If you want to point fingers at those responsible for the ongoing Israel-Palestine conflict, which has recently escalated, look no further than the British Empire of the 1900s.
Jay Dyer, during the 4th Hour of the Alex Jones Show, said that the ruling elite of Britain had a plan for the Middle East, which included bringing the Jews back to Palestine in order to foment division and chaos.
This disruption would enable them to control the pieces of the geopolitical chessboard, and increase their power in the region and beyond.
Dyer says that this plan was hatched by the Milner Fabian group and funded by Lord Rothschild. The Milner Group (or Society) was a secret society of elites running the British Empire from within, but using an outer core of academics at Oxford and Cambridge, and eastern establishment elites in the United States for public facing legitimacy.
At that time it was an Ottoman region with a very small Jewish population. In 1914 Britain declared war against the Ottoman Empire, and in 1917 the British government kicked off the Zionist project, announcing its support for the establishment of a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine.
The primary authors of the declaration were Lord Walter Rothschild and Lord Milner, though Arthur Balfour’s name was used for the Balfour Declaration.
Even without the benefit of hindsight, it seems the planners of a Jewish settlement plopped right in the middle of Palestine knew it was going to create chaos.
The Brits had been kicking this idea around since the mid-1800s.
Of course, there were squirrely manipulations of the Arabs with promises made and promises broken. Britain also drafted a second Middle East plan with France and Russia in 1917 called the Sykes-Picot Agreement. Lots of … if you help us with this fight, we will give you this land, etc.
World War I ended in November 1918. Jews started flowing into Palestine the following year. Things got testy. Jews wanted support from Britain, but Britain was torn. Many British elites began dalliances with Islam. Or maybe it was a cynical realization that Islam could be used to wreak havoc across the globe.
Anyway, after a tumultuous two decades, David Ben-Gurion rose to power in Palestine in 1935 becoming chairman of the Jewish Agency, which was the de facto government of the Jewish Community in Palestine. He organized the Haganah, a Jewish self-defense force, and worked on immigration and settlement issues.
Things got more hectic as Hitler came to power and Germany and was pushing for deportation of the Jews. No other countries accepted them. Truman asked the Brits to import 100,000 Jews into Palestine, but they ignored him. There were restrictions on Jewish immigration to Palestine put in place in 1923, and to break that agreement would upset an already tense atmosphere.
Menachem Begin headed up the more militant defense force called Irgun at the same time Ben-Gurion was building Haganah. Begin didn’t agree with Ben-Gurion’s more diplomatic approach. He planned and helped execute the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem in 1946, which killed 91 people, including 28 British citizens.
This was the final straw that caused the British to withdraw from the region for good. Or maybe they knew their work was done, as the momentum to create a separate state reached escape velocity.
In 1947, Ben-Gurion headed up the committee that approved the UN partition plan, and in 1948 he declared the establishment of the state of Israel and became its first Prime Minister. He integrated Haganah and Irgun into the Israeli Defense Force, against Begin’s wishes. Surely these combined forces were vital in helping Israel win the 1948 war against the Arabs. Ben-Gurion was Prime Minister on-and-off through 1963. Begin became Prime Minister in 1977, and started to promote settlement expansion and annexation of occupied lands, which has continued through today.
Dyer references a speech by Ron Paul saying that Israel created Hamas. That opens an entirely different thread, including legitimate speculation that the Hamas bombing was a false flag.
The final point to think about is Great Britain seeing power bloc shifts in the world after WWI and into WWII and outsourcing a lot of their empire maintenance to the United States and Israel. Thus, the Anglo-American Zionist Empire.
Resources
The Secrets of the History Behind the Present Day Israel Palestine Conflict
So remember, most of the Middle East, as we know of it today, is a creation of the British Empire, whether it’s Iraq, whether it’s Pakistan, or whether it’s the nation state of Israel. All of this was really established in terms of British imperial geopolitics. And so they wanted to manage both sides of this. T.E. Lawrence, St. John Philby, all these characters, and the Milner-Fabian socialists, they again tended to favor Islam. And I’m going to talk about why they favored Islam here in a moment from Ioan Ratiu’s book on the history of Fabian socialism, because they saw Islam as a way to gradually bring an internationalist order.
