It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
The idea of imperialism was classically associated with competitive internecine battles between a few great European powers. Their internal capitalist-crisis tendencies spurred an unprecedented geographical expansion, facilitated by major financial markets, which in turn ran into various limits.
In that context, colonial military power was typically deployed to conquer territory and establish formal state management and, later, informal neo-colonial political-economic power relations.
In our current age, that imperialist formula remains highly relevant, with an additional element that became more vital after World War II and has been utterly impossible to avoid since the 1990s: the post-war economic, socio-cultural, geopolitical and military dominance of the United States, increasingly exercised through Western-headquartered multilateral institutions whose operations favour the interests of the largest multinational corporations and especially financiers.
Imperialist multilateral institutions include the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF), founded in 1944, and later the World Trade Organisation (WTO, originally the 1948 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade).
The Bretton Woods financial institutions dramatically expanded during the ’80s and ’90s in the wake of commercial bank internationalisation, along with the Bank for International Settlements as a league of central banks dominated by those of the United States, Great Britain, Europe and Japan.
In relation to the most difficult problem — climate change — the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has generally served the main corporate fossil fuel and industrial interests.
As witnessed in Dubai in early December, the annual global climate summits are under imperialist control and hence fail to compel cuts in greenhouse gas emissions to sustainable levels — or to even phase out fossil fuels — while refusing a logical principle: polluter-pays reparations.
A large network of status quo NGOs and philanthro-capitalists have become vital enablers and legitimators of climate imperialism, as is also the case in nearly every other (silo-delimited) sectoral arena of global public policy.
Additional informal networks of imperial power can be found at the Davos-based World Economic Forum, which has taken on the mantle of a futuristic brain trust, one formerly adorning the Bilderberg Group and US Council on Foreign Relations.
Likewise, working to shape public consciousness, the corporate media and numerous think tanks with specialist influences are responsible for ideological and strategic aspects of imperialist regime maintenance, now located in capital cities across the world.
But states remain vital, and military, geopolitical and economic-managerial collaborations between powerful capital cities remain the crucial factor behind imperialism’s durability.
Since the ’70s, the G7 bloc has often coordinated Western state power, depending upon the conjuncture.
The US Pentagon-centred North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, NATO, has been revived in recent years, while the Five Eyes intelligence alliance (involving Great Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) coordinates Anglophone military interests.
And the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue fuses Japanese, Indian, Australian and US forces in Asia, mainly against China’s expansion.
Sometimes, imperial powers use the UN Security Council for broad-based control — albeit recognising divisive contradictions associated with geopolitical antagonisms — and allow the UN General Assembly votes on the “rules-based order” mainly for the sake of legitimacy.
Most of this imperial power requires comprador elite alliances with victim-country neoliberal leaders in business and most governments.
Indeed, since the world financial meltdown of the late 2000s, and again during the COVID-19 pandemic, there has emerged a vital new feature of imperial assimilation, especially associated with the Brazil-Russia-India-China-South Africa (BRICS) bloc’s rise to the global stage.
These middle-sized economies are playing greater roles not only in multilateral institutions, but in the G20 group — hosted in 2023 by India, 2024 by Brazil and 2025 by South Africa.
The utilisation of regional middle-power allies to complement the US military agenda is not new, with Brazil, Turkey and, especially, Israel deserving longstanding titles of sub-imperialist.
This was the term Ruy Mauro Marini coined to characterise Washington-Brasilia relations in 1965, which was later to be broadly characterised within the category semi-periphery by Immanuel Wallerstein’s world-systems school.
The merits of sub-imperialism to US power were articulated by independent presidential candidate Robert F Kennedy Jnr.
In an interview on November 5, RFK Jr pledged that if elected in late 2024, he would “Make sure that we have the resources that are critical to us, including the oil resources that are critical to the world, that we have a strike capacity to make sure to be able to protect those. And Israel is critical, and the reason it’s critical is because it’s a bulwark for us in the Middle East. It’s almost like having an aircraft carrier in the Middle East.”
That is a terribly crude, albeit honest, version of Washington’s desired sub-imperial allies. A more general reflection is in capitalism’s multilateral management, such as when economic stress rose in 2008–11 and 2020–22 and both imperial and sub-imperial regimes used the G20 and IMF to coordinate monetary expansion, bank bailouts and rapidly-lowered interest rates.
How then should we understand the economic and geopolitical contradictions these institutions now confront?
Major shifts in capital accumulation patterns are reflected in quite dynamic imperialist/sub-imperialist arrangements.
Since the 1970s, when capitalist crisis tendencies reemerged, East Asia became an attractive investment option for firms facing lower profit rates in the West. The globalisation of trade, investment and finance accelerated, spurred by the advent of petrodollars (oil economy reserves) and Eurodollars, which centralised money in core Western financial havens.
Then, US/British-led neoliberal financial deregulation, starting in the early ’80s, permitted an explosive growth in credit, financial product innovations and speculative capital.
Soaring interest rates — imposed from Washington in 1979 to address US inflation — attracted more of the West’s investable funds into the financial circuits of capital.
And the European Union economy became a more coherent, less fragmented unit of capitalist power, with a single currency by the early 1990s.
Correspondingly, multilateral institutions’ control functions in relation to debtor countries mainly served the interests of multinational corporations and banks, especially once the ’80s debt crisis transferred policy power to the World Bank and IMF.
This financial component of imperialism is once again a profound problem in the wake of many countries’ COVID-19 debt encumbrances.
In this context, various longstanding geopolitical pressures and military tensions became more acute during the 2010s — mostly evident as full-blown wars in Ukraine and the Middle East at present, but potentially also in conflicts liable to break out at any time in Central Asia, the Himalayan Mountains, the South China Sea and the Korean peninsula.
