New Dawn – World's Most Unusual Magazine

Category: Secret History

  • Apocalypse: The End Times and the Restoration of All Things

    Apocalypse: The End Times and the Restoration of All Things

    From New Dawn 135 (Nov-Dec 2012)

    “The earth abideth for ever,” says the Bible (Ecclesiastes 1:4). Whether this is literally true or not, it corresponds to the deepest core of human experience. The Earth was around long before the existence of human beings, and it will probably continue to exist long after we are extinct. Why, then, does the belief in the end of the world – not as a remote possibility but as an imminent event – persist so stubbornly in the mass consciousness?

    For we continue to believe – and even long for – the fabled Time of the End. The number of predicted dates for this event are astonishing,1 and the huge number of failures has not diminished our appetite for plenty of new dates to come.

    To understand how this mentality came about, it would be useful to look at the history of the genre known in theological jargon as apocalyptic (from the Greek apokalypsis, “revelation”). While apocalyptic has important predecessors in biblical literature (such as Ezekiel and parts of Isaiah), its origins are generally dated to the second century BCE. At the time the Jewish nation was living under the rule of the Hellenistic Seleucid monarchs, who were heirs to a portion of the empire of Alexander the Great. In 167 BCE, one of these rulers, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, embarked on a program of forced Hellenisation of the Jews, setting up an altar, and perhaps an image, of Olympian Zeus in the Temple in Jerusalem.

    The outrage of the Jews is reflected in the Book of Daniel, one of the earliest apocalyptic writings and the only one to make its way into the Hebrew Bible. Written during the ensuing revolt against the Seleucids, this book sets up Daniel, a legendary sage of the sixth century BCE, as the mouthpiece of a prophecy that would “foretell” events 400 years after his time. (The technical term for this practice is vaticinium ex eventu, “prediction after the event.”) Daniel refers to “a vile person” – Antiochus – who will “pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and… shall place the abomination that maketh desolate” (Dan. 11:21, 31) – that is, the idol in the Temple (cf. 1 Macc. 1:54). The archangel Michael will come to Israel’s rescue; the dead will be raised, “some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” Antiochus “shall come to his end, and none shall help him” (Daniel 11:45, 12:1-2).

    What happened in fact was that the Jews rose up under the priestly family of the Maccabees and won back their independence, but this obviously did not begin the end of time. Antiochus himself did not perish as a result of any obvious divine wrath: he died of disease.

    Despite its failure as a prophecy, the Book of Daniel set up the basic structure of the apocalyptic genre. Arising during some crisis, a text of this kind predicts that this event is the harbinger of the Day of Judgment, when justice will be done and evildoers will receive their due. The Book of Revelation at the end of the New Testament is much the same: many scholars say that it is a response to the persecution of Christians by the Roman emperor Domitian in the last decade of the first century CE. (The Greek title of Revelation, apokalypsis, gave its name to the genre.)

    Even this very brief survey tells us something important about apocalypse and our attraction to it. There is a profound human hunger for justice – not only in the social arena but in the universe. And yet the forces of history often seem indifferent to justice: the righteous suffer while the wicked thrive. Every culture has made its own attempt to reconcile these facts. The traditions that arose out of India – Hinduism and Buddhism – posit the law of karma, played out across the backdrop of many lifetimes, as a way of explaining the apparent unfairness of the world. But reincarnation has always been very much a minority view in the West. Nor did the ancient Jews even have a very clear conception of the afterlife; reward in heaven and hell was only introduced later on, from Greek mystery religions.

    Thus the solution the Jewish prophets proposed was the “day of Yahweh” – a final point in history when malefactors would all be brought to justice and the good (inevitably identified with one’s own people or sect) would finally be given their due. This has been such a powerful perspective that it has left its stamp upon practically everyone in Western civilisation. Even twentieth-century distortions such as Hitler’s Thousand-Year Reich and the glorious utopia under the rule of the proletariat, as prophesied by communism, owe much of their inspiration to the apocalyptic genre.

    From all this it would seem that both the fears and the longings for the End Times are simply foolish. And yet it is not quite that simple. Deep down within the human heart lies the unshakable conviction that something is not right about the world we live in. We characterise the problem in different ways – politically, sociologically, psychologically, theologically – but the feeling is so pervasive that man can be defined as the animal that believes something is wrong. We can then ask ourselves, is there a chance that the cosmic order can be restored to its proper state?

    This idea has constantly resurfaced in human thought, and as more than a simplistic version of the Last Judgment. The Christian church father Origen (c.185-c.254 CE) speculated about what he called the apokatastasis or “restoration” of all things, citing such biblical passages as 1 Corinthians 15:28: “And when all things shall be subdued unto him [God], then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” Origen even dared to suggest that all beings had the possibility of redemption, including the devil himself.

    For bold theological moves such as this, Origen was eventually repudiated by the mainstream church, but his theology has continued as a source of inspiration up to the present. Even some orthodox church fathers, such as Gregory of Nyssa (c.335-c.395) and Maximus the Confessor (c.580-662), discussed universal redemption as a serious possibility. In the nineteenth-century United States, the Universalist Church was founded on the basis of this doctrine, and in the twentieth century the highly popular and influential text A Course in Miracles spoke of what it called the “Atonement,” in which all beings will eventually come to realise their fundamental unity with God. A parallel in Mahayana Buddhism is the hope for the ultimate enlightenment of all sentient beings.

    Get the issue this article appears in

    Underlying this idea is another, equally important theme. We constantly hear the saying “We are all one,” but what does that really mean? Certainly in ordinary life we are not all one; I am not you, and you are not me. But, the esoteric traditions tell us, this is only apparently so. In reality we are all cells in a much larger being – a cosmic human who has been known to the Kabbalists as Adam Kadmon, to the eighteenth-century Swedish mystic Emanuel Swedenborg as the maximus homo or universal human, and to A Course in Miracles as the Sonship. (In reply to the question of whether Jesus Christ is the Son of God, the Course replies, “O yes, along with you!”) The apokatasasis is the restoration of each individual to his or her rightful place in this cosmic human, which will then reveal the profound truth of the assertion that we are all one.

    This esoteric idea differs from the popular conception of the Last Judgment in two important ways. In the first place, it holds that ultimately no one will be condemned. While some will accept the truth of the Atonement sooner than others, eventually all will take part in it. In the second place, it is not posited as some kind of event that will occur next year or next decade. Instead the teaching says that the process of the Fall – the fragmentation of this cosmic human into the disharmonious, apparently separate entities that we now seem to be – took place over the span of unimaginable eons, and that the restoration will require a similarly immense amount of time to be realised.

    As such, this vision does not offer many of the consolations that the conventional picture of the apocalypse provides. It does not give the believer the satisfaction of contemplating the immolation of the wicked (who are usually imagined as one’s own enemies, however these are construed). It does not provide the sensational thrill one might get from thinking that the end of the world is just around the corner. But in acknowledging that the human race is part of an enormous cosmic process, on a scale that we can scarcely conceive of, and in reconciling divine justice with divine mercy, it is a vision that deserves our consideration as well as our respect.

    [alert type=”general” dismiss=”no”]This article was published in New Dawn 135.[/alert]

    [alert type=”success” dismiss=”no”]If you appreciate this article, please consider subscribing to help maintain this website.[/alert]

    Footnote

    1. For one list, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dates_predicted_for_apocalyptic_events

    © New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
    For our reproduction notice, click here.

  • Hidden London: Secrets of the City Revealed

    Hidden London: Secrets of the City Revealed

    This article was published in New Dawn 133 (Jul-Aug 2012)

    American by birth, I have lived in London for fifteen years and consider it my home. During that time I have explored many of the city’s esoteric sites and have concluded that this remarkable metropolis is only just beginning to reveal its true occult significance.

    London has been inhabited for thousands of years and the diversity of its settlements has resulted in a rich, if not peculiar, collection of occult traditions. The earliest humans hunted here over four hundred thousand years ago. While a rich abundance of wildlife and a strategic riverside base would have attracted many different colonies of people, one wonders how the ancients truly saw their landscape, and how many were drawn here due to the distinctive snake-like curvature of the River Thames.

    The serpent is one of the oldest occult symbols, representing many esoteric concepts, including duality, good and evil, and harmony with the earth. Thanks to the wonders of technology, an image of the serpent in the form of the winding Thames has been broadcast daily to millions of viewers across the globe for nearly three decades, courtesy of the television programme Eastenders, whose opening credits feature the unique landscape from the air.

    Like other ancient settlements in Europe, London was inhabited by megalithic societies who constructed stone circles and burial mounds. The Iron Age introduced more sophisticated settlements and hill forts which, sadly, can only really be appreciated today by aerial photography. These include settlements at Wimbledon Common, Heathrow and the present-day Houses of Parliament, to name a few. Urbanisation has all but erased the megalithic footprint of London, but some remnants, such as Primrose Hill, with its curious burial mound and breathtaking views of London, remain. In fact, Primrose Hill would become a haunt of occultists William Blake and Dion Fortune, amongst others, and plans, albeit later aborted, would be made to construct a colossal pyramid burial complex on top of the hill, complete with over five million honeycomb-shaped tombs.

    There is considerable evidence for occult practices having occurred in London in ancient times: beeswax effigies, thought to be five thousand years old, have been found in the Thames, representing man’s attempt at harnessing occult powers via shamanism and many stylised Bronze Age swords have also been discovered in the Thames, suggestive of votive offerings to Celtic deities. Similarly, albeit over a thousand years later, a golden-horned, apparently ceremonial Viking helmet was discovered in the Thames, near Waterloo. The amazing artefact is unique in Europe and appears to reinforce the occult tradition of London’s ancestors and their reverence for the serpentine river.

    The Trojan leader Brutus established a city here in 1100 BCE and named it Troia Nova, or Trinovantum. Later, the 1st-century BCE King Lud renamed it Caer Lud, which evolved into Caerlundein, Londinium and finally London. It is said that giants lived in London in Brutus’s day and that he captured two, Gog and Magog, and employed them as porters at the gate of his palace. Brutus is also associated with another legend, the London Stone, a curious rock of which little is known for certain. Some say it came from Troy, others believe it was a druid stone or even the stone from which Arthur extracted Excalibur.

    A medieval proverb states, “So long as the stone of Brutus is safe, so long shall London flourish.” William Shakespeare wrote about the stone and, intriguingly, many believe that his plays were actually written by Francis Bacon or Christopher Marlowe, both of whom were esoterically connected. Another London occultist, William Blake, wrote of the London Stone in his poem, Jerusalem (1820): “At length he sat on London Stone and heard Jerusalem’s voice.” Clearly, the relic once cast a magical spell on the city. Sadly, it is now embedded in an abandoned building across from Cannon Street Tube Station, its former glory but a distant memory.

    For the best reading experience, obtain the full digital version of this magazine with all this article’s illustrations.

