Tag Archive | WWI

Proof that “World Government” is Banker Tyranny*

Proof that “World Government” is Banker Tyranny*

Rothschild agent Col. E.M. House with puppet Woodrow Wilson

 

We revisit the “Col. E.M. House Report”, (1919), a chilling 10-page document which proved the League of Nations was a facade for “British” (i.e. Masonic Jewish) imperialism. “The League is in substance the Empire with America admitted on the same basis as our other colonies.”

The report oozes contempt for Americans and reveals the “system of thought control” the bankers employed almost 100 years ago. These goals and methods have not changed. If ever we needed proof that democracy is a charade, this is it.

By Henry Makow Ph.D

In 1919, the Rothschild-dominated Bank of England planned to trick the United States into becoming a “British” colony again by joining the League of Nations. The League of the Nations, like the “British Empire”, was the bankers’ fiefdom, and this strategem would merely formalize a colonial status which already existed.

The bankers took over the U.S. during the Teddy Roosevelt Administration (1901-1909) when Rothschild front J.P. Morgan alone controlled 25% of American business.

The “Col. E.M. House Report”, is a chilling 10-page “progress report” dated June 10, 1919 which proves the League of Nations was an aborted attempt at world government and a facade for banker tyranny. The Report reveals the reality and the tactics behind the United Nations and globalization.

House writes: “We have wrapped this plan in the peace treaty so that the world must accept from us the League or a continuance of the war. The League is in substance the Empire with America admitted on the same basis as our other colonies.”

The report oozes contempt for Americans and reveals the deceitful methods international finance employed almost 100 years ago to bring about world government. These goals and methods have not changed. If ever we needed proof of an elite conspiracy to subvert and enslave us, this is it.

Puppet Master 

The author is Col. Edward Mandell House (1858-1938), the Rothschild agent who secretly directed U.S. affairs during the Woodrow Wilson administration. Col. House was known as Wilson’s friend and “alter ego.” (He had not served in the military and the term “Colonel” was merely honorary.) The report is addressed to British Prime Minister David Lloyd George, whose career was made as a lawyer for the World Zionist Organization.

Rep. Jacob Thorkelson (1876-1945) introduced The House Report to Congress in Oct.1939 and published it in the Congressional Record (Oct. 13 1939, pp.598-604). Attempts to delete it were thwarted. The complete text is available on line.
The report details Col. House’s progress in preparing “for the peaceful return of the American colonies to the dominion of the Crown.”

“Crown” refers to the owners of the Bank of England. Their identities are an official secret. According to E.C. Knuth, the “international financial oligarchy uses the allegoric ‘Crown’ as its symbol of power and has its headquarter in the ancient city of London…the giant Bank of England, a privately owned institution… is not subject to regulation by the British parliament and is in effect a sovereign world power.” (The Empire of the City, p. 59)

Col. House continues: The “peaceful return of the American colonies” can only be brought about with “the consent of the dominant group of the controlling clans.”

Col. House relates how these classes are being taught to accept “British” leadership. He details how the universities and press are staffed by “British-born” or Canadians.

“Through the Red Cross, the Scout movement, the YMCA, the church, and other humane, religious, and quasi religious organizations, we have created an atmosphere of international effort which strengthens the idea of unity of the English speaking world.”

The Overseas Clubs, service clubs, and war charities “enable us to pervade all sections and classes of the country.”

We “hold all American newspapers as isolated from the non-American world as if they had been in another planet instead of another hemisphere. The realization of this by the Associated Press and the other universal news gatherers, except Hearst, was most helpful in bringing only our point of view to the papers they served.”

He boasts that the United States “while still maintaining an outward show of independence” is identical with other colonies in its relationship to the Crown. “Has not President Wilson cancelled the big Navy program and dutifully conceded to us the command of the seas?”

He boasts that “the Anglo American alliance” has become “the unchallenged financiers of the world.”

He congratulates “our fiscal agents Messrs Pierpont Morgan & Company” for “putting this country into the war.” They exert “widespread influence on newspaper policy” through advertising and lent $200,000,000 to Japan to build a fleet to compete with America (making the U.S still more dependent on England.)

Col. House boasts that the “Crown” used money lent by the U.S. government for war purposes to buy up oil fields in California, Mexico and Latin America.

The war has made us custodians of the greater part of the world’s raw materials… [We] now largely control the oil fields of the world and thereby the world’s transportation and industry.”
The League of Nations Ruse

The pressing issue now is to “transfer its dangerous sovereignty from this colony to the custody of the Crown. We must, in short, now bring America within the Empire.”

The first step was Wilson’s plan for the League of Nations “which we prepared for him.”

“The plain people of this country are inveterate and incurable hero worshippers,” Col. House explains. They easily can be manipulated by a man with a slogan that expresses their “undefined aspirations.”

Afterwards, they will trust the sloganeer no matter what he does. Wilson has gained this trust and this accounts for “his exceptional usefulness to us.”

“Any abrupt change might startle the ignorant American masses and rouse them to action against it. And us. Our best policy therefore would be to appoint President Wilson the first president of the League… he will be able to satisfy [Americans] that far from surrendering their independence to the League, they are actually extending their sovereignty by it…”

Foreshadowing The Patriot Act, Col. House says Woodrow Wilson “alone can father an anti-Bolshevik act which judicially interpreted will enable appropriate punitive measures to be applied to any American who may be unwise enough to assert that America must once again declare her independence.”

Col. House goes into great detail about how Wilson must be massaged and manipulated. Many people think someone else wrote this Report but only Edward Mandell House knew Wilson this well.

For example he says Wilson “is easily slighted and remarkably vindictive.” The new British ambassador should be a “Wilson worshipper” and “a gentleman-in-waiting to the President.” He lists the gifts Wilson already has been given.
“Our Entire System of Thought Control” Is At Work

Col. House suggests staging the first session of the League of Nations in Washington.

“This will convince these simple people that they are the League and its power resides in them.”

He recommends a “series of spectacles by which the mob may be diverted from any attempt to think too much of matters beyond their province.”

“While awaiting these diversions for the vulgar, we are incessantly instructing them in the wonders of the league. Its praises are thundered by our press, decreed by our college presidents, and professed by our professors. Our authors, writers and lecturers are analysing its selected virtues… we have enlisted 8000 propagandists for the League. We have organized international and national synods, committees, conferences, convocations, conventions, councils…to herald the birth of the League as the dawn of universal peace.”

“Agriculturalists, bankers, brokers, accountants, chemists, and all other functional groups capable of exerting organized professional, business, financial or social pressure are meeting to endorse the League in the name of peace, progress and prosperity…Our film concerns are preparing an epoch-making picture…”

In short, our entire system of thought control is working ceaselessly, tirelessly, ruthlessly, to ensure the adoption of the League. And it will be adopted, for business wants peace, the righteous cannot resist a covenant, and the politicians, after shadow boxing for patronage purposes, will yield valiantly lest the fate of the wanton and wilful pursue them.”

Conclusion

Thanks to the valiant opposition of Republican Senators, the United States rejected the Peace Treaty and with it the League of Nations Nov. 19,1919. The plot was temporarily foiled.

But the secretive bankers’ covert campaign to impose world tyranny has not abated. They financed Hitler and engineered World War Two. The League of Nations was resurrected as the United Nations in 1945 and the “Cold War” initiated. Many believe we are in the early stages of “World War Three.”

All segments of society continue to be propagandized with the virtues of the U.N. National institutions are subverted. The press and education continue to be controlled. Politicians are figureheads.

Some of the tactics have changed. The American empire has replaced the British Empire as their instrument of world hegemony. But Americans should not think they are serving their own interests. They are building a ‘new world order’ and its master is “the Crown.” In Col. House’s words, Americans will be colonists who have to “petition at the foot of the throne.”

The references to control of oilfields suggest that oil is first and foremost an instrument of world domination. The final stage of world tyranny involves gaining complete control of Middle Eastern oil. This portends an invasion of Iran.

The threat can no longer be characterized as strictly “Jewish.” Through Freemasonry, the Rothschilds have received a degree of collaboration from the world’s financial, cultural and political elites as to render this point moot.

Lemming-like, Western elites have embraced a death-wish for civilization.

—–

Source*

Related Topics:

Between the State of the City of London and the Crown*

Judge Anna Von Reitz on NWO vs. the Rest of Us*

Rothschild Demands Western Nations Invade Syria*

Cheney, Rothschild, Murdoch Violate International Law By Drilling for Oil in Syria*

American Civil War: When Russia Blocked British-led Intervention against the Union

The Secret Oil War Has Begun*

Disturbing Message to All Americans from Former Defense Minister of Canada on the NWO*

World War 3: Trump Begins Paying His Penance to Rothschilds*

World Freemasons Gather in Tokyo to Select New Leader as Golden Age Dawns*

Pope Orders Purge of Freemasons from Knights of Malta*

Say Hi to the Head of your NWO Nightmare Baron Jacob Nathaniel Rothschild*

Major U.S. Politicians Are Being Blackmailed by the Deep State

Financing the New World Order*

Hitler Was Financed by the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England*

The U.S. Military Bid as a Global Force for Peace, and the Cabals Current Power Struggle *

The Three World Wars of Albert Pike*

The U.S. is At the Centre Of The Global Economic Meltdown*

War Is a Racket*

 

Advertisements

The U.S. Interfered In Foreign Presidential Elections 81+ Times from 1946-2000*

The U.S. Interfered In Foreign Presidential Elections 81+ Times from 1946-2000*

That number doesn’t include military coups and regime change efforts following the election of candidates the U.S. didn’t like, notably those in Iran, Guatemala and Chile.

U.S. President Harry Truman, left, and Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, right, stand together on Oct. 23, 1951. The coup d’état that led to the democratically elected Mossadegh’s ouster two years later was orchestrated by the U.S. CIA, declassified documents confirm. – Photo/Abbie Rowe

 

The CIA has accused Russia of interfering in the 2016 presidential election by hacking into Democratic and Republican computer networks and selectively releasing emails. But critics might point out the U.S. has done similar things.

