in no need of unbiased investigation – even when there were and are compelling religious (or anti-religious), political, financial, and cultural motives for blackening the name of Catholic clergy.

It should be noted that when it comes to World War II, Hoffman abhors his own logic. In that context he freely admits that Hitler was indeed a war criminal and “one of history’s prize fools” but argues that these facts in no way vindicate all the charges of systematic genocide laid at his door.

Incidentally, while we’re on the subject of revisionism, one of the ironies of the on-going anti-Catholic feeding frenzy is that Protestants like Dr. David Duke recognise it for the co-ordinated Zionist psy-op that it is, whereas the Catholic Hoffman – not to mention the Catholic Trads – refuse to see what’s staring them in the face.

It would be remiss to write on this subject without noting how the Zio-masonic media and political establishment treat genuinely credible allegations of paedophile rings in their own milieu. Since 2012, many senior public figures in Britain, living and deceased, have been accused of paedophilia. Some have already been sent to prison for such offences. Very recently, allegations of child abuse against former British Prime Minister Ted Heath made it into the mainstream media. Most of that media, including the BBC, implied that these were completely new allegations, and that Heath’s accusers were cynically taking advantage of the fact that he was no longer around to defend himself.

As anyone with even a passing acquaintance with the so-called alternative media can testify, this is complete bunkum. Regardless of one’s view of David Icke, it is a matter of public record that he publicly challenged Heath (in the Guardian newspaper) to sue him over precisely the allegations that many in the media are now dismissing as cowardly posthumous attacks on the reputation of the “asexual” former Prime Minister. Strangely the notoriously combative Heath declined to take up Icke’s gauntlet. The point here is that the same media which accepted without any reservation every allegation made against Catholic priests and religious, living or deceased, seem far less eager to form lynch mobs where pillars of the secular masonic establishment are concerned. Indeed many media outlets have viciously character-assassinated the alleged victims of establishment paedophile rings.

By the same token, many of the media that have obsessively pursued the Church on the issue of paedophile clergy, have themselves been deeply and very directly implicated in the cover-up of paedophile networks. The BBC, a deeply corrupt organisation that has broadcast endless hit pieces on the Church, not only covered up paedophilia in its own organisation, but actively facilitated the notorious child predator Jimmy Savile, by continuing to employ him as host of audience-based children’s TV shows long after his criminal proclivities were widely known.

(Editor’s note: Footnotes to come)

Part I of this series

The Star-Spangled Heresy

perf5.500x8.500.inddSource Unknown
(apparently based on the late Solange Hertz’ work pictured on the right)

The US constitution is not a solution to today’s problems. It is a Masonic document that teaches what Christianity calls “the Star-Spangled Heresy” the prominent tenets of which are: 1.) Revolution 2.) the separation of the Church from state 3.) Moral Relativism. Distrusting the Catholic Church and separating the Catholic Church from the state has led to the tyranny of moral relativism and to super demon possessed leaders who lie to their own subjects and carry out false flag acts of terrorism.

‘FOUNDING FATHERS’ FOUNDED AMERICA TO BRING IN THE NEW WORD ORDER
Adam Weishaupt founded the Illuminati on May 1st of 1776 which is the date commemorated on the back of the US dollar bill and has the words in Latin ‘Annuit Coeptis Novus Ordo Seclorum’ meaning ‘Announcing the Conception of the New World Order.’ The declaration of independence – a name that is not in the document itself – was not signed on July 4th supposedly in 1776 but August 2nd by 50 signers. Some of the remaining 6 signers did not even sign it until 2 years later. This is the consensus of the super majority of professional US historians. The ‘articles of confederation’ was the proto-constitution of the continental revolutionary congress. It was made in the early 1780s. The constitution itself which established the US political sect was not made until 1787.

July 4th is the date on which Babylonians lighted pyres for their false god Baal. This is why the masonic founders wanted the date to be observed in the celebration of the revolution. The date is dedicated to a concealed worship of Lucifer. The symbols of the dollar bill honor Lucifer. They do not honor God the Lord Jesus Christ and His Blessed Mother.

