There are 7 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. march 20, 2006
From: kennnthomas@webtv.net
2. Analysis of executive order 13292 A careful reading of Vice President
From: ranger116@webtv.net
3. Thorkelson, 1940: Brit-Am Pyramid Pilgrims' 911 Plan
From: "Ozzy bin Oswald" <hisholiness@rome.com>
4. Abramoff's Evangelical Soldiers
From: "norgesen" <norgeson@hotmail.com>
5. Brit-Am Pyramid Pilgrims' 911 Plan [continued]
From: "Ozzy bin Oswald" <hisholiness@rome.com>
6. Fw: A WAKE UP CALL
From: "norgesen" <norgeson@hotmail.com>
7. Fw: News - Workers Tagged
From: "norgesen" <norgeson@hotmail.com>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 18:52:51 -0600
From: kennnthomas@webtv.net
Subject: march 20, 2006
all the spooks are jabbering about arabistan (google it. you'll be
knocked on your ass) and a date of march 20, 2006, gold,currencies, end
of some aspects of civilization- not armageddon, though.
kthomas
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 21:11:20 -0500
From: ranger116@webtv.net
Subject: Analysis of executive order 13292 A careful reading of Vice President
Analysis of executive order 13292 A careful reading of Vice President Cheney's statement regarding his power to DE-classify documents reveals that he was NOT asserting any such power;
He asserted the power to classify documents and added that he had
participated in de-classification decisions.
Here is Cheney's quote from his Fox News interview on Wednesday:
<"I have certainly advocated declassification. I have PARTICIPATED in declassification decisions," Cheney said. Asked for details, he said, "I don't want to get into that. There's an executive order that specifies who has CLASSIFICATION authority, and obviously it focuses first and foremost on the president, but also includes the vice president.">
I don't think Dick Cheney actually asserted that he has power to DE-classify classified material. Rather, he says that he has
"participated" in "decisions" to de-classify material.
That is vastly different from having the unilateral power to
de-classify anything. It's the one who gets to sign the paper that
wields the power, not the people who "participate" in the discussion
leading up to the signing. Cheney said he was given authority to
classify documents; he did not say he was given authority to DE-classify
documents.
Cheney may WANT everyone to think he has a power to de-classify, but I doubt we will ever see his signature on a document de-classifying a document that HE did not originally classify.
Furthermore, it is unthinkable that a vice president -- who stands to inherit the presidency in the event a president is thrown out of office -- would be given any power to do anything that could conceivably undermine the president, such as de-classifying documents that could lead the president's impeachment and removal from office. After all, not all vice presidents are loyal to the president they serve under. Some are just hoping the president will be pushed out so they can ascend to that lofty office.
Below is an analysis of the provisions in Bush's Executive Order
13292 regarding the vice president:
I see NOTHING in it that gives the vice president power to
DE-classify anything. Maybe he can de-classify something he, himself,
originally classified, but that would be about it as far as I can see.
If you see anything that gives the vice president authority to
DE-classify something a different government entity has classified --
such as the National Intelligence Estimate or Valerie Plame's
identity as a covert CIA operative -- please let me know. I don't think you will, but I remain willing to be informed.
------------------------------------------
*analysis of executive order 13292*
Changes in Classification Policy Imposed By the Bush Administration
Executive Order
by Public Citizen - www.citizen.org
Feb. 16, 2006
<snip>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
8. Vice President
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The new order amends the definition of "original classification
authority" to include "the Vice President in the performance of
executive duties." Although the Vice President was not listed as an
original classification authority in the previous Executive Order, a
separate Presidential directive gave the Vice President Top Secret
original classification authority, including the power to delegate that
authority to others. See 60 Fed. Reg. 53845-46 (Oct. 17, 1995)
(Presidential Order designating the Vice President and other senior
officials as "original classification authorities")
The new order adds information originated by the Vice President and
his staff to the categories of information that are exempt from
mandatory declassification review. Under the 1995 Order, the categories
of exempt information included those originated by the incumbent
President, White House Staff, commissions appointed by the incumbent
President and "other entities within the Executive Office of the
President that solely advise and assist the incumbent President." These
categories continue to be exempt under Executive Order 13,292. Executive
Order 13,292, Section 3.5(b)
The Vice President and certain Vice Presidential appointees have
also been added to the list of individuals that may be given access to
classified information after they leave office without demonstrating a
need to know. Executive Order 13,292, Section 4.4(a).>>
Read this and the rest of the analysis at:
http://www.bushsecrecy.org/page.cfm?PagesID=1&ParentID==4&CategoryID==4
LINKS:
See: 60 Fed. Reg. 53845-46 (Oct. 17, 1995) (Presidential Order
designating the Vice President and other senior officials as "original
classification authorities") at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/clinton/oca.html
Executive Order 13292, Section 3.5(b), at:
http://www.bushsecrecy.org/page.cfm?PagesID=3&ParentID==0&CategoryID==4#SECT3_5
Executive Order 13292, Section 4.4(a), at:
http://www.bushsecrecy.org/page.cfm?PagesID=3&ParentID==0&CategoryID==4#SECT4_4
Here's the link to President Clinton's "EXECUTIVE ORDER 12958":
http://www.fas.org/sgp/clinton/eo12958.html
Here's the link to President Bush's "EXECUTIVE ORDER 13292":
http://www.fas.org/sgp/bush/eoamend.html
- - - - - - - - - - -
CHENEY HAD NO LEGAL POWER TO DECLASSIFY CIA DOCS
Yesterday, Cheney claimed in a televised interview that he may on his own authority make public classified documents. This assertion comes in the wake of accusations made in Grand Jury testimony by Cheney’s former Chief of Staff, I. Lewis Libby, that he was “authorized” by his “superiors” to release to Judy Miller and other reporters a classified CIA National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) related to Iraq WMDs issued the previous October.
The Vice President is quoted by AP as stating during an interview on Fox News last night: “There's an executive order that specifies who has classification authority, and obviously it focuses first and foremost on the president, but also includes the vice president.'' See, AP, 02/16/2003, “Cheney Says He Has Power to Declassify Info” http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Cheney-CIA-Leak.html
***
A review of relevant laws, executive orders, and presidential directives reveals that the Vice President has no lawful power to unilaterally declassify CIA documents. Court documents released last week revealed that Dick Cheney stands accused of having told his aide to release a secret National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) ten days before it was declassified by the Agency. See, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/10/politics/10leak.html ; http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/2/10/105540/799
Cheney appears to be referring here to Executive Order 13292, issued March 25, 2003 which gave the Vice President the authority to request the classification of his own documents, and to exempt some of these from release under the Freedom of Information Act. See, E.O 13292, Sec. 3.5 (03/25/2003) http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030325-11.html
However, there is nothing contained in that Order, or any other law, executive order or presidential directive that gives the Vice President the power to unilaterally de-classify secret agency documents, or to authorize others to do so on his behalf. Such a power by the Vice President simply has never been provided for in any written statute, executive order, presidential directive, or agency regulation. It simply didn’t exist as part of American law until Cheney announced it yesterday.
***
Quite to the contrary. Federal law states that it is a felony for officials to disclose the contents of classified documents to persons who aren’t authorized to receive them. It is a separate offense to disclose the identity of an undercover intelligence officer. If the Vice President desires that his subordinates desire to make such disclosures, Executive Order spells out the precise procedures whereby any official must first request that a document be declassified, and recisely who in the government has the authority to carry out declassification. As before, that authority rests with the head of the “originating” agency, which in this case is the Director of Central Intelligence.
At that time, Cheney would have first had to request that George Tenet authorize Agency declassification. There is no record that such permission was ever sought or obtained. Tenet resigned a year later without explanation.
Since the beginning of the Bush Administration, EOs have been published and posted at the White House website, and are not classified. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/orders / Additionally, there is a second category of presidential orders, National Security Presidential Directives (NSPDs), the contents of some of which are classified. But even these have been numbered and indexed, and NSPDs issued since February 13, 2001 are posted by the Federation of American Scientists. http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/index.html
A series of EOs spell out the precise procedures whereby any official may request that a classified document may be declassified, and who has the authority to carry out declassification. The Executive Order prescribes a uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information. The first one still in effect was issued on April 17, 1995 and took effect on October 14, 1995. E.O. 12958 was amended with E.O. 12972, dated September 18, 1995, E.O. 13142, dated November 19, 1999, and E.O. 13292, dated March 25, 2003.
As before, that authority rests with the head of the “originating” agency, which in this case is the Director of Central Intelligence. While the President may overrule the head of the agency regarding declassification, the matter must first be considered by the CIA Director or his designate. That is clear from the language of the controlling document. In this particular, Executive Order 13292, Sec. 3.5 (03/25/2003) remains the lawful directive for declassification of CIA documents. See, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030325-11.html
PART 3--DECLASSIFICATION AND DOWNGRADING
“Sec. 3.1. Authority for Declassification. (a) Information shall be declassified as soon as it no longer meets the standards for classification under this order.
(b) It is presumed that information that continues to meet the classification requirements under this order requires continued protection. In some exceptional cases, however, the need to protect such information may be outweighed by the public interest in disclosure of the information, and in these cases the information should be declassified. When such questions arise, they shall be referred to the agency head or the senior agency official. That official will determine, as an exercise of discretion, whether the public interest in disclosure outweighs the damage to the national security that might reasonably be expected from disclosure.
SNIP
(c) If the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office determines that information is classified in violation of this order, the Director may require the information to be declassified by the agency that originated the classification. Any such decision by the Director may be appealed to the President through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. The information shall remain classified pending a prompt decision on the appeal. “
SNIP
Definition of terms is essential to a full understand in of what is meant here. As before, these terms contained in the 1995 Order remain operative. Consider the following, and it become clear that Mr. Cheney was not following the law when he told Mr. Libby to reveal the contents of the NIE to Ms. Miller.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/clinton/eo12958.html
(e) "Classification" means the act or process by which information is determined to be classified information.
(f) "Original classification" means an initial determination that information requires, in the interest of national security, protection against unauthorized disclosure.
(g) "Original classification authority" means an individual authorized in writing, either by the President, or by agency heads or other officials designated by the President, to classify information in the first instance.
(h) "Unauthorized disclosure" means a communication or physical transfer of classified information to an unauthorized recipient.
(i) "Agency" means any "Executive agency," as defined in 5 U.S.C. 105, and any other entity within the executive branch that comes into the possession of classified information.
(j) "Senior agency official" means the official designated by the agency head under section 5.6(c) of this order to direct and administer the agency's program under which information is classified, safeguarded, and declassified.
(k) "Confidential source" means any individual or organization that has provided, or that may reasonably be expected to provide, information to the United States on matters pertaining to the national security with the expectation that the information or relationship, or both, are to be held in confidence.
(l) "Damage to the national security" means harm to the national defense or foreign relations of the United States from the unauthorized disclosure of information, to include the sensitivity, value, and utility of that information “
CONCLUSION
As one should expect with such bureaucratic matters, the law is not in the least bit vague about the steps that government officials are required to take before they can release classified documents to the public. The Vice President is no exception.
In Mr. Cheney’s case, there is no evidence that he requested the Director of Central Intelligence to declassify the NIE before its contents were revealed by his aide, Scooter Libby, to Judy Miller of the New York Times on July 8, 2003. That document was not in fact declassified until ten days later. Dick Cheney and any other official who might have issued such an authorization was thus in violation of law in carrying out that disclosure. There is no murky presidential delegation of powers, as has been suggested by some, that might change that fact.
Therefore, the Vice President should be prosecuted for this.
MARK G. LEVEY, 2006.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az==view_all&address=64x441331
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 18:28:27 +0800
From: "Ozzy bin Oswald" <hisholiness@rome.com>
Subject: Thorkelson, 1940: Brit-Am Pyramid Pilgrims' 911 Plan
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD (pages 5122-5123)
Steps Toward British Union, a World State, and International Strife-Part
I
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
Of
HON. J. THORKELSON
OF MONTANA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, August 19, 1940
Mr. Thorkelson. Mr. Speaker, in order that the American people may have a
clearer understanding of those who over a period of years have been
undermining this Republic, in order to return it to the British Empire, I
have inserted in the Record a number of articles to prove this point.
These articles are entitled “Steps Toward British Union, a World State,
and International Strife.” This is part I, and in this I include a hope
expressed by Mr. Andrew Carnegie, in his book entitled “Triumphant
Democracy.” In this he expresses himself in this manner:
Let men say what they will, I say that as surely as the sun in the
heavens once shone upon Britain and America united, so surely is it one
morning to rise, to shine upon, to greet again the reunited states-the
British-American Union.
This statement is clear, and the organizations which Mr. Carnegie endowed
have spent millions in order to bring this about. This thing has been
made possible by scholarships, exchange professors, subsidies of
churches, subsidies of educational institutions; all of them working for
the purpose of eliminating Americanism as was taught once in our schools
and to gradually exchange this for an English version of our history.
These organizations were organized to bring about a British Union, a
union in which the United States would again become a part of the British
Empire. However, this has been upset to some extent by the attempt of the
internationalists to establish their own government as an international
or world union.
And there is, therefore, a conflict between the two, for England wants a
British union, with America as a colony, and the international money
changers want a Jewish controlled union, in order to establish their own
world government.
It is, therefore, best for us to stay out of both of these, in order to
save what is left of this Republic as it was given to us in 1787, by the
people who knew more about international intrigue and the real problems
that confronted the world, than we know today. These early founders not
only understood the problems, but in drafting the Constitution they
provided an instrument for us to follow, so that we could remain secure
from foreign double-dealing and intrigue. Had we adhered to the
Constitution, as it was given to us, we would have been secure and safe
today.
Therefore, it is our duty, in the interest of our people and in the
interest of this Republic of the United States, to ponder seriously and
to give fullest consideration to solving the problem which now confronts
the world. In doing so, I am rather inclined to believe that the real
American people will decide without hesitation, to return to those
fundamental principles that were set forth in the Constitution of the
United States. Let no one tell you that this instrument is not as
valuable today as it was in 1787; for the fact is that it is much more
valuable today-so much so that complete disintegration of this Republic
cannot be avoided should we fail to return our Government to the
principles set forth therein.
I shall now quote an article by Andrew Carnegie, which he wrote at the
request of the London Express, and which appeared in that paper October
14, 1904, entitled “Drifting Together.” Drifting Together-Will the United
States and Canada Unite? (Written by request for the London Express,
October 14, 1904 by Andrew Carnegie)
Britain and America being now firmly agreed that those who attempted to
tax the American Colonies against their protest were wrong, and that in
resisting this the colonists vindicated their rights as British citizens
and therefore only did their duty, the question arises: Is a separation
forced upon one of the parties, and now deeply regretted by the other, to
be permanent?
I cannot think so, and crave permission to present some considerations in
support of my belief that the future is certain to bring reunion of the
separated parts, which will probably come about in this way: Those born
north and south of an imaginary line between Canada and the United
States, being all Americans, must soon merge. It were as great folly to
remain divided as for England and Scotland to have done so.
It is not to be believed that Americans and Canadians will not be warned
by Europe, with it’s divisions armed, not against foreign foes, but
against each other. It is the duty of Canadians and Americans to prevent
this, and to secure to their continent internal peace under one
government, as it was the duty of Englishmen and Scotsmen to unite under
precisely similar conditions. England has 7 times the population of
Scotland; the Republic has 14 times that of Canada. Born Canadians and
Americans are a common type, indistinguishable one from the other.
Nothing is surer in the near future than that they must unite. It were
criminal for them to stand apart.
CANADA’S DESTINY
It need not be feared that force will ever be used or required to
accomplish this union. It will come-must come- in the natural order of
things. Political as well as material bodies obey the law of gravitation.
Canada’s destiny is to annex the Republic, as Scotland did England, and
then, taking the hand of the rebellious big brother and that of the
mother, place them in each other’s grasp, thus reuniting the then happy
family that should never have known separation. To accept this view, the
people of the United Kingdom have only to recall the bloody wars upon
this island for centuries arising from Scotland and England floating
separate flags, and contrast the change today under one flag.
The Canadians and Americans may be trusted to follow the example of the
motherland and have but one flag embracing one whole race in America.
Present petty jealousies melt away as the population north and south
become in a greater degree born Americans.
Even if the blessed reunion came as early as the end of the next decade,
say 16 years hence, Canada and the Republic – the Scotland and England of
America- would embrace 115,000,000 of English speaking people, probably
7,000,000 of these in Canada. By the end of the present decade, 6 years
hence, their population will be close to 97,000,000-6,000,000 of these in
Canada. The Republic added to her numbers the past 14 years more than the
total population of Australia, or than that of Canada, the immigration
having been enormous. One of these years it almost reached a million.
CECIL RHODES
The peaceful union of Canada and America would lead Britain to a serious
view of her position, resulting in the conclusion that Cecil Rhodes
reached-it will be remembered that he was at first a strong British
imperialist. Mr. Stead recounts that Mr. Rhodes went to Lord Rothschild
and laid that scheme before him, who replied-“This is all very well, if
you can get America to join-if not, it amounts to nothing!” This led Mr.
Rhodes to a study of the subject and the result was he saw clearly that
Lord Rothschild was right.
British federation would leave Britain as a member of the smaller part of
her own race, and out of the main channel of progress: instead of sitting
(with race imperialism accomplished) enthroned as the mother among
hundreds of millions of her own children, composing all but a fraction of
English-speaking men. Hence he abandoned the scheme and thereafter
favored race federation, and left to America more scholarships than to
all other lands. He saw that it was to the Republic, not to British
settlements, his country had to lock for the coming reunion of his race,
with Britain in her rightful place as parent of all. A few figures will
leave no room for dispute about this. In the last decade, 1890-1900,
Britain, Canada, Australasia , and New Zealand, combined, added to their
population 4,500,000-America 13,500,000. Canada only added 508,000, the
Commonwealth of Australasia, only 660,000. In the 4 years since 1900
America added more than the total population of either Canada or
Australasia. During the present decade, 1900-1910, at the same rate of
increase to date, she will add more than the present total white
population of Canada, Australasia , New Zealand, and South Africa
combined. So fast does the Republic grow, so slowly the Empire.
INCREASE OF POPULATION
The United Kingdom itself increased last decade more than three times as
much as Canada and Australasia combined. It is not to her colonies,
therefore, that Britain can look for much increase of population or of
trade. The growth of Australasia, small as it was in the last decade, so
far as reported in this decade is even less. Canada is growing faster
only in the far northwest, which is separated from a thousand miles of
barren land from the English-speaking Province of Ontario. Last decade
Ontario Province (English) actually declined in British population;
Quebec province (French) slightly increased. The census of 1900 shows
fewer British - born residence in all of Canada than that of 1890. The
wheat fields now reached by rail are now being settled by Americans who
crossed the border, selling their American farms and buying new farms in
Canada at one-tenth of the price realized for the old. Except for this
influx, about 70,000 so far, the rate of increase in Canada will be about
as last decade.
When we come to the population of the United Kingdom we find already in
England and Wales 558 to the square mile. What thoughtful man could wish
much further increase, even if it were possible? A dense population must
cause deterioration. The density of population in England and Wales is
not reached by any European country, except the small state of Belgium.
France has only 188, Germany 270 (or one- half), Italy 290, Japan has
only 296. The authorities agree that England and Wales are fully
populated. Ireland proves that it is so by the small increase. Scotland
has increased steadily for some decades, but little scope is left for
further increase. Substantially, Ireland and Scotland have today all they
can maintain in comfort.
Mark the contrast. America has only 21 people per square mile,
One-Sixteenth that of the United Kingdom, one for every 26 in England and
Wales. These figures include Alaska, which resembles most of Canada, and
is not likely to support many people. Excluding Alaska, the American
population is number 28 per square mile, one-twentieth that of England
and Wales. It is evident that Green was right when he wrote years ago
that the home of the English speaking race was not to be on the Clyde and
the Thames, but upon the Hudson, the Delaware, Ohio, Mississippi and St.
Lawrence. There is not room for it in the dear old home, but there is,
fortunately, in the new lands of her children in Canada and America.
When we note the development Britain has attained industrial we are
amazed. It is wonderful almost beyond belief: we doubt investigate to
assure ourselves that we have the facts. This little Kingdom has today
more shipping, and about as many spindles turning as all the rest of the
world. She is the richest of all nations per capita. She makes more iron
and minds, more coal per capita than any nation. Marvelous! Nothing
comparable to her and history! She positively dwarfs all previous
records. –A dwarf more powerful than most giants. Who is there? Then, who
can expect her to do more, what she has accomplished being scarcely
credible?
PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE
It is physically impossible that much further increase can come to
Britain, and in addition to this, conditions otherwise are unfavorable to
further development. Other nations by the use of her inventions, are more
and more supplying their own wants, and will continue to do so. They will
also compete with her more and more, and especially in iron and steel,
and in cotton manufacturers, owing to her lack of the cotton plantations
and of needed iron stone. If Britain succeeds in maintaining present
production in these fields great will be the credit due to her captains
of industry. As with population, therefore, so with industries – much
increase in impossible.
This is the age of consolidation, industrially and nationally. Consider
the recent consolidation of Italy and more recent consolidation and rapid
growth of the German empire. Who can imagine that the process has
stopped? On the contrary, we are on the eve of further consolidations in
Europe of great extent. The success of the American Republic, 45 states
consolidated into one Union, with free trade overall, and that of Germany
with its Zallverein, are too significant to pass unheeded.
The day of small nations are passing. Their incorporation with larger
areas is to be held by lovers of progress, provided always that one point
be carefully preserved. The national sentiment of the small powers should
not only be guarded, but fostered in every way, so that, as in the
American Union and in Britain the Virginian and the Scotsman remain as
intensely Virginian or Scotch as ever. Pride in loyalty to the whiter
empire do not supplant but supplement love of the part that he was born.
He loves the part and is proud of the whole.
What will Britain do? The day is coming when Britain will have to do
decide on one of three courses. First, shall she sink-comparatively to
the giant consolidations-into a third-or fourth rate power, a Holland or
Belgium comparatively? Here note that we do not postulate her actual
decline, but the increase growth of other powers. Or, second, shall she
consolidate with a European giant? Or, third, shall she grasp the
outstretched hand of her children of American and become again as she was
before, the mother member of the English-speaking race?
Assuming that other powers are to increase their present population (as
Germany and Russia have yet room to do), or by further consolidation, it
being evident that there is not room in the 120,000 square miles of the
little, crowded United Kingdom for further increase of moment, then the
conclusion is inevitable that one of these three courses is the only
possible alternative, for Britain has no adjoining territory that she can
annex.
Some have been disposed to regard British Federation as a possible fourth
alternative, but the figures given, which convinced Rothschild and
Rhodes, we submit, compel its exclusion, especially her-a future
commensurate with her glorious and unparalleled past. Let us rejoice that
this is open. Her Canadian and Republican children across the Atlantic
will hail the day she takes her rightful place in the high council of her
reunited race-that race whose destiny, I believe with faith unshaken, is
to dominate the world for the good of the world.
(This article, in pamphlet form, was placed in a New York Public Library
on February 27, 1906, by the Honorable Joseph H. Choate.)
http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/7-24-03/discussion.cgi.36.html
Steps Toward a British Union, A World State and International Strife Part
II,
Extension of Remarks of Hon. J. Thorkelson of Montana in the House of
Representatives,
Monday, Aug. 19th, 1940
MR. THORKELSON. Mr. Speaker, we are now dominated and plagued by various
pressure groups that care little or nothing about the United States as
long as they can involve us in the present European war. Some of these
groups are well known, others remain obscure, but nevertheless very
powerful and effective in their insideous attempt to convince the people
of this Nation that war is impending. These groups are composed of
members who are generally classed as the "intelligentsia." I shall not
question their intelligence, but if one is to judge them by what they
have said and done, their intelligence is not being directed for the
greater interest of the United States. Aiding these groups, I believe
often innocently, are those whom we may take the liberty of calling their
tools and servants. We have reached a stage where these Anglophiles
advance the thought tha in order to qualify as a good American, one must
be pro-English and willing to fight and die for England. These
England-first groups and hands-across-the-sea organizations are made up
of many Canadian and Anglo-American societies which are located in our
larger cities. One of these, and the one to which I shall now refer, is
the Pilgrims.
The Pilgrims
When the Pilgrims was organized in 1902, to aid in developing Anglophiles
in the United States, the Canadians, being British subjects, were not
solicited at first as members of this charitable and exclusive propaganda
service to sell America to the British Empire. Like converts, many of
these members are more loyal to England than the British themselves. In
their fanatical zeal to serve Albion, I am informed by a student, that
one of them placed the English crown on the flagstaff of the Columbia
University. If this is true, the Columbia alumni should "crown" him who
gave orders for the mounting of it, and replace the crown with the eagle,
so this noble emblem can rest in it's rightful place.
The Pilgrim membership may be found in our military organization, in the
government, and particularly among professors, ministers, and authors. In
wielding the pen, the aid of these writers is more valuable, for can they
not write, as did Carnegie when in substance he said : Give America to
England as a hemostat for the bleeding wound of the British Empire, which
the surgeons left oozing after their operation in 1776 ; the operation
which amputated the United States from the British Empire, and set
America free.
These Pilgrims, being unfamiliar with the surgery of 1776, evidently do
not realize that Canada joined to the United States will prove an equally
efficient hemostat to stop this hemorrhage in the British Empire. The
American Pilgrims no doubt fear this most sensible measure, because it
might antagonize the noble and wealthy in the English Government and the
Bank of England so much that they will pack up and leave for home. Such
exodus might also prove inconvenient to our idle, wealthy, and charming
ladies and their parents, when in their crusade to obtain a new or
slightly used husband to hang on their family tree, they find it
necessary to embark for Palestine to satisfy their family ambition. It is
this and more that the American's must fight to counteract the propaganda
which is now disseminated throughout the country and in our daily press,
in order to save America for the Americans.
Many of the members of these groups are ignorant of the real purpose of
these organizations and their influence in our political life. Some of
these members are so blinded by the glamour and the exclusiveness of
these clubs that they do not realize that in supporting their activities
they betray America. I now quote from the annual meetings of the
Pilgrims, held in New York, 1913 and 1934 : (The Pilgrims, New York.
Addresses delivered at dinner in celebration of the tenth anniversary of
the Pilgrims of the United States. , New York, Tuesday, the 4th of
February, 1913, at the Waldorf Astoria, 1913)
(Hon. Joseph H. Choate, president of the Pilgrims and chairman of the
evening, on rising and rapping for order, is roundly cheered and toasted
by the members and guests assembled.)
MR. CHOATE. I am going to ask you, in the first place, to rise, as you
did just now for a much less worthy object, when I propose the loyal
toasts. I ask you to fill your glasses and rise and drink to the
President of the United States and his Majesty, the King of England.
(The toast was drunk with great enthusiasm, cheering and singing the Star
Spangled Banner and God Save the King.)
