Sasar Parties, Groups and Movements of the 20th Century. Members of Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander and Maori communities are advised that this catalogue contains names and images of deceased people. Benson was most likely involved in a black propaganda effort aimed at electors in the UK, in an effort to sway the Hull North by-election, Showing best matches Show all copies. You can view this on the NLA website. Browse titles authors subjects uniform titles series callnumbers dewey numbers starting from optional. Sign up to receive offers and updates: National Library of Australia.
|Published (Last):||2 August 2010|
|PDF File Size:||2.80 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||12.61 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Richard Clark. What could not be concealed, and has come to be known, are some of the major effects of the Jewish presence in the West, exhaustively chronicled by Wilmot Robertson in his book The Dispossessed Majority, and by innumerable other Western writers.
Two facts of major importance have been established beyond reasonable doubt: 1. A one-world totalitarianism being promoted by the Soviet Union has its almost exact counterpart in the West, both supposedly inspired by egalitarian ideals — like two wheels at the opposite ends of one and the same axle shaft. The Jewish presence in the West everywhere exhibits a marvellous unity of purpose in the promotion of a Jewish national or Zionist ideal, symbolised by, and geographically centred in, the state of Israel.
Here, then, is the question of paramount importance: What role, if any, does Zionism play in helping to turn the Western wheel of a one-world ambition? What has happened to this network of organisations spanning the globe? Is it still in business trying to set up a one-world government in fulfilment of the visions of John Ruskin, Cecil John Rhodes, Lord Alfred Milner and others of that coterie?
Finding precise answers to such questions should be more useful than merely railing at the many obviously unpleasant consequences that have flowed from the dispossession of the American majority; for there can be no thought of remedial action or reversal until we understand what happened, how and when it happened and, most important of all, what were the conditions that made such dispossession possible. The story must be told from the beginning if we are to be able to extract the full meaning of what happened later.
I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and many of its instruments. I have objected. But there was a painful shock in store for Dr Quigley which darkened the last years of his life.
While still in its first printing, his book Tragedy and Hope suddenly ceased to be available. There was no mention of it having to be withdrawn or banned; the publishers, the Macmillan Company, merely stated untruthfully that they had run out of copies.
My publishers stopped selling it and told me that they would reprint when they had orders, which could never happen because they told everyone who asked that it would not be reprinted.. If so, why did none of them ever go to him and explain what had happened and why?
As we proceed to unwrap the mystery and probe into the riddle and enigma, using hard factual information which Dr Quigley supplies but which he himself evidently did not fully understand, we are left in no doubt that the Anglo-American network, while preserving all its original outward appearance, and without any noticeable displacement of its leading functionaries, had undergone a revolutionary inner change — no less than a change of ownership and control at the highest level.
Its control of The Times, of the Round Table, of Chatham House, of the Rhodes Trust, of All Souls and of Oxford generally has continued but has been used without centralised purpose or conviction… Most of the original members of the Group have retired from active affairs; the newer recruits have not the experience or the intellectual convictions, or the social contacts which allowed the older members to wield such power.
The disasters into which the Group directed British policy in the years before are not such as to allow their prestige to continue undiminished… In foreign policy their actions almost destroyed western civilisation, or at least the European end of it. The Times has lost its influence; the Round Table seems lifeless. It would seem that the idealistic adventure which began with Toynbet and Milner in had slowly ground its way to a finish of billerness andashes.
Emphasis added. Dr Quigley appears to have been baffled by the change which had occurred at the British end of the Anglo-American Establishment — but in Tragedy and Hope, published 15 years earlier, we can find the facts which unwrap the riddle and clear up the mystery of strange changes which occurred at both ends of the Establishment, as we shall see.
The British political scenario of those years, the s, begins with an English establishment firmly united in opposition to war with Germany. Dr Quigley identifies four groups, but the categorisation is somewhat arbitrary, with some individuals belonging to two groups and all the groups working amicably together for some years in spite of their differences.
In other words, hatred of the Germans was made to prevail over hatred of the Soviet Communists. With the eclipse of the Milner group in the United Kingdom, it might have been expected that the Rhodes Scholarship Trust and other organisations set up by Rhodes and his disciples, like the Royal Institute of International Affairs and United Kingdom Carnegie Trust, would be liquidated, since it was now obviously impossible to give effect to the purposes for which they had been founded.
This was the plane of high finance where a British concentration of power had, by an imperceptibly gradual process, been drawn into the vortex of a vastly greater alien-controlled international finance power. Hence a political will and ideal which had always been essentially British, by the occult processes of high finance had been transmuted into an essentially alien cosmopolitan political will and ideal, reared on the foundations of what had been accomplished in the Soviet Union and decidedly not on what the British had accomplished with their empire.