THE ILLUMINATI HATES MONARCHY AND THE CHURCH
Weishaupt had as his goal to destroy the States of Europe and the Church. He intended to do this by infiltration of Illuminati freemasons into the top positions of all the governments of the world and call them “republics.” Since they all believed in a universal humanity of religion they could all come together in an attempt to destroy the Church and develop a Luciferian world wide ‘state.’

Excerpt from Hertz’ Star-Spangled Heresy: Americanism:

The popular scientific writer Roger Burlingame coined the phrase, “America was discovered; the United States was invented.” He meant only to make a distinction between a principle and its application, but the eyes of faith see deeper than that: America is the creation of Almighty God and can indeed only be discovered, whereas the United States, being merely a political ontrivance, can qualify only as a human invention. Mistaking one for the other has disastrous consequences, for contrivances may fall apart without warning, as the United States nearly did during its so-called Civil War and may do now by internal collapse.

Catholics who mistake the United States for God’s America may furthermore easily fall into the heresy formally defined by Pope Leo XIII as Americanism. Basically, it is naturalism in American dress, and it accommodates itself to all the ideals of the Enlightenment. French radicals of the last century expected it then to produce a major schism in the Church under the able leadership of Catholic bishops in the United States, some of whom even dared preach Americanism to Europe. It was a threat, apparently, which drove Leo XIII to approve of democracy in practice, if not in principle rather than antagonize the enemy.

“But over there in America,” wrote Emile Zola:

…what fertile virgin soil for a triumphant heresy! How easy to see a Bishop Ireland one fine day like the banner of revolt and become the apostle of the new religion, A RELIGION RELEASED FROM DOGMAS, MORE HUMAN, THE RELIGION WE DEMOCRATS ARE WAITING FOR!

The United States had been only too well prepared for such regrettable leadership. Like Franklin, most of its Founding Fathers were not Christians. Although they often made references to the Deity, the God they invoked was their God, the alchemical God of nature in Christian dress. In fact the most influential among them were not so much deists as thoroughgoing pantheists, for, being avowed rationalists, they looked for divinity only in nature. Themselves products of the Enlightenment, they could hardly have been anything else.

In Alchemy, a Green Dragon signifies the Great Work in its beginnings, and it cannot have been coincidence that the Revolution was planned and carried out by men who met regularly in a Boston tavern of that very name. So diligently did they promote the serpent’s cause that America today finds herself immersed in a sea of neo-Gnosticism so pervading and controlling her moral, intellectual and political life that, by comparison, the Albigensian heresy which once ravaged the whole of Christendom now looks like a harmless childhood disease. God preserve us from the Red Dragon, alchemical sign for the Great Work in its completion!

(pp. 20-22)

Alex Jones all Koched up!

Kochaine
By Timothy Fitzpatrick

July 25, 2015, Anno Domini

Television personality Montel Williams seems to believe that conspiracy icon Alex Jones is a cokehead and con artist, even calling him out on it publicly via Twitter earlier this year.

Perhaps Williams’ coke claim isn’t so far fetched when you consider Jones’ superhuman confidence and energy levels, self-grandiosity, feelings of superiority and narcissism, cokehead friends like Charlie Sheen, and his patriot-funded millions in the bank (see: Cocaine, anatomy of a high and How Narcicissm relates to Cocaine Addiction). And if he is a CIA/Mossad asset and a crony of wealthy elites, as this author believes, he would have ample access to the white stuff. It certainly wouldn’t be a shock if it turned out he were a cokehead.

