In which we learn the unsuspected
and very important difference between "The Crown Empire" and
"The British Empire" -- but not the name of the
current ruling Lord Mayor of The City...which is a well kept secret.
Jewish Banishment And The 'City' Of
February 26, 2011
Anyone thinking very logically and simply would simply ask one question:
WHY HAVE JEWS BEEN BANISHED FROM SOME MANY DIFFERENT COUNTRIES AND CULTURES
OVER CENTURIES? BY PEOPLES WHO HAVE NEVER HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONSPIRE
AGAINST THEM BECAUSE OF VAST DISTANCES BETWEEN THE COUNTRIES WHO HAVE BANISHED
THEM. YET ALL OF THESE PEOPLES HAVE, AT DIFFERENT TIMES THROUGHOUT HISTORY,
FELT IT NECESSARY TO DO JUST THAT. FOR NO REASON? ALL OF THESE CULTURES
HAVE JUST HAD SOME RACIAL HATRED OF JEWS? THERE'S NO LOGIC IN IT. THE ONLY
COMMON DENOMINATOR WHICH PERMEATES THROUGHOUT THESE BANISHMENTS IS THAT
OF MONEY AND USURY.
Henk Ruyssenaars' article on July 10th 2006 drew attention to the
book "Descent into Slavery" by Des Griffin in which the real
meaning of the term "City of London" is explained. The following
is an excerpt from that article.
"To the majority of people the words "Crown" and
"City" in reference to London refer to the queen or the capital
This is not the truth. The "City" is in fact a privately owned
Corporation - or Sovereign State - occupying an irregular rectangle of
677 acres and located right in the heart of the 610 square mile 'Greater
London' area. The population of 'The City' is listed at just over four
thousand, whereas the population of 'Greater London' (32 boroughs) is approximately
seven and a half million.
"The Crown" is a committee of twelve to fourteen men who rule
the independent sovereign state known as London or 'The City.' 'The City'
is not part of England. It is not subject to the Sovereign. It is not under
the rule of the British parliament. Like the Vatican in Rome, it is a separate,
"The City", which is often called "the wealthiest
square mile on earth," is ruled over by a Lord Mayor. Here are grouped
together Britain's great financial and commercial institutions: Wealthy
banks, dominated by the privately-owned (Rothschild controlled) Bank of
England, Lloyd's of London, the London Stock Exchange, and the offices
of most of the leading international trading concerns. Here, also, is located
Fleet Street, the heart and core of the newspaper and publishing worlds.
The Lord Mayor, who is elected for a one year stint, is the monarch in
the City. As Aubrey Menen says in "London", Time-Life, 1976,
"The relation of this monarch of the City to the monarch of the realm
[Queen] is curious and tells much." It certainly is and certainly
When the Queen of England goes to visit the City she is met by the
Lord Mayor at Temple Bar, the symbolic gate of the City. She bows and asks
for permission to enter his private, sovereign State. During such State
visits "the Lord Mayor in his robes and chain, and his entourage in
medieval costume, outshines the royal party, which can dress up no further
than service uniforms."
The Lord Mayor leads the queen into his city.
The symbolism is clear. The Lord Mayor is the monarch. The Queen
is his subject.
The small clique who rule the City dictate to the British Parliament. It
tells them what to do, and when. In theory Britain is ruled by a Prime
Minister and a Cabinet of close advisers. These 'fronts' go to great lengths
to create the impression that they are running the show but, in reality,
they are mere puppets whose strings are pulled by the shadowy characters
who dominate behind the scenes. As the former British Prime Minister of
England during the late 1800s Benjamin D'Israeli wrote:
"So you seeÝ the world is governed by very different personages
from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes" (Coningsby,
The Century Co., N.Y., 1907, p.