These divisions can certainly escalate quickly, submerging broader mutual interests and creating a “camp” mentality — the West versus a China/Russia-led so-called multipolar alignment, which in turn have profoundly affected anti-imperialist sensibilities across the world.
The conflicts have extended to labour migration, trade and finance, as witnessed by the rise of xenophobia and right-wing critiques of “globalism”.
These were crystallised in right-wing populist victories in three 2016 votes: Brexit, Donald Trump in the US, and Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines, followed by other votes including in Brazil, Italy and now Argentina and the Netherlands.
Underlying the lack of faith in liberal elite politics is not only mismanagement of what they concede is a so-called “polycrisis” unfolding in diverse areas of multilateral responsibility, but also the decline of most globalisation ratios (especially trade/GDP) after 2008 resulting in a “deglobalisation” or what The Economist terms “slowbalisation” and the latest UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) report refers to as “stall-speed” growth.
In addition to these openly-admitted flaws in the system, the US-China trade war, starting in 2017, and the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine reflect further contradictions and limits within capital’s geographical expansion.
But many such conflicts — born of internal capitalist contradictions — are not really inter-imperial in character. They reflect a rogue character within sub-imperialism — from which Russian president Vladimir Putin crossed the line by invading Crimea in 2014 and the rest of Ukraine in 2022 — and within imperialism — for example when the US Treasury took extreme measures against Russia’s global financial integration, kicking Moscow out of the main bank transaction system and seizing several hundred billion dollars of its carelessly-scattered official and oligarch assets.
It is difficult to contemplate contemporary imperialism without at least touching on all these dynamics and mentioning the institutions undergirding imperial power.
We need conceptual tools — especially sub-imperialism, although the term is very alienating for Third World nationalists — to attack each of these processes.
This will, in the process, allow us to transcend the simplistic anti-imperialist rendition of “my enemy’s enemy is my friend”, so often found in so-called campist logic.
So, the formulations we use are increasingly important, for example in contesting both Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Israel-US’ genocidal attacks, with a consistent line of analysis.
Patrick Bond is a political economist, political ecologist and scholar of social mobilisation. From 2020-21 he was Professor at the Western Cape School of Government and from 2015-2019 was a Distinguished Professor of Political Economy at the University of the Witwatersrand School of Governance. From 2004 through mid-2016, he was Senior Professor at the University of KwaZulu-Natal School of Built Environment and Development Studies and was also Director of the Centre for Civil Society. He has held visiting posts at a dozen universities and presented lectures at more than 100 others.
Sep 11, 2023 ... But this change will be possible if imperialism, the striving of every great capitalist State to extend its own colonial empire in opposition to ...
Saturday, December 30, 2023
THE NWO IN THE MAKING
Sir Henry Kissinger: Midwife to New Babylon
by Matthew J.L. Ehret / December 29th, 2023
LONG READ
The moment Kissinger’s last breath left his corpse, media commentators lost no time running out the gates, either singing songs of slavish praise about the “great liberal statesman” on one hand or composing devastating critiques of the bloodstained trail of tears Kissinger’s legacy left on the world.
Speaking on Israel’s future in 2012, Kissinger sent shock-waves of confusion through the world when he said, “in 10 years, there will be no more Israel.”
Why would Kissinger, a man who devoted such a major part of his life to the cause of Zionism, believe with certainty that Israel would no longer exist in 10 years? What was supposed to happen under a Hillary Clinton regime that would have resulted in Kissinger’s prediction unfolding in 2022?
Did Kissinger not want the Middle East stability he so often spoke so highly of?
His apparent dual support for Zionist empowerment on one hand and his belief in the impending destruction of Israel on the other is not a glitch in the matrix nor a contradiction in Sir Kissinger’s thinking. Rather, it represents two sides of one bloody program that ultimately involves purging the Holy Land of both Jews and Arabs.
Since Kissinger’s 2012 opinion provided such an important, ironic crack in the machinery of oligarchism, I’d like to take a moment to invite you to join me as we peek through this crack into a story that may take us as far back as Babylon…
‘Greater Israel’ as a British Imperial Project
In 1914, the man who later became Israel’s first president, Chaim Weizman, stated:
Should Palestine fall within the British sphere of influence, and should Britain encourage a Jewish settlement there, as a British dependency, we could have in 20 to 30 years a million Jews there-perhaps more; they would. . . form a very effective guard for the Suez/Canal.”
These words indicated a deeply underappreciated value that leading Jewish Zionists had for the British empire’s plans for global control over a century ago; these Zionists believed the empire could further their own plans for a Jewish state. Lord Shaftesbury’s Zionist project was launched in 1839, the British Empire created the Palestinian Exploration Fund in 1865, and the founder of modern Zionism, Theodor Herzl, joined the cause of convincing the world’s Jews to live in the desert, but the role of British intelligence’s hidden hand in shaping the state of Israel, as well as international fascism more broadly, is often ignored. [1]
It wasn’t ignored by Sir Winston Churchill, then Lord of the British Admiralty during WWI. He wrote forcefully about the international Jewish conspiracy to take over the world on one hand, but he also spoke proudly of Zionism, saying in 1917: “If, as it may well happen, there should be created in our own lifetime by the banks of the Jordan a Jewish state under the protection of the British crown … [it] would be especially in harmony with the truest interests of the British Empire.”
Additionally, Leo Amery was a close collaborator of pro-fascist Zionist leader Vladimir Ze’ev Jabotinsky during the former’s management of British Mandate Palestine (1925-1929) and co-founder of the Jewish Legion, which Jabotinsky went on to control. More than a Zionist, Amery was a believer in Cecil Rhodes’ vision for “a Church of the British Empire.”