Jones also appears to be jacked up on another Koch—powerful billionaires Charles de Ganahl Koch and David Hamilton Koch, who represent the Koch family empire of industrial capitalism. The Kochs are more or less the Rockefellers of the 21st century, with their tentacles virtually everywhere, but especially in the realm of the neoconservative-libertarian mix. While not overtly Zionist, or even Jewish (nobody seems to know), the Kochs are a credit to predatory Judeo-masonic usury, also known as capitalism. Daddy Koch—Fred Chase—happened to found the crypto-Jewish “conservative” society of John Birch, of which Alex Jones appears to be a solid member (see Did the CIA recruit Alex Jones through the John Birch Society?). The Kochs are also behind the Tea Party and Libertarian movements in the United States, even throwing their support behind Jones cronies Rand and Ron Paul, and all helped by the promotion of controlled opposition news aggregates like the Jewish homosexual Matthew Drudge (DrudgeReport) and Zionist Joseph Farrah (WorldNetDaily).

Notice CIA front National Review as one of the event sponsors.

Notice CIA front National Review as one of the event sponsors.

Jones’ real agenda seems to have reared its trollish head more and more over the last few years, and perhaps it is because of the upcoming federal election in the United States, whether it’s outright endorsing neocon Zionists like Sarah Palin, rallying against raising the minimum wage, or touting the Koch’s Keystone XL pipeline as the saviour of the economy. Now that Jones has built up the core of his audience to its maximum potential, he can really let loose with his agenda, which directly lines up with the Koch agenda (the Koch agenda is a key fixture on the right of the kabbalist dialectic of seeming opposites. To show how flimsy Koch politics is, consider that the Koch empire helped set up the Soviet Unions oil industry under the watch of Stalin even though the Kochs have always been outspokenly anti-Communist. They have also gone both ways in the gay marriage debate as well as the abortion debate). Jones admits now that he is a “classical liberal” who advocates laissez-faire capitalism. The researched reader will know that laissez-faire is a product of the Judeo-masonic Enlightenment. Jones is as close to neo-conservatism as one can get (it also falls under the umbrella of masonic libertarianism). The Kochs are also for laissez-faire capitalism, as it allows them to conduct their exploitative practices, unfettered by government or anyone else.

Koch and Jones’ political views line up perfectly
Here’s some perspective on the similarities between what Alex Jones preaches daily through his media empire and the Koch Brothers’ agenda:

  • Minimum wage freeze
  • Anti-union
  • Tea Party (Alex Jones claims to have founded Tea Party movement, so do Kochs—Kochs actually founded it: Study Confirms Tea Party Was Created by Big Tobacco and Billionaire Koch Brothers)
  • Smaller government
  • Laissez-faire capitalism
  • Support Israel and neoconservative foreign policies despite being “libertarian” (anti-war)
  • Stand with coal
  • Support Keystone XL pipeline and conventional oil and gas development
  • John Birch Society (Fred Koch a founding member of JBS)
  • Libertarianism (David H. Koch was the Libertarian Party’s vice-presidential candidate in 1980; Kochs funded $250 million to libertarian causes from 1998 to 2008; Alex Jones is an outspoken Libertarian)
  • Oppose socialized health care
  • Oppose carbon tax schemes
  • Oppose official narrative on climate change
  • Attack renewable energy
  • Anti-tax, especially for the rich
  • Privatization of government services
  • Ron Paul/Rand Paul (Koch Brothers Support Rand Paul)
  • The Cato Institute (Ron Paul at the Cato Institute)
  • Oppose net neutrality (Alex Jones’ Stance On Net Neutrality Proves He Is A Shill)
  • Anti-police (Kochs have advocated criminal justice reform through Cato and The Charles Koch Institute; Alex Jones constantly fear mongers about the police state, even naming some of his documentaries “Police State”)
  • Advocate restoration of U.S. Constitution (which is masonic)
  • Monetary Reform, specifically a return to the gold standard

See now why Jones nor the alternative media rarely, if ever, talk about the Koch brothers, much less in a critical manner? The Kochs hide their money and influence in a complex web of political action committees (PACs) and tax-exempt foundations. Seems Jones has learned a trick or two from the Kochs, as he has done a good job of hiding his own funding through various incorporated dummy companies.