The U.S. has a long history of attempting to influence presidential elections in other countries – it’s done so as many as 81 times between 1946 and 2000, according to a database amassed by political scientist Dov Levin of Carnegie Mellon University.

That number doesn’t include military coups and regime change efforts following the election of candidates the U.S. didn’t like, notably those in Iran, Guatemala and Chile. Nor does it include general assistance with the electoral process, such as election monitoring.

Levin defines intervention as “a costly act which is designed to determine the election results [in favor of] one of the two sides.” These acts, carried out in secret two-thirds of the time, include funding the election campaigns of specific parties, disseminating misinformation or propaganda, training locals of only one side in various campaigning or get-out-the-vote techniques, helping one side design their campaign materials, making public pronouncements or threats in favor of or against a candidate, and providing or withdrawing foreign aid.

The U.S. hasn’t been the only one trying to interfere in other countries’ elections, according to Levin’s data. Russia attempted to sway 36 foreign elections from the end of World War II to the turn of the century – meaning that, in total, at least one of the two great powers of the 20th century intervened in about 1 of every 9 competitive, national-level executive elections in that time period.

In the 1990 Nicaragua elections, the CIA leaked damaging information on alleged corruption by the Marxist Sandinistas to German newspapers, according to Levin. The opposition used those reports against the Sandinista candidate, Daniel Ortega. He lost to opposition candidate Violeta Chamorro.

In Haiti after the 1986 overthrow of dictator and U.S. ally Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier, the CIA sought to support particular candidates and undermine Jean-Bertrande Aristide, a Roman Catholic priest and proponent of liberation theology. The New York Times reported in the 1990s that the CIA had on its payroll members of the military junta that would ultimately unseat Aristide after he was democratically elected in a landslide over Marc Bazin, a former World Bank official and finance minister favoured by the U.S.

The U.S. also attempted to sway Russian elections. In 1996, with the presidency of Boris Yeltsin and the Russian economy flailing, President Clinton endorsed a $10.2-billion loan from the International Monetary Fund linked to privatization, trade liberalization and other measures that would move Russia toward a capitalist economy. Yeltsin used the loan to bolster his popular support, telling voters that only he had the reformist credentials to secure such loans, according to media reports at the time. He used the money, in part, for social spending before the election, including payment of back wages and pensions.

Source*

Related Topics:

DHS Caught Hacking Georgia Secretary of State Office during the Election (NOT RUSSIA)*

CIA’s Woman in Brazil*

Washington Rape of Brazil Begins*

Declassified Docs Detail U.S. Role in Dirty War Horrors of Argentina *

What I’ve Learnt About US Foreign Policy*

10 Examples of the CIA Using Secret Armies to Overthrow Foreign Governments*

The CIA Coup and Sponsored Massacre that Led to the Ruin of Indonesian Society*

CIA’s Harper’s Canada is in a Crisis of Epic Proportions*

The Soft Coup: How Canada’s PM Harper was installed by the CIA*

As Rothschilds Did to China, the CIA is Drug Running in the Philippines*

Declassified Docs Detail U.S. Role in Dirty War Horrors of Argentina *

German Intelligence Service to Become Branch of U.S. CIA*

U.S. Agents Are Filling Key Posts in Argentina*

U.S. Army Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson on Perpetual War to Maintain the Empire*

U.S. on Russia’s Borders Trying to Provoke War*

Why the U.S. won’t get the Hell out of Afghanistan*

A New Puppet so the Cabal Can Rape Afghanistan of its Rare Earth Mineral Wealth*

U.S.-Sponsored Genocide in Syria*

South America and another U.S Invasion*

Iraq Will Likely Sue U.S. Govt For 2003 Invasion Following Passage of 9/11 Bill*

The First U.S. invasion of Haiti (1915) Remembered*

Statement on the Invasion of the African State of Libya By the Imperialist Forces

U.S. has Killed over 20 Million People in 37 “Victim Nations” Since World War II*

Bush’s War on Terror in the Philippines*

US Vaporized and Experimented on the Indigenous of Marshall Islands*

Britain’s Secret Plan for the Invasion of Grenada*

Hawaiians Reject President Obama’s Rule to Federalize Hawaiian Tribe*

 

 

War Is a Racket*

War Is a Racket*

By Major General Smedley Butler

Smedley Darlington Butler

  • Born: West Chester, Pa., July 30, 1881
  • Educated: Haverford School
  • Married: Ethel C. Peters, of Philadelphia, June 30, 1905
  • Awarded two congressional medals of honor:
    1. capture of Vera Cruz, Mexico, 1914
    2. capture of Ft. Riviere, Haiti, 1917
  • Distinguished service medal, 1919
  • Major General – United States Marine Corps
  • Retired Oct. 1, 1931
  • On leave of absence to act as
    director of Dept. of Safety, Philadelphia, 1932
  • Lecturer — 1930’s
  • Republican Candidate for Senate, 1932
  • Died at Naval Hospital, Philadelphia, June 21, 1940
  • For more information about Major General Butler,
    contact the United States Marine Corps.

CHAPTER ONE

War Is a Racket

WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small “inside” group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.

How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?

Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. They just take it. This newly acquired territory promptly is exploited by the few — the selfsame few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill.

And what is this bill?

This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations.

For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it. Now that I see the international war clouds gathering, as they are today, I must face it and speak out.

Again they are choosing sides. France and Russia met and agreed to stand side by side. Italy and Austria hurried to make a similar agreement. Poland and Germany cast sheep’s eyes at each other, forgetting for the nonce [one unique occasion], and their dispute over the Polish Corridor.

The assassination of King Alexander of Jugoslavia [Yugoslavia] complicated matters. Jugoslavia and Hungary, long bitter enemies, were almost at each other’s throats. Italy was ready to jump in. But France was waiting. So was Czechoslovakia. All of them are looking ahead to war. Not the people — not those who fight and pay and die — only those who foment wars and remain safely at home to profit.

There are 40,000,000 men under arms in the world today, and our statesmen and diplomats have the temerity to say that war is not in the making.

Hell’s bells! Are these 40,000,000 men being trained to be dancers?

Not in Italy, to be sure. Premier Mussolini knows what they are being trained for. He, at least, is frank enough to speak out. Only the other day, Il Duce in “International Conciliation,” the publication of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said:

“And above all, Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. . . . War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the people who have the courage to meet it.”

Undoubtedly Mussolini means exactly what he says. His well-trained army, his great fleet of planes, and even his navy are ready for war — anxious for it, apparently. His recent stand at the side of Hungary in the latter’s dispute with Jugoslavia showed that. And the hurried mobilization of his troops on the Austrian border after the assassination of Dollfuss showed it too. There are others in Europe too whose sabre rattling presages war, sooner or later.

Herr Hitler, with his rearming Germany and his constant demands for more and more arms, is an equal if not greater menace to peace. France only recently increased the term of military service for its youth from a year to eighteen months.

Yes, all over, nations are camping in their arms. The mad dogs of Europe are on the loose. In the Orient the maneuvering is more adroit. Back in 1904, when Russia and Japan fought, we kicked out our old friends the Russians and backed Japan. Then our very generous international bankers were financing Japan. Now the trend is to poison us against the Japanese. What does the “open door” policy to China mean to us? Our trade with China is about $90,000,000 a year. Or the Philippine Islands? We have spent about $600,000,000 in the Philippines in thirty-five years and we (our bankers and industrialists and speculators) have private investments there of less than $200,000,000.

Then, to save that China trade of about $90,000,000, or to protect these private investments of less than $200,000,000 in the Philippines, we would be all stirred up to hate Japan and go to war — a war that might well cost us tens of billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of lives of Americans, and many more hundreds of thousands of physically maimed and mentally unbalanced men.

Of course, for this loss, there would be a compensating profit — fortunes would be made. Millions and billions of dollars would be piled up. By a few. Munitions makers. Bankers. Ship builders. Manufacturers. Meat packers. Speculators. They would fare well.

Yes, they are getting ready for another war. Why shouldn’t they? It pays high dividends.

But what does it profit the men who are killed? What does it profit their mothers and sisters, their wives and their sweethearts? What does it profit their children?

What does it profit anyone except the very few to whom war means huge profits?

Yes, and what does it profit the nation?

Take our own case. Until 1898 we didn’t own a bit of territory outside the mainland of North America. At that time our national debt was a little more than $1,000,000,000. Then we became “internationally minded.” We forgot, or shunted aside, the advice of the Father of our country. We forgot George Washington’s warning about “entangling alliances.” We went to war. We acquired outside territory. At the end of the World War period, as a direct result of our fiddling in international affairs, our national debt had jumped to over $25,000,000,000. Our total favorable trade balance during the twenty-five-year period was about $24,000,000,000. Therefore, on a purely bookkeeping basis, we ran a little behind year for year, and that foreign trade might well have been ours without the wars.

It would have been far cheaper (not to say safer) for the average American who pays the bills to stay out of foreign entanglements. For a very few this racket, like bootlegging and other underworld rackets, brings fancy profits, but the cost of operations is always transferred to the people — who do not profit.

CHAPTER TWO

Who Makes the Profits?

The World War, rather our brief participation in it, has cost the United States some $52,000,000,000. Figure it out. That means $400 to every American man, woman, and child. And we haven’t paid the debt yet. We are paying it, our children will pay it, and our children’s children probably still will be paying the cost of that war.

The normal profits of a business concern in the United States are six, eight, ten, and sometimes twelve percent. But war-time profits — ah! that is another matter — twenty, sixty, one hundred, three hundred, and even eighteen hundred per cent — the sky is the limit. All that traffic will bear. Uncle Sam has the money. Let’s get it.

Of course, it isn’t put that crudely in war time. It is dressed into speeches about patriotism, love of country, and “we must all put our shoulders to the wheel,” but the profits jump and leap and skyrocket — and are safely pocketed. Let’s just take a few examples:

Take our friends the du Ponts, the powder people — didn’t one of them testify before a Senate committee recently that their powder won the war? Or saved the world for democracy? Or something? How did they do in the war? They were a patriotic corporation. Well, the average earnings of the du Ponts for the period 1910 to 1914 were $6,000,000 a year. It wasn’t much, but the du Ponts managed to get along on it. Now let’s look at their average yearly profit during the war years, 1914 to 1918. Fifty-eight million dollars a year profit we find! Nearly ten times that of normal times, and the profits of normal times were pretty good. An increase in profits of more than 950 per cent.

