Iluminati Bankers Organized the English Revolution
March 9, 2012
Left, Zionist go-fer Oliver Cromwell
"It was fated that England should be the first of a series of Revolutions, which is not yet finished."
With
these cryptic words, Isaac Disraeli, father of Benjamin Earl of
Beaconsfield, commenced his two-volume life of Charles I, published in
1851.
The
origin of the modern world and the New World Order can be traced to the
English Revolution 1641-1660 and consequently the "Glorious Revolution"
of 1688, when the Illuminati Jewish bankers established a foothold in
England and made it their instrument for world domination.
by A.M. Ramsay (from his book, "The Nameless War" 1952)
Isaac Disraeli's "Life of Charles I" (1851) is a
work of astonishing detail and insight, based on information obtained
from the records of one Melchior de Salom, French envoy in England
during that period.
The
scene opens with distant glimpses of the British Kingdom based upon
Christianity, and its own ancient traditions; these sanctions binding
Monarchy, Church, State, nobles and the people in one solemn bond on the
one hand; on the other hand, the ominous rumblings of Calvinism.
Calvin,
who came to Geneva from France, where his name was spelled Cauin,
(possibly a French effort to spell Cohen) organized great numbers of
revolutionary orators, not a few of whom were inflicted upon England and
Scotland. Thus, was laid the groundwork for revolution under a cloak
of religious fervour.
On
both sides of the Tweed, these demagogues contracted all religion into
rigid observance of the "Sabbath." To use the words of Isaac Disraeli,
"the nation was artfully divided into Sabbatarians and Sabbath
breakers."
"Calvin," states Disraeli, "deemed the Sabbath to have been a Jewish ordinance, limited to the sacred people."
He
goes on to say that when these Calvinists held the country in their
power, "it seemed that religion chiefly consisted of Sabbatarian
rigours; and that a British senate had been transformed into a company
of Hebrew Rabbins": and later "In 1650, after the execution of the
King, an Act was passed inflicting penalties for a breach of the
Sabbath."
CUE THE PROLETARIAT
"Operatives"(the medieval equivalent for "workers" no doubt). Let me quote Disraeli:
"They were said to amount to ten thousand ... with war-like weapons.
It was a militia for insurgency at all seasons, and might be depended
upon for any work of destruction at the cheapest rate ... as these
sallied forth with daggers and bludgeons (from the city) the inference
is obvious that this train of explosion must have been long laid."
These
armed mobs of "workers" intimidated all and sundry, including both
Houses of Parliament and the Palace at critical moments, exactly on the
model employed later by the "Sacred Bands" and the "Marseillais" in
the French Revolution.
Isaac
Disraeli draws again and again startling parallels between this and
the French Revolution; Notably in his passages on the Press, "no longer
under restraint," and the deluge of revolutionary pamphlets and
leaflets.
"From 1640 to 1660," he writes, "about 30,000 appear to have started up."
And
later, "the collection of French revolutionary pamphlets now stands by
the side of the French tracts of the age of Charles I, as abundant in
number and as fierce in passion."
He
goes on, "Whose hand behind the curtain played the strings ... could
post up a correct list of 59 commoners, branding them with the odious
title of 'Straffordians or betrayers of their country'."
Whose
hand indeed? But Disraeli who knew so much, now discreetly draws a veil
over that iron curtain; and it is left to us to complete the
revelation.
To do so we must turn to such other works as the Jewish Encyclopedia, Sombart's work, The Jews and Modern Capitalism, and others.
From
these we learn that Cromwell, the chief figure of the revolution, was
in close contact with the powerful Jew financiers in Holland; and was in
fact paid large sums of money by Manasseh Ben Israel; whilst Fernandez
Carvajal, "The Great Jew" as he was called, was the chief contractor of
the New Model Army.
In The Jews in England
we read:- "1643 brought a large contingent of Jews to England, their
rallying point was the house of the Portuguese Ambassador De Souza, a
Marano (crypto-Jew). Prominent among them was Fernandez Carvajal, a
great financier and army contractor."
In
January of the previous year, the attempted arrest of the five members
had set in violent motion the armed gangs of "Operatives" already
mentioned, from the city.
Revolutionary
pamphlets were broadcasted on this occasion, as Disraeli tells us:
"Bearing the ominous insurrectionary cry of 'To your tents, O Israel'."