Before the chairman could resume, a delegation of members, consisting of
Messrs. F. Cunliff-Owen, R.A.C. Smith, Herbert Noble, George W. Burleigh,
Lawrence L. Gillespie, and George Gray Ward, presented Mr. Choate with a
large and beautiful gold and silver salver, richly decorated and suitably
inscribed, Mr. Cunliffe-Owen addressed him as follows :
"Mr. Choate, your brother Pilgrims making you the offering herewith of
the Pilgrim fare, bread and salt to ward off from you all evil spirits
and every kind of harm-and we ask you, our honored president, in the name
of all our brother Pilgrims of the United States, to accept this gold and
silver salver as a momento of the occasion." --CUT--
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to read the speeches given by the American
members of the Pilgrims, for they, like all converts are more un-American
and pro-English than the British themselves.
The address of Joseph. H. Choate is an example of Anglo-phile. pertinent
at this time in view of the conditions that exist today. I shall now
re-quote some of these statements in order to show how deceptive they can
be. Mr. Choate states :
"We have no difficulty and never have had that I know of with the people
of England."
A statement that is perfectly true, because the people of England have
little or nothing to say in the British government. Our trouble has been
with the British Government, which has never at any time been friendly
toward the United States -- but the gentleman did not make such
statement. Furthermore, it is well to note the servile attitude of the
speaker to the Crown of England, and his praise of the rulers, which
again is perfectly all right, yet he has failed in his speech as others
have in theirs, to say one good word for the Government of the United
States. He then goes on to say :
"The people of England and the people of the United States are always
friendly to each other; another statement, which no one can criticize,
but to which I want to add that the people of all countries -- the common
people -- have always been and are now friendly to each other. If war
depended upon them there would be no war. The trouble lies with the
rulers of the different governments. It is they who advocate war; war of
destruction, not only of property and human life but of christian
civilization itself."
So in view of this, let us remember that no country has been at war so
much as England and no country has brought about more misfurtune and
suffering than the British Government. This should be clear as we review
the early history of our own colonies, of India, Irelandand the
400,000,000 opium addicts in China, all of which may be charged to the
greed of the British Government. Mr. Choate, in making his statements,
spoke for the people of the United States, when in reality he should have
hesitated even to speak for himself. His sole concern appeared to have
been out friendliness toward Great Britain, but not their friendliness
toward us ; and again, he palced the United States in the position of a
suppliant to the British throne.
Mr. Choate then referred to a dispute which arose in regard to the
passage of ships through the Panama Canal and intimated that it was the
understanding of Hon. John Hay and Lord Landsdowne that the British
should have equal rights with us in the use of this Canal ; a right which
the British have never conceded to the United States in the Suez Canal.
We have even been driven out of foreign markets by England for many, many
years, and in her wars she has brazenly furnished us with a blacklist of
firms with which we are not supposed to trade ; and we, like fools,
comply with her demands.
Continuing his discussion on this topic, Mr. Choate expressed himself as
being quite willing to leave the decision of the Panama Canal in the
hands of the British and American Pilgrims, which anyone can readily
understand would be a one-sided decision ; that is, all for England and
nothing for he United States.
Mr. Choate then makes his most extraordinary statement, upon which every
member of Congress and the people of this nation should ponder --
particularly in view of the happenings since 1912 :
"Now the people of this country are not going to allow anybody -- any
Congress, any government, any President -- to break the good faith which
they have pledged to the mother country."
In making this statement, Mr. Choate takes the position that Great
Britain or England is our mother country ; the same position that was
taken by Cecil Rhodes over 60 years ago and by Andrew Carnegie in 1893,
when he wrote a book entitled "Triumphant Democracy."
I want you to note particularly that this was in 1913, and that 1913 was
the very year we changed our Government from a republic to a
semi-democracy ; the year in which we destroyed constitutional
government, international security, and paved the road for us to become a
colony of the British Empire. It was also the same year in which we, by
adopting the Federal Reserve Act, placed our Treasury under the control
and domination of the Bank of England and the international banking
groups that are now financing the British-Israel movement in the United
States. It was also the year preceding the World War ; a war in which we
became involved, as everyone knows, in 1917, but what everyone does not
know is that we were commited to this war in 1910, and were to all
intents and purposes in the war in 1914, when J.P. Morgan and Co. began
to finance the Triple Entente. This statement is borne out by Mr. J.P.
Morgan's own testimony before the Senate committee investigating the
munitions industry.
Mr. Choate was, therefore, right, because nothing has stopped, not even
Congress, the destruction of this republic and it's gradual incorporation
into the British Empire through the efforts of the many subversive and
pro-English groups, led and directed, as I have said, by the
British-Israel movement.
Let me now quote a message sent by George T. Wilson, Chairman of the
American Pilgrims, to his brother Pilgrims in London, when they
celebrated our entry into the World War. This message states the real
hopes and the purpose of the Pilgrims :
Sir Harry E. Brittain,
Chairman (London) :
"I should like to read two cables which have arrived within the last few
minutes from New York. The first is from our good friends and fellow
members, the Pilgrims of America, and it reads as follows :
--CUT--
CON'T -
Mr. Speaker, I have included Mr. Butler's address, in order to show how
far we have drifted toward this British Union. In this speech, you will
note he brings out the fact that the olive branch petition has now been
adopted by England and extended to her colonies. He further intimates
that in view of this adoption, it is now in order for us to join the
British Empire. He makes the further statement that this movement has
gone Anglican, or more English, which is quite true, for we are just
about on the verge of capitulating to the forces which are driving us
into the British Empire. To show this, let me quote :
That petition was presented to King George III in July 1775, over the
signatures of 46 members of the Continental Congress, praying for
precisely the relationship which the Statute of Westminster has written
into public law, the public law of England, for the Dominions. * * *
I recall that a year ago it occured to me to say something on this
occasion of the movement going on to bring into existence a British
Commonwealth of Nations, a new form of political organization to take the
place of the centuries-old organization of the British Empire. I invited
your attention to the fact that the movement was going forward, more
Anglican, informally, quietly, illogically under the pressure of
opportunity in events and without any formal or public announcement.
During the year, however, without the world paying much attention, and
hardly noticed in these United States, that movement, which has been
under way for the better part of a generation, came to it's climax and
has now been formally written into the public law of Great Britain.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steps Toward a British Union, A World State and International Strife Part
III,
Extension of Remarks of Hon. J. Thorkelson of Montana in the House of
Representatives,
Tuesday, Aug. 20th, 1940
MR. THORKELSON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my own remarks in the
Record, I include a pamphlet by John T. Whiteford. This pamphlet should
be of interest to every member of Congress because it deals with a
subject that will soon confront us, as it did in 1917 :
SIR UNCLE SAM, KNIGHT OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE
(By John T. Whiteford)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steps Towards British Union, a World State and International Strife - Pt.
IV,
Extension of Remarks of Hon. J. Thorkelson of Montana in the House of
Representatives,
Monday Aug. 19, 1940
MR. THORKELSON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my own remarks in the
record, I include a short article entitled, "Undermining America."
Undermining America
Mr. Speaker, the information contained in this booklet is important at
this time, particularly in view of the fact that the pro-English groups
in the United States are now working in close cooperation with world
internationalist organizations. Before 1917, foreign influence came
mainly from Anglo-American groups. Since the World War, these groups have
been fortified by international financiers and the internationalists, or
the so-called minority group. The pressure is therefore more than double,
for combined, these groups control all avenues of communication and are
now using them to further their plan of British domination to establish a
world federation of states.
Let me call your attention to the fact that on the reverse of the great
seal of the United States, which appears on our dollar bills, you will
find the exact symbol of the British-Israel world federation movement.
This symbol is also carried on literature of other organizations
promoting a world government and a world religion. At the bottom of the
circle surrounding the pyramid, you will find the wording : "Novus Ordo
Seclorum." It was this new order that was advocated by Clinton Roosevelt
several hundred years ago; recently in Philip Dru, and now followed by
the Executive.
Do you not think, as good American people, that the administration has
gone far from constitutional government, when there is inscribed a symbol
on the reverse of our great seal, that advocates a new order? Yes, an
order which means the destruction of our Republic as formulated in the
Constitution of the United States.
It may also interest you to know that this contemplated "Union Now", as
advocated by Clarence Streit, will be under the control of Great Britain,
and is a movement to return the United States as a colony in the British
Empire. Should we become a part of this union, our traditional rights and
liberties will be lost, and we will have no greater status than an
English possession. This was the dream of Cecil Rhodes and Andrew
Carnegie, when the latter wrote his book, Triumphant Democracy, in 1893.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steps Towards British Union, a World State and International Strife - Pt.
VI,
Extension of Remarks of Hon. J. Thorkelson of Montana in the House of
Representatives,
Wednesday, Aug. 21, 1940
ARTICLE FROM THE SAN FRANCISCO LEADER, FEBRUARY 17 AND 24, 1912
------------
Mr. THORKELSON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my own remarks in the
Record, I include an article which is a reprint from the San Francisco
Leader of February 17, and 24, 1912, by Lillian Scott Troy. The article
is entitled "Benedict Arnold Peace Society -- Some Inside and Interesting
History of the Infamous Peace Proposal -- How the Scheme To Form an
Alliance With England Is Being Engineered -- Carnegie's Crafty Method."
This is in line with the other matter which I have inserted in the
RECORD, of which it is part VI. In these articles I have made it a point
to show that this insideous British influence to return the United States
as a colony of Great Britain has been active for over a hundred years.
[Reprinted from The Leader of February 17 and February 24, 1912, San
Francisco, Calif.]
Benedict Arnold Peace Society -- Some Inside and Interesting History of
the Infamous "Peace" Proposal;
How the Scheme To Form an Alliance With England Is Being Engineered;
Carnegie's Crafty Method.
(By Lillian Scott Troy)
(--CUT--)
(Web Ed. This article is not included at this time. It is lengthy and not
vital to this study at this time. I will be adding it at some point in
the future.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steps Towards British Union, a World State and International Strife - Pt.
VII,
Extension of Remarks of Hon. J. Thorkelson of Montana in the House of
Representatives,
Tuesday, September 3, 1940
MR. THORKELSON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the
RECORD, I include an article by the Reverend Dr. W. Pascoe Goard, which
appeared in the National Message, March 28, 1936, the official
publication of the British-Israel World Federation. The article is
entitled "British-Israel Is True."
We wish to speak a word of caution and expostulation to those of our
brethren of the Christian ministry who are boldly challenging the truth
of the British-Israel.
First, may we present our credentials to justify what we are about to say
hereafter. The following has been written without particular consultation
with our associates, but there need be no question that they carry the
weight of the judgement of the clergymen and ministers, educationalists,
and other professional men, and of the laity, who stand with us in the
many countries where our movement prevails.
What is the truth of British-Israel? The truth is that British-Israel is
not a denomination and is not an ecclesiastic sect; but is instead a
subsidized political organization. The question may then be asked. How
can the British-Israel call the Christian clergy "brethren" when their
organization is not ecclesiastical, but political, as I have stated?
It is generally stated, in order to give weight by comparison to the
opposition, that there are no scholars in the British-Israel movement. No
doubt those who make such statements think that they are strictly
adhering to truth, and that this movement is one carried forward by those
not qualified to judge.
The statement, however, is not only untrue--which is the negative form of
the statement--it is positively untrue. A much shorter form of expression
might be used. Facts will be desired to support this statement. Anyone
who cares to search the literature of the British-Israel movement will be
struck with the fact that among the small number who for many years stood
together in defense of this truth a very large proportion of them carried
the various degrees which our universities bestow. Such degrees were
earned from Oxford, Cambridge, London, Birmingham, Durham, Trinity
College, Dublin, Aberdeen, Yale, McGill, Toronto, British Columbia, and
many other Universities. We warn our opponents, if they have any respect
for truth, to avoid circulating such misleading statements as these.
I do not believe anyone will dent that the British-Israel World
Federation is well connected and well financed. The question is, Who are
the financial promoters of the subversive movement to establish a world
government? Can it be possible that the international bankers are the
financial backers? Can it be possible that this movement is connected
with the Grand Orient Lodge? Is it not true that the British-Israel and
its proponents comprise the group now actively promoting war, and is it
not true that the backers of this movement are those who control gold and
International gold credit? We must recognize that the British-Israel
world movement is anti-American and destructive to the principles of this
Government.
Turning to standing and experience in the various churches : Within our
ranks we have archbishops, bishops, well-placed clergy, ministers of high
standing in various churches, heads of educational departments and
institutions, distinguished members of the bar, and so on. Such positions
as have been occupied by many of those referred to have been achieved
through merit in long and vigorous years of service in the various
branches of the Christian church.
It is indeed unfortunate that many Christians churchs Ministers should
know that political movements within church organizations will destroy
the church itself.
Of late a movement to bring forward such leaders as Dr. Goudge, Dr.
Dimont, Dr. Campbell, and so on, heads of theological divinity schools,
has evidently had as its object the forming of a ring around us of
authority. We recognize the attainments and achievements of these highly
esteemed men in other fields, but not in the one under consideration.
Within our movement we can meet these gentlemen with men of equal
attainments, of as wide experience; teachers and authors of equal
standing. We cannot allow position or authority to weigh in a question of
facts and (have allowed the British-Israel in the Church Organizations.)
truths. That arguement does not meet the point at issue. But if the
arguement continues to be advanced, we balance it as we have already
said.
We respectfully ask of the rank and file, of those who oppose us -- What
is it you oppose? We recommend each opponent to face this question, lest
in opposing us he may be found to oppose the very standard upon which the
whole doctrinal structure of his own communion is based. We will state
the things for which we stand.
Dr. Goard employs a subtle argument to disarm anyone who may take issue
with his statements. The fact remains, however, that the British Israel
is to establish a world state with a David as King, and the Capital of
this state is to be Jerusalem. I am opposed to the British-Israel,
because I am quite well satisfied with our own government and unwilling
to crusade for the British Empire or for the real motivators behind this
movement in Asia, Africa, Egypt, or anywhere else.
We accept the Bible as it stands. We are quite aware of the various
approaches to the Bible and of the various criticism to which it has been
subjected. We do not speak in ignorance of these things. but rather with
the full knowledge of them as men who have been over the ground again and
again for many years past. Our approach to the Bible is an intelligent
one. Our acceptance of the Bible is confirmed by facts beyond counting.
It is our considered opinion that with the facts in hand which we
possess, it is impossible to do otherwise than accept the great, sequent,
even consequent, development of facts and truth as it is presented in
Holy Writ.
We believe the Bible as it now stands does not need any other
interpretation than that which facts, history, and experience accord. The
Bible carries information not otherwise possessed by humanity, and which
must have had a source higher higher than humanity because its scope is
wider than the sum total of unaided human knowledge. For instance, the
Bible contains knowledge of the past before human history began, and
knowledge of the future to which humanity has not yet attained but is
from day to day attaining. We accept it in its spiritual revelations, in
its contacts with natural science and history, and in its prophetic
dealing with the future. We take the Bible to be what the Prayer Book
assures us it is, namely "The Word of God Written."
I shall not discuss the historical aspect of the Bible or its
revelations, for I grant that education existed then as well as today.
The point in issue is that the British-Israel have appointed themselves
as the chosen people to sit in judgement on the throne of David in
Jerusalem, and I do not deny the British-Israel such rights. Reserving my
own rights, I object to giving my aid in this cherished desire, and I
refuse to share any responsibility in establishing this world state.
The Bible deals with Israel as a continuous national entity, from Sinai
to the end of the world.
The Bible deals with Judah as a seperate national entity, from its
organization as a kingdom under David to the coming again of our Lord
Jesus Christ.
These two paragraphs are illuminating, for they reveal the real purpose
of the British-Israel plan; and it is to establish Judah as a kingdom
under David, and so stated in the latter paragraph. The British-Israel
movement is, therefore, backed by those who are interested in a Judaic
state, and they are not the gentiles or those which the British-Israel
pretend they represent.
The Bible deals with the continental empires and nations, from the
granting of the imperial charter to Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon and to his
successors right down to that time indicated by Daniel, of which he said,
"I beheld till the thrones were cast down * * * " Many scriptures show
this to have been the ending of the Babylon succession, which took place
A.D. 1018 (Ed. Note "0" looks like it could be a "9"), 2,520 years after
the granting of the great Babylon charter.
We see that these three participants in world history have been the chief
actors on the stage. They have so monopolized the activities of world
history that what has taken place outside of their scope has scarcely
been worth telling.
Bible prophecy and secular history are now merged into one.
This is within the scope of our faith. What objection has any churchman
of any denomination to make of the facts here given, and on what grounds
can such objection be raised? Surely every Bible reader must know the
truth of that which we have just stated. If not he can easily verify the
truth.
We see and know that the general course of the history of each of these
peoples is told in the prophetic scriptures. Further, by the interweaving
of these lines of prophecy the general course of world history was
foretold.
We take these lines of prophecy and we compare them carefully with world
history. This is not an easy task. It takes much original research, which
we have gone to the labor and expense of making. For instance, for years
we have maintained a research department, the members of which have
worked and still work in such institutions as the British Museum, and
elsewhere, where the treasures of knowledge are deposited. As a result of
the general scholarship of our leaders and the special knowledge thus
obtained, we can give chapter and verse for much of the information
required to establish the fact that history fully fulfills prophecy. A
large and growing literature is produced and is still being produced in
this field of research.
What a triumph that is for the Bible and for those who preach the Bible
facts and truths. Dr. Driver was compelled by his lack of this special
knowledge to admit what he believed to be a fact, that many of the
promises made by God to the northern Kingdom of Israel and to the
southern Kingdom of Judah had never been fulfilled, and that
circumstances have so changed that they never can be fulfilled, but must
be rather looked upon as ideals which God would fain see fulfilled in the
life of His people. This is not a verbatim quotation, but whoever desires
to do so will find the original statement in the introduction to Dr.
Driver's Commentary on Jeremiah.
The fact that a scolarly wing of the British church, for whom Dr. Driver
spoke as the regius professor of Hebrew at Oxford, should have found
itself driven by the great atheist, Tom Paine, and his follower,
Bradlaugh, to make such an admission, denotes a great tragedy for British
Christianity.
The whole thing was a consequence of Dr. Driver's failure to read the
continuous history of Israel and to identify it in its modern strength.
Possessing this key to the knowledge of history, we are able to say that
every covenant which God has entered into, every promise which God has
made, and every prophecy which God has authorized concerning the northern
Kingdom of Israel and the southern Kingdom of Judah have been and are
being fulfilled to the letter up to date, and time only is the element
required to complete the fulfillment of them all. Thus we bring triumph
to the church; thus we restore shaken faith in the Bible and all its
implications. Why Christian ministers should oppose us in making known
this triumph is beyond our understanding.
We send the constantly increasing army of our members into congregations
and churches. We take none out. We leave it to the membership and
adherents of our movement to exercise perfect freedom as to the formula
by which they express their faith.
This statement leaves no doubt as to this movement, for it is an
organization which Judah is employing to destroy and upset Christian
faiths in order to establish their own world state. The statement, "We
take none out," is true, for these "fifth columnists" are sent into every
church, and even into the Government itself, to spread British-Israel and
world union now. This in itself proves clearly that all of these
movements are un-American, anti-American and most damnably subversive. If
we had a patriotic Justice Department and law enforcement bodies that had
the interest of the United States at heart, they would bring every one of
these organizations before the bar of justice, because they are enemies
of the Unted States and performing treasonable acts against our
Government.
Stated briefly, the Bible, the prayer book, the great confessions of
faith are ours. We are probably unique in this, that alone we hold what
was generally held by established church, the covenanters, the Puritans,
and all the great denominations up to a very recent period, namely, the
fact that Britain and her associate nations are Israel. Consequently we
hold the Bible in its entirety, both in its references to the church and
state; we hold the prayer book to mean fully what it says; we hold the
great confessions of faith, with all the understanding of the fathers who
produced them. We hold the state to be designed of God to be as holy as
the church, and we believe the time is speedily coming when upon the holy
vessels of the temple and the bells of the horses in the streets there
will be inscribed equally, "Holiness to the Lord."
This paragraph also identifies the source of this movement in these words
:
We are probably unique in this case, that alone we hold what was
generally held by the established church, the Covenanters, the Puritans,
and all the great denominations up to a very recent period, namely, the
fact that Britain and her associate nations are Israel.
This statement reveals how deceptive this movement is, for Great Britain
and her associates comprise Mongolians, Negroes, Australians, and many
other racial types, who are not of the tribe of Israel. I may also say
that no one would make such claim except the British-Israel; and the
reason for that claim is due entirely to the fact that the background of
this movement is Judaic.
Knowing these things, we know that we, as Israel, are subject to the
Israel constitution, that in fact our kingdom is made up as of old
Jehovah, the King of Israel, represented on earth by the House of David,
of the nation Israel, over which the King bears rule; and of the
constitution, which consists of the commandments, statutes, and
judgements of the Lord.
This paragraph lets the cat out of the bag, for Jehove, or Jehovah, is
the God of the Jews and David is their coming king. Their constitution or
laws is the Talmud, and their prophecy is taken from the Old Testament.
IS THIS AN AGE OF REASON?
Let us now be practical. The United States Army and the United States
Navy, conscripts or no conscrips, are to crusade in a stupid war in Asia
and Africa. Our young men are to give their lives--not in protection or
defense of the United States, but for the sole purpose of establishing a
kingdom in Arabia with Jerusalem as the capital, and with David as the
king of the world.
I now conclude by quoting the last paragraph :
These are the things we hold; these are the things we teach. On what
ground do Christian ministers oppose us? On what ground do they say that
we are schismatic or heretics? Surely, if either ourselves or our
opponents are schismatic or hertics, it must be our opponents, for we
stand sqarely for the faith which was first delivered to the saints.
Published by the Covenant Publishing Co., Ltd., 6 Buckingham Gate,
London, SW. 1. Printed by the Stanhope Press, Ltd., Rochester, Kent.
I hope that members of Congress will read this insert, entitled,
"British-Israel Is True," and another insert entitled, "The International
Situation," because both state the purpose of the British- and the
American-Israel, as well as the Anglo-Saxon Federation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steps Towards British Union, a World State and International Strife - Pt.
VII,
Extension of Remarks of Hon. J. Thorkelson of Montana in the House of
Representatives,
Tuesday, September 3, 1940
Mr. THORKELSON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the
RECORD, I include an article entitled "The International Situation."
This article appeared in the National Message, the official organ of the
British-Israel World Federation, under date of November 23, 1925. It is
also affiliated with the American-Israel movement, located in Knoxville,
Tenn.
The front page of this pamphlet shows the battle map of Egypt and Arabia,
with arrows pointing from Ethiopia toward the Sudan; and with three
arrows pointing from Persia, Siberia, and Tobolsk, toward Iraq and
Arabia. There are also three arrows pointing from Moscow, central Europe,
and southern Europe toward Syria, and one arrow from Libya, poiting
toward Egypt. This map is therefore to show the direction of attack on
these British Mandates, as prophesied by the British-Israel World
Federation.
What is our position in this battle plan of British-Israel? Our position
is supposed to be on the side of Great Britain, or war in the Sudan,
Egypt, Arabia, Iraq, Palastine, and Syria, against all the world powers.
It will require a large army to fight the world, so I am not astonished
when the Chief insists that we call out 40,000,000 men to fight for the
British-Israel World Federation. All of this is to establish Jerusalem as
the capital of the world and the center of this world government in Egypt
and Arabia.
Our army will travel by the way of the Pacific anfd Indian Ocean to India
and the South African British possessions, such as Tanganyika and
Rhodesia, from which attack will be launched against the forces that are
supposed to attack this little parcel of land lying on each side of the
Red Sea. This might seem like a crazy plan, but it is that which the
British-Israel and Great Britain have in mind in this war.
I have described the map and shall now insert the article which appears
on the other side of the pamphlet.
We come to the consideration of the international situation. The
attention of the world has been drawn irresistibly to Italy by the
movements of Italy. This is focused at the moment on the invasion of
Ethiopia. We have not dealt at large with this matter, and we have
avoided having much discussion on it in the Nation Message. It is
important, and the events will be the measure of the importance. But,
after all, it is but a detail of the larger plan.
Italy is moving; Russia is quiescent and Germany active only within her
own boundaries. We consider that Italy is less of a menace to ultimate
world peace than either Russia or Germany. We turn to our Book and there
find our instructions. We give, in connection with this article, a map of
the heart of the world. We call to mind that the city of Jerusalem is
placed exactly in the center of the world's population. We further call
to mind that the Great Pyramid is the center of the land surface of the
world. Around those two centers, including them, we find the mandated
territories and possessions of Britain. Taking Jerusalem as the center,
and looking eastward and north and south, we have Palestine,
Trans-Jordania, Iraq, Arabia. Again taking our stand at Jerusalem and
looking southward, we have Egypt and the Sudan; with the countries beyond
that we do not now deal; they do not come into the picture. The map shows
the British mandated territories and possessions as the heart of the
world, and this they are. Whoever possesses them a quarter of a century
from now will dominate the world. God has said that Israel shall possess
them. We believe that the Celto-Saxon world is Israel. Therefore, Israel,
the sons of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, with Ishmael, will possess the
land.
But Italy has announced her intention to regain that which once
constituted the eastern part of the Roman Empire. That is plain enough
and needs no explanation.
Russia has long announced her intention and has every plan made to take
possession of the Euphrates Valley and Palestine, at the least. That also
is historic, plain, and needs no interpretation.
Germany, in the last war, made a definite attempt to hold the land which,
through Turkey, she has occupied. She lost the war, but not the cause,
and has by no means given up hope or intention in regard to such
possession.
The Bible takes knowledge of all this, and prewrites the history of the
threefold attempt to obtain possession of the land. The thirty-eighth and
thirty-ninth chapters of Ezeliel are very definite on the matter. We
shall later quote the neccessary passages to illustrate this. The minor
prophets have had very clear vision of this upheaval, as they had very
clear vision of that upheaval which ended in the destruction of
Jerusalem. We recommend the reader to turn to Joel and read that
wonderful prophecy. In my copy of the Oxford Bible it begins at page
1112. It embraces less than four pages, and can be read in half an hour.
I would recommend then that the reader should turn to Zecheriah, chapter
XII, and read it to the end. In my copy it is page 1152, and
two-and-a-half pages of the Bible embrace it all. In chapter XIV, verse
2, there is this statement : "For I will gather all nations against
Jerusalem to battle." Now, this is a prophecy which would not have fitted
any former period of world history. It is a prophecy which wll fit no
future period of the world history. It is a prophecy which will have
fulfillment now.
