post by don Quixote:
The significance of the bone of contention over jewish rule of Britain first came to my attention in Majority Rights Radio:
Guessedworker speaks with Tanstaafl, and especially in the comments at MR afterward.
Months later I came across the issue again in Yockey on Culture and Race – Part 8 and Part 9.
The “British” Empire is one of those elements of European history which resonates very strongly in the European psyche.
Racialists tend to see it as an expression of Anglo-Saxon greatness.
The jews have turned it into a cornerstone of their guilt-tripping about colonialism.
Neither view accords with reality.
The jews puppeteered the empire at the expense of Britons, just as today they puppeteer the colonization of Britain itself.
Evola’s assessment, excerpted below, was written in 1940, at which point jewish parasitic infiltration and manipulation of Britain
(from the top) was clear enough.
Evola’s discussion of the precise who and how provides a welcome contrast to Yockey’s jew-blind account in 1948.
Indeed, the false notion that Britons ruled Britain then, and even now, prevails exactly because the jews still rule.
Disraeli the Jew and the Empire of the Shopkeepers :
We know that, wherever economic interests predominate, the Jew rapidly rises and accedes to the commanding positions.
The penetration of Judaism into England is not a thing of recent days alone.
It was the English Revolution and Protestantism which threw open England’s doors.
The Jews, who had been expelled by Edward I in 1290, were readmitted to England as a result of a Petition accepted by Cromwell
and finally approved by Charles II in 1649.
From this time forward, the Jews, and above all the Spanish Jews (the Sephardim) began to immigrate en masse to England,
bringing with them the riches which they had acquired by more or less dubious means, and it was these riches,
as we have just explained, which allowed them to accede to the centres of command within English life,
to the aristocracy and to positions very close to the Crown.
Less than a century after their re-admission, the Jews were so sure of themselves that they demanded to be naturalised,
that is to say, to be granted British citizenship.
This had a very interesting result : the Law, or Bill, naturalising the Jews was approved in 1740.
Most of its supporters were members of the upper classes or high dignitaries within the Protestant Church,
which shows us the extent to which these elements had already become Judaised or corrupted by Jewish gold.
The reaction came not from the English upper classes, but from the people.
The Law of 1740 provoked such outrage and disorder among the populace that it was abrogated in 1753.
The Jews now resorted to another tactic : they abandoned their synagogues and converted, nominally, to Christianity.
Thus the obstacle was circumvented and their work of penetration proceeded at an accelerated pace.
What mattered to the Jews was to keep their positions of command and to eliminate the religious arguments
on which the opposition of that period principally rested ; everything else was secondary, since the converted Jew remains,
in his instincts, his mentality, and his manner of action, entirely Jewish, as is shown by one striking example among many others :
the extremely influential Jewish banker Sampson Gideon, despite having converted, continued to support the Jewish community
and was buried in a Jewish cemetery.
His money bought for his son an enormous property and the title of Baronet.
This was the preferred tactic of the rich Jews of England from the eighteenth century on :
they supplanted the English feudal nobility by acquiring their properties and titles, and thus mixing themselves with the aristocracy,
by the nature of the British representative system, they came closer and closer to the government,
with the natural consequence of a progressive Judaification of the English political mentality.
from the inception of imperialism on the large scale, what was less apparent was that the ‘British Empire’
was a creature of Judaism, which a Jew had given as a present to the British Royal Crown.
This Jew was Benjamin Disraeli, Queen Victoria’s Prime Minister
Only one Jew could have conceived the idea of ‘reforming’ the conception of Empire and making of it something plutocratic
and transforming it into imperialistic materialism.
This Jew was Disraeli – ‘Dizzy’ as he was known.
It was he who made of Queen Victoria an ‘Empress’, a colonial Empress, the Empress of India.
This indefatigable proponent of the English ‘Imperial’ idea modelled his conception upon the Jewish Messianic-imperial idea,
the idea of a people whose power consists in the riches of others, over which they take power, and which they cynically exploit and control.
Disraeli always attacked very violently those who wished to separate England from her overseas territories,
within which, as a Jewish historian has pointed out, Jews were the pioneers.
