By Mary W Maxwell, PhD, LLB
Gumshoe’s editor Dee McLachlan published an article on November 3, 2015, complaining that Derryn Hinch, Melbourne journalist at The Age, had printed false facts about Assad of Syria. This led to a Gumshoe contributor, Christopher Brooks, shirt-fronting Derryn Hinch in the comments section of that article.
I referred to the Hinch-Brooks fight as the ‘Thrill in Manila,’ recalling the prizefight of Cassius Clay, later known as Mohammed Ali. By the way, the US Supreme Court granted Ali a draft status of conscientious objector. He said:
“War is against the teachings of the Holy Qur’an. I’m not trying to dodge the draft. We are not supposed to take part in no wars unless declared by Allah or The Messenger. We don’t take part in Christian wars or wars of any unbelievers.”
Anyway, on November 9, Gumshoe editor McLachlan pincered out Brooks’ comments and made them into a free-standing article called “The Dairy Farmer” (as that is the occupation of Mr Brooks). The comments on that article then began to focus on an issue which Brooks calls Zionism.
Whenever I see today’s troubles being blamed on Zionism I jump into action. Is this because I think Jews need defending? Maybe there’s a bit of that in my motherly heart, but mainly I hate to see the very important question of US policy-making get chalked up to an ethnic group. We need to have this out, urgently. I want us to put EVERYTHING on the table.
Christopher Brooks is a really good sparring partner and I would like our readers to get in on the discussion. You can find the back-and-forth in the comments of the November 9 article. Christopher can write a new article as a rejoinder to me, if he wishes, or can use the Comment section below.
The Brother Bond
Before discussing Zionism, a word about power.
Dee McLachlan tells me that in the South Africa of her youth there was an elite group among the Dutch-speaking portion of the white population – that is, the Afrikaans. It was called Broederbond, the brotherhood. Like any secret society or powerful Old Boy network, you had to be in it to get ahead.
I have recently re-read Justice Robert Jackson’s speech at the Nuremberg trial and noticed that he summarized the power situation in Hitler’s day in the following succinct way:
“The German people were in the hands of the police, the police were in the hands of the Nazi party, and the Party was in the hands of a ring of evil men.”
I don’t know what values the South African group promoted as its membership requirements. Nor do I know much about what a ‘worthy’ German had to proclaim in order to rise in the Nazi party. But I assume either would have been just so much fluff.
That is, the rationale proclaimed by the Broederbond, or by the Nazis, would be but an add-on to their real purpose, namely, sticking together to get what they want, and trying to break the power of any who would oppose them.
Recruiters could easily spot (and kill?) anyone who wanted to be a leader but was not suited to their ranks. I have found this in my own life since becoming a dissident ten years ago. I am blacklisted almost everywhere. Well, “I asked for it,” didn’t I? Yep, I did. This is the power routine.
Is Zionism an Elite Group of the Powerful?
- There was something called the Zionist movement that got underway in 1880s, of which Theodore Herzl was said to be the leader. (He died at 44; I’ll bet he got Bradstreeted.) The mission of Herzl’s group included a homeland for Jews, but not necessarily to be located in Palestine.
- There is a nation today called Israel. US President Harry Truman in 1948 seems to have been a key ally by recognizing the statehood of that new entity. (Note that quite a few new states have come about since 1990 – e.g., Slovakia, Macedonia, South Sudan. Recognition is often the key.)
- Zionism can be seen as a religious emotion of persons who love the Bible, or the God of Abraham, or who want in some way to be associated with Israel. A huge group of Christians in the US, especially in the South, identify as Zionists. I mention that to show how confusing a label can be.
- Finally (for my little scheme here, which itself shouldn’t be assigned any “meaning”), there is the Zionist political position. In order to deal with Christopher Brooks I will now speak mainly of that definition. In my fightin’ comments to the Dairy Farmer article, I had not realized that Brooks wanted to zoom in on this Number 4 aspect.