Shortly after this the King and the Royal Family left the Palace of
Whitehall.
The five
members with armed mobs and banners accompanying them, were given a
triumphal return to Westminster. The stage was now set for the advent of
Carvajal and his Jews and the rise of their creature Cromwell.
WHO FUNDED CROMWELL?
The
scene now changes. The Civil War has taken its course. The year is
1647: Naseby has been won and lost. The King is virtually a prisoner,
while treated as an honoured guest at Holmby House.
According to a letter published in 'Plain English'*** on 3rd September, 1921:-
"The
Learned Elders have been in existence for a much longer period than
they have perhaps suspected. My friend, Mr. L. D. van Valckert, of
Amsterdam, has recently sent me a letter containing two extracts from
the Synagogue at Mulheim. The volume in which they are contained was
lost at some period during the Napoleonic Wars, and has recently come
into Mr. van Valckert's possession.
It
is written in German, and contains extracts of letters sent and
received by the authorities of the Mulheim Synagogue. The first entry
he sends me is of a letter received:-
16th June, 1647.
From O.C. (i.e. Oliver Cromwell), by Ebenezer Pratt.
In return for financial support will advocate admission of Jews to England: This however impossible while Charles living.
Charles cannot be executed without trial, adequate grounds for which do not at present exist.
Therefore
advise that Charles be assassinated, but will have nothing to do with
arrangements for procuring an assassin, though willing to help in his
escape.
In reply was dispatched the following:-
12th July, 1647.
To O.C. by E. Pratt.
Will
grant financial aid as soon as Charles removed and Jews admitted.
Assassination too dangerous. Charles shall be given opportunity to
escape: His recapture will make trial and execution possible. The
support will be liberal, but useless to discuss terms until trial
commences."
***
'Plain English' was a weekly review published by the North British
Publishing Co. and edited by the late Lord Alfred Douglas.
With
this information now at our disposal, the subsequent moves on the part
of the regicides stand out with a new clearness. On 4th June, 1647,
Cornet Joyce, acting on secret orders from Cromwell himself, and,
according to Disraeli, unknown even to General-in-Chief Fairfax,
descended upon Holmby House with 500 picked revolutionary troopers, and
seized the King.
According
to Disraeli, "The plan was arranged on May 30th at a secret meeting
held at Cromwell's house, though later Cromwell pretending that it was
without his concurrence."
This move coincided with a sudden development in the army; the rise of the 'Levelers" and "Rationalists."
Their doctrines were those of the French revolutionaries; in fact, what
we know today as Communism. These were the regicides, who four times
"purged" Parliament, till there was left finally 50 members,
Communist-like themselves, known later as the Rump.
THE EXECUTION OF CHARLES I
To
return to the letter from Mulheim Synagogue of the 12th June, 1647, and
its cunning suggestion that attempted escape should be used as a
pretext for execution. Just such an event took place, on 12th November
of that year.
Hollis and
Ludlow consider the flight as a stratagem of Cromwell's. Isaac
Disraeli states: "Contemporary historians have decided that the King
from the day of his deportation from Holmby to his escape to the Isle
of Wight was throughout the dupe of Cromwell."
Little
more remains to be said. Cromwell had carried out the orders from the
Synagogue, and now it only remained to stage the mock trial.
Maneuvering
for position continued for some time. And it became apparent that the
House of Commons, even in their partially "purged" condition, were in
favour of coming to an agreement with the King. On 5th December, 1648,
the House sat all night; and finally carried the question, "That the
King's concessions were satisfactory to a settlement."
Should
such agreement have been reached, of course, Cromwell would not have
received the large sums of money which he was hoping to get from the
Jews He struck again. On the night of December 6th, Colonel Pryde, on
his instructions, carried out the last and most famous "purge" of the
House of Commons, known as "Pryde's Purge." On 4th January, the
Communist remnant of 50 members, the Rump, invested themselves with "the
supreme authority."
On
9th January "a High Court of Justice" to try the King was proclaimed.
Two-thirds of its members were Levelers from the Army.
Algernon
Sidney warned Cromwell: "First, the King can be tried by no court.
Second, no man can be tried by this court." So writes Hugh Ross
Williamson in his Charles and Cromwell; and he adds a finishing
touch to the effect that "no English lawyer could be found to draw up
the charge, which was eventually entrusted to an accommodating alien,
Isaac Dorislaus."
