Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution: Chapter 3

 Bolshevik Revolution Paid for by Germans and Banksters

To pick up where we left off, Lenin's train-load of Bolsheviks traveled from Switzerland to meet Trotsky in Russia. This April 1917 trip was financed and approved by the German General Staff in order to get Russia out of the war. The Kaiser was not directly involved in the movement of Bolsheviks through his country. That was handled by Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg, the first chancellor ever censured by the Reichstag. The Germans didn't consider the "blowback" that this would cause, writes General Hoffman:

We neither knew nor forsaw the danger to humanity from the consequences of this journey of the Bolsheviks into Russia.

The  Germans wanted first dibs on the Russian markets after the war, and Lenin wanted a chance to build his Marxist utopia. At this same time in the United States was the US Committee on Public Information, an Orwellian sounding group to be sure. The chairman of this committee was George Creel, who had been a contributor to the pro-Bolshevik publication Masses. In 1918, Edgar Sisson, a representative of the CPI, bought a lot of documents that "proved" that Lenin, Trotsky and company were agents of Germany. These were known as the Sisson Documents and were published byt the CPI. These papers were gobbled up by the papers, but were later proved to be forgeries.

George Creel

While these documents were not genuine, they did contain enough facts to seem credible. These papers have been used to "prove" Jewish/Bolshevik conspiracy theories. But more importantly, they were used to "prove" a connection between Germany and Bolsheviks in order to get up support for WWI. Notice how I put "prove" in quotes because these documents were well-done forgeries that provided misinformation for purposes we will discover together.

The US State Department had a heads-up on the Bolshevik Revolution as shown here:

On November 28, 1917, President Woodrow Wilson ordered no interference with the Bolshevik Revolution. This instruction was apparently in response to a request by Ambassador Francis for an Allied conference, to which Britain had already agreed. The State Department argued that such a conference was impractical. There were discussions in Paris between the Allies and Colonel Edward M. House, who reported these to Woodrow Wilson as "long and frequent discussions on Russia." Regarding such a conference, House stated that England was "passively willing," France "indifferently against," and Italy "actively so." Woodrow Wilson, shortly thereafter, approved a cable authored by Secretary of State Robert Lansing, which provided financial assistance for the Kaledin movement (December 12, 1917). There were also rumors filtering into Washington that "monarchists working with the Bolsheviks and same supported by various occurrences and circumstances"; that the Smolny government was absolutely under control of the German General Staff; and rumors elsewhere that "many or most of them [that is, Bolshevists] are from America."

Here's a great excerpt on two of our favorite persons: Woodrow Wilson and Col. House controlling the media:

But there were influential counterforces at work. As early as November 28, 1917, Colonel House cabled President Woodrow Wilson from Paris that it was "exceedingly important" that U.S. newspaper comments advocating that "Russia should be treated as an enemy" be "suppressed." Then next month William Franklin Sands, executive secretary of the Morgan-controlled American International Corporation and a friend of the previously mentioned Basil Miles, submitted a memorandum that described Lenin and Trotsky as appealing to the masses and that urged the U.S. to recognize Russia. Even American socialist Walling complained to the Department of State about the pro-Soviet attitude of George Creel (of the U.S. Committee on Public Information), Herbert Swope, and William Boyce Thompson (of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York).

Even some Russians noticed the hypocrisy of banksters and socialists working together:

On December 17, 1917, there appeared in a Moscow newspaper an attack on Red Cross colonel Raymond Robins and Thompson, alleging a link between the Russian Revolution and American bankers:

Why are they so interested in enlightenment? Why was the money given the socialist revolutionaries and not to the constitutional democrats? One would suppose the latter nearer and dearer to hearts of bankers.

The article goes on to argue that this was because American capital viewed Russia as a future market and thus wanted to get a firm foothold. The money was given to the revolutionaries because

the backward working men and peasants trust the social revolutionaries. At the time when the money was passed the social revolutionaries were in power and it was supposed they would remain in control in Russia for some time.

