In a radio address by then U.S. Secretary of State, Cordell Hull, on May 18, 1941, the American people were informed of - and most didn't notice - many of the same goals later adopted by the churchmen: Hull's speech is excerpted below from Voices of History: (emphasis added)

"Tonight we inaugurate another annual National Foreign-Trade Week . . . now there is little use in our talking about and planning for foreign trade unless the outcome of this war is favorable to the free peoples of the world. For free trade means free bargaining to mutual advantage . . .

To get a more complete picture of what [the dangers] involve, it is necessary to envisage the kind of an economic world that would exist if the would be conquerors were to win...

Under it, trade is reduced essentially to... barter."

Hull's reference to 'barter' alludes to the dreaded economic program of Germany, implemented by Adolf Hitler which we will discuss in some detail later. Cordell Hull went on to say:

"After the first World War an attempt was made to reorganize the world on a sound basis. New institutions were created [League of Nations]

and new methods of cooperation were established [International Law].

All peoples shared the hope that a new era in international relations had begun [New World Order].

Unhappily, shortly after the close of the World War, power fell into the hands of groups which advocated political and economic nationalism in their most extreme forms... [most likely referring to Italy, Japan and Germany, the three major powers opposing Bolshevism in Europe - for all Europeans]

Knowing these facts as we do, it is none too early to lay down at least some of the principles by which policies must be guided at the conclusion of the war, to press for a broad program of world economic reconstruction and to consider tentative plans for the application of those policies. The main principles, as proven by experience, are few and simple:

1. Extreme nationalism must not again be permitted to express itself in excessive trade restrictions.

2. Nondiscrimination in international commercial relations must be the rule, so that international trade may grow and prosper.

3. Raw-material supplies must be available to all nations without discrimination.

4. International agreements regarding the supply of commodities must be handled as to protect fully the interests of the consuming countries and their people.

5. The institutions and arrangements of international finance must be so set up that they lend aid to the essential enterprises and the continuous development of all countries, and permit payment through processes of trade consonant with the welfare of all countries.

Measures taken to give effect to these principles must be freely open to every nation which desires a peaceful life in a world at peace and is willing to cooperate in maintaining that peace."

That would mean their version of peace of course: total and complete absence of resistance to the plan for World Dominion.

Hull's statement in that last paragraph is loaded. Any nation that refuses to comply with their world economic and trade policies will be caught up in wars, having their natural leaders removed in favor of puppet leaders along with new government structures: like the Bosnian Accord in 1995 of which Richard Holbrooke, then Assistant Secretary of State ordered, "it will be signed, or else!".

What the 'or else' meant was never disclosed to the public. They wrote a new constitution for the people in Bosnia, nearly identical to the Soviet constitution, which is very much like the UN Charter. But then, why would they not concur? The minions of the same group wrote them all.

That the people in Bosnia didn't agree to the agreement meant nothing to the 'nation builders' representing the U.S. Incidentally, the Jew, Holbrooke was a proud protege' of the Jew, Henry Kissinger. Continuing with Cordell Hull: 

"There still are people who do not see that if, when the present conflict ends, we do not have a system of open trade, they will not be able either to buy or to sell except on terms really laid down by the military forces and political authorities of the countries with which they have to deal.

Unless a system of open trade becomes firmly established, there will be chronic political instability and recurrent economic collapse. There will never be peace in any real sense of the term."

Peace only exists for them in their sense of the term.

"In the final reckoning, the problem becomes one of establishing the foundations of an international order in which independent nations cooperate freely with each other for their mutual gain -- of a world order, not new but renewed, which liberates rather than enslaves.

We shall not be able to do this until we have a world free from imminent military danger and clear of malign political intrigue.

This nation is resolved to evade no issues and to face harsh facts. We believe that there can be created a safer and more prosperous world. We have the tools -- the resources, the brains, the hands -- with which to make it such.

But first the tide of force must be turned back. Once that is done, we and other nations can reestablish an open, cooperative, economic life in which trade may increase, economic welfare may grow, civilization may advance, and the peaceful and benevolent instincts of masses of now prostrate people may once more flourish in the really worthwhile ways of life."  

All of that was said sixty-two years ago. The Allies won the war. Germany was crushed along with the threat to the International Economic Order, which has since tightened its stranglehold on the people of the world.

Twenty million German men, women and children died by starvation and murder after the allied victory 'peace' was made. The surviving German people have paid over $100 billion dollars in 'reparations' to Jews in Israel. They are still paying. It seems the reparation agreement signed on behalf of the German people was an open-ended deal to yoke them into perpetuity in a dual state of guilt to the world and servitude to Israel.

'Open and free trade' exists under the NAFTA and GATT/ WTO. . . ah, yes, the people of the world are certainly 'flourishing' aren't they? Tens of millions of jobs have been lost to Americans, while factories continue to close up shop in the U.S. and head to foreign shores. 'China-made' products abound. We must search diligently for made-in-the-U.S.A; and today, many of those U.S. products come from laborers - a vast portion of whom are not criminals in the real sense of the word - in the privatized prison systems.

Is the world free of 'malign political intrigue' today? Obviously not; and sadly, the 'imminent military danger' of which Hull spoke is now the United States and its very expensive stepchild, Israel. Or do we have that backwards? Has the creature become the real seat of power?