Take one of our little steel companies that patriotically shunted aside the making of rails and girders and bridges to manufacture war materials. Well, their 1910-1914 yearly earnings averaged $6,000,000. Then came the war. And, like loyal citizens, Bethlehem Steel promptly turned to munitions making. Did their profits jump — or did they let Uncle Sam in for a bargain? Well, their 1914-1918 average was $49,000,000 a year!

Or, let’s take United States Steel. The normal earnings during the five-year period prior to the war were $105,000,000 a year. Not bad. Then along came the war and up went the profits. The average yearly profit for the period 1914-1918 was $240,000,000. Not bad.

There you have some of the steel and powder earnings. Let’s look at something else. A little copper, perhaps. That always does well in war times.

Anaconda, for instance. Average yearly earnings during the pre-war years 1910-1914 of $10,000,000. During the war years 1914-1918 profits leaped to $34,000,000 per year.

Or Utah Copper. Average of $5,000,000 per year during the 1910-1914 period. Jumped to an average of $21,000,000 yearly profits for the war period.

Let’s group these five, with three smaller companies. The total yearly average profits of the pre-war period 1910-1914 were $137,480,000. Then along came the war. The average yearly profits for this group skyrocketed to $408,300,000.

A little increase in profits of approximately 200 per cent.

Does war pay? It paid them. But they aren’t the only ones. There are still others. Let’s take leather.

For the three-year period before the war the total profits of Central Leather Company were $3,500,000. That was approximately $1,167,000 a year. Well, in 1916 Central Leather returned a profit of $15,000,000, a small increase of 1,100 per cent. That’s all. The General Chemical Company averaged a profit for the three years before the war of a little over $800,000 a year. Came the war, and the profits jumped to $12,000,000. a leap of 1,400 per cent.

International Nickel Company — and you can’t have a war without nickel — showed an increase in profits from a mere average of $4,000,000 a year to $73,000,000 yearly. Not bad? An increase of more than 1,700 per cent.

American Sugar Refining Company averaged $2,000,000 a year for the three years before the war. In 1916 a profit of $6,000,000 was recorded.

Listen to Senate Document No. 259. The Sixty-Fifth Congress, reporting on corporate earnings and government revenues. Considering the profits of 122 meat packers, 153 cotton manufacturers, 299 garment makers, 49 steel plants, and 340 coal producers during the war. Profits under 25 per cent were exceptional. For instance the coal companies made between 100 per cent and 7,856 per cent on their capital stock during the war. The Chicago packers doubled and tripled their earnings.

And let us not forget the bankers who financed the great war. If anyone had the cream of the profits it was the bankers. Being partnerships rather than incorporated organizations, they do not have to report to stockholders. And their profits were as secret as they were immense. How the bankers made their millions and their billions I do not know, because those little secrets never become public — even before a Senate investigatory body.

But here’s how some of the other patriotic industrialists and speculators chiseled their way into war profits.

Take the shoe people. They like war. It brings business with abnormal profits. They made huge profits on sales abroad to our allies. Perhaps, like the munitions manufacturers and armament makers, they also sold to the enemy. For a dollar is a dollar whether it comes from Germany or from France. But they did well by Uncle Sam too. For instance, they sold Uncle Sam 35,000,000 pairs of hobnailed service shoes. There were 4,000,000 soldiers. Eight pairs, and more, to a soldier. My regiment during the war had only one pair to a soldier. Some of these shoes probably are still in existence. They were good shoes. But when the war was over Uncle Sam has a matter of 25,000,000 pairs left over. Bought — and paid for. Profits recorded and pocketed.

There was still lots of leather left. So the leather people sold your Uncle Sam hundreds of thousands of McClellan saddles for the cavalry. But there wasn’t any American cavalry overseas! Somebody had to get rid of this leather, however. Somebody had to make a profit in it — so we had a lot of McClellan saddles. And we probably have those yet.

Also somebody had a lot of mosquito netting. They sold your Uncle Sam 20,000,000 mosquito nets for the use of the soldiers overseas. I suppose the boys were expected to put it over them as they tried to sleep in muddy trenches — one hand scratching cooties on their backs and the other making passes at scurrying rats. Well, not one of these mosquito nets ever got to France!

Anyhow, these thoughtful manufacturers wanted to make sure that no soldier would be without his mosquito net, so 40,000,000 additional yards of mosquito netting were sold to Uncle Sam.

There were pretty good profits in mosquito netting in those days, even if there were no mosquitoes in France. I suppose, if the war had lasted just a little longer, the enterprising mosquito netting manufacturers would have sold your Uncle Sam a couple of consignments of mosquitoes to plant in France so that more mosquito netting would be in order.

Airplane and engine manufacturers felt they, too, should get their just profits out of this war. Why not? Everybody else was getting theirs. So $1,000,000,000 — count them if you live long enough — was spent by Uncle Sam in building airplane engines that never left the ground! Not one plane, or motor, out of the billion dollars worth ordered, ever got into a battle in France. Just the same the manufacturers made their little profit of 30, 100, or perhaps 300 per cent.

Undershirts for soldiers cost 14¢ [cents] to make and uncle Sam paid 30¢ to 40¢ each for them — a nice little profit for the undershirt manufacturer. And the stocking manufacturer and the uniform manufacturers and the cap manufacturers and the steel helmet manufacturers — all got theirs.

Why, when the war was over some 4,000,000 sets of equipment — knapsacks and the things that go to fill them — crammed warehouses on this side. Now they are being scrapped because the regulations have changed the contents. But the manufacturers collected their wartime profits on them — and they will do it all over again the next time.

There were lots of brilliant ideas for profit making during the war.

One very versatile patriot sold Uncle Sam twelve dozen 48-inch wrenches. Oh, they were very nice wrenches. The only trouble was that there was only one nut ever made that was large enough for these wrenches. That is the one that holds the turbines at Niagara Falls. Well, after Uncle Sam had bought them and the manufacturer had pocketed the profit, the wrenches were put on freight cars and shunted all around the United States in an effort to find a use for them. When the Armistice was signed it was indeed a sad blow to the wrench manufacturer. He was just about to make some nuts to fit the wrenches. Then he planned to sell these, too, to your Uncle Sam.

Still another had the brilliant idea that colonels shouldn’t ride in automobiles, nor should they even ride on horseback. One has probably seen a picture of Andy Jackson riding in a buckboard. Well, some 6,000 buckboards were sold to Uncle Sam for the use of colonels! Not one of them was used. But the buckboard manufacturer got his war profit.

The shipbuilders felt they should come in on some of it, too. They built a lot of ships that made a lot of profit. More than $3,000,000,000 worth. Some of the ships were all right. But $635,000,000 worth of them were made of wood and wouldn’t float! The seams opened up — and they sank. We paid for them, though. And somebody pocketed the profits.

It has been estimated by statisticians and economists and researchers that the war cost your Uncle Sam $52,000,000,000. Of this sum, $39,000,000,000 was expended in the actual war itself. This expenditure yielded $16,000,000,000 in profits. That is how the 21,000 billionaires and millionaires got that way. This $16,000,000,000 profits is not to be sneezed at. It is quite a tidy sum. And it went to a very few.

The Senate (Nye) committee probe of the munitions industry and its wartime profits, despite its sensational disclosures, hardly has scratched the surface.

Even so, it has had some effect. The State Department has been studying “for some time” methods of keeping out of war. The War Department suddenly decides it has a wonderful plan to spring. The Administration names a committee — with the War and Navy Departments ably represented under the chairmanship of a Wall Street speculator — to limit profits in war time. To what extent isn’t suggested. Hmmm. Possibly the profits of 300 and 600 and 1,600 per cent of those who turned blood into gold in the World War would be limited to some smaller figure.

Apparently, however, the plan does not call for any limitation of losses — that is, the losses of those who fight the war. As far as I have been able to ascertain there is nothing in the scheme to limit a soldier to the loss of but one eye, or one arm, or to limit his wounds to one or two or three. Or to limit the loss of life.

There is nothing in this scheme, apparently, that says not more than 12 per cent of a regiment shall be wounded in battle, or that not more than 7 per cent in a division shall be killed.

Of course, the committee cannot be bothered with such trifling matters.

CHAPTER THREE

Who Pays the Bills?

Who provides the profits — these nice little profits of 20, 100, 300, 1,500 and 1,800 per cent? We all pay them — in taxation. We paid the bankers their profits when we bought Liberty Bonds at $100.00 and sold them back at $84 or $86 to the bankers. These bankers collected $100 plus. It was a simple manipulation. The bankers control the security marts. It was easy for them to depress the price of these bonds. Then all of us — the people — got frightened and sold the bonds at $84 or $86. The bankers bought them. Then these same bankers stimulated a boom and government bonds went to par — and above. Then the bankers collected their profits.

But the soldier pays the biggest part of the bill.

If you don’t believe this, visit the American cemeteries on the battlefields abroad. Or visit any of the veteran’s hospitals in the United States. On a tour of the country, in the midst of which I am at the time of this writing, I have visited eighteen government hospitals for veterans. In them are a total of about 50,000 destroyed men — men who were the pick of the nation eighteen years ago. The very able chief surgeon at the government hospital; at Milwaukee, where there are 3,800 of the living dead, told me that mortality among veterans is three times as great as among those who stayed at home.

Boys with a normal viewpoint were taken out of the fields and offices and factories and classrooms and put into the ranks. There they were remolded; they were made over; they were made to “about face”; to regard murder as the order of the day. They were put shoulder to shoulder and, through mass psychology, they were entirely changed. We used them for a couple of years and trained them to think nothing at all of killing or of being killed.