Rothschild gold bought
supplies for the Duke of Wellington before
Waterloo, financed Disraeli's purchase of the Suez Canal
and bankrolled 19th century Imperialism
This fact is further demonstrated by another passage from Menen's book:
"The Prime Minister, a busy politician, is not expected to understand
the mysteries of high finance, while the Chancellor of the Exchequer is
only expected to understand them when he introduces the budget. Both are
advised by the permanenet officials of the Treasury, and these listen to
the City. If they suspect that some policy of the government will back-fire,
it is of no use their calling up British ambassadors to ask if it is so;
they can find out more quickly from the City. As one ambassador said: "Diplomats
are nowadays no more than office boys, and slow ones at that. The City
will know. They will tell the Treasury and the Treasury will tell the Prime
Minister." Woe betide him if he does not listen. The most striking
instance of this happened in recent history. In 1956 the then Prime Minister,
Sir Anthony EdenÝ launched a war to regain the Suez Canal. It had
scarcely begun when the City let it be known that in a few days he would
have no more money to fight it; the Pound would collapse. He stopped the
war and was turned out of office by his party. When the Prime Minister
rises to address the Lord Mayor's banquet, he hopes that the City will
put more behind him than the gold plate lavishly displayed on the sideboards."
The British government is the bond slave of the "invisible
and inaudible" force centred in the City. The City calls the tune.
The "visible and audible leaders" are mere puppets who dance
to that tune on command. They have no power. They have no authority. In
spite of the outward show they are mere pawns in the game being played
by the financial elite.
It is important to recognise the fact that two separate empires
were operating under the guise of the British Empire. One was the Crown
Empire and the other the British Empire.
The colonial possessions that were white were under the sovereign - i.e.
under the authority of the British government. Such nations as the Union
of South Africa, Australia, New Zealand and Canada were governed under
British law. These only represented thirteen percent of the people who
made up the inhabitants of the Britsh Empire.
All the other parts of the British Empire - nations like India,
Egypt, Bermuda, Malta, Cyprus and colonies in Central Africa, Singapore,
Hong Kong and Gibraltar were all Crown Colonies. These were not under British
rule. The British parliament had no authority over them.
As the Crown owned the committee known as the British government there
was no problem getting the British taxpayer to pay for naval and military
forces to maintain the Crown's supremacy in these areas.
The City reaped fantastic profits from its operations conducted
under the protection of the British armed forces. This wasn't British commerce
and British wealth. The international bankers, prosperous merchants and
those members of the aristocracy who were part of the "City"
machine accumulated vast fortunes .
About seventy years ago Vincent Cartwright Vickers stated that :
Ý."financiers in reality took upon themselves, perhaps
not the responsibility, but certainly the power of controlling the markets
of the world and therefore the numerous relationships between one nation
and another, involving international friendship and mistrustsÝ Loans
to foreign countries are organised and arranged by the City of London with
no thought whatsoever of the nation's welfare but solely in order to increase
indebtedness upon which the City thrives and grows richÝ"
In "Empire of the City" E. C. Knuth said:
" This national and mainly international dictatorship of money
which plays off one country against another and which, through ownership
of a large portion of the press converts the advertisement of its own private
opinion into a semblance of general public opinion, cannot for much longer
be permitted to render Democratic Government a mere nickname. Today we
see through a glass darkly: for there is so much and it would not be in
the public interest to divulge."Ý
The battle for power and riches is an ancient one, but any attempt
to make sense of the present world situation where the bulk of humanity
is being herded like sheep into a corral without some knowledge of history
is a difficult if not impossible task.
At present names have been replaced by groups, capitalists, republicans,
democrats, terrorists, corporations, NATO, UNO, NAFTA, EMI, ECB, ASEAN.
They are names that are spewed out like confetti in an endless list of
In spite of modern technology the figures in the background remain
blurred. Mention the word "Jew" or "Conspiracy" and
everyone with few exceptions will turn away. Why? Fear? Of what? What is
the magic talisman which makes the mention of these co-religionists a no-go
area? Is it because they have infiltrated every aspect of human activity?
Is it they who are pulling the strings which are leading the world on its
The Jew has been mistrusted since way back. But what is apparent
now is that any attempt to offer an answer to the question is clamped down
upon. What does that indicate? Above all it indicates that these shadowy
figures fear more than anything else the truth.