Amery stated of his peculiar religion: “The Empire is not external to any of the British nation. It is something like the Kingdom of Heaven within ourselves.” (Take note that the term “Kingdom of Heaven” was the name of the Templar Kingdom of Jerusalem, which will play a larger role in this story).
After leading the passage of anti-Jewish immigration laws in England in 1905 that prevented persecuted Russian Jews from coming to the UK, Balfour wrote in 1919 that Zionism would “mitigate the age-long miseries created for Western civilization by the presence in its midst of a Body which it too long regarded as alien and even hostile, but which it was equally unable to expel or to absorb.”
Balfour saw the creation of Israel as one stone that could kill two birds by 1) providing an excuse to purge the Jews from Europe and 2) creating a perfect weapon for destabilization in the geopolitical pivot of Halford Mackinder’s Heartland and the cross-section of all major civilizational forces on the earth.
Caption: The Silk Road trade routes of the Han Dynasty were revived again under the Tang Dynasty and have historically played a major role in disrupting systems of global empire by encouraging trade, cooperation, and understanding around diverse cultures (in opposition to the Crusader agenda that has promoted ‘clash of civilizations’ ideologies).
In his book Der Judenstat, Theodor Herzl openly admitted this when he said:
We should, there, form a portion of the rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism. We should, as a neutral state, remain in contact with all Europe, which would have to guarantee our existence.
Herzl was clear that like his British Imperial (and typically antisemitic pro-fascist sponsors), he envisioned Israel’s borders to extend “from the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.”
In the 1890s, Herzl was not yet settled on the specific location of the Jewish national homeland. William Eugene Blackstone, a devotee of John Nelson Darby, leader of a British sect called “The Plymouth Brethren,” sent him a voluminous report justifying Jerusalem as the only location ordained by God. This earned him the title of “the father of Zionism” by American Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis. In 1891, Blackstone drafted a memorandum dubbed “Palestine for the Jews,” which called for US leadership in establishing a homeland for the persecuted Jews of Russia. The memorandum was signed by 413 prominent Americans, including John D. Rockefeller, J. P. Morgan, Supreme Court Justice Cyrus McCormick, the heads of dozens of major newspapers, the Speaker of the House, and many members of Congress.
In the 1890s, Herzl was not yet settled on the specific location of the Jewish national homeland. William Eugene Blackstone, a devotee of John Nelson Darby, leader of a British sect called “The Plymouth Brethren,” sent him a voluminous report justifying Jerusalem as the only location ordained by God. This earned him the title of “the father of Zionism” by American Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis. In 1891, Blackstone drafted a memorandum dubbed “Palestine for the Jews,” which called for US leadership in establishing a homeland for the persecuted Jews of Russia. The memorandum was signed by 413 prominent Americans, including John D. Rockefeller, J. P. Morgan, Supreme Court Justice Cyrus McCormick, the heads of dozens of major newspapers, the Speaker of the House, and many members of Congress.
The Plymouth Brethren Gnostic Overhaul of Christianity
The Plymouth Brethren were a gnostic sect of pseudo-Christians founded in 1829 by an agent of the British East India Company named Anthony Norris Groves. Groves was sent to the Ottoman Empire and then India in 1830 as an orientalist engaged in recruiting young elites to train in British universities while carrying out espionage under the banner of Christian missionary work. Groves was soon joined by John Nelson Darby (godson of Admiral Horatio Nelson and father of modern rapture theology).
Darby, who considered himself a prophet, conducted six tours of the US seeding his doctrine into dozens of gnostic cults. Each one taught followers to interpret Bible prophecy the same way. This obviously required sending all Jews to Palestine, at which point a “secret rapture” for believers would unfold—followed by a hellscape of pain for heathens left to burn under the fires of global war and the anti-Christ.
Of course, in 1856, Darby’s prophetic gifts taught him that Russia—then Britain’s dominant nemesis after the US—was the anti-Christ and that the Civil War was a sign of the End Times. Darby went so far as to encourage his American followers not to fight to save the union since that would go against God’s will (to blow up the universe). Instead, he believed they should wait like good passive sheep atop their barns to be beamed up to heaven.
Among those American Christian movements influenced (and even created by Darby and the Plymouth Brethren sect), we have Cyrus Scofield. His 1909 reference bible became the most popular in the US during the 20th century and drew heavily upon Darby’s works.
Darby’s influence can also be seen in the works of Charles Fox Parham (the founder of Pentecostalism), George Pember, (the originator of the ‘fallen Nephilim’ interpretation of demonology now advanced by the alien disclosure movement), Dwight Lyman Moody (founder Moody Bible College), and James Hall Brookes (founding father and president of the Niagara Bible Conference, which helped spread Dispensationalism across America).
In fact, the entire Christian Zionist movement of war-pushing, faith-healing, rapture-loving preachers from John Hagee to Benny Hinn and Pat Robertson all sit on foundations created by Darby’s Plymouth Brethren—not the Bible.
The 1826 Albury Conferences on Prophecy
The Plymouth Brethren emerged onto the scene in tandem with a tightly knit network of Anglican/Jesuit intelligence operatives who operated under the leadership of 1) Henry Drummond (financier and co-founder of the New Apostolic Church founded in 1834), 2) Lord Anthony Ashley Cooper, the 7th Earl of Shaftesbury, and 3) John Nelson Darby (founder of the ‘Exclusive Brethren’ Plymouth Brethren and leader of the sect).
Lord Anthony Ashley Cooper was a follower of Henry Drummond, who devoted himself to the cause of “Premillennial Dispensationalism” soon after a series of conferences on prophecy were held between 1826 and 1830. They were dubbed “The Albury Conferences.”