Just three months after Red October, the banksters start to move in:

On January 22, 1918, Robert L Owen, chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking and Currency and linked to Wall Street interests, sent a letter to Woodrow Wilson recommending de facto recognition of Russia, permission for a shipload of goods urgently needed in Russia, the appointment of representatives to Russia to offset German influence, and the establishment of a career-service group in Russia.

This approach was consistently aided by Raymond Robins in Russia. For example, on February 15, 1918, a cable from Robins in Petrograd to Davison in the Red Cross in Washington (and to be forwarded to William Boyce Thompson) argued that support be given to the Bolshevik authority for as long as possible, and that the new revolutionary Russia will turn to the United States as it has "broken with the German imperialism." According to Robins, the Bolsheviks wanted United States assistance and cooperation together with railroad reorganization, because "by generous assistance and technical advice in reorganizing commerce and industry America may entirely exclude German commerce during balance of war."

 We have learned that monied interests is what made the Bolshevik Revolution possible. From Leon Trotsky living it up in NYC to the Germans using revolutionaries to their benefit, we need to understand that this didn't "just happen" as the official textbooks would have us believe. When we follow the money as Dr. Sutton has so meticulously done, we see historical events more accurately and clearly and can draw parallels to our present day.

Wall Street and Bolshevik Revolution by Dr. Antony Sutton is available at Reformed Theology and I encourage to read the whole book with its thorough footnotes to gain Level 3 knowledge.

Forgotten History of Corporations

 Here is a lengthy, but timely excerpt from Charles Lindbergh, Sr. on the danger of corporations. It comes from his book Your Country At War out of a section entitled, Memorial to the Presidents, in which he addresses the past and present presidents of America and apprises them of our situation as it was in 1917. You may notice that not much has changed as the root problem was never remedied and has metastasized. I put in my own comments and links as I felt necessary to help educate you on forgotten history and apply it to our predicament today.

Mr. Presidents, you will recall that the National Monetary Commission had previously been created. This, of course, was a mere sham, for already the Money Trust knew what it wanted and proposed to get it, and finally did. The National Monetary Commission was a “just make believe” to deceive Us. It was ridiculous to send those men at great public expense to Europe to study finance to frame a bill for Congress to pass. Europe has not been economically successful. That was not it at all. The whole scheme had been planned long before. One of the greatest of you, President Lincoln, had warned those of you who followed in succession, and warned the people as well during the Civil War, in the following language:

“Yes, we may congratulate ourselves that this cruel war is nearing the close, but I see in the future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before in the midst of the war.”

(This is not my endorsement of Mr. Lincoln - but he sure did accurately observe how things were to go down in the corruption/big money arena)

Yes, Mr. Presidents, the above quotation from Lincoln’s letter to Mr. Elkins, of Illinois,became quite well known at the time as well as other of Lincoln’s statements to the same effect. Those were the ad monitions of one of the world’s greatest of the great— came from the lips and the pen of the one of you who piloted us through the dark days of the Civil War. He knew whereof he spoke and wrote, for the evidences were already clear as to what the corporations sought and the means they used to deceive the people.
The corporations referred to by Lincoln have indeed grown mighty, even more so than could have been dreamed of at that time, and they now seek to commercialize patriotism, by having us look at it through their eyes. The thing that Lincoln said would happen has happened, and it is up to us now to correct it, not only in honor of the great President who made the statement, not only in honor of the heroes who then fought for and won the liberty of all, and not only in honor of the people who supported them, most of whom have passed to the great beyond; not only in their combined honor, but, as a duty to America, the one nation to which the world should look to redeem its people everywhere from industrial bondage.