    Hail the Romans: As Above So Below

    The arrival of the Romans marked a significant milestone in the evolution of London’s occult tradition and in 54 BCE Julius Caesar and his men crossed the Thames in West London, signalling the new era.

    The Romans were especially threatened by the Druids, who, according to Caesar, were involved in divine worship and human sacrifice, including the burning of prisoners, or even innocents, in ‘wicker men’. Sure enough, London’s native tribes appear to have paid homage to their gods for protection from the Romans, as indicated by a decorative bronze shield with inlaid coloured glass found in the Thames near Battersea that dates to this time. The original inhabitants of London were incredibly resilient and fought bravely to maintain their cultural identity. One hundred years later Queen Boudica sacked the city and soundly, if not brutally, defeated the Romans in retaliation for the rape of her daughters and the killing of the Druids; but the Romans would soon avenge this attack and all but extinguish the Druids and their largely oral occult traditions.

    The Roman invasion changed the landscape, language, culture and thought process of native Britons forever. There are many museum exhibits in London that document these changes via artefacts and re-creations. From an occult perspective there was a less tangible, but no less fundamental, change in consciousness starting to take place: the introduction of Mithraism, and the theology of ‘as above, so below’.

    Not much is known of this ancient mystery school, other than it involved Mithras, the Roman God of Light, but we do know that it also involved the ritualistic slaughter of bulls and included a seven-grade system of initiation. Like the Masonic rituals that would be conducted some fifteen hundred years later in London’s Grand Lodge, Mithraism included ritual meals and a secret handshake.

    The Romans conducted their rituals in underground temples called mithraea, and several of these evocative temples have been discovered in London, including one remarkable 60-feet long, 26-feet wide temple beneath the now underground River Wallbrook.

    The origins of Mithraism are uncertain, although it is known to have been popular amongst Roman soldiers, most likely because it provided a comforting framework for the afterlife, and understandably so. In their profession a premature death was almost inevitable. The cult is thought to be Roman or Persian in origin and the name ‘mi-it-ra’ has been found inscribed in a 1400 BCE peace treaty between the Hittites and the kingdom of Mitanni in Northern Syria. This is interesting, for both regions have a rich tradition of bull veneration and each was contemporary with Dynastic Egypt, where I believe the tradition of Mithraism originated. In Egypt, the slaughter of Apis (‘bee’ in Latin) bulls resulted in 1,000 souls, represented as bees, being born out of the body of the dead bull. The occult tradition of bull slaughter, which is referenced in the Mesopotamian Epic of Gilgamesh and the Egyptian Opening of the Mouth ceremony, commemorates what the ancients observed in the constellation of Taurus: a hunter killing a bull with distinctive marks (3 stars) on its forehead, just as the Apis bull has distinctive marks on its forehead.

    I believe London’s adoption of the occult tradition of ‘as above so below’ can also be found in the legend of King Arthur, whom every Celtic nation claims as their own, most notably England. In a recent documentary on King Arthur that I presented for the National Geographic Channel, I expressed my belief, much to the producer’s chagrin, that the ambiguity around Arthur’s origins is due to the fact that he never existed. Rather, he was an archetypical hero, who lived in the constellation of Ursa Major, known as the ‘Great Bear’, meaning Arthur. Man would have observed the Big Dipper, which resembles a platter (the object that was considered to be the Grail in the first complete account) rotating around the Pole Star, promising to return, like Arthur. The night sky also includes an outline of a man with a wounded thigh, which sounds very much like the Fisher King. And, of course, Arthur fought twelve battles and there were twelve knights of the ‘round’ table; one for each of the twelve constellations perhaps? Was the legend of King Arthur just another archetype, much like Mithraism?

    The Arrival of the Knights Templar

    The Order of the Hospital of St John of Jerusalem was founded in 1099, shortly after the First Crusade. Less than fifty years later they established their headquarters at the Priory in Clerkenwell, the remains of which are now a museum. Across town, the Knights Templar established a base in High Holborn, in a Roman temple once revered by Hugues de Payens. The Knights Templar outgrew their headquarters and built Temple Church between Fleet Street and the River Thames, a round church based on the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. In keeping with their power elsewhere in Europe, the Order installed the Master of Temple Church in Parliament, thus ensuring that their powerful occult views would become part of the nation’s legislature.

    The land between Fleet Street and the Thames was owned by the Knights Templar and divided into Outer Temple and Middle Temple, with Temple Church serving as Inner Temple. Each existed above the covered-up River Fleet and, in occult tradition, an underground stream provides divine augmentation to rituals and spiritual attainment.

    Come the middle of the 19th century the tale of Sweeney Todd, the demon barber of Fleet Street, began to emerge. The gory urban myth appears to be without historical merit, causing some to speculate that the legend of a serial killer in the vicinity of the Templar precinct may be a memory of former ritual sacrifices. Today a dragon guards the entrance to Temple Bar and reminds one of the esoteric traditions once practiced there.

    Despite the recent Hollywood movie starring Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter, the legend of Sweeny Todd has largely been superseded by one that took place half a century later, in 1888, when a serial killer by the name of Jack the Ripper murdered five women, forming a 5-sided pentagram in the process and removing their organs along the way, including, in some instances, their hearts.

    Ritual killings continue in London, and the river Thames continues to be the depository for the ritual remains of victims. In recent years the analysis of limbless torsos discovered in the Thames has prompted authorities to suspect ritual murder and superstition as the reason for the crimes. This is not a new tradition in London. The nursery rhyme, ‘London Bridge is falling down’, is said by English Myths and Legends author Henry Bett to be the folk memory of the ancient practice of human sacrifice at the building of a bridge.

    Summoning the Spirit World

    A belief in the occult appears to have helped London achieve prosperity during periods of pending adversity. Dr. John Dee (1527-1608), who used a crystal ball and scrying mirror to guide Queen Elizabeth through one of the most challenging eras in British history, is perhaps the most renowned example (see “John Dee and the Enochian Apocalypse”).

    But there are many other examples of occult traditions in the court of the king and queen. Take, for example, the peculiar tale of King Charles II (1630-1685), who presented his mistress, a resident of West London, with a griffin. The dog-like figure with wings fell into a local river, survived and ended up in the Thames, near the point at which Caesar had crossed. It was later paired with a second griffin that Joseph Banks, a scientist who accompanied Captain Cook on his voyages, had brought back from an exotic island in the Pacific Ocean. The account leads us to believe that the griffin may have been a real animal, which multiplied before fading from history, only to be seen once more in the 1980s, and on multiple occasions by various upstanding citizens of West London.

    Charles II also domesticated the ravens at the Tower of London, a tradition summed up as follows: “If the Tower of London ravens are lost or fly away, the Crown will fall and Britain with it.” The belief appears to stem from the legend of the Celtic god, Brân the Blessed, whose name means ‘Blessed Raven’ in Welsh and who was killed in an otherwise successful battle against an adversary, the Irish King, Matholwch. Brân’s head was buried beneath the spot where the Tower now stands, facing France as a talisman against further foreign invaders. Could the legend of the griffin and the raven somehow be related?

    Henry VIII (1491-1547) created a religious revolt with great consequence when he severed ties from Rome in an act known as the Dissolution of the Monasteries. Given the many cathedrals and orders that were subsequently transformed into ruins, any number of different sects could have been culpable of the act of desecration that awaited the king after his death. On his way from London to Windsor, where he would be buried, the King’s funeral procession rested overnight at Syon Abbey in West London. In the morning it was discovered that wild dogs had ripped open his casket and ravaged his body, leading some to speculate that the attack was a deliberate act of revenge enacted by a member or group of individuals from one of the aggrieved monastic orders he had defied.

    Phoenix Rising

    The Great Fire of 1666 devastated London, destroying over 13,000 buildings. What is less widely known, however, is that occult beliefs prevented an otherwise manageable outbreak from being extinguished. This is confirmed by first-hand accounts of Londoners whose belief in the prophecies of Mother Shipton and Nostradamus, each of whom was thought to have predicted the catastrophic fire, led them to feel disempowered and unworthy of extinguishing the fire and thus saving the city from its destiny.

    Out of the ashes came a vision of a New Jerusalem, masterminded by the Freemason and architect, Christopher Wren, who drew on the occult traditions of the Kabbalah, and the tree of life in particular, in addition to the sacred geometry of the Old Testament. Wren reintroduced the hallowed number of 2,000 cubits, or roughly 2/3 of a mile, which represented the distance from the Mount of Olives to Jerusalem (the furthest a Jew was allowed to walk during the Sabbath), and proposed that many of London’s newly-constructed buildings be set 2,000 cubits apart.

    Foremost amongst Wren’s impressive, occult inspired designs is Saint Paul’s Cathedral, which not surprisingly is aligned 2,000 cubits from Temple Bar to the West and 2,000 cubits from St Dunstan’s in the East. Miraculously, the stunning edifice survived the bombings of a world war, and it is no wonder that Prime Minister Winston Churchill addressed his staff each morning with the pensive question; “Is Saint Paul’s still standing?” Poignantly, Saint Paul’s is where Wren is buried. Fortunately for all, the fabulous monument still stands like the esoteric beacon it was always intended to be.

    Other buildings erected after the fire, such as the Monument and Nelson’s Column, were either designed with occult-inspired dimensions or aligned to the solstices. Further, Wren’s student Nicholas Hawksmoor followed in the occult tradition by placing Egyptian obelisks on top of churches, forming, in the estimations of some, a pentagram on the ground across London. The tradition of creating buildings with occult dimensions had been re-born and continued in later periods of development, such as the nude, winged statue of Anteros, the Greek avenger God of requited love, erected in Piccadilly Circus in 1892, and which was originally orientated in the direction of Parliament, presumably to send ‘love’ and to produce greater synergies within government.

    King George III (1738-1820) was a remarkable man and one of England’s many occult-minded kings. In 1769 George III anxiously awaited the completion of an alchemist observatory in the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames. In commissioning the work, George III was creating his personal observatory and meridian, despite the fact that the official and Royal Observatory – and meridian, the naval of the country – had been established in Greenwich a hundred years earlier. The King was passionate about astronomy and instructed his architect, the renowned occultist Sir William Chambers, to complete the work in time to view the transit of Venus, which occurred that year on 3rd June.

    Meridians have existed since ancient times. While the placement of a meridian is arbitrary, its function is quite specific: to project an imaginary line across earth’s surface, stretching from the North Pole to the South Pole, esoterically connecting all locations within a given longitude. In the case of George III, he projected his own meridian straight down the serpentine Thames, a stunning riverside landscape, rich in history and renowned for its visionary inhabitants, innovators such as J M W Turner, Alexander Pope, James Thompson, Horace Walpole, David Garrick and William Hogarth, to name a few. The Meridian was special, for it intersected sacred sites along the way, which were part of what George envisaged as a new Arcadia; a diamond in the rough – a paradise amidst the urban chaos of London.