All nations, then, are to be gathered against that terrirory now under
the British throne, which has Jerusalem for it center. Three groups will
move against this territory, with the intention of occupying the whole or
a part thereof. First among them will be the chief prince of Meshech
(Moscow) and Tubal (Tobolsk). The secong group listed are Persia,
Ethiopia, and Libya. The third group listed are Gomer (Middel Europe) and
all his bands, the house of Togarmah of the north quarters, and all his
bands, and many peoples with him. In the map on the previous page we have
traced arrows to show the lines of approach by which the various peoples
will invade the British territories, all aiming at Jerusalem as the
central point. Here is the map :
Translated into modern phraseology, Central Europe, Russia, and that
power which holds Ethiopia and Libya will be marching toward a common
center with one definite purpose; namely, the seizing of the land. Those
who will read what will be the final issue of the matter may read the
passages already named in Joel and Zechariah and, more specifically, the
thirty-eighth and thirty-ninth chapters of Ezekiel.
The following pasages furnish those details :
"And say, Thus saith the Lord God; behold, I am against thee, O God, the
chief prince of Meshech and Tubal :
"And I will turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws, and I will bring
thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed
with all sorts of armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields,
all of them handling swords :
"Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya with them : all of them with shield and
helmet :
"Gomer, and all his bands; the House of Togarmah of the north quarters,
and all his bands : and many people with thee." -- Ezekiel xxxviii :
3--6.
The Lords army who shall oppose them are :
"Sheba and Dedan, and the merchants of Tarshish, with all the young lions
thereof, shall say unto thee, Art thou come to take a spoil? Hast thou
gathered thy company to take a prey? To carry away silver and gold, to
take away cattle and goods, to take a great spoil? --Ezekiel XXXVIII :
13.
The gathering of the nations is expected and provided against by the
Lord; the King of Israel :
"For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city
shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half
of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people
shall not be cut off from the city.
"Then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations, as when
he fought in the day of battle." --Zechariah XIV : 2-3.
Mr. Speaker, I shall make no comments on this article, except to say that
this is a description of the coming war that is planned to take place in
Egypt. I shall now include excerpts from other articles, giving the names
of the magazines, so that those who read may be better informed of the
most devilish plot which has ever been evolved by the brain of man.
I now quote from "The hand of God in the White House, " by Edna Bandler :
Franklin D. Roosevelt, ordained and used by God to be His executive -- to
be the leader and deliverer of His people (like Moses) to deliver them
out of the depresseion and out of chaos.
Only the hand of God could have delivered this man out of the net of the
Chaldeans. But he stood alone like a Christian statesman and pleaded the
cause of his people. Just he and God-- no "party man" or organization
could boast. Just the hand of God put him on the throne.
I have seen the hand of God in the White House. From the day the shield
of David and Seal of Soloman was discovered on the porte-cochere of the
White House kitchen, President Roosevelt has been accused of placing the
Jew sign on everything : The six-pointed star rightfully belongs to us,
and George Washington ordered it on the White House pillar, and it was
not an accident that Betsy Ross, whose father and family were the makers
of the first Stars and Stripes; , Betsy changed the star to the
five-pointed star, but God meant it to be so. We, "the preserved of
Israel,"were lost and hidden until a time appointed to be revealed.
With the David shield, Soloman's seal, the great pyramid message, "A
memorial forever," told in the book of Joshua, fourth chapter, and this
pyramid coming out on the new $1 bill with the six-pointed star, all has
great significance.
"All the shields of the earth belongeth unto Me, saith the Lord, and when
the standard and the ensign is set up, ye shall know your redemption
draweth nigh." The reason this obverse side of the seal is only on the $1
bill is because "Christ and His people are one." On our early coin with
the 13 links of chain, and in the center of the coin "We are one," and on
the other side it was written : "Mind your own business." Our shield and
all the shields of the nation tell their story. In my new book, Unveiling
of Israel, many startling things. A new prophecy has just been revealed.
I shall now quote from a book entitled "The House of Israel" :
Much is made of the "perpetuity of the Davidic throne." If the Davidic
throne was to be established forever, then it must be found somewhere
now. The English throne must therefore be the throne of david, and King
George the seed of David, for does not the Scripture say that "David
shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of Israel"? (Jer. 33 : 17,
20-21.)
I shall now quote an excerpt from Time, of September 16, 1936, by Mrs.
Edna Bandler, whose husband, I believe, was a prominent Jew :
"The coming of the Lord * * * Great confusion upon earth * * * September
16, 1936," was announced last year in Manhatten by a Mrs. Edna Bandler in
volume 1, No. 1 of a magazine called the Prophet. Last week Mrs. Bandler
turned up in the news again, conducting a "week of prophecy" in Town Hall
daily, donning a white veil and prophesying for the 25 to 100 people who
dropped in, admission free, to hear her.
Edna Bandler is a white-haired intense-eyed widow of a rich diamond
merchant. Until 2 years ago she lived in a mansion, full of gilt and
marble, which John D. Rockefeller built years ago in West Fifty-fourth
Street for his son, John D., Jr. She now dwells and conducts prophetic
for a small band of followers in a lushly furnished duplex studio in West
Fifty-seventh Street, a neighborhood in which flourish many swamis and
faith healers.
Mrs. Bandler prophesies in a helter-skelter flow of words which many a
listener last week found incoherent. Several of her ideas accord with
those of British "Pyramidologists," who believe that in the courses of
masonry and many tunnels of the Great Pyramid of Cheops are to be found
prophecies of the world's history until the year 2045. Pyramidologists
thought September 16, 1936 was to be epochal for the world, but
Prophetress Bandler now denies that she said anything like the world's
end. She insists, however, that, known only to her, 300,000 people were
slaughtered on Mt. Carmel on that date. Sample Bandler prophesies :
Fascists are the Philistines, Mussolini is the Biblical "beast of iron
teeth," and he will take over Spain.
The 12 most powerful nation on earth are the 12 tribes of Israel, of
which Prophetress Bandler will identify only England (Ephraim), France
(Reuben), the United States (Manasseh).
President Roosevelt, to be the last United States President, is God's
anointed. Because he is divinely ordained, and also because man's span is
70 years, the President will be allowed to appoint as many Supreme Court
Justices as he pleases.
The world's redemption will come through love. "I'm giving the last
love-call for the world before the tribulation comes."
When all communications between the United States and Europe are cut off,
when radios go dead, when we are forbidden by decree to speak the name of
Jesus, when David, Duke of Windsor, takes an airplane to Jerusalem, then
we will know the conflict is at hand.
This will give my colleagues an idea of the British-Israel World
Federation, an organization which is widely distributed into every nook
and corner of the Nation. These subversive teachings which have for their
purpose the creation of a world government, with Jerusalem as the
capital, should now be clear to all who read this message. This movement
has infiltrated our churches, schools, and even the Army itself, as this
quotation clearly reveals :
More than a year has passed, but at least we have secured, through the
help of Mr. C.H.M. Foster, the honarary secretary of the Keswick
convention, testimonials from several men of high rank in the British
military and naval service, which we intend placing in the hands of every
officer in the United States Army and Navy. As a foretaste of what our
readers are to receive in the next months from the publication of these
wonderful stories of God's dealing in the lives of great men of empire,
we quote a sentence or two, from the letter from Admiral Sir Harry H.
Stileman which accompanied the manuscript. "I sent it with the earnest
prayer that my experience as a reconciled sinner may help some brother
officer in the United States Navy to lay down the arms of his rebellon at
the feet of the Lord Jesus, the captain of the Lord's host, and accept
from these pierced hands God's gift of eternal life." These admirals and
these generals are men who won their promotions and highest honors in the
Great War. Their testimonials are going to be of great interest, heart
warming, thrilling words to put into the hands of young people.
This movement is very subtle, and on it's face appears to be a Christian
movement. We must, however, take into consideration that the people who
fight and die in this war are not only Christians, but incluse other
creeds and races as well. We will conscript an army today, not to protect
America, for we are not threatened. We will instead organize an army to
fight in the Holy Land on the side of the English. Can we hope to succeed
in this war, facing as we will all nations in the world? The answer is
absolutely "No." We should, therefore, make it our business to build the
defenses of the United States, wash our hands of this deadly
international intrigue that is enshrouding common sense and sound
reasoning. And this may be done, as I have said many, many times, by
returning to our fundamental teachings and to the principles set forth in
the Constitution of the United States.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steps Towards British Union, a World State and International Strife - Pt.
IX,
Extension of Remarks of Hon. J. Thorkelson of Montana in the House of
Representatives,
Thursday, September 5, 1940
Mr. THORKELSON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the
RECORD, I include certain excerpts from the magazine Prophecy,
monthly--current events in the light of Scripture, June 1936
I am endeavoring to shed a little light on the British-Israel World
Federation and the Anglo-Saxon Federation, for both of these movements
are not, as I have said, in the interest of the United States.
Unfortunately, members of these groups--and I believe many of them are
innocent members--are going hand in hand, supporting a plan which is
undermining our churches, changing our educational system, so as to
prepare the public to quietly accept a colonial status of the British
Empire.
This movement is carried forward, as I have said, by the various
endowment foundations and by the many pro-English organizations, such as
the Overseas Club, the Pilgrims, American-Canadian Clubs, and
Anglo-American Clubs, and even the Octavia Society of England. All of
these have many branches throughout the United States, and are in reality
as subversive as the communistic party itself. The only difference is in
that the membership of these upper-strata organizations occupy a social
status, which leaves them more or less immune from critisicm. However, it
is important that light be shed upon their activities, so that we may
know them for what they are.
The first article concerns Bishop William T. Manning, and is evidently a
critisicm of statements which he has made. Bishop Manning is well known
and no doubt the walls of his church carry more secrets that in
themselves would be a revelation. I shall now quote this article :
[From Prophecy Monthly--Current Events in the Light of Scripture of June
1936]
WORKING TOWARD THE ONE VISIBLE CHURCH
"Mystery, Babylon the great, the mother of harlots and abominations of
the earth" (Revelation, 17 : 5).
The Episcopal bishop, William T. Manning, who a few years ago had
something of a testimony for orthodox Christianity, is now campaigning
for a great religious federation to include everything Protestant and
Catholic. In an essay being distributed in several nations he decries the
"sin" of disunion of Protestantism and Catholicism.
He calls for "true and full conversion to Christ" in Protestantism of all
sects and Catholicism, whether Roman, Anglican, or otherwise.
The essays are to be the subject of discussion and questionnaires among
these Anglican communcants during the next 4 years to obtain a statement
of essential principles, or a platform on which the reunion of
Christendom may be approached by Anglicans.
This platform will be presented at an international convention in London
in June 1940, to which three representatives from every Anglican diocese
in the world will be invited.
"In the great task of reconciling Protestantism and Cathlicism," he said,
"it seems that God has set the Anglican communion in the middle place for
the very purpose of reconciliation."
W can never believe that when our Lord prayed that His people "might be
one" that He contemplated that the desired unity should be manifested by
one comprehensive religious corporation. Where will we find in the church
epistles any intimation that God recognizes in any way the existence on
earth of one visible church under the authority of one ecclesiastical
organization? God recognizes only the mystic church, comprised of
born-again persons, wherever they may be, and God's purpose requires no
tinkerig at the hands of schemers to repair its unity, for it has never
been broken. The unity for which our Lord prayed (John, 17 : 21-23) is a
unity of life in the Father and in Himself.
If the good bishop is working for such a unity, produced only through the
regeneration of individuals, we are with him. A church that is the
creation of the Holy Spirit must be a church founded on the eternal
rock--the deity and atoning work of Jesus Christ. The apostate
denominations can never be brought together on such a basis. Any vast
human organization such as is proposed can be brought into existence only
through compromise. It would be the counterfeit of the body of Christ,
the prophesied federation of apostate sects which is to mark the days of
the age end. With such a movement, we would have no part whatever.
The words of the risen Christ recorded in Revelation should be
sufficient guidance as to His mind in this age. Here he addressed each of
the several churches of Asia and His appeal at the close of each is : "He
that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches."
His appeal is ot the individual believer in respect to His word and He
holds each individual church responsible directly to Himself.
My opinion is that the people should be left free to worship as they
please, within the rights and liberties of the Constitution. For anyone
to attempt to establish a monopolistic church, as advocated by Bishop
Manning, is as unsound as monopoly in commerce and of the gold which is
now in the Treasury of the United States. All of this is a part of the
British-Israel plan to undermine the United States. I shall now quote an
article from the same magazine entitled "Proofs of British-Israel
Trickery," on page 21 :
PROOFS OF BRITISH-ISRAEL TRICKERY
If it seems to some of our readers that we have much to say on the
subject of Anglo-Israelism, they should understand that our mail is
flooded with letters and literature from readers who are taking up with
these ideas, and our increasing conviction that this is one of the
latter-day deceptions, leads us to repeat our warning.
We sometimes receive letters from premillenial ministers defending these
doctrines, and remonstrating that we have no right to term this a heresy
for it is being preached by many who are true to the fundamentals of
salvation. This we do not doubt, yet we are certain that these sincere
men do not realize to what extent they have been imposed upon by official
literature of the movement, or to what port they are being led. It may be
true that some advocates of Anglo-Israelism preach "Christ and Him
crucified," but it is equally certain that some of the outstanding
writers on the subject have no place for this message but preach legalism
in its full potency. In all the literature, it is the peculiar "gospel"
of the kingdom" which is given prominence, and this is a doctrine of the
supremacy of the Anglo-Saxon people and their calling to reform the
world.
One of the most startling exposures of the official literature that we
have seen in small form is a recent booklet by Rev. Roy L. Aldrich, of
Detroit, entitled "Anglo-Israelism Refuted." Mr. Aldrich dated the
subject with Howard B. Rand, general secretary of the Anglo-Saxon
Federatrion of America, in a high school auditorium in Detroit. Mr. Rand
utterly failed to answer the propositions stated by Mr. Aldrich.
In the booklet mentioned, Mr. Aldrich gives numerous quotations taken
from the best known books of the movement, showing how the writers have
deliberately misquoted Scripture or omitted portions of verses which
would have ruined the arguement. He shows how they have also
misrepresented the position of other writers. But if one wishes
conclusive evidence of the fallacy of the thing, he should read the
quotations as to time reckonings and the setting of dates based upon
pyramid measurings and the year-day theory. He quotes again and again
from positive predictions of officially recognized leaders, showing how
their dates brought fourth nothing, and how subsequent issues of the
books dropped these references and substituted references to dates still
in the future.
Anglo-Israel literature has been saturated with predictions that
Armageddon would take place in the years 1928 to 1934. In this period was
included the seven times for Judah's trouble, the gathering of all
nations against Jerusalem, the repealing of all man-made laws by Britain
and America, the adoption of the constitutional law given to Moses and
the assumption of Authority by Christ. We were to see in 1934 the last
war for 1000 years. It was flatly stated that if these things did not
come to pass as scheduled, it would be the first time that the revelation
of the Sons Bible (pyramid) had ever failed. One of their most cocksure
writers, W. C. McKendrick, went so far as to say : "You can depend upon
it that every divinely inspired prophecy from 1917 to 1936 will come true
at the allotted time. Armageddon will be upon us 11 years from the time
we took Jerusalem."
Those who are sincere seekers of truth should accept our challenge to
read Mr. Aldrich's booklet and check his quotation with the standard
books from which they are taken. They will find that they are following
blind leaders who have not hesitated to employ trickery in their efforts
to mainain a following. We do not question the sincerity of many who have
accepted and are teaching these doctrines, but we do pray that they will
let the sure Word of Prophecy be their guide. When the books of men
become essential to one's maintaining of a system called Christian, we
have reason to suspect that we are off the main track.
I have taken the liberty of including this article, in order to show that
British-Israel is suspected by many people, who know the real background
of this movement. My reason for inserting these articles is to bring to
light the fact that there is a movement on foot to try to establish
authenticity, or to prove the prophecies of the Old Testament. We have no
need for occultism, or for astrology, or for phrenology--feeling te bumps
on the head and the hocus -pocus. What we need is good, sound
statesmenship, that is based upon the Constitution of the United States.
What do we care about Moses, and what do we care about the prophecies of
the Old Testament? What interest can we have in the people who are trying
ot interpret these prophcies in order to compel us to enact these
mysteries in a real world war, which can only end in the sacrifice of
millions of lives. Let us get back to sound reason and common sense, and
forget all of this soothsaying, legerdemain, and prophsying. Our Nation
cannot be guided by astrological predictions or by any other mystic
procedure, for such entertainment is fine in the parlor but has no place
on the ship of state.
I shall now quote another short article from the same magazine :
THIS IS JERUSALEM SPEAKING
"Then will I turn to the people a pure language." (Zeph, 3 : 9.)
It is interesting enough to find that a language for centuries considered
dead, should be suddenly revived and spoken by 90 percent of the Jews in
Palestine, but doubly striking to learn that within the last few months,
a Palestine Jew, Jacob Maimon, has adapted the international stenographic
system to the Hebrew language, achieving the maximum of efficiency
required. Maimon and his adept students are a familiar sight at meetings
of the Zionist General Council and the Zionist Congress, compiling
complete records in Hebrew. Classes were started some time ago in Tel
Aviv, and the first shorthand writers are on the staff of Daver, the
Hebrew labor daily.
On March 30 Hebrew made its world debut as a radio language, when the
Palestine broadcasting service was inaugurated, with addresses by Sir
Arthur Wauchope and members of the Jewish and Arab community.
"This is Jerusalem calling" were the words that opened the station in
English, Hebrew, and Arabic, and introduced the speech of Postmaster
General William Hudson.
In various parts of Jerusalem, crowds thronged the outside of radio
stores listening as the radio loud speakers broadcasted the countries
first program.
We read in a Jewish paper that a serious disturbance threatened as Arabs
warned the Palastine Broadcasting Co. that a national issue would be made
of it, if the new broadcasters dared to refer to Palastine as "Eretz
Israel." Use of the phrase, which is the Hebrew for "the land of Israel"
has already caused the resignation of the Arab section of the
broadcasting station.
It is quite evident, after reading this article, that the Arabs did not
like the Jews to say, "Eretz Israel." The Arabs no doubt look upon Arabia
as their own home, which is proper and right, because they have lived
there longer than anyone else.
This article also calls attention to the split in the false and true
Semitic ranks, for the Arab, we must confess, is a true Semite.
I wish to quote still another article from the same magazine, which is in
regard to a manifesto, which the editor received :
We who have subscribed our names hereto declare that we are opposed to
anti-Semitism in whatever form it may take, as inconsistent with our
heritage of liberty and fair play as citizens of America, and as unworthy
of those who bear the name of Christian. We further declare that any
attempt to use the Scriptures as an excuse for an anti-Semitic attitude
is a perversion of God's Word and irreconcilable with the spirit and
teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ. * * * We wish our lives to be worthy
of the gospel of Christ so that the Jew may differentiate between the
gentile who is a Christian and the one who is not. And wherever there are
those seeking to make the Jewish people aquainted with the contents of
the Christian message, we wish to uphold their hands in prayer and
sympathy. * * * To the Jewish people we declare : We have for you a heart
full of sympathy. * * * We have no part in the stirring up of base
passions against you, and we want you to know that those who are thus
guilty do not express the love which the Lord Jesus Christ has commanded
us to show you.
Among the many signers are Dr. George W. Arms, Brooklyn, N.Y., Dr. Arthur
I Brown, Bible lecturer; Dr. Oliver Buswell, Wheaton College; Dr. Herbert
W. Bieber, Philadelphia; Dr. O. F. Bartholow, Mount Vernon, N.Y.; Dr. H.
A. Ironside, Chicago; Dr. Howard A. Kelly, Baltimore; Dr. Fred Melday,
Denver; Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer, Dallas; Dr. Robert Evans, Pasadena; Dr.
Otis Fuller, Grand Rapids; Dr. Albert G. Johnson, Portland; Dr. Cortland
Myers, Pasadena; Dr. Wm. Pettinghill, Wilmington, Del; Dr. Herbert Booth
Smith, Los Angeles; Dr. John Bunyan Smith, San Diego; Dr. W. H. Rogers,
New York; Dr. W. P. White, Los Angeles; Dr. Harold Strathearn, Rochester,
N.Y.; Dr. Theodore Taylor, New York; Dr. Frank Throop, Columbus, Ohio;
Dr. I. L. Yearby, El Paso, Tex., and many others.
People like the signors of this manifesto are responsible for
anti-Semitism, for it is they who designate the anti-Semite and who raise
the question so that it becomes an issue. These gentlemen who signed the
manifesto must be Semites themselves, or else why would they go into
battle against an enemy of their own selection and designation? Surely no
one bears any enmity toward the Semites as long as they are willing to
conform to the same rules and regulations that all Americans have
obligated themselves to do. A citizen of the United States, however, has
the right to speak in defense of his own Government, without having his
life threatened by those who employ the term anti-Semite, and who are
Semitic: and I include the gentlemen who signed the manifesto in that
category.
Would it be not more honorable if the same gentlemen said, if they are
not Semites themselves, that they are supporters of the Semites; that
they believe in extra constitutional rights for them; that they believe
they should own and control all the gold; that they believe they should
own all the business and means of communication in the United States;
that they believe the so-called Anti-Semitic, or gentile American should
work with a pick and shovel while the people they support, the Semites,
should be lords over the land? Should these gentlemen come out like this,
we would know where they stand; but they, like the others, hide behind a
screen of deception.
From now on I shall assume that all who use the designation anti-Semitic
are Jews or close associates of the Jew. I believe the gentlemen in
question will concede this point to me, and in doing that they have also
classified themselves.
The so-called anti-Semites, or gentile Americans can then meet this
unfair designation as a clear-cut issue.
I was indeed astonished to hear the gentleman from New York [Mr. Celler]
denounce those of his own race of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob for having
besieged him in his office, to express their views on a critical piece of
legislation. They, of course, acted within their constitutional rights,
in seeking this audience; and, more than that, they acted within the
provisions of a resolution passed by a conference of rabbies, who, in
1936, went on record as claiming military exemption for conscientious
objectors of their own race.
I can well understand the Member's embarrasment, particularly in view of
the position he has taken in regard to the conscription bill; yet these
people are, as I have said, clearly within their constitutional rights,
to express their opinion; for it is the people of this Nation who must
fight and die in defense of their own rights. I take it that these people
do not object to service within the Uited States, but they do object
being conscripted into service and sent to the Far East to fight for a
nation and a cause in which they have little interest.
As a Representative in Congress, I have given audience to many people who
are not residents of my own State, but I look upon this as a public duty
to treat all people with consideration and courtesy--no matter who they
may be. After all, it is the people who are the power in this Nation, and
we Members of Congress are elected to protect their rights; and when we
fail in this worthy object they must, in view of our failure, act in
their own behalf. It is because of this that these people are here in
Washington to protest against the conscription bill.
I wish to further quote from the Prophecy magazine :
Can it be that the modernists sense the need of a revival and of getting
back to the great commission?
Let us read on :
That Protestantism is not as potent as it once was is hardly a matter of
dispute. Our denominations mean less and less to us. They represent no
important convictions on the part of their membership, and would visibly
collapse were it not for their vested interests and the spirit of
fellowship sustained by a common tradition.
Yes; all this we can follow if the writer is thinking of the results of a
denatured gospel, with it's resultant loss of a missionary incentive.
Surely there are many churches where the pulpit stands for no positive
convictions, and membership in them amounts to little more than belonging
to a social club. But perhaps we have not caught this editor's drift. He
proceeds :
"It is high time the churches and leaders who sense the weakness of our
sectarian missionary structure should come together in a missionary
project which is independent of denominational control. An ideal
alternative would be for the Federal Council of Churches to take over the
missionary enterprise of such denominations as would transfer their
present responsibilities to it. It is both logical and urgent."
And why, pray tell, should we hand over the management of missions to
this troup of Modernists?
"The primary reason," says the Christian Century, "is that denominational
agencies do not and cannot express the conception of Christianity which
is taking form among us today. The goal should be nothing less than the
reorientation of the Christian Church in respect to the world mission of
Christianity. It is probable that the very word "missions" would have to
be abandoned for a more Christina term."
The cat is out of the bag. It is not a revival of the old-time religion
that these gentlemen are desiring. New emphesis upon the marching orders
given by our Lord, is not in their thoughts. No; they would even rid the
church of the word which implies that men without Christ are lost and
needing the good news of salvation. Instead of going forth "to seek and
to save that which is lost," thye would instill into the church the "new
conception of Christianity's social responsibility."
No longer are we to regard missionaries as saving brands from the
burning. Under the direction of the Federal Council of Churches, we would
delegate them to put out the conflagration by introducing modern
scientific methods and mass social reforms. As Dr. Shailer Methews once
put it : "The church should be less concerned in rescuing people than in
educatig them to keep out of danger."
But if we are to set aside completely the fundamental basis of missions
as given to us by the Lord Jesus Christ; if the church is no longer to
hold convictions based upon a divinely inspired Christian revelation--one
wonders why we should trouble ourselves to maintain such an organization
as the Christian Church, or what need we have of a Federal Council of
Churches of Christ? "Woe unto them, for they have gone in the way of
Cain."
In concluding this speech, may I say that the Federal Councl of Churches
is a subversive organization, the members of which are clothed in
garments of pink, red, and scarlet, all the colors of radicalism and
communism. It is now well to take heed, for this movement is carrying
this Nation into trials, tribulations, and war. No nation can survive
unless it maintains Christian morals and believes in the teachings of the
Man who came from Galilee. It is this faith that has carried people on,
and it is this faith which has built up the Christian civilization, a
civilization which cannot survive when we deny Christian teachings.
I have included these articles in my remarks because they are
self-explanatory and more or less in line with the position I have taken
as a Member of Congress. No nation can survive that foregoes the
teachings that gave it life and security, and these teachings cannot
survive if we destroy the Nation that gives the people an opportunity ot
express and fortify themselves in the comfort that such teachings give
them.
We must, therefore, as I have said before, return this Nation to those
sound and fundamental principles upon which it came into life, namely,
the Constitution of the United States.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proof of Authenticity of British Secret Document
Extension of Remarks of Hon. J. Thorkelson of Montana in the House of
Representatives,
Wednesday, September 4, 1940
Mr. THORKELSON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my own remarks,
quotations from magazines, the press, and to include exhibit 125, I shall
attempt to prove that the contents of the British secret document, which
I inserted in the RECORD on October 11, are true.
This report, as you know, was investigated by the Senate committee on the
alleged activities at the Geneva Conference, and is an exhibit in those
hearings.
EXHIBIT NO. 125 -- BRITISH SECRET DOCUMENT
Comprises 27 pages, 8 by 5 1/2 inches each, photostats, and is a
duplicate, line for line, of Exhibit 126, without the cover sheet and the
forward of the publishers inside the cover sheet; the first page of
Exhibit 125 being page 3 of Exhibit 126, which first page of Exhibit 125
is also numbered 3.
As placed with the committee, Exhibit No. 125 has the following
memorandum accompanying it :
"NAVY DEPARTMENT,
"OFFICE OF NAVAL INTELLIGENCE,
"Washington, February 9, 1929.
"Memorandum for the director :
"With reference to a document recently obtained from Mr. W. B. Shearer,
which purported to be a confidential letter from Sir William Wiseman to
Mr. Lloyd George, I wish to submit the following comment which I believe
is convincing that the document is not authentic. The information which
disproves the direct statements made, was obtained in New York by Lt.