USA! USA! USA! oh, excuse me, I just can't get enough of nationalism, er  patriotism. In fact, I have American flag T-shirts, bedspreads, shower curtains, napkin holders, mousepads, etc. Actually, I don't, but millions of people do even though according to US Code, you're not supposed to. But in this paragraph, commercializing patriotism doesn't mean merchandising the flag, although it helps. It mean that the very meaning of the word has changed and the thought behind the world. American Patriotism is changed from defending the principles of liberty and self-determination to supporting anything the US Government is doing. The US Government is never wrong and always wants to do what is "best" for us, including all of our thinking, lulling us into an apathetic slumber.

Rep. Lindbergh now lays on the Jefferson quotes:

Mr. Presidents, you and we as well—even the great Lincoln among you—had an earlier notice from one of you. It was by another of the greatest of the great— Thomas Jefferson.
We quote from him as well:

“I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of the moneyed corporations, which
dare already to challenge our Government to trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws
of our country.”—From Jefferson’s letter to George Logan, November, 1816.

Again: “Banking institutions are more dangerous than standing armies.”—From
Jefferson’s letter to John Tyler, one of you, 1816.

Again: “Spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but
swindling futurity on a large scale.” —Jefferson

Again: “The banks have the regulation of the safety valves of our fortunes and they
condense and exploit them at their will.” —Jefferson’s letter to John Adams, one of you,
November, 1819.

Remember that the Federal Reserve is a PRIVATE entity controlled by persons unknown, but we're starting to figure it out.

Again: “It is cruel that such revolutions in private fortunes should be at the mercy of
avaricious adventurers, who instead, of employing their capital, if any they have, in
manufacturies, commerce, and other useful pursuits, make it an instrument to burden all
the interchanges of property with their swindling profits which are the price of no useful
industry of theirs.”—from letter by Jefferson to Dr. Thomas Cooper, 1814.

Again: “We are completely saddled and bridled, and the bank is so firmly mounted on us
that we must go where they ill guide.”—From letter by Jefferson to James Monroe, one
of you.

Again: “All eyes are opening to the rights of man. The general spread of science has
already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been
born with saddles on their ‘jacks, nor a favored few booted and spurred ready to ride
them legitimately by the grace of God.”—From Jefferson’s writings.

When you follow the money up, it all winds up in the hands of a very few. For those of you who are conservatives, your automatic Pavlovian training will make you think that anyone who makes a statement like that is a Marxist/Commie/Socialist. I know that because that's where I was but a year or so ago. We're not talking millionaires, we're talking super-duper billionaires, whose fake interest is compounding thousands of dollars every second. We're talking about people who are so intertwined with the government-corporate-nonprofit foundation complex, that you can't tell where their interests begin and end. What we're witnessing is the same phenomenon Rep. Lindbergh is describing in detail in this book. Except that we are viewing the end of a great, great big con passed down from generation to generation. Seriously, just check out the grandfathers of those in the wealth bracket I'm describing and you will find Lindbergh giving their grandfathers heck in 1917.

Mr. Presidents, the last statement above from the great Jefferson stands out with prominence when we take into account that now, more than a century later, we have been completely “saddled” and special privilege, forever, if we permit t, “booted and spurred,” is actually riding us—sticking the “spurs” as deep as they can into our “flanks”—not, however, by the grace of God, but by the acts of the Congresses of the United States.

Our own tyranny was voted on by our democratically elected body. From the rise of all the Federal Agencies of the 1970s to NAFTA and GATT  to the Patriot Act of 2001 to who knows what all, it was all legitimately rubber-stamped in the farce that is our government.

Rick Perry Loves Illegal Immigration

 Update: Jumped the gun on the word free, apparently the deal was just instate tuition. Sometimes I get carried away!

Here's a blast from the past featuring Mexican President Vicente Fox in 2003 publicly thanking Rick Perry for signing legislation that would give illegal aliens from Mexico free instate tuition at the Texas state college of their choice.

Isn't that swell?

Fact is, Rick Perry for his entire tenure as Texas Governor, has worked overtime to practically erase our borders. When you factor in his relationship with these one-world elitists, it makes complete sense.

