Episode 349 – The WWI Conspiracy – Part Three: A New World Order

11/30/201849 Comments

In the first two parts of this series we have seen how the WWI conspiracy came to be. But more important by far is the question of why it happened. For what purpose was such carnage released upon the world? What did the First World War mean? Discover the hard truth about the First World War this week on The Corbett Report as we conclude The WWI Conspiracy.

CLICK HERE for the complete transcript and downloads of The WWI Conspiracy.

Watch this video on BitChute / DTube / YouTube or Download the MP4 VIDEO

For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.

For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).

TRANSCRIPT

PART THREE – A NEW WORLD ORDER

February 21, 1916.

A week of rain, wind and heavy fog along the Western Front finally breaks, and for a moment there is silence in the hills north of Verdun. That silence is broken at 7:15 AM when the Germans launch an artillery barrage heralding the start of the largest battle the world had ever seen.

Thousands of projectiles are flying in all directions, some whistling, others howling, others moaning low, and all uniting in one infernal roar. From time to time an aerial torpedo passes, making a noise like a gigantic motor car. With a tremendous thud a giant shell bursts quite close to our observation post, breaking the telephone wire and interrupting all communication with our batteries. A man gets out at once for repairs, crawling along on his stomach through all this place of bursting mines and shells. It seems quite impossible that he should escape in the rain of shell, which exceeds anything imaginable; there has never been such a bombardment in war. Our man seems to be enveloped in explosions, and shelters himself from time to time in the shell craters which honeycomb the ground; finally he reaches a less stormy spot, mends his wires, and then, as it would be madness to try to return, settles down in a big crater and waits for the storm to pass.

Beyond, in the valley, dark masses are moving over the snow-covered ground. It is the German infantry advancing in packed formation along the valley of the attack. They look like a big gray carpet being unrolled over the country. We telephone through to the batteries and the ball begins. The sight is hellish. In the distance, in the valley and upon the slopes, regiments spread out, and as they deploy fresh troops come pouring in. There is a whistle over our heads. It is our first shell. It falls right in the middle of the enemy infantry. We telephone through, telling our batteries of their hit, and a deluge of heavy shells is poured on the enemy. Their position becomes critical. Through glasses we can see men maddened, men covered with earth and blood, falling one upon the other. When the first wave of the assault is decimated, the ground is dotted with heaps of corpses, but the second wave is already pressing on.

This anonymous French staff officer’s account of the artillery offensive that opened the Battle of Verdun—recounting the scene as an heroic French communications officer repairs the telephone line to the French artillery batteries, allowing for a counter-strike against the first wave of German infantry—brings a human dimension to a conflict that is beyond human comprehension. The opening salvo of that artillery barrage alone—involving 1,400 guns of all sizes—dropped a staggering 2.5 million shells on a 10-kilometre front near Verdun in northeastern France over five days of nearly uninterrupted carnage, turning an otherwise sleepy countryside into an apocalyptic nightmare of shell holes, craters, torn-out trees, and ruined villages.

By the time the battle finished 10 months later, a million casualties lay in its wake. A million stories of routine bravery, like that of the French communications officer. And Verdun was far from the only sign that the stately, sanitized version of 19th century warfare was a thing of the past. Similar carnage played out at the Somme and Gallipoli and Vimy Ridge and Galicia and a hundred other battlefields. Time and again, the generals threw their men into meat grinders, and time and again the dead bodies lay strewn on the other side of that slaughter.

But how did such bloodshed happen? For what purpose? What did the First World War mean?

The simplest explanation is that the mechanization of 20th century armies had changed the logic of warfare itself. In this reading of history, the horrors of World War One were the result of the logic dictated by the technology with which it was fought.

It was the logic of the siege guns that bombarded the enemy from over 100 kilometres away. It was the logic of the poison gas, spearheaded by Bayer and their School for Chemical Warfare in Leverkusen. It was the logic of the tank, the airplane, the machine gun and all of the other mechanized implements of destruction that made mass slaughter a mundane fact of warfare.

But this is only a partial answer. More than just technology was at play in this “Great War,” and military strategy and million-casualty battles were not the only ways that World War One had changed the world forever. Like that unimaginable artillery assault at Verdun, the First World War tore apart all the verities of the Old World, leaving a smouldering wasteland in its wake.

A wasteland that could be reshaped into a New World Order.

For the would-be engineers of society, war—with all of its attendant horrors—was the easiest way to demolish the old traditions and beliefs that lay between them and their goals.

This was recognized early on by Cecil Rhodes and his original clique of co-conspirators. As we have seen, it was less than one decade after the founding of Cecil Rhodes’ society to achieve the “peace of the world” that that vision was amended to include war in South Africa, and then amended again to include embroiling the British Empire in a world war.

Many others became willing participants in that conspiracy because they, too, could profit from the destruction and the bloodshed.

And the easiest way to understand this idea is at its most literal level: profit.

War is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small “inside” group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

In the World War [One] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.

How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?

Major General Smedley Butler

As the most decorated Marine in the history of the United States at the time of his death, Smedley Butler knew of what he spoke. Having seen the minting of those tens of thousands of “new millionaires and billionaires” out of the blood of his fellow soldiers, his famous rallying cry, War Is A Racket, has resonated with the public since he first began—in his own memorable words—”trying to educate the soldiers out of the sucker class.”

Indeed, the war profiteering on Wall Street started even before America joined the war. Although, as J.P. Morgan partner Thomas Lamont noted, at the outbreak of the war in Europe, “American citizens were urged to remain neutral in action, in word, and even in thought, our firm had never for one moment been neutral; we didn’t know how to be. From the very start we did everything we could to contribute to the cause of the Allies.” Whatever the personal allegiances that may have motivated the bank’s directors, this was a policy that was to yield dividends for the Morgan bank that even the greediest of bankers could scarcely have dreamed of before the war began.

John Pierpont Morgan himself died in 1913—before the passage of the Federal Reserve Act he had stewarded into existence and before the outbreak of war in Europe—but the House of Morgan stood strong, with the Morgan bank under the helm of his son, John Pierpont Morgan, Jr., maintaining its position as preeminent financier in America. The young Morgan moved quickly to leverage his family’s connections with the London banking community and the Morgan bank signed its first commercial agreement with the British Army Council in January 1915, just four months into the war.

That initial contract—a $12 million purchase of horses for the British war effort to be brokered in the US by the House of Morgan—was only the beginning. By the end of the war, the Morgan bank had brokered $3 billion in transactions for the British military—equal to almost half of all American supplies sold to the Allies in the entire war. Similar arrangements with the French, Russian, Italian, and Canadian governments saw the bank broker billions more in supplies for the Allied war effort.

But this game of war financing was not without its risks. If the Allied powers were to lose the war, the Morgan bank and the other major Wall Street banks would lose the interest on all of the credit they had extended to them. By 1917, the situation was dire. The British government’s overdraft with Morgan stood at over $400 million dollars, and it was not clear that they would even win the war, let alone be in a position to repay all their debts when the fighting was over.