I think it’s helpful in the Confusion and the madness of all what’s going on recently to step back and try to learn the big picture the madness of all of what’s going on recently to step back and try to learn the big picture, the history of the present Israel-Palestine conflict. And to know this, to understand this, you really have to go back to the time of the British Empire. And if we understand that, then we’ll have a better understanding of both sides of the issue and what each side, both Israel and Palestine, have as their legitimate disagreements and their complaints. The media and I think the world would like this, the elites would like this to be an either or situation where you immediately take a side and then get caught up in the issue of the time as Part of dialectical manipulation and I think there is precedent for that There’s a lot of reasons to believe that it could actually spark a bigger world war We could be going into World War three and and a lot of analysts a lot of people have been thinking that Like Alex said earlier, it would be conflicts like Russia and Ukraine, like China, Taiwan, and like perhaps North Korea or perhaps even in the Middle East that would contribute to this larger World War, World War III.
So how do we understand the history of this? How does this actually help us? Well, we have to go back to the British Empire and what we call in many of our lectures the Milner-Fabian circle. That’s the circles that were running the British Empire under the mandate of Cecil Rhodes, who sets up the secret society, the society of the elect, according to Dr. Carroll Quigley, that would run the inner party of the British Empire. They would have as their outer core several thousand academics from Oxford, Cambridge, and then Eastern US establishment elites that would all make up together the Anglo-Americanist establishment. And it’s true that in the background, a big player in this was Lord Rothschild himself. He was the one that was really sort of setting the policy for what Milner would do and what Cecil Rhodes would do when they set up this inner structure of the British Empire. And they had an idea for the Middle East that was not actually completely Zionist. A lot of people think that because Lord Balfour was really working as Lord Rothschild’s representative to set up the Balfour Declaration to help create the nation-state of Israel, that this was completely one-sided.
But actually, if you look at what Quigley says about this, this was a British imperial strategy of partitioning to control the region and to have kind of a managed powder keg, so to speak, at least originally. Originally the British thought we will have this as an outpost of the Anglo-American establishment and its empire. Imperial geopolitics demands that you divide and conquer in all of these regions. You go back to Caesar, you go back to the ancient empires. This was a strategy of how you ruled all of the different dominions, is that you would keep managed conflicts and managed splits, partitions in those regions. That way, no one could ever align against the ruling elite. And this has worked very well for millennia. Humans are very easily ruled in this way.
And because they don’t consider even the possibility of higher level strategists and elites ruling them in this way, they fall prey to being trapped in a very dialectical either or tribalist type of view. And unfortunately, in the Middle East, the tribalism is in the extreme. In fact, the British Empire had many famous Arabists who themselves became enamored with Islam. And so it is wrong to think that the totality of the British power structure was completely aligned with or was totally pro-Zionist. In fact, there was a giant portion of the British elite, even to this day still, who are very pro-Arab and have a fascination with Islam and Arabic culture. In fact, King Charles himself was at one point inducted into a Sufi mystical order and has had a long-time fascination with Islam to the degree that many think he might be even a covert Muslim convert. Now, to be fair, in terms of King Charles, he’s also done similar things with all the religions. So he seems to be a kind of a perennialist more so than a Muslim.
But Sufism actually fits very well with perennialism. So if we go back to what Dr. Carroll quickly says, writing from the archives of the Council of Formulation and the elite in their own history of the 20th century, he gives us a lot of big bird’s-eye view, God’s-eye view perspective here where he says that the origins of the mandate system of the British Empire were largely the results of the Milner Group, the Milner Society. What have I been talking about this whole time? He says that Palestine, this mandate applied to them as well as all the other mandates. Palestine, however, had a particular position among the mandates because the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which states that Britain would regard with favor the establishment of a national home for the Jews in Palestine.
This declaration, which is known as Balfour, should rather be called the Milner Declaration, as it was Lord Milner and Lord Rothschild that were the real architects of this policy. This was not made public, however, until 1937. And then he goes on to say that this draft was drawn up and the support for the British Empire here for this partition, they thought would be of a tremendous advantage in the Middle East. And so initially, this seemed to work. However, there was opposition as the Labour Party that came into power soon after that, then would not allow any Jews to, or very few Jews to actually go to Palestine.
And so this notion of an outpost was not working very well because obviously this fostered a lot of contention with putting Jews into the region when there was existing Arab populations. And so the British elite were kind of split amongst themselves as to whether to favor the Arabs or whether to favor the Jews in this region. At that time, the Jewish local government or control structure was known as the Jewish Agency, and they were getting more and more tired of the British rule. And so eventually what happens is they decide that they would like to be independent of British rule. And so there’s an interesting article in the history of this that I wanted to reference. This is in the public academic text from the conversation, which is a public academic side, it’s not controversial. It’s just talking about the history of Britain and their relationship to the founding of Israel. And it notes that before they were Israel, the Jewish community of Palestine known as the Yishuv had been Britain’s closest junior partner.