Needless
to say, Isaac Dorislaus was exactly the same sort of alien as
Carvajal and Manasseh Ben Israel and the other financiers who paid the
"Protector" his blood money.
THE TRUE NATURE OF REVOLUTION
The
Jews were once again permitted to land freely in England in spite of
strong protests by the sub-committee of the Council of State, which
declared that they would be a grave menace to the State and the
Christian religion.
Perhaps it is due to their protests that the actual act of banishment has never to this day been repealed.
"The
English Revolution under Charles I," writes Isaac Disraeli, "was unlike
any preceding one ... From that time and event we contemplate in our
history the phases of revolution."
There
were many more to follow on similar lines, notably in France. In 1897 a
further important clue to these mysterious happenings fell into Gentile
hands in the shape of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
In
that document we read this remarkable sentence: "Remember the French
Revolution, the secrets of its preparation are well known to us for it
was entirely the work of our hands."[Protocol No.3, 14.]
The
Elders might have made the passage even fuller, and written, "Remember
the British and French revolutions, the secrets of which are well known
to us for they were entirely the work of our hands."
The
difficult problem of the subjugation of both Kingdoms was still however
unsolved. Scotland was Royalist before everything else; and she had
proclaimed Charles II King. Cromwell's armies marched round Scotland,
aided by their Geneva sympathizers, dispensing Judaic barbarity; but
Scotland still called Charles II King. He moreover accepted the
Presbyterian form of Christianity for Scotland; and slowly but steadily
the feeling in England began to come round to the Scottish point of
view.
Finally upon the death of Cromwell, all Britain welcomed the King's restoration to the throne of England.
THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH
The
chief figure amongst those who deserted James at that crucial juncture
was John Churchill, first Duke of Marlborough. It is interesting to
read in the Jewish Encyclopedia that this Duke for many years received not less than 6,000 pounds a year from the Dutch Jew Solomon Medina.
The
real objective of the "Glorious Revolution" was achieved a few years
later in 1694, when the Royal consent was given for the setting up of
the "Bank of England" and the institution of the National Debt.
This
charter handed over to an anonymous committee the Royal prerogative of
minting money; converted the basis of wealth to gold; and enabled the
international money lenders to secure their loans on the taxes of the
country, instead of the doubtful undertaking of some ruler or potentate
which was all the security they could previously obtain.
From
that time economic machinery was set in motion which ultimately reduced
all wealth to the fictitious terms of gold which the Jews control; and drained away the life blood of the land, the real wealth which was the birthright of the British peoples.
SCOTLAND SHACKLED
The
political and economic union of England and Scotland was shortly
afterwards forced upon Scotland with wholesale corruption, and in
defiance of formal protests from every county and borough.
The
main objects of the Union were to suppress the Royal Mint in Scotland,
and to force upon her, too, responsibility for the "National Debt." The
grip of the moneylender was now complete throughout Britain. The danger
was that the members of the new joint Parliament would sooner or later,
in the spirit of their ancestors, challenge this state of affairs.
To
provide against this, therefore, the party system was now brought into
being, frustrating true national reaction and enabling the
wire-pullers to divide and rule; using their newly-established
financial power to ensure that their own men and their own policies
should secure the limelight, and sufficient support from their
newspapers, pamphlets, and banking accounts to carry the day.
Gold was soon to become the basis of loans, ten times the size of the amount deposited.
In
other words, 100 pounds in gold would be legal security for 1,000
pounds of loan; at 3% therefore 100 pounds in gold could earn 30 pounds
interest annually with no more trouble to the lender than the keeping of
a few ledger entries.
The
owner of 100 pounds of land, however, still must work every hour of
daylight in order to make perhaps 4%. The end of the process must only
be a matter of time.
The moneylenders must become millionaires; those who own and work the land, the Englishman and the Scotsman, must be ruined.
The
process has continued inexorably till now, when it is nearly completed.
It has been hypocritically camouflaged by clever propaganda as
helping the poor by mulcting the rich. It has been in reality nothing
of the kind. It has been in the main the deliberate ruination of the
landed classes, the leaders among the Gentiles, and their supplanting
by the Jew financiers and their hangers-on.
No comments:
Post a Comment