The following paragraphs should be read with the closest attention, if the riddle is to be unwrapped and its secret contents exposed to the understanding. Dr Quigley says that the Eastern Establishment which formed the American end of the Anglo-American network was completely dominated by J. He adds that as late as the s I. Morgan and his associates were the most significant figures in policy-making at Harvard, Columbia and to a lesser extent Yale, while the Whitneys were significant at Yale, and the Prudential Insurance Company, through Edward Duffield, dominated Princeton.
He adds: The less obvious implications of this shift were illustrated in a story which passed through Ivy League circles in in connection with the choice of a new president for Columbia University. Morgan and Company. When the WASPs lost top-dog position in Wall Street they naturally also lost the power to decide who should head the leading educational institutions like Columbia University.
And the fact that such an alliance of money and intellect behaves much the same, regardless of who controls it at the top, made the change even more difficult to detect. A difference there was, but this was at first completely invisible, being concerned only with the envisioned end result; the one was for containing the Soviet Union with its socialist rulers with a view to the ultimate absorption of the former Russian empire in a new world order which they, the inheritors of the Rhodes dream, would control; the other was for building up the Soviet Union as an industrial and military giant which would replace the British Empire then still in full flower as the foundation of a new world order; a mere technical difference, so it might seem, but one of stupendous consequence as subsequent events have shown.
We learn, or are reminded if old enough, that Henry Ford in the s became involved in a furious struggle with Wall Street — but only with one half of it! Dr Antony Sutton tells us that there was a time when Ford regarded all the finance capitalists as his adversaries; this is understandable, since finance capitalism is the natural foe of private ownership capitalism, of which Henry Ford was the supreme exponent.
Dr Sutton writes: By Henry Ford, in his public statements, had divided financiers into two classes, those who profited from war and used their influence to bring about war for profit. Among the latter group he now included the House of Morgan. The Times reporter asked Ford how he equated this assessment with his long-standing criticism of the House of Mogan, to which Ford replied: There is a constructive and a destructive Wall Street.
The House of Morgan represents the constructive. I have known Mr Morgan for many years. The historical picture of those times is hard to read because both brands of finance capitalism were playing the same game and were using much the same methods; what is more, both had instantly and with marvellous realism recognised Marxist socialism as a most useful instrument for the expansion and concentration of financial power and its translation into political power by harnessing to their purposes all the rootless intellectuals.
Inevitably, too, there was a good deal of overlapping of interests and even co-operation. Indeed, the battle line existed only inside the minds of ad hoc segments of the two elites. However, the difference between the two power vortices was important enough to guarantee that Henry Ford would hate the one and love the other — even to love one he had formerly hated. Everything that has happened in the West, especially in the United States of America, in the last 50 years endorses the accuracy of this interpretation of history, as three major constellations of purposes, all of them ominous, now move at an increasing pace towards convergence: 1.
The Soviet Union, set up and built up from the West as an industrial and military giant, and its socialist system repeatedly rescued from collapse. The state of Israel set up and maintained almost entirely at the expense of the working populations of the Western industrialised countries. Failure to detect the preponderant Jewish influence in the West in the promotion of these converging purposes can today be attributed only to wilful blindness, that is, blindness required by a suicidal ideological commitment.
The same can be said of all other careers with any bearing on finance and politics, especially in the unversities and the communications media, including the book trade. The peoples of the West mostly do not understand what has happened, but there must be few today not haunted by a feeling that the country in which they live and the nation to which they belong has been ravaged, and that the West as an ethnic and cultural entity is in a most perilous situation.
The exercise of enormous power that dares anything except exposure to identification has generated a monstrous world of lies. Knowledge of the existence of this global system of mind control is the first requirement for an accurate interpretation of contemporary history. We are told in effect that if we do not like what is being made to happen these are the people to blame, nearly all of them linked in one way or another to the Rockefeller financial empire.
But how strong is that Rockefeller financial empire? Notes: 1. Although now such a vastly composite nation. Australia See Professor P.
Behind the News, August That bare ideas willgel you no further forward, that you cannot make a revolution without power, that in our time the primary source of power is money, and that all other forms of power — organisation, weapons, people capable of using those weapons to kill — are begotten of money.
Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Lenin in Zurich The need for an impartial treatment of Jewish history has become greater than ever before, writes Professor Hannah Arendt in the preface of her page book The Origins of Totalitarianism.
This statement Keith supports with quotes from many other authorities. Nevertheless, the publisher, the Macmillan Company, abruptly ceased distributing this book when it was realised in establishment circles that it contained a great deal of information. Whether it was by an exercise of cunning that Dr. Quigley managed to get his book accepted and launched by an important establishment publisher, or whether he was so naive as to suppose that he could safely throw so much light on the activities and policies of the great power-wielders of high finance.