Then, suddenly, we discharged them and told them to make another “about face”! This time they had to do their own readjustment, sans [without] mass psychology, sans officers’ aid and advice and sans nation-wide propaganda. We didn’t need them anymore. So we scattered them about without any “three-minute” or “Liberty Loan” speeches or parades. Many, too many, of these fine young boys are eventually destroyed, mentally, because they could not make that final “about face” alone.

In the government hospital in Marion, Indiana, 1,800 of these boys are in pens! Five hundred of them in a barracks with steel bars and wires all around outside the buildings and on the porches. These already have been mentally destroyed. These boys don’t even look like human beings. Oh, the looks on their faces! Physically, they are in good shape; mentally, they are gone.

There are thousands and thousands of these cases, and more and more are coming in all the time. The tremendous excitement of the war, the sudden cutting off of that excitement — the young boys couldn’t stand it.

That’s a part of the bill. So much for the dead — they have paid their part of the war profits. So much for the mentally and physically wounded — they are paying now their share of the war profits. But the others paid, too — they paid with heartbreaks when they tore themselves away from their firesides and their families to don the uniform of Uncle Sam — on which a profit had been made. They paid another part in the training camps where they were regimented and drilled while others took their jobs and their places in the lives of their communities. The paid for it in the trenches where they shot and were shot; where they were hungry for days at a time; where they slept in the mud and the cold and in the rain — with the moans and shrieks of the dying for a horrible lullaby.

But don’t forget — the soldier paid part of the dollars and cents bill too.

Up to and including the Spanish-American War, we had a prize system, and soldiers and sailors fought for money. During the Civil War they were paid bonuses, in many instances, before they went into service. The government, or states, paid as high as $1,200 for an enlistment. In the Spanish-American War they gave prize money. When we captured any vessels, the soldiers all got their share — at least, they were supposed to. Then it was found that we could reduce the cost of wars by taking all the prize money and keeping it, but conscripting [drafting] the soldier anyway. Then soldiers couldn’t bargain for their labor, Everyone else could bargain, but the soldier couldn’t.

Napoleon once said,

“All men are enamored of decorations . . . they positively hunger for them.”

So by developing the Napoleonic system — the medal business — the government learned it could get soldiers for less money, because the boys liked to be decorated. Until the Civil War there were no medals. Then the Congressional Medal of Honor was handed out. It made enlistments easier. After the Civil War no new medals were issued until the Spanish-American War.

In the World War, we used propaganda to make the boys accept conscription. They were made to feel ashamed if they didn’t join the army.

So vicious was this war propaganda that even God was brought into it. With few exceptions our clergymen joined in the clamor to kill, kill, kill. To kill the Germans. God is on our side . . . it is His will that the Germans be killed.

And in Germany, the good pastors called upon the Germans to kill the allies . . . to please the same God. That was a part of the general propaganda, built up to make people war conscious and murder conscious.

Beautiful ideals were painted for our boys who were sent out to die. This was the “war to end all wars.” This was the “war to make the world safe for democracy.” No one mentioned to them, as they marched away, that their going and their dying would mean huge war profits. No one told these American soldiers that they might be shot down by bullets made by their own brothers here. No one told them that the ships on which they were going to cross might be torpedoed by submarines built with United States patents. They were just told it was to be a “glorious adventure.”

Thus, having stuffed patriotism down their throats, it was decided to make them help pay for the war, too. So, we gave them the large salary of $30 a month.

All they had to do for this munificent sum was to leave their dear ones behind, give up their jobs, lie in swampy trenches, eat canned willy (when they could get it) and kill and kill and kill . . . and be killed.

But wait!

Half of that wage (just a little more than a riveter in a shipyard or a laborer in a munitions factory safe at home made in a day) was promptly taken from him to support his dependents, so that they would not become a charge upon his community. Then we made him pay what amounted to accident insurance — something the employer pays for in an enlightened state — and that cost him $6 a month. He had less than $9 a month left.

Then, the most crowning insolence of all — he was virtually blackjacked into paying for his own ammunition, clothing, and food by being made to buy Liberty Bonds. Most soldiers got no money at all on pay days.

We made them buy Liberty Bonds at $100 and then we bought them back — when they came back from the war and couldn’t find work — at $84 and $86. And the soldiers bought about $2,000,000,000 worth of these bonds!

Yes, the soldier pays the greater part of the bill. His family pays too. They pay it in the same heart-break that he does. As he suffers, they suffer. At nights, as he lay in the trenches and watched shrapnel burst about him, they lay home in their beds and tossed sleeplessly — his father, his mother, his wife, his sisters, his brothers, his sons, and his daughters.

When he returned home minus an eye, or minus a leg or with his mind broken, they suffered too — as much as and even sometimes more than he. Yes, and they, too, contributed their dollars to the profits of the munitions makers and bankers and shipbuilders and the manufacturers and the speculators made. They, too, bought Liberty Bonds and contributed to the profit of the bankers after the Armistice in the hocus-pocus of manipulated Liberty Bond prices.

And even now the families of the wounded men and of the mentally broken and those who never were able to readjust themselves are still suffering and still paying.

CHAPTER FOUR

How to Smash This Racket!

WELL, it’s a racket, all right.

A few profit — and the many pay. But there is a way to stop it. You can’t end it by disarmament conferences. You can’t eliminate it by peace parleys at Geneva. Well-meaning but impractical groups can’t wipe it out by resolutions. It can be smashed effectively only by taking the profit out of war.

The only way to smash this racket is to conscript capital and industry and labor before the nations manhood can be conscripted. One month before the Government can conscript the young men of the nation — it must conscript capital and industry and labor. Let the officers and the directors and the high-powered executives of our armament factories and our munitions makers and our shipbuilders and our airplane builders and the manufacturers of all the other things that provide profit in war time as well as the bankers and the speculators, be conscripted — to get $30 a month, the same wage as the lads in the trenches get.

Let the workers in these plants get the same wages — all the workers, all presidents, all executives, all directors, all managers, all bankers — yes, and all generals and all admirals and all officers and all politicians and all government office holders — everyone in the nation be restricted to a total monthly income not to exceed that paid to the soldier in the trenches!

Let all these kings and tycoons and masters of business and all those workers in industry and all our senators and governors and majors pay half of their monthly $30 wage to their families and pay war risk insurance and buy Liberty Bonds.

Why shouldn’t they?

They aren’t running any risk of being killed or of having their bodies mangled or their minds shattered. They aren’t sleeping in muddy trenches. They aren’t hungry. The soldiers are!

Give capital and industry and labor thirty days to think it over and you will find, by that time, there will be no war. That will smash the war racket — that and nothing else.

Maybe I am a little too optimistic. Capital still has some say. So capital won’t permit the taking of the profit out of war until the people — those who do the suffering and still pay the price — make up their minds that those they elect to office shall do their bidding, and not that of the profiteers.

Another step necessary in this fight to smash the war racket is the limited plebiscite to determine whether a war should be declared. A plebiscite not of all the voters but merely of those who would be called upon to do the fighting and dying. There wouldn’t be very much sense in having a 76-year-old president of a munitions factory or the flat-footed head of an international banking firm or the cross-eyed manager of a uniform manufacturing plant — all of whom see visions of tremendous profits in the event of war — voting on whether the nation should go to war or not. They never would be called upon to shoulder arms — to sleep in a trench and to be shot. Only those who would be called upon to risk their lives for their country should have the privilege of voting to determine whether the nation should go to war.

There is ample precedent for restricting the voting to those affected. Many of our states have restrictions on those permitted to vote. In most, it is necessary to be able to read and write before you may vote. In some, you must own property. It would be a simple matter each year for the men coming of military age to register in their communities as they did in the draft during the World War and be examined physically. Those who could pass and who would therefore be called upon to bear arms in the event of war would be eligible to vote in a limited plebiscite. They should be the ones to have the power to decide — and not a Congress few of whose members are within the age limit and fewer still of whom are in physical condition to bear arms. Only those who must suffer should have the right to vote.

A third step in this business of smashing the war racket is to make certain that our military forces are truly forces for defense only.

At each session of Congress the question of further naval appropriations comes up. The swivel-chair admirals of Washington (and there are always a lot of them) are very adroit lobbyists. And they are smart. They don’t shout that “We need a lot of battleships to war on this nation or that nation.” Oh no. First of all, they let it be known that America is menaced by a great naval power. Almost any day, these admirals will tell you, the great fleet of this supposed enemy will strike suddenly and annihilate 125,000,000 people. Just like that. Then they begin to cry for a larger navy. For what? To fight the enemy? Oh my, no. Oh, no. For defense purposes only.

Then, incidentally, they announce maneuvers in the Pacific. For defense. Uh, huh.

The Pacific is a great big ocean. We have a tremendous coastline on the Pacific. Will the maneuvers be off the coast, two or three hundred miles? Oh, no. The maneuvers will be two thousand, yes, perhaps even thirty-five hundred miles, off the coast.

The Japanese, a proud people, of course will be pleased beyond expression to see the united States fleet so close to Nippon’s shores. Even as pleased as would be the residents of California were they to dimly discern through the morning mist, the Japanese fleet playing at war games off Los Angeles.

The ships of our navy, it can be seen, should be specifically limited, by law, to within 200 miles of our coastline. Had that been the law in 1898 the Maine would never have gone to Havana Harbor. She never would have been blown up. There would have been no war with Spain with its attendant loss of life. Two hundred miles is ample, in the opinion of experts, for defense purposes. Our nation cannot start an offensive war if its ships can’t go further than 200 miles from the coastline. Planes might be permitted to go as far as 500 miles from the coast for purposes of reconnaissance. And the army should never leave the territorial limits of our nation.

To summarize: Three steps must be taken to smash the war racket.

  1. We must take the profit out of war.
  2. We must permit the youth of the land who would bear arms to decide whether or not there should be war.
  3. We must limit our military forces to home defense purposes.

 

CHAPTER FIVE

To Hell with War!

I am not a fool as to believe that war is a thing of the past. I know the people do not want war, but there is no use in saying we cannot be pushed into another war.