Comdr. Paul Foster, who conducted a personal investigation."
Please note that exhibit 125 is not the report rendered by Lt. Comdr.
Paul Foster, but is instead an abstract of his report which Mr. A. S.
Merrill furnished the Senate committee. The report is ambiguous and
incomplete, and therefore of little value. As a matter of fact, it
appears to be an attempt to shield the British Consulate and the British
Military Intelligence Department.
1. Without question the original of this document was printed and not
typewritten. Obviously such a letter as this purports to be would never
have been printed by Sir William Wiseman or any other man writing from
New York a letter of such confidential character and addressed personally
to Lloyd George, Prime Minister of England, In evidence that this letter
was printed are the following :
To say that the original was printed is silly, because originals of
printed documents are written in long hand, typed, or recorded. This
should be obvious, for no one dictates a lengthy report to a linotype
operator. However, let me say here and now that the author of the British
document, whoever he ws, knew what he was talking about, because the
contents of the letter are only too true. Dr. William J. Maloney, a
former English citizen, but now a naturalized citizen of the United
States, graciously accepted the blame of authorship, to whitewash the
responsible parties who wrote the document. He was not even familiar with
the document, as his testimony revealed when he appeared before the
Senate committee. I shall now reproduce a small part of his testimony.
Senator SHORTRIDGE. Who prepared the words which are found on the first,
or outside page?
Dr. MALONEY. I don't remember his name, sir. He was a journalist who had
been employed in Mr. Creel's bureau. He read the pamphlet and made this
cover for it. I do not remember what his name was.
Senator SHORTRIDGE. So that is a fact, is it, Mr. Maloney, that you
wrote this document?
Dr. MALONEY. Yes, sir.
Senator SHORTRIDGE. And caused it to be published?
Dr. MALONEY. Yes, sir.
Senator SHORTRIDGE. Was there a publishing house knowns as A. Gordon
Brown and Co.?
Dr. MALONEY. No; that was just a name.
Senator SHORTRIDGE. One hundred and sixty-four East Thirty-seventh
Street, New York?
Dr. MALONEY. That was just the name adopted for putting that out.
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * *
Senator ALLEN. When the State Department had this hearing in New York
touchig this, what was their purpose? Were they objecting to the
promulgation of this pamphlet?
Dr. MALONEY. I refused to attend that hearing. It was scheduled for a
Friday morning at 10 o'clock; and about 9 o'clock I sent a telegram to
Dr. Bannaman, saying I regretted if I inconvenienced him but that I would
not attend the hearing. He did not then either arrest or subpoena me.
Two Secret Service man came around and told me this was a matter of
twenty years; and they fixed the date for another hearing the following
morning. I had noit asked for any postponement; and, again they did not
compel my presence; so I ignored them.
Senator ALLEN. What did they allege as the nature of the offense which
you had commited in promulgating this?
Dr. MALONEY. They did not allege anything, sir.
Senator ALLEN. And was it dropped?
Dr. MALONEY. It was dropped. I heard no m ore about it.
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * *
Senator SHORTRIDGE. While you may have answered this question, why did
you pursue the matter in the way you have just stated? What was the
motive?
Dr. MALONEY. I wanted to show the ramifications, as I saw it, of British
propaganda in this country..
Senator SHORTRIDGE. I think you said you were then opposed to our
country entering the League of Nations?
Mr. MALONEY. Yes, sir.
Senator ALLEN. Did this circulate in Great Britain in any form?
Dr. MALONEY. We got a number of orders from Great Britain for single
copies, from members of Parliament and others, who seemd to think it was
an amusing thing.
The testimony of Dr. Maloney is illuminating, for he could not remember
the name of the printing company, nor the name of the journalist who
prepared the words on the front page of the pamphlet. He admits, however,
that the document was written--which is contrary to the statement in the
report by Mr. Merrill. Then, again, he ignored the request of the State
Department to appear before it, by refusing to attend such hearing. The
State Department made no effort to have Mr. Maloney testify. He
furthermore states that two Secret Service men informed him that the
authorshup of the document was a matter of twenty years. That, in itself,
is interesting, for what right had our Secret Service officials to
threaten him with twnety years for publishing this document. Surely it
was no offense against the United States. So it appears to be another
form of coercion in order to protect the British Government.
The doctor was, however, interested in exposing British propaganda, and
he makes the statement in his testimony that he exposed only a part of
it; and he is right.
Let me again quote from the testimony :
Senator SHORTRIDGE. May I ask you why you wrote it?
Dr. MALONEY. Lord Northcliffe, at the time the proprietor of the London
Times, the London Daily Mail, and a great number of English newspapers,
was over here in charge of the British propaganda in America. I used to
read his newspapers and follow his boastings as to what he was doing to
put us into the League, and I was opposed to the League. I heard, about
May 1919, that his campaign had reached a crisis in an issue of the
London Times of July 4. He was going around getting articles from various
Americans friendly to England and friendly to going inot the League at
that time, and he was telling in his papers about the numbers. I think he
said he had 8,000 purchasing agents. He had a club over here of 100,000
which he called the Overseas Club. He ran a magazine for their special
benefit. He was very busy in interchanging preachers, and I think he
claimed he had arranged 1,260 meetings for British preachers to address
in the United States. He was also interchanging newspaper correspondents,
and so forth. So I thought that if I prepared a skit on all he was
alleged to be doing, or said he was doing, when he published his account
of his stewardship on July 4, it would not have the effect that he
anticipated, particularly if I could spread this all over America and
show them just what he thought he was doing.
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * *
When Mr. Northcliffe published his report on July 4, he had much of what
is in here. he had more that is not in here, and some of the things in
here he had not. I thought we had rather brought his campaign to an
anticlimax.
In his testimony, Dr. Maloney makes the statement that the English and
Canadian people thought the British secret document was amusing. I do not
question the amusing part of it, for they must have looked upon us as the
biggest suckers in the world in allowing ourselves to be used and abused
and ridiculed by a power we helped to win a war which they would have
lost.
It is particularly tragic, in that it has not only brought about another
war, but has in addition to that provided a wide dissemination of
socialistic and communistic doctrines which are now destroying our own
Government. It also authenticates a part of the letter which I inserted
in the RECORD on October 11, 1939. No one can fail to recognize the
effort which was made by the committee, innocently or otherwise, to cover
up the authenticity of this report, for it is absolutely clear that the
real author was whitewashed by the committee, in not trying to establish
the identity; and by Mr. Merrill in obscuring pertinent matter which
should have gone into the record.
I. Subparagraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d), :
(a) The paragraph headings indented into the left margin are of a
different kind of type than other capitol letters shown in the document.
Two typewriters would be necessary to effect this variety of capital
letters.
(b) Both the right and left margins throughout are perfectly uniform. No
typist would be able to sustain such perfection.
(c) There are no typographical errors or erasures.
(d) The individual leters examined under a microscope show different
characteristics, in itself conclusive proof that the document was not
typewritten. For instance, to follow the letter "e" throughout a
sentence : In the first case, the loop at the bottom might be indistinct
and in the second it might be heavier at the bottom, an inconsistency
that is not found in typing.
Mr. Merrill's report on these subparagraphs is ambiguous, immaterial, and
not pertinent, as to proving or disproving the authenticity or
correctness of the British secret document. He reports on a printed
pamphlet and not on the original report. As a matter of fact, he has not
even taken the original report into consideration.
I shall now quote subparagraph (e) of paragraph I.
(e) The letterhead reads British consulate. This is incorrect, as the
office in New York is a consulate general.
The statement in this subparagraph is also incorrect, for the office is
the British consulate, and the official in charge of it is the British
consul general. This is a designation used by all governments.
Referring again to paragraph I, wherein the statement is made that
messages of such confidential character were not addressed to Prime
Minister Lloyd George personally, is another error, for Sir Gilbert
Parker did render a weekly, personal report to the Prime Minister of
England, as this paragraph I now quote will show :
(By Rt. Hon. Sir Gilbert Parker, Bart.)
I was in the United States for some months on this trip. I have been from
New York to San Francisco. I was at Washington when President Wilson
dismissed Count Bernstorff and heard him do so, and I am firmly convinced
of this -- that President Wilson commited his country to this war at the
right moment -- neither too soon nor too late. He had stopped up every
avenue of attack by the pacifists and the jurists and the pedants and the
pettifoggers.
Perhaps here I may be permitted to say a few words concerning my own work
since the beginning of the war. It is in a way a story by itself, but I
feel jusitfied in writing one or two paragraphs about it. Practically
since the day war broke out between England and the Central Powers I
became responsible for American publicity. I need hardly say that the
scope of my department was very extensivce and its activities widely
ranged. Among the activities was a weekly report to the British cabinet
on the state of American opinion, and constant touch with the permanent
correspondents of American newspapers in England. I was frequently
arranged for important public men in England to act for us by interviews
in American newspapers, and among these distinguished people were Mr.
Lloyd George (the present Prime Minister), Viscount Grey, Mr. Balfour,
Mr. Bonar Law, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Sir Edward Carson, Lord
Robert Cecil, Mr. Walter Runcimen (the Lord Chancelor), Mr. Austen
Chamberlain, Lord Cromer, Will Crooks, Lord Curzon, Lord Gladstone, Lord
Haldane, Mr. Henry James, Mr. John Redmond, Mr. Selfridge, Mr. Zangwill,
Mrs. Humphrey Ward, and fully a hundred others.
Among other things, we supplied 360 newspapers in the smaller States of
the United States with an English newspaper, whihc gives a weekly review
and comment of the affirs of the war. We established connection with the
man in the street through cinema pictures of the Army and Navy, as well
as through interviews, articles, pamphlets, etc.; and by letters in reply
to individual American critics which were printed in the chief newspaper
of the State in which they lived, and were copied in newspapers of other
and neighbor States. We advised and stimulated many people to write
articles; we utilized the friendly services and assistance of
confidential friends; we had reports from important Americans constantly,
and established association by personal correspondence with influential
and eminent people of every profession in the United States, beginning
with university and college presidents, professors, and scientific men,
and running through all the ranges of the population. We asked our
friends and correspondents to arrange for speeches, debates, and lectures
by American citizens, but we did not encourage Britishers to go to
America and preach the doctrine of entrance into the war. Besides an
immense private correspondence with individuals, we had our documents and
literature sent to great numbers of public libraries, Y. M. C. A.
societies, universities, colleges, historical societies, clubs, and
newspapers.
It is hardly necessary to say that the work was one of extreme difficulty
and dilicacy, but I was fortunate in having a wide acquaintance in the
United States and in knowing that a great many people had read my books
and were not prejudiced against me. I believed that he American people
could not be driven, preached to, or chivied into the war, and when they
did enter it would be the result of their own judgement and not the
result of exhortation, eloquence, or fanatical pressure of Britishers. I
believed that the United States would enter the war in her own time, and
I say this, with a convinced mind, that on the whole, it was best that
the American commonwealth did not enter the war until that month in 1917
when Germany played her last card of defiance and indirect attack.
Perhaps the safest situation that could be imagined actually did arise.
The Democratic Party in America, which probably would not have supported
a Republican President had he declared war, were practically forced by
the logic of circumstances to support President Wilson when he declared
war, because he had blocked up every avenue of attack.
This is conclusive proof that confidential messages were sent to Lloyd
George, and not only prove that the report by Mr. Merrill is in error,
but it also substantiates the contents of the letter which was in the
RECORD of October 11.
I shall now continue to quote from exhibit No. 125, British secret
document :
2. The office of which Sir William Wiseman was in charge, although he
worked in close harmony with the British consulate general. was never
really connected with it and the consulate letterhead was not used. The
headings used by Sir William were invariably "MI-c, Report No. ---."
Paragraph 2 is immaterial, for it does not prove or disprove this report.
3. Sir William Wiseman was relieved by Colonel Thwaites in 1918 and left
the United States shortly afterward. During June 1919, when the subject
document was supposed to have been written in New York City, Sir William
was actually in Paris attending the peace conference as an advisor to the
British delegation on American affairs. In March 1919, Colonel Thwaites
was relieved by Captain Strath-Gordon. He was in charge on the date of
the document.
This paragraph is immaterial, because it again deals with an issue that
has no bearing on the authenticity of the document.
4. Neither Sir William Wiseman nor Captain Strath-Gordon were friendly to
Lloyd George, either in a political or persoanl way. Even had they been,
such a report as this would have been addressed to the head of the
intelligence service in London, thence to the central offices of the
various branches of British intelligence (the Foreign Office, the Home
Office, the Colonial Office, the Military Office, the Naval Office etc.),
which are directly under the Prime Minister.
This paragraph is, if I may use the word, silly, or even childish, for it
assumes an impossible situation. It would be ridiculous should anyone
take this seriously and believe that the Prime Minister of England would
send people unfriendly to himself to America to take charge of the
consulate, of the British propaganda service, and of the British military
service. Such things never happen in any government, particularly in such
important organizations.
5. It is difficult to believe that anyone would attempt to figure out the
average time and cost of "Anglicization" to the penny and minute, as
mentioned on page 4.
It may be a little difficult to figure out how anyone would sit down and
estimate the cost of "Anglicizing" Americans. However, it is not
difficult to imagine that the British Government would engage in such
tabulation, for they look upon us as sheep, as one of their nobility has
already stated. Looking upon us as sheep, they will, of course, count us
like sheep; and that is what they did in the British secret report.
6. On page 9 mention is made of a dope scandal in the family of Lord
Reading. It is hardly conceivable that such reflections on a prominent
member of the English Government would be made in an official document,
especially if such references were irrelevant.
This also has no bearing on the authenticity of the letter which was in
the RECORD of October 11, but inasmuch as it is mentioned, let us bear in
mind that there was a dope scandal in England and a Marconi scandal which
nearly disrupted the British Parliament.
7. There are repeated references to Messrs, Pierpont Morgan and Co.,
whereas the firm name is always referred to as J.P. Morgan and Co.and the
individual as J. Pierpont Morgan. A man of Sir William Wiseman's
intelligence and experience in New York would not make such an error.
Mr. Merrill takes exception to the fact that the author of the British
secret document interchanged the name of J.P. Morgan and Co. and J.
Pierpont Morgan, and states that no one connected with the British
Government would make such a mistake. This statement is also immaterial,
for it is quite likely that a Britisher or an American might use one name
when he referred to the company and the other name when he referred to
Mr. Morgan personally.
8. On page 12 the work of F. Cunliffe-Owen is spoken of in a commendatory
way, whereas at this time he was under the surveillance of the British
Secret Service, as he had been reported on adversely.
Again Mr. Merrill draws a very peculiar deduction, when he refers to Mr.
F. Cunliffe-Owen. I am sure the gentleman in question was not adverse to
the Brithish Government, and that there was not reason why the British
Secret Service should watch Mr. Cunliffe-Owen. It would be much more
sensible if he and other Englishmen were watched by the American Secret
Service.
9. On page 16 references are made to the Morgan firm, regarding the loan
to Japan, and to the statement that the greater part of that firm's
capital is invested within the British Empire, both of which statements
Sir William Wiseman would have known to be incorrect.
Page 16 of the British secret document refers to a loan of $200,000,000
made by the United States Treasury, through J.P. Morgan & Co., to the
British Government. This statement is absolutely true, for I have
photographs of two checks issued by the United States Treasury, one for
$200,000,000, drawn to the order of Sir Cecil Arthur Spring-Rice,
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Government of the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and the other for
$30,000,000, drawn to the order of Colville Barclay, Minister
Plenipotentiary of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland.
This is, therefore, sufficient proof that the author of the British
secret document knew what he was talking about when he wrote that report.
I now quote from the New York Times American of Sunday, February 22, 1925
:
April 25, 1917 : The famous $200,000,000 check issued against this
warrant was promptly endorsed to J. P. Morgan & Co., British fiscal
agents, to cover an overdraft which Morgan and the banks allied with him
had granted Great Britain before our entrance into the war. This
$200,000,000 of the United States Government got to Morgan just in time,
as is evidenced by Walter Hines Page, then American Ambassador to Great
Britain, in his authoritative Life and Letters.
"In April 1917 the British balances in New York were in a serious
condition. By April 6, 1917, the date of America's entrance into the war,
Great Britain had overdrawn her account with J.P. Morgan & Co. to the
extent of $400,000,000 and had no cash available with which to meet this
overdraft. The money was now coming due; if the obligations were not met
the credit of Great Britain in this country would reach the vanishing
point. The American Government finally paid the overdraft out of the
proceeds of the Liberty Loan. This act saved the credit of the Allied
countries."
Thomas W. Lamont, of the morgan firm, has made the proposition that we
cancel half the allied indebtedness to us, now totalling $12,000,000.
May 15, 1919 : Thirty million dollars of Liberty Loan money handed to
Great Britain without legal warrant after the war was over. American
diplomats and consular officials abroad were complaining at this time
that Great Britain was spending millions to get a monopoly of the oil
resources of the world and to recover her pre-war trade supremacy. The
total sum unlawfully advanced to Great Britain after the armistice was
$330,000,000.
The endorsement of Colville Barclay, Minister representing the British
Government, on the back of the $30,000,000 check paid to Great Britian 6
months after the war was over.
On December 5, 1918, after the war, Norman H. Davis, special
representative of the Treasury Department abroad, wrote to the Assistant
Secretary of the Treasury Albert Rathbone as follows :
"From the Treasury standpoint it is advisable, of course, to cut off as
soon as possible all advances to the Allied Governments. But, on the
other hand, from a political standpoint, it may be advisable not to cause
tooo much anxiety just before the peace conference.
"As I have already advised you, the British Treasury has notified the
French and Italian Treasuries that they are through making advanced to
them. . They have either done this in order to force them on us or for
political reasons in order to force their opinions at the peace
conference in consideration of them agreeing to additional advances."
Loans unauthorized : The secret correspondence carried on by cable,
courier, and sealed diplomatic pouch, and therafter carefully guarded in
the archives at Washington, discloses thta the officials on duty in
Washington, having applied to Congress for authority to make these loans,
and having been refused such authority, therafter continued to make them
without legal authority. These amazing documents, whose authenticity is
beyond question, prove that the Treasury Department, in making these
unwilling advances, was yielding to a contention of the President, then
in Paris negotiating the Versailles Treaty, that the success of his
policies -- the League of Nations -- depended uopn liberal advances to
the countries upon whose representatives at Versailles he counted for
support.
For example, Secretary Glass, on January 14, 1919, cabled President
Wilson in Paris, promising a new loan to Rumania, and containing the
sentence :
"Appreciate importance of food supplies in relation to your policies and
anxious to use powers of Treasury to support them."
A judicious interpretation of the mass of data now available can lead
only to the conclusion that both the representatives of the American
Government and the representatives of foreign governments knew that there
was no authority under the law to make post-war advances for European
reconstruction and relief.
The language of the law, the successive Liberty Loan Acts clearly
provided that credits should be advanced to the Allies only for the
purpose of prosecuting the war against our public enemy.
The record further shows that Secretaries of the Treasury McAdoo and
Glass, realizing their inability legally to make further loans after the
war ended, sought authorization for such loans in Congress in December
1918 and February 1919.
The books of the Treasury Department show that, specifically denied this
power by the Congress, Treasury officials then proceeded to disburse to
the Allies $15,000,000,000 more of American public moneys.
The foregoing quotations should be sufficient evidence to show that Mr.
Merrill's report is wrong and the British secret document to Lloyd George
is correct.
10. On page 13 there is a reference to Kuhn, Loeb's entry into the
motion-picture field and aquisition of the Players-Lasky-Hearst
motion-picture concerns. The consolidation occured in December 1919,
while the date of the document is June 1919.
This statement by Mr. Merrill is also wrong, for the Famous Players-Lasky
was aquired by British interests in May 1919, and not, as he states, in
December of the same year.
The following quotation from the New York Times, May 16, 1919, is in
proof of this :
EUROPE, THE FIELD FOR ITS PICTURES--FAMOUS PLAYERS-LASKY AND BRITISH
INTERESTS IN A $3,000,000 CORPORATION--AMERICAN-FOREIGN
ACTORS--CONSTRUCTION OF BIG STUDIOS TO BE BEGUN AT ONCE-THE LEAGUE OF
NATIONS THE FIRST FILM
The formation in London of a corporation capitalized at $3,000,000 to
produce motion pictures against European backgrounds was announced last
night by the Famous Players-Lasky Corporation. The name of the
corporation is the Famous Players-Lasky British Producers, Ltd.
The construction of studios and plants on a large scale will be started
immediately, according to C. A. Clegg, business manager of the
international enterprise. American and European actors will take part in
photoplays staged in the Alps, the devastated areas of France and
Belgium, Wales, Scotland, Spain, and other famous and picturesque parts
of the Old World.
The Americans chiefly interested in the venture are Adolph Zukor,
president, and Jesse L. Lasky, first vice president of the Famous
Players-Lasky Corporation. Among those representing British interests are
Maj. David Davis, M. P., Maj. Norman Holden, Alexander Nisbet, W. J.
Burdon Evans, Albert Hirst, A. W. Keeley, Thomas Wrigley, J. H. Kippax,
J. G. Thompson, George Isaac, and Abraham Collins. Most of these men are
already identified with banking, manufacturing, and theatrical
institutions in England.
Mr. Merrill concludes his report with the following statement :
11. The above, to me, is quite convincing that the document is a fraud.
Mr. Merrill makes a statement whihc I flatly contradict, because his
report is wrong, and the British secret document is correct.
There is much more evidence to be had to prove the authenticity of the
British secret document, that was sent to Lloyd George on June 10, 1919,
and which I hope to have time to submit before this Congress adjourns.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proof of Authenticity of British Secret Document
Part II
Extension of Remarks of Hon. J. Thorkelson of Montana in the House of
Representatives,
Friday, August 30, 1940
Mr. THORKELSON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my own remarks in
the RECORD and to include excerpts from magazines, press, and other
publications, I shall now proceed to discuss the British Secret Document,
which was addressed to the Right Honorable Lloyd George, and dated June
10, 1919. The second paragraph of this document, entitled "Preliminary
Consideration," deals with Anglo-American Alliance, which will eventually
result in a peaceful return of the American Colonies to the dominion of
the Crown of England. This has been discussed in the articles entitled
"Steps Toward a British Union, World State, and International (should be
internal) Strife," August 20, parts I, II, III, and IV, and August 21,
parts V and VI, and September 3, parts VII and VIII, and September 5,
part IX. In these remarks the reader will find much evidence to
substantiate the letter sent to Lloyd George June 1, 1919. Further
evidence may be found in the Appendix of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, under
the title "Proof of Authenticity of British Secret Document," page 5547.
I shall now proceed with further discussion of this most dispicable
letter; a letter which holds, American people to ridicule and shame by
those who are now dragging this Nation into a war that the people do not
want and which will, if the warmongers do not desist, lead this country
into internal strife. The greatest threat to this Nation will come when
the English Government moves to Canada. It is then that the various
groups such as the British-Israel, Anglo-Saxon Federation, and various
endowment organizations and international bankers will become the real
"fifth-columnists" and crusaders for Britain, to incorporate the United
States in the British Union. In this attempted sabotage of the Republic,
the Communists will be used as they have been to date, only to be
liquidated when they have served their purpose to those in power, who
have bribed them and paid their way.
The New Deal is copying the political coups of South American republics,
and the President no doubt hopes to establish himself as a dictator by
the aid of the Army, Navy, and intelligence units in the United States,
which means, of course, that there may be no election if this "coup
militaire" is accomplished.
Cecil Rhodes is the Britisher, the internationalist, who supported and
gave his aid to the Anglo-Saxon movement for the reunion of this Republic
and the British Empire. Let me call your attention to the undermining of
America, which actively began when Cecil Rhodes, in 1877, left money to
establish scholarships at Oxford for the purpose of training diplomats to
foster such re-union.
In the firts draft of his will, which is quoted in the book Cecil Rhodes,
by Basil Williams, and the book Cecil Rhodes, by Sarah Gertrude Millin,
he stated :
" * * * directed that a secret society should be endowed with the
following objects. "The extension of British rule throughout the world;
the colonization by British subjects of all lands where the means of
livelihood are attainable by energy, labor, and enterprise; and
especially the occupation by British settlers of the entire continent of
Africa, the Holy Land, the valley of the Euphrates, the islands of Cyprus
and Candia, the whole of South America, the islands of the Pacific not
heretofore possessed by Great Britain, the whole of the Malay
Archipelago, the seaboard of China and Japan, the ultimate recovery of
the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire."
The foundation of so great a power as to hereafter render wars impossible
and promote the best interests of humanity.
A new will was made :
"He substituted English-speaking peoples for actual Britons; he came to
realize his limitations and reduced his scheme to a mere beginning of it,
the scholarships; but yet the thought behind each successive will
remained the same -- the world for England, England for the world."
(Cecil Rhodes by Sarah Gertrude Millin.)
Other quotations :
" * * * but the essence of the will, as the world knows, is the
Scholarship Foundation. In the end all that Rhodes can do toward
extending British rule throughout the world and restoring Anglo-Saxon
unity and founding a guardian power for the whole of humanity is to
arrange for a number of young men from the United States, the British
colonies, and Germany to go to Oxford. There are, accordingly, rather
more Rhodes scholars from America than from all the British dominions put
together.
"If the Union of South Africa could be made under the shadow of Table
Mountain, why not an Anglo-Saxon union under the spires of Oxford?"
This also clarifies much of which is stated in the British Secret
Document to Lloyd George. This movement of Anglicizing America was
continued by Andrew Carnegie, a Britisher who made his money in the
United States, only to sell the country that made him into the hands of
our greatest enemy. The author of the British Secret Document calls
attention to the fact that the last chapter in Andrew Carnegie's book,
Triumphant Democracy, was published in the North American Review in 1893,
and now I quote from that volume. This chapter is entitled "Looking
Ahead," and I may say at this point that this same chapter was removed
from the 1932 edition of Triumphant Democracy.
If Britain, America, and Canada were to reunite today, the population of
the reunion would be one hundred and eight millions. All other parts of
the English-speaking race would not number five millions. It is into such
a complete race reunion of her people that the door is now wide open for
the parent land to enter and take first place--first among equals * * *
Readers will kindly note that this is a look ahead--how far ahead I shall
not attempt to guess--nevertheless it is ahead, and sometime, somehow, it
is to come to pass. I see it with the eys of faith, the faith of the
devotee which carries with it a realizing sense of certain fulfillment.
Time may dispell many pleasing illusions and destroy many noble dreams,
but it shall never shake my belief that the wound caused by the wholly
unlooked for and undesired seperation of the mother from her child is not
to bleed forever.
Let men say what they will, therefore, I say that as surely as the sun in
the heavens once shone upon Britian and America united, so surely, is it
one morning to rise, shine upon, and greet again the "Re-united states,"
British-American union.