A dispute over British restrictions on Jewish immigration into Palestine began in 1939, and that was the result of the Labour Party’s decision to limit that immigration. And the reason for that, I think, is that the Labour Party was always very close to the Fabian Socialist Movement, and the Fabian Socialists were always opposed to any forms of nationalism, and they would have been thus against Jewish nationalism or against any people group having a nationality because they were international socialist ultimately in their orientation, even though they had a progressive approach to the implementation of Marxism, communism, socialism. So then what happens is with the rise of Hitler, which was actually fostered and funded by the same elite power structure in the West that is funding and aiding the communists, and I’m going to read from Quigley’s famous text, Tragedy and Hope. He has a great section on 1059 where he says that, by the summer of 1953, almost irresistible forces were building up against Mosaddegh. This is in regard to Iran and the overthrow of Mohammad Mosaddegh by the CIA.
The lack of Soviet interference gave the West full freedom of action. The British and the Anglo-Iranian oil company, which would later become BP, the World Petroleum Cartel, and the American government and the older Iranian elite led by the Shah combined to crush Mosaddegh. The chief effort for this came from the American Intelligence Agency, the CIA, under the personal direction of its director, Alan Dulles, the brother of Secretary of State. Dulles was the former director of Schroeder Bank in New York. He was the old associate of Frank Tiark’s, partner of the Schroeder Bank in New York. He was the old associate of Frank Tiarck’s, partner of the Schroeder Bank in London of 1902, the director of the Bank of England from 1912 to 1945, as well as Lazar Brothers Bank and the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. It will be recalled that Schroeder Bank in Cologne is who helped to arrange Hitler’s accession to power as chancellor in 1933. Not only that, in Quigley’s two chapters on Britain’s dual appeasement strategy, the British were secretly at a pact with Hitler, telling him that they would support him if he invaded Poland, and they were giving him tremendous amounts of money. I think it was to the tune of a billion dollars at the time. And so there’s a dual policy where publicly the British were saying that we oppose Hitler, he’s a monster. Secretly they were allowing him, goading him into, telling him that we’re gonna support him if he goes into Poland and if he engages in this war.
So that’s relevant for today’s discussion because as Hitler made his moves, and Hitler did have an anti-Jewish policy, he did say, in fact, there are even discussions of this in the writings of Himmler as well, that Judaism has to be gotten rid of because the God of the Old Testament, according to Himmler, for example, he says, is a monster. And so there’s a Gnostic, a sort of Marcionite philosophy in Himmler’s theology. And so that was a motivating factor in this. And so Hitler did want to stamp out this ideology and this people group. And so this worked, though, however, for the formation of the, to help form the modern nation state of Israel, right? So Balfour Declaration is earlier on. And then by the 1930s, when we have the beginnings of the rise of Hitler, this is pushing then Jewish refugees to want to go to Palestine. And so you see that people are forced into these situations, it’s not their fault. Ultimately, they’re tools for the power elite on the grand chessboard. And so it’s not an either or of one group shares all the blame versus the other group.
Jews did want to flee from the persecution of Hitler. And so there was an agreement made, for example, in 1933 between the Zionist Federation of Germany and the, it’s called the Havara Agreement, and the Nazis to allow Jews to leave Germany to go to Palestine. And so you see that it’s actually, this would have worked in the sense of if Jews have been allowed to go there. But when the Jews go there, they’re then put into a powder keg situation where Arabs don’t want them there, and originally the British Empire supported the Arabs because they were the existing people group there against the newly arrived Jewish refugees. So you can see how this is just a nightmare situation on both sides. And then it gets even crazier because as we mentioned in the conversation, academic essay, conversation is a website that has academic essays, it notes that after the Balfour Declaration and after this powder keg and the anger of Jews at the British Empire for not letting Jews come while they were also secretly supporting Hitler, you see. You see how this is causing the anger and the British geopolitical strategies, which is not totally wedded to either Zionism or Arabs, it’s trying to play both sides.
Key point here, because maybe the American empire tries to do the same thing. Playing both sides results in all of these destructive policies and these tragedies. So this partition, which was intended to be a managed dialectic, is becoming a problem because now Jews are mad that the British Empire is not allowing the refugees to come. And there could have been various reasons why they wanted that.
