The New World Order Is Universally Chaotic
by Jonas E. Alexis and Gerard Menuhin, Veterans Today
April 15, 2016
“Every time we see some politician on television, pontificating about the benefits of some scheme which is obviously against the interests of the majority of any population, we must remind ourselves that he is just being paid to lie.”
~ Gerard Mehunin, Author of Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil
Alexis: You argue that “The only winners of the World Wars were the politicians and bankers who instigated them. The politicians were not representatives of their peoples but traitors; the bankers by their trade were cosmopolites. It followed that the benefits of these conflagrations were so significant that they eclipsed the importance of the estimated 76 million who left their lives while fighting in them. Since finance backed both sides in a ‘managed conflict,’ the citizens of both sides were left to foot the bill.”
This is an important point. The war in Iraq for example will cost the average American at least $6 trillion. Neither George W. Bush nor the Neocons who spearheaded the war will suffer from it. In fact, those same Neocons, most specifically people like Daniel Pipes, want to use perpetual wars to destroy countries like Syria.
With respect to the World Wars, you argue that “In the interval between the first and second acts, the Versailles Treaty, with its impossible demands, was imposed, in order to ensure that the looting could continue.” You also quote Winston Churchill elsewhere saying that “Everything tends towards catastrophe and collapse. I am interested and geared up and happy.” Expand on that statement a bit. Tell us how the oligarchs used political manipulation to bludgeon the West into the World Wars.
Menuhin: What is an oligarch? An oligarch may not only be a business magnate but a powerful individual too. ‘Oligarch: member of oligarchy. Oligarchy: Government, State governed by the few.’ (Greek, oligoi few, arkho rule, Oxford Concise Dictionary) It all depends on their purpose.
When we think of oligarchs, we usually mean the Russians who came to their riches during alcoholic President Yeltsin’s reign (Beresowski, Abramovich, Khodorkovsky, etc.), with the advice of Harvard’s Jeffrey Sachs. The word ‘oligarch’ implies a quality of banditry, a frontier spirit, which we in the West attribute to primitive societies.
However, ‘The most civilized people are as near to barbarism as the most polished steel is to rust. Nations, like metals, have only a superficial brilliancy’ (Antoine de Rivarol). Some might dispute whether the U.S. is truly civilized. It was ‘discovered’ in the 15th century, colonized in the 17th century, its indigenous inhabitants tamed or exterminated, and then re-occupied by the money powers in the 18th , 19th, and 20th centuries, crowning their efforts with the institution of the Fed.
Britain had been infected with the pestilence as early as 1066 and capitulated entirely by 1694; France in 1789. 1913 was a key year for the money powers in America. It saw the establishment of the Fed, of income taxes, and of the ADL, created to prevent criticism of Jews, by the same powers who wave the magic wand over those designated to become oligarchs.
By the time the enormous landmass that is Russia became a target, North America had been captured by its own oligarchs. Oil, transport and the media had been monopolized. Carnegie, Harriman, Mellon, Morgan, Rockefeller are some of the most famous of the original 19th century ‘robber barons’, but there are plenty of other present-day pillars of U.S. society, who also began as oligarchs.
How can one ‘begin’ as an oligarch? Well, oligarchism doesn’t involve becoming in a regular way. It involves a sudden – to the external world inexplicable — boost in fortune. It doesn’t necessarily include a learning curve, or a brilliant invention. Inventions can be stolen, learning is on the job. It’s more an endowment, or assignment.
Ethnicity isn’t always essential; a suitable character is. Some oligarchs have both. The required traits are: opportunism, indifference, venality. But oligarchs are all chosen for their willingness to endorse a New World Order. Briefly put, the New World Order requires universal chaos to be caused by means of a ‘strategy of tension’ (false flag terrorist action) which, in turn, requires a new order to be imposed, ‘for the good of the people’.
Clearly, this change from a stable to an unstable society cannot occur overnight. It must be guided by hand-picked politicians, major foundations (created by the oligarchs), and ostensibly well-meaning, convincingly-named organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center or the NAACP.
Populations must be degraded and dumbed down by means of expensive but devalued education, senseless entertainment, noxious nutrition and its ensuing disorders and addictions, and harmful pharmaceutical medication.
The young must be indoctrinated in subjects supported by generous university endowments, and infiltrated by egalitarian principles, like ‘Equal Opportunity’ and Women’s Rights, which purport to seek only what sounds utterly reasonable and desirable (‘Liberté, Fraternité, Egalité), but, in fact, are driven by quite other long term motives. This plan has been ongoing since the late 19th century and is now nearing fruition.
In the occupied countries, populations have succumbed to ‘Representative Democracy’, as exemplified by the parliamentary system. By and large, even under the politics of controlled opposition in the parliamentary system, populations are a nuisance. They must be allowed only as much choice as will lull them into apathy and the illusion that they enjoy basic freedoms, like freedom of expression, until the new world order takes form and they can be dominated completely.
