« Helen Thomas resigned? Nothing surprising hereDear Helen Thomas with a PS to all her 'Colleagues' and Every American »

The War to End All Wars: Providence, Pointless Tragedy or What Really Happened

June 8th, 2010

By Robert Singer


[War and the Modern State of Israel seem to be “hot topics” on the Internet. However, it is my belief that I am the only one that connects two World Wars, the Balfour Declaration and the Holocaust to (The Key to the Secret of the Universe).]

The First World War: A Modern View

Thanks partly to a generation of war poets who recorded the horrors of the war and a generation of historians who castigated the Allied high command for their decisions and ‘waste of life’ (Allied soldiers being the 'Lions led by Donkeys'), the war is generally viewed as a pointless tragedy.

The War to End all Wars, according to Churchill, would have ended in 1917 if the U.S. had not entered the war.

“The mood in London was bleakly pessimistic in early 1917. The blood-drenched Battle of the Somme, from July to November 1916, had proved that France and Britain could not defeat Germany without U.S. help. As Winston Churchill later wrote, Britain was so close to defeat that any straw had to be grasped.” [1]

History goes on to record the losers were about to accept a simple status quo and end of the war, with no punitive conditions when France and Britain were approached with an offer they should have refused. [2]

“The deal entailed that if the Zionist-led international banking cartel could arrange Britain's victory, would Great Britain support a Zionist state later on when the right conditions presented themselves. Great Britain agreed to these terms, and as their part of the deal, the Zionist bankers would get the United States of America into the conflict and reverse the obvious outcome.” [3]

Great Britain agreed to these terms and the famous Balfour Declaration was their part of the deal, so that they could “reverse the obvious outcome.” [4].

The 1974 World Book Encyclopedia contradicts Churchill and acknowledges the military situation was in the Allies favor [5] and claims the U.S. entered the war because the British intercepted a message in January 1917 from Germany to Mexico asking for an alliance in case of war.

Churchill’s Statements are Disinformation

Disinformation is deliberately misleading information announced publicly or leaked by a government, intelligence agency or other entity for the purpose of influencing opinions or perceptions. Unlike misinformation, which is also a form of wrong information, in this case Churchill intended to sow confusion and deceive the public.

To fully understand this pointless tragedy and how the Battle of the Somme lead to the creation of the State of Israel requires we engage in a little historical revisionism (HR).

HR is the tradition begun by such distinguished historians as Harry Elmer Barnes, A.J.P. Taylor, Charles Tansill, Paul Rassinier and William H. Chamberlin and continues at The Institute for Historical Review (IHR).

I contacted The Institute's director, Mark Weber by telephone.

Mark is a historian, lecturer, current affairs analyst and author. He holds a master's degree in modern European history from Indiana University.

I offered a donation to acknowledge his work in bringing “history in accord with the facts” and offered him my Modern State of Israel series of articles.

I pointed out the absurdity of the official World War stories:

WW I leading directly to WW II without stopping at the Versailles treaty began when three members of the Black Hand secret society envisioned the death of an Archduke as the key that would unlock the shackles of their people to the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

The Serbian government knew of the plot to kill the Archduke and gave instructions for the men to be arrested and the Black Hander was told to abort the mission but inexplicably neither order was carried out.

Then a fanatical dictator, financed by George H.W. Bush’s father, failed in his attempt to take over the world but was ultimately successful in the Entfernung (removal or expulsion) of the Jews. [6]

My series resolves all of the anomalies of two World Wars and the Holocaust and makes a connection that just about every historian has missed: [7]

The Scofield Bible, World War I, World War II and the Holocaust were an Illuminati conspiracy to create the Modern State of Israel and ensure the Jews arrived in Palestine not in 1946 or 1950 but in 1948. [8]

IHR has been unjustly accused of being the "world's leading Holocaust denial organization” with links to neo-Nazi organizations, and that its primary purpose is to disseminate views denying key facts of Nazism and the genocide of Jews and others. [9]

Holocaust denial movement should really be labeled “The Six Million That Didn’t Die.”

IHR and others, labeled Holocaust deniers, are not saying that hundreds of thousands of Jews were not killed and otherwise perished during the Second World War as a direct and indirect result of the harsh anti-Jewish policies of Germany and its allies.

What Mark and the 'revisionist scholars' such as Faurisson, Butz 'and best selling British historian David Irving are saying is that there is no evidence for the systematic extermination of six to eight million Jews in concentration camps.

