By John 'Birdman' Bryant
I have often found Henry Makow's essays of interest, and yet it has bothered me that Henry, sophisticated as he is in many ways, seems impervious to certain facts which make his Jewish brethren look bad. For the most part I have allowed this sleeping dog to lie undisturbed, but recently I wrote the essay below on an inspiration of sorts from one of Henry's old essays, and sent it to him with an invitation to comment. The result was the correspondence which follows the essay, and which leaves Henry smelling less like a rose than a skunk cabbage. This exposure is less important, however, than the timeline of 20th century Jewish abuses of Western civilization which I wrote in the course of the correspondence, and which I will expand upon in a future essay.
The New World Order: Who
Is the Enemy?
Commentary inspired by an essay of Henry Makow
The ostensible centers of power in the modern world are governments, but we know they are not the real power centers for one very simple reason, to wit, the worldwide mental infection of political correctness which could not have secured a death-grip on the Western psyche in only the last half-century unless the process had been centrally directed. So we ask, What is this power, or more precisely, CONSPIRACY, which has rent asunder common sense and created a multicultural world which is on the verge of extinguishing Western civilization and the race which built it -- the white race -- and the human freedom and prosperity which has been its legacy? The answer is the same conspiracy which is driving us toward a one-world government, or New World Order, using Turd-world numerical superiority and white guilt to destroy the white race, which is the only race with the intelligence to create a successful opposition. The point of all this, of course, is to concentrate political power in the hands of a tiny elite, which I call the New World Orderlies, and from whose behavior I conclude that they care for nothing except power, and in particular give no thought for the rights or comfort of the human beings that they intend to rule over.
In attempting to identify the New World Orderlies, many suggestions have been put forward: Jews, 'international bankers', the Round Table groups (CFR, Trilaterals, etc), Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Skull & Bones, the Vatican, Freemasons, the 'Illuminati', and even space aliens (including Sitchin's Annunaki and the 'shape-shifting reptilians' of David Icke). Most of these have something that can be said for them, except for the 'Illuminati', which may have existed in the 18th century, but for which there is absolutely no evidence in the present day, and space aliens, which may well be the eminence grise of the NWO, but for which there is again no evidence. As for the others, they seem heterogeneous until one recognizes that there is a thread that unites all of them except Skull & Bones and the Vatican, to wit, the heavy presence of Jews. Bankers are mostly Jews; the Round Table was the creation of the Jew Rothschild and his friends; the Rockefellers are genetically Jewish, even if Baptist by religion. As to Freemasons, there are obviously a lot of gentiles who populate Freemasonry; but the Jewish connection, if less certain in some ways, seems clearly established by the fact that the Israeli Supreme Court building is chock full of Masonic symbolism. For these reasons, any attempt to identify the New World Orderlies must abstain from speculation about 'the Illuminati' and space aliens, and focus instead on the one fact that draws together most of the powerful people who are actively working to bring about the NWO, namely, the Jewish connection. This is not to say that the NWO is exclusively Jewish, and it is certainly not to say that most Jews are New World Orderlies; but it is to say that the NWO is dominated by Jews and guided by them. Whatever gentile momentum may be added to the NWO by Skull and Bones, the Vatican, the Jesuits, Opus Dei and other groups and individuals is an interesting question, but it will not change the Jewish character of the operation, nor will it release the students of this conspiracy from the obligation to focus on the ties of blood that make the blood of the rest of us run cold.
But this is not the end of the story; for many of the conspiracy theorists who wish to avoid the Jewish question have found an 'out' in the notion that Freemasonry is a 'satanic religion', and that the real devil behind the NWO is ... Satan! In my opinion, however, this is a weak-minded copout, even for someone who actually believes in Satan. Yes, one can make a case that Freemasons -- or at least those of the higher degrees -- bow their heads to 'Lucifer'; but the evidence that Freemasons actually believe in Lucifer as their god is weak at best, and the explanation for Lucifer as part of the Masonic catechism can in any event be attributed to a view of 'Lucifer' as a personification of enlightenment, which is what many Luciferians, from Mme Blavatsky onward, seem to have done.