No electorate is genuinely empowered to choose a popular leader. Should, as a result of a breakdown in oversight, a popular leader be elected (Chavez in Venezuela, Morales in Bolivia, earlier, Peron in Argentina), they are threatened by corrupt ‘opposition’, backed by external powers, and, almost inevitably, overthrown by a coup.
Oligarchs exist and flourish all over the world. Particularly in the unsettled or rebellious countries, they play a useful role. The Ukraine, for instance, is run, officially and unofficially, by oligarchs, actually successful gangsters who stop at nothing to get what they want.
In the Ukraine, ethnicity has been a major factor since the 8th century Khazar conversion. Practically all business and media in the Ukraine is in the hands of Jewish oligarchs, some of them previous communist party apparatchiks. In such unruly countries, where government is still unsettled, oligarchs must control their fiefdoms by violence; in secured or occupied countries, where governments have been accustomed to obeying the money powers for centuries, oligarchs may simply act as placeholders for wealth transfers from alleged foes, like Russia.
In unsettled countries, people are still marginally free. That is, they may be shot for expressing a genuine desire for choice/freedom. That explains why countries previously ruled from Moscow are unwilling to submit to the dictates of the EU now. They refuse to accept hordes of refugees. In the secured countries, opposition is often feigned, or instigated only to confuse citizens. Decades of dumbing down and debt-acquired benefits have ensured that any genuine resistance seldom occurs and is easily quelled with a few whiffs of teargas.
So how do you get to be an oligarch? How does a nobody from nowhere become enormously wealthy, or president of a country? Who gives them their jump-start?
One can only go by probability. Essential is, obviously, to search for a suitable person among those to whom money means everything. This qualification alone reduces the quest to a certain ethnicity, although not exclusively. Probably, a young, malleable person (often an orphan) comes to the attention of those who make these decisions and is put on the right track. (One can almost picture a line-up of protégés being interviewed by the local rabbi.)
Those who prove unsuitable may have to be discarded, but the attractions are so great that the chosen must hardly ever disappoint their mentors. Eventually, you have a structure in which politics (e.g. Clinton, Obama) and business (e.g. Murdoch) are in lockstep. They perform on demand and are allowed their private weaknesses, no matter how deplorable. Most likely, they would never have been chosen, had they not exhibited a potential weakness in the first place. In this way, the ones who really pull the strings and whose ethnicity is unvaried can stay in the background.
Take, for example, Roman Abramovich. Depending on whom you believe:
‘Abramovich, the son of Jewish parents from Saratow on the Volga, was an early orphan and school dropout from the provinces, who became a powerful oil and metals tycoon during the Yeltsin era. When Abramovich was one and a half years old, his mother Irina, a piano teacher, died of blood poisoning (the result of an illegal abortion), at four, he lost his father Arkadi too, in a work-related accident (he was knocked down by a construction crane).’ (Metapedia, translated from the German)
‘(Abramovich) first worked as a street-trader and then as a mechanic at a local factory. At the peak of perestroika, Abramovich sold imported rubber ducks from his Moscow apartment. He attended the Gubkin Institute of Oil and Gas in Moscow (where he sold retreaded car tires as a sideline), then traded commodities for Runicom, a Swiss trading company.
‘In 1988, as perestroika opened up opportunities for privatization in the Soviet Union, Abramovich got a chance to legitimize his old business. He and Olga set up a company making dolls. Within a few years his wealth spread from oil conglomerates to pig farms and he also started investing in other businesses.’ (Wikipedia)
Possibly, the mysterious boost in Abramovich’s entrepreneurial fortunes occurred between the rubber duck venture and his induction into the Institute of Oil and Gas. Presumably, his success at selling bath toys did not integrate seamlessly into the stratosphere of a billionaire. Today, Abramovich owns three of the world’s largest yachts and the Chelsea football team. How much time such amusements allow him for ‘business’ is debatable.
The father of Abramovich’s mentor, Berezovsky, was, like Abramovich’s, a construction worker, who then moved to Moscow and became a rabbi (Metapedia). The mystery of how Berezovsky and Abramovich acquired Russia’s largest energy provider (Sibneft, now Gazprom) and probably were used to export its ownership to the UK where they both live(d) — in 2013, Berezovsky was found suspended by his scarf from a shower rail — is explained by the action of the third oligarch in this trio, Khodorkovsky, who left the shares of his oil firm, Yukos, to Jacob Rothschild, when Putin had him arrested in 2003. Gazprom is based in Moscow, but its profits may not remain there.
In the case of Europe’s latest political pawns, an additional curious commonality is their small stature: France’s Sarkozy and Hollande, Italy’s Berlusconi, Russia’s Medvedev, Germany’s Heiko Maas are all very small men, at a time when humans are growing taller. Apart from their smallness, each would reveal under scrutiny some standard deficiency which has rendered them serviceable.
Conversely, none of them is interesting in his own right (except perhaps as a study in pathology), or statesmanlike, or distinguished. These marionettes are not stupid, but they were perhaps not very good at their chosen professions. Lack of ability is more than made up by ambition.