Maybe they wanted more outrage. Maybe they wanted to outrage, maybe they wanted to use Jews as a tool to get international outrage to further the Second World War, because we know the British elite and a lot of these money makers, power players, corporations, they want to benefit from a Second World War, and ultimately they want to create a world government, you see. they want to create a world government, you see. So then, some of the forces within Israel decide that they’ve had enough of British rule. And so they decide that they want to start working against and fighting against British rule.
And so you get David Ben-Gurion and other figures within the Jewish militia at that time known as the Haganah or the defense, who were auxiliaries to the British police and army. Its intelligence service, called the Sherut Hayediot, or the Shea, supported Britain in the war effort and cooperated in the suppression of anti-British Zionist terrorism, led by other future prime ministers, Menachem Begum and Yitzhak Shamir. Ben-Gurion then learned from a source in the cabinet that Britain would prevent Jews from entering Palestine. So you see how that’s the thing that kicks this off. He then authorized secret cooperation between Haganah and organized crime groups known as the Irgun and the Stern Gang. So this would kick off a bunch of attacks, militia assassinations, bombing. The Jews assassinated, I think, a person from the UN and one of the British lords. And then you got the King David Hotel bombing. And that led to the death of 90 people, including people from GCHQ, which is the British version of signals intelligence for the NSA. And then, oddly enough, deceptive intelligence was disseminated by none other than Kim Philby, the Soviet traitor to Britain, later unmasked to be a Soviet mole, who sent Palestine’s top security and police officers to Beirut.
Britain’s poor security at its headquarters was thus compounded by the absence of those meant to interpret the warnings intelligence. Terrorism thus destroyed part of Britain’s top secret intelligence service, and then you began to have the aligning of the establishment of the 1948, soon after that, or soon after these events, or the 1948 establishment of the nation of Israel But that’s relevant as well because the in regard to Islam because remember that Britain typically had in their elite structure an equal support for both The Arabs and the Jews because they wanted to manage both sides as part of imperial geopolitics. In fact, Twigley goes on to say that, and this is from a tragedy in hope, I’m just giving you from Anglo-American establishment.
He notes about this time period that some amongst the Milner group elites were pro-Arab, they were neither pro-Arab nor pro-Zionist. Although many of them were supporting both the former and the latter, the group was never anti-Semitic and not a shred of evidence in this direction was ever found. In fact, they were sympathetic to Jews and to their legitimate aspirations in terms of their faith, to overcome their faith. But this feeling, it must be confessed, was general. It was not personal and it had to do with what he says is purely academic or imperial geo-strategy here. The feelings about anti-Semitism were actually remote and academic. On the other hand, most of the British upper class supported the Arabs. Many members of the elite had been in Arab countries, were Arab experts, Arabists, and many of them had in fact converted to Islam.
Think of the character TH Lawrence, or the character of, I mean, I just mentioned Kim Philby. Kim Philby’s dad, St. John Philby, converted to Islam because he was a British intelligence operative in the Middle East, and he helped to establish Saudi Arabia. So remember, most of the Middle East, as we know of it today, is a creation of the British Empire, whether it’s Iraq, whether it’s Pakistan, or whether it’s the nation-state of Israel. All of this was really established in terms of British imperial geopolitics. And so they wanted to manage both sides of this. T.E. Lawrence, St. John Fildy, all these characters, and the Milner-Fabian socialists. They, again, tended to favor Islam, and I’m going to talk about why they favored Islam here in a moment from Yoan Ratti’s book on the history of Fabian socialism, because they saw Islam as a way to gradually bring into Europe and into the entire West an internationalist order. Don’t go anywhere this is the Alex Jones Show covering the history of the Israel-Palestine conflict.
Welcome back to the Alex Jones Show. Your guest host, Jay Dyer, Jaysanalysis.com. We’re going into the very complex, very difficult, no easy answers history of the Arab-Palestine, or the Jewish-Palestine conflict. And we were talking about the establishing of the modern nation state of Israel in 1948. Interestingly not too long after that, one of the Nazi collaborator figures known as the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, a position completely invented by the British Empire, and in fact the Grand Mufti himself was a British intelligence operative. Then claimed, remember he was a Nazi collaborator, British intelligence operative, then claimed, remember he was a Nazi collaborator, British intelligence operative, then he proclaimed that there would be an Arab government of all Palestine, again further provoking the flames here. And again, that just shows that the motivations were on the part of the British Empire, pure imperial geopolitics had nothing to do with necessarily favoring some people group over another people group. British efforts to invoke the 1936 alliance with Egypt and to justify British military action against Israel were blocked by Egypt’s refusal to allow public display of Egypt’s helplessness.