Looking back, Woodrow Wilson was re-elected president in 1916 on a platform that he had “kept us out of war” and on the implied promise that he would “keep us out of war.” Yet, five months later he asked Congress to declare war on Germany.

In that five-month interval the people had not been asked whether they had changed their minds. The 4,000,000 young men who put on uniforms and marched or sailed away were not asked whether they wanted to go forth to suffer and die.

Then what caused our government to change its mind so suddenly?

Money.

An allied commission, it may be recalled, came over shortly before the war declaration and called on the President. The President summoned a group of advisers. The head of the commission spoke. Stripped of its diplomatic language, this is what he told the President and his group:

“There is no use kidding ourselves any longer. The cause of the allies is lost. We now owe you (American bankers, American munitions makers, American manufacturers, American speculators, American exporters) five or six billion dollars.

If we lose (and without the help of the United States we must lose) we, England, France and Italy, cannot pay back this money . . . and Germany won’t.

So . . . “

Had secrecy been outlawed as far as war negotiations were concerned, and had the press been invited to be present at that conference, or had radio been available to broadcast the proceedings, America never would have entered the World War. But this conference, like all war discussions, was shrouded in utmost secrecy. When our boys were sent off to war they were told it was a “war to make the world safe for democracy” and a “war to end all wars.”

Well, eighteen years after, the world has less of democracy than it had then. Besides, what business is it of ours whether Russia or Germany or England or France or Italy or Austria live under democracies or monarchies? Whether they are Fascists or Communists? Our problem is to preserve our own democracy.

And very little, if anything, has been accomplished to assure us that the World War was really the war to end all wars.

Yes, we have had disarmament conferences and limitations of arms conferences. They don’t mean a thing. One has just failed; the results of another have been nullified. We send our professional soldiers and our sailors and our politicians and our diplomats to these conferences. And what happens?

The professional soldiers and sailors don’t want to disarm. No admiral wants to be without a ship. No general wants to be without a command. Both mean men without jobs. They are not for disarmament. They cannot be for limitations of arms. And at all these conferences, lurking in the background but all-powerful, just the same, are the sinister agents of those who profit by war. They see to it that these conferences do not disarm or seriously limit armaments.

The chief aim of any power at any of these conferences has not been to achieve disarmament to prevent war but rather to get more armament for itself and less for any potential foe.

There is only one way to disarm with any semblance of practicability. That is for all nations to get together and scrap every ship, every gun, every rifle, every tank, every war plane. Even this, if it were possible, would not be enough.

The next war, according to experts, will be fought not with battleships, not by artillery, not with rifles and not with machine guns. It will be fought with deadly chemicals and gases.

Secretly each nation is studying and perfecting newer and ghastlier means of annihilating its foes wholesale. Yes, ships will continue to be built, for the shipbuilders must make their profits. And guns still will be manufactured and powder and rifles will be made, for the munitions makers must make their huge profits. And the soldiers, of course, must wear uniforms, for the manufacturer must make their war profits too.

But victory or defeat will be determined by the skill and ingenuity of our scientists.

If we put them to work making poison gas and more and more fiendish mechanical and explosive instruments of destruction, they will have no time for the constructive job of building greater prosperity for all peoples. By putting them to this useful job, we can all make more money out of peace than we can out of war — even the munitions makers.

So…I say,

TO HELL WITH WAR!

Source*

Related Topics:

Charlie Chaplin’s Final Speech in the Great Dictator*

Neuroscience has been a Tool of War from the Start*

Obama Just Expanded the Global War on Terror to Somalia*

Rouhani urges Muslims to Unite against ‘great plot’*

The International Criminal Court is investigating U.S. War Crimes, with a Huge Catch*

U.S. has Killed over 20 Million People in 37 “Victim Nations” Since World War II*

On Gaza, Gaza, Defense Minister Says ‘Next War Will Be The Last’*

The Oil-Gas War Over Syria*

Queen Elizabeth Warns Of ‘Holy War To End All Wars’ *

Britain’s Seven Covert Wars*

The Anguish, Bloodshed and Forgotten Heroes in the Ignored War on Yemen*

British Parliament Confirms Libya War Was Based On Lies …*

Declassified Docs Detail U.S. Role in Dirty War Horrors of Argentina *

NATO Just Attempted to Invade Moldova, but were Thwarted by People’s Resistance*

U.S. Army Captain Files Lawsuit against Obama over ‘Illegal’ War in Iraq and Syria*

Preparing for War or a Huge Profit? Oil Supertankers Forming “World’s Biggest Traffic Jam”*

Putin: Illuminati Plans to Use Islam To Spark World War III*

The “Islamophobia” Industry Feeds War Abroad, Grows Police State at Home*

Clinton’s Emails Reveals a Sunni-Shiite War Would be Good for Israel and the West*

Judge Anna von Reitz: We Are Determined There Will NOT Be a Third World War, We Want the Criminals Recognized as Criminals

U.S. Army Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson on Perpetual War to Maintain the Empire*

British Soldiers Throw War Medals to the Floor*

Israel’s Undeclared Final War Killed 2,600 Palestinians in October Alone*

The Captain Defied His Orders and Stopped America from Starting World War III*

 

When Palestine was 85% Arab, 15% Israeli and U.K. and U.S. Paid the Jews from the Caucasus to Live There*

When Palestine was 85% Arab, 15% Israeli and U.K. and U.S. Paid the Jews from the Caucasus to Live There*

According to Wikipedia The Dearborn Independent, also known as The Ford International Weekly, was a weekly newspaper established in 1901, but published by Henry Ford from 1919 through 1927….  Lawsuits regarding anti-Semitic material published in the paper caused Ford to close it, and the last issue was published in December 1927..

This is a  1926 article…

 

 

 

 

Source*

Related Topics:

The Eight Families’ Rigged Oil Game

Palestine Before Israel*

Palestine to Sue U.K. for the Creation of ‘Israel’*

Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion

Protocol VII of the Learned Elders of Zion*

A 1829 Newspaper Reports on the Rothschilds and Jerusalem*

Rothschild Temple: The Conspiracy, the Call, the Plan to Destroy Al-Aqsa Mosque*

The Rothschild’s Zionist World Order*

Jean-Claude van Damme Summoned for ‘re-education’ in Israel after Expose on Rothschilds*

Rothschild Crime Syndicate in Israel *

How Fear was Instilled to Make Jews Leave for Israel

Ashkenazi Jews are Genetically European

A Rabbi Refers to Netanyahu’s Claim of All Jews ‘Identity Theft’

The Knights Templar were Descendants of Jewish Elders!?*

Israeli Report Admits They Are Descendants of Khazars*

Hitler: The War on Jews that was Started by Ashkenazi Jews!*

Global Jewish Population in 1933 and 1948*

Illuminati, Nazis & The Illegal State of Israel

Israel Grants Oil Rights in Syria to Murdoch and Rothschild*

Tony Blair Visits Caesarea, an Israeli Rothschild Estate*

Palestine from Sovereignty to an Israeli Enclave*

One of Israel’s Greatest Spies

The Innate Racism of Israel: Ashkenazi Jews Exterminating Arab Jews*

To be an Arab Jew in the West is to Say you don’t Exist*

Israel’s Beersheba Plan*

For Greater Israel: 3,200 acres of Palestinian Land Near Jerusalem*

For Greater Israel: Israeli Legal Jurisdiction to be Extended to Judea and Samaria*

When the Bible mentioned ‘Israel’ it did not mean Judea*

Greater Israel” Requires the Breaking up of Existing Arab States*

Israel’s Iron Dome *

Jewish Odyssies to Islam

The Relentless Jewish Campaign against Islam*

The Brothers who Funded Blair, Israeli Settlements and Islamophobia*

Why Is Israel looking for Imam Mahdi?*

U.S., Britain and Israel are the Biggest Terrorists on the Planet.

Behind the Occult Significance of the Israeli Supreme Court*

The Israeli Invasion and Gaza’s Offshore Gas Fields*

Ukraine: Europe’s Israel*

Ukraine: Israel’s Secret Plan for a «Second Israel»

Franco-Zionist Decimation of Algeria*

Hebrew Bibles from Syria Taken by MOSSAD*

ISIS Preserving Jewish Cultural Heritage in Iraq*

Captured Israeli Officer Details Israeli-ISIS Plan to Wipe-out all Islamic and Muslim Culture and Prevent Religions Coming Together*

The Butcher of Khuza’a*

Israel Considers Full Annexation of Sinai*

Israel’s Latest War in the Planning Eight Years*

The Occult and U.S. Evacuation of ISIS/Israeli Military Commanders from Ramadi*

Netanyahu Sues Own Office to Prevent Airing of Dirty Laundry*

Former Israeli President Shimon Peres Dies at 93*

Obama snubs Duterte at end of Laos Summit after Filipino President Rightly Blames U.S. for Killing his Ancestors*

Obama snubs Duterte at end of Laos Summit after Filipino President Rightly Blames U.S. for Killing his Ancestors*

Filipino casualties on the first day of Philippine-American War. Original caption is ‘Insurgent dead just as they fell in the trench near Santa Ana, February 5th. The trench was circular, and the picture shows but a small portion.’

By Ananya Roy

Philippines President Duterte expresses ‘regret’ for comments on Obama. Before signing off from The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) Summit on Thursday (9 September) night, U.S. President Barack Obama apparently snubbed his Filipino counterpart Rodrigo Duterte, who had earlier called him ‘a son of a b***h’.

TAP – He actually called Obama son of a whore – ‘putang ina’ – which is in fact correct.  Obama was the son of a prostitute, and there are plenty of pictures of her on the internet.  Obama was clearly deeply affected.  As they say, the truth hurts.

Obama went around shaking hands with all the leaders present at the final summit meeting in Vientiane, Laos, but avoided Duterte.

Obama’s reaction was reportedly triggered by yet another humiliating remark made by Duterte.

This time he reportedly veered off his prepared speech and took a dig at American soldiers, blaming them for killing his “ancestors”. Duterte says he didn’t insult Obama but thinks U.N.’s Ban Ki-Moon is a ‘fool’.