    Dawn of the Occultists

    Arguably the greatest spiritual explorer of the 18th century, Emanuel Swedenborg (1688-1722), hailed from Stockholm, but spent much of his time in London. He eventually moved to Wellclose Square, a former hotbed of esoteric notables, including Rabbi Falk, ‘The Ba’al Shem of London’. Also in the 18th century the London-born poet, painter and esotericist William Blake (1757-1827) became one of a long tradition of writers whose work may need to be reconsidered in the context of a recent discovery; not a temple, book or artefact, but a portal, supposedly concentrated in the garden of Saint Marylebone Church.

    The portal is said by modern occultists to be a stargate to an alternative dimension and consciousness, accessible only by initiates. The so-called energy field/cosmic doorway is said to stretch all the way to Primrose Hill, which is precisely the expanse of land that Blake was writing about in his epic poem, Jerusalem. Lord Byron was born in the church; Francis Bacon was married there, as were Robert Browning and Elizabeth Barrett. Lord Nelson had his daughter christened at the church and Charles Dickens lived but a short distance away. May each have drawn on the occult energy of the portal to enhance their art?

    As the 20th century neared, London became esoterically linked to ancient Egypt and other sacred cities, when an obelisk from the ancient capital of Heliopolis was installed on the south bank of the Thames. Like Rome and Paris before it, and New York shortly thereafter, London now possessed one of the most highly charged artefacts in the ancient tradition, an Egyptian obelisk; a powerful talisman to the sun god. Cleopatra’s Needle, as the London obelisk is known, is flanked by two replica sphinxes that appear to guard the ancient structure. In fact, sphinxes adorn the whole of London’s Embankment, including armrests on the benches along the Thames. In 1917, during World War I, a bomb from a German air raid landed near the obelisk, but, inexplicably, produced no real damage. Had the sphinx protected London from a disastrous fate?

    Come World War II an urban myth arose in which British witches were said to have gathered to assist Winston Churchill in deterring Hitler from advancing on Britain. Given the occult traditions of London at this time, who is to say that the witches did not play their part in the war effort?

    The Victorians were obsessive about all matters of the supernatural and the legend of Spring-Heeled Jack, the Bogeyman of London, persisted throughout the reign of Queen Victoria. It is said that the creature could walk through walls, had a pointed nose and ears and fiery eyes. Half a century or so later the creature would return, or so it would appear, this time as a 20th century apparition of a vampire in Highgate Cemetery.

    The legend of the Highgate vampire has its roots in tales of creatures that roamed the north London district of Dracula author Bram Stoker. The practice of Satanism was not uncommon in London and some believe that the creature with the fiery eyes was manifested by satanic rituals and remained in this realm, only later becoming known as Spring-Heeled Jack and the Highgate Vampire. Speculation aside, one wonders if the legend of Dracula was inspired by London’s secret traditions.

    Cults Wars

    The Theosophical Society, co-founded by Madame Blavatsky (1831-1891), introduced the notion that the evolution of mankind was governed by a chosen elect known as the ‘brotherhood’. The Ukraine-born spiritualist believed the occult and science worked in tandem, and the occult was simply accessing realms that science had yet to conquer. 

    Despite its success at displacing Victorian spiritualism, the Theosophical Society had its own competition, the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, whose first temple, Isis-Urania, was created by Samuel Liddell Mathers in 1888, and which conducted its first tomb-based rituals at Thavies Inn, off Holborn Circus. The ritual was said to have included the enactment of the death and rebirth of Christian Rosencreuz, the founder of the Rosicrucian Order. The Golden Dawn was alleged to have been based on rituals contained in a coded ‘cipher manuscript’. Others believed it was a ruse to compete with the Theosophical Society. Regardless, the Golden Dawn grew rapidly, converting 50 members in its first year and another 250 in its second, before starting to implode into more offshoots than Clapham Station has train tracks.

    Aleister Crowley was initiated as the group began to fragment into various offshoots, such as the Alpha et Omega which formed in around 1900. Crowley had a fierce reputation as an occultist and his own mother believed him to be the Anti-Christ of the Apocalypse and the ‘Great Beast’. Crowley studied at Cambridge before moving to a flat at 67 & 69 Chancery Lane in London, where his occult studies flourished with the help of a mentor by the name of Allan Bennett, who introduced him to Buddhism. Here the two men sought to perform the ‘Abramelin Operation’, an intense six-month ritual designed to conjure the Holy Guardian Angel. One account suggests that Crowley succeeded, for he is said to have returned home one night only to find his door open and ‘semi-materialised beings’ marching around his flat. Crowley had his hands in all sorts of secret traditions, and despite his Masonic involvement elsewhere in Europe, the United Grand Lodge of England denied him admission.

    Another famous occultist of the 20th century was Dion Fortune, who left Alpha et Omega and joined another Golden Dawn derivative, the Stella Matutina (Morning Star), a group originally known as the Mystic Rose or Order of the M R in the Outer. Fortune left because she feared she was under psychic attack, and proceeded to write the definitive book on psychic and occult protection. In 1924 she formed her own cult, the Fraternity of the Inner Light, which met in Primrose Hill.

    In 1960 the French poet and occultist Jean Cocteau, an alleged Grand Master of the Priory of Sion, visited the Church of Notre Dame de France in Leicester Square. Here, he created a mural dedicated to the Virgin Mary, which features a Black Sun and references layer upon layer of veiled knowledge.

    The year 2000 came and went, with the only homage to the millennium being the creation of a ‘dome’ (now called the ‘O2’), which was nestled in one of the curvatures of the serpent Thames. However, the previous year, 1999, had seen the creation of an even more esoterically potent edifice, the London Eye. This huge, slow-moving Ferris wheel amusement ride stands majestically on the banks of the Thames. The structure dominates the landscape, recalling many occult circular symbols, from the zen-like concepts of completeness and wholeness, to the brutal death of heretics upon the Catherine Wheel. It also includes a brazen Masonic compass in its centre, as well as being named after another ancient occult symbol, the all-seeing eye. The ‘Eye’ became a powerful part of the landscape in a very short period of time and one that is colourfully lit during special occasions, such as New Year’s Eve.

    Fast forward to 2012 and the London Olympics, whose logo inexplicably resembles the word ‘Zion’ and whose stadium sits amidst symbolically named streets (see “The London Olympics Conspiracy”). One wonders how much invisible influence occult powers may have in Parliament.

    The foundations of London’s occult traditions run wide and deep and represent a microcosm of the esoteric tradition the world over. If history is any indication, it is unlikely these traditions will fade any time soon, although they may move underground, much the same as London’s forgotten rivers, in order to survive.

    [alert type=”general” dismiss=”no”]This article was published in New Dawn 133.[/alert]

    [alert type=”success” dismiss=”no”]If you appreciate this article, please consider subscribing to help maintain this website.[/alert]

    © New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
    For our reproduction notice, click here.

  • ‘In the Interests of Money’: America, Big Business & Revolution

    ‘In the Interests of Money’: America, Big Business & Revolution

    From New Dawn Special Issue Vol 6 No 3 (Aug 2012)

    There is no proletarian, not even communist movement, that has not operated in the interests of money, in the directions indicated by money, and for the time permitted by money – and that without the idealist amongst its leaders having the slightest suspicion of the fact. 
    – Oswald Spengler1

    One of the great myths of history is the concept of the mass people’s revolt against tyranny, epitomised in our era by the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. Much political analyses have focused on the supposed clash between socialism and capitalism. The philosopher-historian Oswald Spengler was one of the first in our era to point out that revolts in the name of ‘the people’ operate in the service of the moneyed class:

    Herein lies the secret of why all radical (i.e. poor) parties necessarily become the tools of the money-powers, the Equites, the Bourse. Theoretically their enemy is capital, but practically they attack, not the Bourse, but Tradition on behalf of the Bourse. This is as true today as it was for the Gracchan age, and in all countries…2

    The concepts of Liberalism and Socialism are set in effective motion only by money. It was the Equites, the big-money party, which made Tiberius Gracchu’s popular movement possible at all; and as soon as that part of the reforms that was advantageous to themselves had been successfully legalised, they withdrew and the movement collapsed.3

    The socialist triumphs, whether by revolt or by the ballot box, have generally been no more directed by ‘the people’ than the present so-called ‘Arab Spring’, or the sundry ‘velvet revolutions’ funded and prompted by George Soros’ Open Society Institute, the US State Department, National Endowment for Democracy, Freedom House, and sundry other plutocratic think tanks.4

    Russia Targeted

    New York financial interests marked Russia for revolt at least a dozen years before the Revolution. It was first necessary to sour the hitherto friendly relations existing between Americans and Russians, by portraying the Czar as the pinnacle of antiquated tyranny. A journalist, George Kennan, was chosen for the purpose. Historian Thomas A. Bailey stated of Kennan that “no person did more” to turn Americans against the Czar.5

    The opportunity for undermining Czarism came with the 1905 Russo-Japanese War. During this time Kennan was in Japan organising Russian POWs into “revolutionary cells,” and claimed to have converted “52,000 Russian soldiers into ‘revolutionists’.” Cowley comments that such activities were “well-financed by groups in the United States.”6 The financial patron was primarily Jacob Schiff, senior partner of Kuhn, Loeb & Co, New York.

    World War I provided the opportunity to deal a deathblow to the Czar, serving as a catalyst for the March 1917 Revolution. Kennan reported of a celebratory event in New York by the “Friends of Russian Freedom,” that the dissemination of revolutionary propaganda among Russian soldiers in 1905, who formed the cadres of the 1917 Revolution, had been “financed by a New York banker you all know and love,” Jacob Schiff. The New York Times reported that a telegram was read from Schiff to the gathering referring to “what we had hoped and striven for these long years.”7

    Writing to The Evening Post in response to a question about revolutionary Russia’s new status on the world financial markets, Schiff stated:

    Replying to your request for my opinion of the effects of the revolution upon Russia’s finances, I am quite convinced that with the certainty of the development of the country’s enormous resources, which, with the shackles removed from a great people, will follow present events, Russia will before long rank financially amongst the most favoured nations in the money markets of the world.8

    This reflected the generally jubilant attitude of the international financiers. John B. Young of the National City Bank, who had been in Russia in 1916 in regard to a US loan, stated of the revolution that it was discussed widely when he had been there. He regarded those involved as “solid, responsible and conservative.”9 In the same issue of The New York Times it was reported there had been a rise in Russian exchange transactions in London 24 hours preceding the revolution, and that London had known of the revolution prior to New York. The article reported that most prominent financial and business leaders in London and New York had a positive view of the revolution.10 Another report states that while there had been some disquiet about the revolution, “this news was by no means unwelcome in more important banking circles.”11

    ‘The Bolshevik of Wall Street’

    The March Revolution was the prelude to the November Bolshevik Revolution. Again, international financial interests were involved from the start. This was primarily undertaken under the guise of the American Red Cross Mission to Russia, which comprised mostly Wall Street rather than medical personnel.12 The Mission was under the direction of William Boyce Thompson, a director of the NY Federal Reserve Bank, who funded the Mission along with International Harvester. According to Thompson’s assistant, Cornelius Kelleher, the mission was “nothing but a mask” for business interests.13

    Such was Thompson’s enthusiasm for Bolshevism that he was nicknamed “the Bolshevik of Wall Street” by his business comrades. Thompson gave an interview with The New York Times shortly after his four-month tour with the American Red Cross Mission, expressing his favourable views on the still precarious Bolshevik regime. The article states that Thompson’s “opinion is that Russia needs America, that America must stand by Russia.” He stated: “The Bolsheviki peace aims are the same as those of the Untied States.” The Times commented:

    Colonel Thompson is a banker and a capitalist, and he has large manufacturing interests. He is not a sentimentalist nor a ‘radical’. But he has come back from his official visit to Russia in absolute sympathy with the Russian democracy as represented by the Bolsheviki at present.14

    Thompson stated that in reply to surprise at his pro-Bolshevik sentiments he did not mind being called “red” if that meant sympathy for 170,000,000 people “struggling for liberty and fair living.” He said that “the present government in Russia is a government of workingmen. It is a Government by the majority, and, because our Government is a government of the majority, I don’t see how we can fail to support the Government of Russia.”15 

    Trotsky’s Business Connections

    While the manner by which Russian revolutionary Vladimir Lenin and his entourage made their way by train to Russia courtesy of the German General Staff, facilitated by the wealthy and well-connected Marxist ‘Parvus’ (Israel Helphand), is well documented,16 the manner by which Leon Trotsky reached Russia from New York has been obscure.