Professor Jesse H. Holmes, writing in, "The American Hebrew,"
expressed the following similar sentiments:
"It can hardly be an accident that antagonism directed against the
Jews is to be found pretty much everywhere in the world where Jews and
non-Jews are associated. And as Jews are the common element of the situation
it would seem probable, on the face of it, that the cause will be found
in them rather than in the widely varying groups which feel this antagonism.
In Europe and Russia alone, the Jews have been banished 47 times
in the last 1,000 years: Mainz, 1012; France, 1182; Upper Bavaria, 1276;
England, 1290; France, 1306; France, 1322; Saxony, 1349; Hungary, 1360;
Belgium, 1370; Slovakia, 1380; France, 1394; Austria, 1420; Lyons, 1420;
Cologne, 1424; Mainz, 1438; Augsburg, 1438; Upper Bavaria, 1442; Netherlands,
1444; Brandenburg, 1446; Mainz, 1462; Lithuania, 1495; Portugal, 1496;
Naples, 1496; Navarre, 1498; Nuremberg, 1498; Brandenburg, 1510; Prussia,
1510; Genoa, 1515; Naples, 1533; Italy, 1540; Naples, 1541; Prague, 1541;
Genoa, 1550; Bavaria, 1551; Prague, 1557; Papal States, 1569; Hungary,
1582; Hamburg, 1649; Vienna, 1669; Slovakia, 1744; Mainz, 1483; Warsaw,
1483; Spain, 1492; Italy, 1492; Moravia, 1744; Bohemia, 1744; Moscow, 1891.
(The above is excerpted from The Synagogue of Satan by Andrew Carrington
Hitchcock.) Of what were these people guilty to arouse such a reaction
from so many diverse people? Well, in England, it's very interesting:
IT ALL STARTED with The Edict of Expulsion of 1290 AD.
The Jews would have us believe that their expulsion from England by Edward
I (reigned 1272-1307) was due to their money lending endeavors. The real
reason was due to the Jews' crime of blood ritual murders.
The Orthodox Christian historian of the 5th Century, Socrates Scholasticus,
in his Ecclesiastical History, 7:16, recounts an incident about Jews killing
a Christian child:
- "At a place near Antioch in Syria, the Jews, in derision of the
Cross and those who put their trust in the Crucified One, seized a Christian
boy, and having bound him to a cross they made, began to sneer at him.
In a little while becoming so transported with fury, they scourged the
child until he died under their hands." - Here are a few examples
which led to the English expulsion of the Jews in 1290 AD:
1144 A.D. Norwich: A twelve year-old boy was crucified and
his side pierced at the Jewish Passover. His body was found in a sack hidden
in a tree. A converted Jew to Christianity named Theobald of Cambridge
informed the authorities that the Jews took blood every year from a Christian
child because they thought that only by so doing could they ever return
to Palestine. The boy has ever since been known as St. William.
1160 A.D. Gloucester: The body of a child named Harold was
found in the river with the wounds of crucifixion. 1255 A.D. Lincoln:
A boy named Hugh was tortured and crucified by the Jews. The boy's mother
found the body in a well on the premises of a Jew named Jopin. 18 Jews
were hanged for the crime by King Henry III.
1290 A.D. Oxford: The Patent Roll 18 Of Edward I, 21st June 1290
contains an order for the Gaol delivery of a Jew named Isaac de Pulet for
the murder and blood letting of a Christian boy. Only one month after this,
King Edward I issued his decree expelling the Jews from England.
(See Sources #1 Below )
JEWISH BANKERS FROM AMSTERDAM led by the Jewish financier and army contractor
of Cromwell's New Model Army, Fernandez Carvajal and assisted by Portuguese
Ambassador De Souza, a Marano (secret Jew), saw an opportunity to exploit
in the civil unrest led by Oliver Cromwell in 1643.
A stable Christian society of ancient traditions binding the Monarchy,
Church, State, nobles and people into one solemn bond was disrupted by
Calvin's Protestant uprising. The Jews of Amsterdam exploited this civil
unrest and made their move. They contacted Oliver Cromwell in a series
Cromwell To Ebenezer Pratt of the Mulheim Synagogue in Amsterdam, 16th
- "In return for financial support will advocate admission
of Jews to England: This however impossible while Charles living. Charles
cannot be executed without trial, adequate grounds for which do not at
present exist. Therefore advise that Charles be assassinated, but will
have nothing to do with arrangements for procuring an assassin, though
willing to help in his escape." - To Oliver Cromwell From Ebenezer
Pratt, 12th July 1647:
- "Will grant financial aid as soon as Charles removed and
Jews admitted. Assassination too dangerous. Charles shall be given opportunity
to escape: His recapture will make trial and execution possible. The support
will be liberal, but useless to discuss terms until trial commences."