Mark realizes the six million figure was a systematic distortion of history that allows Israel, over the last 50 years, to violate international law and avoid punishment for its repeated acts of military aggression against the Arab states and the Pal­estinians. [10]

We both want to expose the “real” power behind that distortion, the "Jewish (Khazar)-Zionist (Illuminati) conspiracy", but his goal is to end the reign of "Jewish-Zionist power" for the “sake of our nation and humankind” and mine is for the sake of Mother-Earth (Gaea).

Mark had a number of comments/critiques of my 4 part series on the Modern State of Israel. He admitted he might be nit-picking but thought my outrageous statements required especially rigorous proof. Here are three of his comments (more later):

  1. Theodor Herzl’s famous quote, “there would be a Jewish State within fifty years” wasn’t prophetic because Herzl made a lot of predictions that didn’t come true (I can only find one, his prophecy of an end to anti-Semitism went unfulfilled). [11]
  2. My definitions of Zionism: an organization of Jews who believed the Jewish people needed a nation of their own to escape persecution and Judaism: Jews collectively who practice a religion based on the Torah and the Talmud were not clear because “Zionism” is a movement and ideology not an organization and that “Judaism” is a religion not a collective. He highlights the enigma of Judaism: religion, a race, a culture or a nation.
  3. “How Rothschild could be sure Germany would win World War I the first time” which led to the Balfour declaration.

“How Rothschild could be sure Germany would win World War I the first time” is a trick question.

Mark will admit to the Balfour Declaration conspiracy:

Samuel Untermeyer blackmails Wilson with Mary Peck’s love letters in order to get Louis Dembitz Brandeis, the most politically influential of all Zionists in the United States appointed to the Supreme Court. Brandeis volunteered his opinion that the sinking of the S.S. Sussex by a German submarine in the English Channel justified the declaration of war against Germany. [12]

And he knows the Allies could have defeated Germany without grasping at the straw in the United States before, during, and after the battle of the Somme.

Therefore Mark knows the Germans didn’t win the battle of the Somme, the British went into the tank (pun intended) and took a dive.

How Rothschild could be sure of the outcome of the Battle of the Somme?

"...lumbering slowly towards us came three huge mechanical monsters such as we had never seen before."

Simple, the Rothschilds, the hidden hand behind the belligerents in every conflict, operate out of their headquarters in the square-mile sovereign state in the heart of greater London, only deployed the tank in limited numbers in 1916. [13]

Why didn’t the Rothschilds use tanks in greater numbers until after the U.S. entered the war?

Answer: Because the Jews would not have arrived in Haifa in 1948. The Key to the Secret of the Universe, Part 2

Note: This is Part 5 of a series
Part 1: The Modern State of Israel: Providence, Miracle, or What Really Happened
Part 2: World War I, II: Providence, Miracle, or What Really Happened
Part 3: Adolph Hitler: Providence, Miracle, or What Really Happened
Part 4: How did Hitler lose the war: Providence, Miracle, or What Really Happened

Robert Singer writes about Secrets, Sentient Creatures and The Federal Reserve at The Peoples Voice and The Market Oracle (http://twitter.com/rds2301)

Footnotes:

[1] So Zionist claims of influence in America, surely exaggerated, looked enticing enough for Britain to act upon. Zionism - the Hidden Tyranny - Benjamin H. Freedman,

[2] Ted Lang’s The Zionist Connection - An Unholy Tripartite.

1916 - July 1-November 18- the battle in Somme causes 1 million deaths, and no strategic gain. Things look bleak for the allies at this point in the war.

“Germany won World War I. The war was over, but prior to an acceptance of Germany's offer of a simple status quo ante end to the war with no punitive, attendant conditions for the losers, namely Great Britain and France, the international banking community, through its Zionist representatives, approached the British, desperate to win the war, and offered Britain a deal.
The deal entailed that if the Zionist-led international banking cartel could arrange Britain's victory, would Great Britain support a Zionist state later on when the right conditions presented themselves? Great Britain agreed to these terms, and as their part of the deal, the Zionist bankers would get the United States of America into the conflict and reverse the obvious outcome.” http://www.123helpme.com/view.asp?id=23656

Ted Lang’s The Zionist Connection needs the following documentation about the Battle of the Somme and the details of Wilson’s May 27, 1916 speech, where he expressed the hope that "peace was close at hand" to be complete.