    Dr. Richard Spence of Idaho State University has provided the best research. While Lenin and Co. were backed by German interests, Spence provides convincing evidence that the British were backing Trotsky. However, behind both stood international financiers, centred on Kuhn, Loeb & Co. in Wall Street, and the Warburg banking dynasty, which encompassed simultaneously Allied and German business. In the centre of these interests around Trotsky was Sir William Wiseman,17 de facto head of the British Secret Service in the USA who, interestingly, stayed in America after the war to work with Kuhn, Loeb & Co. becoming a partner in 1929.

    When Trotsky arrived in New York with his family, despite later claims that he was “penniless,” he carried at least $500 (the equivalent of $10,000 today) and had been booked into the elite Hotel Astor. After a brief stay, the Trotsky’s were provided with a spacious apartment in the Bronx, and were taken under wing by Dr. Julius Hammer, who lived nearby.18 Like Parvus, Dr. Hammer was another example of a millionaire Marxist, whose son Armand, as head of Occidental Petroleum, became a mainstay of commercial relations with the USSR for decades,19 interrupted only by the Stalinist interregnum.20 

    Spence further traces associations between the enigmatic British master spy Sidney Reilly, whose dealings seem to have been duplicitous, having traded with the Germans as a director of Allied Machinery Co. He was associated in business with Abram Zhivotovskii, an international banker who was Trotsky’s maternal uncle.21 Zhivotovskii in turn was associated with Olof Aschberg,22 head of the Nye Banken, Stockholm, who channelled funds to the Bolsheviks, earning Aschberg the title of “Bolshevik banker.” Uncle Abram, suspected of being a German agent while supposedly working for the Russian Government, was described by the US State Department as laundering large sums to the Bolsheviks, while professing to be anti-Bolshevik.23

    As for Aschberg, Dr. Antony Sutton of the Hoover Institution cites a US State Department File Green Cipher message from the US Embassy in Christiania (Oslo), dated 21 February 1918, stating that Bolshevik funds were deposited in the Nye Banken.24 When the Bolsheviks established their international bank Ruskombank in 1922, it was headed by Aschberg, with Max May, vice president of the JP Morgan bank Guaranty Trust Co., as director of the Foreign Division.25

    However, to return to Trotsky, when the call came to get back to Russia, en route he was detained at Nova Scotia, Canada by British authorities, on suspicion of being a German agent.26 Spence points out that Trotsky was just the type of revolutionary that Wiseman would seek out to direct the movement. Spence believes that Trotsky’s brief detention at Nova Scotia on suspicion of pro-German sympathies would make sense as a pretext for allaying suspicions as to a pro-British agenda. He was soon allowed to proceed.

    Pro-Bolshevik Agendas

    The Bolsheviks took several years of a very bloody civil war to consolidate their hold over Russia. Their initial position did not extend much beyond Moscow and Petrograd (now St Petersburg). Both socialist and mainstream Western history maintain the Bolsheviks were engaged in a life and death struggle with reactionaries who received largesse from the capitalist powers. As will be seen below, this is not correct. However, diplomatically, plutocratic interests lost no time in advocating for the Bolshevik cause in the aftermath of World War I. We have already considered the actions of William Boyce Thompson and the merchant interests that comprised the bulk of the Red Cross Mission to Russia. There was also high-powered lobbying behind the scenes at the peace conferences.

    Two prominent sources, one conservative, and one socialist, observed the same machinations of High Finance on behalf of Bolshevism. Henry Wickham Steed, editor of The London Times, with the backing of the newspaper’s proprietor, Lord Northcliffe, was a one-man lobby against the powerful international forces trying to secure support for Bolshevik Russia. The extent of his success was due to his position in being able to publicly expose these machinations while also publicising the atrocities of the Bolsheviks.

    In a first-hand account of the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, Wickham Steed stated that proceedings were interrupted by the return from Moscow of William C. Bullitt and Lincoln Steffens, who had been sent to Russia by Colonel Edward M. House27 and US Secretary of State Robert Lansing, to study political and economic conditions and report back to the US Commissioners plenipotentiary at the peace conference. Steed observed that Jacob Schiff was particularly “eager to secure recognition” of the Bolsheviks, also writing that, “Potent international financial interests were at work in favour of the immediate recognition of the Bolshevists.”28 House met Steed and expressed concern at the publicity Steed was giving to the machinations. Steed replied that it was Schiff, Warburg and other bankers who were behind the diplomatic moves in favour of the Bolsheviks in order to secure the exploitation of Russia. I have written on this subject that:

    House disingenuously asked Wickham Steed to compromise; to support a move that would supposedly secure benefits for both the pro-Bolshevik and non-Bolshevik Russian masses in terms of humanitarian aid. Wickham Steed agreed to consider this, but soon after talking to House found out that British Prime Minister Lloyd George and Wilson were to proceed with recognition the following day. Steed therefore wrote the leading article for the Paris Daily Mail of March 28th, exposing the manoeuvres and asking where a pro-Bolshevik stance stood with Wilson’s high moral principles for the post-war world?29

    Steed was visited again by House, who stated that Steed’s article in the Paris Daily Mail, “had got under the President’s hide”; while the publicity also bothered Prime Minister Lloyd George as it was preventing him from recognising the Bolsheviks.

    Several years later, on the other side geographically and politically, Samuel Gompers, president of the American Federation of Labor, also observed that it was capitalistic interests that were lobbying for the Bolsheviks. On 1 May 1922 The New York Times reported that Gompers, reacting to negotiations at the international economic conference at Genoa, declared that a group of “predatory international financiers” were working for the recognition of the Bolshevik regime for the opening up of resources for exploitation. He also noted that prominent Americans who had a history of anti-labour attitudes were advocating recognition of the Bolshevik regime.30

    The American ‘Intervention’

    If capitalistic interests were really supporting the Bolsheviks, the sceptical reader might ask, what is one to make of the Allied ‘intervention’ on the side of the White Armies against the Red Army during the Russian Civil War? Again we are faced with the simplifications and obfuscations of socialist propaganda and Western mainstream academia. The Allies sent troops into Russia when there was an impending collapse of the Russian Home Front, for the purpose of ensuring that Allied war supplies sent to Russia would not fall into German hands. While there were those in military, diplomatic and political circles that did want to assist the White Army and fight the Bolsheviks, these never prevailed. Many others of much greater influence sought a policy that was a literal ‘stab in the back’ to the forces fighting the Red Army.

    US State Department Russia expert George F. Kennan31 stated that when the Americans sent their first representative to Archangel in 1917, at the time the Bolsheviks had seized power, Archangel was an important strategic port where war supplies that had been shipped by the Allies had accumulated in large quantities.32 This materiel included 2,000 tons of aluminium, 2,100 tons of antimony, 14,000 tons of copper, and 5,230 tons of lead, etc.33 With the possibility of Russia concluding an armistice with Germany, the Allies were anxious to recover the stocks. The Bolsheviks dispatched a commission to Archangel to deliver the war materials to the interior.34 Despite the arrival of two British ships, the British sat by for several months while the Bolsheviks removed the war materiels.35 The second factor was to ensure the safety of Czech soldiers who had been prisoners-of-war in Russia and wished to fight Germany with the aim of gaining support for Czech nationhood after the war. Their release was agreed by the Bolshevik regime and the Americans and Japanese were responsible for their transport by rail to Vladivostok.36

    The attitude of the Bolsheviks in regard to armistice with Germany was far from clear. Trotsky in particular did not support Lenin’s priority to withdraw from war, and after aggravating the German representatives at Brest-Livotsk, resigned as Commissar for Foreign Affairs, assuming the position of Commissar for Military Affairs and head of the Red Army. This resulted in the Germans launching another offensive on the Eastern Front against the embryonic Red Army. This caused a sense of “solidarity” between the Allies and the Bolsheviks.37 Trotsky remained a focus of efforts to secure Bolshevik support for the Allied war effort. There is no sense, therefore, in the perception that the Allies invaded Russia to destroy Bolshevism.

    The resistance to Bolshevism formed around Admiral A.V. Kolchak, who created the White Army and established control over Siberia, while other White forces were pressing against the only two Bolshevik strongholds, Petrograd and Moscow. Kolchak was pro-British by inclination, but if not given any choice would be obliged to turn to the Germans for assistance. The USA therefore established a military presence in Siberia under the command of Major-General Robert Graves, whose hatred of the opponents of Bolshevism, and of Kolchak in particular, ensured Kolchak’s defeat and death. While Gajda, head of the Czech soldiers, and British General Knox tried to pursue an anti-Bolshevik position, Graves told Gajda that “as long as he was in command no American soldiers would be used against the Bolsheviks.”38 Graves’ real policy, however, was far from neutral: he pursued a pro-Bolshevik agenda wherever he was able. To what level this antagonism descended can be seen by the situation with the American Red Cross, which Graves slandered as having “no sympathy for the aspirations of the Russian people.” When the Red Cross was found to be providing Kolchak’s forces with warm underwear and running hospitals for the troops, Graves responded that no further guards would be available for Red Cross trains unless this humanitarian aid ceased.39

    In March 1919 Captain Montgomery Schuyler, Chief of Staff of the American Expeditionary Force in Siberia, reporting from Omsk to Lt. Colonel Barrows in Vladivostok, wrote of his misgivings, stating that, “It is very largely our fault that Bolshevism has spread as it has and I do not believe we will be found guiltless…”40

    By late 1919 the Kolchak forces were in retreat, and the White offensive was beginning to be crushed throughout Russia. The White Army had never received training and weaponry from the Allies, and were scuttled by Allied withdrawal. Lack of diplomatic recognition had also been a major factor in undermining the Kolchak Government at Omsk.