Rick Perry is:

• Pro-Anchor Baby
• Pro-North American Union
• Anti-Border Fence
• Pro-Sanctuary City before he was agin' 'em
• Anti-Deportation of Illegal Alien Criminals

All Perry has to do to erase the fact that he used to be a card-carrying leftist himself (TX campaign manager of pro-abort/huge gov/entitlement Al Gore) is mention succession and talk about being "fed up" with leftists. The big neocon "conservative" mouthpieces just have to repeat Perry's rhetoric and talk him up and we out here in Red State America are supposed to just lap it up and bark like seals. Hate to tell you guys, but the man's record is all over the internet and can be punched up by anyone. If Perry does announce his presidential ambitions, I predict a growing number of bloggers are going to be on him like white on rice.

Our government is full of congenital lying psychopaths, ok? Just assume that everyone in politics is lying, fact-check them all, and you'll be well on your way to help restoring our country.

Rick Perry Is a Bold-Faced Liar

Ok, so here's the deal with Texas Anti-Groping TSA Bill:

HB 1937 would have applied to the TSA the same guidelines the rest of us mundanes are subjected to when it comes to putting our hands on other people's privates. This bill passed the Texas House of Representatives 128-0 - that's what we call unanimous where I live. It was about to go to the Senate for a vote and was expected to also pass overwhelmingly, as everyone hates this obscene groping tyranny. I can't imagine that the TSA workers enjoy violating people everyday, but I'm sure a significant percentage really get off on it.  So a strange, strange thing happened on the way to the Senate: a menacing letter from a Department of Justice lackey, U.S. attorney John E. Murphy saying the following:

If HR [sic] 1937 were enacted, the federal government would likely seek an emergency stay of the statute. Unless or until such a stay were granted, TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of passengers and crew.

We urge that you consider the ramifications of this bill before casting your vote.

Lt. Governer Dewhurst, thought to be an up and coming candidate for US Senate did some last minute intimidation lobbying to get the bill tabled. Apparently Lt. Gov. Dewhurst is totally down with the TSA's tyrannical and unseemly underwear searches, which goes above and beyond what other dictatorships have imposed on its people casually traveling within their own country. So where in the world is Mr. "Fed UP" Rick Perry in all this? Are you aware that under Texas law, the Governor can call for a special session of the Legislature whenever he wants and set up any agenda he wants? So see here where a citizen calls him out on the TSA legislation that he is copiously absent on:

 h/t Campaign for Liberty
Am I supposed to believe that the governor of Texas has absolutely no clue as to what was going on with the TSA bill in his own state's legislature making front page news across the country for an entire month! He said they didn't have the VOTES? I wrote on this little blog over a month ago that it passed overwhemingly in the house and he didn't know it? If he's with us on reigning in the TSA, then why didn't he put that on the agenda of the special session he called this summer? He did not because it was his understanding that they didn't have the votes. As if the people of Texas enjoy having their nakedness exposed to our new little brownshirt army in the naked body scanners. This man is a disgrace - not only will he trade his signiture for Big Pharma lobbying money on completely unneccessary vaccines, he will trade the honor and decency of Texan women and children in exchange for elite favors, the extent of which are unknown at this time. There's nothing else that will really explain this. Either you have a problem with federally approved agents putting their hands on your private parts or you don't. Rick Perry, I'm guessing has immunity from this and therefore doesn't care. I'm sure if we follow the money swirling around this guy, we will find that he has been bought off by that villinous coterie of elitists that seem to be at the end of every daisy chain of corruption that I have investigated so far.

This post serves as a notice to any gullible little conservative babes in the woods out there who actually still base their opinions of politicians on the words they say and not their actions.

