Pedro said (May 6, 2019):

Miles Mathis did Smedley Butler here http://mileswmathis.com/butler.pdf
and http://mileswmathis.com/butler2.pdf

Partial and distractive truth telling is the biggest racket of them all. Butler never mentioned the 'J' word, nor does Alex Jones or Julian Assange. Organised International Jewish Power is the biggest racketeering project of all time and it is vorbotten hate speech to even
mention it in the polite company of lemmings.

Voltaire said if you want to know where the real power lies, know who you cannot criticise. Gilad Atzmon's variant is that jewish power is
the power to stop you from discussing Jewish power.

Old Salt said (August 15, 2015):

General Smedley Butler was the man in charge of waging war in Mexico and Central America.
After he retired, he wrote a book about those wars and the bankster bastards who funded those wars so they could wax rich. Smedley was unable to get any publisher to do the book.

He later gave it to his son who buried it in the back yard in a waterproof case and planted a
flower bed over it so that the rotten spies would never discover its whereabouts.

After 20 years had gone by, the son was able to get the book published, but the deal was
kept small. Very few copies of that book now exist. As usual, political correctness always
ruins anyone’s attempt to properly record history. No gangster will be exposed.

Old Salt on the Lobster Coast, Area 23

Old Salt said (August 14, 2015):

General Smedley Butler was the man in charge of waging war in Mexico and Central America.
After he retired, he wrote a book about those wars and the bankster bastards who funded
those wars so they could wax rich. Smedley was unable to get any publisher to do the book.
He later gave it to his son who buried it in the back yard in a waterproof case and planted a
flower bed over it so that the rotten spies would never discover its whereabouts.

After 20 years had gone by, the son was able to get the book published, but the deal was
kept small. Very few copies of that book now exist. As usual, political correctness always
ruins anyone’s attempt to properly record history. No gangster will be exposed.

Old Salt on the Lobster Coast, Area 23

HB said (August 14, 2015):

There are not many unbiased people around.
Of course, the LaRouche people, in so many aspects of knowing history and circumstances, espouse as their political basis that FDR's administration and
policy were a sound one, discarding the fact key positions were held by crypto jews/traitors/communists.
Webster Tarpley is still a very ardent proponent of the FDR "system", knowingly or unknowingly, I have my strong doubts.

No, there is nothing honorable and patriotic within the sphere of FDR, to me a traitor and monster (he relished in the millions of deaths of the cream of each nations young generation, the future of greatness and progress) to his country.

Tom said (August 13, 2015):

FDR demonstrated his loyalty to the international banking cabal, (who controlled the Federal Reserve), by confiscating the gold of private USA citizens at $20.67 with executive order 6102 on April 5, 1933, shortly after taking office. Citizens not complying were subject to harsh financial fines and long prison terms.

Then in January 1934, FDR set the base price for gold at $35.00 per ounce meaning he stripped USA citizens of approximately 40% of the value of their gold holdings, and replacing it with less valuable paper currency.

Because FDR was such a weak, willing dupe for the bankers, he was deemed worthy by them to be elected to the presidential post four times, and he delivered for the bankers by getting the USA into World War II even though the citizens had voted for him because he had campaigned to keep the United States out of the war in 1940.

This is similar to today, as once again the US Army is used to wreak destruction and chaos in countries where previously no international banker controlled central IMF banks existed ... but now these countries have IMF banks!

http://americanfreepress.net/?p=2743

Tony Blizzard said (August 13, 2015):

Yeah, "they" (in some cases the same people) also said the federal reserve act was going to destroy the bankers. Only a few called them the liars they were. One, who wrote the first book about it, was Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh, father of the flyer.

I have a copy of that book, "Banking and Currency and The Money Trust," with Curtis Dall's name written by him on the cover. It was his personal copy which he donated to Liberty Lobby. I was librarian there when it was unlawfully shut down by the Washington, DC bankruptcy court and kept a few valuable books of interest rather than throw them away.

Martin said (July 30, 2007):

I'd also like to chime in about Ron Paul. Don't the PoZ say:

"In the third rank we shall set up our own, to all appearance, opposition, which, in at least one of its organs, will present what looks like the very antipodes to us. Our real opponents at heart will accept this simulated opposition as their own and will show us their cards."

So, if those FEMA concentration camps are ready and all that is needed is a long list of names, wouldn't it be handy to set to a candidate in such a way as to get that list of "dissidents" soon? Has any Ron Paul supporter ever considered that possibility?

If Ron Paul is on "their" side, associating with him might be quite dangerous. If he is real, it is clear he will never be allowed to succeed. Either way, he is just another distraction IMHO.

Notice how he always harps about the gold standard as the solution to everything. Who owns all the gold? The private banks. Thanks to the "Money Masters" documentary (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936), we should be able to realize that the return to a gold standard is a trick -- the problem is not the fiat currency as such (money is just an abstraction anyway, it can be anything as long as everybody agrees on it), but that it is issued and controlled not by the state but by privately-owned central banks who use it for their own gain!

Your own entry about FDR, Hearst and Co. shows how devious the game is and how the public is baited mercilessly, so why not this time?

---

Martin,

At this rate they'd have to lock up 75% of the population. Remember we are collateral on the debt. They need us-it's our credit they're burning through. We're a necessary evil, from their p.o.v.

Henry

Cliff Shack said (July 29, 2007):

I believe that there is a deeper level of understanding that begs our attention and contemplation with regard to the relationship of FDR, Prescott Bush and the rest of the Illuminati gang. To understand this relationship, you’ve got to go back in history, well beyond 1933.

The core of the ruling “Illuminati” are, IMHO, descendants of Jews and Crypto-Jews who were believers in the messiahship of Shabbatai Tzvi- the mystic considered by history to have been a dismal failure after he consented to convert to Islam rather than face death at the hand of the ruling Ottoman Sultan; whose crown he desired to remove so that he may have become, like James Cameron, “King of the World”!

While most Jews have categorically rejected Shabbatai Tzvi, there was a widespread, but hidden group whose faith became stronger due to the apostasy. Shabbatai Tzvi became the welcome hero of the many devout Catholics and Protestants of the 17th century who were actually Crypto-Jews; descendents of Jews who had chosen conversion to expulsion (or worse) in 15th Century Spain.

Since the Spanish and later Portuguese expulsions, many Marranos left the Iberian Peninsula for Northern Europe and the Meditterranean Basin, as gentiles. Some landed in England, which didn’t allow entry to Jews at the time. These Crypto-Jews would become the bedrock of English aristocracy and royalty. The “Saxe” in Gotha-Saxe-Coburg (now Windsor) is Spanish Jewish in origin. Some landed in the Netherlands where in many instances crypto-Jews were rejected by the Jewish communities when they attempted to re-enter the Jewish fold. Others did succeed like the families of Spinoza and Menashe ben Israel.

Though not quite Jewish or Gentile, the crypto-Jews managed to develop a hidden culture of their own. What they lacked was a hero and a home. The hero would arrive in the personage of the mystical messiah, Shabbatai Tzvi. The home, for many would be the The New World “discovered” by Christopher Columbus, perhaps a crypto-Jew himself. Just how many crypto-Jews crossed the Atlantic on the Santa Maria or immigrant ships like the Mayflower? Who can say? But cross they did.

Which brings us to Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Prescott Bush. Both, coincidently descend from ancestors who lived in the city of Leyden, The Netherlands. The same city where the Pilgrims lived before their Mayflower voyage. Was Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s ancestor, Philippe De La Noye (1602-1681), a crypto-Jew? Possibly. Perhaps likely. It is known that he lived during the time of Shabbatai Tzvi. [De La Noye had children with customary biblical names. One child of particular interest was a girl with the name of Esther (the patron saint of crypto-Jews). Queen Esther was the Jewish heroine that concealed her religious identity in a successful effort to save the Jews within the Persian Empire from genocide. An annihilation that was to take place on one single day. The drama is kown as the story of Purim. Esther’s son would come to rule the known world. That was accomplished with one strategically placed crypto-Jew.

Crypto-Jews would form Freemasonry in England in 1717. Based on the Seven biblical laws of Noah, Freemasonry allowed the crypto-Jewish “believers” of Shabbatai Tzvi to finally remove the crown from the Sultan and reign over the world in the names of the God of Shabbatai Tzvi. The “Marrano” or “Pig” would re-emerge on the world stage as princes of the world. The feelings of guilt and inadequacy gone forever.

One hundred years after the death of Shabbatai Tzvi, Freemasonry, with an inner core referred to as The Illuminati, with the aid of Jacob Frank, a militant Shabbatean convert to Catholicism and Rothschild mentor, would launch the “American” Revolution. Three years later they would bring about the French Revolution and soon thereafter the Napoleonic takeover of Europe. Napoleon, I suspect, was a descendant , like FDR and the Bushs, of Masonic crypto-Jews and puppet of the Illuminati.

By 1830, Philippe De La Noye’s descendant-- Warren Delano (FDR’s maternal grandfather) was shipping Shabbatean (Rothschild/Sassoon) Opium to China. The Sabbatian opium trade was the source of FDR’s wealth. Warren Delano was also named after the little-known Mayflower passenger Richard Warren, an ancestor of Prescott Bush. Was he a Crypto-Jew? Maybe.

www.geocities.com/cliff_shack.com

Bill said (July 29, 2007):

The most useful model of the world of politics and high finance is arguably the Mafia. In which every faction co-operates in the common endeavor, but nobody trusts anybody and is always looking for some way to get the upper hand and exploit it. If there is a single head, his role is more nearly that of moderator than dictator. This is evident from considering history (very rarely indeed does a major player like the Austrian House of Rothschild ever disappear, although fortunes rise and fall among them) and the nature of business. (Or Congress, for that matter).

You never suffer one individual or interest to function in any capacity without rivals. In this way, a coalition of players "loyal" (for the time being) to you can be mobilized against a coup attempt by any one of them. With this in mind, consider that historians have long puzzled over Roosevelt's having assigned cabinet powers ambiguously enough that intra-agency rivalries consumed a lot of time and energy. This is also the way the illicit drug trade is organized, and why. Corporate politics 101.

Given an opportunity, these rival forces stick it to each other with glee. For an example, recall the way the City forces (which largely financed the Union side) prohibited the redemption of Confederate bonds (ditto French Rothschild) after the War Between the States. It would be in this light that I'd consider the Third Reich's financial system. Some saw their profits cut into. Some made out well ; all had their bets hedged to an extent. There was enough to go around for everybody and then some. In war, there usually is.

Liberty said (July 29, 2007):

You have an excellent article today on the Truth
Seeker and one that is required to keep us all alert to the propaganda and tactics that 'they' use. It is a good reminder to us all if anyone in power can betrusted and the content of your article leads me on to Ron Paul. Now as far as I am concerned Ron Paul is what one could call one of their 'containers'. Now he is sprining into action and become an election candidate. Just so convenient. For years that man has spoken of the Federal Reserve but can you ever recall ANYTHING of ANY significance that he has said
to highlight the problem to the american people?

But here is the most pertinent point. Have you ever heard Ron Paul criticise the Fed or those in power who are corrupt? No he never does. Now think about this. For years Ron Paul has been the lone voice or should we say the one 'approved' voice that has been
permitted to speak on that subject but of course NO OTHER politician has done so. Now that the people are waking up. It is time to dust him down and push him right to the front to contain the situation and give the people a focus BUT a focus that will be in safe hands.

Ron Paul is not the man that people think he is. Just listen to what he has to say. Will he ever criticise his masters?
---

Thanks Liberty, I am not as cynical as you about Paul. Just because he doesn't beat the drum on the Fed, doesn;t mean he isn't on our side. The reality is that the bankers do not want Paul and he will not be elected either because of media coverage or election rigging.

Henry

Robert said (July 29, 2007):

I disagree with your characterization of the plot to use Smedley Butler to overthrow FDR as a sham coup d 'etat. First, because even though Butler was assuredly the last man who would lead a coup, that would never prevent those behind the plot from believing that he could be
bought or manipulated. The elite believe everyone has a price, but they have no recourse against that one-in-ten-million--a brave and honest man--but actual or character-asassination. Second, because even though FDR was connected (he could not have been elected otherwise), that does not mean that the elite are monolithic and cannot disagree among themselves. JFK was connected, but when he tried to buck the master plan, he was murdered; same with his brother. I find it curious that the coup backers were so interested in the gold standard, when the
Federal Reserve is a far more subtle and powerful tool of control than J.P. Morgan's periodic use of manipulating the price of gold to bring the U.S. government to its knees. This suggests to me a split in the illluminati.

The biggest mystery to me is that this event--surely equal to 9/11 as a fraud and myth, if it was a fraud--has had zero exposure in the history books. Given that history can be and is controlled, surely this event could have been spun into a monumental national myth about supporting the government no matter what. Butler himself, arguably the greatest American of the last 100 years, is completely unknown to the public, and would have remained buried forever but for the internet. Given the mythos created around MacArthur and Patton, surely Butler's story could have been more profitably put to use by the powers-that-be than to place him in total obscurity. If the plot was a sham--like 9/11--why isn't it spun far-and-wide, and for equal effect, as 9/11 has been? After Butler exposed the plot, couldn't J. Edgar Hoover have rounded up a few anarchists, made them confess and had them executed, and thereby paved the way for martial law and a dictatorship to "protect the Homeland?"

Nobody would have listened to Butler protesting that the backers were millionaires, not patsies, after they were dead and villified. Perhaps it's unknown because the Illuminati don't want the precedent known:they want the "popular" fascist coup card in reserve for when they
really need it--as the American economy collapses in the next few years.

----

Robert,

I think they handled this sham coup very well. If they publicized it, there would have been demands for the millionaires to be brought to trial. FDR was a puppet. Look who his children worked for and married! It is touching how many cling to the illusion of democracy, prefering a comfortable lie to the unpleasant truth. --Henry

Anonymous in S. Korea said (July 29, 2007):

I live in a culture and society much different from yours. But this is the same it seems; feminism and its destructive behavior to society; always depicting the few incidents as something that happens because of men, not to mention making themselves people that can only be right.

As S.Korea had been neighbors with N.Korea, USSR, and China, the introduction of communism followed by a false link with feminism had been inevitable.

Today, it actually has a Ministry of Women. A government body not many people here know why it exists, including myself, as it does a lousy job if you ask me.

Divorce rate is at one of the highest in the world, and fertility at one of the lowest. Unlike the US (which is where I think you are from), many women's universities didn't go co-ed, but instead decided to stay a women's only institution, and now has turned into a hideous feministic value instilling factory.

I applaud you for your ability to talk about these things on your books and website and talking to us, because so many men seem to be cowardice to ever even go against what the media or some women think. And some even, cheering feminists for being free to sex, as that's all they care about.

Tim said (July 28, 2007):

Interesting take on the 1933 coup. The thought had crossed my mind but I always reasoned that Butler was the closest to the event and he thought it was real so it must be real. Your article has me back to sitting on the fence and I hate that! I am now at the 50-50 point again after having been 90% sure it was a real coup attempt.

The choice of Butler to lead a coup is not as far fetched as you think. He did a lot of hatchet jobs in central & south America for decades, was very popular with the public and offering the ultimate power to even the most loyal person does work most of the time. If he went along with it they get their dictatorship and if he blows the whistle on them then FDR get the benefits you describe in the article. They could have been playing it both ways.

Tim said (July 28, 2007):

Interesting take on the 1933 coup. The thought had crossed my mind but I always reasoned that Butler was the closest to the event and he thought it was real so it must be real. Your article has me back to sitting on the fence and I hate that! I am now at the 50-50 point again after having been 90% sure it was a real coup attempt.

The choice of Butler to lead a coup is not as far fetched as you think. He did a lot of hatchet jobs in central & south America for decades, was very popular with the public and offering the ultimate power to even the most loyal person does work most of the time. If he went along with it they get their dictatorship and if he blows the whistle on them then FDR get the benefits you describe in the article. They could have been playing it both ways.

Sam said (July 28, 2007):

It isn't easy to decide exactly to what extent FDR, Hitler and Stalin and were controlled by the banksters.

Hitler was financed by the banksters. But we do know that his Government, under the direction of his finance minister Hjalmar Schacht, issued its own currency. This was apparently regarded as heresy by the banksters.

Stalin had told FDR's son that the banksters had poisoned FDR. Stalin also complained that the Banksters were trying to poison him.

Some people have suggested that while FDR was indeed put into power by the banksters, he turned against them. I would urge your readers to also take a look at "FDR vs the Banks", Part 1.

http://american_almanac.tripod.com/morgan1.htm

--

Thanks Sam,

The article you cite is by the LaRouche people. Their research on most subjects is good but in my opinion they are truly blind when it comes to Roosevelt.

Henry