One inconvenient fact which Satanic conspiracy
theorists wish us to forget is that Masonry has played an
important and useful role in world history. As I have explained
elsewhere, Masonic lodges were originally created as secret
societies for the purpose of protecting and developing trade
secrets in the building profession, but eventually attracted
non-masons as members who were interested in investigating new
ideas in a milieu that would not attract the attention of -- and
probable condemnation by -- the Church. We note, of course, that
the Church was hostile to the ideas of science (witness Galileo),
and building is of course a science; but once a free forum for
scientific ideas had been established in the Lodges with the help
of initiations which promised death to those who would reveal
Masonic secrets, other ideas rapidly crept in. Masonic lodges,
then, became the fons et origo of political and philosophical
revolution, and this is why they have attracted so much hatred
from conservatives who were eager to maintain the Old Time
Religion and a government ruled by 'the divine right of Kings'.
Nowadays not many conservatives wish to return to a kingship
(this is left to the New World Orderlies and libertarian
professor Hans-Herman Hoppe), but many pine for a return to the
Bad Old Days of religion-up-the-tush, and therefore see Masonry
as -- Dare we say it? -- Satanic. Masonry may perhaps be faulted
in the present day if it has fallen into the hands of the Jews,
but it cannot be faulted for having historically served as a
fertile field for the growth of new and earth-shaking ideas upon
which the modern world is founded.
Correspondence with Henry Makow on the above essay
"This is not to say that the NWO is exclusively
Jewish, and it is certainly
not to say that most Jews are New World Orderlies; but it is to say that the
NWO is dominated by Jews and guided by them. Whatever gentile momentum may
be added to the NWO by Skull and Bones, the Vatican, the Jesuits, Opus Dei
and other groups and individuals is an interesting question, but it will not
change the Jewish character of the operation, nor will it release the
students of this conspiracy from the obligation to focus on the ties of
blood that make the blood of the rest of us run cold."
I appreciate your scknowledgement of the role of
non-jews. But you seem to
contradict yourself when you say all jews aren't nwo but we must still focus
on ties of blood. Then surely we must notice that most of the top nwo jews
intermarry, like John kerry's parents.
Look I hate the "jewish element" in the nwo
as much as you, and especially
what israel is doing. I just think we have to see that this couldn;t happen
unless everyone was brainwashed to participate.
Thanks for your letter.
I believe you are failing to recognize a point which is rather subtle, and which I may not have expressed very well, so let me just try to put things slightly differently.
The problem with 'da jooz' is not that they are all bad or anywhere near all bad, as far as we can determine. The problem with 'da jooz' is that all this evil stuff (and I use the term 'evil' generically, not theologically) keeps coming out of the Jewish quarter, whereas very little of it is coming out of any other quarter. (Yes, plenty of bad stuff comes from blacks and Mexicans, but this is the kind of stuff that everyone agrees is bad, and in any event is not directly related to the NWO. In contrast, there is an argument about whether the Jewish stuff -- feminism, communism, Israel, federal reserve, etc -- is evil: You and I know it is, but a lot of people don't.) So what I am saying is that the Jews are a problem because of all the bad stuff coming out of the Jewish quarter, not because there are not individual Jews who are good (I believe there are many who are). This however raises the question of what the 'endlosung' (final solution) to the Jewish question should be: Must Jews and gentiles be separated (the Herzlian solution) or must gentiles find other ways of protecting themselves against the ill wind that blows from the Jewish quarter? Indeed, SHOULD they? -- maybe the Jews are the ones who, if they don't kill us, will make us stronger, and that will ultimately be a help in our survival.
