You Really Can Learn from History: Today’s TPP and Versailles in 1919

The Signing of Peace by Irish painter William Orpen

by Mary W Maxwell, PhD, LLB

The so-called Great War of 1914-1918 was followed by the Paris Peace Conference at Versailles. Many nations had fought in the war and two empires had collapsed — the Hapsburg and the Ottoman. Some sorting-out was required. On what basis could people get what they needed or demanded?

In this article I am really talking about the TPP of 2016 even when it looks like I am talking about the Versailles conference of 1919. That is how similar are the machinations of these two top-level events.

“Nations” Were Not Represented

Versailles was a conference for the victors. “Discretion is the better part of valor” was not the leading theme of the day. Part of the conference’s mission was for the Allied nations to screw the daylights out of the Central Powers, especially Germany. This was to make sure Germany did not have strength.

But, frankly, no nation is allowed to have strength. The world is run by a band of individuals who are not in the business of protecting “any race color creed or national origin.” The world exists for their personal purposes!

Fortunately for us, a lot has been learned in the intervening century as to how the people can deal with the cabal, that band of nameless men who operate with untrammeled hubris, behind the scenes.

My message is: Regarding the TPP, be sure not to picture in your mind a group of nations whose leaders are attending the meeting to get what they need for their nation. And likewise don’t think of the substance of the talks at the TPP as being compromises between differing demands.

Dillon’s Inside Story

A book entitled The Inside Story of the Peace Conference, by Emile Dillon, was published way back in 1920. Dillon was present in Paris, snooping around for our benefit. Please note that the whole book is online at archive.org.

In a nutshell, Dillon demonstrated that the behavior of US President Woodrow Wilson was not in any way related to his pronouncements about accommodating the requests of the various nations, or the ethnic minorities with those nations.

On the agenda was a new distribution of power. The decisions were being made by people above Wilson. He was their servant, their ‘prestigious’ mouthpiece.

Thus I think even the USA was not represented at the Peace Conference. I will only quote lightly from Dillon’s book below. If you read it all you will see what I mean. Come to think of it, the UK was not represented either. Sure, Lloyd George was conspicuously present but he was not acting on behalf of the Brits.

We need to realign our concepts to fit this reality. Come on, Versailles almost a hundred years ago. Time we caught up!

Who Was Who?

Who were they? Roughly speaking, we do know the names of several powerful people of that era. For example, the Russian Revolution of 1917 was overseen by a man in Germany, Max Warburg, in cahoots with men in New York. (Yes, it was not “indigenous” to Russians.)

The two main organizers of World War I, in England, were Lord Esher and Earl Grey. (That fact was clarified only recently by the two Scottish authors of Hidden History – Gerry Doherty and Jim MacGregor.) All members of the British House of Commons were duped.

In the US, it’s been known for decades that a mere handful of people conspired, starting in 1910, to get Congress to set up the Reserve Bank. Some of the names were Nelson Aldrich, Jacob Schiff, and Paul Warburg. They met in secret on Jekyll Island.

Not only is this not conspiracy “theory,” it is not theory. It is plain fact. At the website “EustaceMullins.us” you can find all the books by cantankerous old Eustace Mullins. He spent years in the library reading open source material.

Mullins dug through records of corporate directorships. Then he combed obituaries and marriage announcements to trace the relationships among powerful families.  The result, in 1985,  was his well-named book The World Order: A Study in the Hegemony of Parasitism.

Note that above we saw a surname appearing in two countries – Paul Warburg in the US, and in Germany his brother Max who helped the overthrow of the Russian Czar (by means of a “proletarian revolution”). Just think about that. A set of brothers who could grab power in two huge nations, the US and Russia.

Just as in early human history, a small coterie, especially of kin, can whisper and deceive, and bamboozle the lot of us.

The TPP

There’s no time to waste here, as we’ll soon see a takeover that is possibly as great as the ones of the 1910-1920 period.

Recall that the Russian “revolution” put millions of people into servitude and also caused the death-by-starvation of millions. The divvying up of the Ottoman Empire made “mandates” of some places such as Palestine.

