Kissinger & the Balfour Declaration

the grand vizier of global bloodsuckers & the world's bloodiest agreement

Sometimes I’m accused of questioning Israel’s right to exist. This is completely false. I don’t believe Israel does exist.

Giving a name to a military occupation doesn’t make it a country. The borders of Palestine, or historical Canaan, have never been changed unless we accept the moral principle that might makes right, which I don’t.

Israel’s legitimacy depends the authority of a random individual named Balfour to tell another random person named Rothschild that the homes and lands of millions of people were now his. What sane person would call that legitimate? I don’t.

And I don’t recognize the authority to condone this by so-called heads of state who, for their own profit and self-promotion, force or coerce millions to kill and be killed in the homelands of others. The grand vizier of global bloodsuckers has just died at 100, although not the way Anthony Bourdain hoped:

Pasheen Stonebrooke of Diva Drops exposes Kissinger’s eugenics through the twin strategies of invading countries and invading bodies. The former adds up to a minimum of seven million horrific deaths, not including those disappeared or tortured:

For the second strategy, Kissinger and the CIA set up the WEF on behalf of the Council on Foreign Relations, and he was the mentor for Klaus Schwab. As pointed out by MANY readers, the following quote and a WHO council on eugenics is too outspoken to be true. Yet this meme captures the thinking too perfectly to delete:

It’s interesting to note that Kissinger left Germany at the age of 15 in 1938 and changed his name from Heinz to Henry. In his public life he never spoke about his German youth other than retorting once that “his relatives were soap,” repeating one of the most blatant of Holocaust lies. His life parallels the Century of War Against Germany, as Michael Hudson has termed it.

He was 50 and Nixon’s Secretary of State during the Yom Kippur War when he said his “nightmare was that either side won.” As the Intercept points out, his prevention of peace negotiations in the Middle East, even ones favorable to Israel, “helped cause the 1973 Arab–Israeli War and set in stone the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. This underappreciated aspect of Kissinger’s career adds tens of thousands of lives to his body count, which is in the millions.”

As I wrote about, Churchill’s goal in WWII was the prolonged war where Germany and Russia would bleed each other dry. But it was Churchill’s Jewish financier who called the shots. That has since been the goal in Vietnam, in Syria and Yemen against Russia, certainly in Ukraine, and possibly in every other ‘military intervention.’ As Kissinger reportedly said, “Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.” Whether this strategy is now being deployed against the US is an open question.

Kissinger is seen as the exemplar of realpolitik, putting pragmatic national interests ahead of ideologic or humanitarian concerns. I look at Shemitism, the dynastic records of the Torah and Talmud, as an ideology based on who has the right to rule over who. It has no loyalty to a nation, a religion, a people, or a morality. All of those exist to serve the rulers. Kissinger’s realpolitik was the pragmatic interests of the global ruling class. The US, Judaism, Israel and Zionism are all mere tools.

In this episode, I’ll look at the Balfour Declaration that paralleled Kissinger’s life and set his direction as proxy-king maker and ruthless regime breaker of the world. I’ll show how we are all pawns in this Rothschild game of vengeance and fealty. And I’ll return to Kissinger at the end to put a stake through the role he played and release us all from the cycle of deceit.

---

To begin, the Great War was turned into the first World War by involving the United States. Germany, from a position of strength with no battle fought on German soil, had offered peace in 1916 with no reparations or annexation of land, only going back to the pre-war status quo. This is not a history under dispute. It would have hurt no one but the bankers, some of whom had loaned the Kaiser money for the war while others funded Great Britain and France. None of these loans could be repaid without a loser to be charged reparations.

Who convinced the US to enter a war on another continent in which they were not threatened in any way? In his 1961 speech on the Balfour Declaration, Benjamin Freedman provides evidence that the Bolshevik Jews of Germany told England not to agree to peace, and they would bring the political, economic and media pressure of Jews in the US to convince President Wilson to enter the war. In exchange they wanted Palestine.

Whether or not their influence tipped the balance is dubious, but is it relevant? In October of 1916, Lord Balfour tendered the written promise of Palestine at the end of the war, addressed to Lord Rothschild with the International Zionists to be informed. It is certainly payment for some major service rendered in secret against Germany. According to Wikipedia on David Lloyd George, British Prime Minister in WWI:

After Germany's offer (12 December 1916) of a negotiated peace, Lloyd George rebuffed President Wilson's request for the belligerents to state their war aims by demanding terms tantamount to German defeat.^[86]

Lloyd George believed the Zionists would bring the US on his side and rejected negotiations for peace, even when President Wilson was offering to negotiate. That was the pivotal point that could have averted the millions who died horrible deaths in the coming decades. Kissinger was born in 1923 and left Germany at 15. For German men born a year later, 97% died in WWII. Now tell me, who persecuted who?