Now do you understand why I am 'focusing on the
blood'? To which I would add that we cannot explain the ill wind
from the Jewish quarter by invoking 'brainwashing', even if some
of it is cultural (ie, non-genetic). But even if we could explain
all of it by non-genetic means such as brainwashing or culture,
that still does not solve the problem of the Jewish ill wind. Or
to put it another way, we still are left with a 'judenfrage'
(Jewish question), so what are we to do about it? -j
We've been having this conversation for five years
now. I am disgusted by
what many Jews are up to but I think you are covering up for your blopod
bropthers, the goyim. The evilemanates from Satanism, which is Freemasonry
in disguise. It is widespread. Mormons, JW's, Christians of all
denominations, Opus Dei, Jesuits. But hey, you obviously like your gig, so
All I am saying is, look at the facts. And the facts are that there is lots of evidence showing heavy Jewish involvement in causing a lot of major world events, but little or no evidence showing involvement by 'bankers', 'satanists', 'the Illuminati' or any of the others to whom you wish to assign blame beyond those who have a Jewish connection. Here, for example, are historical events in which there is ample documentation to show that Jews were involved in a major way:
* Panic of 1907 and other panics (to prepare the
ground for the Federal Reserve)
* Defeat of Russia by Japan, 1906 (funded by Jacob Schiff)
* 1906 attempted Russian Revolution (Lenin was involved)
* Engineering of the election of Woodrow Wilson to get rid of Taft, who was blocking the Federal Reserve Act (1912)
* Federal Reserve (1913) - Paul Warburg & friends
* Bolshevik Revolution and subsequent regimes, especially Stalin, who was Jewish - 60 million killed (Robert Conquest)
* Getting America into WW1 (Balfour declaration)
* 1919 depression
* 1929 stock market crash (via contraction of credit)
* Great Depression (maintaining contraction of credit)
* Armenian Holocaust (by Judeo-Turks)
* Deliberate fostering of American racial strife - Policy of CPUSA, which was mostly Jewish, and took its orders from Moscow - continued thru the Civil Rights era, where most of the Freedom Riders were Jews
* Nazism - The rise of Hitler was a reaction to the abuses of the Versailles Treaty (written by Jews according to Benjamin Freedman) and to Jewish revolutionary activity in Germany in the wake of WW1 (Rosa Luxembourg, et al) - The Jews also financed Hitler (Warburgs etc), declared war on him (1933), and Hitler himself was 1/4 Jew
* American entry into WW2 (Jew Roosevelt was eager to enter, and made Pearl Harbor a sitting duck)
* Creation of the Soviet atomic bomb (see The Diaries of Major Jordan)
* Atomic and other spying - practically all were Jews, from the Rosenbergs downward - the problem continues, with Jonathan Pollard, Larry Franklin, the 'Pentagon memo' concerning Jews, etc etc etc
* The Holocaust Lie and sequelae, including all the laws against Holo denial, the prosecution of 100,000 persons in Germany alone for the 'crime' of historical inquiry, including several of my friends, the funnelling of billions of dollars to the rogue state of Israel by the US and Germany
* Founding of Israel - Throwing Arabs out of their ancient homelands, making the US an enemy of Arabs, creating an unending series of wars and conflicts via Jewish terrorism (bombing of King David Hotel, assassination of Folk Bernadotte, Deir Yassin, etc which continues to the present) - And don't forget the role of Jew Hitler and his Jewish regime which negotiated the Ha'avara (Transfer Agreement) (See Kardel's Hitler: Founder of Israel)
* The creation of a Zionist Occupation Government in the US and most other Western countries ("Congress is Israeli-occupied territory")
* Attack on the USS Liberty
* Assassination of JFK (see Michael Collins piper's books)
* Nonwhite immigration (1965 immigration 'reform')
* Antiwhite discrimination (1964 'Civil Rights' act et seq)
* Hate crime laws (ADL)
* Anti-militia statutes (ADL)
* Feminism (Most major feminists are Jewish)
* US attack on Libya (Ostrovsky's By Way of Deception)
* Gulf Wars 1 and 2
* Hiring of KGB and Stasi chiefs for Homeland Security (Jew Chertoff = 'Devil')
* Judiazation of America and the world (all major media are in Jewish hands)
* 911 and subsequent coverup (see my extensive collection of articles)
* White slavery (Israel)
The above list is just off the top of my head. With a little research I could make it twice as long or more. I will be happy to provide documentary evidence for any item you question the legitimacy of.) My point here -- and my challenge to you -- is, come up with a list of events you can link to 'Illuminati' or 'satanists' or Skull and Bones or whatever gentiles you think are responsible for the NWO (or whatever you want to call it), and then show me documents that give GOOD EVIDENCE (not just speculation) that (a) these people or organizations exist as a functioning unit, and (b) that they have had major involvement in the events you name. I say you can't do it, and for that reason I say that the only RATIONAL position is to view the NWO as an essentially Jewish phenomenon.