TAP – Americans indeed killed hundreds of thousands of poorly armed Filipinos and massacred unarmed Filipinos during the Filipino-American War.  This fact is hidden from history as inconvenient.  Well done to Duterte for bringing this matter up.  It’s about time Filipinos woke up form their American dream.  The American Army needlessly killed 1.5 million Filipinos and have covered up their atrocious behaviour ever since.  The normal ratio of 1 killed to 5 wounded, typical of warfare, was reversed to 5 killed to one wounded.  The Americans massacred every village they came across.  Vietnam was a picnic compared to this little episode.

Earlier, Duterte had toned down his language following outrage against his blatant remarks and had even said he regretted swearing at the “most powerful president” of the world. Duterte’s remarks came after Obama raised concerns about the human rights violations allegedly being committed as part of the Philippine leader’s bloody drug war. A scheduled meeting between the two leaders was cancelled following the verbal spat.

On Thursday, Duterte raised the same topic again during an impromptu speech at the final summit meeting in Laos. An Indonesian diplomat present at the meeting, told Agence France Presse that Duterte veered off his prepared speech,

“showed a picture of the killings of American soldiers in the past”, and said: “This is my ancestor[s that] they killed. Why now we are talking about human rights.”

The diplomat said that the atmosphere at the gathering following Duterte’s statement was “quiet and shocked”. U.S. President Barack Obama snubbed Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte during the last meeting at the Laos summit. Later, while bidding farewell to all the leaders at the meeting, Obama shook hands with everyone, except Duterte, a source told GMA news network. However, Filipino Foreign Affairs Secretary Perfecto Yasay Jr was quoted as saying that the two leaders missed a handshake as they just happened to walk in opposite directions at that time.

Following the cancellation of the scheduled first meeting between the two leaders, they were reported to have met informally on the sidelines of the summit. Obama is said to have shaken hands with Duterte then. The U.S. president was also quoted as saying earlier that he did not take Duterte’s comments personally.

From Liberators to Killers: American Attitudes toward Filipinos

The attitudes of American commanders involved in pacifying the Philippines are remarkable for both their disdain for the people they had allegedly “liberated” and their willingness to resort to the most ruthless methods in suppressing resistance. For example, General J.M. Bell, wrote in December 1901:

“I am now assembling in the neighbourhood of 2,500 men who will be used in columns of about fifty men each.  I take so large a command for the purpose of thoroughly searching each ravine, valley and mountain peak for insurgents and for food, expecting to destroy everything I find outside of towns.  All able bodied men will be killed or captured. … These people need a thrashing to teach them some good common sense; and they should have it for the good of all concerned.”

That same month, General Bell issued Circular Order No. 3 to all American commanders in the field:

Batangas, Dec. 9, 1901.

“To All Station Commanders:

A general conviction, which the brigade commander shares, appears to exist, that the insurrection in this brigade continues because the greater part of the people, especially the wealthy ones, pretend to desire, but in reality do not want, peace; that, when all really want peace, we can have it promptly. Under such circumstances it is clearly indicated that a policy should be adopted that will as soon as possible make the people want peace, and want it badly.

Commanding officers are urged and enjoined to use their discretion freely in adopting any or all measures of warfare authorized by this order which will contribute, in their judgment, toward enforcing the policy or accomplishing the purpose above announced. … No person should be given credit for loyalty solely on account of his having done nothing for or against us, so far as known. Neutrality should not be tolerated. Every inhabitant of this brigade should either be an active friend or be classed as an enemy….

Another dangerous class of enemies are wealthy sympathizers and contributors, who, though holding no official positions, use all their influence in support of the insurrection, and, while enjoying American protection for themselves, their families and property, secretly aid, protect, and contribute to insurgents. Chief and most important among this class of disloyal persons are native priests.

The same course should be pursued with all of this class; for, to arrest anyone believed to be guilty of giving aid or assistance to the insurrection in any way or of giving food or comfort to the enemies of the government, it is not necessary to wait for sufficient evidence to lead to conviction by a court, but those strongly suspected of complicity with the insurrection may be arrested and confined as a military necessity, and may be held indefinitely as prisoners of war, in the discretion of the station commander or until the receipt of other orders from higher authority. It will frequently be found impossible to obtain any evidence against persons of influence as long as they are at liberty; but, once confined, evidence is easily obtainable.”

Although few soldiers joined the anti-imperialist cause, their statements did sometimes provide ammunition for the opponents of annexation and war. In 1899, the Anti-Imperialist League published a pamphlet of Soldiers Letters, with the provocative subtitle: “Being Materials for a History of a War of Criminal Aggression.”

Although few soldiers joined the anti-imperialist cause, their statements did sometimes provide ammunition for the opponents of annexation and war. In 1899, the Anti-Imperialist League published a pamphlet of Soldiers Letters, with the provocative subtitle: “Being Materials for a History of a War of Criminal Aggression.”

Even worse, perhaps, is the fact that the policies instituted by General Bell and other American commanders were endorsed by Secretary of War Elihu Root.  In an amazing letter to the Senate dated May 7, 1902, Root argued that

“The War Department saw no reason to doubt that the policy embodied in the above-mentioned orders was at once the most effective and the most humane which could possibly be followed; and so, indeed, it has proved, guerrilla warfare in Batangas and Laguna and the adjacent regions has been ended, the authority of the United States has been asserted and acquiesced in, and the people who had been collected and protected in the camps of concentration have been permitted to return to their homes and resume their customary pursuits in peace. The War Department has not disapproved or interfered in any way with the orders giving effect to this policy; but has aided in their enforcement by directing an increase of food supply to the Philippines for the purpose of caring for the natives in the concentration camps.

Like many of their officers, American troops also showed incredible callousness toward the Philippine civilian population.  A man named Clarence Clowe described the situation as follows in a letter he wrote to Senator Hoar.  The methods employed by American troops against civilians in an effort to find insurgent “arms and ammunition” include torture, beating, and outright killing.

At any time I am liable to be called upon to go out and bind and gag helpless prisoners, to strike them in the face, to knock them down when so bound, to bear them away from wife and children, at their very door, who are shrieking pitifully the while, or kneeling and kissing the hands of our officers, imploring mercy from those who seem not to know what it is, and then, with a crowd of soldiers, hold our helpless victim head downward in a tub of water in his own yard, or bind him hand and foot, attaching ropes to head and feet, and then lowering him into the depths of a well of water till life is well-nigh choked out, and the bitterness of a death is tasted, and our poor, gasping victims ask us for the poor boon of being finished off, in mercy to themselves.

All these things have been done at one time or another by our men, generally in cases of trying to obtain information as to the location of arms and ammunition.

Nor can it be said that there is any general repulsion on the part of the enlisted men to taking part in these doings. I regret to have to say that, on the contrary, the majority of soldiers take a keen delight in them, and rush with joy to the making of this latest development of a Roman holiday.

Another soldier, L. F. Adams, with the Washington regiment, described what he saw after the Battle of Manila on February 4-5, 1899:

“In the path of the Washington Regiment and Battery D of the Sixth Artillery there were 1,008 dead niggers, and a great many wounded. We burned all their houses. I don’t know how many men, women, and children the Tennessee boys did kill. They would not take any prisoners.”

Similarly, Sergeant Howard McFarland of the 43rd Infantry, wrote to the Fairfield Journal of Maine:

“I am now stationed in a small town in charge of twenty-five men, and have a territory of twenty miles to patrol…. At the best, this is a very rich country; and we want it. My way of getting it would be to put a regiment into a skirmish line, and blow every nigger into a nigger heaven. On Thursday, March 29, eighteen of my company killed seventy-five nigger bolo men and ten of the nigger gunners. When we find one that is not dead, we have bayonets.

These methods were condoned by some back at home in the U.S., as exemplified by the statement of a Republican Congressman in 1909:

“You never hear of any disturbances in Northern Luzon; and the secret of its pacification is, in my opinion, the secret of pacification of the archipelago.  They never rebel in northern Luzon because there isn’t anybody there to rebel.  The country was marched over and cleaned in a most resolute manner.  The good Lord in heaven only knows the number of Filipinos that were put under ground.  Our soldiers took no prisoners, they kept no records; they simply swept the country, and wherever or whenever they could get hold of a Filipino they killed him.  The women and children were spared, and may now be noticed in disproportionate numbers in that part of the island.”

The Example of Samar: A “Howling Wilderness”

Early in the morning on September 28, 1901 the residents of the small village of Balangiga (located in the Samar Province) attacked the men of U.S. Army Company C, Ninth U.S. Infantry, who were stationed in the area.  While the Americans ate breakfast, church bells in the town began to peal.  This was the signal for hundreds of Filipinos armed with machetes and bolos to attack the garrison.  Forty-eight U.S. soldiers, two-thirds of the garrison, were butchered, in what is called the Balangiga Massacre.  Of the Filipinos who attacked, as many as 150 were killed.

American troops began retaliating as soon as the next day by returning to Balangiga in force and burning the now abandoned village.  General Jacob H. Smith, however, sought to punish the entire civilian population of the Samar province.  Arriving in Samar himself toward the end of October, Smith charged Major Littleton Waller with responsibility for punishing the inhabitants of Samar.  Smith issued Waller oral instructions concerning his duties.  These were recounted as follows (see below) in Smith and Waller’s court martial proceedings the following year in 1902.  These proceedings, indeed attention to the entire matter of U.S. Army conduct in the Philippines, were driven by the appearance of an interview with General Smith in the Manila Times on November 4, 1901.  During this interview, Smith confirmed that these had truly been his orders to Major Waller.

“‘I want no prisoners. I wish you to kill and burn: the more you kill and burn, the better you will please me,’ and, further, that he wanted all persons killed who were capable of bearing arms and in actual hostilities against the United States, and did, in reply to a question by Major Waller asking for an age limit, designate the limit as ten years of age. … General Smith did give instructions to Major Waller to ‘kill and burn’ and ‘make Samar a howling wilderness,’ and he admits that he wanted everybody killed capable of bearing arms, and that he did specify all over ten years of age, as the Samar boys of that age were equally as dangerous as their elders.”