Koch brothers libertarianism, like JBS, serve to homogenize NWO dissenters and the so called right wing
In How the Money Power created Libertarianism and Austrian Economics, monetary reformer and anti-usurist Anthony Migchels draws some interesting conclusions about Koch involvement in the truth movement:

But in the meantime another very wealthy Jewish family, the Koch family (see ‘the Zionist Billionaires that Control Politics’), had taken over the organization of Libertarianism and Austrian Economics.

Fred Koch founded the John Birch Society in 1958. Ed Griffin was educated there. He later wrote a famous book, “The Creature of Jekyll Island”. This was a rehash of Eustace Mullins’ brilliant ‘Secrets of the Federal Reserve’, with one exception: it left out all Mullins’ analysis of the Gold Standard as a Banker operation and how Britain’s demand for taxes paid in Gold were the cause of the war of Independence. Instead it called for the reinstatement of a Gold Standard. This is a key part of the story OF how Austrian Economics managed to take over the ‘Truth Movement’.

Koch’s son Charles Koch founded the CATO Institute, together with Murray Rothbard. The CATO Institute remains to this day a leading Libertarian outlet.

Of course, Jones frequently references Griffin (also a JBS member) and dabbled in the gold trade himself (apparently he has moved on to just selling herbal supplements and water filters).

Infowars’ talent pool a who’s who of controlled opposition
In retrospect, Jones pool of “experts” used in his documentary films and on his daily radio show all seem to come from only a few groups, either from the John Birch Society, Koch-connected groups, the intelligence community, or Zionist groups like the Council For National Policy, the Remnant Saints Inter-Continental Congress, and WorldNetDaily. Here’s a short list of some of the Infowars go-to characters from these groups:

  • G. Edward Griffin
  • Joseph Farrah
  • Joel Skousen (nephew of Bircher Cleon Skousen, a former FBI official and Mormon apologist)
  • Phyllis Schlafly
  • Matt Drudge
  • Stanley Monteith
  • Lew Rockwell
  • Ron Paul
  • Dan Bongino
  • Jesse Benton

Jones is an honorary founding member of the Remnant Saints Inter-Continental Congress, a seemingly Christian Zionist, Birch-like think tank styled like a Koch PAC.

COINTELPRO Alex Jones

Why does Adnan Khashoggi keep popping up around Alex Jones?
Regular readers know that I have been onto Alex Jones’ disinfo trail for some time. One of the first big articles I wrote exposing Jones, with much credit to Daniel Hopsicker, revealed a possible connection of Jones to Israeli intelligence through Saudi arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi, who is as big as anybody in The Octopus—a moniker for the Judeo-Masonic criminal network, especially as it was revealed in the 1980s with arms scandals and BCCI. Like many Saudi elites, Khashoggi is an Israeli Mossad asset. (See: The Growing Complexity of Alex Jones’ Israeli Connections). There is yet another possible connection between the two characters, this time through our hosts of the evening, the Kochs.

In Triad, Khashoggi, and the Republicans: Together Again, we discover:

Triad Management, the company directed by the Koch Brothers, is one of hundreds of Triad companies run by global magnate Khashoggi. Incidentally this is the Khashoggi who was responsible for heading the Iran Contra arms for hostages deal for which he was later pardoned by senior George Bush. In 1983, the year Triad Governmental Systems was founded in Ohio, Khashoggi formed the gold company Barrick Gold Corp. In 1985, Khashoggi borrowed $21 million, using his Barrick stock as collateral, for the covert transfer of arms to Iran for the Bush-North group.

Khashoggi allegedly provided the loan from his Cayman Islands company, Triad American holding company. Khashoggi used the Monte Carlo offices of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) to launder money for Iran arms sales. After Khashoggi was investigated and indicted for his role in the Iran-Contra affair, the Canadian director of Barrick, Peter Munk, paid the $4 million to get Adnan bailed out.

Screen shot 2011-08-25 at 4.52.58 PM

Ron Paul has Khashoggi’s Barick Gold as holding.