Churchill, a political turncoat, was the perfect example of such a character. He was infinitely adaptable and cared only for luxury and personal aggrandizement. Judging by the famous photograph of him with the cigar and sub-machine gun, he liked to think of himself as a sort of upper class gangster.
“Everything tends towards catastrophe and collapse. I am interested, geared up and happy. Is it not horrible to be built like that? The preparations have a hideous fascination for me” (Letter to his wife, 28 July, 1914).
By 1914, all the second-ranking kingpins were in place and financed to ensure that the plan for world domination could take the next great step: the imposition of ’Communism’ (false socialism) on Russia. For Communism to have a chance, Tsarist Russia had to be weakened. Japan had been backed by Rothschild front Schiff against Russia in 1904 – 1905, but the 1905 Russian revolution was premature.
Obviously a greater conflagration was required. The fuse for World War I was lit with the assassination by Serbs of Archduke Franz Ferdinand at Sarajevo in June 1914 (planned by the Grand Orient Lodge in 1912). Russian politicians Iswolski and Sasonow, rather than Nicholas II, colluded with France’s President Poincaré (a Germanophobe, married to a Jewess), and were financed by France to spread anti-Austria/Germany propaganda.
Germany, as the main target, had to be enticed into the conflict. Each of the major powers, Germany, Britain and France, received loans from its own Rothschild affiliate, to enable it to fight the war. Even before the turn of the century, Russia had received loans from ‘French’ banks Hoskier-Paribas and Rothschild.
To ensure the manipulation of public opinion, the money powers bought the most important news agencies: Wolff (Germany), Reuters (Britain), Havas (France). Their control of these agencies also enabled the Rothschilds to keep their name out of the news.
During the First World War, Churchill, having advanced meanwhile to First Sea Lord, instigated the catastrophic 1915/1916 Gallipoli campaign (115,000 British and dominion casualties).
“I know this war is smashing and shattering the lives of thousands every moment –and yet –I cannot help it—I love every second I live.” (Letter to Asquith’s daughter Violet, 22 February, 1915).
During the Second World War, Churchill fulfilled his role, once he had been saved from bankruptcy and incorrect political views, by a genetic helper and thus reminded of his duty to this mother’s ethnicity. Ever unsuitable in his position, he was responsible for the failed Norway campaign, even before he became Prime Minister. If Chamberlain had remained prime minister, the war might not have occurred, or might have been curtailed, the U.S. might not have been able to participate, Germany might have defeated Soviet Russia, etc.
“… the powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole.” (Tragedy and Hope, Carroll Quigley, 1966)
The collusion of business and politics, of ethnic oligarchs and politicians, is clearly illustrated by the photograph of Churchill and Bernard Baruch in the back of Baruch’s limousine in 1944. Baruch, a major force behind the War Industries Board, had left the NYSE (on which he had bought a seat), to ‘advise’ both Woodrow Wilson and Roosevelt, both of whom performed ideally for their handlers, for some of the same reasons as mentioned above.
FDR had been diagnosed with polio already in 1921. As for his wife, she shared certain of Hillary Clinton’s preferences, which, while ordinary these days, were scandalous then. And so it continues.
Every time we see some politician on television, pontificating about the benefits of some scheme which is obviously against the interests of the majority of any population, we must remind ourselves that he is just being paid to lie. The marriage of money and politics, in the service of a plan conceived by mercenary hominids, will prove the downfall of humanity.
 Gerard Menuhin, Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil (Washington: The Barnes Review, 2015), 367.
 David Lazarus, “Iraq war cost: $6 trillion. What else could have been done?,” LA Times, March 18, 2013; Michael B Kelley and Geoffrey Ingersoll, “The Iraq War Could Cost More Than $6 Trillion,” Business Insider, March 14, 2013; Bob Dreyfuss, “The $6 Trillion Wars,” The Nation, March 29, 2013; “Iraq War Cost U.S. More Than $2 Trillion, Could Grow to $6 Trillion, Says Watson Institute Study,” Huffington Post, March 14, 2013.
 Menuhin, Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil, 325.
 For studies on some of these issues, see for example David Healey, Let Them Eat Prozac: The Unhealthy Relationship Between the Pharmaceutical Industry and Depression (New York: New York University Press, 2006); Pharmageddon (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2012); Ronald William Maris, Pillaged: Psychiatric Medications and Suicide Risk (Columbia: University of South Carolina, 2015); Robert Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America (New York: Random House, 2012); Peter R. Breggin, Toxic Psychiatry: Why Therapy, Empathy and Love Must Replace the Drugs, Electroshock, and Biochemical Theories of the “New Psychiatry” (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1991); Peter Gotzsche, Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma Has Corrupted Healthcare (New York and London: Radcliffe Publishing, 2013).
 See for example E. Michael Jones, Degenerate Moderns: Modernity as Rationalized Sexual Misbehavior (South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2012).