Smith carried out his mission by having U.S. troops concentrate the local population into camps and towns.  Areas outside of these camps and towns were designated “dead zones” in which those who were found would be considered insurgents and summarily executed.  Tens of thousands of people were herded into these concentration camps.  Disease was the biggest killer in the camps, although precisely how many lives were lost during Smith’s pacification operations is not known.  For his part, Major Waller reported that over eleven days between the end of October and the middle of November 1901 his men burned 255 dwellings and killed 39 people.  Other officers under Smith’s command reported similar figures.  Concerning the overall number of dead, one scholar estimates that 8,344 people perished between January and April 1902.

The Death Toll of American Occupation

The overall cost in human lives of American actions in the Philippines was horrific.  One scholar has concluded concerning the American occupation that

“In the fifteen years that followed the defeat of the Spanish in Manila Bay in 1898, more Filipinos were killed by U.S. forces than by the Spanish in 300 years of colonization. Over 1.5 million died out of a total population of 6 million.”

A detailed estimate of both civilian and American military dead is offered by historian John Gates, who sums up the subject as follows:

“Of some 125,000 Americans who fought in the Islands at one time or another, almost 4,000 died there.  Of the non-Muslim Filipino population, which numbered approximately 6,700,000, at least 34,000 lost their lives as a direct result of the war, and as many as 200,000 may have died as a result of the cholera epidemic at the war’s end. The U. S. Army’s death rate in the Philippine-American War (32/1000) was the equivalent of the nation having lost over 86,000 (of roughly 2,700,000 engaged) during the Vietnam war instead of approximately 58,000 who were lost in that conflict.  For the Filipinos, the loss of 34,000 lives was equivalent to the United States losing over a million people from a population of roughly 250 million, and if the cholera deaths are also attributed to the war, the equivalent death toll for the United States would be over 8,000,000.  This war about which one hears so little was not a minor skirmish.”

Yet another estimate states,

 “Philippine military deaths are estimated at 20,000 with 16,000 actually counted, while civilian deaths numbered between 250,000 and 1,000,000 Filipinos.  These numbers take into account those killed by war, malnutrition, and a cholera epidemic that raged during the war.”

“The comparative figures of killed and wounded — nearly five killed to one wounded if we take only the official returns — are absolutely convincing. When we examine them in detail and find the returns quoted of many killed and often no wounded, only one conclusion is possible.  In no war where the usages of civilized warfare have been respected has the number of killed approached the number of wounded more nearly than these figures. The rule is generally about five wounded to one killed.  What shall we say of a war where the proportions are reversed?

Investigating War Crimes: The U.S. Senate Investigating Committee

The United States Senate Investigating Committee on the Philippines was convened from January 31, 1902 after word of the Army’s Samar pacification campaign reached Washington via the Manila Times story of November 4, 1901.  Chaired by Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, the committee heard testimony concerning crimes that had allegedly been committed by U.S. troops and officers in the Philippines.  The policies behind the U.S. occupation were also examined.

For six months officers and political figures involved in the Philippine adventure, both pro and anti-imperialists, testified as to the brutal nature of American anti-insurgent operations.  Although attempts were made to justify the amount of damage U.S. troops were doing, as well as the number of Filipino lives lost, the evidence provided by several individuals was damning.

Major Cornelius Gardener, for example, a West Point graduate and the U.S. Army’s Provincial Governor of the Tayabas province in the Philippines, submitted the following evidence via letter on April 10, 1902:

“Of late by reason of the conduct of the troops, such as the extensive burning of the barrios in trying to lay waste the country so that the insurgents cannot occupy it, the torturing of natives by so-called water cure and other methods, in order to obtain information, the harsh treatment of natives generally, and the failure of inexperienced, lately appointed Lieutenants commanding posts, to distinguish between those who are friendly and those unfriendly and to treat every native as if he were, whether or no, an insurrection at heart, this favourable sentiment above referred to is being fast destroyed and a deep hatred toward us engendered.

The course now being pursued in this province and in the Provinces of Batangas, Laguna, and Samar is in my opinion sowing the seeds for a perpetual revolution against us hereafter whenever a good opportunity offers. Under present conditions the political situation in this province is slowly retrograding, and the American sentiment is decreasing and we are daily making permanent enemies.”

The letters of American troops home to the U.S. were also introduced as evidence of war crimes.  In this case, a letter written in November 1900 by one Sergeant Riley described an interrogation torture procedure used on Filipino captives:

“Arriving at Igbaras at daylight, we found everything peaceful; but it shortly developed that we were really “treading on a volcano.” The Presidente (or chief), the priest, and another leading man were assembled, and put on the rack of inquiry. The presidente evaded some questions, and was soon bound and given the “water cure“. This was done by throwing him on his back beneath a tank of water and running a stream into his mouth, a man kneading his stomach meanwhile to prevent his drowning. The ordeal proved a tongue-loosener, and the crafty old fellow soon begged for mercy and made full confession. … The presidente was asked for more information, and had to take a second dose of “water cure” before he would divulge.”

Committee proceedings adjourned on June 28, 1902.  For two months after this the legal team presenting evidence for the committee compiled its report.  This report was released on August 29, 1902 under the title Secretary Root’s Record: “Marked Severities” in Philippine Warfare, An Analysis of the Law and Facts Bearing on the Action and Utterances of President Roosevelt and Secretary Root.  The report was a damning indictment of U.S. policy in the Philippines and the almost criminal conduct of the war by War Secretary Elihu Root, who multiple times had expressed support for the extreme measures implemented by the U.S. Army.

Altogether thirteen conclusions were drawn from the evidence, the most significant of which were:

  1. That the destruction of Filipino life during the war has been so frightful that it cannot be explained as the result of ordinary civilized warfare.
  2. That at the very outset of the war there was strong reason to believe that our troops were ordered by some officers to give no quarter, and that no investigation was had because it was reported by Lieut.-Colonel Crowder that the evidence “would implicate many others,” General Elwell Otis saying that the charge was “not very grievous under the circumstances.”
  3. That from that time on, as is shown by the reports of killed and wounded and by direct testimony, the practice continued.
  4. That the War Department has never made any earnest effort to investigate charges of this offence or to stop the practice.
  5. That from the beginning of the war the practice of burning native towns and villages and laying waste the country has continued.
  6. That the Secretary of War never made any attempt to check, or punish this method of war.
  7. That from a very early day torture has been employed systematically to obtain information.
  8. That no one has ever been seriously punished for this, and that since the first officers were reprimanded for hanging up prisoners no one has been punished at all until Major Glenn, in obedience to an imperative public sentiment, was tried for one of many offences, and received a farcical sentence.
  9. That the Secretary of War never made any attempt to stop this barbarous practice while the war was in progress.
  10. That the statements of Mr. Root’s, whether as to the origin of the war, its progress, or the methods by which it has been prosecuted, have been untrue.
  11. That Mr. Root has shown a desire not to investigate, and, on the other hand, to conceal the truth touching the war and to shield the guilty, and by censorship and otherwise has largely succeeded.
  12. That Mr. Root, then, is the real defendant in this case. The responsibility for what has disgraced the American name lies at his door. He is conspicuously the person to be investigated. The records of the War Department should be laid bare, that we may see what orders, what cablegrams, what reports, are there. His standard of humanity, his attitude toward witnesses, the position which he has taken, the statements which he has made,

Source*

November 1944: U.S. landing ship tanks are seen from above as they pour military equipment onto the shores of Leyte island, to support invading forces in the Philippines.

November 1944: U.S. landing ship tanks are seen from above as they pour military equipment onto the shores of Leyte island, to support invading forces in the Philippines.

Related Topics:

Bush’s War on Terror in the Philippines*

Corporate Plunder of the Philippines*

Italy, the Philippines and Oklahoma get an Earthquake*

Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte Slams U.S. For “Killing Black People”*

Philippines Indigenous Excluded from Peace and Development Agenda*

Hitler’s Chief of General Staff of the Army during World War II, went on to become Chairman of the NATO Military Committee

Hitler’s Chief of General Staff of the Army during World War II, went on to become Chairman of the NATO Military Committee*

Adolf Heusinger

General Adolf Heusinger (August 4, 1897 – November 30, 1982) was a German general officer who served as Adolf Hitler’s Chief of the General Staff of the Army during World War II and then served as the first Inspector General of the Bundeswehr, the West German armed forces, from 1957 to 1961. Heusinger also served as Chairman of the NATO Military Committee from 1961 to 1964.

Early years

Heusinger was born in Holzminden, in the Duchy of Brunswick, German Empire. He entered the Imperial German Army on June 17, 1915, and was assigned to 7. Thüringisches Infanterie-Regiment Nr. 96, an infantry regiment raised in the Thuringia region of Germany (including the Reuss principalities). He was promoted to Ensign (Fähnrich) on March 31, 1916, and was commissioned a second lieutenant on July 4, 1917. He was wounded several times in combat at Verdun and in Flanders, and was taken prisoner by the British on July 31, 1917. During World War I, he was decorated with the Iron Cross 2nd Class and Iron Cross 1st Class, Brunswick’s War Merit Cross 2nd Class, the Reuss Silver Merit Medal with Swords, the Reuss Honor Cross 3rd Class with Swords and the Wound Badge in Black.

After World War I, and upon being freed from British captivity, Heusinger returned to Germany and entered the Reichswehr, the small 100,000-man army Germany was permitted to keep under the Treaty of Versailles. He entered the Reichswehr on New Year’s Day 1920 as a second lieutenant in the 15th Infantry Regiment, based in Kassel. From 1927 to 1930 he was enrolled in the leadership assistant course.

He served in a variety of infantry and staff assignments until October 1931, when he was assigned to the operations staff of the Troop Office (Truppenamt) in the Reichswehr Ministry (Reichswehrministerium). The Troop Office was the German Army’s covert General Staff during the Weimar Republic era, as the Treaty of Versailles also forbade that institution. Promotions were slow in the small Reichswehr; Heusinger was promoted to first lieutenant (Oberleutnant) in April 1925 and a captain (Hauptmann) on October 1, 1932.