Five British planes were attacked and shot down in 1949 by Israel, and this led to Britain’s de facto recognition of Israel as a nation-state. And part of the reason that Britain wanted to do that was to try to maintain imperial power versus other rivals and versus other groups. Britain felt like if they could maintain Muslim support, if they could control areas like Mecca as part of their old geopolitical strategy, they could sway the Islamic world into favor with the British Empire, or they could try to manage it or control it. And so as they failed in these endeavors, you can see how their manipulation strategy was more and more transparent to history as history progresses. In fact, it gets even more hairy and confusing when you look at the fact that after World War II, some of the most famous of the SS individuals, these are articles that are still public on Koretz.
The strange case of the Nazi who became the Israeli hitman, Otto Skorzeny was one of Mossad’s most valuable assets, but was in fact a former lieutenant colonel in the Waffen SS and was one of Hitler’s favorites. And that’s because it’s not just Otto Skorzeny, but it’s also the figure of Reinhard Galen, who actually also helped out in Israel’s Six-Day War. It was Galen who was, now that he worked with the CIA, aiding and contributing intelligence work and giving tips off to the Mossad during that conflict, as well as Skorzeny, because Galen, as the former general to Hitler, had a vast intelligence network throughout all of Europe. And when the Nazis lost the war, the CIA came to Galen and said, if you hand over your intelligence network to us, you can maintain your freedom. In fact, we’ll put you as the head of the new BND, German intelligence. So as the head of the BND, he was now aiding and working with the Mossad. So you understand that that helps explain why you can have things like the former SS guy in Canada being cheered on by the West, because the West has for a long time worked with these people, as have groups in Israel.
And that’s why it’s, if you know the inner deeper history in geopolitics, it’s not surprising that Hamas was a creation of the West. In fact, Ron Paul, the clip of Ron Paul saying this is still going around on Twitter. I played it the other day, right? And he was just years ago talking about how we helped, much like the British Empire caused a lot of this at the time, we helped foster this conflict by sending aid and money to both sides of the conflict. And some of that’s done secretly and covertly. In fact, Hamas was created out of the Muslim Brotherhood, which was an old British intelligence controlled Islamic network. In fact, British intelligence and their agents helped to set up the Muslim Brotherhood famously. And they were, out of that is partly where you get Hamas. There’s also the CIA, British intelligence, and Mossad as well helped to work with the establishment of Hamas. And so that might explain partly why some of this intelligence was ignored when Israel was warned by Egypt and other places that there might be a coming attack. I mean, that’s speculation, but we know that a lot of this is not like, you know, Israeli intelligence didn’t know what was going on or what the opposition was up to.
So it’s really odd because, you know, when somebody comes out and tries to say something with sanity, in fact, Gal Gadot, who used to be in the IDF, she was getting attacked by both sides because she said something about how, you know how she wished that there could be peace and that Jews have a right to exist and that also that the neighbors next door should also be allowed to exist. It’s odd because, I mean, she was in the IDF, surely she would have some knowledge of this situation, right? Wouldn’t she know about it, being a former IDF soldier? I mean, I think that people in those situations kind of see it up close and they understand that it’s complex, it’s not an easy either or, but the media, the elites, they always want everybody to really get wrapped up in some either or, and people don’t know the history and they don’t know either side of this and the contentions that both sides have.
And so I think it’s important to know this and to understand that the old strategy was to play both sides. And I think, I mean, I don’t have exact proof of this, but when I hear about, you know, the U.S. money, especially the Democratic Party that tends to favor working with Iran and the money that’s sent to them, some of that could, I mean, this is speculation, but I think it goes back to the overthrow of the Shah, and, excuse me, the overthrow of Mosaddegh, the installation of the Shah, and then also the CIA helping to make backdoor deals with the Ayatollah, which Alex just talked about, and that had to do with Iran-Contra, it had to do with actually still continuing to arm Iran, even under the Ayatollahs, and again, backdoor deals under the Reagan era.