My guess as to what Christopher Brooks thinks is going on in the US is as follows:
A group called the Zionists, and/or the Neocons, has control of Congress, of the Pentagon, of the White House (at least in terms of foreign policy), and of the media.
Control of Pentagon? Control of US Foreign Policy?
Was I ever surprised to read, in the book by Thomas Barnett entitled “The Pentagon’s New Map,” that there is a plan to eliminate almost the whole continent of Africa, and large parts of South America, as well as the already well-marked-for-extinction areas of the Middle East.
Was I ever surprised to learn that Barnett was permitted – nay, forced – to publish his book, by the guys in charge! But I suppose General Wesley Clark had already announced the US plans to destroy 7 countries and nobody squawked, so maybe now it’s is considered safe to say that the US has big genocidal plans. (Actually, Dee McLachlan squawks every chance she gets; it’s becoming the theme of GumshoeNews.)
Still, the biggest surprise I got from Thomas Barnett’s book is that the campus of the Pentagon isn’t occupied primarily by governmental entities. It has been privatized. Wow. Barnett himself works for one of the companies at the Pentagon, Cantor Fitzgerald, an investment firm.
Note: the Pentagon also includes a wholly illegal entity called The National Guard Bureau. It sponsors “Partnerships for Peace” – thus each of the 50 states currently houses foreign troops. I presume they are there to clobber Americans. I discuss this in my book, “Prosecution for Treason,” but have never seen anyone else refer to it. The mind boggles.
John Kerry, Julie Bishop, etc.
So, is Irish-descended John Kerry, the US Secretary of State a Zionist? Well, yes, if your definition of Zionism is the same as my definition of the cabal. Kerry is also a member of the secret society Skull and Bones, since his days at Yale.
As far as I know, that secret society came from Germany. I doubt that it affiliates with Zionism. Still, if Kerry is to operate as the head of US foreign policy, he has to play the cabal’s game. I’ve been told by commenters here at Gumshoe that the same applies to Australia’s foreign minister.
(That job is currently occupied by Julie Bishop; prior occupants include Kevin Rudd and Alexander Downer. You could ask them to explain whom they took orders from. Or you could ask anyone, including Julie herself, who told her to take the NATO line straightaway when Malaysian flight 17 crashed.)
An aside about Sheilas. The South African Broederbond is males only. They nixed the idea of having a Susterbond, as females can’t keep secrets. Yale’s Skull and Bones has recently ‘tapped’ (i.e., recruited) a few women. Wonder if they will spill any beans. Come on, Gals, talk! Come on, Julie Bishop, sing!
Control of the Media
I capitulate to Christopher Brooks straightaway in regard to Jewish control of the mass media. The boards of newspapers, movies, TV and radio shows, and control of most of the “alternative media” is in the hands of a few men.
Dame Elisabeth (1909-2012)
Rupert Murdoch is the son of Dame Elisabeth Murdoch, a pious Jew. The late British press magnate, Robert Maxwell, was buried on the Mount of Olives, a privilege that indicates his pro-Israel stance. In its early days, Hollywood movie making was controlled by just a few men, with hardly a Gentile in the lot.
Call me thick, but even with all that I still don’t see the power group as being “Jewish.” They are simply a power group. (And I definitely can’t give a nod to any notion that the power-behavior of a Jew is ‘genetic.’ Sure, power behavior is genetic – we’ve all got that gene, thank you.)
Control of media is surely the most important means today for the cabal to suppress any challengers. (And they are far from 100% successful, poor things.) Here is what they said in 1905, in the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” It is amazing:
“All organs of the press are bound together by professional secrecy ….We shall erase from the memory of men all facts of previous centuries…. Through the Press we have gained the power to influence while remaining ourselves in the shade…. And if there should be any found who are desirous of writing against us, they will not find any person eager to print their productions…. Trial shots… fired by us in the third rank of our press, will be energetically refuted by us in our semi-official organs.” (Wow.)