(Signed) ANDREW CARNEGIE
This movement of anglicizing America began with Alexander Hamilton, when
he, by trickery submerged the United States Treasury under the domination
of the Bank of England. It was first a British movement, but is now
international, and is financed by the international bankers, who are the
real rulers of England and the United States. Those who preach world
union or world federation are in the pay of some of the organizations to
which I have already referred in my previous remarks, the object of which
is to destroy the Government of this Republic and to enslave the American
people under the domination of the British rulers.
The arrogance of the British is unbelievable, and the low estimate in
which we are held by these dukes and "ducklings" creeps in, I may say, in
every statement which they make. As an illustration, let me again quote
Sir Gilbert Parker, who, as the letter to Lloyd George states, was in
charge of the British propaganda machine in the United States. (Harper's
Magazine, March, 1918)
Also, it should be remembered that the Society of Pilgrims, whose work of
international unity cannot be overestimated, has played a part in
promoting understanding between the two peoples, and the establishment of
the American Officers' Club in Lord Leconfield's house in London, with
His Royal Highness the Duke of Connaught as president, has done, and is
doing, immense good. It should also be remembered that it was the
Pilgrims' Society, under the fine chairmanship of Mr. Harry Brittain,
which took charge of the Honorable James M. Beck when he visited England
in 191(cannot make out looks like an "8"), and gave him so good a chance
to do great work for the cause or unity between the two nations. I am
glad and proud to think that I had something to do with these
arrangements which resulted in the pilgrims taking Mr. Beck into their
charge.
I may say that they did take Mr. Beck into their charge, for he was a
most abject worshiper of England ever since that time.
Then Mr. Parker continues :
Then it was that the Monroe Doctrine became an accepted fact, but the
United States could not have made it a fact unsupported and unprotected
by the British Navy. It is no exaggeration to say that the policy and
prosperity of the United States had a free and fair run for over the last
90 years, because Great Britain, which had learned her great lesson in
the American Revolutionary War, made her Navy the defender of the Monroe
Doctrine.
No one, not even a Britisher, could have uttered a greater falsehood, for
the British Government, has never been an aid to the United States, and
the British have never protected our interest in South America; but have,
instead, destroyed our interest by undermining American commerce in that
Southern Hemisphere. This should be clearly evident to anyone, when he
takes into consideration the effect upon our foreign trade when we
observe the British blacklist, which is handed to us by the British
Government. A statement of this kind simply makes me boil, and should
start the blood surging in the arteries of every American who has the
interest of this Nation at heart. However, this, as I have already said,
shows the contempt in which we are held by those who are now crying for
help, and whose Navy is not even able to protect the insignificant area
contained within the British Isles. How is it possible for such Navy to
give any aid in the protection of the Monroe Doctrine, a doctrine which
we could never enforce with an Army of 5,000,000 men; yes, and with three
navies as large as the one which we now have.
It is well to bear in mind that the Central and South American Republics
are sovereign governments within themselves, and it is within their
rights to do as thye please in regard to admitting foreign people within
their borders. Should we foolishly attempt to enforce an arbitrary
doctrine upon them, we will in such procedure invite war with these
Republics. When this war is over, we will be a nation without a single
friend, either in the western continent or in any part of the world. Yes;
even England herself, will give us "thumbs down" as she has always done
when such necessity suits her own purpose.
The letters of Sir Cecil Spring-Rice to Balfour and others, which were
published in the Saturday Evening Post, July 13, August 3 and 24, 1929,
reveal, if nothing else, the manner in which our Secretary of State, Hon.
William Jennings Bryan, and the President of the United States, Woodrow
Wilson, were taken into camp by the British. The Secretary of State is
treated with contempt in Sir Cecil Spring-Rice's correspondence, and our
President, Mr. Wilson, was not treated any better. It is well to read
these letters, for I believe they will be useful in reestablishing
patriotism in those of our people who are now vacillating between the
British Empire and the United States. I may say at this point that I have
inserted some articles from the Report on Investigation of Pro-British
History Textbooks in the Public Schools of the City of New York, in the
RECORD. This report also authenticates the secret British document in its
reference to change in our educational institutions and in our churches.
The author of the British document thanks Mr. Taft and Mr. Polk; and he
should, because Mr. --- was on the board of the League to Enforce Peace.
In fact, he was the President of the league, and therefore, guilty or
innocent. a tool of the British propaganda service. Mr. Frank Polk was a
member of the Pilgrim Society, and so recorded in it's membership list.
Mr. Baker, whom the author of the British secret document also mentioned,
was trustee of the Twentieth Century Corporation.
Mr. Edward Filene, of Boston, an internationalist, set up the Twentieth
Century Fund, Inc., and by interlocking directorates has control over 124
trust funds, together totaling nearly a billion dollars. Included in this
control are : The Carnegie, Rockefeller, the Duke and Russell Sage
Foundations from which funds go subsidies to subversive communistic,
socialistic and all peace movements, as well as the cooperative
movements. Among activities of Twentieth Century Fund, Inc., are the
following : N. R. A., S. E. C., Wagner Labor Act, International Labor
Office (affiliated with League of Nations), Foreign Policy Association,
Credit Unions, Cooperatives, League of Women Voters. (See Red Network,
published by Elizabeth Dilling, 53 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Ill.,
for communistic activities of the groups. Also see Yearbooks and American
Foundations and Their Fields, published by Twentieth Century Fund, Inc.)
It is well to note that Messrs, Pierpont Morgan, Rockefeller, Insull, can
be found among the "Pilgrims," while Cleveland Dodge belongs to the
Carnegie clan.
In the London Times, July 4, 1919, appeared an article entitled,
"Insurance of Peace," from which I now quote :
NEED OF PROPAGANDA
By efficient propaganda, carried out by those trained in the arts of
creating public goodwill and of swaying public opinion toward a definite
purpose, not only the natural and proper competition of interest between
the two countries would be robbed of the poison of ignorant resentment,
but also the malign influence of existing and potential propaganda
antagonistic to British-American goodwill will be nullified.
What is now needed--urgently needed--is to make a beginning. .
Efficiently organized propaganda should mobilize the press, the church,
the State, and the cinema; press into active service the whole
educational systems of both countries, and root the spirit of good will
in the home, universities, public and high schools, and primary schools.
It should also provide for subsidizing the best men to write books and
articles on special subjects. to be published in cheap editions or
distributed free to classes interested. Authoritative opinion upon
current controversial topics should be prepared, both for the daily press
and for magazines; histories, and textbooks upon literature should be
revised. New books should be added, particularly in the primary schools.
Hundreds of exchange university scholarships should be provided. Local
societies should be formed, in every center to foster British-American
good will, in close cooperation with an administrative committee.
Important articles should be broken up into mouthfuls for popular
consumption, and booklets, cards, pamphlets etc., distributed through
organized channels to the public. Advertising space should be taken in
the press, on hoardings, and in the streetcars, for steadily presenting
terse, easily read and remembered mind-compelling phrases and easily
grasped cartoons, that the public may subconsciously absorb the
fundamentals of a complete, mutual understanding.
EFFORT MUST BE UNITED
This work cannot be efficiently done by individuals or by small
independent societies. It must be all coordinated into one great, steady,
efficient effort, and the execution of it be under the direction of men
in both countries who are qualified by capacity and experience to sound
exactly the right note and to employ the right media to interest the
section of the public to which any particular appeal is made.
The whole expense for carrying out this enterprise in both countries
should immediately be budgeted for and the necessary funds secured, to be
administered by one strong administrative committee of eminent men in the
United States and one in the United Kingdom. These two committees should
be coordinated in one international supervisory committee. Literary
matter should be secured by subcommittees of British and American
journalists and publishers who know the capacity of all of those writers
competent to assist in the work of interpreting one country to the other,
to establish the mutuality of British-American international interest,
and to impress the entire public opinion of both countries wiht the
advantage, nay, the necessity for a world-wide unity of British-American
peace effort, Ambassadors of good will should be exchanged, to meet the
public in our pulpits, on our lecture platforms, and to preside in the
lecture rooms of our colleges.
In the words of a great American patriot, "We must hang together, or
assuredly we shall all hang seperately." If there be one who still doubts
the axiomatic truth, let him carefully consider the blood-red future of
the world with the Brith Empire and the United States in active
hostility, or even engaged in consuming their existing and potential
material and spiritual resources in bitter Anglo-American controversy,
quarrel, and intrigue.
In reading the foregoing can anyone close his eyes to the evil effect of
such propaganda, and particularly when nearly all American publications
are controlled by an alien power, the interests of which are only in the
conquest of America. Where are the loyal Americans who should, first of
all, guard this Republic with their very lives? Where is the patriotic
press that prides itself on truth? The press that should rally to the
defense of America and give full support to those who, back to the wall,
are fighting alien influences to save what is left of our Republic. I am
astounded and shocked by public apathy and by the attitude of the
American press, which is pro-English, proforeign, and prointernational; a
press which has forsaken our country in its greatest hour of need.
In order to reveal the attitude of some deluded Americans, I shall quote
Owen Wistor, so that he may be regarded correctly as he was---pro-British
(from the London Times, Friday, July 4, 1919) :
The truth of it was, you had been driving us colonies with such light
reings for so long that directly you tighten them we took the bit between
our teeth and bolted. We mena to be our own nation and not your colonies,
no matter how easy with us you might be. And you were easy, very easy,
until quite late in our Revolution. So our school histories had to make
out a case. They played up George III and Lord North Strong, and they
suppressed Burke and Pitt and the whole liberal element in England that
was in sympathy with us; thought of us as free British brothers over the
water who were insisting on our British rights. In short, they painted a
distorted picture of England's political condition at that time.
INFLUENCE OF SCHOOL BOOKS
Generations of American schoolboys have studied this picture. To fathers
and grandfathers all over our States, the names Concord, Bunker Hill,
Valley Forge, mean resistance to the tyrannical enemy of liberty,
England. England is still that to our schoolboys of today, though not so
many. A movement to correct the schoolbooks has been started and will go
on. It will be thwarted in every way possible by certain of your enemies.
These will busily remind you that you burnt our Capital in the next war
we had; that you let loose the Alabama upon us during our Civil War; they
will never mention the good turns you have done us. They would spoil, if
they could, the better understanding that so many of us are striving for.
They would pry us apart, if they could. They will fail. Our dead over
whom you strewed flowers on May 30 will help us living to defeat them.
Could I name all the matters wherein we have varied much or little from
you since that original Fourth of July, 143 years ago, a teeming page
would be compiled. In truth, a whole book devoted to these differences,
with the history of such divergence, would have that same light-throwing
quality which is possesed by any great dictionary giving the evolution
and successive use of words. We vary from you, for instance, in our
Protestant Episcopal prayer book, here and there; in our vocabulary,
written and spoken; in the custom of primogeniture, the rule of the road,
coinage, spelling, pronounciation, enunciation. Many of us speak through
our noses, none of us drop our h's; ommission of the g, as in shockin'
denotes mostly the 'umble with us, the 'aughty with you. And so forth,
and so forth.
This confirms the statements made in the letter to Lloyd George in which
the author of it brags how the British changed our history in order to
destroy patriotism.
To establish more indisputable evidence as to the authenticity of this
document, and to the importance of the author, I shall quote a brief
excerpt from the letter itself :
Suggestions for the visit : His Royal Highness, the Prince, should have a
brilliant entourage of our American-born nobility. About the time of his
coming the Grand Fleet might make a demonstration in American waters,
preferably off Newport, R. I., so that Lady Gerard, lady Sims, Lady
Strauss, Lady Rodman, and the wives of our other knights may participate.
And Field Marshal Haig, with Sir John Pershing, might review the American
forces. During the visit special courtesies should be shown to the
presidents and professors whom I have listed in appendix 23. I would also
suggest that a complete programme of social favours be arranged for the
parsons, editors, and newspaper proprietors in appendixes 20 and 26. A
new order might be created to reward the celebrants of the visit, the
Royal Order of the Pilgrims. It should have three degrees, Knights Grand
Cross, Knights Bachelor, and Commanders. With respect to the knighted
classes we could, of course, reassure the suspicious by Mr. A. Maurice
Low's patent device, first described in the New York Times, August 15,
1918 (appendix 44), which safeguards the democracy of the knighted by the
withholding of the accolade. Would you, however, kindly give instructions
to the publishers of Whittaker's Almanac, and of the official registers,
to delete, in their next issue, from their lists of British Knights, the
name of Sir John Biddle, Sir Tasker Bliss, Sir P. D. Lechridge, Sir Sims,
Sir Joseph Strauss, and the other American knights, as their inclusion in
the 1919 issue has tended to shake American faith in our Mr. Low's
ingenuity?
The foregoing paragraph is correct, for the 1920 edition of Whitaker's
Almanac listed the following American's as Sir Knights :
Pershing, Gen. John, G. C. B. (U.S. Army).
Rodman, Rear Admiral Hugh, K. C. B. (U.S. Navy).
Biddle, Maj. Gen. John, K.C. B. (M) (Hon.) (U.S. Army).
Bliss, Gen. Tasker, G. C. M. G. (U.S. Army).
Marsh, Gen. Peyton, C.M.G. (U.S. Army).
Sims, Vice Admiral William Snowden, G.C.M.G. (U.S. Navy).
Strauss, Rear Admiral Joseph, K. C. M. G. (U.S. Navy).
Let me also call attention to the fact that the author of the British
secret document, or letter to Lloyd George, suggested that inasmuch as
these titles had shaken the confidence of the American people, that their
names should be removed from the Almanac and deleted from the Royal
Register. Did the Prime Minister of England comply with this request? He
surely did, for the names were removed from the very next issue of the
Almanac. Surely, anyone with such entry to the British Prime Minister
must have been important, and particularly so when the Prime Minister of
England complied with his request. His reference to Mr. Low is also
correct, for in the New York Times of August 15, 1918, appears an article
entitled "British Decorations," from which I shall quote a few lines :
To the EDITOR OF THE NEW YORK TIMES :
So many persons have written and asked me about the decorations conferred
by Kin George on American generals and admirals, and there is evidently a
fear in the minds of some Americans that the acceptance of these
decorations may insidiously sap American democracy by creating a titled
class, that perhaps you will permit me to quiet their fears and explain
what these appreciations signify.
Knighthood is an honor dating back to feudalism. It is conferred by the
sovereign in person, who dubs his kneeling subject--the posture
indicating allegiance, submission, and fidelity--by touching his
shoulders wiht a drawn sword, and saying : "I dub thee knight; arise Sir
John," and the man who 30 seconds before knelt down as plain John Smith
arises Sir John Smith. (A. Maurice Low, Washington, August 11, 1918.)
The only difference in this initiation, if I may so designate it, is in
the fact that our Sir Knights were not dubbed as is the customary
procedure with British subjects.
This, Mr. Speaker and Members of Congress, further authenticates the
British document which some Members refused permission for insertion in
the RECORD. There is not one paragraph in this letter that is not
absolutely correct, and the letter was, in spite of opinions to the
contrary, actually sent by some one to the Prime Minister of England.
This should be clear, as one reads the evidence I have produced in order
to prove this document.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proof of Authenticity of British Secret Document
Part III
Extension of Remarks of Hon. J. Thorkelson of Montana in the House of
Representatives,
Tuesday, September 3, 1940
Mr. THORKELSON. Mr. Speaker, my object in having inserted in the
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD evidence to prove the authenticity of the British
secret document, or the letter which was sent to Lloyd George, is solely
for informative purposes.
The substance matter which I have inserted in the RECORD is to identify
this letter as a true report sent by a British official to the Prime
Minister of England. Everyone who has the interest of our country at
heart, should demand that this letter be republished in the CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD, for it is Exhibit 126 of the Senate hearings on the alleged
activities of the Geneva Conference. No objection should be raised in
having this document printed, unless the suppression of it is for the
purpose of protecting officials in the British Government.
The letter, as I have already said, is contemptible, as it treats all
Americans as inferiors to self-anointed upper strata in English society.
It follows, therefore, that if the with-holding of publicity on this
document is of value to Great Britain, the cost of reproducing it is of
much greater value to the people of the United States.
I shall now quote excerpts from the British secret document, so that they
may be compared with the articles I have inserted in the CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD on September 10 and 11, entitled "Proof of Authenticity of the
British Secret Document" and "British Propaganda and Subversion of
Textbooks in American Public Schools."
EDUCATION
For many years we had trained the inhabitants to view native culture with
disdain and disgust. Real culture was produced only "on the other side."
Americans such as Henry James, Whistler, Sargent, and Edwin Abbey were
conceded domestic recognition only after they had received our
imprimatur. Before the war we had created a considerable demand for
British-born and trained men to fill positions of intellectual control
here. During the war we added thousands to the number of these men by
substituting them for hostile natives, teachers, preachers, professors,
and lecturers who were dismissed for our sake by patriotic authority. We
organized our thought controllers into British schools and universities'
clubs; and we are now nearing the point where, through their concerted
efforts, we shall control from the cradle to the grave whatever mind this
Nation possesses.
HOSTILE NATIVE TENDENCIES
On the Irish-American situation here, Sir Horace Plunkett has lately
reported. There is no German-American situation; it is considered near
treason to use German silver, to hear German music, or to have German
measles. German we have managed to bar from so many schools that we need
no longer fear either intellectual or commercial competition from Germany
in America, or commercial competition from this country in Germany. And
we are rewriting the school history books in order to make King George
III, of glorious memory, a German king so that our late enemies may be
penalized for the wrongs which the Colonists fancy they received at his
royal hands and ours.
PUERICULTURE
We are at present engaged in a campaign to Americanize the schools, to
make obedient loyal little Britons out of the undisciplined native young.
School books now refer to the 1776 revolt as an unfortunate and senseless
family quarrel, which has been given regrettable publicity by the vulgar
and scandalous. With votive wreaths we laid the ghosts of the foolish
fathers. The Child's Book of Knowledge and similar works, which we have
tactfully introduced, enable the young to anglicize their parents. There
is a growing tendency on the part of the wealthy to seek exclusively
English scools, such as St. Bernard's in New York City, for the education
of their children. This tendency should be fostered by Foreign Office
subsidy, if necessary.
We are replacing with the song America the scurrilous Star Spangled
Banner, which, after expurgating, we socially ostracized. America, which
has te same air as God Save the King, is usually played and not sung; so
in effect, we are conferring on this colony the imperial anthem.
These excerpts from the British secret document are self-explanatory, and
the claims made are confirmed by the articles to which I have referred.
Was the author of the letter to the Honorable Lloyd George correct when
he asserted that attempts would be made to remove The Star-Spangled
Banner as our national anthem? The answer is "yes," as the articles I now
quote will reveal :
The spiritual union of England and America---and there is no other
union---is God-made. Its attempted disruption through the insistence on
the perpetuation of The Star-Spangled Banner is German propaganda, and it
must and shall cease. It had not occured to me that this was German
propaganda to keep up a former animosity which existed between England
and America, or Ephraim and Manasseh, until it was told me by those
highest in authority.
The Star-Spangled Banner is not our official anthem, and therefore is not
a national institution. It is an excrescence---an illegitimate branch
that has been engrafted on the holy roots of our national consciousness.
It is a blot on our escuteon and in no way represents us in this
momentous hour. A supreme power has evidently prevented the authorization
of a hymn which does not express American democracy.
Lloyd George emphasized the same sentiment in the press today (September
12, 1918) : "This must be the last war. * * * There is no compromise
between freedom and tyranny, no compromise between light and darkness. I
know that it is better to sacrifice one generation than to sacrifice
liberty forever. That is what we are fighting for, and Heaven grant that
we fight through to the end."
It would interest you to know, no doubt, that I am in receipt of a letter
from Queen Mary of England, in which she states that she has read my
pamphlet, Words and Music of The Star-Spangled Banner Oppose the Spirit
of Democracy, Which the Declaration of Independence Embodies, and assures
me of her interest in it, and also her interest in the words of the new
national anthem, Our America.
This is the standard around which I am rallying my spiritual, mental
forces. The insistence on perpetuating darkness and schism, which The
Star-Spangled Banner represents, is, I have been told by some in the
highest authority, nothing more nor less than German propaganda, working
to keep alive the spirit of animosity between England and America. It
must and shall cease. True Americans are demanding and taking possession
of their spiritual birthright of life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness and will share eventually this birthright with their
Anglo-Saxon brothers, who, with them, will lead all nations out of the
misery and darkness of hatred and animality into the light of life and
love, the source and supply of man's real spiritual individuality.
These excerpts are from a book entitled "Words and Music of The
Star-Spangled Banner Oppose the Spirit of Democracy Which the Declaration
of Independence Embodies." A protest, by Kitty Cheatham, which was
copyrighted in 1918.
I now quote from the New York Times, August 5, 1925 :
The Star-Spangled Banner, with its words breathing hatred of our
Anglo-Saxon brother, Britain, and its music borrowed from a foul English
drinking song, To Anacreon in Heaven, can never become our national
anthem. Never has Congress, and never will Congress legalize Francis
Scott Key's Ballad, which voices "bombs bursting in air," "blood," "the
terror of flight and the gloom of the grave," "foul footsteps'
pollution," and refers to our Anglo-Saxon brother, Britain, as "the foe's
faughty host."
880 ST. NICHOLAS AVENUE,
New York City, August 1, 1925.
Mrs. AUGUSTA E. STETSON,
7 West Ninety-sixth Street, New York City.
DEAR MRS. STETSON : I have just been reading your book, Sermons Which
Spiritually Interpret the Scriptures, published by G. P. Putnam's Sons.
The article which engaged my attention at this time is entitled "The
Star-Spangled Banner Can Never Become Our National Anthem," which you
first published in the press of New York, Washington, and Baltimore, in
June, 1922. In this article you protest against the song, both words and
music, which you characterize as being un-American, unauthorized by
Congress, and which you prophecy will be erased from America's historic
record by flat of God.
For years I have been aware of the subtle, un-Christian influence of this
song, The Star-Spangled Banner, and of the very evident use of which is
made of it to stir up sentiments inimical and hurtful to every ideal
which Americans cherish. The fact is that each time a bill has been
introduced in Congress seeking to legalize The Star-Spangled Banner as
our national anthem Congress had refused to give its sanction.
Allow me to relate two incidents which occured in my experience recently.
At a large public gathering, held near New York City early last month,
The Star-Spangle dBanner was palyed by the band as a prelude to the
addresses and exercises of the evening. I was seated in my car, but I did
not remove my hat, as this would have been equivalent to my acquiescence
in the vicious sentiments and ribald music of this song, which I
repudiate, as well as acknowledgement of its legality, contrary to
Congress' attitude.
A man came runnning toward me, excitedly waving his arms, and demanding
that I remove my hat, but I paid no attention to him, and the music
ceased before he reached my car.
On a similar occasion, a few days later, the band again played The
Star-Spangled Banner. This time I was one of the throng about the
platform, which was brilliantly lighted; but I again kept my hat upon my
head. A lady, a member of a group standing near, said, "take off your hat
to our national anthem." I replied, "Madam, The Star-Spangled Banner is
not the national anthem of America, for it has never been authorized by
Congress." She expressed surprise. At that moment a gentleman approached
me from behind, tapped me on the shoulder, and said, "Excuse me, sir, you
have forgotten your hat." I said, "No sir; I have not forgotten my hat.
This song is not our national anthem."
I longed to tell these people, who were the ignorant mouthpieces for
vicious, un-American sentiments, the truths about this song and it's
foreign ribald music setting, but the time was not opportune. Therefore,
dear Mrs. Stetson, I feel that your article on this subject, if reprinted
in the press at this time, will do a great work in enlightening the
people of America as to a phase of the hidden, secret, alien warfare
which is today being fiercely waged against our beloved country, America,
as well as against the God-ordained and predestined unity of the two
great Anglo-Saxon peoples, America and Britain, under the rulership of
Christ. Will you republish your valueable article now? With much respect,
Sincerely yours,
J. P. BLAIR.
I have taken the liberty of quoting these excerpts, in order to show that
the author of the British secret document was not given to idle
speculation. He knew that our schools, colleges, and churches were
undermined with British-Israel and Anglo-Saxon federation propaganda, and
that an attempt would be made to exchange The Star-Spangled Banner for a
song, entitled, "Our America," a verse of which I now quote :
America, America, in thee is found
Manasseh's tribe, to Ephraim bound.
By Israel's vow,
Whose destiny is heaven-sealed :
Far-spreading vine in fruitful field.
God's planting, thou!
From Words and Music of The Star-Spangled Banner Oppose the Spirit of
Democracy Which the Declaration of Independence Embodies; a protest, by
Kitty Cheatham, which shows the hand of the British-Israel World
Federation.
In contrast to this, it is to the everlasting credit of the Committee on
the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Sixty-Eighth Congress, which
came valiently to the defense of The Star-Spangled Banner, as our
national anthem. Much credit for this must be given to the distinguished
gentleman from New York [Mr. Celler] and to former Representative
Linthicum from Maryland, whom I now quote :
STATEMENT OF HON. J. CHARLES LINTHICUM, MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE
OF MARYLAND
Mr. LINTHICUM. I introduced a similar bill to the one under discussion
today, No. 6429, on the 1st of April 1919, and on the 2d of April 1921.
We feel that though the Army and Navy have issued rules and regulations
for the adoption of Key's anthem, The Star-Spangled Banner, it should
have recognition by Congress itself. We feel that the Congress, with the
approval of the Executive, should promulgate this as the national anthem
of our country, just as many other countries have adopted and approved
national anthems for their respective countries.
There are many songs which are perhaps easier sung and soome people think
that perhaps The Star-Spangled Banner is a little hard to sing that
therefore it should not be the national anthem. But while there are many
songs, there has never been in the history of this country a song which
sprung from the hearts of the people as did The Star-Spangled Banner, and
at a time when the destiny of the country weighed in the balance.
I do not want to go too far into history, because with this committee it
is like carrying coals to newcastle.
But we can readily realize the condition of our country when in Aug.
1814, the National Capitol had been destroyed, the White House in the
city had been destroyed, and British vessels with 7000 troops under their
control were leaving it in this devastated condition, having in a great
measure dispensed practically the National Government and were then
proceeding on to Baltimore.
It was the intention, as stated in the London Times on that occasion that
troops should come down from Canada, that troops should proceed from
Washington on to Baltimore, then to Philadelphia and New York, and there
to meet the troops from Canada and thereby capture the entire easten
coast of our country, which was practicall the whole of our country.
It was the indomitable courage of the men of America at North Point and
at Fort McHenry who met General Ross and his troops on that memorable day
on the 12th of September, at North Point, which defeated him, though the
American troops were less than 3,000 only 1,700 of which went into
action, while the British troops numbered somewhere around 7,000 trained
and picked men from the battlefields of Europe, men who had fought
Napoleon under the great General Wellington, and had now been released
because Napoleon had been sent to the island of Elba, the war having
practically ceased in Europe.
Those were the men who were sent to capture America and those were the
men whom the patriotic Americans defeated at North Point and Fort
McHenry.