In April 1917, just eight days after the US declared war on Germany, Congress passed the War Loan Act, extending $1 billion in credit to the Allies. The first payment of $200 million went to the British and the entire amount was immediately handed over to Morgan as partial payment on their debt to the bank. When, a few days later, $100 million was parceled out to the French government, it, too, was promptly returned to the Morgan coffers. But the debts continued to mount, and throughout 1917 and 1918, the US Treasury—aided by the Pilgrims Society member and avowed Anglophile Benjamin Strong, president of the newly-created Federal Reserve—quietly paid off the Allied powers’ war debts to J.P. Morgan.

DOCHERTY: What I think is interesting is also the bankers’ viewpoint here. America was so deeply involved in that war financing. There was so much money which could only really be repaid as long as Britain and France won. But had they lost, the loss on the American financial stock exchange’s top market—your great industrial giants—would have been horrendous. So America was deeply involved. Not the people, as is ever the case. Not the ordinary citizen who cares. But the financial establishment who had, if you like, treated the entire thing as they might a casino and put all the money on one end of the board and it had to come good for them.

So all of this is going on. I mean, I personally feel that the American people don’t realize just how far duped they were by your Carnegies, your J.P. Morgans, your great bankers, your Rockefellers, by the multi-multimillionaires who emerged from that war. Because they were the ones who made the profits, not those who lost their sons, lost their grandsons, whose lives were ruined forever by war.

After America officially entered the war, the good times for the Wall Street bankers got even better. Bernard Baruch—the powerful financier who personally led Woodrow Wilson into Democratic Party headquarters in New York “like a poodle on a string” to receive his marching orders during the 1912 election—was appointed to head the newly created “War Industries Board.”

With war hysteria at its height, Baruch and the fellow Wall Street financiers and industrialists who populated the board were given unprecedented powers over manufacture and production throughout the American economy, including the ability to set quotas, fix prices, standardize products, and, as a subsequent congressional investigation showed, pad costs so that the true size of the fortunes that the war profiteers extracted from the blood of the dead soldiers was hidden from the public.

Spending government funds at an annual rate of $10 billion, the board minted many new millionaires in the American economy—millionaires who, like Samuel Prescott Bush of the infamous Bush family, happened to sit on the War Industries Board. Bernard Baruch himself was said to have personally profited from his position as head of the War Industries Board to the tune of $200 million.

The extent of government intervention in the economy would have been unthinkable just a few years before. The National War Labor Board was set up to mediate labor disputes. The Food and Fuel Control Act was passed to give the government control over the distribution and sale of food and fuel. The Army Appropriations Act of 1916 set up the Council of National Defense, populated by Baruch and other prominent financiers and industrialists, who oversaw private sector coordination with the government in transportation, industrial and farm production, financial support for the war, and public morale. In his memoirs at the end of his life, Bernard Baruch openly gloated:

The [War Industries Board] experience had a great influence upon the thinking of business and government. [The] WIB had demonstrated the effectiveness of industrial cooperation and the advantage of government planning and direction. We helped inter the extreme dogmas of laissez faire, which had for so long molded American economic and political thought. Our experience taught that government direction of the economy need not be inefficient or undemocratic, and suggested that in time of danger it was imperative.

But it was not merely to line the pockets of the well-connected that the war was fought. More fundamentally, it was a chance to change the very consciousness of an entire generation of young men and women.

For the class of would-be social engineers that arose in the Progressive Era—from economist Richard T. Ely to journalist Herbert Croly to philosopher John Dewey—the “Great War” was not a horrific loss of life or a vision of the barbarism that was possible in the age of mechanized warfare, but an opportunity to change people’s perceptions and attitudes about government, the economy, and social responsibility.

Dewey, for example, wrote of “The Social Possibilities of War.”

In every warring country there has been the same demand that in the time of great national stress production for profit be subordinated to production for use. Legal possession and individual property rights have had to give way before social requirements. The old conception of the absoluteness of private property has received the world over a blow from which it will never wholly recover.

All countries on all sides of the world conflict responded in the same way: by maximizing their control over the economy, over manufacturing and industry, over infrastructure, and even over the minds of their own citizens.

Germany had its Kriegssozialismus, or war socialism, which placed control of the entire German nation, including its economy, its newspapers, and, through conscription—its people—under the strict control of the Army. In Russia, the Bolsheviks used this German “war socialism” as a basis for their organization of the nascent Soviet Union. In Canada, the government rushed to nationalize railways, outlaw alcohol, institute official censorship of newspapers, levy conscription, and, infamously, introduce a personal income tax as a “temporary war time measure” that continues to this day.

The British government soon recognized that control of the economy was not enough; the war at home meant control of information itself. At the outbreak of war, they set up the War Propaganda Bureau at Wellington House. The bureau’s initial purpose was to persuade America to enter the war, but that mandate soon expanded to shape and mold public opinion in favour of the war effort and of the government itself.

On September 2, 1914, the head of the War Propaganda Bureau invited twenty-five of Britain’s most influential authors to a top secret meeting. Among those present at the meeting: G. K. Chesterton, Ford Madox Ford, Thomas Hardy, Rudyard Kipling, Arthur Conan Doyle, Arnold Bennett and H. G. Wells. Not revealed until decades after the war ended, many of those present agreed to write propaganda material promoting the government’s position on the war, which the government would get commercial printing houses, including Oxford University Press, to publish as seemingly independent works.

Under the secret agreement, Arthur Conan Doyle wrote To Arms! John Masefield wrote Gallipoli and The Old Front Line. Mary Humphrey Ward wrote England’s Effort and Towards the Goal. Rudyard Kipling wrote The New Army in Training. G. K. Chesterton wrote The Barbarism of Berlin. In total, the Bureau published over 1,160 propaganda pamphlets over the course of the war.

Hillaire Belloc later rationalized his work in service of the government: “It is sometimes necessary to lie damnably in the interests of the nation.” War correspondent William Beach Thomas was not so successful in the battle against his own conscience: “I was thoroughly and deeply ashamed of what I had written for the good reason that it was untrue . . . [T]he vulgarity of enormous headlines and the enormity of one’s own name did not lessen the shame.”

But the Bureau’s efforts were not confined to the literary world. Film, visual art, recruitment posters; no medium for swaying the hearts and minds of the public was overlooked. By 1918, the government’s efforts to shape perception of the war—now officially centralized under a “Minister of Information,” Lord Beaverbrook—was the most finely tuned purveyor of propaganda the world had yet seen. Even foreign propaganda, like the infamous Uncle Sam that went beyond a recruitment poster to become a staple of American government iconography, was based on a British propaganda poster featuring Lord Kitchener.

Control of the economy. Control of populations. Control of territory. Control of information. World War One was a boon for all of those who wanted to consolidate control of the many in the hands of the few. This was the vision that united all those participants in the conspiracies that led to the war itself. Beyond Cecil Rhodes and his secret society, there was a broader vision of global control for the would-be rulers of society who were seeking what tyrants had lusted after since the dawn of civilization: control of the world.

World War One was merely the first salvo in this clique’s attempt to create not a reordering of this society or that economy, but a New World Order.