I wonder if Alex Jones’ old-time listeners who bought gold from him back in his goldsmithing heyday are currently storing a quickly devaluing metal that was supplied by Khashoggi’s Barick Gold! Guess who has Barrick Gold in his top ten holdings? One Ron Paul. The Kochs also happen to be subscribers to Israeli intelligence firm Stratfor, based in Austin, Texas. We suspect Jones is in cahoots with Stratfor—Stratfor being in cahoots with Khashoggi.

Line between Jones and Fox News fading into oblivion
If Jones is following the Koch agenda as a subplot within the Judeo-Masonic conspiracy, it explains his recent endorsement of Tea Partier Sarah Palin, which is odd considering his previous attacks on her, and his outrageous claim that all Muslims be deported from the United States or that Israeli proxy ISIS is a legitimate threat to America as far as it is perceived as Islamic. Furthermore, we can anticipate, as we inch closer to the election, that Jones will ramp up the Koch-neocon rhetoric. The strategy at first seemed to be the advocacy for the Libertarian ticket in Rand Paul, but Plan B may be to go with the Republican ticket in Jeb Bush. Alternatively, it’s difficult to see the Kochs opposing a Trump Whitehouse, should the impossible happen.

Jones has been criticizing President Obama and the Democrats hard in the last four years in the run up to Obama’s exit. Now that Jones’ core audience has been hooked by Jones exposing legitimate but fairly general conspiracies, they are struggling to see how they are being duped with his current rhetoric, which protects the Jewish money power that runs the show. Since his beginning as a conspiracy icon, Jones has played the right wing card of the Kabbalist dialectic of the NWO conspiracy. He has consistently advocated JBS-, Koch-styled political views as part of his counter-intelligence mission. His mission has been to homogenize, radicalize, and then misdirect dissenters of the NWO conspiracy. One of the key tactics he uses to achieve this is to dilute resistance by keeping his listeners from focusing on specific things. Instead, he has them looking in all directions, exerting, thus wasting their energy away from anything meaningful. It’s diabolical scheme to manage the NWO’s opposition to a predetermined outcome, thus we call Alex Jones and other shills in the patriot movement “controlled opposition.” Jewish Soviet dictator Vladimir Lenin once said:

The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.

 

For more on the Alex Jones scandal, read the following:

Millionaire Alex Jones’ mysterious Dogwood Creek home

Alex Jones pulls the Goldman over the sheeple’s eyes

Alex Jones’ Jewish handler at Emmis promotes Hicks meme

Alex Jones using hypnosis, subliminals, and NLP on audience

Did the CIA recruit Alex Jones through the John Birch Society?

COINTELPRO caught setting up strawman attacks against Alex Jones

Stratfor had two Alex Joneses

Alex Jones creating bogus stories to circumvent Stratfor revelations

Parallels between Alex Jones and CIA front National Review

Alex Jones, freemasonry, and the cult of Constitution

The Stratfor Infowar – Wikileaks reveals more on Kinky cointelpro Jones

Alternative media continues to ignore Alex Jones’ Stratfor connections

Learned helplessness through the alternative media

Infowars photo op at Stratfor?

The growing complexity of Alex Jones’ Israeli Connections

False opposition Mark Dice returns to the InfoWhores fold

Hypocrite Alex Jones as fake as Obama when crying

Is Alex Jones externalizing the hierarchy?

Alex Jones follows in the footsteps of Vladimir Zhirinovsky

Why the U.S. Constitution is completely bankrupt

Americanism Anti Christian ConspiracyBy Timothy Fitzpatrick
April 10, 2015 Anno Domini

Resistance to the New World Order conspiracy has been pigeonholed to constitutionalism—specifically the U.S. Constitution, Americanism, and libertarianism by the architects who have set up the “truth movement” as the supposed antidote to the “enslavement” of mankind.

No further evidence is needed to expose these architects as either controlled opposition or unwitting dupes than an examination of the beacons of freedom and liberty they hold up as the primary goal around which “truthers” must rally.