But it also relates to something that few know about, which is Iran’s involvement in the international drug trade. That’s a big part of this. It’s not just oil, it’s also drugs and opium. And according to Dr. John Coleman, former British intelligence writer, the Ayatollahs covertly gave the okay to allow a lot of opium and drugs to be sold and shipped via Iran. And so, the to allow a lot of opium and drugs to be sold and shipped via Iran. And so there’s a lot going on that people don’t know about and thus there could be backdoor deals that are made with Iran on the part of the democratic establishment. Neocons, of course, don’t typically want to do that. They want to bomb Iran, which again could spark World War III. But again, the point is that all of this is complex. There’s no easy answers. There’s no simple solutions to this because it goes back to old imperial geopolitics. And so now that we’re under the American Empire and the breakdown of the American Empire and the meaningless liberalism that we’ve adopted, right? I mean, it really, none of this makes any sense now that the, I mean, what does the American Empire stand for? If these conflicts continue and if our borders open and the country begins more and more to collapse and have economic catastrophes, which is very likely. What are we actually fighting for?
Are we just fighting to extend gay rights in other countries so that everybody can have Coke and Pepsi and Subway and abortion? Is that what we’re going in all the other countries for? And people are figuring out that all of the foreign aid and all these foreign interventions is ruining our own country as our country itself collapses. And so we’re told all day long that it’s bad to have borders, it’s bad to have guns, but we got to defend every other country’s borders and send every other country billions of dollars of weapons and guns. And all the citizens now need to be armed. But Americans can’t be armed because that’s racist. I mean, everybody has figured this out, that it’s completely hypocritical and it makes no sense. It does make sense, however, if the goal is to actually weaken and destroy America because the long-term goal is to bring all of the countries into a single global order out of all of this chaos, and that’s precisely what the global elite have said is their goal. Whether this is going to be World War III, I don’t know, but it certainly could turn into that.
And some of the theorists, as we said, believe that out of World War III, you would get a lot of death, destruction, and chaos, but you would get the synthesis of Russia, China, the Muslim world versus the West, out of this synthesis, you would get the future technocratic world order, the Davos plan, the global, you know, one world order, one world religion plan could come out of this synthesis of East versus West. But that’s the key thing here. And that’s what, you know, one of the figures that plays into this who was involved in some of these Israeli operations at that time, Bernard Lewis, is the father of neoconservatism. And Bernard Lewis, if I recall, taught Samuel P. Huntington, who wrote Clash of Civilizations, and Huntington talks about basically this idea that the West would clash against the Islamic world. And there’s a lot of different theories and scenarios as to how that might happen and what the result exactly might be, but their overall result would be a new kind of order out of that, a new world order out of dialectical manipulation and synthesis. It sounds like everything that you’ve heard me talking about. Now for the idea that, oh, well, this is only a Jewish power bloc issue, remember that the Milner-Fabian circles have always supported and aided and promoted Muslim causes.
Why would they intentionally constantly promote Muslim and Islamic causes in this regard? Well, according to causes in this regard? Well, according to Yohan Ratu in his whole chapter about the Islamicization of Britain, you can see in a microcosm what their plan was. And the idea was that through early on in the early 1900s, the importation of Sufi Islam, because it’s ecumenist and because it’s kind of open to a lot of different mystical practices and whatnot, Sufi Islam is a way to soften up a society for the later importation of more fundamentalist versions or serious versions of Islam. And so the Fabians and the Fabian social circles of And so the Fabians and the Fabian social circles of the Milner group, that was their overriding political ideology and strategy.
They were fine with bringing in these figures and these characters and the promotion of the Islamic revival at Oxford and Cambridge in the 19-teens, 20s, 30s, and 40s. And this continued all the way up until today, which is precisely why England is London-istan. When you go to London, it is Muslim. I’ve been, I went a few years ago and did a lecture there, and it’s Islamic. Now, is this just all accident? No, no, it’s not accident, because it’s actually the Fabian strategy, as they themselves said, they would islamicize England first and then the rest of Europe. That was their plan. They wrote about it. In fact, the original Fabians were either atheists or Christian socialists, and thus they had a very soft spot for Islam. And they thought that because of Islam’s universal brotherhood teaching, that it could be a tool for global domination.
It might even be a potential future world government from their vantage point. H.G. Wells praised Islam in his book, A Short History of the World. George Bernard Shaw said that Muhammad was the greatest Protestant religious force in the world, like a George Fox or a John Wesley. Other leading Fabians were apologists for Islam, like Witch Annie Besant and like Bertrand Russell. This is known as the Fabian window, which carried, well, the Fabian window, which is that famous window, glass window, carried the motto, remolding the world according to the heart’s desire. The Fabian socialist model to remold the world is taken from a Muslim poem by Omar Khayyam.