Cromwell had carried out the orders of the Jewish financiers and beheaded,
(yes, Cromwell and his Jewish sponsors must face Christ!), King Charles
I on January 30 1649. Beginning in 1655, Cromwell, through his alliance
with the Jewish bankers of Amsterdam and specifically with Manasseh Ben
Israel and his brother-in-law, David Abravanel Dormido, initiated the resettlement
of the Jews in England.
(See Sources #2 Below )
JEWS GET THEIR CENTRAL BANK OF ENGLAND
WILLIAM STADHOLDER, a Dutch army careerist, was a handsome chap with money
problems. The Jews saw another opportunity and through their influence
arranged for William's elevation to Captain General of the Dutch Forces.
The next step up the ladder for William was his elevation by the Jews to
the aristocratic title of William, Prince of Orange.
The Jews then arranged a meeting between William and Mary, the eldest daughter
of the Duke of York. The Duke was only one place removed from becoming
King of England. In 1677 Princess Mary of England married William Prince
To place William upon the throne of England it was necessary to get rid
of both Charles II and the Duke of York who was slated to become James
II of the Stuarts. It is important to note that none of the Stuarts would
grant charter for an English national bank. That is why murder, civil war,
and religious conflicts plagued their reigns by the Jewish bankers.
In 1685, King Charles II died and the Duke of York became King James II
of England. In 1688 the Jews ordered William Prince of Orange to land in
England at Torbay. Because of an ongoing Campaign of L'Infamie against
King James II contrived by the Jews, he abdicated and fled to France. William
of Orange and Mary were proclaimed King and Queen of England.
The new King William III soon got England involved in costly wars against
Catholic France which put England deep into debt. Here was the Jewish bankers'
chance to collect. So King William, under orders from the Elders of Zion
in Amsterdam, persuaded the British Treasury to borrow 1.25 million pounds
sterling from the Jewish bankers who had helped him to the throne.
Since the state's debts had risen dramatically, the government had no choice
but to accept. But there were conditions attached: The names of the lenders
were to be kept secret and that they be granted a Charter to establish
a Central Bank of England. Parliament accepted and the Jewish bankers sunk
their tentacles into Great Britain.
ENTER THE ROTHSCHILDS
MAYER AMSCHEL BAUER OPENED a money lending business on Judenstrasse (Jew
Street) in Frankfurt Germany in 1750 and changed his name to Rothschild.
Mayer Rothschild had five sons.
The smartest of his sons, Nathan, was sent to London to establish a bank
in 1806. Much of the initial funding for the new bank was tapped from the
British East India Company which Mayer Rothschild had significant control
of. Mayer Rothschild placed his other four sons in Frankfort, Paris, Naples,
and Vienna. In 1814, Nathanael Rothschild saw an opportunity in the Battle
of Waterloo. Early in the battle, Napoleon appeared to be winning and the
first military report to London communicated that fact. But the tide turned
in favor of Wellington. A courier of Nathan Rothschild brought the news
to him in London on June 20. This was 24 hours before Wellington's courier
arrived in London with the news of Wellington's victory. Seeing this fortuitous
event, Nathan Rothschild began spreading the rumor that Britain was defeated.
With everyone believing that Wellington was defeated, Nathan Rothschild
began to sell all of his stock on the English Stock Market. Everyone panicked
and also began selling causing stocks to plummet to practically nothing.
At the last minute, Nathan Rothschild began buying up the stocks at rock-bottom
prices. This gave the Rothschild family complete control of the British
economy - now the financial centre of the world and forced England to set
up a revamped Bank of England with Nathan Rothschild in control. (See Sources
#4 Below )
ALL ABOUT THE JEWISH VATICAN (As much as that is possible given
A PRIVATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION exists today in England known as "The
City." It is also known as The Jewish Vatican located in the heart
of Greater London.