Rick Perry is Bad News

I've said before that Rick Perry is a RINO. This article at The American Dream gives you 14 reasons not to support this man for higher office. I noticed that Drudge was highlighting Perry's speech over the weekend. If all it take is a Southern accent talking halfway tough to win over Red State America, then we are really, really screwed. I submit that Perry is a paid insider actor positioned in a key role as TX governor. If these planners really want a North American Union, they have to have one of their own positioned in Texas. As a former Bilderburg attendee, Perry has rubbed shoulders with these one-world government types. Anyway, here are the 14 reasons, but don't be fooled by the latest conservative gesture on Perry's part of fighting the TSA - where was he back when the session was in and the bill was up the first time, hmm?


Big Spender

#1 Rick Perry is a "big government" politician.  When Rick Perry became the governor of Texas in 2000, the total spending by the Texas state government was approximately $49 billion.  Ten years later it was approximately $90 billion.  That is not exactly reducing the size of government.

Big Debtor

#2 The debt of the state of Texas is out of control.  According to usdebtclock.org, the debt to GDP ratio in Texas is 22.9% and the debt per citizen is $10,645.  In California (a total financial basket case), the debt to GDP ratio is just 18.7% and the debt per citizen is only $9932.  If Rick Perry runs for president these are numbers he will want to keep well hidden.

#3 The total debt of the Texas government has more than doubled since Rick Perry became governor.  So what would the U.S. national debt look like after four (or eight) years of Rick Perry?

 How is this not treasonous?

#4 Rick Perry has spearheaded the effort to lease roads in Texas to foreign companies, to turn roads that are already free to drive on into toll roads, and to develop the Trans-Texas Corridor which would be part of the planned NAFTA superhighway system.  If you really do deep research on this whole Trans-Texas Corridor nonsense you will see why no American should ever cast a single vote for Rick Perry.

Making You Pay for it All!

#5 Rick Perry claims that he has a "track record" of not raising taxes.  That is a false claim.  Rick Perry has repeatedly raised taxes and fees while he has been governor.  Today, Texans are faced with significantly higher taxes and fees than they were before Rick Perry was elected.

This doesn't Create a Job-Growth Environment

#6 Even with the oil boom in Texas, 23 states have a lower unemployment rate than Texas does.

A conservative through and through! /eyeroll/

#7 Back in 1988, Rick Perry supported Al Gore for president.  In fact, Rick Perry actually served as Al Gore's campaign chairman in the state of Texas that year.

Doesn't help when you have so much illegal immigration, but when your goal is a big happy continent, immigration doesn't matter anymore!

#8 Between December 2007 and April 2011, weekly wages in the U.S. increased by about 5 percent.  In the state of Texas they increased by just 0.6% over that same time period.

Having a huge population that doesn't speak English would drag down your education stats.

#9 Texas now has one of the worst education systems in the nation.  The following is from an opinion piece that was actually authored by Barbara Bush earlier this year....

•  We rank 36th in the nation in high school graduation rates. An estimated 3.8 million Texans do not have a high school diploma.

•  We rank 49th in verbal SAT scores, 47th in literacy and 46th in average math SAT scores.

•  We rank 33rd in the nation on teacher salaries.

Danger, Danger Will Robinson!

#10 Rick Perry attended the Bilderberg Group meetings in 2007.  Associating himself with that organization should be a red flag for all American voters.

No surprise when you let in a zillion illegals!

#11 Texas has the highest percentage of workers making minimum wage out of all 50 states.

If he's hanging with these one-worlder types, then of course he's going to be soft on immigration. When you're goal is to dissolve national sovereignty anyway, why waste resources on maintaining the "Old World Order"?

#12 Rick Perry often gives speeches about illegal immigration, but when you look at the facts, he has been incredibly soft on the issue.  If Rick Perry does not plan to secure the border, then he should not be president because illegal immigration is absolutely devastating many areas of the southwest United States.

Further illustrating the collapse of America into a third world nation:

#13 In 2007, 221,000 residents of Texas were making minimum wage or less.  By 2010, that number had risen to 550,000.