But Quigley demonstrated, as others had done before him, that there prevails in the West a system of censorship not as obvious as that behind the Iron Curtain but equally effective. We can find out quite easily what happened and how it happened, but we are no better off if we cannot find out what were the real motives of those who made it happen. In all three books, Sutton writes as if Jews as an ethnic entity are now of more historical significance than Gypsies or Eskimoes. Having thus excluded race, or ethnic identity, as a factor, Sutton does not feel called upon to try to explain why, after World War Il, only Max Warburg was exempted when all the German bankers on the supervisory board of directors of the great I.
It is reasonable to suppose that the identity and motives of those who financed Hitler might have had something to do with the identity and motives of those who were financing the Communists. On the other hand, as we shall try to show, the information supplied by Sutton does have some value as being half of the truth — but only if it can be brought into combination with the missing half.
Sutton avoids the race question as such, but it is significant that the Wall Street financiers he most frequently names are all unmistakably gentiles, these forming part of a vast constellation of financial and industrial power with J. P, Morgan in the centre of it. And it is this financial elite which he blames both for the success of the Bolshevik Revolution and for the precipitation of World War II, supporting his accusations with much sound documentation.
What he does not tell us, and what we most of all need to know, is that the major revolutionary changes which have characterised our century of conflict can be traced to two financial elites, their separateness hard to detect because they so often operated in unison, which found themselves increasingly in a relationship of fierce antagonism from about , the one a gentile elite and the other Jewish. Thereafter, however, he continues to write about Wall Street financiers as a homogeneous species in which there is no need to draw any distinction between Jew and gentile.
In other words, we cannot hope to be able to understand what is happening now unless we know what happened in the past, and if we do not know what is happening now, we have lost all control over what happens to us in future. We know that the Germans were defeated in World War Il, but what were the consequences of the real struggle between the two financial elites? It is an answer to that question we must have, if we are to understand what is happenig now and what perils are to be averted.
First of all, however, we need to know how a situation arose in which two financial power elites became involved as opponents in a world war. For several centuries international financial activity was largely monopolised by Jewish banking dynasties, the most powerful and best-known of these being the Rothschilds. However, financial capitalism was only fully consolidated on an international basis in the early years of the twentieth century.
Much the same happened in Britain and Europe, where gentile predominance in private-ownership capitalism and industrial enterprise produced national concentrations of finance capital which the Jewish banking families could exploit but could not dominate.
It should be remembered that industrialisation in the West was exclusively a product of the inventiveness, energy and enterprise of ethnic Europeans; that is why no Jewish names are to be found among the names of those who founded the great industrial empires, whether in oil, coal, iron and steel, railways and shipping, automobiles, aircraft, electricity, chemicals or anything else. It was thus an explosive increase in the production of real wealth which conferred on the ethnic Europeans — the Christians, or gentiles — a short-lived supremacy in the realm of high finance.
So enormous was the new wealth generated that a newly created gentile financial power, in which personalities like J. Morgan and Montagu Norman figure most prominently, superseded the Jewish financial power of which the house of Rothschild formed the apex. A very complex struggle ensued on many different planes.
One major setback for the gentile financiers, engineered by their Jewish rivals through their growing influence in the media and their direct involvement in party politics and the trade union movement, was the inheritance tax and graduated income tax aimed at the powerful gentile families in particular and the middle class in general. Then, when the gentile elite allowed themselves to be lured into complicity in establishing privately owned central banking systems in all the countries of the West, the tables were decisively turned and the gentile elite began to lose ground at an alarming rate in the competitive rivalry of the two elites.
In the United States the instigator of central banking was Paul Warburg, a scion of the powerful German-Jewish banking family. The Morganites realised at once that their rivals had stolen a march on them by master-minding the Bolshevik Revolution and funding it from Germany, so they hastily got into the act — as Dr Sutton has reported in great detail. Morgan also took the precaution of supplying funds to Admiral Kolchak in Siberia, since it was by no means certain at that time that the Bolshevik Revolution would succeed — and Morgan, like some members of the British financial elite, might even have pinned his hopes on the victory of the counter-revolution.
IVOR BENSON THE ZIONIST FACTOR PDF
The Jewish Impact on Twentieth Century History A study of the jewish presence in 20th Century History Ivor Benson - author, journalist and current affairs analyst, and a good friend of the Institute for Historical Review - died in mid-January in a small market town in West Suffolk, England, where he and his wife had lived for nearly eight years. He was in his 86th year. He also served as assistant editor of the Sunday Tribune in Durban. He left Norway just ahead of the occupying German forces.
Réfutation par Ivor Benson des thèses de Tony Sutton sur les sources de financement du nazisme
Malagal Benson was born in South Africa. He became chief assistant editor of the Rand Daily Mail ; however, after he wrote an editorial in favour of fascist Sir Oswald Mosleywho was staying with him, he was sacked. How do I find a book? He started out as a journalist in Durban before later moving to London where he wrote for the Daily Telegraph and the Daily Express. White Power, Black Liberation p. Can I view this online? Order a copy Copyright or permission restrictions may apply.