Heusinger served in Berlin with the Troop Office until August 1934, and then returned to troop assignments. He was made chief operations officer of the 11th Division in October 1935, where he served until August 1937. In the meantime he was promoted to major on March 16, 1936. With the rise of the Nazis in Germany and Adolf Hitler’s assumption of power, the restrictions of the Treaty of Versailles were abrogated and the German General Staff was officially re-established. In August 1937, Heusinger was assigned to the Operations Staff (Operationsabteilung) of the Army General Staff as a general staff officer. He served there, being promoted to lieutenant colonel on March 20, 1939, and remained in that position until October 15, 1940, when he became its chief.

World War II

With the outbreak of the Second World War, the German Army High Command (Oberkommando des Heeres, or OKH) assumed its wartime organization. Heusinger accompanied the field staff and assisted in the planning of operations in Poland, Denmark, Norway, and France and the Low Countries. He was promoted to colonel on August 1, 1940 and, as noted above, became chief of the Operationsabteilung in October 1940, making him number three in the Army planning hierarchy, after the Chief of the General Staff, General Franz Halder, and the Deputy Chief of the General Staff/Chief Quartermaster (Oberquartiermeister I), General Friedrich Paulus.

After the invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941, the OKH became primarily responsible for planning operations in that theatre, while the Armed Forces High Command (Oberkommando der Wehrmacht, or OKW) was responsible for other theatres. Halder was replaced as Chief of the General Staff in September 1942 by General Kurt Zeitzler. Paulus left the OKH in December 1941 and was succeeded in January 1942 by General Günther Blumentritt, who held the Oberquartiermeister I position until September 1942 when it was abolished.

Heusinger remained chief of the Operationsabteilung and was promoted to Generalmajor (Wehrmacht equivalent of brigadier general) on January 1, 1942 and to Generalleutnant (Wehrmacht equivalent of major general) on January 1, 1943.[1] In June 1944, General Zeitzler became ill, and on June 10, Heusinger temporarily assumed his office as Chief of the General Staff of the Army. In this capacity, he attended the meeting at Adolf Hitler’s “Wolf’s Lair” on July 20, 1944, and was standing next to Hitler when the bomb planted by Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg exploded.

Heusinger was hospitalized for his injuries in the explosion, but was arrested and interrogated by the Gestapo to determine his role, if any, in the July Plot. Although there was evidence that Heusinger had had contacts with many of the conspirators, there was insufficient evidence to directly connect him to the plot, and he was freed in October 1944. However, he was placed into the “Führer-Reserve” and was not assigned to another position until March 25, 1945, when he was made chief of armed forces mapping department (Chef Wehrmacht-Kartenwesen). He was taken prisoner by the Western Allies in May 1945.

Adolf Heusinger (left) and Hans Speidel (right) sworn into the newly founded Bundeswehr by Otto Blank (center).

Post-World War II

A prisoner of war from 1945 to 1947, Heusinger testified during the Nuremberg Trials.

According to documents released by the German intelligence agency (Bundesnachrichtendienst, or BND) in 2014, Heusinger may have been part of the Schnez-Truppe, a secret army that veterans of the Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS sought to establish in the early ’50s.

In 1950, he became an advisor on military matters to Konrad Adenauer, the first Chancellor of West Germany. He served in the Blank Office Amt Blank, the office headed by Theodor Blank, which became the West German Ministry of Defense in 1955.

With the establishment of the West Germany Army Bundeswehr in 1955, Heusinger returned to military service. He was appointed a Generalleutnant (lieutenant general) on November 12, 1955. in the Bundeswehr and chairman of the Military Leadership Council (Militärischer Führungsrat).

In March 1957, he succeeded Hans Speidel as chief of the Bundeswehr’s all-armed forces department (Chef der Abteilung Gesamtstreitkräfte).

Shortly thereafter, in June 1957, Heusinger was promoted to full general and named the first Inspector General of the Bundeswehr (Generalinspekteur der Bundeswehr), and served in that capacity until March 1961. In April 1961, he was appointed Chairman of the NATO Military Committee in Washington, D.C., where he served until 1964, when he retired. He was, according to news reports, wanted by the Russians in the early 1960s in respect of organizing the Koriukivka massacre.

Heusinger died in Cologne on November 30, 1982, aged 85.

Source*

Related Topics:

Hitler: The War on Jews that was Started by Ashkenazi Jews!*

WWIII: Guns A-ho but there’s a Spanner in the Works

NATO Preparing for the Banksters WWIII*

Hundreds Gather against Militarism, at the NATO’ Summit*

Open Letter from Former NSA Director and Veterans on NATO’s Ukraine Pretext for WWIII*

Ukraine Breaks Ceasefire as NATO Aids the Blood Feast*

One Example Why NATO Should not be Invited onto One’s Soil*

NATO Inflaming Civil War and More Sends Arms to Kiev*

NATO Airstrikes Target Grain Silos not ISIS*

U.S. and NATO Launch Disinformation Terror War*

1000s March against NATO War Games in Italy, Spain*

Paris Attack a Perfect Pretext for NATO to Invade Syria and Iraq*

U.S.-NATO Next Battle Front towards WWIII in Crimea Causes National Blackouts*

Poland’s New Government Breaks into NATO Intelligence-Gathering Centre and Takes It Over*

Illuminati, Nazis & The Illegal State of Israel

Greek Neo-Nazi Party Trial Begins On Hitler’s Birthday*

ISIS/L and European Neo-Nazis United under Pentagon’s 5th Generation Warfare*

Pro-Nazi Roots of Planned Parenthood was Never Hidden*

Twenty-Seven Million Russians Died Defending Europe against the Cabal’s WWII*

Congress Removes Ban on Funding Neo-Nazis*

Kerry Calls For Peace as NATO Proxies Lose Ground in Syria*

The Zionist Holocaust of 66 Million Russians*

The Zionist Holocaust of 66 Million Russians*

The brave Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the famous Russian writer who has been called the “Conscience of the 20th Century,” served eight long years in the Soviet Gulag prison system. Today, he is hated by top-level Jews in America and around the world because he exposed the Jewish leadership of the genocide of 66 million Communist Gulag victims. Many victims were Christians.

Penned in one of the world’s most banned books Together For Two Hundred Years by Solzhenitsyn the first volume covers Russian-Jewish History 1795-1916, and the second volume was called The Jews in the Soviet Union. The pre-Zionist owned Guardian described the book as follows:

Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who first exposed the horrors of the Stalinist gulag, is now attempting to tackle one of the most sensitive topics of his writing career – the role of the Jews in the Bolshevik revolution and Soviet purges. In his latest book Solzhenitsyn, 84, deals with one of the last taboos of the communist revolution: that Jews were as much perpetrators of the repression as its victims… Two Hundred Years Together – a reference to the 1772 partial annexation of Poland and Russia which greatly increased the Russian Jewish population – contains three chapters discussing the Jewish role in the revolutionary genocide and secret police purges of Soviet Russia.

A Taboo Subject

Although officially Jews have never made up more than five percent of the country’s total population,5 they played a highly disproportionate and probably decisive role in the infant Bolshevik regime, effectively dominating the Soviet government during its early years. Soviet historians, along with most of their colleagues in the West, for decades preferred to ignore this subject. The facts, though, cannot be denied.

With the notable exception of Lenin (Vladimir Ulyanov), most of the leading Communists who took control of Russia in 1917-20 were Jews. Leon Trotsky (Lev Bronstein) headed the Red Army and, for a time, was chief of Soviet foreign affairs. Yakov Sverdlov (Solomon) was both the Bolshevik party’s executive secretary and — as chairman of the Central Executive Committee — head of the Soviet government. Grigori Zinoviev (Radomyslsky) headed the Communist International (Comintern), the central agency for spreading revolution in foreign countries. Other prominent Jews included press commissar Karl Radek (Sobelsohn), foreign affairs commissar Maxim Litvinov (Wallach), Lev Kamenev (Rosenfeld) and Moisei Uritsky.

Karl Marx, the Jewish radical who inspired Lenin and Trotsky with his communist theories, was secretly a High Priest of Satan (Luciferian Illuminati)(see Richard Wurmbrand’s book, Marx and Satan). Shown here in his official portrait, Marx is giving an enigmatic Masonic hand sign (see Richardson’s Monitor of Freemasonry, p. 74).

Lenin himself was of mostly Russian and Kalmuck ancestry, but he was also one-quarter Jewish. His maternal grandfather, Israel (Alexander) Blank, was a Ukrainian Jew who was later baptized into the Russian Orthodox Church.

A thorough-going internationalist, Lenin viewed ethnic or cultural loyalties with contempt. He had little regard for his own countrymen. “An intelligent Russian,” he once remarked, “is almost always a Jew or someone with Jewish blood in his veins”

The term “GULAG” is an acronym for the Soviet bureaucratic institution, Glavnoe Upravlenie ispravitel’no-trudovykh LAGerei (Main Administration of Corrective Labor Camps), which operated the Soviet system of forced labour camps in the Stalin era.

Currently translated parts are at:-

Chapter 4. In the Age of Reforms

Chapter 5. After the Murder of Alexander II

Chapter 13. The February Revolution

Chapter 14. During 1917

Chapter 16. During the Civil War

Chapter 17. Emigration between the two World Wars

Chapter 18. During the 1920s

Chapter 19. In the 1930s

Chapter 20. In the camps of GULag

Chapter 21. During the war with Germany

Chapter 22. From the End of the War to Stalin’s Death

Chapter 23. Before the Six-Day War

Chapter 24. Breaking Away From the Bolshevism

Chapter 25. Accusing Russia

Chapter 26. The Exodus Begins

Chapter 27. About the Assimilation. Author’s afterword

 

Related Topics:

U.S. on Russia’s Borders Trying to Provoke War*

Global Jewish Population in 1933 and 1948*

City of London’s Imperialist Designs on Russia

And One Ring to Bind Them All*

St. Patrick’s Day*