GROVE: What World War One allowed these globalists, these Anglophiles, these people who wanted the English-speaking union to reign over the whole world, what it allowed them to do, was militarize American thinking. And what I mean by that is there was a whistle blower called Norman Dodd. He was the head researcher for the Reese committee that looked into how nonprofit foundations were influencing American education away from freedom. And what they found was the Carnegie [Endowment] for International Peace was seeking to understand how to make America a wartime economy, how to take the state apparatus over, how to change education to get people to continually consume, how to have arms production ramp up.

And then once this happened in World War One, if you look at what happened in the 1920s, you’ve got people like Major General Smedley Butler, who is using the US military to advance corporate interest in Central and South America and doing some very caustic things to the indigenous people, insofar as these were not American policies really before the Spanish-American War in 1898. Meaning that going and taking foreign military action was not part of the diplomatic strategy of America prior to our engagement with the British Empire in the late 1800s and as it ramped up after Cecil Rhodes’s death. So what these people gained was the foothold for world government from which they could get through globalism, what they called a “New World Order.”

The creation of this “New World Order” was no mere parlor game. It meant a complete redrawing of the map. The collapse of empires and monarchies. The transformation of the political, social, and economic life of entire swaths of the globe. Much of this change was to take place in Paris in 1919 as the victors divvied up the spoils of war. But some of it, like the fall of the Romanovs and the rise of the Bolsheviks in Russia, was to take place during the war itself.

In hindsight, the fall of the Russian Empire in the midst of the First World War seems inevitable. Unrest had been in the air since Russia’s defeat by the Japanese in 1905, and the ferocity of the fighting on the Eastern Front, coupled with the economic hardship—which hit Russia’s overcrowded, overworked urban poor particularly hard—made the country ripe for revolt. That revolt happened during the so-called “February Revolution,” when Czar Nicholas was swept from power and a provisional government installed in his place.

But that provisional government—which continued to prosecute the war at the behest of its French and British allies—was competing for control of the country with the Petrograd Soviet, a rival power structure set up by the socialists in the Russian capital. The struggle for control between the two bodies led to riots, protests, and, ultimately, battles in the street.

Russia in the spring of 1917 was a powder keg waiting to explode. And in April of that year, two matches, one called Vladimir Lenin and one called Leon Trotsky, were thrown directly into that powder keg by both sides of the Great War.

Vladimir Lenin, a Russian communist revolutionary who had been living in political exile in Switzerland, saw in the February Revolution his chance to push through a Marxist revolution in his homeland. But although for the first time in decades his return to that homeland was politically possible, the war made the journey itself an impossibility. Famously, he was able to broker a deal with the German General Staff to allow Lenin and dozens of other revolutionaries to cross through Germany on their way to Petrograd.

Germany’s reasoning in permitting the infamous “sealed train” ride of Lenin and his compatriots is, as a matter of war strategy, straightforward. If a band of revolutionaries could get back to Russia and bog down the provisional government, then the German Army fighting that government would benefit. If the revolutionaries actually came to power and took Russia out of the war altogether, so much the better.

But the curious other side of this story, the one demonstrating how Lenin’s fellow communist revolutionary, Leon Trotsky, was shepherded from New York—where he had been living well beyond the means of his income as a writer for socialist periodicals—through Canada—where he was stopped and identified as a revolutionary en route to Russia—and on to Petrograd, is altogether more incredible. And, unsurprisingly, that story is mostly avoided by historians of the First World War.

One of the scholars who did not shy away from the story was Antony Sutton, author of Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, whose meticulous research of State Department documents, Canadian government records, and other historical artifacts pieced together the details of Trotsky’s unlikely journey.

ANTONY C. SUTTON: Trotsky was in New York. He had no income. I summed his income for the year he was in New York; it was about six hundred dollars, yet he lived in an apartment, he had a chauffeured limousine, he had a refrigerator, which was very rare in those days.

He left New York and went to Canada on his way to the revolution. He had $10,000 in gold on him. He didn’t earn more than six hundred dollars in New York. He was financed out of New York, there’s no question about that. The British took him off the ship in Halifax, Canada. I got the Canadian archives; they knew who he was. They knew who Trotsky was, they knew he was going to start a revolution in Russia. Instructions from London came to put Trotsky back on the boat with his party and allow them to go forward.

So there is no question that Woodrow Wilson—who issued the passport for Trotsky—and the New York financiers—who financed Trotsky—and the British Foreign Office allowed Trotsky to perform his part in the revolution.

SOURCE: Wall Street Funded the Bolshevik Revolution – Professor Antony Sutton

After succeeding in pushing through the Bolshevik Revolution in November of 1917, one of Trotsky’s first acts in his new position as People’s Commissar for Foreign Affairs was to publish the “Secret Treaties and Understandings” that Russia had signed with France and Britain. These documents revealed the secret negotiations in which the Entente powers had agreed to carve up the colonial world after the war. The stash of documents included agreements on “The Partition of Asiatic Turkey,” creating the modern Middle East out of the remnants of the Ottoman Empire; “The Treaty With Italy,” promising conquered territory to the Italian government in exchange for their military aid in the campaign against Austria-Hungary; a treaty “Re-Drawing the Frontiers of Germany,” promising France its long-held wish of reacquiring Alsace-Lorraine and recognizing “Russia’s complete liberty in establishing her Western frontiers”; diplomatic documents relating to Japan’s own territorial aspirations; and a host of other treaties, agreements, and negotiations.

One of these agreements, the Sykes-Picot Agreement between Britain and France, which was signed in May 1916, has grown in infamy over the decades. The agreement divided modern-day Turkey, Jordan, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon among the Triple Entente and, although the revelation of the agreement caused much embarrassment for the British and the French and forced them to publicly back away from the Sykes-Picot map, served as the basis for some of the arbitrary lines on the map of the modern-day Middle East, including the border between Syria and Iraq. In recent years, ISIS has claimed that part of their mission is to “put the final nail in the coffin of the Sykes-Picot conspiracy.”

Other territorial conspiracies—like the Balfour Declaration, signed by Arthur Balfour, then acting as Foreign Secretary for the British Government, and addressed to Lord Walter Rothschild, one of the co-conspirators in Cecil Rhodes original secret society—are less well-known today. The Balfour Declaration also played an important role in shaping the modern world by announcing British support for the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, which was not under British mandate at the time. Even less well-known is that the document did not originate from Balfour but from Lord Rothschild himself and was sent to fellow Round Table conspirator Alfred Milner for revision before being delivered.

GROVE: So this was Lord—he’s known as Lord Walter Rothschild, and professionally he’s a zoologist. He inherits a lot of wealth in a very high status family. He pursues his art and his science and his scientific theories and research. But he has zoological museums and he’s collecting specimens. And he’s famously the Rothschild that’s riding the giant tortoise and leading him around with a piece of lettuce on his stick, and there’s a piece of lettuce hanging out of the tortoises mouth. And I’ve always used that: here’s the metaphor for the bankers, like they’re leading people around with stimulus-response. This turtle, this tortoise, can’t ask questions. It can’t question its obedience. So that’s Lord Walter Rothschild.