---

In The Balfour Declaration and 116,000 American Lives or Did the Zionists Buy Palestine with the American Army During the Great War? Ron Unz questions whether Jewish pressure actually brought the US into WWI. He confirms that US intervention prolonged WWI and made WWII inevitable. He writes:

Veterans Day came a week ago, marking the 105th anniversary of the end of the Great War, once optimistically known as “the war to end all wars.” Perhaps twenty million died in that unfortunate conflict, which sparked the Bolshevik Revolution and also set the stage for its even greater sequel two decades later that laid the basis for our modern world at the cost of many tens of millions of lives and the destruction of most of Europe. As I discussed in a long article last November, I think a strong case can be made that without American intervention, a stalemate and negotiated peace would have resulted, probably producing a far better outcome for the world.

Unz states the most cited evidence is the 1961 speech by Benjamin Freedman in which he lays out what happened:

The Balfour Declaration was merely Great Britain's promise to pay the Zionists what they had agreed upon as a consideration for getting the United States into the war. So this great Balfour Declaration, that you hear so much about, is just as phony as a three dollar bill. And I don't think I could make it more emphatic than that.

Now, that is where all the trouble started. The United States went in the war. The United States crushed Germany. We went in there, and it's history. You know what happened. Now, when the war was ended, and the Germans went to Paris, to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, there were 117 Jews there, as a delegation representing the Jews, headed by Bernard Baruch. I was there: I ought to know.

Now what happened? The Jews at that peace conference, when they were cutting up Germany and parceling out Europe to all these nations that claimed a right to a certain part of European territory, the Jews said, “How about Palestine for us?” And they produced, for the first time to the knowledge of the Germans, this Balfour Declaration. So the Germans, for the first time realized, “Oh, that was the game! That's why the United States came into the war.”

And the Germans for the first time realized that they were defeated, they suffered this terrific reparation that was slapped onto them, because the Zionists wanted Palestine and they were determined to get it at any cost. Now, that brings us to another very interesting point. When the Germans realized this, they naturally resented it. Up to that time, the Jews had never been better off in any country in the world than they had been in Germany. …

Well, that's how the Germans felt towards these Jews. "We've been so nice to them"; and from 1905 on, when the first Communist revolution in Russia failed, and the Jews had to scramble out of Russia, they all went to Germany. And Germany gave them refuge. And they were treated very nicely. And here they sold Germany down the river for no reason at all other than they wanted Palestine as a so-called “Jewish commonwealth.”

After the Paris Peace Conference, Freedman continues:

Nahum Sokolow—all the great leaders, the big names that you read about in connection with Zionism today—they, in 1919, 1920, '21, '22, and '23, they wrote in all their papers and the press was filled with their statements—that "the feeling against the Jews in Germany is due to the fact that they realized that this great defeat was brought about by our intercession and bringing the United States into the war against them."

Although Freedman was present at the Paris Peace Conference, and was an advisor in direct contact with Woodrow Wilson (credentials left out of his Wikipedia page), Unz feels that he is not entirely credible because of unspecified historical errors and because his prediction that Kennedy would lead us into WWIII did not come true. But Unz doesn’t dispute Freedman’s claim that:

on August 25th 1960—that was shortly before elections—Senator Kennedy, who is now the President of the United States, went to New York, and delivered an address to the Zionist Organization of America. In that address, to reduce it to its briefest form, he stated that he would use the armed forces of the United States to preserve the existence of the regime set up in Palestine by the Zionists who are now in occupation of that area.

As the coming year brings a US election in which every candidate including JFK’s nephew is committed to fulfilling this prediction, it’s worth asking whether an international coalition of Jews claiming responsibility for turning the Great War into a global conflict is enough. Unz continues his research and finds:

Samuel Landman was a high-ranking Zionist leader in Britain, and in 1935 and 1936 he published various articles and pamphlets describing how the Zionists had secretly arranged to bring America into the war on the Allied side in exchange for receiving Palestine as a Jewish homeland, with the Balfour Declaration merely constituting the formalization of this bargain.