At first, President Wilson used every means at the disposal of a neutral power to offer his good offices to the belligerents. However, "his efforts met with no success. In fact, it increased bitterness, and brought about an extended use of propaganda upon both sides."2 In 1915, American aloofness and neutrality were sorely tried both by Allied control of the sea lanes (which adversely affected foreign trade), and by the sinking, in May, of the British passenger ship, the Lusitania, by a German submarine. Many Americans were among those who lost their lives. This incident, as well as submarine warfare in general, brought the United States close to breaking with the Central Powers. The crisis subsided when the Central Powers pledged in May 1916 to restrict submarine warfare (before the battle of Somme they were trying to end the war). As American awareness of the war was growing in the Presidential election year of 1916, the President stepped up his peace efforts. On May 27, 1916, Wilson gave a speech in Washington at a rally held by the League to Enforce Peace. He expressed the hope that "peace was close at hand" and implied that the United States was ready to mediate and guarantee it. http://www.hungarian-history.hu/lib/tria/tria18.htm
The League's rally gave President Wilson the opportunity to state his views regarding the postwar settlement.3 One of the ideas he espoused was "the right of every people to choose its sovereign affiliation."4 Wilson also suggested that in order to assure the freedom of the seas and to prevent future wars, "universal association of nations" should be formed. The President hoped in vain that his initiative would be followed by a similar British move.

[3] The Greatest Story Never Told, Winston Churchill and the Crash of 1929 by Pat Riott, pg. 20

[4] The Balfour Declaration was not a declaration or public statement but a letter drafted by Lord Alfred Milner, a Rothschild employee to Lord Lionel Walter Rothschild.” Carroll Quigley, Georgetown history professor.

[5] Though Germany turned out to be the Central Power most involved in the war, there is little or no evidence that the Germans had planned for war.

Manpower - The greater population of the Allied countries gave them a distinct advantage over the Central Powers in the mobilization of manpower.

Mobilized Manpower Of Belligerents (in 1916 before the United States 4,355,000, Romania 750,000, Greece 230,000 Portugal 100,000enter the war):

The Allies (Russia, Britain, France) = 36,754,000

Central Powers (Germany and Austria-Hungary) = 22,850,000

source: Grolier’s Online Encyclopedia Americana

Naval Power (1914) - Great Britain was the greatest naval power in the world, Germany was a distant second.

Commercial shipping (1914) - The Allies had a decisive advantage. Moreover, whereas Allied commercial shipping was free to roam the oceans but that of the Central Powers was restricted by the Allied blockade to inland waters under their control.
Battle Conditions 1915 - The situation at the beginning of 1915 was definitely not in Germany's favor. The western front showed 90 German divisions against 108.5 Allied. On the eastern front, there were 78.5 German divisions against 93.5 Russian.

Poison Gas The Germans tried to gain a decisive advantage by the employment of poison gas but the problems with its deployment became apparent after the Second Battle of Ypres in 1915. Countermeasures were soon developed, and though both sides employed gas occasionally throughout the war, its use had only nuisance value.

Bibliography for Footnote [5] 
1. Holborn, Hajo. A History of Modern Germany 1840-1945. New York: Knopf, 1969, p.415
2. Holborn, Hajo. A History of Modern Germany 1840-1945. New York: Knopf, 1969, p.422
3. Ryder, A. J. Twentieth Century Germany From Bismarck to Brandt. New York: Columbia University Press, 1973, p. 115
4. Holborn, Hajo. A History of Modern Germany 1840-1945. New York: Knopf, 1969, p.434
5. Ryder, A. J. Twentieth Century Germany From Bismarck to Brandt. New York: Columbia University Press, 1973, p. 154
4. Holborn, Hajo. A History of Modern Germany 1840-1945. New York: Knopf, 1969, p.506

[6] Doctor Kubovy, from the Tel Aviv "Documentation Center", admitted in 1960 "There is no document signed by Hitler, Himmler or Heydrich which speaks of exterminating the Jews... and in 1981, Walter Laqueur, author of The terrible secret, admitted: "Until now, we have never found Hitler's order to destroy the European Jewish community, and in all probability the order was never given." There is no order because Hitler used the term Entfernung of the Jews – removal or expulsion.

[7] Some of the most important events in the twentieth century took years to accomplish, while others took only minutes. Twentieth century history is made up of both the large and the small events that shaped it, however Jennifer Rosenberg’s 20th Century History Guide does not include the creation of the State of Israel.