In conclusion, please do not misunderstand me on this. You have written some excellent stuff, and I always find it worthwhile to read, even if I don't agree with it. I also know that, by living in the Politikally Korrekt Pimple Republik of Kanada, you are not free to speak your mind. I would like to say, however, that I am not trying to cover for white sins, the greatest one being lack of courage and intellect in dealing with Jewish power and Jewish machinations. I don't want to speculate on your motive for blaming the 'Illuminati', but I just don't think it stands up to scrutiny, unless it is merely convenient name for the evil elite that is seeking to impose world government and place all power into their own hands. If it is that, however, I think it is proper to look at its membership, and I think that it will be found to be largely Jewish. -j
PS: With your accusation that I am covering for the goyim and your remark that we have been having the same discussion for 5 years, it is clear that you are getting irritated at me. That could mean one of two things: Either that I am boring boring boring, or else you know I am right and you have no answer for my challenges.
Your move, Henry.
No evidence of bankers? Then you begiun by listing
financial panics? I have
to wonder about your sanity. Practically everything on your list is
sponsored by the central bankers who are directed by the Rothschilds and
include alot of goyim in their networks. Look I have criticized the Jewish
role as disproportionate. It is disgusting. We agree on that. You are blind
to the true dimensions of this conspiracy..I don't wish to continue this.
1) I said bankers INDEPENDENT OF JEWS (or something with the same meaning). So you had better stop worrying about my sanity and start worrying about your reading skills.
2) If you don't want to continue this, just don't respond. However, if you DO respond, I will feel free to answer.
3) FYI, I will be posting our correspondence for my
next Weekly Letter. I will let readers decide whose sanity to
I would not post our correspondance without asking
your permission and I
think you owe me the same courtesy. It was private. I stand by it but this
is simple ethics.
You say you don't want me to post our correspondence. Here is what I say to that:
I have posed a challenge to you on the CENTRAL THESIS FOR WHICH YOU ARGUE CONSTANTLY, namely, that it is not 'the Jews' or some subset thereof who are propelling us toward a New World Order, but rather other organizations and individuals (bankers, Freemasons, etc) who either don't exist ("Illuminati") or else who are disparate entities for which there is no evidence to link them together, and whose Jewishness, if extant, is merely an epiphenomenon which is not essentially related to their NWO activity. My view, on the contrary, is that the best explanation of the NWO is that it is an essentially Jewish activity that involves some gentile components. I have based my case on the many major world events which support the NWO and which have a strong Jewish component, and the absence of any lengthy list of NWO-supportive world events which does NOT have a strong Jewish component.
In sum, I am challenging the basic thesis behind what you have been writing all these years, and yet you want to keep your response to my challenge 'private'. That can only mean one thing, Henry -- that your thesis is bankrupt, and you are ashamed to let people see that. Well, I guess I can't blame you, exactly, but on the other hand it is fundamentally dishonest, and you know it.
What I can do is to omit your letters from our correspondence, and just publish my own. But that is not going to save you, Henry, because your thesis will still appear bankrupt, and in addition you will be shown to be a coward who dare not debate with the person Apollonius has called 'the mighty Birdman'. (Thanks Ap, even if I don't quite meet that demanding standard.) So it's your choice, Henry -- Hobson's choice: 'You lose' versus 'You lose and show yourself a coward'. Which one will it be?
PS: Being as publishing the entire correspondence is
the lesser of two evils for you, I will assume that is your
preference unless you advise me otherwise. A third choice is of
course for you to attempt (again) to answer me, but I rather
think you will prefer not to go that route.