The So-called Protocols
The Protocols appeared in a Russian newspaper in 1905, and were translated by London journalist Victor Marsden. The Elders of Zion disclaimed authorship. So the question is: did Zionists write it, or did someone else try to attribute it to them for purposes of stirring people up against the Jews?
My best guess is that it was cooked up for the purpose of stirring. (It is still having that effect today!) I doubt that someone caught the Elders red-handed with minutes of their meeting, so to speak. Yes, it reflects a real plan to screw the world, but no it did not get “leaked.” It was purpose-built.
Still, my best guess as to the religious affiliation of the Protocols writers is: Jewish. The purpose of trying to stir Russians up, in 1905, was related to the planned takeover of the Czar’s government. (Reminder, you are not dealing with a well-versed historian here; I am only trying to connect dots.)
What followed in 1917, the Bolshevik Revolution, is well-documented to have been carried out by Wall Streeters. A leading member was Paul Warburg. He had also played a major role in the takeover of the US economy by dint of the Federal Reserve Act, whose legislation he engineered in 1913, along with Jacob Schiff, his co-religionist.
As far as I know, it’s a historical fact that Warburg’s brother Max got Lenin transported into Russia on a ‘sealed train.’ In 1922, in Paris, Wickham Steed published this quote, alleged to be from President Woodrow Wilson:
“Who are the tempters that would dare whisper into the ears of the Allied and Associated Governments? They are not far removed from the men who preached peace with profitable dishonour to the British people in July, 1914. They are akin to, if not identical with, the men who sent Trotsky and some scores of associate desperadoes to ruin the Russian Revolution as a democratic, anti-German force in the spring of 1917.”
Excerpts from the Protocols
Please consider just these three paragraphs from what we call the protocols, published in 1905:
“In these [Masonic] lodges we shall find our principal intelligence office and means of influence…. Among the members of these lodges will be almost all the agents of international and national police since their service to us is irreplaceable. [They keep from view] our activities and provide pretexts for discontents. We execute Masons in such wise that none save the brotherhood can ever have a suspicion of it. They all die as from a normal kind of illness. [Hello!]
“The people, under our guidance, have eliminated the aristocracy, who were their one and only defense and foster mother…. Masonry blindly serves as a screen for us. We appear on the scene as alleged saviors – Socialists, Anarchists, Communists, to whom we always give support in accordance with alleged brotherly rule (of the solidarity of all humanity) of our social masonry. De facto we have already wiped out every kind of rule except for our own…. Nowadays, if any States raise a protest against us it is only proforma, and by our direction.
“Capital must be free to establish a monopoly of industry and trade …. This freedom [as in ‘a free hand’] will give political force to those engaged in industry, and that will help to oppress the people…. The intensification of armaments, the increase of police forces – are all essential for the completion of the aforementioned plans.”
[Note: The UK, in 2015, is seriously thinking of privatizing its police! EEEEEKS!!]
Back to the Dairy Farmer, Christopher Brooks
As stated, I am arguing with Christopher Brooks. I now quote a few paragraphs from his wee-hours comments of November 12, 2015 – with which I totally agree:
Brooks: “I think…the relation between the elements of authority, philosophical beliefs, behavior, power in association, strategies, and results in terms of the practical realities, is the essence of our situation.
The social and political labels can be distracting or even poisonous if we allow the attached, often mischievously ambiguous symbolic imagery, to overwhelm our determined efforts to achieve firm consistent understanding ….
Unless we correctly understand how things work it is impossible to address why the results are not what most people are choosing politically or desire for their life experience.”
My invitation to readers is: Please try to identify our rulers. It is a sin not to. Have not the slightest inhibition about claiming that it’s Jews, the Catholic Church, or anyone else. Why in the world should you try to be polite about your tormenters?
— Mary W Maxwell is author of “Fraud Upon the Court” (Trine Day Press, 2015), and co-author with Dee McLachlan of “Truth in Journalism” (2015). She will say Yes to requests for a lecturer.