Forget that the U.S. Constitution was adopted by a largely freemasonic clique of American revolutionaries or that it was shaped from the freemasons’ own constitution, the document is fundamentally illogical and contrary to true freedom. The Constitution’s absolute promulgation of indifferentism—that all beliefs are equally valid—is the most glaring error. This gross error permeates the document as well as its offspring movements libertarianism and Americanism. Indifferentism violates the primary law of philosophy, the law of noncontradiction, that no two truths can contradict each other. All beliefs cannot be equally valid simultaneously as Christ claims to be the only Truth. The U.S. Constitution then is declaring unequivocally that Christ is not the only Truth. This denial is in harmony with their loose definitions of “God”, freedom, and liberty.

The U.S. Founding Fathers’ deliberately vague writings on “God” are completely consistent with the doctrines of freemasonry, which are equally as vague and indifferent. Of course, not believing in any one truth, how can they adequately describe God? They are functioning on the basis of a fundamental lie. In Freemasonry, “God” is liberation from the true God, freedom from the true God and His just order of the universe. The masonic ambition of Godless autonomy is manifested in the rebellious character of Satan, in the pride of mankind, and in the “do what thou wilt” revolutionary spirit. It is codified in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and commonly known as “separation of Church and State”. Ironically, the truth movement is sold the lie that anything that violates their masonic liberation from God Almighty is “enslavement”. The global conspirators, as guilty as they are, function as a mere prop in this grand delusion. Truthers are struggling against a ghost and have no truth from which to defend their true freedom, which is only found in Christ Jesus, the true and only liberator of mankind.

I can hear supposed Christian constitutionalists arguing that notions of “free speech” and the “right to bear arms” are Godly. Under the overall rebellious spirit of the U.S. Constitution, concepts such as freedom of speech are also loosely defined by the document and the fathers. What exactly constitutes free speech and what limits ought to be in place, if any? Obscenity and pornography have only gained prominence in American society because they have been attached to freedom of speech. Is this merely a misuse of the Constitution? How can it be when the concept is so loosely defined, open to interpretation? If the framers of the Constitution wished this not to happen, would they not have clearly stated so? It’s virtually the same with every other supposed misuse of the Constitution, whether it be the dominance of corporations over the U.S. government, infanticide (state-sanctioned abortion through the 14th amendment), Talmudic influence through the courts, or, worst of all, state-sanctioned usury through institutions like the U.S. Federal Reserve. It appears that the U.S. Founding Fathers, guided by dark spirits, designed the Constitution to fail the people in their true pursuit of freedom, which comes only through Christ Jesus. To corroborate this, we have the testimony of the authors of the infamous Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, a documented purported to be the documented framework from which the world’s anti-Christian conspirators would execute their specific plans for world governance. Whether or not the document is real or fiction matters not. The concepts and ideas were in circulation among the populace of the time of the document’s writing.

Constitution designed to self-destruct?

The constitution scales of these days will shortly break down, for we have established them with a certain lack of accurate balance in order that they may oscillate incessantly until they wear through the pivot on which they turn. The goyim are under the impression that they have welded them sufficiently strong and they have all along kept on expecting that the scales would come into equilibrium. But the pivots – the kings on their thrones – are hemmed in by their representatives, who play the fool, distraught with their own uncontrolled and irresponsible power. This power they owe to the terror which has been breathed into the palaces. As they have no means of getting at their people, into their very midst, the kings on their thrones are no longer able to come to terms with them and so strengthen themselves against seekers after power. We have made a gulf between the far-seeing Sovereign Power and the blind force of the people so that both have lost all meaning, for like the blind man and his stick, both are powerless apart. (Protocol 3:1, 19th Century)

This shows that the Elders of Zion knew full well the self-contradiction of the humanist constitutions they went on to feed the gentiles as the saviour of mankind. It makes their governance of mankind all the more diabolical.

Most Protestants and some Catholics alike have been hoodwinked by the masonic mechanism of Americanism. In order for the “truth movement” to realize its true purpose, it must recognize its error and return to Christ, the true liberator of mankind. An American or libertarian identity is really a pseudo-identity. Only through a resurgence in Catholic/Orthodox identity can the New World Order be defeated and Logos be restored.