A Committee of 12 men rule The Jewish Vatican. They are known as "The
Crown." The City and its rulers, The Crown, are not subject to the
Parliament. They are a Sovereign State within a State. The City is the
financial hub of the world. It is here that the Rothschilds have their
base of operations and their centrality of control:
* The Central Bank of England (controlled by the Rothschilds) is located
in The City. * All major British banks have their main offices in The City.
* 385 foreign banks are located in The City. * 70 banks from the United
States are located in The City. * The London Stock Exchange is located
in The City. * Lloyd's of London is located in The City. * The Baltic Exchange
(shipping contracts) is located in The City. * Fleet Street (newspapers
& publishing) is located in The City. * The London Metal Exchange is
located in The City. * The London Commodity Exchange (trading rubber, wool,
sugar, coffee) is located in The City. Every year a Lord Mayor is elected
as monarch of The City. The British Parliament does not make a move without
consulting the Lord Mayor of The City. For here in the heart of London
are grouped together Britain's financial institutions dominated by the
Rothschild-controlled Central Bank of England.
The Rothschilds have traditionally chosen the Lord Mayor since 1820. Who
is the present day Lord Mayor of The City? Only the Rothschilds' know for
sureÝ (See Sources #5 Below )
Sources #1: Ariel Toaff, Bloody Passover-Jews of Europe and Ritual
Homicide, 2007 Click Here; J. C. Cox, Norfolk Churches; Victoria County
History of Norfolk, 1906; Arnold Leese, Jewish Ritual Murder In England;
Henry III, Close Roll 16; Joseph Haydn, Dictionary of Dates.
Sources #2: Isaac Disraeli, Life of Charles I, 1851; Hugh Ross Williamson,
Charles and Cromwell; AHM Ramsey, The Nameless War; Lord Alfred Douglas,
Plain English, 1921; Geoffrey H. Smith, The Settlement Of Jews In England
Sources #3: John Harold Wood, History of Central Banking in Great
Britain; Gustaaf Johannes Renier, William of Orange
Sources #4: Frederick Morton, The Rothschilds; Benjamin Disraeli,
Sources #5: E.C. Knuth, The Empire of The City; Des Griffin, Descent
In 1875, the Khedive of Egypt, forced by financial stringency, was
anxious to sell his interest in the Suez Canal. Disraeli must have known
of this at once through his friend and master Rothschild. A Mr. F. Greenwood,
Editor of the Pall Mall Gazette, received private advices that the
shares might be acquired for England, and patriotically refusing to make
a journalistic "scoop" of the information, hastened to Lord Derby
with the news. Lord Derby consulted with his Hebrew Prime Minister, and
the latter then bought the shares. Parliament was not sitting at the time,
and Disraeli borrowed ¬£4,000,000 from his colleagues the Rothschilds,
who made a profit of about ¬£500,000, which no doubt earned for
Disraeli a considerable commission. It was, of course, to the Jewish interest
that Britain should hold the Suez Canal (until the Jews got Palestine out
of the Great War). Disraeli had written to the Queen saying, "We have
scarcely time to breathe, we must carry the matter through." He was
very, very anxious that Rothschilds should handle the loan! Now, read this
extract from a letter from the Hon. G. M. Kinnaird to The Times
dated 20th March, 1930.
Nathan Mayer Rothschild also funded Cecil Rhodes in the development
of the British South Africa Company and the De Beers diamond conglomerate.
He succeeded him as General of the Society of the Elect and later administered
Rhodes's estate after his death in 1902 and helped to set up the Rhodes
Scholarship scheme at Oxford University. He worked as a partner in
the London branch of the family bank NM Rothschild and Sons and became
head of the bank after his father's death in 1879. During his tenure he
also maintained its pre-eminent position in private venture finance and
in issuing loans to the governments of the USA, Russia and Austria. Following
the Rothschild's funding of the Suez Canal a close relationship was maintained
with Benjamin Disraeli and affairs in Egypt and the Middle East.
This Site Served