He explained that during 1916 the Zionist leaders convinced the government of Britain “that the best and perhaps the only way (which proved so to be) to induce the American President to come into the War was to secure the co-operation of Zionist Jews by promising them Palestine, and thus enlist and mobilise the hitherto unsuspectedly powerful forces of Zionist Jews in America and elsewhere in favour of the Allies on a quid pro quo contract basis.”

Unz also writes:

Chaim Weizmann was the top Zionist leader who had personally played a central role in negotiating the Balfour Declaration, later becoming the first president of the State of Israel. Someone brought to my attention his 1941 letter to Winston Churchill, who had been a member of the British Cabinet at the time, which contained a key sentence seemingly supporting that story. Although the Weizmann letter is available on scribd.com, that crucial sentence was rather suspiciously censored, but fortunately the unexpurgated text is available on British Historian David Irving’s website.

“It has been repeatedly acknowledged by British Statesmen that it was the Jews who, in the last war, effectively helped to tip the scales in America in favour of Great Britain.”

Furthermore, in a 1923 memorandum to the British Cabinet, Colonial Secretary Lord Cavendish wrote: “The object [of the Balfour Declaration] was to enlist the sympathies on the Allied side of influential Jews and Jewish organizations all over the world… [and] it is arguable that the negotiations with the Zionists … did in fact have considerable effect in advancing the date at which the United States government intervened in the war.

David Lloyd George had been the British Prime Minister at the time, and his later private correspondence and statements seemed to support this interpretation, as do a number of other mentions or apparent allusions to the agreement that can be found in the writings and private papers of other prominent Zionists and British officials.

Prof. John Beaty had held an important position in our Military Intelligence during World War II and his 1951 bestseller Iron Curtain Over America focused upon the nefarious role of Jewish influence. In that work, he devoted several paragraphs to this version of the Balfour story, relying heavily upon Landman’s writings and those of various other Zionist figures. Although he wasn’t fully convinced it was true, he regarded the account as quite credible and plausible.

In 2014, Alison Weir, a journalist and anti-Zionist activist, published Against Our Better Judgment, a short book summarizing the suppressed history of Israel’s creation, and she devoted a chapter to presenting this account of the Balfour Declaration.

Unz was also able to find in the footnotes on the hostile Wikipedia page on Freedman, a reference to Robert John’s article Behind the Balfour Declaration, which chronicles that:

On 31 August 1918, President Wilson wrote to Rabbi Wise "to express the satisfaction I have felt in the progress of the Zionist movement . . since ... Great Britain's approval of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people." Brandeis joined in Zionist delight at the President's endorsement and wrote: "Since the President's letter, anti-Zionism is pretty near disloyalty and non-Zionism is slackening." [178] Non-Zionist Jews now had a hard time if they wanted to disseminate their views; if they could not support Zionism they were asked at least to remain silent.

On 30 June 1922, the following resolution was adopted by the United States Congress: “Favouring the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people; Resolved by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That the United States of America favours the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which should prejudice the civil and religious rights of Christians and all other non-Jewish communities in Palestine, and that the holy places and religious buildings and sites in Palestine shall be adequately protected.[GG]”

How is that working for people a century later? Ron Unz documents in Gaza and the Anti-Semitism Hoax:

Over 14,000 Gazans have died from the relentless Israeli bombardment of the last few weeks, two-thirds of them women and children and almost none of them members of Hamas. That total represents the official figures of identified bodies, and with most of the local medical system destroyed and so many thousands more missing, buried under the rubble of the tens of thousands of demolished buildings, the true death toll probably already exceeds 20,000. …

By contrast, what we are now seeing is the deliberate massacre of civilians, aimed at driving out the Palestinians living in Gaza and rendering their enclave uninhabitable. Most of Gaza’s hospitals and medical facilities have been eliminated, and when the Jordanians established field hospitals in South Gaza, those too were bombarded. Schools, bakeries, and other facilities necessary for continued human existence have also been deliberately destroyed, along with the bulk of the housing stock, while the Israelis have blocked the inhabitants from any access to food, water, and fuel.

Unz looks at the history of the word anti-Semitism and finds:

… while the term “Anti-Semitism” is so powerful in today’s political debate, it was only first coined in the late nineteenth century by journalist Wilhelm Marr, a German nationalist writer and former radical. Although his first three wives were all of Jewish ancestry, Marr became alarmed by the growing control over finance and industry exercised by his country’s tiny Jewish minority, which he viewed in racial rather than religious terms, and he therefore founded the League of Anti-Semites to combat such encroachments. Thus, over the course of a century, Jewish media control has successfully transformed a term originally intended to challenge Jewish power and influence into one of the ideological weapons used to maintain it.