As a mother, this one scares me the most:

#14 Rick Perry actually issued an executive order in 2007 that would have forced almost every single girl in the state of Texas to receive the Gardasil vaccine before entering the sixth grade.  Perry would have put parents in a position where they would have had to fill out an application and beg the government not to inject their child with an untested and unproven vaccine. Since then, very serious safety issues regarding this vaccine have come to light.  Fortunately, lawmakers in Texas blocked what Perry was trying to do.  According to Wikipedia, many were troubled when "apparent financial connections between Merck and Perry were reported by news outlets, such as a $6,000 campaign contribution and Merck's hiring of former Perry Chief of Staff Mike Toomey to handle its Texas lobbying work."

 This vaccine only covers 4 of the dozens of strains of HPV. The lead researcher of this vaccine said that mandatory vaccinations were unnecessary and over-the-top. The vaccine is only effective for five years and if you give it to eleven-year-olds, it will wear off by the time they're 16. Tell me again how pharmaceutical companies are all about public health and not money? If they could get Gov Perry to mandate this vaccination through an executive order, what would he do to us as president? It's not like he did his own research to see if this vaccine was actually necessary for public health in Texas, he just took the money in exchange for his signature. Ugh.

So I Just Got My Mail

and I find a newsletter from my local megachurch. It's a children's department newsletter featuring a Focus on the Family article about how important family meals are. Skimming it over, I could help but realize how impoverished the average churchgoing family in America really is. I'm talking serious spiritual poverty. The image to my mind reading this article is of desperately hungry people trying to decide how to best divide a small portion of food. I say this as someone who eats three meals a day with my family and with my husband after work. Like God instructs us in Deut. 6, effective discipleship is an all-day, everyday endeavor, but the authors of my newsletter suggested using the meal time as time to discuss prayer and "getting to know your family" better. When you are raising up children God's way, you don't need to cram in the important stuff unnaturally at the end of the day. I am so grateful that my husband and I decided to be a one-income family back when we were in high school. So many young couples become ensnared in debt and are trapped like rats in maze that will take years to get out of. By then, the kids will be grown and gone. With only a 10% retention rate among Christians, you think they'd be getting a clue by now.

The sad fact is that in many churches, a SAHM who's homeschooling is not going to get a lot of encouragement. But that's cool, because I get my validation from God's Word and not the crowd, especially in these Great Apostasy times we're living in. I just feel sorry for those who are living such a shallow life working all the time for earthly things and not investing in the heavenly treasures. This is why I write on the topics I do, because I know that modern feminism as we know it was a construct of these central planners for the express purpose of lowering American wages, increasing the tax base, and separating children from their families.

Embedding Youtube Soon to be a Crime?

That would put me in big trouble. Here's the text:

So if you click on a youtube video on my site more than 10 times and it was a video of a concert and the camera was in the front row seat perspective, will you be sending me to jail for not more than 5 years? If my speech here is unfavorable to the gov., will Homeland goons be clicking on our youtubes over and over to send us over?

I think we need to see who's behind this bill - Senator Amy Klobuchar-D, who I'd never heard of. John Cornyn-R a RINO we're all familiar with, and Christopher Coons-D, whom ya'll will remember beat that other girl -whatshername? -Christine O'Donnell. So there you have it: a bipartisan effort to send us all to the FEMA camps or somewhere because that's what it would take to send every blogger who has embedded a youtube to jail.

Do these people sit around and say to themselves, you know the dollar is facing an imminent crash, people can't get jobs, are being thrown out of their homes, our soldiers are enduring oppressive heat in barbaric conditions, but we need to make sure that the crappy content coming out of Hollywood and the "recording industry" is protected. even though they've been putting out total crap for years. Was their MPAA or RIAA money behind this or is this a getting around the first amendment kind of thing?

This calls for a song - but don't download this song "'cause you don't want to mess with the RI double A -they'll treat you like the evil hard-bitten scum that you are!"