Why is he important? Well, he and his family are some of the early financiers and backers of Cecil Rhodes and promoters of his last will and testament. And in the question of America being brought back into the British Empire, there are newspaper articles—there is one in 1902 where Lord Rothschild is saying, you know, “This would be a good thing to have America back in the British Empire.” He’s also the Lord Rothschild to whom the Balfour Declaration is addressed.

So in 1917 there’s a letter of agreement sent from the British government—from Arthur Balfour—to Lord Rothschild. Now Lord Rothschild and Arthur Balfour, they know each other. They have a long history together and there’s a lot of Fabian socialists in this whole story of what led up to World War One. Specifically with Balfour, he’s acting as an agent of the British government, saying, “We are gonna give away this land that’s not really ours, and we’re gonna give it to you guys in your group.” The problem is the British had also promised that same land to the Arabs, so now the Balfour Declaration is going against some of the foreign policy plans that they’ve already promised to these other countries.

The other interesting thing about the Balfour Declaration is it just had its hundredth anniversary, so they last year had a site that had the whole history of the Balfour Declaration. You could see the originals from Lord Rothschild and going to Lord Milner for changes and coming through Arthur Balfour and then being sent back as an official letter from the monarchy, basically. So that’s interesting. But there’s also interviews where the current Lord Rothschild—Lord Jacob Rothschild—comments on his ancestors’ history and how they brought about the Jewish state in 1947–48 because of the Balfour Declaration.

So there’s a lot of history to unpack there, but most people, again, they’re not aware of the document let alone the very interesting history behind it let alone what that really means in the bigger story.

Over two decades after Cecil Rhodes launched the secret society that would engineer this so-called “Great War,” the likes of Alfred Milner and Walter Rothschild were still at it, conspiring to use the war they had brought about to further their own geopolitical agenda. But by the time of the Armistice in November 1918, that group of conspirators had greatly expanded, and the scale of their agenda had grown along with it. This was no small circle of friends who had embroiled the world in the first truly global war, but a loosely knit network of overlapping interests separated by oceans and united in a shared vision for a new world order.

Milner, Rothschild, Grey, Wilson, House, Morgan, Baruch, and literally scores of others had each had their part to play in this story. Some were witting conspirators, others merely seeking to maximize the opportunities that war afforded them to reach their own political and financial ends. But to the extent that those behind the WWI conspiracy shared a vision, it was the same desire that had motivated men throughout history: the chance to reshape the world in their own image.

INTERVIEWER: Just tell us again: why?

SUTTON: Why? You won’t find this in the textbooks. Why is to bring about, I suspect, a planned, controlled world society in which you and I won’t find the freedoms to believe and think and do as we believe.

SOURCE: Wall Street Funded the Bolshevik Revolution – Professor Antony Sutton

DOCHERTY: War is an instrument of massive change, we know that. It is an instrument of massive change in particular for those who are defeated. In a war where everyone is defeated, then it’s simply an element of massive change, and that’s a very deep, thought-provoking concept. But if everyone loses, or if everyone except “us”—depending on who the “us” are—loses, then “we” are going to be in a position to reconstruct in our image.

RAICO: Altogether in the war, who knows, some 10 or 12 million people died. People experienced things—both in combat and the people back home understanding what was happening—that dazed them. That stunned them. You know, it’s almost as if, for a few generations, the peoples of Europe had been increased, sort of like a flock of sheep by their shepherds. OK? Through industrialization. Through the spread of liberal ideas and institutions. Through the decrease of infant mortality. The raising of standards of living. The population of Europe was enormously greater than it had ever been before. And now the time came to slaughter some part of the sheep for the purposes of the ones who were in control.

SOURCE: The World at War (Ralph Raico)

For the ones in control, World War One had been the birth pangs of a New World Order. And now, the midwives of this monstrosity slouched towards Paris to take part in its delivery.

THE END (OF THE BEGINNING)

All over the world on November 11, 1918, people were celebrating, dancing in the streets, drinking champagne, hailing the Armistice that meant the end of the war. But at the front there was no celebration. Many soldiers believed the Armistice only a temporary measure and that the war would soon go on. As night came, the quietness, unearthly in its penetration, began to eat into their souls. The men sat around log fires, the first they had ever had at the front. They were trying to reassure themselves that there were no enemy batteries spying on them from the next hill and no German bombing planes approaching to blast them out of existence. They talked in low tones. They were nervous.

After the long months of intense strain, of keying themselves up to the daily mortal danger, of thinking always in terms of war and the enemy, the abrupt release from it all was physical and psychological agony. Some suffered a total nervous collapse. Some, of a steadier temperament, began to hope they would someday return to home and the embrace of loved ones. Some could think only of the crude little crosses that marked the graves of their comrades. Some fell into an exhausted sleep. All were bewildered by the sudden meaninglessness of their existence as soldiers – and through their teeming memories paraded that swiftly moving cavalcade of Cantigny, Soissons, St. Mihiel, the Meuse-Argonne and Sedan.

What was to come next? They did not know – and hardly cared. Their minds were numbed by the shock of peace. The past consumed their whole consciousness. The present did not exist-and the future was inconceivable.

Colonel Thomas R. Gowenlock, 1st Division, US Army

Little did those troops know how right they were. As the public rejoiced in the outbreak of peace after four years of the bloodiest carnage that the human race had ever endured, the very same conspirators that had brought about this nightmare were already converging in Paris for the next stage of their conspiracy. There, behind closed doors, they would begin their process of carving up the world to suit their interests, laying the groundwork and preparing the public consciousness for a new international order, setting the stage for an even more brutal conflict in the future, and bringing the battle-weary soldiers’ worst fears for the future to fruition. And all in the name of “peace.”

The French General, Ferdinand Foch, famously remarked after the Treaty of Versailles that “This is not a peace. It is an armistice for 20 years.” As we now know, his pronouncement was precisely accurate.

The armistice on November 11, 1918, may have marked the end of the war, but it was not the end of the story. It was not even the beginning of the end. It was, at best, the end of the beginning.

TO BE CONTINUED. . .

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Filed in: Podcasts
Tagged with:

Comments (49)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. 9tH says:

    excellent work, thank you, James and Co.

    I have a proposition for you. In the Flemish city, Ghent, there’s a small anarchist hub that has a library/archive (of which even the dutch and english @s are jealous, so i hear!), a people’s kitchen, movie theatre, regular meetings of related groups, etc etc.. The library is some 20 yrs old and despite the internet still stands. https://acgent.wordpress.com/infotheek/
    The website is in flemish/dutch though..

    You may want to consider donating some videos as an introduction? 100% they would appreciate, when they see your content. I just can’t afford it..

    just a thought. Keep up the good work.

  2. beadbud5000 says:

    James – just excellent! I had a gut feeling right after 9-11 when my journey into this wild world of “conspiracy” that WW1 (and even the 1871 Prussian war tied into all of the world’s madness.

    Piece by piece this all fits in my mind. Your work is up there with the best of it all. Many of us want to scream it to the masses but they seem so unreachable.

    You have a natural way with lining up the facts in a coherent way.
    Time may be running out but I’ll forward this as often as it is practical to do so. Thank you!