    The New York Times, reporting on the routing of Kolchak by the Red Army, placed the blame on the Allies, particularly the US Administration. The Admiral’s White Army had been beaten back over 800 miles, “because he had not sufficient gun power, no airplanes, no tanks, and little food.”

    The Allies withheld the necessary supplies, especially the supplies of arms and ammunition from the Omsk Government… [T]he Allies have given no officers to Kolchak, not even a non-commissioned officer to train the undisciplined privates he has in some fashion dragged together. So Kolchak, without ammunition, food or other supplies, and with a patriotic mob he cannot discipline by himself without aid, has done wonders and has finally been routed…41

    In the midst of this Allied scuttle of the White Army, the USA kindly allowed Kolchak to receive the weapons he had paid for several years previously. However, Graves still ensured that even now there were delays and ill-will attached to the late delivery. The New York Times reported on the situation:

    Major General Graves recently refused delivery of the arms to the Russian authorities at Vladivostok, his action resulting in criticism of the American command by the Russian authorities in the Far East, as well as by General Knox, chief of the British Military Mission at Omsk, who said that General Graves had held up the delivery of arms which the Russians had bought and paid for.42

    In December 1919 a revolt by an army regiment against Kolchak in Irkutsk resulted in the proclamation of a revolutionist Government, whose forces captured the railway station. Kolchak threatened to bomb the station but was prevented from doing so by the Allies, and the station was declared “neutral.” Kolchak drove the revolutionists across the Irkutsk River. However, several days later he was detained at Nijnie Udinsk after the establishment of a revolutionary authority. Several hundred of Cossack Ataman Semenoff’s soldiers arrived and clashed with the revolutionists. On 12 January 1920 American troops clashed with Semenoff’s troops.43 Thus, one of the final acts of the American forces had been to fight against the desperate remnants of the White movement under Semenoff, Kolchak’s successor, as he attempted to assist the Admiral.44

    The American forces guarding the Trans-Siberian railway left Vladivostok amidst wild acclaim from the revolutionist regime. The New York Times reported:

    Parades, street meetings and speechmaking marked the second day today of the city’s complete liberation from Kolchak’s authority. Red flags fly on every Government building, many business houses and homes. There is a pronounced pro-American feeling evident. In front of the American headquarters the revolutionary leaders mounted steps of buildings across the street, making speeches calling the Americans real friends, who at a critical time saved the present movement.45

    In 1920, in the midst of defeat, Kolchak stated that “the meaning and essence of this intervention remains quite obscure to me.”46 Kolchak was captured after being betrayed by his Czech guard and was shot by the Revolutionist regime on 7 February.47 

    The New York Times editorialised with pertinent analysis of the Allied “intervention” and the impending collapse of the White remnants:

    There can be no doubt that the allied Governments must bear a large part of the blame for the collapse of this movement. As The New Europe recently observed, ‘the publicly proclaimed vacillations of our statesmen are worth a whole army corps to the Bolsheviki’.48

    Get the issue this article appears in

    Big Business and the Soviets

    Big business is by no means antipathetic to Communism. The larger big business grows the more it approximates to Collectivism. It is the upper road of the few instead of the lower road of the masses to Collectivism.
    – H.G. Wells

    In 1920, when the Allies were in Vladivostok to supposedly assist the Whites, an American businessman, Washington Vanderlip, representing a consortium of US business interests and the US Government, was negotiating a concession with Lenin for what would have virtually made the whole region a protectorate of the USA. This involved a sixty-year lease of the Far Eastern Kamchatka Peninsula to secure important oil and mining concessions.49 Vanderlip embarked on his mission at a time when the Soviets did not control the region, and undertook the trip with the authority of the US State Department.

    At the time the ‘ownership’ of Kamchatka was not even known to Lenin, but the Japanese were in possession, and did not withdraw until signing a Treaty with Soviet Russia in 1925. Lenin pointed out that an American presence, including a naval base, would act as a “buffer” to Japanese aggression, stating: “Actually the Japanese are in possession, and they do not relish the idea of our giving it away to the Americans.”50 Hence the statement often made that the Vanderlip concession never became operative because of opposition from the US Government and “big business” is incorrect.51 However, American “big business” had initiated commercial relations with the Bolsheviks as early as 1920, the press reporting that “on the initiative of American businessmen a new international organisation had been formed in Denmark to exchange raw materials for manufactured goods after ‘lengthy discussions with Maxim Litvinoff’, Commissar for Foreign Affairs.”52

    It was a chance meeting between Fabian-socialist, pro-Bolshevik historian and novelist H.G. Wells with Washington Vanderlip in Russia that prompted Wells to comment:

    The only Power capable of playing this role of eleventh-hour helper to Russia single-handed is the United States of America. That is why I find the adventure of the enterprising and imaginative Mr. Vanderlip very significant. I doubt the conclusiveness of his negotiations; they are probably only the opening phase of a discussion of the Russian problem upon a new basis that may lead it at last to a comprehensive world treatment of this situation. Other Powers than the United States will, in the present phase of world-exhaustion, need to combine before they can be of any effective use to Russia. Big business is by no means antipathetic to Communism. The larger big business grows the more it approximates to Collectivism. It is the upper road of the few instead of the lower road of the masses to Collectivism.53

    In 1923 the omnipresent think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR),54 whose luminaries such as Warburg, Schiff and Edward M. House, had been involved in attempting to secure support for the Bolshevik regime when it hardly held Russia, issued its report on the Soviets. As has been seen, however, Big Business had been busy enough in its dealing with the Bolsheviks since 1917. CFR historian Peter Grose, in his semi-official history of the Council, states:

    The impetus for this first study was Lenin’s New Economic Policy, which appeared to open the struggling Bolshevik economy to foreign investment. Half the Council’s study group were members drawn from firms that had done business in pre-revolutionary Russia, and the discussions about the Soviet future were intense. The concluding report dismissed “hysterical” fears that the revolution would spill outside Russia’s borders into central Europe or, worse, that the heady new revolutionaries would ally with nationalistic Muslims in the Middle East to evict European imperialism. The Bolsheviks were on their way to “sanity and sound business practices,” the Council study group concluded, but the welcome to foreign concessionaires would likely be short-lived.55

    The CFR was correct in warning that the opening up of the USSR to exploitation under Lenin and Trotsky might be short-lived. Four years later Joseph Stalin had consolidated absolute power, and the plutocrat’s favourite, Trotsky, was gone. Armand Hammer, head of Occidental Petroleum, reminisced that he had intimately known every Soviet leader from Lenin to Gorbachev – except for Stalin. In 1921 Armand Hammer was in the USSR concluding business deals when he met Trotsky (whom it should be recalled was a guest of Armand’s father Julius in New York) who wanted to know whether financial circles in the USA “regard Russia as a desirable field of investment?” Trotsky remarked to Hammer that “capital was really safer in Russia than anywhere else” because capitalists who invested there would have their investments protected even after the “world revolution.”56 Hammer states that Trotsky remarked to him that, “no true Marxist would allow sentiment to interfere with business.” The comments “startled” Hammer at the time, “but they wouldn’t surprise me today.”57 In contrast, Hammer said he never had any dealings with Stalin and that by 1930 “Stalin was not a man with whom you could do business. Stalin believed that the state was capable of running everything without the support of foreign concessionaires and private enterprise.”58

    Despite the temporary alliance against the Axis during World War II, the hoped for ‘new world order’ that would see the friendly relations with Stalin continue did not transpire, and Stalin disdainfully rejected US plans for the establishment of a United Nations world government and the “internationalisation” of nuclear energy via the Baruch Plan. The result was the Cold War.59 This, however, only prompted the revolutionary zeal of Big Business, which proceeded to create and fund an anti-Russian Left, which metamorphosed into both the ‘New Left’, and into a post-Trotskyite movement misnamed ‘neo-conservatism’.60 Proceeding from these have been the ‘velvet revolutions’ that continue to convulse the world, and the persistent attitude of suspicion towards Russia, which seems as reluctant now to enter the ‘new world order’ as it did under Stalin.61

    Also see Dr. Bolton’s article “Empire of Mammon: Secret History of the World’s Financial Capital” published in New Dawn 133.

    [alert type=”general” dismiss=”no”]This article was published in New Dawn Special Issue Vol 6 No 3.[/alert]

    [alert type=”success” dismiss=”no”]If you appreciate this article, please consider subscribing to help maintain this website.[/alert]

    Footnotes

    1. Oswald Spengler, The Decline of The West, London: George Allen & Unwin, 1971, Vol. 2, 402.

    2. Ibid., 464.

    3. Ibid. 402.

    4. ‘Who’s Plotting World Government?’, various authors, New Dawn Special Issue 16.

    5. Robert Cowley, ‘A Year in Hell’, America and Russia: A Century and a Half of Dramatic Encounters, ed. Oliver Jensen, New York: Simon and Schuster, 1962, 92-121, quoting Thomas A. Bailey, 118.

    6. Ibid., 120.

    7. New York Times, 24 March 1917.

    8. ‘Loans easier for Russia’, The New York Times, 20 March 1917.

    9. ‘Is A People’s Revolution’, The New York Times, 16 March 1917.

    10. ‘Bankers here pleased with news of revolution’, ibid.

    11. ‘Stocks strong – Wall Street interpretation of Russian News’, ibid.

    12. Of the 24 members of the American Red Cross Mission, seven had medical backgrounds.

    13. Antony Sutton, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, New York: Arlington House Publishers, 1974, ‘The American Red Cross Mission in Russia – 1917’, Chapter 5, 71.

    14. ‘Bolsheviki Will Not Make Separate Peace: Only Those Who Made Up Privileged Classes Under Czar Would Do So, Says Col. W B Thompson, Just Back From Red Cross Mission’, The New York Times, 27 January 1918.

    15. Ibid.

    16. Parvus had made a fortune as an arms and grain dealer in Constantinople. Pearson writes: “Though he still had socialist ambitions, he had become a caricature tycoon with an enormous car, a string of blondes, thick cigars and a passion for champagne – often a whole bottle for breakfast.” M. Perason, The Sealed Train: Journey to Revolution, Lenin – 1917, London: Macmillan, 1975, 58.

    17. R.B. Spence, ‘Spies, Lies & Intrigue Surrounding Trotsky’s American Visit January-April 1917’, Revolutionary Russia, London: Francis & Taylor Group, Vol. 21, Issue 1, 2008, 33-55.

    18. Ibid. Spence concludes that Julius Hammer is probably the mysterious “Dr M” that Trotsky refers to in his memoirs as befriending the family and taking them for excursions in his chauffeured car. Spence also believes Julius to have been the provider of the Bronx apartment and its furnishings, and the provider of financial largesse that exceeded Trotsky’s meagre income as a socialist journalist.