These conferences, overseen by Drummond at a vast estate he purchased featuring 70 bedrooms in Surrey, England, included leading figures of London’s gnostic intelligentsia. This included occultists Robert Haldane and Sir Thomas Carlyle, both of whom went on to become 12 “apostles/prophets” of the New Apostolic Catholic Church created by Drummond and George Irving in 1830.
The Albury Conferences themselves were sparked by the rediscovery of the writings of the influential Jesuit Francisco Ribera (1537-1591) of Salamanca, who played a major role in the Council of Trent of 1545, which ensured never-ending wars between Catholics and Protestants. This council and its Jesuit controllers are sometimes called ‘the counter-reformation.’
A Jesuit Sleight of Hand Sets the Stage for Zionism
Ribera’s primary task was to create an intellectual argument in opposition to the Protestant affirmation that the end times were now (i.e. 545) and that the Whore of Babylon described in the Book of Revelation was the Catholic Church. Ribera’s solution was simple: make the case why the events of Revelation were neither in the present nor in the past (the majority of Christians at the time believed that the subject of the “Whore of Babylon” was Nero’s Rome). Rather, he argued, they were to take place at some distant moment in the future.
Jesuit grand strategist and true father of Christian Zionism Francisco Ribera (1537-1591). Note the Templar Cross. That will make more sense later.
Moreover, in his 500-page treatise In Sacrum Beati Ioannis Apostoli, & Evangelistiae Apocalypsin Commentari, Ribera explained that the signs of the end times would only occur when the temple of Solomon, destroyed in 70 CE during the first Roman Jewish War, was rebuilt (additionally implying the restoration of Jews to their homeland). Ribera’s writings became known as the Futurist School of Pre-Millennial Dispensationalism, from which arose such modern perversions of Christian-Zionism, Rapture theology, and the diverse array of End Times Cultists of Christian and Jewish brands in our modern era.
By the early 17th century, Ribera’s writings had fallen into obscurity. They were only rediscovered when S.R. Maitland (Keeper of Manuscripts for the Archbishop of Canterbury) found himself working in the Vatican archives. Maitland believed the Jesuitical concepts were revolutionary, and they inspired him to write books on the antichrist and End Times in the form of An Inquiry into the Grounds of the Prophetic Period in Daniel and St, John (1826), A Second Inquiry (1829), and An Attempt to Elucidate the Prophecies Concerning Anti Christ (1830).
Perhaps most importantly, Ribera’s eschatology lent itself to the geopolitical aims of a British Empire struggling to 1) prevent the spread of independence movements across the world that followed America’s lead and 2) maintain a system of global enslavement with India, Russia, Egypt, China, and the Ottoman Empire as prime targets.
The obvious danger of the renewal of Silk Road routes of cooperation connecting these ancient civilizational states would be a disaster for the British Empire’s ambitions to become a New Roman Empire retaining control through divide-to-conquer tactics.
Dozens of End Times cults splintered off from this source. Various prophets like Edward Irving (founder of the Irvingites), John Dowie (founder of Zion Illinois), John Darby (founder of Exclusive Brethren), Charles Parham (founder of Pentecostalism), Joseph Smith of the Mormons, and Dwight L. Moody (founder of Moody Bible College) created occult societies masquerading as “Christian” movements.
The thread tying these new sects together tended to revolve around 1) rapture interpretations of the Bible, 2) the restoration of the Jews to the Holy Land, and, in most cases, 3) the rebuilding of Solomon’s Temple.
Were these actions to occur, it was taught by those with ‘special gnostic knowledge,’ the apocalyptic End Times would be invoked. The dual origins of Christian Zionism and End Times rapture theology are found here—not in the Bible.
The Fraud of British Israelism
It is also noteworthy that many of these “apostolic” cult creators were also devotees of “British Israelism,” which claimed that the 10 lost Tribes of Israel actually settled in Britain, and the British Royal family was directly descended from the House of David—the ‘secret children’ of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Films such as Martin Scorsese’s The Last Temptation of Christ and the popular book Holy Blood Holy Grail made these actual beliefs of the oligarchy into articles of popular mythology in the minds of plebian consumers.
Most people watching King Charles III sprinkled with water from the River Jordan during his coronation had no idea what insane symbolism was occurring. In the mind of Charles and the broader oligarchy he represents, this ritual symbolizes Charles as the blood heir to the throne of Christ himself. The choice to carry a metallic globe and cross symbolizing his divine right to rule the entire globe as prima inter pares (first among equals)—a symbol of the Holy Roman Emperor—should also not be ignored (see image below).
In 1834, British Israelite Henry Drummond stated that “The majority of what was called the religious world, disbelieved that the Jews were to be restored to their own land, and that the Lord Jesus Christ was to return and reign in person on this earth.”
The Logic of England’s Use of Zionism
In January 1839, Lord Anthony Ashley Cooper wrote an article in the London Quarterly Review commonly referred to as the first public call for the restoration of the Jews in Palestine:
The soil and climate of Palestine are singularly adapted to the growth of produce required for the exigencies of Great Britain; the finest cotton may be obtained in almost unlimited abundance; silk and madder are the staple of the country, and olive oil is now, as it ever was, the very fatness of the land. Capital and skill are alone required: the presence of a British officer, and the increased security of property which his presence will confer, may invite them from these islands to the cultivation of Palestine; and the Jews, who will betake themselves to agriculture in no other land, having found, in the English consul, a mediator between their people and the Pasha, will probably return in yet greater numbers, and become once more the husbandmen of Judaea and Galilee. (Cited in Victoria Clark, Allies for Armageddon, p.67)
In 1840, Lord Palmerston (Lord Cooper’s cousin and British Foreign Secretary) echoed this proto-zionist outlook in a letter to the British ambassador to Constantinople:
There exists at the present time among the Jews dispersed over Europe, a strong notion that the time is approaching when their nation is to return to Palestine… It would be of manifest importance to the Sultan to encourage the Jews to return and to settle in Palestine… I have to instruct your Excellency to recommend to hold out every just encouragement to the Jews of Europe to return to Palestine.