  3. zyxzevn says:

    Some Black Adder humor:
    “How many land did we capture today?”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZT-wVnFn60

    I think that everyone knew at that time that the war was not
    only futile but also orchestrated.

    A lot of the nobility that still had a lot of power was also
    involved, as they were often part of the military command.
    Was WW1 also an attack on a part of the nobility?
    Or did that happen at WW2?

    Up to the next war (WW2)

    Something about WW2:
    ‘The Traitors of Arnhem?’; Tony Gosling
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmaskz-LLoU
    How the operation in a “Bridge too far” was betrayed
    to stall the war.
    In the video Tony mentions that after the war, the Nazis were covering-up their real intentions by installing Jews in their organization.

    Funny: Let’s not forget that Hitler was recommended for the Noble-prize
    for peace:
    https://qz.com/803976/adolf-hitler-was-nominated-for-the-nobel-peace-prize-in-a-darkly-ironic-letter-by-erik-gottfrid-christian-brandt/

    And then we the good evidence that Hitler actually escaped Berlin.
    See: https://watchdocumentaries.com/hunting-hitler/
    While ill, he moved to Argentina to create a new organization that tried to create terror weapons to attack the US.

  4. Fawlty Towers says:

    Brilliant piece James, jolly good how you put it all together!
    There was a reason that I instinctively used to fall asleep in history class when I was a kid.
    I couldn’t quite put my finger on it at the time.
    Now I know what it was.

    When your series started I had a feeling that the war was all about money and touch of ego here and there. My hunch was right.

    Worldwide, the masses it seems will always be naive and hoodwinked each time their ‘leaders’ sound the trumpets of war.
    For what could be more noble than fighting for your country?

    • herrqlys says:

      Your ending “what could be more noble than fighting for your country?” invoked a memory of a scene in the movie “War Horse” (2011) that spoke to this and remains idelibile in my own mind.

      Benedict Cumberbatch plays the role of Major Jamie Stewart who commands a British cavalry regiment stationed in France during the autumn of 1914, in the early weeks of the war. Reconnaissance has reported the presence of a German infantry division not far from his cavalry bivouac, and although his 300 cavalry are outnumbered 2:1 plans are quickly laid to surprise and rout the enemy.

      Maj. Stewart immediately orders that the cavalry be formed up for battle, then comes to the front of the formation and addresses the mounted troopers:

      “Gentlemen, it is an honour to ride beside you. Make the Kaiser rue the day he dared to cross swords with us. Let every man make himself, his King, his country, and his fallen comrades proud. Be brave. Fear God! Honour the King!”

      The assembled formation loudly replies in unison, “Fear God! Honour the King!”

      I won’t spoil things any more than this for those of you that haven’t seen the movie, but all this military bravado and jingoism that was so prevalent throughout Europe at the time comes to a bad end.

  5. manbearpig says:

    I learned of the following WW1 phenomenon on this site somewhere, sometime…
    It seems somehow fitting here on this comments board in juxtaposition with the graphic heart-wrenching human tragedy that is so starkly and masterfully rendered in this documentary.
    The absurdity of how people’s minds can be so utterly requisitioned, co-opted and instrumentalized in the name of otherwise seemingly noble, well-meaning causes, in this case, women’s rights and sufferage:

    “World War I

    In August 1914, at the start of the First World War, Admiral Charles Fitzgerald founded the Order of the White Feather with support from the prominent author Mrs Humphrey Ward. The organization aimed to shame men into enlisting in the British army by persuading women to present them with a white feather if they were not wearing a uniform.[3][4]

    This was joined by prominent feminists and suffragettes of the time, such as Emmeline Pankhurst and her daughter Christabel. They, in addition to handing out the feathers, also lobbied to institute an involuntary universal draft, which included those who lacked votes due to being too young or not owning property. Although the draft would conscript both sexes, only males would be on the front lines…

    …The supporters of the campaign were not easily put off. A woman who confronted a young man in a London park demanded to know why he was not in the army. “Because I am a German”, he replied. He received a white feather anyway…”

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_feather

    How sad and demeaning to be so unwittingly manipulated, put to the service of inhuman power-hungry, blood-thirsty greed… and how common it continues to be…

    the desire to be good put to the service of evil…

    humans being wielded like WMDs against each other and so gleefully complying with such dedicated, self-rightous, ego-stroking gusto

    and on it goes…

    • mkey says:

      I found enthralling the story of an officer who was on his way to receive a medal or a commendation, wearing civilian clothes. After being stopped by one of these “women” and decorated with a white feather, he proceeded to take out his glass eye and put it on the aforementioned person’s palm.

    • HomeRemedySupply says:

      -Bump-
      Ya’ll, Thanks for posting these.

      In so many ways, I see these anecdotes applicable to our times. It could be “You are not concerned with Climate Change?!” or it could be “not being ‘patriotic’ & supportive of our military” or “not standing and singing the anthem at the football game” or….

      • generalbottlewasher says:

        Along the white feather thought and applicable to our times Homey:
        A cultural, society psyop from our times must be the $ 599.00 checks we all received in the mail from President Bush and Vice President Cheney. The cynissism and brillent success of the evil act, to “just go shopping” was mass hypnosis by retail therapy. Does anyone know who thought that one up? It worked as well in its ploy to move the public’s attention away from the crimes being committed and horrors being implanted against our freedoms as the white feathers moved or forced the pacifist public and saner young men off the fence and into the trenches.
        The effect was like nothing I have ever wittnesed. Everyone forgot about ” IT ” and went to another place. Sixteen years later its As sick and evil as a white feather ever was.

      • manbearpig says:

        ambient use of the words “conspiracy theorist”, “denialist”, “revisionist”, “negationist” and finally, and most objectionable; “beardless”…

        inc.com/jessica-stillman/the-best-way-to-fight-back-against-conspiracy-theorists-like-alex-jones.html

        guardian.com/environment/2013/apr/25/obama-for-america-shame-climate-sceptics

        campaigncc.org/climate_change/sceptics/hall_of_shame

        guardian.com/commentisfree/2007/feb/20/comment.september11
        9/11 fantasists pose a mortal danger to popular oppositional campaigns: George Monbiot

        encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/holocaust-deniers-and-public-misinformation

        and finally, the sort of shaming that is PARTICULARLY RAMPANT on THIS SITE; that of our less fortunate beardless bretheren:
        metro.co.uk/2018/11/28/men-with-beards-make-better-boyfriends-study-says-8187712/
        Don’t kick a man when he’s down.

        • manbearpig says:

          Though I must point out I don’t feel personally targeted; indeed, my own facial hair would make a mullah blush with envy… 😎
          just sayin’…

        • mkey says:

          Many of these links have a lot to offer. Guardian articles throw a 404 error at me, I’m not really interested in finding out why.

          Blaming the internet for spread of information. Clinging on Sandy Hook shooting as a kosher event. Taking the Nurnberg trial evidentiary documents as something that is trustworthy i.e.surely hasn’t been fabricated. Quite sufficient for one morning worth.