    19. A. Hammer (with N. Lyndon), Hammer: Witness to History, London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1988, 188-221.

    20. Ibid., 221. Hammer states that he got out of Russia in 1930, discerning that Stalin would not be as favourable to foreign business dealings as Lenin and Trotsky.

    21. R.B. Spence, op. cit.

    22. Ibid.

    23. Ibid.

    24. Antony Sutton, op. cit., 60.

    25. Ibid., 60-63.

    26. However, when Trotsky became Commissar of Foreign Affairs he maintained friendly relations with Bruce Lockhart, who represented the British War Cabinet in Russia, Trotsky hoping for US and British assistance. Trotsky was angrily at odds with Lenin’s policy of armistice with Germany.

    27. House was President Woodrow Wilson’s principal adviser and acted for the international banking and business interests. Discerning students of history will recall he was the founder of the omni-present globalist think tank The Council on Foreign Relations, and its predecessor, The Inquiry.

    28. Henry Wickham Steed, Through Thirty Years 1892-1922 A Personal Narrative, ‘The Peace Conference, The Bullitt Mission’, Vol II., New York: Doubleday Page and Co., 1924, 301.

    29. K.R. Bolton, Revolution from Above: Manufacturing ‘Dissent’ in the New World Order, London: Arktos Media Ltd., 2011, 64-65; Henry Wickham Steed, ‘Peace with Honour’, Paris Daily Mail, 28 March 1922; quoted in Steed, op. cit.

    30. S. Gompers, ‘Soviet Bribe Fund Here Says Gompers, Has Proof That Offers Have Been Made, He Declares, Opposing Recognition. Propaganda Drive. Charges Strong Group of Bankers With Readiness to Accept Lenin’s Betrayal of Russia’, The New York Times, 1 May 1922.

    31. Not to be confused with the anti-Russian writer and revolutionary propagandist George Kennan, a relative, previously cited.

    32. George F. Kennan, The Decision to Intervene, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1958, 17.

    33. ‘Memorandum regarding allied war stores lying at Archangel’, US National Archives, Foreign Affairs Branch, Petrograd Embassy, 800 File; March 20, 1918.

    34. George F. Kennan, op. cit., 20.

    35. Ibid., 21.

    36. William S. Graves, America’s Siberian Adventure 1918-1920, New York: Peter Smith, 1941, ‘Aid to the Czechs’.

    37. George F. Kennan, op. cit., 35.

    38. Michael Sayers & Albert E. Kahn, The Great Conspiracy Against Russia, London: Collet’s Holdings, 1946, 64.

    39. William S. Graves, op. cit., ‘The Railroad Agreement’.

    40. Capt. Montgomery Schuyler, Report of March 1, 1919, Record Group 120, Records of the American Expeditionary Forces, 383.9 Military Intelligence Report, 2.

    41. ‘Kolchak Beaten’, The New York Times, Editorial, August 13, 1919.

    42. ‘Semenoff demanded arms of Americans’, The New York Times, November 2, 1919.

    43. ‘Says Kolchak’s Staff Joined Revolution. Happenings in Irkutsk Region Before and After Admiral’s Overthrow’, The New York Times, 25 January 1920.

    44. ‘Revolt in Irkutsk. Admiral Kolchak Resigns Command. Russian Leader said to be Ill, Names Semenoff as Military Successor’, The New York Times, 28 December 1919.

    45. ‘Vladivostok Pro-American. Revolutionist Staff Thanks Graves for Preserving Neutrality’, The New York Times, 15 February 15 1920.

    46. J. Smele, Civil War in Siberia: The Anti-Bolshevik Government of Admiral Kolchak 1918-1920, New York: University of Cambridge, 1996, 201

    47. ‘Kolchak Sought to Save Companions. 48 Officers and Civilians Refused to Leave Him when Miners Halted Train. Czech Guard Gave Him Up’, The New York Times, 22 February 1920.

    48. ‘Kolchak’s Fall’, The New York Times, 30 December 1919.

    49. ‘The Vanderlip Concession, an alternate history’, 26 December 2009, www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/the-vanderlip-concession-an-alternate-history-1626435.html

    50. Lenin, 22 December 1920; ‘Speech To The R.C.P.(B.) Group At The Eighth Congress Of Soviets During The Debate On The Report Of The All-Russia Central Executive Committee And The Council Of People’s Commissars Concerning Home And Foreign Policies’, Lenin Internet Archive (2003), www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/dec/x01.htm

    51. The Vanderlip project was still proceeding in 1922 when Standard Oil purchased one-quarter of the stock and exclusive rights for oil exploration in the area. However the concession could not become operative until diplomatic recognition. ‘Standard Oil Joins Vanderlip Project’, The New York Times, 11 January 1922.

    52. ‘Americans to Trade with Reds’, The New York Times, 15 February 1920.

    53. H.G. Wells, Russia in the Shadows, Chapter VII, ‘The Envoy’. Wells went to Russia in September 1920 at the invitation of Kamenev, of the Russian Trade Delegation in London, one of the leaders of the Bolshevik regime. Russia in the Shadows appeared as a series of articles in The Sunday Express. The whole book can be read online at: gutenberg.net.au/ebooks06/0602371h.html

    54. K.R. Bolton, Revolution from Above, op. cit., 32-49. 

    55. Peter Grose, Continuing The Inquiry: The Council on Foreign Relations from 1921 to 1996, New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 2006, ‘Basic Assumptions’. The entire book can be read online at: Council on Foreign Relations: www.cfr.org/about/history/cfr/index.html

    56. Armand Hammer with Neil Lyndon, Hammer: Witness to History, Kent: Hodder and Stoughton, 1988, 160.

    57. Ibid., 201.

    58. Ibid., 221.

    59. K.R. Bolton, ‘Origins of the Cold War and How Stalin Foiled a New World Order’, Foreign Policy Journal, 31 May 2010, www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2010/05/31/origins-of-the-cold-war-how-stalin-foild-a-new-world-order/all/1

    60. K.R. Bolton, ‘Trotsky, Stalin and the Cold War: The Historic Implications and Continuing Ramifications of the Trotsky-Stalin Conflict’, The Occidental Quarterly, Vol. 10, No. 3 Fall 2010, 75-105.

    61. K.R. Bolton, ‘Mikhail Gorbachev: Globalist Super-Star’, Foreign Policy Journal, 3 April 2011, www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2011/04/03/mikhail-gorbachev-globalist-super-star/

    © New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
    For our reproduction notice, click here.

  • John Dee & the Enochian Apocalypse

    John Dee & the Enochian Apocalypse

    Doctor John Dee (1527-1609) remains one of London’s most intriguing historical figures. Dee was a renaissance man; an occultist, mathematician, astronomer, astrologer and navigator. In addition to his prodigious skills, Dee was a confidant of Queen Elizabeth I, who guided the nation through one of its most challenging eras, partly based upon Dee’s unique blend of alchemy, divination and Hermetic philosophy. In fact, the Queen had so much faith in Dee’s calculations she had him choose her coronation date.

    By all accounts Dee was a distinctive looking gentleman, respected and admired by many, as John Aubrey describes: “Dee had a very cleare rosie complexion… a long beard as white as milke. A very handsome man… he was tall and slender. He wore a gowne like an artist’s gowne, with hanging sleeves, and a slitt. A mighty good man he was.”

    Dee lived in Mortlake, a West London village mentioned in the 1086 ’Domesday Book’. Here, his modest residence along the River Thames provided easy access for Elizabeth and other dignitaries, especially other occultists, for Dee had amassed what was arguably the grandest esoteric library of his day. Sadly, fashionable apartments now stand where Dee once lived, and a block of council flats across the street boasts his name.

    What is less known is that Dee was obsessed with the apocalypse, and believed he had opened a supernatural gateway leading to a powerful and disgruntled spirit world. But this came later. During the early part of his career Dee had little interest in the supernatural. He was a devoutly religious man and deeply ambitious. From the 1550s until the 1570s he honed his skills as a writer as well as a navigator with unique technical expertise. Few recall that he coined the phrase ‘British Empire’ and helped shape the emerging ideology of the nation.

    Dee became frustrated with his perceived inability to uncover more occult secrets than he already had obtained, and so began his fascination with the supernatural. During the 1580s he focused his attention on contacting angels in the spirit realm in order to obtain greater wisdom. Initially Dee tried his hand at using a ‘scrying’ mirror or crystal ball, each of which can be found in the British Museum.

    Dee struggled to achieve the results he was hoping for and thus reached out to someone who professed to have expertise in these matters. Enter the occultist and spirit medium Edward Kelley, who stumbled upon a ration of magical red powder, which he had received from an innkeeper in Glastonbury, who had acquired the powder from tomb robbers. In a different version of the story, Elias Ashmole, who wrote the first account of Kelley’s discovery, recounts how Kelley found a book containing the curious powder in the ruins of Glastonbury Abbey. Regardless, Kelley’s desire to learn as much as possible about the magical substance, which he believed could turn base metals into gold, led him to Dee, whose library attracted many such seekers.

    Like Dee, Kelley was a fascinating man; a seer whose ritual expertise in the black art of necromancy, combined with his passion for alchemy, and his quest for the Philosopher’s Stone in particular, so impressed Dee that the two soon became inseparable. Together they embarked on a journey that would transform their lives and quite possibly ours too.

    Dee and Kelley held various ‘spiritual conferences’; a quest that Dee believed would render immeasurable benefit to mankind. Kelley’s integrity, on the other hand, is the subject of continued debate and in fact before coming to London he was convicted of forging title deeds in Lancaster. Nevertheless, Kelley became Dee’s regular scryer and the two men appear to have achieved, if not exceeded, their goals, for Dee began to write truly remarkable, albeit sublime, works that he maintained were the product of angels who spoke in language known as Enochian.

    In 1583, Dee and Kelley embarked for Europe, seeking the patronage of Emperor Rudolf II in Prague and King Stefan of Poland in Kraków, amongst others. The two occultists continued their alchemical pursuits on the continent for a number of years. One incident in particular stands out, which stems from their involvement in necromancy. An inquisition by the Catholic Church proved messy, yet both men were acquitted in 1587. That same year the angels instructed Dee, through Kelley, that the two were to share everything, including their wives, which they did. Dee’s wife gave birth nine months later to what is now thought to be Kelley’s child.

    At the best of times the two men had what could be called a terse relationship, and the ‘sharing’ mandate of the angels angered Dee and led to his break up with Kelley, who later died in prison. Dee returned to his residence in Mortlake, only to find that his world had changed. Much of his library had been pillaged and his political stature fallen. What little that remained of his relationship with the Queen enabled him to assume the office of Warden at Christ’s College, Manchester in 1595. He returned to Mortlake in 1605, where he died in 1609 and was buried under the high altar of his parish church.