Recently I wrote “The TPP Is Clearly an Enabling Act.” And  on March 16, 2015 I wrote “Who Signs the TPP Commits Treason.” (Both at GumshoeNews.com.) I think I have made it as clear as the English language will permit that a higher, hidden force is pushing us to accept this outrageous deal.

Not just to accept it but to categorize it very inaccurately as an economic measure that will benefit people and as a legal nicety comparable to other, more benign treaties.

Notes from Versailles in Emile Dillon’s Book

Countess Elise von Bernstorff, wife of the Danish Minister wrote:

“Most comical was the mixture of the very different individuals who all fancied they had work to do at the Congress ….

One noticed noblemen who had never transacted any business before, but now looked extremely consequential and took on an imposing bearing, and professors who … soon turned  peevish and wandered hither and thither, complaining  that they could not, for the life of them, make out what  was going on.”

Dillon says:

Mr. (Woodrow) Wilson in Paris admitted to his presence only the authorized spokesmen of states and causes, and not all of these. He declined to receive persons who thought they had a claim to see him, and he received others who were believed to have none.

During his sojourn in Paris he took many important Russian  affairs in hand …And  as familiarity with Russian conditions was not one of his accomplishments, he presumably needed advice… A large number of Russians, representing all political

parties and four governments, were in Paris waiting to be consulted. But between January and July not one of them was ever asked for information or counsel….”

Surprisingly, given that Britain was the biggest force in the war, Dillon says of Prime Minister David Lloyd George:

“Opportunism is an essential element of statecraft, which is the art of the possible. But there is a line beyond which it becomes shiftiness, and it would be rash to assert that Mr. Lloyd George is careful to keep on the right side of it. At the Conference his conduct appeared to careful observers to be traced mainly by outside influences, and as these were various and changing the result was a zigzag. One day he would lay down a certain proposition as a dogma not to be modified, and before the week was out he would advance the contrary proposition ….

Guided by no sound knowledge and devoid of the ballast of principle, he was tossed and driven hither and thither like a wreck on the ocean.”

American journalist Melville Stone wrote from Versailles:

“Mr. Lloyd George has a very keen sense of humor and a great power over the multitude, but with this he displays a startling indifference to, if not ignorance  of, the larger affairs of nations.”

Those snippets prove a point that is otherwise hard to make: We laypersons envision a high-level meeting as having some argumentation among representatives of nations, or at least between holders of strong points of view.  But it is more likely that the outcome was already set, in secret.

We absolutely know that the TPP was created in secret. Congressmen and Parliamentarians twiddled their thumbs, accepting the rule of censorship – even they were not “allowed” to see the draft treaty.

Dillon wrote about the Great Powers at the Conference:

Censorship was retained as a sort of soft cushion on which the self-constituted dispensers of Fate comfortably reposed. In Paris, where it was particularly severe and unreasoning, it protected the secret conclave from the harsh strictures of the outside world, concealing from the public, not only the incongruities of the Conference, but also many of the warnings of contemporary history.

This twofold policy of secrecy on the part of the delegates and censorship on the part of the authorities proved dangerous, for, upheld by the eminent statesmen who had laid down as part of the new gospel the principle of “open covenants openly arrived at,”  it furnished the world with a fairly correct standard by  which to interpret the entire phraseology…

How To Resist

Come on, folks, this is 2016. You don’t have to repeat 1919. We now have the benefit of Emile Dillon – on on-the-spot observer – telling us how it works.

I claim (but this is not even faintly original with moi) that all aspects of the “treaty” known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership were planned many years ago. No “countries” as such sat at the planning table.

Listen again to Dillon: “Censorship protected [the big boys] from the strictures of the outside world, concealing from the public… many of the warnings of contemporary history.”

You and I, right this minute, are not prevented from seeing the warnings, and the precious gift of the Internet deprives the big boys of “the soft cushion on which they can comfortably repose.”

Isn’t that nice?

— Mary W Maxwell was inspired to write this article by Commenter Bob