The gist of the message behind the political rhetoric in Mr. Hull's speech on the importance of open and free trade in a peaceful world is explained in Protocol No. 5.

"Capital, if it is to cooperate untrammeled, must be free to establish a monopoly of industry and trade: this is already being put in execution by an unseen hand in all quarters of the world.

This freedom will give political force to those engaged in industry, and that will help to oppress the people." 

Open and free trade ". . . will give political force to those engaged in industry. That will help to oppress the people" in our peaceful world.

Having a look at the goals expected to be achieved by that Second World War, it begins to make sense why FDR kept secret the foreknowledge of the pending attack on Pearl Harbor; the plan rested wholly on their ability to beguile the American people into a spirit of war - again. In fact, there was more than foreknowledge at work; it was fore planning, as has become evident in the so-called terrorist attack on the World Trade Center being used to justify the current 'final conflict'.

Wars in other nations have become so common place today the planners knew it would take an act of 'terrorism' within our nation's borders to execute an all-out war with the blessings of brain-numbed Americans. With the passing of time Americans' passion for this New War has waned. To remedy that vexing situation, George W. enlisted the professional aid of powerful ad agencies for the needed hype.

On a recent (May 2002) panel discussion aired on C-Span, the panelists were lamenting the fact that Americans - other than New Yorkers - have already compartmentalized the World Trade Center tragedy and have resumed their normal daily routines. Panelist, William Kristol, was quoted as saying that in six months the war will be the foremost thought in all Americans' minds. In six months. What gruesome assault is on the planning boards now? We shall see if Mr. Kristol is another modern day prophet.

This next was from our past, over eighty five years ago, and yet, it could have been William Kristol speaking today; or by its open and at least honest hostility, one of the Elders of Zion:

"The task before us will be completed through the use of the military spirit in the citizenry.

The principle of wearing uniforms will enable us to complete the negative missions: only when every member of our cultural circle are in uniform and ready to fight can we regard this task as completed".

The author of that statement was Nahum Goldman, an ardent Zionist, written in his war pamphlet - 'The Spirit of Militarism' - in 1915, published in the Reich in the midst of World War I. [from End Times End Games by Hans Schmidt]

Douglas Reed maintained that WWII was merely an 'Extension' of the World Revolution. We excerpt here from this chapter of his book, Controversy of Zion, confirming the fore-planning involved:

"Thus the story of America's embroilment in the Second War demonstrated the power of the 'foreign group' which had come to dictate in Washington, and gave living reality to the farewell address of George Washington himself:

"Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence, I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens, the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government".

Washington spoke in 1796, when the Reign of Terror had shown the true nature of the revolution in France and when the presence of the conspiracy's agents in America was first realized.

The published records of the Second War show that the conspiracy had obtained power to dictate major acts of American state policy, the course of military operations and the movement of arms, munitions, supplies and treasure. Its conscious agents were numerous and highly-placed.

A significant resemblance occurs between the manner of America's entry into war in 1898 and 1941. In both cases the provocation necessary to inflame the masses was supplied, and difficult problems of convincing Congress or 'public opinion' were thus eluded.

In 1898 the Maine was 'sunk by a Spanish mine' in Havana harbour, and war followed on the instant; many years later, when the Maine was raised, her plates were found to have been blown out by an inner explosion.

In 1941 the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour 'on a day that will live in infamy' enabled President Roosevelt to sell his country that through a completely unexpected attack it was 'at war'. The later disclosures showed that the government in Washington had long been warned of the impending attack and had not alerted the Pearl Harbour defenders.

In both cases the public masses remained apathetic when these revelations ensued. (They are of continuing relevance in 1956, when another American president [Eisenhower] has publicly sworn that he will 'never be guilty' of sending his country to war 'without Congressional authority', but has added that American troops might have to undertake 'local warlike acts in self-defence', without such parliamentary approval.)

In the First War President Wilson, re-elected on the promise to keep his country out of war, immediately after his re-inauguration declared that 'a state of war exists'.

In the Second War President Roosevelt was re-elected in 1940 on the repeated promise that 'your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars'. His electoral programme, however, included a five-word proviso: 'We will not send our armies, navies or air forces to fight in foreign lands outside the Americas except in case of attack'.

The importance of the proviso was shown on December 7, 1941, when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour. Twelve days earlier, Mr. Henry L. Stimson, the Secretary for War, after a cabinet meeting on November 25, 1941, had noted in his diary,

"The question was how we should manoeuvre them (the Japanese) into the position of firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves; it was a difficult proposition".

The record now available suggests that the Americans on Hawaii alone were left without knowledge of the imminent onslaught which cost two battleships and two destroyers (apart from many vessels put out of action), 177 aircraft and 4,575 dead, wounded or missing. 

A direct and immediate consequence was also the disaster suffered by the British navy off Malaya, when the battleships Prince of Wales and Renown were sunk with great loss of life.

Political leaders who are ready to obtain their country's entry into war by facilitating an enemy attack on it cannot be depended on to wage it in the national interest.

The American people as a whole still is unaware of the truth of Pearl Harbour, an ominous beginning which led in unbroken line to the ominous end."

The beginning of the end is now. Today! It is the neverendingwar in which the U.S. is engaging the world, along side the push into Palestine by Israel.


Previous PageNext Page