Designed for students, “Events That Changed the World in the Twentieth Century”, Edited by Frank W. Thackeray and John E. Findling is a unique resource that offers detailed descriptions and expert analysis of the 20th century's most important events: World War I, the Russian Revolution, the Rise of Fascism, the Great Depression, World War II, the Cold War, the Chinese Revolution, the end of Colonialism and the Rise of the Third World, European unification, and the collapse of the Soviet union.

The creation of the State of Israel is not among the Events That Changed the World in the Twentieth Century.

In response to an inquiry from a Vassar College student publication, B.W. Van Norden wrote his opinion of “The Ten Most Important People of the 20th Century.”

His criteria for inclusion were how many people were influenced, and to how great an extent, by the event(s) associated with this person and would the event(s) associated with this person not have occurred, or would they have happened in a significantly different way, had this person not existed?

* Adolph Hitler: WWII and the Holocaust are central events of this century. He does not consider the creation of the State of Israel a central event of this century.

[8] 'Jewish Soap' and Auschwitz: Myths and Facts by Mark Weber document the “unknown holocaust” -- a “horrible era of destruction, looting, starvation, rape, ‘ethnic cleansing,’ and mass killing” in which some three million Germans died unnecessarily after the official end of the war in 1945 -- about two million civilians, mostly women, children and elderly, and about one million prisoners of war.

This “`unknown holocaust’ of non-Jews,” he said, “is essentially ignored not because the facts are disputed or unknown, but rather because this reality does not fit well with the Judeo-centric view of history (six million died in concentration camps) that is all but obligatory in our society, a view of the past that reflects the Jewish-Zionist hold on our cultural and educational life.”

[9] In January 2009, Weber, the IHR's director, released an essay titled, "How Relevant Is Holocaust Revisionism?"

In it he noted that Holocaust denial had attracted little support over the years: "It’s gotten some support in Iran, or places like that, but as far as I know, there is no history department supporting writing by these folks." Accordingly, he recommended that emphasis be placed instead on opposing "Jewish-Zionist power", which some commentators claim is a shift to a directly antisemitic position.

[10] THE NUREMBERG TRIALS The story of the Six Million was given judicial authority at the Nuremberg Trials of German leaders between 1945 and 1949, proceedings which proved to be the most disgraceful legal farce in history. For a far more detailed study of the iniquities of these trials, which as Field Marshal Montgomery said, made it a crime to lose a war, the reader is referred to the works cited below, and particularly to the outstanding book Advance to Barbarism (Nelson, 1953), by the distinguished English jurist, F. J. P. Veale. From the very outset, the Nuremberg Trials proceeded on the basis of gross statistical errors. In his speech of indictment on November 20th, 1945.

ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE It should be emphasised straight away that there is not a single document in existence which proves that the Germans intended to, or carried out, the deliberate murder of Jews. In Poliakov and Wulf’s Das Dritte Reich und die Juden: Dokumente und Aufsätze (Berlin, 1955), the most that they can assemble are statements extracted after the war from people like Hoettl, Ohlendorf and Wisliceny, the latter under torture in a Soviet prison. In the absence of any evidence, therefore, Poliakov is forced to write: “The three or four people chiefly involved in drawing up the plan for total extermination are dead, and no documents survive.” This seems very convenient. Quite obviously, both the plan and the “three or four” people are nothing but nebulous assumptions on the part of the writer, and are entirely unprovable.

[11] Mark didn’t try the “he was off by one year” because he knew UN Resolution (GA 181) partitioned Palestine in 1947.

[12] Zionism - the Hidden Tyranny - Benjamin H. Freedman, The Greatest Story Never Told, Winston Churchill and the Crash of 1929 by Pat Riott, pg. 20

[Excerpt from Part 2: World War I, II: Providence, Miracle, or What Really Happened]

He didn’t keep us out of war

Winston Churchill claimed “the U.S. entry in the war cost one million British, French, American, and other lives."

Up to and during the 1916 Presidential campaign The U.S. had no interest in a European adventure even after the suspicious sinking of "45,000 tons of live bait”, the Lusitania.

President Wilson campaigned for re-election with the slogan, "He kept us out of war." Then ninety days after beginning his second term, he called upon Congress for a declaration of war in order to "make the world safe for democracy."

No one was fooled by Wilson’s mysterious change in position so a massive government propaganda campaign and the Espionage Act were required to sell the war. It was now a crime for Americans to speak against their government's war effort, incite disloyalty, or encourage men to resist the draft.