In 1853, Shaftesbury wrote to then-Prime Minister Aberdeen describing Syria as “a country without a nation, which should be matched to a nation without a country… Is there such a thing? To be sure there is. The ancient and rightful lords of the soil, the Jews!”
Shaftesbury recognized the need to map Palestine (which also involved finding the location of Solomon’s Temple) in preparation for this vast project. To this end, he worked closely with his cousin Lord Palmerston and the Prince of Whales (later King Edward VII) to create the Palestinian Exploration Fund in 1865.
Templars, Mithra, and the Roots of the Palestinian Exploration Fund
This project was been put into motion a little earlier, when in 1862, Queen Victoria’s son, Prince Edward Albert, led an expedition to Palestine. The first secretary of the Palestinian Exploration Fund (PEF), Walter Besant, described the importance of the King’s venture to the Holy Land in his work Twenty-One Years Work in the Holy Land (1886):
Hitherto the opportunity for such systematic research has been wanting. It appears now to have arrived. The visit of HRH the Prince of Wales to the Mosque at Hebron has broken down the bar which for centuries obstructed the entrance of Christians to that most venerable of the sanctuaries of Palestine; and may be said to have thrown open the whole of Syria to Christian research.
The fact that Walter Besant of the Palestinian Expedition Fund was the brother-in-law of Annie Besant, leader of the international Theosophy movement, should raise some alarm bells since it has been noted that John Nelson Darby infused his translations of the Bible with language and terms only being used by the Theosophists.
The Templars were a mercenary cult established by Cistercian grand strategist Bernard of Clairvaux in 1118 CE. They were officially called “The Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon.” Not living up to their aspirations of poverty, this order of elite Christian mercenaries soon became the dominant financial empire across Europe and the Mediterranean sphere. It oversaw a network of Mithraic mystery cults throughout the world stretching from Russia to Europe, England, and the Middle East.
In fact, the Kingdom of Jerusalem, which reigned from 1099-1291, was frequently managed by the Templars and ranged widely in size during several bloody Crusades against the Muslims. An animation of the Kingdom can be seen here:
The Kingdom’s flag can be seen here:
The Jerusalem crosses became affiliated with the Templars before the order was dissolved (at least publicly) and appeared on the insignia of the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre, established as a papal knighthood in 1098. It currently has 30,000 official members under an Order not too dissimilar in structure to Jesuit Generals [3]. Keep in mind that this papal knighthood was established 20 years before the founding of the Clairvaux’s Templars.
According to the sect’s website, the Knighthood of the Holy Sepulchre is devoted to “absolute fidelity to the Popes” and seeks to “sustain and aid…the Catholic Church in the Holy Land.” In Freemasonic fashion, the Order is organized around a Grand Master and a chain of command of obedience down to the lower degrees.
In 1222, Francis of Assisi (ordained as the environmentalist’s saint) established a subdivision of his Franciscans dubbed “The Order of Penitent Brothers and Sisters.” Like its later incarnation in the Jesuits, the order was arranged around a general and featured an outward (exoteric) practice of strict Benedictine asceticism (this involved self-flagellation).
This order became known as the Franciscan Minorite Order and selected for themselves a very peculiar emblem.
This is important to keep in mind since the Prince of Whales Albert Edward celebrated his 1862 arrival in the Holy Land by engraving a tattoo featuring the Templar crosses on his arm. The Templar headquarters in Jerusalem were found in the elaborate crypts built under the Al-Aqsa Mosque (the supposed location of Solomon’s Temple) and are the source of much speculation. The likelihood of a Mithraic temple as part of a network of thousands scattered across the Holy Land and Europe is the most attractive hypothesis this author has yet seen.
Working directly under Prince Albert Edward was Sir Charles Warren, chief of the Palestine Exploration Fund (PEF) and First Grand Master of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge, which was established in 1886. The Quatuor Coronati (Four Crowns) was the first archeology lodge devoted to mapping out the Middle East and ultimately rebuilding Solomon’s Temple, which was destroyed in 70 CE.
Additional aims of the lodge and Palestinian Exploration Fund involved locating the ark of the covenant and holy grail. The geopolitical benefits of mapping the Middle East for the British High Command (as well as mapping out the tribal relations of Arabs living there under the manipulation of British orientalists) were obvious.
The entire field of ‘Biblical Archeology’ was created—and continues to be shaped—by the Quatuor Coronati. Upon founding the PEF, Warren stated that it was designed with the avowed intention of “gradually introducing the Jews, pure and simple, who are eventually to occupy and govern this country.”
In 1886, Sir Charles Warren was appointed the chief commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, where he was assigned to protect the Prince of Whales’ ritualistic murder of prostitutes across London in a famous unsolved case called “Jack the Ripper.” Warren worked with Plymouth Brethren member Sir Robert Anderson, head of Scotland Yard, to sabotage the investigation into the masonic ritual murder of prostitutes across London. These murders most likely occurred at the hand of Prince Albert Edward’s eldest son Prince Albert Victor. The 2001 Hollywood film From Hell, starring Johny Depp, was but one of many films banalizing this grotesque chapter of history in the form of popular entertainment.