Khayyam was invoked amongst the progressive liberal faction of the British elites. And thus, what’s significant about him is that he was believed to be a follower of a kind of Sufism, and that Sufism would, for many British elites, serve as the instrument for softening up non-Muslim populations to the later penetration of real Islam. Because it was mystical, it could appear to work together with other religions in a society, and it also overlapped with socialism, Gurdjieff’s New Age philosophy, Freemasonry, and Theosophy. So Sufism, which then got more and more into vogue, and keep in mind Prince Charles was initiated into a Sufi order. They more and more brought in entities, groups, and academics to teach and push Islam throughout England. And I’ll tell you some of these figures. Yeah, the figure at Cambridge, you had the promotion of a guy named Muhammad Iqbal, a lawyer who combined the teachings of Sufi poet Rumi with Islamic revivalism in the 1930s. Iqbal pioneered the idea of a Muslim state in the 1930s and collaborated with the Fabian socialist leaders, including people like Muhammad al-Jannah in the creation of Pakistan.
Sufism and Islam were also promoted by various disciples of these characters at the University of London. Annie Besant was busy preaching theosophy and various brands of reformed Islam as they were being planted throughout England. In 1913, another lawyer from India named Kamal Uddin was established in the Woking Muslim Mission. Many British, including Lord Headley, wrote a Western Awakening to Islam book in 1914, which was very popular. In 1916, the London Sufi Order of the West was founded by Indian Hazrat Inyat Khan, who taught that the Prophet Muhammad brought the message of democracy to the world. H.G. Wells could not have said it better, according to Raju. Following the footsteps of Colin, Idris Shah was the chief architect of Sufi deception in Britain and elsewhere. He started Octagon Press in 1960, and a foundation called the Institute for Cultural Research, the ICR.
This allowed for the publication and progress of Sufism throughout England, as well as eventually Prince Charles’s overt support for Islam, which began in the 1980s. And this then led to the Labour Party and their policy of open borders to bring in more and more Muslims. Again, why? Because labor and their Fabian socialist origins have always favored the destruction of the nation-state to bring in the technocratic order. And so you can see that obviously they’re not going to be pro-Israel or side with Israel. That’s why you find a tendency amongst the left and communist socialists to support Palestine.
That does not mean that everybody in Palestine is communist socialist, so don’t misunderstand me, I’m not saying that. Many people in Palestine are Orthodox Christians, for example. So Sufi Neoplatonism is a crucial element of the perennialism and the ecumenism that is able to then change an existing culture, not just demographically, but also ideologically and religiously. So this is why Sufism is a good tool for that. And that’s exactly what happened in the UK. It began with those kind of new agey mystical groups and then now it’s completely overrun in London and in England throughout the UK with Muslims of all variety.
And that, again, I think plays into this shock strategy of tension model, which is to do this on purpose. An angrier world, why? Well, that’s just what Brzezinski talked about a long time ago when the strategy of the CIA was to arm and fund the Taliban, the Mujahideen, and so forth in Operation Cyclone, and even earlier than that. So you can see that it’s a way to exploit the clash of civilizations model. And ultimately, the idea here is to destroy Christianity and the West. And perhaps some of the other entities will be destroyed in the process, right? Maybe Islam versus the West could result in some sort of mass destruction, who knows. But the reality is that the power elite are not actually against either of these groups in the long run. People are used as chess pieces on the chessboard, if that makes sense. And so if we grasp this, we begin to understand that it’s a bigger picture than just choosing a side right away.
And so I wanted to point out quickly says also that the Brit some of the British, for example, in the support of Israel thought that you could have a Western outpost, not just for the point of geo strategy, and you know, oil and stuff like that later on, but some thought that maybe they could introduce democracy to the Middle East, and that this would then heal the tribalism and the ancient warfare in the Middle East that’s been there for millennia. But this didn’t work out because it’s just this bizarre, silly notion. I don’t think that at the top the real power elite cared about this, but some of the more academic intelligentsia people in the US and in the UK probably thought that, oh, if we just export democracy to all these places, then they’ll see that science and technology and having running water and having, you know, refrigerators and iPads or whatever.