Disraeli knew who it was that sustained this England which in turn was to dominate the riches of the world ;
it is possible that he was among those initiates who knew that it was more than a simple British-Jewish plutocracy
which was pulling the strings.
One recalls those often-quoted words of Disraeli :
“The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.”
The prudent and noiseless penetration of Jewry into the English upper classes and into the government itself continued.
It was Disraeli who performed the coup upon Egypt in 1875 – with whose help? Rothschild.
In 1875, the Khedive had financial worries and Disraeli managed to learn that he was willing to sell 177,000 shares of Suez Canal stock.
This was a magnificent opportunity to gain certain control of the route to the Indies.
The government hesitated. Rothschild did not.
Here is the record of the historic conversation between Disraeli and Rothschild (Disraeli had asked him for four million pounds sterling) :
“What guarantee can you offer me?”
“The British government.”
“You shall have five million tomorrow.”
The interest on the loan was ‘extremely low’ ; naturally, the real and important interest of the Jewish clique lay on another and less visible plane …
Disraeli did not fail to make more convenient to the Jews of England their ritual observance.
A little-known fact is that the ‘English Saturday’ is nothing other than the Jewish Sabbath, the ritual day of rest of the Jews.
It was suitably Disraeli who introduced it to England, under an adequate social pretext.
Thus, as the Judaification of old feudal England was accomplished by diverse means, and as the old aristocracy gradually decomposed
and underwent inoculation with ideas which would make it an easy prey for the material and spiritual influences of Judaism and Freemasonry,
Disraeli did not forget his other task, that of augmenting and reinforcing the power of the new ‘Empire of Shopkeepers’,
the new ‘Imperial Venice’, the reborn Israel of the Promise.
This he did in a manner which was just as characteristically Jewish.
Disraeli was one of the principal instigators of that sad and cynical English foreign policy by means of ‘protected’ third parties
and the use of blackmail, which it pushes to the most extreme consequences.
The most striking case is that of the Russo-Turkish War.
Disraeli did not hesitate to betray the ancient cause of European solidarity, by placing Turkey under British protection.
Turkey, defeated, was saved by Britain ; by use of the well-known ‘English’ method of threats and sanctions,
Disraeli was able to paralyse the Slavic advance to the South without a single shot being fired, and a grateful Turkey made him a present of Cyprus.
At the Congress of Berlin, the Russian ambassador, Gortshakov, was unable to restrain himself from crying dolorously :
“To have sacrificed a hundred thousand soldiers and a hundred million of money, and for nothing!”
There is a factor even more serious, from a higher point of view. By virtue of this situation, brought about by Disraeli,
Turkey was admitted into the community of the European nations protected by so-called ‘International Justice’.
We say ‘so-called’ because, until that time, far from being held to be valid for all the peoples of the world,
this justice was held to be valid uniquely among the group of the European nations ; it was a form of recourse and of internal law for Europeans.
With the admission of Turkey, a new phase of international law began, and this was truly the phase in which ‘justice’ became a mask
and its ‘international’ character became a ruse of ‘democracy’, for it was simply an instrument in the service of Anglo-Jewry,
and subsequently of the French also.
This development led to the League of Nations, to crisis, and to actual war.
post by omega:
An interesting position. I have often pondered my Father’s thoughts on Britain’s survival of the Euro.
Long before the evidence arrived my Father predicted that Britain would survive entry into the European Union by refusing the financial constraints of a single European Currency and keeping the Pound.
Despite appearances, Britain has, to the most, part managed to maintain the loyalty of The Commonwealth. The loyalty of Seikhs, Indians, Jamaicans, Australians, Canadians, New Zealanders etc. etc. etc. time after time.
There is evidence that the U.S. Corp is still owned by Britain and my interactions with brothers and sisters in the USA would suggest that loyalties abound beyond any hidden agenda, on an individual level.
My Point? If indeed the British Empire were, in most part, a puppet of Jewish subterfuge it would be evidenced by it’s apparent survivability of the coming collapse. I have an inner feeling that the scaremongering in Britain is smoke and mirrors, that Israel has always been in a tenuous position and that Britain will always be the Zionist survival bunker.