        • generalbottlewasher says:

          How apropos MBP on the eve of that slick jaw devil Herbert Walker Bushes demise. So I won’t . aduex bon riddance!

          • HomeRemedySupply says:

            Yea, a huge photo of HWB is front page on the Sunday Dallas news stands.
            Pretty nauseating accolades are all across the press.

  6. manbearpig says:

    the strategic unveiling of Secret Treaties and Understandings…?

    It might seem paradoxical that the elite-funded and handled Trotsky would publish his “Secret Treaties and Understandings”…

    but in addtion to blackening the Tsar, and capitalist imperialism it was a rallying call inciting

    “Proletarians of all countries unite!”

    perhaps it was a means of giving power and credence to the socialist, government-centralized wind that was blowing over the temporarily abandoned battlefields of WW1 at the time…

    A mis-information strategy that had functioned for the break-up of Standard Oil, of making it appear that imperialist capitalism had been defeated as symbolized by the creation of the League of Nations?

    preparing the world for the new eternal war-time-style dictatorship of very big government…the new (transparent) deal…?

    reminds me of that movie The Circle (what doesn’t?)… the first draft of an alleged total transparency as birthed within a ubiquitous and tyrannical technocratic government…

    the bespeckled, bearded and book-bearing trotsky giving way to emma watson’s sexier marianne leading the masses, bearing the torch in the light and the form of an all-seeing smart phone…
    ??

  7. Mark K. P. says:

    As good as this work is, more could have been said about the peculiar role and status of Russia. That status was number one enemy of the City of London financial empire throughout the 19th century from the defeat of Napoleon, recently underlined by the Japanese conflict for which Japan had been so vigorously enabled by the City.
    The diplomatic and financial resources which the City poured into breaking the Russo-German alliance were immense and innovative, and seem to predate the specific conspiracy undertaken by Rhodes and the Milner group upon which Quigley and researchers like Richard Grove place so much emphasis. Chief among the innovations was the creation and funding of the Slavophil movement (and overtly racist anti-German movement) to inject a deep and enduring rancour into Russian and German relations which had not existed before the 1880s.

    In contrast to the backward and reactionary image of late Tsarist Russia portrayed in most western histories, Stephen Goodson has the following to say, after a survey of the amazing wealth and prosperity generated by Russia’s state bank oriented and debt-free financial system :

    QUOTE
    An independent study by British lawyers concluded that the Russian Code of Laws and judiciary were “the most advanced and impartial in the world”. Elementary education was obligatory and free right up to university level, where only nominal fees were charged. Between 1906 and 1914 10,000 schools were opened annually. Russian universities were renowned for their high academic standards.
    In labour relations the Russians were pioneers. Child labour was abolished over 100 years before it was abolished in Great Britain in 1867. Russia was the first industrialised country to pass laws limiting the hours of work in factories and mines. Strikes, which were forbidden in the Soviet Union, were permitted and minimal in Tsarist times. Trade union rights were recognized in 1906, while an Inspectorate of Labour strictly controlled working conditions in factories. In 1912 social insurance was introduced. Labour laws were so advanced and humane that President William Taft of the United States was moved to say that “the Emperor of Russia has passed workers’ legislation which was nearer to perfection than that of any democratic country”. The people of all races in the Russian Empire had an equality of status and opportunity which was unparalleled in the modern world. His Imperial Majesty Tsar Nicholas II (1868-1917) and his state bank had created a workers’ paradise that was unrivalled in the history of mankind.
    UNQUOTE

    Food for thought, suggestive that the fraudulent English language historical and propaganda traditions surrounding WW1 and the overthrow of German power might lie even thicker on the ground concerning the creation and maintenance of the Russian Revolution.

    The subject of the Tsarist state bank financial system might be as worthy of investigation as its diametric opposites in the old City of London and the US Federal Reserve based on the old Roosevelt Bank of New York.

    • mkey says:

      Those crazy Russians insist on a very low public debt still to this day. Who the hell do they think they are?

    • russ says:

      Most of the information below is from the Russian archives. It identifies exactly who the Bolsheviks were, where they came from, and who financed them. A free pdf and text of this book is available online.

      Free PDF of the book: UNDER THE SIGN OF THE SCORPION

      http://www.freepdf.info/index.php?post/Lina-Juri-Under-the-Sign-of-the-Scorpion

      Free Full Text of the book: UNDER THE SIGN OF THE SCORPION

      https://archive.org/stream/UnderTheSignOfTheScorpion/sign_scorpion_djvu.txt

      The Book: UNDER THE SIGN OF THE SCORPION (Jüri Lina, Updated, 3rd edition)

      https://www.amazon.com/Under-Sign-Scorpion-Soviet-Empire/dp/9197289779

      Documentary: IN THE SHADOWN OF HERMES Jüri Lina (2009)

      https://youtu.be/oIuW-vNQsQI

      Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, and other Bolshevik leaders looted Russia, then took the Czar and his family out to a house in the country and executed them.

      Descendants of these Zionists who financed the Bolsheviks and their central communist government that killed 60 million (+) mostly white Christian Russians—the globe’s virtually unknown holocaust—still control The City today.

      Over the centuries, The City has amassed trillions by financing both sides during wars (with first dibs on the loser’s spoils). James Corbett has brilliantly laid out how they hid their war profits from the public. This is why they own/control the world’s MSM that keeps humanity uninformed, misinformed, confused, propagandized, brainwashed about their plan for a world socialist/communist government, or NWO.

      This deliberate ‘neutral’ lie/façade was best illustrated by Cuba’s Communist dictator Castro (who, like the Bolsheviks that ran Russia) had a billion or two tucked away) and why he always wore fatigues in photo ops.

      His people? Still stuck in the 1950’s in dire poverty and rags to this day.

      http://www.therealcuba.com/?page_id=74

      The end-game of these London bankers is to own/control earth and its hard assets and resources—including money, gold, silver, land, minerals, oil, etc.. Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Spain are bankrupt and primed for foreclosure (Greece no longer exists financially). These bankers tried to foreclose on Iceland, but the tiny country repudiated their debt and started throwing their Icelandic confederates in prison.

      http://grapevine.is/mag/articles/2015/03/24/bankers-behind-bars-is-iceland-living-up-to-that-meme/

      Here’s an insider’s look at how these bankers stole billions from America.

      http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/mcfadden.html

      President Andrew Jackson kicked these English bankers out of the country. Prosperity followed. They tried to assassinate him in retaliation and failed. They succeeded with Lincoln, Garfield, Congressman McFadden, and Kennedy, and attempted assassinations on other candidates who opposed to them.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4n0J19yFMY&feature=youtu.be

      In 1913, President Woodrow Wilson, a socialist, illegally and unconstitutionally (it specifies only congress can print/control the nation’s money) sold his soul and the nation to these bankers who bankrolled his candidacy and guaranteed him the office for his signature on a central bank charter (The Federal Reserve Act) that legislatively gave the bankers the “right” to print and sell America its own money as a “loan” at face value at perpetual interest.