    In retrospect, we can glean that the essence of the Enochian dialogues centred upon a coming apocalypse, which Dee’s angels referred to as ‘the Harvest’. Dee and Kelley succeeded in manifesting the spiritual beings they had summoned, and what followed appears to have been the process of opening the gates to another dimension and obtaining the keys required to activate the angels’ agenda, an apocalypse of the mind – a poisoning of man’s spiritual essence and the rapid degeneration of society. In one instance the angel, Mapsama, instructs Dee as to his role in the whole affair:

    Mapsama: These Calls are the keyes into the Gates and Cities of wisdom. Which [Gates] are not able to be opened, but with visible apparition.

    Dee: And how shall that be come unto?

    Mapsama: Which is according to the former instructions: and to be had, by calling of every Table. You called for wisdom, God hath opened unto you, his Judgement: He hath delivered unto you the keyes, that you may enter; But be humble. Enter not of presumption, but of permission. Go not in rashly; But be brought in willingly: For, many have ascended, but few have entered. By Sunday you shall have all things that are necessary to be taught; then (as occasion serveth) you may practice at all times. But you being called by God, and to a good purpose.

    Dee: How shall we understand this Calling by God?

    Mapsama:  God stoppeth my mouth, I will answer thee no more.

    The exchange is intriguing and hints at the angels’ selection of Dee as the wick by which the fuse to ignite the end of days would be lit. Had Dee and Kelley unknowingly ushered in the Enochian Apocalypse?

    Three centuries later the Golden Dawn incorporated many of its teachings and one of their initiates, Aleister Crowley, picked up where Dee and Kelley had left off. He wrote: “Much of their work still defies explanation.” Crowley is known to have concentrated on Dee’s ‘Apocalypse Working’, although it is not known whether he accessed the elusive occult key necessary to usher in the apocalypse. Nevertheless, Crowley died in 1947, believing he had opened the gate of the apocalypse almost 45 years earlier, in 1904, when he spiritually ‘received’ The Book of the Law.

    Today, we are uncertain if Dee, Kelley or Crowley did in fact unlock the door of the apocalypse, for it is said the apocalypse is a slow-working mental transformation within the collective unconscious of the human race.

    The year is 2012. Now, as then, we contemplate the possibility we are living in an Enochian end of days. Doctor Dee influenced history at the highest levels of government. His legacy influenced perhaps the most notorious of occult groups, which in turn influenced the ‘New Age’ and modern occult movement. But was he also instrumental in the opening of a door in human consciousness that would allow the apocalypse to manifest?

    (For more on Dr. Dee, see Glyn Parry’s article John Dee & the Magical Origins of the British Empire in this same issue of New Dawn. Use link below to purchase.)
    [alert type=”general” dismiss=”no”]This article was published in New Dawn 133.[/alert]

    [alert type=”success” dismiss=”no”]If you appreciate this article, please consider subscribing to help maintain this website.[/alert]

    © New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
    For our reproduction notice, click here.

  • Of Towering Infernos, False Flags & Terrorism

    Of Towering Infernos, False Flags & Terrorism

    From New Dawn Special Issue Vol 6 No 3 (Aug 2012)

    When Moscow’s Federation Tower skyscraper caught fire last April, images of the blazing inferno on its upper floors were grim reminders of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks on the Twin Towers of New York City’s World Trade Centre.

    However, had the “9/11 laws of physics” prevailed, Federation Tower would have collapsed into its footprint at free-fall speed and turned into an inches-deep dust carpet covering central Moscow. Clearly, that is not what happened…

    What did happen was that twenty Moscow fire brigades and helicopters fought the blaze throughout the night, bringing it under control and finally extinguishing it.

    Birth of the “Global War on Terror”

    Indeed, strange events surround the 9/11 terror attack, which has become the watershed event of our modern times. For it marks the beginning of Imperial Overdrive on the part of the United States, Britain and key allies in Europe and the Middle East, all masqueraded as the “Global War on Terror.” In just over a decade, this war has cost untold suffering, death and injury to millions of people and widespread violence in many countries, some of which have since been invaded and destroyed.

    Closer to home, 9/11 has served to “justify” today’s Gestapo-like 24/7 total surveillance police-state spying on the domestic populations of the US, UK, Europe, Australia, New Zealand and – even if to a lesser degree – in most other countries too.

    These are just two of the many significant reasons why the 9/11 Event needs to be revisited and reassessed until the full truth finally comes out: who really did it, why did they do it, how did they manage to pull it off, and who have been hiding or at least diverting the awful truth about it and why?

    We need not delve here on all the flagrant contradictions and damned lies propagated by US authorities and the mainstream media to this very day. In this respect, readers are recommended to visit the many excellent and well-researched and documented sites on the Internet, including Scholarsfor911Truth.com, 911Truth.org, wtc7.net, 911research.com, and wtc7.net, amongst others.

    Rather, it’s the dramatic geopolitical consequences of the flagrant 9/11 lies that need to be increasingly stressed. By now, all independent thinking people know that the World Trade Centre was not brought down by 19 suicidal fanatics led by some nut hiding inside a deep cave in Afghanistan.

    Funnily, this is the most grotesque and idiotic conspiracy theory ever told and yet… that is exactly what US, UK and European authorities expect the world to believe occurred. People everywhere, however, are increasingly waking up to the obvious fact that steel-framed buildings don’t just collapse the way the World Trade Centre did.

    Steel and Concrete Skyscrapers Do Not Crumble to Dust…

    Moscow’s Federation Tower is just one of many examples of high-rise steel buildings suffering catastrophic fires and yet remaining intact. Let’s take a quick look at other eloquent examples, some dating back many decades:

    On 17 October 2004, a fire broke out in Caracas, Venezuela’s tallest skyscraper housing the Ministry of Infrastructure. The upper 20 of its 50 floors were destroyed and yet… it did not collapse.

    On 12 February 2005, Madrid’s 33 storey Winsor Tower suffered a huge fire causing the outer parts of its 30 upper floors to partially collapse. It took fire fighters a full day to extinguish the blaze and yet the building… did not collapse.

    On 23 February 1991, a major fire at One Meridian Plaza, a 38 storey skyscraper in Philadelphia, gutted 8 floors, killed 3 fire fighters and causing US$100 million in direct fire losses. The fire burned for over 19 hours, broke most windows on the fire floors; vertical columns were not damaged but horizontal beams sagged as much as 3 feet. The building did not collapse and was finally demolished eight years later.

    28 July 1945: lost in heavy fog, a World War II twin-engine B-25 bomber rammed straight into New York City’s emblematic Empire State Building at the 78th, 79th and 80th floor levels igniting major fires and yet… the building did not collapse.

    On 15 November 2010 a 28-story high-rise apartment building in Shanghai, China was completely destroyed by fire killing dozens, but the building did not collapse.

    On 26 February 1993 – World Trade Centre’s North Tower suffered the detonation of a massive 600 kilogram Urea-Nitrate-Hydrogen gas-enhanced truck bomb deep under its basement level which was intended to topple the building, and yet… it did not budge an inch…

    Ground Zero: Criminal Destruction of a Major Crime Scene

    These and many other similar examples of catastrophic fires on high-rise buildings beg the question: what really happened on 9/11? Why did the two towers collapse at free-fall speed? Why did they turn into dust? Why was all the evidence immediately removed, whisked away and destroyed by US authorities?

    What happened to those massive foundation beams cut at exactly 45° – tell-tale signs of controlled demolitions – that quickly disappeared? Think about it: the world’s deadliest and most famous crime scene where over 3,000 people were murdered was quickly gutted by the FBI, FEMA, police and military authorities; all the evidence removed and destroyed so that no forensic analyses could be done. Whatever steel beams and trusses survived were quickly sold as scrap metal to steel mills in South Korea, Taiwan and other countries for immediate melting and re-forging.

    One would have at least expected US authorities to be curious to find out why two 110 storey towers lying next to each other collapsed so suddenly and catastrophically, if only to learn how to build stronger buildings in the future that won’t come down so very easily.

    Everyone knows that whenever a major airliner disaster occurs, civil aviation authorities carefully pick up all the pieces, trying to put the unlucky airliner back together in some far-off hangar so they can investigate and maybe discover what went wrong. The cause of the accident – a faulty rudder, fuel tank, wing strut, avionics, hydraulic system, or whatever – can be re-designed so that airplane type and model is made safer.

    Not on Ground Zero. US authorities cleared the area of all beams, trusses, bolts, burying whatever body parts turned up in the rubble, very fast. They only seemed concerned in ensuring Ground Zero quickly became “hallowed ground”: a mystical symbol inspiring the new-born Global War on Terror.

    Physicists, engineers and the WTC’s own architects and builders state that the Twin Towers were built to resist direct hits from the largest jetliner of the late 60’s – the Boeing 707 – which is about as big and carries about as much fuel as the more modern Boeing 767’s that rammed into both Towers on 9/11.

    What brought the towers down was the jets’ fuel, say government experts. And yet both fires inside the upper floors of the Twin Towers were not hot – certainly not hot enough to melt steel beams – hence their orange colour and thick black smoke, both evidence of bad or “cold” combustion. Why, even the blue flame coming out of your kitchen stove is much hotter than that, and yet your steel pots and pans do not melt every time you cook your food, right?

    Worse still: video images of both jet impacts were very dramatic, particularly the ones of the South Tower that showed a massive, huge fireball exploding… outside the building!! Yes, indeed: a large part – perhaps most – of the fuel exploded outside and away from the tower. And yet… the South Tower collapsed first whilst videos show signs of molten steel pouring down from a spot around the 80th floor, something that was clearly not caused by jet fuel, which is basically refined kerosene. Tell-tale signs perhaps of Thermite and Nano-thermite, both of which are high-power military explosives?

    That is what a report published in the April 2009 edition of The Open Chemical Physics Journal concludes. Led by University of Copenhagen chemistry professor Niels H. Harrit, a research team of nine chemists concludes they “…discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Centre. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites of… these red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. …The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.”1

    Clearly a “smoking gun,” although not exactly the one George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice were looking for!

    WTC7 – The Solomon Building

    Then we have that 64 million dollar question that no one can answer: why did 47-storey World Trade Centre Tower No. 7 – that was not hit by any airplane and only suffered moderate fires on its 6th and 12th floors that were being extinguished at the time – suddenly collapse into its own footprint also at free-fall speed at 5:30pm on that fateful day?

    This nice and tidy controlled demolition even allowed for the authorities to evacuate the building so nobody got hurt. WTC7 was home to SEC (Securities & Exchange Commission) offices investigating Enron, WorldCom and high-tech stock market bubble scandals, as well as the Secret Service’s largest field office. Alas! All the evidence they had put together came down with the building…

    Further, was WTC7 also home to a secret ultra hi-tech Command Post housing all the hardware and electronics necessary to sequentially (and probably wirelessly) detonate bombs placed inside the Twin Towers to bring them down? Once that operation was achieved, how perfect to destroy all the evidence under thousands of tons of rubble from the collapsed building? It’s just too good (or bad!) to be true!