The evidence is overwhelming that Britain is a puppet of Zionism but, as has always been their lot in life, they exist as a man holding a lion by it’s tail.
post by aequitas:
A good article,by Dean Henderson(Left Hook) showing the history(some) between Saudi Arabia,the UK,and the US. London’s Saudi Assassins
Posted on 08/17/2015 | 2 Comments
2015 Central America (38) Quetzaltenango (Xela) – Parque a Centro América Catedral del Espíritu Santo de Quetzaltenango(Excerpted from Chapter 3: The House of Saud & JP Morgan : Big Oil & Their Bankers…)
In 1917 the British made a client of Ibn Saud, who was told to encourage Arab tribesman to repel the Ottoman Turks from the Gulf Region. That same year the British House of Rothschild pushed through the Balfour Declaration, lending Crown support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine. A year later the Ottomans were defeated. 
Iraq, Jordan and Saudi Arabia were carved out of the Ottoman Empire and fell under British rule, with Ibn Saud taking control of his namesake, Saudi Arabia. In 1922 the Treaty of Jeddah gave Saudi Arabia independence from Britain, though the Crown still exerted considerable influence.  During the 1920’s, with help from British troops, Ibn Saud grabbed more territory from the Ottomans when he annexed Riyadh, then seized the holy cities of Mecca and Medina from the Hashemites. 
Ibn Saud’s progeny form the modern-day House of Saud monarchy which rules Saudi Arabia. Less than twenty families, all tied to the House of Saud, control the Saudi economy. The House of Saud spreads its influence through money and reproduction, with male members of the Saud family now numbering over 5,000.
Crown Prince Abdullah, half-brother of King Fahd, runs the Saudi National Guard and has assumed day to day control of the Kingdom since King Fahd suffered a serious stroke in 1995. Prince Sultan, Prince Nayef and Prince Salman are full brothers of King Fahd and serve as Ministers of Defense and Interior and Governor of Riyadh, respectively.  Prince Sultan’s son is Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the long-time Saudi Ambassador to the US. Prince Bandar’s cousin, Prince Saud al-Faisal is the Saudi Foreign Minister.
These princes use the Saudi Arabian government agencies they run as personal piggy banks and also represent foreign companies bidding for contracts in the Kingdom. They handle over $600 billion in overseas investments.  King Faud is the second richest man in the world with a personal fortune of over $18 billion.
Prince Bandar is part of the Sudeiri clan which is comprised of the offspring of the late King Adbul Aziz and his favorite wife. The Sudeiris are the most powerful and most Westernized family in the kingdom. The House of Saud encourages a fundamentalist Wahhabist interpretation of Islam, but practitioners of Wahhabism in the Kingdom consider the Sudeiris munafaqeen (hypocrites). While the Sudeiri clan lives in opulence, most Saudis struggle to put food on their tables. The increasingly unpopular Sudeiris rule with an iron fist and are constantly cited by international human rights organizations for their brutality and opposition to democratic freedoms.
The Saudi monarchy rules by decree. Women are not allowed to drive cars and are banned from many restaurants. The Kingdom has no democratic institutions. Opposition to the House of Saud is criminalized, driving political opponents underground. In 1990 the Saudis beheaded 111 dissidents.
US corporations acquiesce in the Saudi oppression of women. At Pizza Hut, McDonalds and Starbucks establishments in Saudi Arabia, there are segregated sections for men and women. The women’s sections are run down. Starbucks has no seating for women. Women who show up at other Western restaurants without their husbands are turned away. 
In January 2002 the US-based Freedom House released a survey which ranks countries in accordance with the freedoms they allow. Saudi Arabia was ranked as one of the ten least free countries in the world, along with Burma, North Korea, Turkmenistan, Sudan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Cuba, Libya and Syria. Human Rights Watch recently accused the United States of ignoring Saudi human rights violations to ensure a continuous oil supply. 