That was the condition of this country, the Capitol and buildings
destroyed, the White House destroyed, the Nation's Capital under the heel
of the British. They were leaving this section, going from Upper
Marlboro. Dr. Beans, who had protested against their actions in his
little town, had been captured, had been put aboard one of the British
boats and carried to Baltimore, where the British were to attack Fort
McHenry.
Francis Scott Key, who lived in this city, right here where you have
established and built the great Key Bridge---in a small house recently
razed, just this side of that---a member of the bar, born in Frederick,
Md., proceeded to Baltimore with orders from the President, asking to
have his friend, Dr. Beanes, released.
He was taken aboard the ship Minden, where he went to consult with the
British commander and, owing to the attack which was to be made, he was
kept on that ship all night pending the attack on Fort McHenry.
There, during the night, he witnessed these bombs flying from the British
ships to the fort, 400 of which are said to have reached the fort. From
that comes that immortal line, "Bombs bursting in air."
So, in suspense, he remained there that entire night, listenin to the
bombardment of a city where his friends lived, where his relatives lived,
listening to the bombardment of a city, which, if it fell, he knew meant
the proceeding of the British on to Philadelphia, New York, and perhaps
the capture of the entire country.
There, in great suspense, was born this great anthem, The Star-Spangled
Banner. In the early days we can imagine him looking to that little fort
to see if The Star-Spangled Bannet yet waved. I can imagine him almost
trying to pierce the darkness to discover whether the little fort had
fallen or not. Seeing that "Star-Spangled Banner yet waved," he took a
pencil and jotted down this immortal anthem, which has stood as the great
anthem of the people for more than a hundred years.
And today, we come to ask the Congress to recogize, in its official
capacity, something which should have been done more than a hundred years
ago. It was not only the birth of this anthem, the sentiment surrounding
it, but what it meant to the people. At that time our people were
somewhat divided. The war had not been prosecuted with the vim and
courage with which the recent war was conducted by our country. People
were doubtful whether we ought to have declared war. People were doubtful
about whether it had been the proper policy and they were somewhat
divided on the issue. The war therefore was not pressed as it should have
been pressed.
But, when that national anthem burst forth and the people began to sing
throughout our land, it was worth more than 100,000 bayonets, because it
united our people in one solid phalanx for the prosecution of the war.
Not only that, but the battle at North Point and Fort McHenry was the
decisive battle of the war of 1812. We have histories which describe the
great decisive battles just as much as the great Battle of Waterloo or
the Battle of Gettysburg.
It is true that there were not so many troops here, but the troops who
were there won that battle and that discontinued the war and the Treaty
of Ghent soon followed.
General Ross, who did not believe the American patriots would come
forward to meet his invincible forces, rode ahead and met his death at
the Battle of North Point and was carried from there to Quebec to be
buried. There stands a monument in Baltimore to the boys who fired the
fatal shots, Wells and McComas.
From that time on there were no battles which influenced the writing of
the treaty. We have the Battle of New Orleans, of course, and a great
battle it was, but the fact is that battle was fought after the treaty
had been signed.
News traveled slowly in those days and Jackson fought his battle and won
it---the great Battle of New Orleans---after the Treaty og Ghent
(hearings before the Committee on the Judiciary, House of
Representatives, 68th Cong., March 20, 1924).
I shall now quote another excerpt from the British secret document, in
which reference is made to British control of the Boy and Girl Scouts :
EXTRASCOLASTIC EDUCATIONAL BODIES
We have spread everywhere the Boy Scout movement and placed the 1,000,000
American Boy Scouts under the headship of Gen. Sir. Baden-Powell. Through
the good offices of a British subject, Mrs. Juliette Low, and of Mrs.
Arthur Choate we have enrolled 60,000 in the Girl Scout movement under
the headship of Lady Baden-Powell. And the Chief Scouts now propose a
periodic interchange of Scouts between England and America at the expense
of some American millionair. We have, moreover, linked the Scout movement
with the varied patriotic organizations for maidens and for youths, and
with the school system through the loyalty of Dean Russell, of Columbia
University. In his case a degree from one of our universities is already
overdue.
For the young over Scout age we have the Y.M.C.A., Y.W.C.A., and kindred
organizations, financed by our auxiliaries, and directed by gentlemen
such as the Reverend Drs. Mott and Spear, who hold degrees from the
University of Edinburgh, and who are imbued with our culture. These
organizations have directorates interlocking with the Scout movement and
are affiliated with the organizations of the same name in England. As the
style here has it, they are internationalized. We are arranging further
to link up all these extrascholastic bodies and to correlate them through
Teachers College, Columbia University, with the school system, so that we
may remove the mind of the young from the prejudicial family influences
and peculiarities to the custody of a series of organizations which will
exert a continuous standardizing influence during the formative years.
Quantity production of thought-proof, disciplined, evangelical, uniformed
colonists is thus insured to the Empire. I cannot too highly commend the
financial support which Messrs, Dodge, Pratt, Macy, and Rockefeller,
together with Messrs, Warburg, Schiff, Morgenthou, and Rothschild have
given to this standardizing campaign. President and Mrs. Wlson have
graciously bestowed their patronage upon it; Miss Wilson has aided it
with song; the Presidential sons-in-law, less tuneful, have been no less
helpful; and all the official family, male and female, have been zealous
even where they have proved expensive.
The statements made by the author of the document are substantiated by
many newspaper articles, from one of which I now quote :
(From the New York American of November 20, 1932)
LEAGUE OF NATIONS IN DRIVE TO LURE CHILDREN FROM UNITED STATES
IDEALS SEES
INTERNATIONALISM BEING IMPLANTED WITH JUNIOR RED CROSS AND GIRL
SCOUTS
(By Willis J. Ballinger, formerly assistant professor of economics at
Williams College, Williamstoen, Mass.)
This is a story about forced friendships---the kind that is manufactured
on a large scale and pumped into the bosoms of gentle, unsuspecting
natures. It is a little insight into a powerfully organized European love
call that has been heard in America of late with increasing volume and
soulfulness.
I stated in the last article that the League of Nations is the hope of
the distracted Old World merchants, but that its mercantile designs are
cleverly masked behind an ingenious pother about loving the peoples of
the world---loving them so well that nationalistic boundaries,
governments, tariffs, immigration bars seem un-Christianlike and absurd.
In the center of the spider's web are the astute trade interests of
Europe led by international bankers waiting patiently for the feast when
the evangelism of good will has betrayed our resources into the hands of
a world league controlled by European powers. Such is the chief ballot
box bait of League City---Geneva.
So the league makes a terrible fuss over little children---ballotcasters
in the making. It adores tots---from the cradle to the polling booth.
American children are particularly esteemed, for these children will some
day come into great inheritance---the United States, with it's enormous
natural wealth.
It is all-important that these future owners of America be properly
trained in sound international sympathies, the soundest one of which is
to make them so humanity-conscious that they will entrust their
inheritence to the legislative care of the League.
Observe how the Junior Red Cross hotfoots is after our kids for the
league. This is a British initiated organization. In an incredibly short
space of time it has established a tutelary influence over 12,000,000
children. George Milsom, the director of the society, writing in the
Educational Survey (league publication) for January 1931, leaves no doubt
that this organization is an auxiliary of League City. He says :
"It does seem fairly reasonable to hope that children who, during their
years of mental development have learned to sympathize with their fellows
will, when they have reached manhood, be determined to fight for the
removal of every obstacle seperating them from their fellows in far-off
lands. Thi sis the goal toward which we strive."
Interpreted this means that children properly trained will on maturity
hate nationalism and vote fervently for league control of America. The
juveniles of the Junior Red Cross are put though an excellent course in
sobbing. They are trained to correspond with foreign children, to write
them kiddie notes of consolation over any misfortune they have
experienced. Thirty-eight publications (see Educational Survey, January
1931) keep up an incessant campaign aimed at internationalism. Their
mental outlook is saturated with the misery of children in far-away
lands. And Mr. Milsom kindly informs us that the material is carefully
"selected." Thus the hearts of our children are being skillfully
cultivated to produce crops of league votes.
"First, the Girl Scouts were founded under British auspices. At the
offices of the Manhattan Girl Scouts I was told that Sir Baden-Powell
often talks to Girl Scouts on scouting and international problems.
"Baden Powell is the founding father of the organization and a rabid
leaguer. Then I discovered that the American Girl Scouts had been
internationalized in the last 10 years, and that in 1930 at Foxlease,
England, a world flag was adopted. * * *
"After the French good-bye song each delegate took from the fire a
half-burned brand---a symbol of world sisterhood.
"Now I read through 6 years of the American Girl, George Washington' s
Birthday is commemorated with an editorial that calls him a good
man---but his role as a patriot, his philosophy of American-mindedness,
his warnings about European wiles and cunning were carefully ommited.
"This is all very strange deletion, considering that each Girl Scout
taken an oath to 'do my duty to God and my country.'
"How can this be done without any mention of patriotism or
American-mindedness it is difficult to conceive. Of course, the truth is
that that oath has lost its original meaning since league doctrinaires
got busy with our foremost juvenile orders."
http://www.freedomdomain.com/racism.html
*Please note that neither the "State of Israel", nor the "United
Nations" existed yet at this time. The "League to Enforce the Peace" was
the forerunner to the U.N. Both the "State of Israel" and the U.N. share
the same flag colors (U.N. Blue [a particular shade of blue], and White).
It is also important to realize that many of the people discussed as the
main power players in these articles are all members of Skull and Bones,
founded by Alphonso Taft whose grandson the President helped to found the
"League for the Settlement of International Disputes, which became the
"League to Enforce the Peace, and then, ultimately, the United Nations.
Put out originally by the authors of Pandora's Box back in 1994.
*******
In the late 1930s, the British Israel World Federation Movement's Destiny
Magazine published articles identifying September 2001 as the target date
for beginning their planned global theocratic state -- a"Kingdom of
Heaven on Earth."
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
'Destiny', December 1939 issue, page 14
[IMAGE]
'Destiny', February 1941 issue, page 31 er 1939 issue, page 1
Related Posts:
Five "I Wills" of Lucifer and 7 Wills of Race Warrior Cecil Rhodes
Bill Clinton, 2003: Rhodes' Vision Shaping Future Leaders
Round Table Spawned CFR Behind UN Planning
Manly P. Hall, 1928: United States Of EuroMystica
William Fulton, 1951: Restoration of Britannia Via Rhodes Scholarships
Kissinger, 1982, Knight of the British Realm
British Foundation of Israeli New World Order Springboard
Arafat's Uncle Husseini: Britain's Nazi Mufti of Jerusalem
Allen Dulles, 1946: World Government Propaganda Campaign
Secretary of State Talbot, 1992: Globalism Over Nationalism
Carroll Quigley: Bank of International Settlements Plutocracy
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Quotes_of_the_Imperium/message/2283
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 08:09:57 -0500
From: "norgesen" <norgeson@hotmail.com>
Subject: Abramoff's Evangelical Soldiers
Pity any who have these scam artists for friends and/or pastors or TV
spiritual advisors, including all their ilk, for they'll never need
enemies. I can't imagine any worse an enemy than one disguising
themselves as a benevolent friend of faith and spiritual counselor or
teacher, while the opposite is quite true. There is none more malignant
and dangerous than a sheep in wolves clothing and none that do more damage
to and cause more shame for what very little genuine Christendom
remains. There is no comparable enemy that can pierce the knife of
betrayal more sharply than these "Evangelical" cock roaches. As many times
over the many years as they've been implicated in all sorts of malfeasance
and phoniness, in their adventuresome and play acting careers of Bible
thumping, just maybe, this time, even they have over tested the game of
pretend Christianity and numerous grand hoaxes, in their many crimes and
collusion with fellow criminals in all spheres.
ac
------
Abramoff's Evangelical Soldiers
by MAX BLUMENTHAL
[from the February 20, 2006 issue]
Gambling might not rank as high as homosexuality or abortion on the list of social evils monitored by Focus on the Family founder James Dobson, but its growth has provided many occasions for his jeremiads. The indictment of Indian casino lobbyist and influential GOP activist Jack Abramoff was one such occasion. In a January 6 press release issued three days after Abramoff's indictment, Dobson declared, "If the nation's politicians don't fix this national disaster, then the oceans of gambling money with which Jack Abramoff tried to buy influence on Capitol Hill will only be the beginning of the corruption we'll see." He concluded with a denunciation of vice: "Gambling--all types of gambling--is driven by greed and subsists on greed."
What Dobson neglected to mention--and has yet to discuss publicly--is his own pivotal role in one of Abramoff's schemes. In 2002 Dobson joined a coterie of Christian-right activists, including Tony Perkins, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, to spearhead Abramoff's campaigns against the establishment of several Louisiana casinos that infringed on the turf of Abramoff's tribal clients. Dobson and his allies recorded messages for phone banking, lobbied high-level Bush Administration officials and took to the airwaves. Whether they knew it or not, these Christian soldiers' crusade to protect families in the "Sportsmen's Paradise" from the side effects of chronic slot-pulling and dice-rolling was funded by the gambling industry and planned by the lobbyist known even to his friends as "Casino Jack."
The only Christian-right activist confirmed to be completely aware of Abramoff's rip-off was Ralph Reed. He and Abramoff have a long and storied history together. When Abramoff chaired the College Republican National Committee in the early 1980s, Reed served as the organization's executive director. They reunited in 1989, when Abramoff helped Reed organize the remains of Pat Robertson's failed 1988 presidential bid into the Christian Coalition. In 1997, with the Christian Coalition under IRS investigation and Reed facing accusations of cronyism from the group's chief financial officer, he left to start his own consulting firm, Century Strategies. Reed contacted Abramoff right away. "I need to start humping in corporate accounts," Reed told him in 1998. "I'm counting on you to help me with some contacts."
Though Abramoff apparently was not fond of Reed, he viewed him as useful. "I know you (we!) hate him [Reed], but it does give us good cover and patter to have him doing stuff," he wrote in a February 14, 2002, e-mail to his business partner, Michael Scanlon. "Let's give him a list of things we want...and give him some chump change to get it done." Reed thus became Abramoff and Scanlon's liaison to the Christian right, enlisting his evangelical allies into a web of shadowy casino hustles for "chump change."
Reed's first sleight of hand was enticing Perkins, Falwell and Robertson to try to block a 2001 bill in the Louisiana legislature loosening restrictions on riverboat casinos, which would have posed a competitive threat to Abramoff's clients, the Coushattas. At the time, Perkins was a right-wing State Representative hailed by Reed as the legislature's "anti-gambling leader."
As Perkins lobbied his colleagues against the riverboat bill, he pushed Reed to pour money into an aggressive phone-banking campaign to rally conservative Christian voters.
With a steady supply of gambling industry cash, Abramoff dumped a phone-bank budget of more than $60,000 into Reed's war chest for PR efforts against his clients' rivals, the Jena Choctaws (Reed had asked for $150,000)--supplementing the $10,000 in tribal gambling money he directed to Reed's 2001 campaign for chair of the Georgia GOP and the nearly $4 million he ultimately funneled into Reed's personal account. Reed then recruited Falwell to record a phone message against the bill. He also solicited the help of his former boss at the Christian Coalition, Pat Robertson, thanking him for his "leadership for our values." Like the answering of a prayer, tens of thousands of Louisiana Republicans suddenly were bombarded with the voice of God against vice, played by Robertson and Falwell.
On March 22, 2001, the bill was resoundingly defeated in the legislature. "You are the greatest!!!" an ecstatic Abramoff wrote to Reed.
Miracle accomplished, Abramoff tapped Reed's services again in January 2002, when his clients learned that then-Louisiana Governor Mike Foster had secretly approved a casino site for the Jena Choctaws. Following a battle plan devised by Scanlon (who inexplicably signed a memo outlining the plan, Mike "The Sausage King" Scanlon), Reed re-enlisted his evangelical allies to rev up grassroots pressure on Bush Interior Secretary Gail Norton, who had the final say on the Jena deal.
Reed first prompted Dobson to attack the Jenas' lobbyist, Washington super-lawyer, former RNC chair and current Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, during a Focus on the Family broadcast. (In his 2002 campaign for governor, Barbour described himself as "a five-point Calvinist" on American Family Radio.)
"Let me know when Dobson hits him," Abramoff wrote to Reed on February 6, 2002. "I want to savor it." That same day, he e-mailed Scanlon, "He [Dobson] is going to hit Haley by name! He is going to encourage people to call Norton and the WH [White House]. This is going to get fun."
Abramoff transferred more cash to Reed to blast Dobson's tirade against the Jena casino across Louisiana airwaves. Abramoff was confident his Bush Administration contacts would make sure all the right people heard Dobson's hit. "Dobson goes up on the radio next week!" he told Scanlon on February 20. "We'll play it in WH [the White House] and Interior." Abramoff's gamble paid off when word of the ad filtered through the tension-filled halls of the Interior Department. "[White House liaison] Doug [Domenech] came to me and said, 'Dobson's going to shut down our phone system,'" an unnamed former Interior official recounted to the Washington Post. " 'He's going to go on the air and tell everyone who listens to Focus on the Family to call Interior to oppose the Jena compact.' "
But Abramoff's fun didn't stop there. Reed urged a Who's Who of the Christian right to lobby Norton against the Jena compact with a stream of breathless letters. On February 19 Perkins warned Norton that gambling leads to "crime, divorce, child abuse." American Family Association chair Don Wildmon sent a lengthy missive to Norton filled with statistics on gambling's adverse social impact. The Eagle Forum's Phyllis Schlafly sent another. American Values president Gary Bauer declared in a letter to Norton that the compact ran "contrary to President Bush's pro-family vision." Focus on the Family vice president Tom Minnery wrote Norton and White House Chief of Staff Andy Card to demand they stop the deal. Dobson capped the mail blitz with his own missive against gambling expansion.
Despite the best efforts of Abramoff and the Christian soldiers Reed recruited, in December Norton approved the Jena compact. Soon after, Louisiana's new governor, Kathleen Blanco, reversed the deal on the basis of her opposition to casino growth. Abramoff's goal was achieved, but all his work was for naught. And his skulduggery was beginning to catch up with him. "I hate all the shit I'm into," he moaned to Scanlon in a February 2003 e-mail. "I need to be on the Caribbean with you!"
However, Abramoff's campaign against the Jena compact was a blessing for most of its Christian-right players. Perkins got to prove his mettle in a national campaign, prompting his appointment the following year by Dobson to president of the Family Research Council, the Washington-based lobbying powerhouse. Dobson, for his part, got to demonstrate his grassroots muscle to the Bush White House, raising his visibility to Karl Rove & Co. and helping him increase his influence over its social agenda as the presidential election approached.
Among Abramoff's evangelical surrogates, only Reed emerged from their relationship with visible baggage. But this was not apparent at the time. Now, as a result of extensive media coverage of his involvement with Abramoff, his campaign for lieutenant governor of Georgia, intended as a stepping stone to higher office, is lagging. He has gone from denying early in his campaign that he accepted gambling money to claiming most recently that Abramoff lied to him about the source of his fees. To generate a strong turnout for his January 21 appearance at a Georgia Christian Coalition meeting, Reed was reduced to enticing his dwindling band of "supporters" with cash and free hotel rooms.
It is still unknown whether Dobson and his allies knew that Reed was working for Abramoff during the anti-Jena campaign. Abramoff claimed in a February 2002 e-mail to his employee Todd Boulanger that he was "working FOR and WITH them [emphasis in original]," referring to Christian-right activists. Dobson, Perkins, Robertson and Falwell have remained silent. Whether or not evidence surfaces to support the claim Abramoff made in his e-mail, it is undeniable he was deeply embedded in the Christian right's infrastructure.
In July 2002, at the height of the anti-Jena campaign, Bauer and Rabbi Daniel Lapin, a fixture at Christian-right events, founded the American Alliance of Christians and Jews. On the group's board were Dobson, Robertson, Falwell and one Jack Abramoff. Lapin's organization, Toward Tradition, which administered the AACJ, received $25,000 from one of Abramoff's gambling industry clients in 2000; took $75,000 from Abramoff and his clients; and then, upon Abramoff's written instructions, hired the wife of Tony Rudy to the tune of $5,000 a month. Rudy, who was Tom DeLay's deputy chief of staff at the time, later a lobbyist, has been named in Abramoff's guilty plea.
While Abramoff cooperates with federal prosecutors, his former Christian-right surrogates have abstained from coming clean about their relationship with him. Acknowledging willing collusion with a disgraced casino lobbyist would be suicidal among their followers. But there are also risks in casting themselves as useful idiots in Abramoff's game. Such a tactic would reveal the "pro-family" movement as just another gear in a sordid Republican political operation. What did Dobson know and when did he know it? As the wheels of justice grind on, those who claim to speak with the authority of Scripture may soon find themselves under oath.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060220/blumenthal
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 19:18:56 +0800
From: "Ozzy bin Oswald" <hisholiness@rome.com>
Subject: Brit-Am Pyramid Pilgrims' 911 Plan [continued]
Continued...
4. Neither Sir William Wiseman nor Captain Strath-Gordon were friendly
to Lloyd George, either in a political or persoanl way. Even had they
been, such a report as this would have been addressed to the head of the
intelligence service in London, thence to the central offices of the
various branches of British intelligence (the Foreign Office, the Home
Office, the Colonial Office, the Military Office, the Naval Office etc.),
which are directly under the Prime Minister.
This paragraph is, if I may use the word, silly, or even childish, for it
assumes an impossible situation. It would be ridiculous should anyone
take this seriously and believe that the Prime Minister of England would
send people unfriendly to himself to America to take charge of the
consulate, of the British propaganda service, and of the British military
service. Such things never happen in any government, particularly in such
important organizations.
5. It is difficult to believe that anyone would attempt to figure out the
average time and cost of "Anglicization" to the penny and minute, as
mentioned on page 4.
It may be a little difficult to figure out how anyone would sit down and
estimate the cost of "Anglicizing" Americans. However, it is not
difficult to imagine that the British Government would engage in such
tabulation, for they look upon us as sheep, as one of their nobility has
already stated. Looking upon us as sheep, they will, of course, count us
like sheep; and that is what they did in the British secret report.
6. On page 9 mention is made of a dope scandal in the family of Lord
Reading. It is hardly conceivable that such reflections on a prominent
member of the English Government would be made in an official document,
especially if such references were irrelevant.
This also has no bearing on the authenticity of the letter which was in
the RECORD of October 11, but inasmuch as it is mentioned, let us bear in
mind that there was a dope scandal in England and a Marconi scandal which
nearly disrupted the British Parliament.
7. There are repeated references to Messrs, Pierpont Morgan and Co.,
whereas the firm name is always referred to as J.P. Morgan and Co.and the
individual as J. Pierpont Morgan. A man of Sir William Wiseman's
intelligence and experience in New York would not make such an error.
Mr. Merrill takes exception to the fact that the author of the British
secret document interchanged the name of J.P. Morgan and Co. and J.
Pierpont Morgan, and states that no one connected with the British
Government would make such a mistake. This statement is also immaterial,
for it is quite likely that a Britisher or an American might use one name
when he referred to the company and the other name when he referred to
Mr. Morgan personally.
8. On page 12 the work of F. Cunliffe-Owen is spoken of in a commendatory
way, whereas at this time he was under the surveillance of the British
Secret Service, as he had been reported on adversely.
Again Mr. Merrill draws a very peculiar deduction, when he refers to Mr.
F. Cunliffe-Owen. I am sure the gentleman in question was not adverse to
the Brithish Government, and that there was not reason why the British
Secret Service should watch Mr. Cunliffe-Owen. It would be much more
sensible if he and other Englishmen were watched by the American Secret
Service.
9. On page 16 references are made to the Morgan firm, regarding the loan
to Japan, and to the statement that the greater part of that firm's
capital is invested within the British Empire, both of which statements
Sir William Wiseman would have known to be incorrect.
Page 16 of the British secret document refers to a loan of $200,000,000
made by the United States Treasury, through J.P. Morgan & Co., to the
British Government. This statement is absolutely true, for I have
photographs of two checks issued by the United States Treasury, one for
$200,000,000, drawn to the order of Sir Cecil Arthur Spring-Rice,
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Government of the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and the other for
$30,000,000, drawn to the order of Colville Barclay, Minister
Plenipotentiary of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland.
This is, therefore, sufficient proof that the author of the British
secret document knew what he was talking about when he wrote that report.
I now quote from the New York Times American of Sunday, February 22, 1925
:
April 25, 1917 : The famous $200,000,000 check issued against this
warrant was promptly endorsed to J. P. Morgan & Co., British fiscal
agents, to cover an overdraft which Morgan and the banks allied with him
had granted Great Britain before our entrance into the war. This
$200,000,000 of the United States Government got to Morgan just in time,
as is evidenced by Walter Hines Page, then American Ambassador to Great
Britain, in his authoritative Life and Letters.
"In April 1917 the British balances in New York were in a serious
condition. By April 6, 1917, the date of America's entrance into the war,
Great Britain had overdrawn her account with J.P. Morgan & Co. to the
extent of $400,000,000 and had no cash available with which to meet this
overdraft. The money was now coming due; if the obligations were not met
the credit of Great Britain in this country would reach the vanishing
point. The American Government finally paid the overdraft out of the
proceeds of the Liberty Loan. This act saved the credit of the Allied
countries."
Thomas W. Lamont, of the morgan firm, has made the proposition that we
cancel half the allied indebtedness to us, now totalling $12,000,000.
May 15, 1919 : Thirty million dollars of Liberty Loan money handed to
Great Britain without legal warrant after the war was over. American
diplomats and consular officials abroad were complaining at this time
that Great Britain was spending millions to get a monopoly of the oil
resources of the world and to recover her pre-war trade supremacy. The
total sum unlawfully advanced to Great Britain after the armistice was
$330,000,000.
The endorsement of Colville Barclay, Minister representing the British
Government, on the back of the $30,000,000 check paid to Great Britian 6
months after the war was over.
On December 5, 1918, after the war, Norman H. Davis, special
representative of the Treasury Department abroad, wrote to the Assistant
Secretary of the Treasury Albert Rathbone as follows :
"From the Treasury standpoint it is advisable, of course, to cut off as
soon as possible all advances to the Allied Governments. But, on the
other hand, from a political standpoint, it may be advisable not to cause
tooo much anxiety just before the peace conference.
"As I have already advised you, the British Treasury has notified the
French and Italian Treasuries that they are through making advanced to
them. . They have either done this in order to force them on us or for
political reasons in order to force their opinions at the peace
conference in consideration of them agreeing to additional advances."
Loans unauthorized : The secret correspondence carried on by cable,
courier, and sealed diplomatic pouch, and therafter carefully guarded in
the archives at Washington, discloses thta the officials on duty in
Washington, having applied to Congress for authority to make these loans,
and having been refused such authority, therafter continued to make them
without legal authority. These amazing documents, whose authenticity is
beyond question, prove that the Treasury Department, in making these
unwilling advances, was yielding to a contention of the President, then
in Paris negotiating the Versailles Treaty, that the success of his
policies -- the League of Nations -- depended uopn liberal advances to
the countries upon whose representatives at Versailles he counted for
support.