I do not want you to post my emails. Although I stand
by them, they were
written in haste (hence the many typos) without thought to being made
public. I do not have patience for this argument because I feel I am talking
to the wall. Let's just agree to disagree.
Here's the deal, Henry. My side of this correspondence is going to be posted permanently on my site in the Net Losses section. Unless you answer it -- and I will let you have all the time you need, within reason -- it shows your mumblings about 'the Illuminati' etc etc are bankrupt, and on top of that you are a coward. I just don't want you to say that you didn't have time to answer, or weren't informed of what was happening, or wrote your emails in haste (altho you 'stand by them' -- hahaha, that's a good one), or any of a hundred other weak excuses you could probably think of to make.
But if I have attacked the major thesis of all your
writing, and you refuse to defend it, this raises yet another
question: Is all your philosophizing just an act of desperately
trying to prove to us stupid goys that the Jewish quarter is not
really the locus of most of this evil that is engulfing the world
-- ie, are you just a shill for your ethnic brethren, whether
conscious or unconscious? Hell, you won't even admit that the
so-called Holocaust is a Jewish Big Lie, when the evidence is
OVERWHELMING that it is. I am saying it loud and clear, Henry:
You are either grossly blind, or grossly dishonest. Your silence
in front of my demonstrably large audience proves my case.
[Birdman writes again:]
I have changed my mind -- I am going to post our full correspondence, as opposed to just my side of it. My reasoning is this:
You are a prominent public figure on the Net. You maintain a website and write weekly essays in order to be influential. Therefore, if I, as a Netizen, have strong evidence that you are dishonest and a disinformation agent, it is my duty to post that information in full so that others may evaluate it for themselves.
In a sense, this is a protection for you, because it allows others to make an independent judgment of whether the serious charges I have lodged against you are true. But by the same token it is a protection for me, because it shows -- in my view at least -- that my charges are justified.
And don't give me a big Jewish whine about your letters not being intended for public consumption. If you are not interested in putting on a good face to someone as influential as I am on the Net, then not only do you have your priorities screwed up, but you insult me as not being important enuf to give a serious (and typo-free) answer to.
You may add to this correspondence if you wish, but I
will not allow you to suppress it.
I have nothing to be ashamed of. You on the other hand
Please correct my typos.
You know John, you could quote my writings and no one could say boo.
You could begin with "The Jewish Banker Conspiracy"
Hey -- there's no law saying you have to admit being ashamed of shameful behavior. Shame comes only for someone who cares what people think of him, and it may just be that you really don't give a damn about other people. So go right ahead -- it is not what one would call 'totally unexpected.' Nor is it unexpected that right after you insult me by calling me unethical, you tell me to correct your typos. That kind of thing -- just on the off-chance that you are not familiar with it -- is called CHUTZPAH (Jews' Bah?). And no, I will not correct them -- if you do not have enuf self-respect to spell-check and proofread your letter -- to say nothing of respect for the person who has to translate it -- then, well, how should I put it? How about "To hell with you, Henry"?
As to your claim that I am unethical, there are many things I could say, but I will just say the following: To quote my book Mortal Words, 'There is no such thing as right or wrong -- there are only consequences.' I choose my behavior to yield the best possible consequences, as far as I can determine what those consequences will be. In this case it is consequentially important that people see your ideas exposed as bankrupt; it is consequentially unimportant that you might have your 'private correspondence' exposed. I could even go further and say that your attempt to hide your ideological bankruptcy is itself unethical in an important consequentialist sense.
As to your PS, I have but one response: BOO!!!!!!
[End of correspondence]
isn't free! To insure the
continuation of this website and the survival of its creator in
these financially-troubled times, please send donations directly to the Birdman at
PO Box 66683, St Pete Beach FL 33736-6683
"The smallest good deed is worth the grandest intention."
contribute today - buy our books - and spread the word to all
Remember: Your donation = our survival!
* * * Back to the Home Page of John "Birdman" Bryant, the World's Most Controversial Author * * *