In the 1920’s a young Egyptian named Hassan Al-Banna revived the Muslim Brotherhood, which had its origins in the old Grand Lodge of Cairo. Al-Banna was an admirer of Adolf Hitler and during the 1930s his group became a secret arm of Nazi Intelligence. During WWII the Palestine-based Grand Mufti went to Germany as a Muslim Brotherhood representative to recruit an international SS division of Arab Nazis. Based in Croatia, the group was known as Handzar Muslim Division. 
After the war, British Intelligence hired these fugitives and sent them to Egypt with help from the French. Later these “assets” were literally sold to the CIA, who saw them as a counterweight to Arab nationalists such as Egyptian President Gamel Nasser, who soon banned the Brotherhood from Egypt. During the 1950s the CIA evacuated them to Saudi Arabia, where they launched madrasses which taught a combination of Nazism and Wahhabism.
One prominent teacher, Dr. Abdullah Azzam, taught Osama bin Laden. Wahhabism has been condemned as heresy by Muslim countries more than 60 times. It is only practiced in Saudi Arabia and by the Afghan Taliban. 
The leader of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood Sayed Kuttub had been sponsored by Saudi King Faisal to undermine Gamel Nasser. Kuttub stated that during this period in the 1960s, “America made Islam”. 
Knight Templar spook-master Allen Dulles was OSS Chief in Berne, Switzerland after WWII where he founded Banque Commerciale Arabe in nearby Lausanne. The bank represented the secret pact between the CIA and the Muslim Brotherhood, now the secret society of choice of House of Saud fundamentalist family members. Dulles was a 33rd Degree Freemason and a founding member of the secretive Council on Foreign Relations which steers US foreign policy. He was a cousin to the Rockefellers.
Part of the Dulles pact may have involved the House of Saud Muslim Brotherhood providing information to US intelligence on how to created mind-controlled assassins. The Brotherhood claims to have been the first to perfect this technique during the Crusades when they spawned a parallel secret society known as the Assassins to carry out their political skullduggery. Was the CIA’s MK-ULTRA mind control program, which began shortly after Dulles founded the Banque Commerciale Arabe, developed with the help of the House of Saud?
The Assassins took their name from the Arabic word hashshasin, meaning “hashish smoker”. Another Arabic word, assasseen, translates “guardians of the secrets”. The group was founded in 1094 by Hasan bin Sabah, who shares his surname with the ruling family of Kuwait. Hasan was schooled in the secrets of the Hebrew Cabala and studied at the Grand Lodge of Cairo, which also spawned the Afghan Illuminated Ones, the Roshaniya, who terrorized that country under the leadership of Bayezid Ansari in the 16th century. 
The Assassins emerged from the Ismaili Muslim sect, which claims descendence from the Hebrew patriarch Abraham and his surrogate wife, Hagar. The Ismailis formed “societies of wisdom” which morphed into the Grand Lodge of Cairo. The Druses which came to run the lodge claimed to be both Christians and Muslims and their protocol mirrored that of Grand Orient Freemasonry. The Cairo Lodge turned out fanatics, who aided the Knights Templar in their Crusade battles against Saracen Muslim nationalists. bin Sabah formed his own Ismaili sect known as the Assassins. The group embraced the dogma that the end justifies the means, a belief they shared with their Masonic brothers and a trademark of modern-day religious and neo-Darwinist fundamentalists worldwide.
According to Marco Polo and many others, bin Sabah took over a valley where he built palaces surrounded by lush gardens and frequented by beautiful women. Young visitors would be lured in and drugged, believing they had found paradise. bin Sabah would then promise them a return to paradise if they would carry out political assassinations for him. bin Sabah’s promise is held out to this day to thousands of young Islamist suicide martyrs, whose missions are bankrolled by the House of Saud.
bin Sabah called himself the Grand Master. Masonic historian Albert Mackey states of the Assassins, “…connections to the (Knights) Templars, as historically proved, may have had some influence over that Order in molding, or at least in suggesting, some of its esoteric dogmas and ceremonies…The Templars entered at various times into amicable arrangements and treaty stipulations with the Assassins.”