For example, Secretary Glass, on January 14, 1919, cabled President
Wilson in Paris, promising a new loan to Rumania, and containing the
sentence :
"Appreciate importance of food supplies in relation to your policies and
anxious to use powers of Treasury to support them."
A judicious interpretation of the mass of data now available can lead
only to the conclusion that both the representatives of the American
Government and the representatives of foreign governments knew that there
was no authority under the law to make post-war advances for European
reconstruction and relief.
The language of the law, the successive Liberty Loan Acts clearly
provided that credits should be advanced to the Allies only for the
purpose of prosecuting the war against our public enemy.
The record further shows that Secretaries of the Treasury McAdoo and
Glass, realizing their inability legally to make further loans after the
war ended, sought authorization for such loans in Congress in December
1918 and February 1919.
The books of the Treasury Department show that, specifically denied this
power by the Congress, Treasury officials then proceeded to disburse to
the Allies $15,000,000,000 more of American public moneys.
The foregoing quotations should be sufficient evidence to show that Mr.
Merrill's report is wrong and the British secret document to Lloyd George
is correct.
10. On page 13 there is a reference to Kuhn, Loeb's entry into the
motion-picture field and aquisition of the Players-Lasky-Hearst
motion-picture concerns. The consolidation occured in December 1919,
while the date of the document is June 1919.
This statement by Mr. Merrill is also wrong, for the Famous Players-Lasky
was aquired by British interests in May 1919, and not, as he states, in
December of the same year.
The following quotation from the New York Times, May 16, 1919, is in
proof of this :
EUROPE, THE FIELD FOR ITS PICTURES--FAMOUS PLAYERS-LASKY AND BRITISH
INTERESTS IN A $3,000,000 CORPORATION--AMERICAN-FOREIGN
ACTORS--CONSTRUCTION OF BIG STUDIOS TO BE BEGUN AT ONCE-THE LEAGUE OF
NATIONS THE FIRST FILM
The formation in London of a corporation capitalized at $3,000,000 to
produce motion pictures against European backgrounds was announced last
night by the Famous Players-Lasky Corporation. The name of the
corporation is the Famous Players-Lasky British Producers, Ltd.
The construction of studios and plants on a large scale will be started
immediately, according to C. A. Clegg, business manager of the
international enterprise. American and European actors will take part in
photoplays staged in the Alps, the devastated areas of France and
Belgium, Wales, Scotland, Spain, and other famous and picturesque parts
of the Old World.
The Americans chiefly interested in the venture are Adolph Zukor,
president, and Jesse L. Lasky, first vice president of the Famous
Players-Lasky Corporation. Among those representing British interests are
Maj. David Davis, M. P., Maj. Norman Holden, Alexander Nisbet, W. J.
Burdon Evans, Albert Hirst, A. W. Keeley, Thomas Wrigley, J. H. Kippax,
J. G. Thompson, George Isaac, and Abraham Collins. Most of these men are
already identified with banking, manufacturing, and theatrical
institutions in England.
Mr. Merrill concludes his report with the following statement :
11. The above, to me, is quite convincing that the document is a fraud.
Mr. Merrill makes a statement whihc I flatly contradict, because his
report is wrong, and the British secret document is correct.
There is much more evidence to be had to prove the authenticity of the
British secret document, that was sent to Lloyd George on June 10, 1919,
and which I hope to have time to submit before this Congress adjourns.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proof of Authenticity of British Secret Document
Part II
Extension of Remarks of Hon. J. Thorkelson of Montana in the House of
Representatives,
Friday, August 30, 1940
Mr. THORKELSON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my own remarks in
the RECORD and to include excerpts from magazines, press, and other
publications, I shall now proceed to discuss the British Secret Document,
which was addressed to the Right Honorable Lloyd George, and dated June
10, 1919. The second paragraph of this document, entitled "Preliminary
Consideration," deals with Anglo-American Alliance, which will eventually
result in a peaceful return of the American Colonies to the dominion of
the Crown of England. This has been discussed in the articles entitled
"Steps Toward a British Union, World State, and International (should be
internal) Strife," August 20, parts I, II, III, and IV, and August 21,
parts V and VI, and September 3, parts VII and VIII, and September 5,
part IX. In these remarks the reader will find much evidence to
substantiate the letter sent to Lloyd George June 1, 1919. Further
evidence may be found in the Appendix of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, under
the title "Proof of Authenticity of British Secret Document," page 5547.
I shall now proceed with further discussion of this most dispicable
letter; a letter which holds, American people to ridicule and shame by
those who are now dragging this Nation into a war that the people do not
want and which will, if the warmongers do not desist, lead this country
into internal strife. The greatest threat to this Nation will come when
the English Government moves to Canada. It is then that the various
groups such as the British-Israel, Anglo-Saxon Federation, and various
endowment organizations and international bankers will become the real
"fifth-columnists" and crusaders for Britain, to incorporate the United
States in the British Union. In this attempted sabotage of the Republic,
the Communists will be used as they have been to date, only to be
liquidated when they have served their purpose to those in power, who
have bribed them and paid their way.
The New Deal is copying the political coups of South American republics,
and the President no doubt hopes to establish himself as a dictator by
the aid of the Army, Navy, and intelligence units in the United States,
which means, of course, that there may be no election if this "coup
militaire" is accomplished.
Cecil Rhodes is the Britisher, the internationalist, who supported and
gave his aid to the Anglo-Saxon movement for the reunion of this Republic
and the British Empire. Let me call your attention to the undermining of
America, which actively began when Cecil Rhodes, in 1877, left money to
establish scholarships at Oxford for the purpose of training diplomats to
foster such re-union.
In the firts draft of his will, which is quoted in the book Cecil Rhodes,
by Basil Williams, and the book Cecil Rhodes, by Sarah Gertrude Millin,
he stated :
" * * * directed that a secret society should be endowed with the
following objects. "The extension of British rule throughout the world;
the colonization by British subjects of all lands where the means of
livelihood are attainable by energy, labor, and enterprise; and
especially the occupation by British settlers of the entire continent of
Africa, the Holy Land, the valley of the Euphrates, the islands of Cyprus
and Candia, the whole of South America, the islands of the Pacific not
heretofore possessed by Great Britain, the whole of the Malay
Archipelago, the seaboard of China and Japan, the ultimate recovery of
the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire."
The foundation of so great a power as to hereafter render wars impossible
and promote the best interests of humanity.
A new will was made :
"He substituted English-speaking peoples for actual Britons; he came to
realize his limitations and reduced his scheme to a mere beginning of it,
the scholarships; but yet the thought behind each successive will
remained the same -- the world for England, England for the world."
(Cecil Rhodes by Sarah Gertrude Millin.)
Other quotations :
" * * * but the essence of the will, as the world knows, is the
Scholarship Foundation. In the end all that Rhodes can do toward
extending British rule throughout the world and restoring Anglo-Saxon
unity and founding a guardian power for the whole of humanity is to
arrange for a number of young men from the United States, the British
colonies, and Germany to go to Oxford. There are, accordingly, rather
more Rhodes scholars from America than from all the British dominions put
together.
"If the Union of South Africa could be made under the shadow of Table
Mountain, why not an Anglo-Saxon union under the spires of Oxford?"
This also clarifies much of which is stated in the British Secret
Document to Lloyd George. This movement of Anglicizing America was
continued by Andrew Carnegie, a Britisher who made his money in the
United States, only to sell the country that made him into the hands of
our greatest enemy. The author of the British Secret Document calls
attention to the fact that the last chapter in Andrew Carnegie's book,
Triumphant Democracy, was published in the North American Review in 1893,
and now I quote from that volume. This chapter is entitled "Looking
Ahead," and I may say at this point that this same chapter was removed
from the 1932 edition of Triumphant Democracy.
If Britain, America, and Canada were to reunite today, the population of
the reunion would be one hundred and eight millions. All other parts of
the English-speaking race would not number five millions. It is into such
a complete race reunion of her people that the door is now wide open for
the parent land to enter and take first place--first among equals * * *
Readers will kindly note that this is a look ahead--how far ahead I shall
not attempt to guess--nevertheless it is ahead, and sometime, somehow, it
is to come to pass. I see it with the eys of faith, the faith of the
devotee which carries with it a realizing sense of certain fulfillment.
Time may dispell many pleasing illusions and destroy many noble dreams,
but it shall never shake my belief that the wound caused by the wholly
unlooked for and undesired seperation of the mother from her child is not
to bleed forever.
Let men say what they will, therefore, I say that as surely as the sun in
the heavens once shone upon Britian and America united, so surely, is it
one morning to rise, shine upon, and greet again the "Re-united states,"
British-American union.
(Signed) ANDREW CARNEGIE
This movement of anglicizing America began with Alexander Hamilton, when
he, by trickery submerged the United States Treasury under the domination
of the Bank of England. It was first a British movement, but is now
international, and is financed by the international bankers, who are the
real rulers of England and the United States. Those who preach world
union or world federation are in the pay of some of the organizations to
which I have already referred in my previous remarks, the object of which
is to destroy the Government of this Republic and to enslave the American
people under the domination of the British rulers.
The arrogance of the British is unbelievable, and the low estimate in
which we are held by these dukes and "ducklings" creeps in, I may say, in
every statement which they make. As an illustration, let me again quote
Sir Gilbert Parker, who, as the letter to Lloyd George states, was in
charge of the British propaganda machine in the United States. (Harper's
Magazine, March, 1918)
Also, it should be remembered that the Society of Pilgrims, whose work of
international unity cannot be overestimated, has played a part in
promoting understanding between the two peoples, and the establishment of
the American Officers' Club in Lord Leconfield's house in London, with
His Royal Highness the Duke of Connaught as president, has done, and is
doing, immense good. It should also be remembered that it was the
Pilgrims' Society, under the fine chairmanship of Mr. Harry Brittain,
which took charge of the Honorable James M. Beck when he visited England
in 191(cannot make out looks like an "8"), and gave him so good a chance
to do great work for the cause or unity between the two nations. I am
glad and proud to think that I had something to do with these
arrangements which resulted in the pilgrims taking Mr. Beck into their
charge.
I may say that they did take Mr. Beck into their charge, for he was a
most abject worshiper of England ever since that time.
Then Mr. Parker continues :
Then it was that the Monroe Doctrine became an accepted fact, but the
United States could not have made it a fact unsupported and unprotected
by the British Navy. It is no exaggeration to say that the policy and
prosperity of the United States had a free and fair run for over the last
90 years, because Great Britain, which had learned her great lesson in
the American Revolutionary War, made her Navy the defender of the Monroe
Doctrine.
No one, not even a Britisher, could have uttered a greater falsehood, for
the British Government, has never been an aid to the United States, and
the British have never protected our interest in South America; but have,
instead, destroyed our interest by undermining American commerce in that
Southern Hemisphere. This should be clearly evident to anyone, when he
takes into consideration the effect upon our foreign trade when we
observe the British blacklist, which is handed to us by the British
Government. A statement of this kind simply makes me boil, and should
start the blood surging in the arteries of every American who has the
interest of this Nation at heart. However, this, as I have already said,
shows the contempt in which we are held by those who are now crying for
help, and whose Navy is not even able to protect the insignificant area
contained within the British Isles. How is it possible for such Navy to
give any aid in the protection of the Monroe Doctrine, a doctrine which
we could never enforce with an Army of 5,000,000 men; yes, and with three
navies as large as the one which we now have.
It is well to bear in mind that the Central and South American Republics
are sovereign governments within themselves, and it is within their
rights to do as thye please in regard to admitting foreign people within
their borders. Should we foolishly attempt to enforce an arbitrary
doctrine upon them, we will in such procedure invite war with these
Republics. When this war is over, we will be a nation without a single
friend, either in the western continent or in any part of the world. Yes;
even England herself, will give us "thumbs down" as she has always done
when such necessity suits her own purpose.
The letters of Sir Cecil Spring-Rice to Balfour and others, which were
published in the Saturday Evening Post, July 13, August 3 and 24, 1929,
reveal, if nothing else, the manner in which our Secretary of State, Hon.
William Jennings Bryan, and the President of the United States, Woodrow
Wilson, were taken into camp by the British. The Secretary of State is
treated with contempt in Sir Cecil Spring-Rice's correspondence, and our
President, Mr. Wilson, was not treated any better. It is well to read
these letters, for I believe they will be useful in reestablishing
patriotism in those of our people who are now vacillating between the
British Empire and the United States. I may say at this point that I have
inserted some articles from the Report on Investigation of Pro-British
History Textbooks in the Public Schools of the City of New York, in the
RECORD. This report also authenticates the secret British document in its
reference to change in our educational institutions and in our churches.
The author of the British document thanks Mr. Taft and Mr. Polk; and he
should, because Mr. --- was on the board of the League to Enforce Peace.
In fact, he was the President of the league, and therefore, guilty or
innocent. a tool of the British propaganda service. Mr. Frank Polk was a
member of the Pilgrim Society, and so recorded in it's membership list.
Mr. Baker, whom the author of the British secret document also mentioned,
was trustee of the Twentieth Century Corporation.
Mr. Edward Filene, of Boston, an internationalist, set up the Twentieth
Century Fund, Inc., and by interlocking directorates has control over 124
trust funds, together totaling nearly a billion dollars. Included in this
control are : The Carnegie, Rockefeller, the Duke and Russell Sage
Foundations from which funds go subsidies to subversive communistic,
socialistic and all peace movements, as well as the cooperative
movements. Among activities of Twentieth Century Fund, Inc., are the
following : N. R. A., S. E. C., Wagner Labor Act, International Labor
Office (affiliated with League of Nations), Foreign Policy Association,
Credit Unions, Cooperatives, League of Women Voters. (See Red Network,
published by Elizabeth Dilling, 53 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Ill.,
for communistic activities of the groups. Also see Yearbooks and American
Foundations and Their Fields, published by Twentieth Century Fund, Inc.)
It is well to note that Messrs, Pierpont Morgan, Rockefeller, Insull, can
be found among the "Pilgrims," while Cleveland Dodge belongs to the
Carnegie clan.
In the London Times, July 4, 1919, appeared an article entitled,
"Insurance of Peace," from which I now quote :
NEED OF PROPAGANDA
By efficient propaganda, carried out by those trained in the arts of
creating public goodwill and of swaying public opinion toward a definite
purpose, not only the natural and proper competition of interest between
the two countries would be robbed of the poison of ignorant resentment,
but also the malign influence of existing and potential propaganda
antagonistic to British-American goodwill will be nullified.
What is now needed--urgently needed--is to make a beginning. .
Efficiently organized propaganda should mobilize the press, the church,
the State, and the cinema; press into active service the whole
educational systems of both countries, and root the spirit of good will
in the home, universities, public and high schools, and primary schools.
It should also provide for subsidizing the best men to write books and
articles on special subjects. to be published in cheap editions or
distributed free to classes interested. Authoritative opinion upon
current controversial topics should be prepared, both for the daily press
and for magazines; histories, and textbooks upon literature should be
revised. New books should be added, particularly in the primary schools.
Hundreds of exchange university scholarships should be provided. Local
societies should be formed, in every center to foster British-American
good will, in close cooperation with an administrative committee.
Important articles should be broken up into mouthfuls for popular
consumption, and booklets, cards, pamphlets etc., distributed through
organized channels to the public. Advertising space should be taken in
the press, on hoardings, and in the streetcars, for steadily presenting
terse, easily read and remembered mind-compelling phrases and easily
grasped cartoons, that the public may subconsciously absorb the
fundamentals of a complete, mutual understanding.
EFFORT MUST BE UNITED
This work cannot be efficiently done by individuals or by small
independent societies. It must be all coordinated into one great, steady,
efficient effort, and the execution of it be under the direction of men
in both countries who are qualified by capacity and experience to sound
exactly the right note and to employ the right media to interest the
section of the public to which any particular appeal is made.
The whole expense for carrying out this enterprise in both countries
should immediately be budgeted for and the necessary funds secured, to be
administered by one strong administrative committee of eminent men in the
United States and one in the United Kingdom. These two committees should
be coordinated in one international supervisory committee. Literary
matter should be secured by subcommittees of British and American
journalists and publishers who know the capacity of all of those writers
competent to assist in the work of interpreting one country to the other,
to establish the mutuality of British-American international interest,
and to impress the entire public opinion of both countries wiht the
advantage, nay, the necessity for a world-wide unity of British-American
peace effort, Ambassadors of good will should be exchanged, to meet the
public in our pulpits, on our lecture platforms, and to preside in the
lecture rooms of our colleges.
In the words of a great American patriot, "We must hang together, or
assuredly we shall all hang seperately." If there be one who still doubts
the axiomatic truth, let him carefully consider the blood-red future of
the world with the Brith Empire and the United States in active
hostility, or even engaged in consuming their existing and potential
material and spiritual resources in bitter Anglo-American controversy,
quarrel, and intrigue.
In reading the foregoing can anyone close his eyes to the evil effect of
such propaganda, and particularly when nearly all American publications
are controlled by an alien power, the interests of which are only in the
conquest of America. Where are the loyal Americans who should, first of
all, guard this Republic with their very lives? Where is the patriotic
press that prides itself on truth? The press that should rally to the
defense of America and give full support to those who, back to the wall,
are fighting alien influences to save what is left of our Republic. I am
astounded and shocked by public apathy and by the attitude of the
American press, which is pro-English, proforeign, and prointernational; a
press which has forsaken our country in its greatest hour of need.
In order to reveal the attitude of some deluded Americans, I shall quote
Owen Wistor, so that he may be regarded correctly as he was---pro-British
(from the London Times, Friday, July 4, 1919) :
The truth of it was, you had been driving us colonies with such light
reings for so long that directly you tighten them we took the bit between
our teeth and bolted. We mena to be our own nation and not your colonies,
no matter how easy with us you might be. And you were easy, very easy,
until quite late in our Revolution. So our school histories had to make
out a case. They played up George III and Lord North Strong, and they
suppressed Burke and Pitt and the whole liberal element in England that
was in sympathy with us; thought of us as free British brothers over the
water who were insisting on our British rights. In short, they painted a
distorted picture of England's political condition at that time.
INFLUENCE OF SCHOOL BOOKS
Generations of American schoolboys have studied this picture. To fathers
and grandfathers all over our States, the names Concord, Bunker Hill,
Valley Forge, mean resistance to the tyrannical enemy of liberty,
England. England is still that to our schoolboys of today, though not so
many. A movement to correct the schoolbooks has been started and will go
on. It will be thwarted in every way possible by certain of your enemies.
These will busily remind you that you burnt our Capital in the next war
we had; that you let loose the Alabama upon us during our Civil War; they
will never mention the good turns you have done us. They would spoil, if
they could, the better understanding that so many of us are striving for.
They would pry us apart, if they could. They will fail. Our dead over
whom you strewed flowers on May 30 will help us living to defeat them.
Could I name all the matters wherein we have varied much or little from
you since that original Fourth of July, 143 years ago, a teeming page
would be compiled. In truth, a whole book devoted to these differences,
with the history of such divergence, would have that same light-throwing
quality which is possesed by any great dictionary giving the evolution
and successive use of words. We vary from you, for instance, in our
Protestant Episcopal prayer book, here and there; in our vocabulary,
written and spoken; in the custom of primogeniture, the rule of the road,
coinage, spelling, pronounciation, enunciation. Many of us speak through
our noses, none of us drop our h's; ommission of the g, as in shockin'
denotes mostly the 'umble with us, the 'aughty with you. And so forth,
and so forth.
This confirms the statements made in the letter to Lloyd George in which
the author of it brags how the British changed our history in order to
destroy patriotism.
To establish more indisputable evidence as to the authenticity of this
document, and to the importance of the author, I shall quote a brief
excerpt from the letter itself :
Suggestions for the visit : His Royal Highness, the Prince, should have a
brilliant entourage of our American-born nobility. About the time of his
coming the Grand Fleet might make a demonstration in American waters,
preferably off Newport, R. I., so that Lady Gerard, lady Sims, Lady
Strauss, Lady Rodman, and the wives of our other knights may participate.
And Field Marshal Haig, with Sir John Pershing, might review the American
forces. During the visit special courtesies should be shown to the
presidents and professors whom I have listed in appendix 23. I would also
suggest that a complete programme of social favours be arranged for the
parsons, editors, and newspaper proprietors in appendixes 20 and 26. A
new order might be created to reward the celebrants of the visit, the
Royal Order of the Pilgrims. It should have three degrees, Knights Grand
Cross, Knights Bachelor, and Commanders. With respect to the knighted
classes we could, of course, reassure the suspicious by Mr. A. Maurice
Low's patent device, first described in the New York Times, August 15,
1918 (appendix 44), which safeguards the democracy of the knighted by the
withholding of the accolade. Would you, however, kindly give instructions
to the publishers of Whittaker's Almanac, and of the official registers,
to delete, in their next issue, from their lists of British Knights, the
name of Sir John Biddle, Sir Tasker Bliss, Sir P. D. Lechridge, Sir Sims,
Sir Joseph Strauss, and the other American knights, as their inclusion in
the 1919 issue has tended to shake American faith in our Mr. Low's
ingenuity?
The foregoing paragraph is correct, for the 1920 edition of Whitaker's
Almanac listed the following American's as Sir Knights :
Pershing, Gen. John, G. C. B. (U.S. Army).
Rodman, Rear Admiral Hugh, K. C. B. (U.S. Navy).
Biddle, Maj. Gen. John, K.C. B. (M) (Hon.) (U.S. Army).
Bliss, Gen. Tasker, G. C. M. G. (U.S. Army).
Marsh, Gen. Peyton, C.M.G. (U.S. Army).
Sims, Vice Admiral William Snowden, G.C.M.G. (U.S. Navy).
Strauss, Rear Admiral Joseph, K. C. M. G. (U.S. Navy).
Let me also call attention to the fact that the author of the British
secret document, or letter to Lloyd George, suggested that inasmuch as
these titles had shaken the confidence of the American people, that their
names should be removed from the Almanac and deleted from the Royal
Register. Did the Prime Minister of England comply with this request? He
surely did, for the names were removed from the very next issue of the
Almanac. Surely, anyone with such entry to the British Prime Minister
must have been important, and particularly so when the Prime Minister of
England complied with his request. His reference to Mr. Low is also
correct, for in the New York Times of August 15, 1918, appears an article
entitled "British Decorations," from which I shall quote a few lines :
To the EDITOR OF THE NEW YORK TIMES :
So many persons have written and asked me about the decorations conferred
by Kin George on American generals and admirals, and there is evidently a
fear in the minds of some Americans that the acceptance of these
decorations may insidiously sap American democracy by creating a titled
class, that perhaps you will permit me to quiet their fears and explain
what these appreciations signify.
Knighthood is an honor dating back to feudalism. It is conferred by the
sovereign in person, who dubs his kneeling subject--the posture
indicating allegiance, submission, and fidelity--by touching his
shoulders wiht a drawn sword, and saying : "I dub thee knight; arise Sir
John," and the man who 30 seconds before knelt down as plain John Smith
arises Sir John Smith. (A. Maurice Low, Washington, August 11, 1918.)
The only difference in this initiation, if I may so designate it, is in
the fact that our Sir Knights were not dubbed as is the customary
procedure with British subjects.
This, Mr. Speaker and Members of Congress, further authenticates the
British document which some Members refused permission for insertion in
the RECORD. There is not one paragraph in this letter that is not
absolutely correct, and the letter was, in spite of opinions to the
contrary, actually sent by some one to the Prime Minister of England.
This should be clear, as one reads the evidence I have produced in order
to prove this document.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proof of Authenticity of British Secret Document
Part III
Extension of Remarks of Hon. J. Thorkelson of Montana in the House of
Representatives,
Tuesday, September 3, 1940
Mr. THORKELSON. Mr. Speaker, my object in having inserted in the
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD evidence to prove the authenticity of the British
secret document, or the letter which was sent to Lloyd George, is solely
for informative purposes.
The substance matter which I have inserted in the RECORD is to identify
this letter as a true report sent by a British official to the Prime
Minister of England. Everyone who has the interest of our country at
heart, should demand that this letter be republished in the CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD, for it is Exhibit 126 of the Senate hearings on the alleged
activities of the Geneva Conference. No objection should be raised in
having this document printed, unless the suppression of it is for the
purpose of protecting officials in the British Government.
The letter, as I have already said, is contemptible, as it treats all
Americans as inferiors to self-anointed upper strata in English society.
It follows, therefore, that if the with-holding of publicity on this
document is of value to Great Britain, the cost of reproducing it is of
much greater value to the people of the United States.
I shall now quote excerpts from the British secret document, so that they
may be compared with the articles I have inserted in the CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD on September 10 and 11, entitled "Proof of Authenticity of the
British Secret Document" and "British Propaganda and Subversion of
Textbooks in American Public Schools."
EDUCATION
For many years we had trained the inhabitants to view native culture with
disdain and disgust. Real culture was produced only "on the other side."
Americans such as Henry James, Whistler, Sargent, and Edwin Abbey were
conceded domestic recognition only after they had received our
imprimatur. Before the war we had created a considerable demand for
British-born and trained men to fill positions of intellectual control
here. During the war we added thousands to the number of these men by
substituting them for hostile natives, teachers, preachers, professors,
and lecturers who were dismissed for our sake by patriotic authority. We
organized our thought controllers into British schools and universities'
clubs; and we are now nearing the point where, through their concerted
efforts, we shall control from the cradle to the grave whatever mind this
Nation possesses.
HOSTILE NATIVE TENDENCIES
On the Irish-American situation here, Sir Horace Plunkett has lately
reported. There is no German-American situation; it is considered near
treason to use German silver, to hear German music, or to have German
measles. German we have managed to bar from so many schools that we need
no longer fear either intellectual or commercial competition from Germany
in America, or commercial competition from this country in Germany. And
we are rewriting the school history books in order to make King George
III, of glorious memory, a German king so that our late enemies may be
penalized for the wrongs which the Colonists fancy they received at his
royal hands and ours.
PUERICULTURE
We are at present engaged in a campaign to Americanize the schools, to
make obedient loyal little Britons out of the undisciplined native young.
School books now refer to the 1776 revolt as an unfortunate and senseless
family quarrel, which has been given regrettable publicity by the vulgar
and scandalous. With votive wreaths we laid the ghosts of the foolish
fathers. The Child's Book of Knowledge and similar works, which we have
tactfully introduced, enable the young to anglicize their parents. There
is a growing tendency on the part of the wealthy to seek exclusively
English scools, such as St. Bernard's in New York City, for the education
of their children. This tendency should be fostered by Foreign Office
subsidy, if necessary.
We are replacing with the song America the scurrilous Star Spangled
Banner, which, after expurgating, we socially ostracized. America, which
has te same air as God Save the King, is usually played and not sung; so
in effect, we are conferring on this colony the imperial anthem.