Another Plymouth Brethren cultist played an important role in British Mandate Palestine. Colonel Charles Wingate was a leading figure in Darby’s sect and ensured that his son, Colonel Orde Wingate, would follow in his father’s shoes as a deviant imperialist and Christian Zionist.
Orde Wingate worked closely with Christopher Sykes (son of Mark Sykes of Sykes-Picot fame) and was sent to British Mandate Palestine in 1935 to train Zionist paramilitary groups. He created a network of elite ‘Night Squads’ working in tandem with Jabotinsky’s Haganah paramilitary group.
As demonstrated by the pioneering work of Steven P. Meyer, Vladimir Jabotinsky was a British intelligence asset from Ukraine who was groomed in the Freemasonic Young Turk operation set into motion by Lord Palmerston and Giuseppe Mazzini in the 1840s. He was a Jewish fascist admirer who Israel’s first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, called “Vladimir Hitler” due to his adoption of Nazi practices and his rabidly racist ethnonationalist attitude.
The Jews are loyal to the Empire… Palestine is essential to our Empire- our Empire is essential to England- England is essential to world peace. We have the chance to plant here in Palestine and Transjordan a loyal, rich and intelligent nation, with which we can hold for us the key to world domination without expense or effort on our part.
It is a notable irony that Col. Orde Wingate had two very influential “pro-Arab” Orientalist cousins: 1) E.G Browne (sponsor of Al-Afghani, the spiritual father of Salafiyyism) and 2) T.E. Lawrence, whose manipulation of Bedouin Hashemite tribes drove the British Empire’s first ‘Arab Spring’ against the weak Ottoman Empire during World War One.
British Mandate Palestine Grand Mullah Haj Amin frequently collaborated with British intelligence from Britain’s Cairo office, including the Muslim Brotherhood, to 1) assassinate moderate Arabs seeking economic cooperation with the Jews and 2) kill Jews to stoke revenge sentiments similar to the earlier program of keeping Protestant vs. Catholic wars ablaze in Europe.
British intelligence’s support of Islamist cults throughout the Arab world, from al-Afghani (founder of Salafyyism) to the Muslim Brotherhood, and their simultaneous support of the most fascist and violent Zionist ideologues should not be seen as contradictory in any way. Rather, this support is united by one firm principle: maintain global dominance for the Church of the British Empire.
Plymouth Brethren grand strategist George Hawkins Pember (1837-1910) is known as one of the most influential of Darby’s sect. His works on ancient mystery cults, Zionism, prophecy, and even alien interpretations of scripture have done an incredible amount of damage in shaping imperial strategic planning for over 150 years.
In his book The Antichrist, Babylon, and the Coming of the Kingdom, Pember laid out the challenge of interpreting what the ‘Whore of Babylon’ might be. This information is very important for anyone wishing to calculate the days until the End Times.
Pember followed the Pre-Millennial Dispensationalist line by extracting the cataclysmic events into the future. “It would seem, that Babylon must be rebuilt and become again the center of the world and the glory of kingdoms, as we have it represented in the eighteenth chapter of the apocalypse,” he wrote.
But who is this Babylon that must rise to power to usher in the End Times? Is it Russia? Is it the papacy? Is it the British Empire? Or is it something else?
As a devout Christian Zionist cut from the cloth of Palmerston, Churchill, or Eichmann, the answer is clear, according to Pember. In his book The Antichrist, Babylon, and the Coming of the Kingdom, he wrote:
The wonder is that the restoration of Babylon has never yet been attempted…As soon, however, as Christendom is united in the form of the Ten Confederate Kingdoms, all jealousy will be at an end, and the great prize may then be seized for the common good. No doubt commerce will be the exciting motive: the civilized world will, perhaps, combine to build a great central emporium, which by their united exertions will quickly surpass all other cities, and finally become the capital of the Antichrist.
Keeping in mind the role of the Plymouth Brethren and gnostic intelligence operatives of the Palestinian Expedition Fund in creating Zionism in the first place, let’s review once more the region proclaimed by Herzl, Jabotinsky, and other Greater Zionists as the divine land ordained by God’s covenant for the “chosen people”…
Today, the Anglo-Zionist project has grown from an aggressively demonic fetus to a vicious, full-grown monster. It appears intent on fulfilling a divine prophecy to recreate a new Babylon while provoking a war with literally every Arab neighbor surrounding them. The maps of Babylon 539 BCE and Herzl’s fantasy are eerily similar.
America’s nuclear arsenal will likely support Zionist ambitions to purge the land of Arabs, starting with Palestine and followed by Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt, and possibly Saudi Arabia, as outlined by the neo-con Clean Break Doctrine submitted to Netanyahu in 1996. But are all Americans (or even Israelis) happy about this scenario? Judging from the mass protests in the US against Netanyahu’s current war and the collapse of his support within Israel itself, the answer is no.
But do the voices of the people who will be exterminated in the wake of a global nuclear war have any influence over the decisions made by imperial ideologues marching about Washington, London, or Tel Aviv? That remains to be seen.
I would also pose the question: Is it at all possible that the forces that birthed the Zionist project may ultimately see their creation as a disposable pawn in the great game? Is it also possible that these same forces don’t even see the US as a permanent fixture of the “end of history” some imperialists wish to see emerge onto the scene? These are just a few questions to ponder.
With all of this in mind, it is worth revisiting Henry Kissinger’s 2012 prophecy that “in 10 years, there will be no more Israel.”
The Fall of Babylon 2.0?