They’ll prefer that to the sort of tribal warfare and the regressive third world status that some of these places have remained in. But that doesn’t work, typically, right? Not every country wants the exportation of democracy. And ultimately, it’s not about the exportation of democracy. I think everybody who’s somewhat sophisticated knows this. It’s about control, right? Democracy is not actually a thing that’s exported to help people. That is a front, it’s a cloak for exporting and expanding the Atlanticist empire. And that’s what even Brzezinski said. Brzezinski says, Kissinger say, America is the successor to the British empire. It’s just another type of imperial control strategy. The poverty, chaos, disunity of the Arab world were consequence of the organizational and moral factors rather than of the objective obstacles.
Especially in the case of Israel. This is Dr. Carol Quigley. It was less than 8,000 square miles with no significant resources and hampered by endless obstacles. The Zionist movement was constructed, has constructed the strongest, most stable, progressive, and democratic hopeful state in the Near East. Quigley’s writing this in the 1960s about where things were at that time. This was possible because of the morale of the Israelis, which was based on outlooks antithetical to the outlooks of the Arabs. The Israelis were full of self-sacrifice and discipline, social solidarity, and readiness to work and cooperate with open hopes for their future. This ideology was largely Western, with a devotion to the notions of science, democracy, individuality, technology, and so forth.
And these were anathema to the Arabs of that time, whose hysterical views and their hatred were not really aimed at the loss of Palestine, but the presence of the Israelis, whose qualities were a reputation of the generations of Arab self-deception and pretenses. So Quigley clearly thinks that the nation-state of Israel represented Western democracy, and that the older Arab models were a regressive approach. This precarious balance that the British tried to keep in Palestine between the promises to the Zionists and to their efforts to placate the Arabs was destroyed by Hitler’s determination to annihilate Jews in Europe and the conditions of World War II, which made it seem that he would be successful. So you see how complex this is. in Europe and the conditions of World War II, which made it seem that he would be successful.
So you see how complex this is. And remember, the British elite are also at the same time, according to Quigley, supporting Hitler. So they’re always trying to play both sides. And that’s why this ultimately results in all kinds of chaos and destruction. The Jews, their supporters and allies, try to smuggle in Jews that could be saved from Europe. Since there was nowhere else that they could go, many were smuggled into Palestine. British efforts to prevent this in fulfillment of their obligations to the Arabs under the League of Nations mandate led to the guerrilla warfare tactics between Jews and British. That’s the Ben-Gurion-Iraq war battles that we were talking about a minute ago. The Arabs were attacking the former intermittently, and this problem reached the acute form Syrian-Iraq war battles that we were talking about a minute ago.
The Arabs were attacking the former intermittently, and this problem reached the acute form with the conquest of Germany, opening the doors for the survival of Jews to escape from the horrors of Nazism. In 1945, President Truman asked the British permission to admit 100,000 European Jews into Palestine, but these requests were ignored by the labor government, you see. Ignoring such permission, large-scale efforts were made to smuggle the Jews into Palestine. That then led to more Arab anger at Jews coming into Palestine. And so all of this had to do with, again, the UK mandate and then the uprising of the Jews against the British, their Haganah, which then eventually becomes the army of Israel as we know it today, I think. So you see how difficult this is. There’s no simple solutions to a situation where people have been on both sides there for a while. And so it’s not no Jew that lives there today, it’s not their fault that they’re there, right? And the Arabs that were there, that were there before the Jews were put there, it’s not the Jews’ fault that they were put there. They were allowed to go there via the Balfour Declaration and then through machinations in Europe that forced them to go there. And also there was laws that were in place that didn’t allow them to go there when they wanted to go there. You see how complicated this gets. And also the British elites were continuing to support the Arab side as well. Through the higher level elites of the Fabian socialist circles, which supported and still support today both sides of it.
In our government, in our power structure, as we see with the money given to Iran. So you see how this continued, the geo-strategy of the Imperium continues on today. So it’s no easy issue. If you want to support me, you can go to my website, jaysanalysis.com, and you can buy my books there as well. And you can subscribe to me on Rockfin, great free speech platform. Also support Alex by going to the Inforwar store and getting those products and keeping this show on the air.
Futurists, philosophers, and tech titans dissatisfied with temporal bodies and finite knowledge want to merge…
What is COINTELPRO? FBI operatives develop plans, facilitate logistics, fund operations, and provoke dupes into…
In his book, Final Judgment: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy, Michael Collins…
The Talmud and interpretation of the voluminous works of the Jewish rabbis promote Jewish Supremacy,…
Twitter shit poster, Douglas Mackey aka Ricky Vaughn sentenced to 7 months in prison in…
Evangelical Christians perpetuate a faulty theological view called dispensationalism, which compels them to demand US…