Saturday, September 27, 2014

Zionism and Nazism, Two Sides of the Same Coin

A fascinating monograph documenting the rise of Zionism within the British aristocracy makes the startling claim that this political movement owes its origins to the occultic beliefs of Britain’s ruling classes as a means to maintain and expand its empire. We consider some of its claims to correlate them with positions we have staked out on the subject of Zionism.
Mark Burdman wrote his fascinating essay on the development of Zionism by tracing its evolution from the early 19th century when various British statesmen advocated the establishment of a Jewish state as a means of controlling the Middle East, to World War 2 whose chief agitators were the British aristocrats who installed Adolph Hitler in power to further the Zionist cause – not because they were philo-Semitic, but because they were covetous of ruling the world.
One of the important elements of his history of Zionism is Burdman’s documentation of the seemingly irreconcilable hatred for Jews and advancement of Zionism as statecraft. We thus see the Janus faced policy, or the Hegelian dialectic at work, of which the British imperialists of the 19th century and later were masters.
More specifically Burdman notes with many quotes the utter contempt with which those of the Round Table, such as Cecil Rhodes and James Balfour, the latter of whom issued the infamous Balfour Declaration of 1917 to Lord Rothschild, held the Jews, juxtaposing the public policy pronouncements of Zionism with the private contempt for Semitic peoples.
While some say it matters not since the ends justifies the means, and although we strongly disagree, we draw attention to the more important element of racism as the motive for this policy. Burdman documents the extensive heritage of Zionism in Britain from Lord Palmerston, Benjamin Disraeli, Lord Balfour, David Lloyd George, and Winston Churchill and others, whose ultimate hand maiden Harry Truman actually did the dirty work of recognizing the State of Israel. Each of these oligarchs was imbued with a sense of towering racial superiority as expressed in the Anglo-Saxon race.
Even though a galaxy of British politicians agitated mightily the Zionist cause, they were actually a numerical minority who worked through various cutouts to advance their aim of a Zionist state under British imperial aegis. Such cutouts included Theodore Herzl, frequently revered as the father of the Jewish state, but quite frequently identified as a British agent during his life time, and a mad one at that.
Herzl in his own right was a tawdry character who died at the young age of 44 of gonorrhea, divorced from his wife, and involved in various debaucheries such as sodomy and pederasty. Such was the ideal instrument of British policy.
Behind the Zionist impulses of the British aristocracy was the racist views of the royalty which not only saw the Anglo-Saxons as the world’s finest and fittest race, but which in combination with the Jews, who were really Khazars and gentiles, made the world safe for Anglo-Zionist predations.
The racist motivations flowed from the occult in which the British royalty were heavily steeped, with such influential persons as Edward Bulwer-Lytton and Aleister Crowley among the more notorious Satanists who influenced the British royals.
One of the more interesting elements of Burdman’s story is the hostility of 19th century Jews towards a Zionist state, nearly all of whom denounced Herzl and others as lunatic, often referring him and his ilk to psychiatrists for treatment.
The British had an antidote for Jewish hostility by supporting various pogroms and persecutions, especially in Eastern Europe, to drive the Jews into the arms of Zionism, while in the West different persuasive tactics were used to induce Westerners to endorse the Zionist cause. Oftentimes appeals to Christians for the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy could be made. We could almost co-opt the Islamic motto as Zionism is god, and Disraeli is his prophet.
Although it may seem incomprehensible to the brainwashed or dull mind that Zionism and Nazism are a singularity, Burdman provides extensive documentation that such is precisely the case. Thus the British during the 1920s-30s, especially through the notorious Clividen Set, but including the all powerful Round Table, espoused the cause of Adolph Hitler as he was the antithesis to their Zionist thesis - the predicate for a Jewish state.
But here Burdman goes badly wrong. Professor Karl  Haushofer, an agent for the powerful Bavarian pro British Wittlesbach family, ghost wrote Mein Kampf, a work attributed to Adolph Hitler. Burdman buys the idea that Hitler sought a final solution for the Jews, which meant that he authored the plan to systemically murder them. This claim is rubbish.
There is no evidence that Hitler murdered Jews, but there is very good evidence that Hitler was indeed an exponent of the British empire, advocate of the Roman Catholic Church, and an early agitator of resettlement of Jews in Palestine. These policies were precisely those of the British, and DNA evidence of the British origins of Hitler, who was heavily augmented by American banksters.
Additionally there were many senior Nazi Jews in Hitler’s military, and openly so, disproving the nonsensical notion of Hitler’s Final Solution. It was the Jews who promoted the myth of the Holocaust in order to continue precisely the policy of the British – that of scaring the Jews into Palestine, and murdering many along the way to make the point. Ariel Sharon admitted to such tactics in 1983 when interviewed by a journalist reporting on the Lebanese War.
Beyond the political heritage of Hitler, Burdman points to the Bank of England, the Rothschild dynasty, and other banking interests in both Britain and Germany which collaborated in the installation of Hitler.
Burdman also down plays the role of the Rothschilds in this grand chess game of the British, as do other analysts who claim that the family has much too much publicity to be a prime power broker. We are inclined to accept this analysis even though it contradicts some of our previous positions on the subject.
In sum, the British aristocracy is simultaneously the progenitor of Zionism and the abettor of anti-Semitism based upon their racist arrogance which owes chiefly to their occultic religious beliefs. While the American press idolizes the British royalty, the fact is that most of its influential members are an inbred aristocracy of hate.

Mark Burdman, How Britain’s Biggest Racists Created Zionism, nd,, accessed 9/27/2014

Copyright 2014 Tony Bonn. All rights reserved.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

A very good article but libertarianism is BS. It is the ruling elite's replacement after fascism failed to end democracy. The people of the US wanted something more progressive and this worried the ruling elite, so they invented libertarianism to could keep democracy at completely at bay, or even do away with it. libertarians have been conned and there is nothing progressive in taking away ordinary people's to vote and have a say in how their country is run. You've been had! Taking for a ride.

After the industrial revolution the ruling elite wanted more way in how their country was run and so they wrestled some of the power away from the king. They liked democracy when only very rich men could vote, i.e., the Anglo Saxon elite you mention above, but hated it when everyone else got a vote.