The Truth Concerning the Land is Revealed in Cabala. Jewish Mysticism (Cabala) militates for life in the Land of Israel. Rationalistic approaches to Judaism place no special value on the Land of Israel. In wars, national characters crystalize. Israel, as the universal reflection of mankind, benefits thereby. The heels of Messiah follow upon World Conflageration… At the hour of the downfall of Western civilization, Israel is called upon to fulfill its divine mission by providing the spiritual basis for a New World Order. [emphasis added]
— Rabbi Abraham Isaac Cohen Kook, Greater Israel champion, End Times cultist, Chief Ashkenaz Rabbi for British Mandate Palestine (1919-1935)
The genie of Greater Israelism, as promoted by the likes of Theodor Herzl, Rabbi A.I Kook, and the army of gnostic Christian Zionist heirs of John Nelson Darby begging for a first strike onto Iran represents a level of zealotry and fanaticism that may spell disaster for much of humanity. Unlike most End Times cults that have stained this world, this one happens to possess a nuclear arsenal, and it is supported by raving hordes of rapture-believing Christian Zionists in America hungry for Armageddon.
A strange collusion of the Jesuit-run papacy of Pope Francis and the Anglican Church of the eco-Crusader King Charles III has united on multiple fronts. This includes Lynn Forester de Rothschild’s Council for Inclusive Capitalism under the banner of the World Economic Forum. Additionally, why did Pope Francis (who took the name from the Templar-connected Francis of Assisi) choose to give shards of the cross upon which Jesus died (so it is claimed) as a coronation gift to a man who is a British Israelite who probably believes himself to be a blood heir to Jesus himself?
For that matter, why did Prince William’s wife, Kate Middleton, present her second baby to the world dressed in an outfit made famous by accused satanist and pedophile Roman Polanski in the film Rosemary’s Baby (featuring the story of a woman who is impregnated by a satanic cult leader and gives birth to the anti-Christ)?
This cult is also operating in a world shaped in large measure by a collapsing hegemon sitting atop a systemic financial meltdown that may make the 1929 depression look like a cakewalk.
Kissinger’s Role as a Midwife to Satan
Sir Henry Kissinger played an instrumental role in converting the US from a republic that aspired to uphold liberty to a nation fully committed to empire under the control of a techno-feudal priesthood.
It is important to keep in mind that throughout his long and destructive life, Kissinger cannot really be accused of being a cause of anything. Rather, he was always an instrument enslaved to a higher agency far beyond him. He was perhaps a fully witting agent—and thus all the more reprehensible than the many lower auxiliaries of technocracy who are ignorant of the evil they represent… but he was a slave nonetheless.
As a prized student of Rhodes Scholar William Yandall Elliot (who served as a guru to a nest of sociopathic young men at Harvard), Kissinger’s devout misanthropy, idealization of oligarchism, and spiritual devotion to systems of stasis were recognized by his handlers. He soon found himself working for the director of the CIA’s Office of Psychological Strategy Board in 1952, where he was brought into the inner sanctum of global intelligence operations.
Kissinger’s star rose quickly as he was made a member of the Round Table’s American think tank in 1956—The Council on Foreign Relations—and was soon brought into the Rockefeller Commission’s 1956 study group on America and the New World Order (named ‘Prospects for America’). There, he worked closely with Rhodes Scholar Dean Rusk and American fascist Henry Luce. This was soon followed by admission to the Bilderberg Group in 1957, where he went on to lead its steering committee.
During his time as secretary of state and national security advisor, Kissinger worked closely with George Schultz in removing the US dollar from the fixed exchange rate gold reserve system, ensuring that what was once a viable industrial capital system would become a speculative weapon of mass destruction.
Once this was achieved, Kissinger’s work in orchestrating the Yom Kippur War of 1973 and broader oil shocks that resulted in a US dollar pegged to the price of OPEC oil was a cakewalk [5]. Kissinger’s next step in drafting the NSSM-200 program, transforming America’s foreign policy from a pro-industrial growth orientation toward “population control,” was another step into hell.
But were any of these policies designed to serve the interests of America or even Israel or Saudi Arabia in the long term?
Were any of these policies designed to serve any nation, or were they all simply different elements to the same abstract painting of chaos that he served on behalf of a higher agency?
What agency could that be if not American or Israeli or Saudi?
Kissinger’s Devotion to the British Empire Means More Than You Think
Many American leaders condemned Churchill as needlessly obsessed with power politics, too rigidly anti-Soviet, too colonialist in his attitude to what is now called the Third World, and too little interested in building the fundamentally new international order towards which American idealism has always tended. The British undoubtedly saw the Americans as naive, moralistic, and evading responsibility for helping secure the global equilibrium. The dispute was resolved according to American preferences- in my view, to the detriment of postwar security… The disputes between Britain and America during the Second World War and after were, of course, not an accident. British policy drew upon two centuries of experience with the European balance of power, America on two centuries of rejecting it.
Where America had always imagined itself isolated from world affairs, Britain for centuries was keenly alert to the potential danger that any country’s domination of the European continent-whatever its domestic structure or method of dominance-placed British survival risk… Britain rarely proclaimed moral absolutes or rested her faith in the ultimate efficacy of technology, despite her achievements in this field. Philosophically she remains Hobbesian: She expects the worst and is rarely disappointed. In moral matters Britain has traditionally practiced a convenient form of ethical egoism, believing that what was good for Britain was best for the rest…. In the nineteenth century, British policy was perhaps the principal factor in European system that kept the peace for 99 years without a major war ….
Perhaps most revealing was his description of his own role as secretary of state when he described his relationship with the British Foreign Office:
The British were so matter-of-factly helpful that they became a participant in internal American deliberations, to a degree probably never practiced between sovereign nations… In my White House incarnation then, I kept the British Foreign Office better informed and more closely engaged than I did the American State Department… It was symptomatic.