      The link below outlines these banker’s attempts to take over America by controlling its money. It’s educational, worth watching if you can find the time.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOk3wBuQNcE

    • n4x5 says:

      I’m somewhat well-acquainted with the canonical history of Russia in the nineteenth century. The standard narrative is that the Westernizer-Slavophile split in Russian intellectual circles emerged at least as far back as 1836 with the publication of Pyotr Chaadayev’s First Philosophical Letter. The two camps differed in their reactions to his criticism of Russia’s identity and direction as a nation. (Also, as I understand it, the labels “Slavophile” and “Westernizer” were not used by the respective intellectuals themselves at that time but were applied to them by others as convenient identifiers.) I haven’t read Goodson’s work, and it’s entirely possible that the Londoners later used the Slavophile movement for their own ends, but it’s at least worth pointing out here that the movement’s roots went back decades prior to the 1880s.

  8. Andre says:

    Hello James,
    Excellent work as always. The end of the beginning suits this perfectly as these events started to shape the world as we know it today.
    Having a great grandfather that fought in this war makes it even tougher to accept the circumstances in which this happened. Found his record in the military historical registry and I was pretty happy to find out he had several punishments and military arrests for disrespect to their superiors… now I know where this anarchist vein of mine comes from 🙂
    Keep up the good work James, bringing some good sense to this world we live in. Thank you for that,
    Kind regards

  9. n4x5 says:

    Great series. Impressive condensation of so much information into a relatively concise, accessible exposition. The Yeats allusion was a nice touch.

  10. HomeRemedySupply says:

    I am pretty impressed with how this story was told.
    All 3 parts.

    There are a lot of ‘unfamiliar’ and remote characters involved, along with many details and side-plots of which I never knew.

    I now better understand what Corbett was talking about in a past interview about “The WW1 Conspiracy”…there is a plethora of information which he had to cull through and condense into a digestible form.
    This all easily could have ended up with “mind over-fill”, but Corbett organized and communicated it extremely well, along with Broc’s picture magic to help the viewer grasp the concepts.

    I have a feeling that this will play in some High School and College History classes.
    If a good teacher gets ahold of this, they are bound to share it.

    “The WW1 Conspiracy” can be used as part of our conspiracy to infiltrate the mainstream system with ‘What is Really Going Down’.

  11. Fawlty Towers says:

    Me thinks that the beginning of the end will form a conspiracy thread continuing into WWII then through the 50’s, 60’s, right up until the 21st century.
    Just a feeling. 🙂

  12. cush350 says:

    “I have a feeling that this will play in some High School and College History classes.
    If a good teacher gets a hold of this, they are bound to share it.”

    Dang HomeRemedySupply, I think it should be shown/shared starting in kindergarden.

  13. FlyingAxblade says:

    Bat Shit Crazy. hmm, where does gunpowder come from?

  14. BbobKS says:

    Really great work , and kind of scary when you look at what is happening today and how it rhymes !
    Here in KC we have the WW1 memorial and it has many artifacts and is having a banner year , they even bought a new laser light system for the obelisk that changes color .
    Much like many of the other memorials, books and history in the US the Paul Harvey version is forbidden since it might confuse and agitate the poor dolts like me !
    I assume part 4 will detail the mass starvation, and didiing up of the world that occurred later as well as how it resulted in the rise of the national socialist movement , and Herbert Hoover .
    I wonder what it would take to get this played in WW1 theater of museum or perhaps we could start a action to build alternate reality venues at all of the US memorials , Vietnam, 911, and Korea come to mind , with a local park memorial to Extortion 17 coming here maybe I can buy and set up truth booth near it ? or perhaps I will just build the park !
    When you get done with series put it on a disk and I’ll buy some of them .

  15. FlyingAxblade says:

    thank you Brock

  16. Lumen says:

    Great Work James and Team. While listening/reading these series, the ‘Hacksaw Ridge Movie’ comes to mind, with the slaughter of the indoctrinated masses, while the instigators reap the profits of war. In it, there was mention that some people committed suicide out of shame for failing the recruitment-process while honourable discharge (as a Conscientious Objector) was symbolic of cowardice. Likewise, Desertion (for Unlawful Orders) would have been difficult to prove during a Court-Martial; that is if one lived through the process. There was/is no way out: shame for not joining; posthumous awards for selected few; emotional/physical injuries for survivors. Doubtless, the ‘White Feather Campaign’ played a huge part as occurs today with the symbolic Red Poppy, the Pink Ribbon etcetera. During my map-reading interest, I came across this Wikipedia information on Memorial Drive, Calgary: “Memorial Drive (formerly Sunnyside Boulevard) is a major road in Calgary, Alberta. Besides having an important role in city infrastructure, the tree lined sides of Memorial Drive serve as a living testament to the many soldiers who died during World War I…” and again, “Ihor Novosilets’ Holodomor Monument near Memorial Drive (Calgary) at Edmonton Trail, Dedication: “Eternal Remembrance. In memory of many millions of Ukrainians who perished in the genocidal great famine inflicted upon Ukraine by the Soviet Regime 1932-1933. “Let us all stand on guard against tyranny, violence and inhumanity.” I do not know when this was erected but I assume that similar Monuments have been/are being erected, world-wide, in relation to this and other events. In 2014, there were demonstrations by Ukrainians at Calgary City-Hall favouring political interventions against Yanukovych. Possibly, similar demonstrations have been/are being held, world-wide, in relation to this and other events. Today, we need to do our own Research using authentic, unbiased material along with a listing of source-documents and, in the case of Surveys, if they do not include the option to ‘opt-out’, I avoid them, wean-out GARBAGE from the outset and prevent ‘Babel Over-Load’. I use Trusted-Sources, selected through careful, ongoing scrutiny and from whom I have learned a great deal.

  17. manbearpig says:

    “…through the decrease of infant mortality. The raising of standards of living. The population of… ” the world… “was enormously greater than it had ever been before. And now the time came to slaughter some part of the sheep for the purposes of the ones who were in control…

    …now, the midwives of this monstrosity slouched towards Paris to take part in its delivery…

    the very same conspirators that had brought about this nightmare were already converging in Paris for the next stage of their conspiracy…”

    …The Paris Agreement…

    …“The Green New Deal we are proposing will be similar in scale to the mobilization efforts seen in World War II or the Marshall Plan,” she told the Huffington Post. In short, Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal would temporarily redirect the US economy towards avoiding catastrophic climate change…

    https://qz.com/1316082/alexandria-ocasio-cortezs-green-new-deal-could-make-the-us-a-climate-change-leader/

    (I just love kicking in these open doors…makes me feel so athletic!)

  18. André says:

    “The armed conflict in Israel today, which threatens to become World War III, is the continuation of almost a century of British-staged armed conflict between Arab and Jew that dates back to the Nebi Musa riots of 1920, just months after the close of World War I, as the British settled in to occupy Palestine. Eyewitness intelligence reports proved that British military operatives encouraged and facilitated the Arab rioting, lead by Haj Amin al-Husseini, against the Jews.