Unz continues on the ideology of a victim religion and writes:

A religion based upon the principal of “Love Thy Neighbor” may or may not be workable in practice, but a religion based upon “Hate Thy Neighbor” might have long-term cultural ripple effects that extend far beyond the direct community of the deeply pious. If nearly all Jews for a thousand or two thousand years were taught to feel a seething hatred toward all non-Jews and also developed an enormous infrastructure of cultural dishonesty to mask that attitude, it is difficult to believe that such an unfortunate history has had absolutely no consequences for our present-day world, or that of the relatively recent past.

What does Unz mean by cultural dishonesty? As a former Jew, Benjamin Freedman said:

When, on the Day of Atonement, you walk into a synagogue, the very first prayer that you recite, you stand—and it's the only prayer for which you stand—and you repeat three times a short prayer. The Kol Nidre. In that prayer, you enter into an agreement with God Almighty that any oath, vow, or pledge that you may make during the next twelve months—any oath, vow or pledge that you may take during the next twelve months—shall be null and void.

The oath shall not be an oath; the vow shall not be a vow; the pledge shall not be a pledge. They shall have no force and effect, and so forth and so on. And further than that, the Talmud teaches: "Don't forget—whenever you take an oath, vow, and pledge—remember the Kol Nidre prayer that you recited on the Day of Atonement, and that exempts you from fulfilling that".

Freedman shows that not all Jews were in unity on Kol Nidre:

… in 1844 the German rabbis called a conference of rabbis from all over the world for the purpose of abolishing the Kol Nidre from the Day of Atonement religious ceremony. In Brunswick, Germany, where that conference was held in 1844, there was almost a terrific riot. A civil war.

The Eastern Europeans said, "What the hell. We should give up Kol Nidre? That gives us our grip on our people. We give them a franchise so they can tell the Christians, 'Go to hell. We'll make any deal you want', but they don't have to carry it out. That gives us our grip on our people".

Neither were they in agreement on Balfour. Freedman continues:

… Here is a paper that we obtained from the archives of the Zionist organization in New York City, and in it is the manuscript by Sir James A. Malcolm, who—on behalf of the British Cabinet—negotiated the [Balfour] deal with these Zionists. And in here he says that all the jews in England were against it. …

And I'll show you in this same document that when they went to France to try and get the French government to back that Zionist venture, there was only one Jew in France who was for it. That was Rothschild, and they did it because they were interested in the oil and the Suez Canal.

---

If the Shemitahs and Jubilee Years were counted from Kissinger’s birth, they would be on track with the cataclysmic events that are culminating now. Yom Kippur, the day of atonement, is about the coming of the Second Messiah, the purification of national Israel, and the final judgment of the world—guilty and sinful, of course, except for a chosen few. That’s the repeating theme of the Bible.

It’s the exact opposite of the concept of atOnement in A Course in Miracles, where the final judgment announces the eternal innocence of each of us. Kissinger is now released from his role as grand vizier. Did we need that role in the world? Apparently so. And now it’s time for a new role.

The Second Messiah, like the first, is not a person but a movement. A recognition that everyone is the Christ. You can’t deceive another, only yourself in another form. Israel was born in the deception of Germany, when it had offered a peaceful home to the Russian Jews. Even the name Israel replaced Jacob meaning “he who deceives.”

Ding dong, the warlock is dead. Long live a new era of peace and honesty.

---

For more on the history of the world wars, here’s

David Irving wrote Hitler's War and 30 other volumes that document the history of WWII. Then Deborah Lipstadt attacked him in her 1993 book Denying the Holocaust. This is the story of his ruinous libel suit against her and Penguin Books and his subsequent imprisonment in Austria, all for taking history at its word.

Did you know that Churchill initiated bombing of civilian cities? Or was paid huge bribes by foreigners? That he wanted to use nerve gas and even drop anthrax bombs? Or that a gambling loss on the US stock market was bailed out in exchange for war? And that FDR referred to him as a drunken bum? Ron Unz cites historians from the 1930's to the present to change your image of Churchill forever.

James Corbett and Keith Knight give 10 lessons from Churchill, Hitler & the Unnecessary War by Pat Buchanan. Ron Unz covers the same in American Pravda: Understanding WWII, and talks about prominent historians 'disappeared' from history for writing about it. The real history is shocking!