    Far Too Many “Significant Questions…”

    We could add to all of this the incredible NORAD, FAA, USAF air defence failures over New York City and Washington DC – the most defended airspace on planet Earth; or the ridiculously small hole left by a large (alleged) Boeing 757 airliner in the Pentagon; or the almost complete lack of commercial jetliner debris in all four crashes; or the fact war games were being carried out at exactly the same time, in the same places and under the same attack scenarios; or the exceptional volume of “put options” short-selling American and United airlines stock which reaped nice earnings for some anonymous people who never dared to show up to cash them; or the fact that Osama bin Laden was immediately accused of being 9/11’s mastermind and culprit and yet for almost a decade the FBI had him on their “Most Wanted” list for other attacks but not a word about 9/11; or the glaring omissions in the 9/11 Commission and NIST reports and their grotesque computer model “proofs”; or incredible cell phones that worked at 30,000 feet; or the very suspicious US government-sponsored Bin Laden family airlift ordered by President George W. Bush once full grounding of all aircraft had taken place on 9/11; or the fact that only a day before defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld admitted the Pentagon was “missing” a mere 2.3 trillion (US$2,300,000,000,000!) in unaccounted for assets; or the fact that the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey decided to privatise the WTC to Larry Silverstein just two months earlier and that Lucky Larry got billions of dollars in insurance indemnity, even after he admitted on public TV that he agreed to “pull” the building down on that dreadful afternoon; or the FBI’s “lucky find” of WTC1 suicide pilot Mohammed Atta’s intact passport on the sidewalk below; or….

    False Flag Attacks

    More and more lucid people inside and outside the US are waking to the fact that 9/11 can only be explained as foul play purposely perpetrated by extremely powerful groups of players that are embedded deep inside the public and private power structures of the United States and its key allies, notably Israel, who have their own independent agenda. 

    They are “False Flag” attacks, and involve staging carefully calculated very high-profile attacks on one’s own country and interests, and then laying the blame on whichever “enemy” the perpetrators wish to wage war against.

    This is nothing new, especially in the United States where False Flag operations are a traditional foreign policy tool of deception. Intelligence agencies contingently partner and interact with discrete clandestine and criminal groups in order to plan and execute such vile acts of terrorism. They range from intentional provocation and “letting things happen,” to outright execution.

    Understanding False Flags as part of US/UK/Israel foreign policy and war efforts not only explains key high profile dramatic events that “justified” war against a wide assortment of “enemies” in the past, but also helps us understand present-day US, UK, French and Israeli behaviour in places like Syria, Iran, Libya, Africa and Latin America. In all cases, one key objective stands out: promoting US/UK & Allies’ imperial expansion and consolidation as global hegemons.

    A quick overview of historical False Flags:

    1898: The US battleship “Maine” was blown up in Havana Harbour, triggering the Spanish-American War won by the US. This left Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam and the Philippines as war booty for the Americans. It also included an early media PsyWar exercise led by William Randolph Hearst’s yellow journalism press that whipped up hysterical war frenzy amongst US citizens with his “Remember the Maine, to hell with Spain!” rhetoric. Years later, it was proven the ship either suffered a coal explosion or, more likely, a bomb attack. Divers later found that the ship’s armour plates were blown from the inside out, and not from the outside as would be caused by an enemy bomb.

    In May 1915, the British passenger ship “RMS Lusitania” was sunk by the U20 German submarine, killing 1,200 of its almost 2,000 passengers; 128 of the dead were US citizens. A week earlier, Imperial Germany’s embassy in Washington DC had issued public warnings to passengers because “Lusitania” was known to regularly transport military supplies to Britain in its war effort against Germany and was, thus, a legitimate war target. Winston Churchill, then Britain’s First Lord of the Admiralty, used the “Lusitania” as bait knowing the Germans would try to sink it.2 On its last voyage, it carried 6 million pounds of shells and munitions shipped by JP Morgan Bank to clients in Britain and France, which explains the catastrophic explosion that quickly sank the vessel. Although it was illegal for passenger ships to transport war materials, it nevertheless “justified” US entry into World War I in 1917. Winston was very happy…

    7 December 1941 was US President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “day that will live in infamy” when Japan attacked a US naval base at Pearl Harbour, Hawaii. In his famous speech, he went on to say, “The United states was at peace with that nation,” and yet for six months before the Pearl Harbour attack a US volunteer squadron known as The Flying Tigers had been running attack missions against Japanese forces in China causing the Japanese to lose 100 aircraft. Pearl Harbour was part of a war plan against Japan, where it served as bait for the Japanese to bite, and they did. The US had captured Japanese “Magic” decrypting machines, so they knew about an impending Japanese attack, and just “let it happen.” In fact, Roosevelt gave several of those decrypting machines to his British allies, but none to his US naval commanders in the Pacific. Hawaii’s navy commander Admiral Husband Kimmel and army commander Lt. General Walter Short were used as scapegoats, found “incompetent,” demoted and retired. However, it “justified” US entry into World War II.3

    In March 1963, “Operation Northwoods” planned by the US Joint Chiefs of Staff was described in a document titled “Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba.” It included staging assassinations and terror attacks in the Miami area, “sinking a boatload of Cuban refugees (real or simulated),” faking a Cuban air force attack on a US civilian airliner and blowing up a US ship in Cuban waters. All to be then blamed on Fidel Castro. Then US President John F. Kennedy did not give his approval, which must have certainly earned him further internal enemies…

    2 August 1964: Another ‘day of infamy’ when North Vietnamese boats allegedly twice attacked the US destroyer Maddox in the Gulf of Tonkin. The truth is that, at the time, the South Vietnamese were running raids against the North in that area. The ‘incident’ was used as a pretext for massive escalation of the Vietnam War by the Lyndon B. Johnson Administration. The Pentagon Papers published in 1971 later showed that this ‘incident’ never even happened!

    During the June 1967 Six-Day War between Israel and its Arab neighbours, unmarked jet fighters repeatedly attacked and bombed the USS Liberty patrolling international waters off Palestine in the clear hope that its sinking could then be blamed on Gamel Nasser’s Egypt, thus dragging the US into a war for Israel. Unfortunately (for Israel) the American ship did not sink, although 35 of its crew were killed by Israeli napalm and bombs. Until his death in 1999, the USS Liberty’s commander William McGonagle demanded that secret documents on this perfidious case be released. They never were.

    These are but a few of the “fleet” of implicit staged False Flag events of which 9/11 is the “mother ship.” All we can add is, “Mission Accomplished!”

    Outside the US we also encounter incredible “coincidences” surrounding London’s Underground terror bombings of 7 July 2005, where private firm Visor Consultants admitted it was running a mock anti-terror drill in which the fictional scenario was exactly the same as the real attacks that were then taking place.

    Visor’s Managing Director Peter Power declared live on BBC Radio that day, “At half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now.” Yeah, sure… we believe you!

    Get the issue this article appears in

    Some Conclusions

    Clearly we see a pattern of covert False Flag attacks that are part of the imperial war strategy of the US, Britain, Israel and their allies. Of course, false flags require careful planning, ample financing, absolute secrecy, fully prepared media coverage using powerful PsyWar techniques, and a suitable assortment of smoke screens, scapegoats and patsies.

    High profile government officers – presidents, cabinet ministers, congressmen – must be kept as far away as possible from the entire planning and execution process.

    Even if they are the ones giving the final go ahead, they must never be perceived as having somehow been in the know regarding the “coming attack.” They must look and act as “surprised” as everybody else! And if doubts do start to arise afterwards, they must have full protection; it’s all part of the False-Flag Model.

    That, for instance, is what National Security secrecy legislation exists for: to ensure that sensitive and damning evidence can be put away, and finger-pointing information fully clamped down for 25, 50, 75, even 100 years if need be.

    The model always includes an “investigation” by a “committee” of notables. Like the 9/11 Commission chaired by insiders Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton and directed by Philip Zelikow. If they summon top brass like George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to “testify,” that too must be done according to discrete rules of engagement, i.e., in full secrecy, both of them declaring together so they agree and correct their “answers” to ensure they are “the correct ones.”4

    They know only too well that, in the long run, the truth ends up surfacing as with the “attacks” on the Maine, Lusitania or Pearl Harbour. The important thing is to “buy time.” If enough time goes by, they can deal with and whitewash everything, as long as the public eye perceives such “revelations” not so much as a political issue, but rather as a historical issue.

    What harm can really arise today if we discover that Woodrow Wilson and F.D. Roosevelt tricked the US into two European wars? Even the Vietnam War is history today; for most people it boils down to several good Hollywood movies and some black-and-white images of hippy peace parades in the sixties.

    Once something becomes “history,” it can be suitably handled, controlled and sanitised. The great opportunity we have today is that the most hideous and dramatic false flag events like 11 September 2001 and 7 July 2005 in London are not “history” (not yet, anyway) but rather an integral part of the ongoing global political scene, that continues to be used to justify US, UK, Israeli & Allies Imperial Overdrive.

    If, thanks to technology, the Internet, the huge dissemination of information, we can somehow bring out the truth regarding these atrocities and who really committed them, to a sufficiently large portion of global public opinion, that will then spell real trouble – even the collapse – of today’s horrific clandestine, illegitimate, unelected and criminal Global Power Masters.

    They perpetrate their mischief enshrouded in deeply entrenched positions of power inside the formal public and private power structures of the US, UK, Israel, France and the EU.

    So, in a way, we have much to be optimistic about. All we need to do is persevere in our endeavours to bring the truth out. Once critical mass amongst the world’s collective psyche is reached, then a tipping point will no doubt be quickly reached in which this whole perverted system of global lies topples over and sinks. Just like the proverbial cruiser Poseidon; then shall this dark system disappear in a moment; in the twinkling of an eye!

    [alert type=”general” dismiss=”no”]This article was published in New Dawn Special Issue Vol 6 No 3.[/alert]

    [alert type=”success” dismiss=”no”]If you appreciate this article, please consider a contribution to help maintain this website.[/alert]

    Footnotes

    1. The Open Civil Engineering Journal, Volume 2, 2009, 7-31. Authors: Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, Bradley R. Larsen
    2. www.lusitania.net
    3. Robert Stinnett, Day of Deceit: The Truth about FDR and Pearl Harbor, 2000.
    4. A grand example of insiders “investigating” insiders was the Warren Commission on the John F. Kennedy assassination. Of its seven members, four were top-level Council on Foreign Relations members: Senator Gerald R. Ford, Senator John Sherman Cooper, John J. McCloy and – last but not least – Allen Welsh Dulles, CIA director from 1953 until 1961 when he was forced to resign by JFK after the Cuban Bay of Pigs fiasco. The CIA is one of the most suspect players in the JFK killing!

    © New Dawn Magazine and the respective author.
    For our reproduction notice, click here.