    The Jewish armed response was led by Jabotinsky, and a British-trained Zionist military force that had been placed in Palestine at the end of the war. The Jewish Legion, as it was called, had no military significance. Its creation was opposed by the world’s Jewish community, including the small Zionist movement that then existed. But it was a major propaganda tool created by Milner and Amery to back up Sykes-Picot. When the war ended and the Legion demobilized in Palestine, it became a deadly weapon to be used for violent bloody confrontations with the Arabs.”

    https://larouchepub.com/other/2009/3603brit-imps_created_jabotinsky.html

  19. rael.n says:

    While I enjoyed the series immensely, I must confess that I was astonished that, despite a significant amount of time devoted to describing the propaganda efforts in the U.S. to build support for American’s entry into WWI, there was not a single mention of Edward Bernays ‘the father of public relations’.

    • HomeRemedySupply says:

      Edward Bernays

      rael.n,
      When you use the “SEARCH” box on the Corbett Report for “Edward Bernays”, some great videos and information come up. I think the ‘Bacon and Eggs’ is a great short one to share to a green, un-awakened individual.
      “Meet Edward Bernays, Master of Propaganda” is top tier in my book. It even touches on Bernays and his influence on water fluoridation, which is my bailiwick as a local activist.

      My take…
      I don’t think Bernays played a very large role during World War One when he was with the Committee on Public Information – (CPI).
      At least, not compared to other players like George Creel and his HUGE ARMY of about 75,000 “Four Minute Men”.

      There are so many aspects to World War One, that I think it would be impossible to mention them all. James Corbett repeatedly states this.
      In fact, it would take a separate video to cover some of the aspects surrounding the Committee on Public Information – (CPI).

      The CPI is fascinating.
      Talk about duping the American people, the CPI did a pretty good job.

      Quoting Wiki..
      “A report published in 1940 by the Council on Foreign Relations credits the Committee with creating “the most efficient engine of war propaganda which the world had ever seen”, producing a “revolutionary change” in public attitude toward U.S. participation in WWI.”
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_on_Public_Information

  20. tillerman says:

    Bravo, Corbett Report! Thank you for demonstrating the truth of Simone Weil’s statement that official history is taking the murderers at their word. Thank you for shining a light round the world on the murderers in high places who have for so long have gone unidentified. As I took in your investigation, I couldn’t help think of a yet another conspiracy unfolding concurrently cross the globe: that of the Armenian Genocide of 1915-23. The genocide was largely completed by the Turkish government from 1915-1916 under the cover of the First World War. It’s worth noting that techniques of propaganda and disinformation were also employed in West Asia by the government of Turkey who, as their empire collapsed, turned on the law abiding Armenian population, identifying them traitors and conspiring against the state– A Turkey for Turks only. In Turkey’s failed transition from empire to republic, 1.5 million Armenians or more murdered by their own government. Likewise, new technology was also employed, from disinformation issued by the Turkish state via the recently employed telegraph to the use of trains to transport populations. Also, regarding the exaggeration of German atrocities during the war, I couldn’t help notice how similar these exaggerations were to actual modes of attack suffered by the Armenian population at the time and as early as the massacres of 1894-1896, planned by the Ottoman government. For example, the cleric grandfather of the pioneering Armenian born, New York School painter, Arshile Gorky really was nailed to the door of his church. As Hayden Herrera, in her book, Arshile Gorky: His Life and Work, states that in 1898 “Sarkis Der Marderosian, the last of a long line of Armenian apostolic priests, had been nailed to the door of the church where he served in Van City.” Other extreme atrocities committed in the Turkish war theater have been documented although they are little known by the general public, who most likely never heard of the ancient land and culture of Armenia or the Armenian genocide.
     
    As to the possibility, albeit speculative, of the propaganda masters drawing on the fate of Armenia to accuse the Germans of similar crimes, support for the idea is not without reason. After all, the race murder of Armenians was widely reported on at the time in organs such as The New York Times, and would certainty be well known by those at the levers of power. Why not re-purpose the crimes as an act of transference, attributing such deeds from the Turkish war theater, fresh in the minds of Europeans and Americans, to the European one? Although not covered by The WWI Conspiracy, I think it is important to mention that, regarding German crimes, Germany did have responsibility in the Armenian Genocide and was in fact complicit in it. See 

    Review of The Armenian Genocide: Evidence from the German Office Archives, 1915–1916, edited by Wolfgang Gust
    https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1179&context=historyfacpub

  21. tillerman says:

    As for the legacy of the Armenian Genocide, it remains, among other things, a fact based account of Turkish denial of responsibility for lives taken, stolen ancestral land, and stolen Armenian wealth that served as a cornerstone to build up modern Turkey after its war-time devastation. Indeed, the Armenian Genocide remains very much alive and remains to be addressed in any legal sense, that is, one that would result in reparations, including return of land and what remains of historic Armenia’s material culture.
     
    The disinformation and propaganda on the part of the Turkish government are still being employed in the attempts to let the murderers and their supporters recast what happened in order to serve Turkish state interests. Fortunately, awareness of the Armenian Genocide and its perpetrators continues to grow. And increasingly, more Turkish academics and other Turks risk their lives to tell the truth about what happened to the Armenians of Turkey and the great crime committed against them by their own government. For those Corbett Report members and followers who would like to learn more about this chapter of World War I, I recommended you investigate the work of Scholars Vahakn Dadrian and Taner Akçam, one of the first Turkish academics to take on the genocide with no dissembling, prevaricating or fabricating on behalf of the Turkish state. Just published is a book whose focus is Talat Pasha (1874-1921), the architect of the Armenian Genocide and one of the most central nation builders of modern Turkey. The book was briefly reviewed in the November 24th edition of the Armenian Mirror Spectator (https://mirrorspectator.com/2018/11/23/exploring-story-of-talaat-as-nation-builder-architect-of-genocide/).Here is an excerpt from the review:
     
    “In the explosive book, Talaat Pasha, Father of Modern Turkey, Architect of Genocide, Hans-Lukas Kieser provides a mesmerizing portrait of a man who maintained power through a potent blend of the new Turkish ethno-nationalism, the political Islam of former Sultan Abdulhamid II, and a readiness to employ radical “solutions” and violence. From Talaat’s role in the Young Turk Revolution of 1908 to his exile from Turkey and assassination — a sensation in Weimar Germany — Kieser restores the Ottoman drama to the heart of world events. He shows how Talaat wielded far more power than previously realized, making him the de facto ruler of the empire. He brings wartime Istanbul vividly to life as a thriving diplomatic hub, and reveals how Talaat’s cataclysmic actions would reverberate across the twentieth century.”  

  22. Rara Avis says:

    Finished watching this series a few days ago and have been meaning to compliment you and your team for an EXCELLENT job. I’ve benefited greatly from all of your documentary-length videos, of course, but this series was truly superb. I frequently recommend your exemplary work to my friends and the WWI series will be no exception. I don’t know where you find the energy to crank out so much well-researched content but I’m glad you have been blessed with that ability, and I will do my best to continue to support your efforts financially.

  23. cat says:

    Fabulous series! However, you missed an extremely key book that includes WWI politics: Against Our Better Judgment: The Hidden History of How the U.S. Was Used to Create Israel by Alison Weir

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Back to Top