For those who may not be aware, Kissinger’s recruitment to William Yandall Elliot’s Round Table operation in Harvard, his allegiance to the Round Table movement’s Chatham House operation in London and New York (dubbed “The Mothership” by Hillary Clinton), and his words above are nothing less than an admission of allegiance to a new Templar order.
The secret society that Cecil Rhodes established in his last will and testament as “a Church of the British Empire,” modeled on “The Jesuit Constitution” was explicitly based on the Grail Myths of the Knighthood of the Round Table. These were designed in the 13th century to promote the Templar-managed Crusades and the reconstruction of the Crusader kingdom of Jerusalem.[6]
As even Scottish Rite Grand Master Albert Pike stated in 1871, the Jesuit Order was itself a reconstructed and more disciplined Templar Order. In his Morals and Dogma, he wrote:
The Templars were unintelligent and therefore unsuccessful Jesuits. Their watchword was, to become wealthy, in order to buy the world. They became so, and in 1312 they possessed in Europe alone more than nine thousand seignories. Riches were the shoal on which they were wrecked. They became insolent, and unwisely showed their contempt for the religious and social institutions which they aimed to overthrow. Their ambition was fatal to them.
It was, after all, the Jesuit influence on the 1545-1563 Council of Trent that both fueled the flames of never-ending religious wars across Europe and established the foundations of Christian Zionism and the End Times cults of our modern-day.
Whether it was the British Empire that created political Zionism as part of the Great Game as Winston Churchill, Lord Shaftesbury, or Lord Balfour believed, or whether Jewish cabalistic bankers were attempting to create a Greater Israel capital for a New World Order as Herzl, Vladimir Jabotinsky, or Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook likely believed…it may not matter which imperial monstrosity is wagging the tail: both may be destined to the same fate that befell the first Babylon over two millennia ago.
Perhaps Kissinger knew what this new age of Babylon would involve… but he’s too busy dealing with other problems at this moment.
One thing is certain: the thing calling itself ‘the antichrist’ has been very angry with something very special within Christianity, Judaism, and Islam for a very long time. It’s time to rediscover what that is before the End Times cult Kissinger served achieves its final act.
Footnotes
[1] According to evidence available on record, Theodor Herzl was many things, but his own man was likely not one of them. His rise to prominence from a low-level journalist in 1893 to the leader of global Zionism within three years is unprecedented and doesn’t happen without vast institutional patronage. Additionally, his connection to Colonel Goldsmid (head of London’s Maccabee movement) from 1894 to 1904 is one of many important red flags of higher influences interfacing with Herzl. Colonel Goldsmid played a role in the Boer War alongside the new Round Table movement and was also the overseer of the British Empire’s Jewish colonial project in Argentina, which is no small thing. The Jewish colonial projects overseen by the British Empire in Argentina—like the Uganda scheme proposed by Chamberlain later (and submitted by Herzl to the World Zionist Congress in 1903)—was an indirect way of corralling international Jews from across Russia and Europe into controlled zones of British imperial domain that would serve as gateways towards a final Palestinian Zionist infusion. Ultimately, the empire’s success in sparking World War One and undermining the Ottoman Empire sped things up and made these stepping stones unnecessary. The fact that Herzl was also an antisemite who saw great practical use in antisemitism to make Europe and Russia unliveable for the Jews is a big red herring. It places him in conjunction with the intelligence agencies (often occult-theosophical) throughout the secret police operations of the Russian, French, Prussian, and British empires that coordinated the Dreyfuss Affair fiasco in France and the Protocols of Zion forgeries in Russia and their translations across the English world.
[2] In 1954, Egypt and the United Kingdom signed an agreement over the Suez Canal and British military basing rights. It was short-lived. By 1956 Great Britain, France, and Israel concocted a plot against Egypt aimed at toppling Nasser and seizing control of the Suez Canal, a conspiracy that enlisted the Muslim Brotherhood. The British went so far as to hold secret meetings with the Muslim Brotherhood in Geneva. According to author Stephen Dorril, two British intelligence agents, Col. Neil McLean and Julian Amery (Leo Amery’s son), helped MI6 organize a clandestine anti-Nasser opposition. Julian Amery would be directly linked to the Gladio networks. In Stephen Dorril’s book MI6: Fifty Years of Special Operations he writes, “They [McLean and Amery] also went so far as to make contact in Geneva…with members of the Muslim Brotherhood, informing only MI6 of this demarche which they kept secret from the rest of the Suez Group [which was planning the military operation via its British bases by the Suez Canal]. Julian Amery forwarded various names to [Britain’s Foreign Secretary].” The full story can be found in Dorril, Stephen. (2000) MI6: Fifty Years of Special Operations. The Free Press, New York p. 356, 629 and Chung, Cynthia, (2022) Empire on Which the Black Sun Never Set, Canadian Patriot Press p. 286
[5] Under his careful watch, oil prices increased 400% during the 1973 OPEC crisis. This has been acknowledged to have played a big role in driving the 1973-79 inflation. But as researcher William Engdahl demonstrated in his 1992 A Century of War, then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger had more of a role in manufacturing this crisis from scratch by keeping hundreds of tankers replete with petrol from being unloaded in the US and facilitating the 400% interest rate increase with the assistance of several high-level oil ministers in the Middle East beholden to Kissinger. In recent years, Saudi Arabia’s OPEC minister at the time of the crisis corroborated Engdahl’s research stating: “I am 100 per cent sure that the Americans were behind the increase in the price of oil. The oil companies were in real trouble at that time, they had borrowed a lot of money and they needed a high oil price to save them.”
[6] See From Ritual to Romance by Jessie L. Weston, Cambridge University Press, 1920.