These excerpts from the British secret document are self-explanatory, and
the claims made are confirmed by the articles to which I have referred.
Was the author of the letter to the Honorable Lloyd George correct when
he asserted that attempts would be made to remove The Star-Spangled
Banner as our national anthem? The answer is "yes," as the articles I now
quote will reveal :
The spiritual union of England and America---and there is no other
union---is God-made. Its attempted disruption through the insistence on
the perpetuation of The Star-Spangled Banner is German propaganda, and it
must and shall cease. It had not occured to me that this was German
propaganda to keep up a former animosity which existed between England
and America, or Ephraim and Manasseh, until it was told me by those
highest in authority.
The Star-Spangled Banner is not our official anthem, and therefore is not
a national institution. It is an excrescence---an illegitimate branch
that has been engrafted on the holy roots of our national consciousness.
It is a blot on our escuteon and in no way represents us in this
momentous hour. A supreme power has evidently prevented the authorization
of a hymn which does not express American democracy.
Lloyd George emphasized the same sentiment in the press today (September
12, 1918) : "This must be the last war. * * * There is no compromise
between freedom and tyranny, no compromise between light and darkness. I
know that it is better to sacrifice one generation than to sacrifice
liberty forever. That is what we are fighting for, and Heaven grant that
we fight through to the end."
It would interest you to know, no doubt, that I am in receipt of a letter
from Queen Mary of England, in which she states that she has read my
pamphlet, Words and Music of The Star-Spangled Banner Oppose the Spirit
of Democracy, Which the Declaration of Independence Embodies, and assures
me of her interest in it, and also her interest in the words of the new
national anthem, Our America.
This is the standard around which I am rallying my spiritual, mental
forces. The insistence on perpetuating darkness and schism, which The
Star-Spangled Banner represents, is, I have been told by some in the
highest authority, nothing more nor less than German propaganda, working
to keep alive the spirit of animosity between England and America. It
must and shall cease. True Americans are demanding and taking possession
of their spiritual birthright of life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness and will share eventually this birthright with their
Anglo-Saxon brothers, who, with them, will lead all nations out of the
misery and darkness of hatred and animality into the light of life and
love, the source and supply of man's real spiritual individuality.
These excerpts are from a book entitled "Words and Music of The
Star-Spangled Banner Oppose the Spirit of Democracy Which the Declaration
of Independence Embodies." A protest, by Kitty Cheatham, which was
copyrighted in 1918.
I now quote from the New York Times, August 5, 1925 :
The Star-Spangled Banner, with its words breathing hatred of our
Anglo-Saxon brother, Britain, and its music borrowed from a foul English
drinking song, To Anacreon in Heaven, can never become our national
anthem. Never has Congress, and never will Congress legalize Francis
Scott Key's Ballad, which voices "bombs bursting in air," "blood," "the
terror of flight and the gloom of the grave," "foul footsteps'
pollution," and refers to our Anglo-Saxon brother, Britain, as "the foe's
faughty host."
880 ST. NICHOLAS AVENUE,
New York City, August 1, 1925.
Mrs. AUGUSTA E. STETSON,
7 West Ninety-sixth Street, New York City.
DEAR MRS. STETSON : I have just been reading your book, Sermons Which
Spiritually Interpret the Scriptures, published by G. P. Putnam's Sons.
The article which engaged my attention at this time is entitled "The
Star-Spangled Banner Can Never Become Our National Anthem," which you
first published in the press of New York, Washington, and Baltimore, in
June, 1922. In this article you protest against the song, both words and
music, which you characterize as being un-American, unauthorized by
Congress, and which you prophecy will be erased from America's historic
record by flat of God.
For years I have been aware of the subtle, un-Christian influence of this
song, The Star-Spangled Banner, and of the very evident use of which is
made of it to stir up sentiments inimical and hurtful to every ideal
which Americans cherish. The fact is that each time a bill has been
introduced in Congress seeking to legalize The Star-Spangled Banner as
our national anthem Congress had refused to give its sanction.
Allow me to relate two incidents which occured in my experience recently.
At a large public gathering, held near New York City early last month,
The Star-Spangle dBanner was palyed by the band as a prelude to the
addresses and exercises of the evening. I was seated in my car, but I did
not remove my hat, as this would have been equivalent to my acquiescence
in the vicious sentiments and ribald music of this song, which I
repudiate, as well as acknowledgement of its legality, contrary to
Congress' attitude.
A man came runnning toward me, excitedly waving his arms, and demanding
that I remove my hat, but I paid no attention to him, and the music
ceased before he reached my car.
On a similar occasion, a few days later, the band again played The
Star-Spangled Banner. This time I was one of the throng about the
platform, which was brilliantly lighted; but I again kept my hat upon my
head. A lady, a member of a group standing near, said, "take off your hat
to our national anthem." I replied, "Madam, The Star-Spangled Banner is
not the national anthem of America, for it has never been authorized by
Congress." She expressed surprise. At that moment a gentleman approached
me from behind, tapped me on the shoulder, and said, "Excuse me, sir, you
have forgotten your hat." I said, "No sir; I have not forgotten my hat.
This song is not our national anthem."
I longed to tell these people, who were the ignorant mouthpieces for
vicious, un-American sentiments, the truths about this song and it's
foreign ribald music setting, but the time was not opportune. Therefore,
dear Mrs. Stetson, I feel that your article on this subject, if reprinted
in the press at this time, will do a great work in enlightening the
people of America as to a phase of the hidden, secret, alien warfare
which is today being fiercely waged against our beloved country, America,
as well as against the God-ordained and predestined unity of the two
great Anglo-Saxon peoples, America and Britain, under the rulership of
Christ. Will you republish your valueable article now? With much respect,
Sincerely yours,
J. P. BLAIR.
I have taken the liberty of quoting these excerpts, in order to show that
the author of the British secret document was not given to idle
speculation. He knew that our schools, colleges, and churches were
undermined with British-Israel and Anglo-Saxon federation propaganda, and
that an attempt would be made to exchange The Star-Spangled Banner for a
song, entitled, "Our America," a verse of which I now quote :
America, America, in thee is found
Manasseh's tribe, to Ephraim bound.
By Israel's vow,
Whose destiny is heaven-sealed :
Far-spreading vine in fruitful field.
God's planting, thou!
From Words and Music of The Star-Spangled Banner Oppose the Spirit of
Democracy Which the Declaration of Independence Embodies; a protest, by
Kitty Cheatham, which shows the hand of the British-Israel World
Federation.
In contrast to this, it is to the everlasting credit of the Committee on
the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Sixty-Eighth Congress, which
came valiently to the defense of The Star-Spangled Banner, as our
national anthem. Much credit for this must be given to the distinguished
gentleman from New York [Mr. Celler] and to former Representative
Linthicum from Maryland, whom I now quote :
STATEMENT OF HON. J. CHARLES LINTHICUM, MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE
OF MARYLAND
Mr. LINTHICUM. I introduced a similar bill to the one under discussion
today, No. 6429, on the 1st of April 1919, and on the 2d of April 1921.
We feel that though the Army and Navy have issued rules and regulations
for the adoption of Key's anthem, The Star-Spangled Banner, it should
have recognition by Congress itself. We feel that the Congress, with the
approval of the Executive, should promulgate this as the national anthem
of our country, just as many other countries have adopted and approved
national anthems for their respective countries.
There are many songs which are perhaps easier sung and soome people think
that perhaps The Star-Spangled Banner is a little hard to sing that
therefore it should not be the national anthem. But while there are many
songs, there has never been in the history of this country a song which
sprung from the hearts of the people as did The Star-Spangled Banner, and
at a time when the destiny of the country weighed in the balance.
I do not want to go too far into history, because with this committee it
is like carrying coals to newcastle.
But we can readily realize the condition of our country when in Aug.
1814, the National Capitol had been destroyed, the White House in the
city had been destroyed, and British vessels with 7000 troops under their
control were leaving it in this devastated condition, having in a great
measure dispensed practically the National Government and were then
proceeding on to Baltimore.
It was the intention, as stated in the London Times on that occasion that
troops should come down from Canada, that troops should proceed from
Washington on to Baltimore, then to Philadelphia and New York, and there
to meet the troops from Canada and thereby capture the entire easten
coast of our country, which was practicall the whole of our country.
It was the indomitable courage of the men of America at North Point and
at Fort McHenry who met General Ross and his troops on that memorable day
on the 12th of September, at North Point, which defeated him, though the
American troops were less than 3,000 only 1,700 of which went into
action, while the British troops numbered somewhere around 7,000 trained
and picked men from the battlefields of Europe, men who had fought
Napoleon under the great General Wellington, and had now been released
because Napoleon had been sent to the island of Elba, the war having
practically ceased in Europe.
Those were the men who were sent to capture America and those were the
men whom the patriotic Americans defeated at North Point and Fort
McHenry.
That was the condition of this country, the Capitol and buildings
destroyed, the White House destroyed, the Nation's Capital under the heel
of the British. They were leaving this section, going from Upper
Marlboro. Dr. Beans, who had protested against their actions in his
little town, had been captured, had been put aboard one of the British
boats and carried to Baltimore, where the British were to attack Fort
McHenry.
Francis Scott Key, who lived in this city, right here where you have
established and built the great Key Bridge---in a small house recently
razed, just this side of that---a member of the bar, born in Frederick,
Md., proceeded to Baltimore with orders from the President, asking to
have his friend, Dr. Beanes, released.
He was taken aboard the ship Minden, where he went to consult with the
British commander and, owing to the attack which was to be made, he was
kept on that ship all night pending the attack on Fort McHenry.
There, during the night, he witnessed these bombs flying from the British
ships to the fort, 400 of which are said to have reached the fort. From
that comes that immortal line, "Bombs bursting in air."
So, in suspense, he remained there that entire night, listenin to the
bombardment of a city where his friends lived, where his relatives lived,
listening to the bombardment of a city, which, if it fell, he knew meant
the proceeding of the British on to Philadelphia, New York, and perhaps
the capture of the entire country.
There, in great suspense, was born this great anthem, The Star-Spangled
Banner. In the early days we can imagine him looking to that little fort
to see if The Star-Spangled Bannet yet waved. I can imagine him almost
trying to pierce the darkness to discover whether the little fort had
fallen or not. Seeing that "Star-Spangled Banner yet waved," he took a
pencil and jotted down this immortal anthem, which has stood as the great
anthem of the people for more than a hundred years.
And today, we come to ask the Congress to recogize, in its official
capacity, something which should have been done more than a hundred years
ago. It was not only the birth of this anthem, the sentiment surrounding
it, but what it meant to the people. At that time our people were
somewhat divided. The war had not been prosecuted with the vim and
courage with which the recent war was conducted by our country. People
were doubtful whether we ought to have declared war. People were doubtful
about whether it had been the proper policy and they were somewhat
divided on the issue. The war therefore was not pressed as it should have
been pressed.
But, when that national anthem burst forth and the people began to sing
throughout our land, it was worth more than 100,000 bayonets, because it
united our people in one solid phalanx for the prosecution of the war.
Not only that, but the battle at North Point and Fort McHenry was the
decisive battle of the war of 1812. We have histories which describe the
great decisive battles just as much as the great Battle of Waterloo or
the Battle of Gettysburg.
It is true that there were not so many troops here, but the troops who
were there won that battle and that discontinued the war and the Treaty
of Ghent soon followed.
General Ross, who did not believe the American patriots would come
forward to meet his invincible forces, rode ahead and met his death at
the Battle of North Point and was carried from there to Quebec to be
buried. There stands a monument in Baltimore to the boys who fired the
fatal shots, Wells and McComas.
From that time on there were no battles which influenced the writing of
the treaty. We have the Battle of New Orleans, of course, and a great
battle it was, but the fact is that battle was fought after the treaty
had been signed.
News traveled slowly in those days and Jackson fought his battle and won
it---the great Battle of New Orleans---after the Treaty og Ghent
(hearings before the Committee on the Judiciary, House of
Representatives, 68th Cong., March 20, 1924).
I shall now quote another excerpt from the British secret document, in
which reference is made to British control of the Boy and Girl Scouts :
EXTRASCOLASTIC EDUCATIONAL BODIES
We have spread everywhere the Boy Scout movement and placed the 1,000,000
American Boy Scouts under the headship of Gen. Sir. Baden-Powell. Through
the good offices of a British subject, Mrs. Juliette Low, and of Mrs.
Arthur Choate we have enrolled 60,000 in the Girl Scout movement under
the headship of Lady Baden-Powell. And the Chief Scouts now propose a
periodic interchange of Scouts between England and America at the expense
of some American millionair. We have, moreover, linked the Scout movement
with the varied patriotic organizations for maidens and for youths, and
with the school system through the loyalty of Dean Russell, of Columbia
University. In his case a degree from one of our universities is already
overdue.
For the young over Scout age we have the Y.M.C.A., Y.W.C.A., and kindred
organizations, financed by our auxiliaries, and directed by gentlemen
such as the Reverend Drs. Mott and Spear, who hold degrees from the
University of Edinburgh, and who are imbued with our culture. These
organizations have directorates interlocking with the Scout movement and
are affiliated with the organizations of the same name in England. As the
style here has it, they are internationalized. We are arranging further
to link up all these extrascholastic bodies and to correlate them through
Teachers College, Columbia University, with the school system, so that we
may remove the mind of the young from the prejudicial family influences
and peculiarities to the custody of a series of organizations which will
exert a continuous standardizing influence during the formative years.
Quantity production of thought-proof, disciplined, evangelical, uniformed
colonists is thus insured to the Empire. I cannot too highly commend the
financial support which Messrs, Dodge, Pratt, Macy, and Rockefeller,
together with Messrs, Warburg, Schiff, Morgenthou, and Rothschild have
given to this standardizing campaign. President and Mrs. Wlson have
graciously bestowed their patronage upon it; Miss Wilson has aided it
with song; the Presidential sons-in-law, less tuneful, have been no less
helpful; and all the official family, male and female, have been zealous
even where they have proved expensive.
The statements made by the author of the document are substantiated by
many newspaper articles, from one of which I now quote :
(From the New York American of November 20, 1932)
LEAGUE OF NATIONS IN DRIVE TO LURE CHILDREN FROM UNITED STATES
IDEALS SEES
INTERNATIONALISM BEING IMPLANTED WITH JUNIOR RED CROSS AND GIRL
SCOUTS
(By Willis J. Ballinger, formerly assistant professor of economics at
Williams College, Williamstoen, Mass.)
This is a story about forced friendships---the kind that is manufactured
on a large scale and pumped into the bosoms of gentle, unsuspecting
natures. It is a little insight into a powerfully organized European love
call that has been heard in America of late with increasing volume and
soulfulness.
I stated in the last article that the League of Nations is the hope of
the distracted Old World merchants, but that its mercantile designs are
cleverly masked behind an ingenious pother about loving the peoples of
the world---loving them so well that nationalistic boundaries,
governments, tariffs, immigration bars seem un-Christianlike and absurd.
In the center of the spider's web are the astute trade interests of
Europe led by international bankers waiting patiently for the feast when
the evangelism of good will has betrayed our resources into the hands of
a world league controlled by European powers. Such is the chief ballot
box bait of League City---Geneva.
So the league makes a terrible fuss over little children---ballotcasters
in the making. It adores tots---from the cradle to the polling booth.
American children are particularly esteemed, for these children will some
day come into great inheritance---the United States, with it's enormous
natural wealth.
It is all-important that these future owners of America be properly
trained in sound international sympathies, the soundest one of which is
to make them so humanity-conscious that they will entrust their
inheritence to the legislative care of the League.
Observe how the Junior Red Cross hotfoots is after our kids for the
league. This is a British initiated organization. In an incredibly short
space of time it has established a tutelary influence over 12,000,000
children. George Milsom, the director of the society, writing in the
Educational Survey (league publication) for January 1931, leaves no doubt
that this organization is an auxiliary of League City. He says :
"It does seem fairly reasonable to hope that children who, during their
years of mental development have learned to sympathize with their fellows
will, when they have reached manhood, be determined to fight for the
removal of every obstacle seperating them from their fellows in far-off
lands. Thi sis the goal toward which we strive."
Interpreted this means that children properly trained will on maturity
hate nationalism and vote fervently for league control of America. The
juveniles of the Junior Red Cross are put though an excellent course in
sobbing. They are trained to correspond with foreign children, to write
them kiddie notes of consolation over any misfortune they have
experienced. Thirty-eight publications (see Educational Survey, January
1931) keep up an incessant campaign aimed at internationalism. Their
mental outlook is saturated with the misery of children in far-away
lands. And Mr. Milsom kindly informs us that the material is carefully
"selected." Thus the hearts of our children are being skillfully
cultivated to produce crops of league votes.
"First, the Girl Scouts were founded under British auspices. At the
offices of the Manhattan Girl Scouts I was told that Sir Baden-Powell
often talks to Girl Scouts on scouting and international problems.
"Baden Powell is the founding father of the organization and a rabid
leaguer. Then I discovered that the American Girl Scouts had been
internationalized in the last 10 years, and that in 1930 at Foxlease,
England, a world flag was adopted. * * *
"After the French good-bye song each delegate took from the fire a
half-burned brand---a symbol of world sisterhood.
"Now I read through 6 years of the American Girl, George Washington' s
Birthday is commemorated with an editorial that calls him a good
man---but his role as a patriot, his philosophy of American-mindedness,
his warnings about European wiles and cunning were carefully ommited.
"This is all very strange deletion, considering that each Girl Scout
taken an oath to 'do my duty to God and my country.'
"How can this be done without any mention of patriotism or
American-mindedness it is difficult to conceive. Of course, the truth is
that that oath has lost its original meaning since league doctrinaires
got busy with our foremost juvenile orders."
http://www.freedomdomain.com/racism.html
*Please note that neither the "State of Israel", nor the "United
Nations" existed yet at this time. The "League to Enforce the Peace" was
the forerunner to the U.N. Both the "State of Israel" and the U.N. share
the same flag colors (U.N. Blue [a particular shade of blue], and White).
It is also important to realize that many of the people discussed as the
main power players in these articles are all members of Skull and Bones,
founded by Alphonso Taft whose grandson the President helped to found the
"League for the Settlement of International Disputes, which became the
"League to Enforce the Peace, and then, ultimately, the United Nations.
Put out originally by the authors of Pandora's Box back in 1994.
*******
In the late 1930s, the British Israel World Federation Movement's Destiny
Magazine published articles identifying September 2001 as the target date
for beginning their planned global theocratic state -- a"Kingdom of
Heaven on Earth."
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
'Destiny', December 1939 issue, page 14
[IMAGE]
'Destiny', February 1941 issue, page 31 er 1939 issue, page 1
Related Posts:
Five "I Wills" of Lucifer and 7 Wills of Race Warrior Cecil Rhodes
Bill Clinton, 2003: Rhodes' Vision Shaping Future Leaders
Round Table Spawned CFR Behind UN Planning
Manly P. Hall, 1928: United States Of EuroMystica
William Fulton, 1951: Restoration of Britannia Via Rhodes Scholarships
Kissinger, 1982, Knight of the British Realm
British Foundation of Israeli New World Order Springboard
Arafat's Uncle Husseini: Britain's Nazi Mufti of Jerusalem
Allen Dulles, 1946: World Government Propaganda Campaign
Secretary of State Talbot, 1992: Globalism Over Nationalism
Carroll Quigley: Bank of International Settlements Plutocracy
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Quotes_of_the_Imperium/message/2283
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Quotes_of_the_Imperium/message/2284
--
___________________________________________________
Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 09:20:15 -0500
From: "norgesen" <norgeson@hotmail.com>
Subject: Fw: A WAKE UP CALL
----- Original Message -----
From: Vicky Davis
It's been a particularly busy year as the assault on our freedoms and our way of life continues unabated. No matter what you choose to call them - Neo Cons, Liberals, Communists, Socialists, Internationalists, Atlantists, Communitarians, Globalists, etc. it has become clear their intention is to completely change American culture, society and institutions to an unconstitutional framework of corporate and international governance. Make no mistake, this is a serious Wake Call to all who care about this country and who want to pass on our legacy of freedom to future generations.
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy ~ James Madison
Idaho Eagle Forum
2nd Annual
Short List of Issues Researched and Tracked in 2005
a.. Illegal immigration, federal failure to defend our borders against foreign invasion, CFR document " Building the North American Community", 'Security and Prosperity Partners for North America', failure to enforce the law.
b.. CANAMEX highway, 'Smart Ports', FTAA,
c.. Deregulation of essential utilities, legal changes to privatize our water resources, use of environmental law to eliminate private property - eminent domain, UN Agenda 21, rewilding of America and biodiversity maps and plans, 'human settlements',
d.. UNESCO/microsoft agreement --- Bill Gates, high school redesign, legislative history of school 'reform'.
e.. Ninth Circuit Court, parents do not have a say about what is taught to their children in public schools in sex education classes
f.. Outsourcing and centrally managed global trade under the WTO, misnamed 'free trade'. Particularly Uruguay Round - legalized, modern day slave trade and global labor arbitrage and job export hemorrhage.
g.. Further removal of the Ten Commandments from public property, attack on pledge of allegiance
h.. USAIP, USDA's plan the force everyone that owns farm animals to register their property in a federal and state database, and have their animals injected with a RFID tracking chip. Chipping systems for people - especially systems for children in schools.
i.. International Baccalaureate program in our public schools, UN-UNESCO sponsored ( global citizenship ) and UNESCO programs in general
j.. Teaching children that the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees them their rights
k.. Department of Homeland Security giving grants out so that they will have a GPS address of our home, 911 enhancement Globe schools using school children to map our environment for the UN.
l.. On-going September 11, 2001, Patriot Act, consolidation of power, 'public-private partnerships', war in Iraq, war profiteering, corporate fraud, lobbying and corruption of congress, national debt, trade deficit and corrupt courts
A Visitor From The Past
(Author Unknown)
I had a dream the other night, I didn't understand,
A figure walking through the mist, with flintlock in his hand.
His clothes were torn and dirty, as he stood there by my bed,
He took off his three-cornered hat, and speaking low, he said:
"We fought a revolution to secure our liberty.
We wrote the Constitution, as a shield from tyranny.
For future generations, this legacy we gave,
In this, the land of the free and the home of the brave.
"The Freedom we secured for you, we hoped you'd always keep,
But tyrants labored endlessly while your parents were asleep.
Your freedom gone, your courage lost, you're no more than a slave,
In this, the land of the free and home of the brave.
"You buy permits to travel, and permits to own a gun,
Permits to start a business, or to build a place for one.
On land that you believe you own, you pay a yearly rent.
Although you have no voice in choosing how the money's spent.
"Your children must attend a school that doesn't educate.
Your Christian values can't be taught, according to the state.
You read about the current news, in a regulated press.
You pay a tax you do not owe, to please the I.R.S.
"Your money is no longer made of Silver or of Gold.
You trade your wealth for paper, so your life can be controlled.
You pay for crimes that make our Nation, turn from God in shame.
You've taken Satan's number, as you've traded in your name.
"You've given government control to those who do you harm,
So they can padlock churches, and steal the family farm.
And keep our country deep in debt, put men of God in jail,
Harass your fellow countrymen, while corrupted courts prevail.
"Your public servants don't uphold the solemn oath they've sworn.
Your daughters visit doctors, so their children won't be born.
Your leaders ship artillery, and guns to foreign shores,
And send your sons to slaughter, fighting other people's wars.
"Can you regain the freedom for which we fought and died?
Or don't you have the courage, or the faith to stand with pride?
Are there no more values for which you'll fight to save?
Or do you wish your children, to live in fear and be a slave?
"People of the Republic, arise and take a stand!
Defend the Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land!
Preserve our Great Republic, and GOD-Given Right!
And pray to GOD to keep the torch of Freedom burning bright!"
As I awoke he vanished, in the mist from whence he came.
His words were true, we are not Free, we have ourselves to blame.
For even now as tyrants, trample each God-Given Right,
We only watch and tremble, too afraid to stand and fight.
If he stood by your bedside, in a dream, while you're asleep,
And wonders what remains of our Rights he fought to keep,
What would be your answer, if he called out from the grave;
"Is this still the land of the free and home of the Brave?"
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 09:23:57 -0500
From: "norgesen" <norgeson@hotmail.com>
Subject: Fw: News - Workers Tagged
----- Original Message -----
From: Vicky Davis
The first mine cave-in I thought was an accident - although, that cruel phone call telling the families that there were 12 survivors from a person who has yet to be identified was odd. When there was a second mine cave-in just a short time later, I knew it was another Hegelian Dialectic. And below, we see the 'solution' to the problem.
Stu wrote:
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 06:44:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Fwd: News - Workers Tagged
Ha !!!!!! We don't make this stuff up........Been hearing over the air waves, that with all the coal mine accidents, this may be considered for coal miners, so that they could locate them in case of a cave in.....Duhhhhhhh, why not fix the mines, so there isn't any cave in's???????
Jim <> wrote:
From: "Jim " <>
To: <Undisclosed-Recipient:;>
Subject: News - Workers Tagged
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 19:21:05 -0500
NEWS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spread The News ~ Forward to a Friend
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
US group implants electronic tags in workers
Source URL: http://news.ft.com/cms/s/ec414700-9bf4-11da-8baa-0000779e2340.html
By Richard Waters in San Francisco
Published: February 12 2006 22:02 | Last updated: February 12 2006 22:02
Financial Times.com
An Ohio company has embedded silicon chips in two of its employees - the first known case in which US workers have been "tagged" electronically as a way of identifying them.
CityWatcher.com, a private video surveillance company, said it was testing the technology as a way of controlling access to a room where it holds security video footage for government agencies and the police.
Embedding slivers of silicon in workers is likely to add to the controversy over RFID technology, widely seen as one of the next big growth industries.
RFID chips - inexpensive radio transmitters that give off a unique identifying signal - have been implanted in pets or attached to goods so they can be tracked in transit.
"There are very serious privacy and civil liberty issues of having people permanently numbered," said Liz McIntyre, who campaigns against the use of identification technology.
But Sean Darks, chief executive of CityWatcher, said the glass-encased chips were like identity cards. They are planted in the upper right arm of the recipient, and "read" by a device similar to a cardreader.
"There's nothing pulsing or sending out a signal," said Mr Darks, who has had a chip in his own arm. "It's not a GPS chip. My wife can't tell where I am."
The technology's defenders say it is acceptable as long as it is not compulsory. But critics say any implanted device could be used to track the "wearer" without their knowledge.
VeriChip - the US company that made the devices and claims to have the only chips that have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration - said the implants were designed primarily for medical purposes.
So far around 70 people in the US have had the implants, the company said.
***************************************************
"We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth...
for my part, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst; and to provide for it."
- Patrick Henry
WARNING: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency (NSA) may have read this email without warning, warrant, or notice.
They may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse, nor protection..........Have a nice day!
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/september_eleven_vreeland/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
september_eleven_vreeland-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment