No More Learning

You have even forgotten your Kipling. Pig Baldwin has forgotten his cousin; if his obscene and treacherous mind ever grasped the meaning of Rudyard's stories. Let me recall one passage to the sow face:
"The Americans," wrote Rudyard, "obligingly slaughtered each other in order that the Czechoslovaks might inherit Boston Common. " Cras tibi, tomorrow is your turn. Damn it all, you slaughtered the flower of England in the Boer War. Then in 1914 in the first three months, the best of you went out and got slaughtered.
. . . been seen only too clearly. And your foul papers, the filth of your newsprint has been subsidized to keep your minds off it.
A dirty bit of meat by the name of Gollancz has used your book trade to conceal it. You have almost NO means of communication.
When a Brooks Adams writes five volumes that would help you to see it, six copies reach England. You have LOST the health of the mind. God knows how the scattered handful of Englishmen still in England can still speak one with another.
I see NO remedy in your parliament. I don't mean as parliament. I mean in the personnel. It is your problem. You do not NOW even elect your own parliament. Whether WITH an election you could get anything save old dead meat, I do not know. During the last war a few men had a glimmer of instinct. On whatever formula, they called it pacifism. Was it? All of 'em I ever met were pugnacious. Was it an instinct to save the butt end of the RACE by not fighting? Is it a mistake to combat Germans
by force?
Is there a RACE left in England? Has it ANY will left to survive? You can carry slaughter to Ireland. Will that save you? I doubt it. Nothing can save you, save a purge. Nothing can save you, save an affirmation that you are English.
Whore Belisha is NOT. Isaccs is not. No Sassoon is an Englishman, racially. No Rothschild is English, no Strakosch is English, no Roosevelt is English, no Baruch, Morgenthau, Cohen, Lehman, Warburg, Kuhn, Khan, Baruch, Schiff, Sieff, or Solomon was ever yet born Anglo-Saxon.
And it is for this filth that you fight. It is for this filth that you have murdered your empire, and it is this filth that elects your politicians.
You have lost your tradition. You have not even learned what Lord Byron told you. You are, as even that foul rag the Times tells you, a little late in making a start.
In the year 1942 Anno Domini, there is only one start you can make. And that is a start toward being England. A refusal to be a province of Israel, or an outpost of Yankee-Judaea.
Quando tutti saremo forti.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- April 20, 1943
If or when one mentions the Protocols alleged to be of the Elders of Zion, one is frequently met with the reply: Oh, but they are a forgery.
Certainly they are a forgery, and that is the one proof we have of their authenticity. The Jews have worked with forged documents for the past 24 hundred years, namely ever since they have had any documents whatsoever. And no one can qualify as a historian of this half century without having examined the Protocols. Alleged, if you like, to have been translated from the Russian, from a manuscript to be consulted in the British Museum, where some such document may or may not exist.
What we know for certain is that they were published two decades ago. That Lord Sydenham wrote a preface to them. That their content has been traced to another sketch said to have appeared in the eighteen forties. The interest in them does not lie in [the] question of their having been, or NOT been concocted by a legislative assembly of Rabbis, democratically elected, or secretly chosen by the Mysterious Order of Seven Branched Antlers or the Bowling Society of Milwaukee. Their interest lies in the type of mind, or the state of mind of their author. That was their interest for the psychologist the day they first appeared. And for the historian two decades later, when the program contained in them has so crushingly gone into effect up to a point, or down to a squalor.
What is interesting, perhaps most, to the historian is their definite campaign against history altogether, their declared intention to blot out the classics, to blot out the record, and to dazzle men with talk of tomorrow. That is a variant on the pie in the bait. As far as reality is concerned, as far as you and I are concerned it makes little difference whether prosperity is in heaven, or in the year 2300, or just round a corner that will never be turned.
A religious man might think his reward might be in heaven, but even a religious man ought to know that his reward will not be on earth in a hundred years time. In fact, the pie in the sky is a more reasonable proposition: an opium with more to it than Mr. Keynes' day after tomorrow.
I am not concerned with fixing blame retrospectively so much as with judging the present: those who are against the true word, the protocolaires. Now Keynes whose fair is foul, foul is fair sentence can be taken as the quintessence of something or other, is the perfect protoclaire. It comes over me that on the one occasion I had the curious experience of seeing him, he managed to utter two falsehoods in a very short space of time. In fact never opened his mouth without doing so. First in stating that he is an orthodox economist, which he is not, second in saying that the then high cost of living was due to lack of labor, when there were millions of men out of work.
You couldn't have done much better in two sentences if you were out for a record in the falsification. Protocol No. 8, second [paragraph]:
"We shall surround our government with a whole world of economists. That is the reason why economic sciences form, etc. Around us again will be a whole constellation of bankers, industrialists, capitalists and the main thing, millionaires, because in substance everything will be settled by the question of figures. "
Is it possible to arouse any interest in verbal precision? Is it possible to persuade more than six or eight people to consider the scope of crossword puzzles and other devices for looking at words for something that is NOT their meaning? Cabala, for example, anything to make the word mean something it does NOT say. Anything to distract the auditor from the plain sense of the word, or the sentence? Even to communism that is NOT communism. To communism of the episcopal sort, which they want in England. A Bolshevism that is to leave the archbishops and curates just where they are, each with his living or benefice. A revelation against capital, allegedly against capital, that attacks property and leaves capital setting pretty.
Lenin all out for making banking a state affair. And then twenty years during which it has seemed to drop decidedly into the background, when the world revolution was very busy about something else.
It should by now be clear that some people fear NOT the outcome of the war, but the END of the war. Churchill, for example. Not defeat, not the ruin of the Empire that worries him, but the END of the war. End of the slaughter, end of the war conditions.
Robert Clive has been clear enough, ex-British ambassador in Tokyo. Tells you and the world Japan can not be beaten. But the war must go ON, according to Churchill and Roosevelt. Churchill sees the end of monopoly and privilege, or at least a shift when the war ends, no matter HOW. That is the point you should consider. In regard to the protocols, either there is and was a plot to ruin all goyim, all nations of Europe, or some people are stark raving crazy. They want war to go on to certain wreck. WHO are they?
Mere cannon fodder. The American troops in N. Africa know they are not there thru any wish of their own. The war was started for gold, to maintain the fetish value of gold. Plenty of other sidelines. Minor advantages have been COMMERCIALLY taken. Did the present regime in England WANT the troops to return after Dunkirk? Every move for
reform in England is a fascist reform, or proposition along fascist lines.
The supreme betrayal of Europe is inherent in the alliance of Anglo- Jewry with Moscow. Debts rise. That is one part of the war. It is a contest between STOPPING the war and going on with it. And only one side does any fighting. Namely the party that STARTED the war. They are for its continuance. Who are they?
BUT they are also for starting the next one. They openly proclaim that AFTER (that is IF) America finishes with Japan, she will have to fight Russia. IF Russia should break into Europe.
Only blindness and deafness can keep you unaware of these proclamations. The U. S. must protect the world7 Why? Does the world want it? The U. S. , once this war is over, must be strong enough to beat Russia.
The U. S. had a chance to maintain her prestige and unique position by staying NEUTRAL. Neutral while other powers exhausted themselves. And she DID not.
Who are the lunatics? Was there a deliberate plot? That is what should concern you. WAS there a pIot? How long had it been in existence? Does it continue, with its Lehmans, Morgenthaus, Baruchs? Proposals to send the darkies to Africa, to work for Judea, and the rest of it? And WILL you, after Japan is thru with you, take on Russia? In order to maintain the banking monopoly? With Mr. Wille Wiseman, late of the British secret service, ensconced in Kuhn, Loeb and Co. , to direct you and rule you?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- April 27, 1943
I think quite simply and definitely that the American troops in N. Africa, all of 'em ought to go back to America: IF they can get there.
America ought not to be makin' war on Europe, and America knows it. I think it is time the American U. S. citizen studied Mr. Morgenthau's treasury reports, whether or not he is out in front proclaiming the coming of Zion or not. I think it is time you opened Kipling's memoirs
"Something about myself. " I think it is time more American Masons developed a curiosity about the possible relations of their order to Jewry as such, and to at least a sect or portion or selection of ORGANIZED Jews as a possible enemy of mankind, and of the American people, the British people in particular.
I think it might be a good thing to hang Roosevelt and a few hundred yidds IF you can do it by due legal process, NOT otherwise. Law must be preserved. I know this may sound tame, but so is it. It is sometimes hard to think so. Hard to think that the 35 ex-army subalterns or whatever who wanted to bump off all the kike congressmen weren't just a bit crude and simpliste. Sometimes one feels that it would be better to get the job done somehow, ANY how, than to delay execution.
A chair has been founded in the Sorbonne to study modern Jewish history, i. e. , the role of the kike in modern history. It would be well to have similar chairs in ALL American universities, though Harvard and the College of the City of N. York might find it hard to get the necessary endowments. I don't think there is any American law that permits you to shoot Nic. Butler. It is a pity but so is it. No ex post facto laws are to be dreamt of. Not that Frankfurter or any other damn Jews care a hoot for law or for the American Constitution. But we are not here to uphold Frankfurter or the Jewish vendetta. In the midst of which YOU jolly well are. And every American boy that gets drowned owes it to Roosevelt and Baruch, and to Roosevelt's VIOLATION of the duties of office.
It is on the ground of those violations, those that occurred before Pearl Harbor, that you should impeach him. It is time that the matter was studied.
It is time that the practical means for doing the job were made subject of study. It will be difficult insofar as your press and radio are mostly in Jewisch hands. It will be difficult to coordinate effort in our so all-fired anarchic country. Instinctively anarchic BUT controlled, by an organization. An organization well worth your study. Be you Mason or Non-Mason. You will have to form cells, nuclei, and communicate. You will have to maintain some freedom of the press and get radio stations somehow. Congress should go on the air. Failing that, state senates and legislatures should go on the air. And state universities in states not wholly run by their ghettoes should start a study of history of the Jew's role in history, of the role of usury, and currency control BY extraneous
private bodies, all that should be made subject of study. You've got to start sometime.
You have got to learn a little, at least a little about the history of your allies. About Jew-ruin'd England. About the wreckage of France, wrecked under yidd control. Lousy with kikes. Blum, Zay, and the rest of 'em pushed France into war, when it was dead certain France would get beaten. Preparing ANOTHER. Oh, yes. ANOTHER ten or twenty years war between the U. S. and Slavic Russia to start just as soon as this one shows signs of relaxin'. Don't think the kike WANTS to stop wars as long as non-kikes will go on killin' and drowning each other, in order to provide dividends for loan capital. And SOME capital. A part of loan capital is, maybe you have heard this before, some part of loan capital IS really in chewish hands. Mebbe you haven't yet heard that. And some of the American dollars that went for gold, went OUT of America to buy gold, well some of that went out to KIKERY. And Heinrick ben Sloman, ben Soloman, ben Isaac, ben Morgenthau, son of his father, was the sheeny that sent it right out.
And you go on taking it, you go on being diddled, and listening to the Jerusalem synagogue radios from London and Jew York City. Gawd ellup you. Bags of money, offered thru fear or guilt, have been uniformly refused by the mobs, wrote Mr. Jefferson to John Jay from Paris, July 19th, 1789. Paris was lively. On September 6 Jefferson was blissfully dreaming an ideal republic as follows:
But with respect to future debts would it not be wise and just for the nation to declare in the Constitution that they are forming, that neither the legislature nor the nation itself can validly contract more debt than they may pay within their own age, or within the term of 34 years?
Think it over. That was T. J. writing to Madison, from Paris, 6 September 1789. It is the famous letter containing the words: "the earth belongs in usufruct to the living. " That theme he later repeated, in the form "the earth belongs to the living. " And the "within their own age" was reduced to 19 years.
First, he thought of the "own age" as the period into which the average inhabitant of a nation would survive. Then he figured that children and those under age wouldn't have any say in contracting the debt. So they ought not to bound. That is, sold into slavery for its payment. These are
fine points of the ethics. They won't appeal to Mr. Constantine Brown. They will have no effect upon those of you who are given over to the comforting (comforting if it comforts you) theory that devastation just doesn't matter and to whom.
Shakespeare and Bach are a bore. Architecture is dangerous. Sculpture is taboo. Mr. Brown wants a bright new world; and debt is after all only the prelude to slavery. One can conceive a regime in which there is NO economic liberty. I mean absolutely NO economic liberty for anyone. Not by accident, but by program. It is much easier, in fact, to conceive a slave state than a free state. A state wherein all men are slaves, and no man has any right whatsoever to life, liberty, and where even the pursuit - marvelous phrase that "pursuit" of happiness - would be illegal, or at least regarded as a grave misdemeanor.
A really severe Puritan like Eden or Morgenthau would probably tell you that the pursuit of happiness is on a level with chippy-chasing. I know you don't THINK you are ripe for a real revolution. You don't think YOU are ripe for the end of the capitalist system altogether. You would rather such revolutions occurred in the Punjab or in Bessarabia. But one thing leads to another.
And yet, Civilization was not yours to destroy.
Poet Ezra Pound broadcast at least 120 original editorial and manifestos over Radio Rome in Italy from 1941 to 1943. The full text of the broadcasts are available in Ezra Pound Speaking: Radio Speeches of World War II, Edited by Leonard W. Doob on Greenwood Press, 1978.