J.P. Morgan, Abraham Kuhn and Solomon Loeb and Rothschild’s financial empire were the power behind the Federal Income tax, the Federal Reserve, millions of deaths from two world wars and Woodrow Wilson’s political career. [4] Zionism - the Hidden Tyranny - Benjamin H. Freedman, The Greatest Story Never Told, Winston Churchill and the Crash of 1929 by Pat Riott, pg. 20

How Does Samuel Untermeyer Fit Into The Scheme?

Another particularly influential figure promoting Woodrow Wilson was New York attorney Samuel Untermeyer, a leader in the Zionist movement and the man who financed the Scofield bible. Zionism - the Hidden Tyranny - Benjamin H. Freedman, The New York Times, December 8, 1922

The former "man of peace" pleaded with Congress to declare war against Germany because when Wilson was president of Princeton he had an affair with a married woman, Mary Peck. Shortly after the inauguration Samuel Untermeyer, attorney and generous contributor to Wilson’s presidential campaign, contacted Wilson about a breach of promise legal action from his client, Mary Peck.

Untermeyer informed President Wilson that his client was willing to accept $40,000 in lieu of commencing a breach of promise action. Wilson did not have the money and Untermeyer volunteered to pay the money on the condition that Wilson would appoint to the first vacancy on the United States Supreme Court a nominee to be recommended by Untermeyer. On June 14, 1916 Louis Dembitz Brandeis, the most politically influential of all Zionists in the United States, on the recommendation of Untermeyer is appointed to the Supreme Court. Supreme Court Justice Brandeis volunteered his opinion to president Wilson that the sinking of the S.S. Sussex by a German submarine in the English Channel justified the declaration of war against Germany. Zionism - the Hidden Tyranny - Benjamin H. Freedman, The Greatest Story Never Told, Winston Churchill and the Crash of 1929 by Pat Riott, pg. 20

As Samuel Landman, the former secretary of the World Zionist Organization disclosed:

The only way . . . to induce the American president to come into the war (was) to secure the cooperation of Zionist Jews by promising them Palestine, and thus enlist and mobilize the hitherto unsuspectedly powerful forces of Zionist Jews in America and elsewhere in favor of the Allies on a quid pro quo contract basis, the Balfour Declaration.

The House of Rothschild and the International Banking community agreed to bring America into the war in exchange for the famous Balfour Declaration. The Balfour Declaration was not a declaration or public statement but a letter drafted by Lord Alfred Milner, a Rothschild employee to Lord Lionel Walter Rothschild.” Carroll Quigley, Georgetown history professor, wrote the “Balfour Declaration was actually drafted by Lord Alfred Milner, a Rothschild employee.”

[End of footnote 12 and the Excerpt]

[13] Andrew Hitchcock, author of The History of the House of Rothschild.

"The Rothschilds have been in control of the world for a very long time, their tentacles reaching into many aspects of our daily lives, and are the hidden hand behind all the social cataclysms in history”

Wall Street & the Bolshevik Revolution by Antony C. Sutton. The World Order by Eustice Mullins, Boring, OR: CPA Book Publisher, 1985. The Power Of The Rothschilds By Fritz Springmeier (Excerpt - Bloodlines of the Illuminati, The History of the House of Rothschild by Andrew Hitchcock, 25.

The Battlefield Debut of the Tank was in 1916 and an EyeWitness to History writes:

The new weapon made its battlefield debut on September 15, 1916 when fifty of the machines joined the Battle of the Somme in a third attempt to attack and break through the German defenses. The attack failed - no breakthrough occurred. Only 35 of the tanks actually took part in the battle. Their presence shocked the enemy, but their practical impact was minimal due to a lack of effective tactics and numerous mechanical failures. But, the door to the future was opened and the first step taken in the development of a weapon that would dominate the battlefield of future wars.

No feedback yet

Voices Share this page submit to reddit

Your donation helps provide a place for people to speak out.
Not tax deductible. editor@thepeoplesvoice.org
Search the Site Search the Web
May 2016
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 << <   > >>
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        

Referred by Liberty
Just Foreign Policy Iraqi Death Estimator

  XML Feeds

powered by b2evolution CMS
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted articles and information about environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. This news and information is displayed without profit for educational purposes, in accordance with, Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Thepeoplesvoice.org is a non-advocacy internet web site, edited by non-affiliated U.S. citizens. editor
ozlu Sozler GereksizGercek Hava Durumu Firma Rehberi Hava Durumu Firma Rehberi E-okul Veli Firma Rehberi