Anti-Semitism, Douglas Reed and Zion
By Staff News & Analysis - July 18, 2011

The true start of this affair occurred on a day in 458 BC which this narrative will reach in its sixth chapter. On that day the petty Palestinian tribe of Judah (earlier disowned by the Israelites) produced a racial creed, the disruptive effect of which on subsequent human affairs may have exceeded that of explosives or epidemics. This was the day on which the theory of the master-race was set up as "the Law". At the time Judah was a small tribe among the subject-peoples of the Persian king, and what today is known as "the West" could not even be imagined. Now the Christian era is nearly two thousand years old and "Western civilization", which grew out of it, is threatened with disintegration. The creed born in Judah 2,500 years ago, in the author's opinion, has chiefly brought this about. The process, from original cause to present effect, can be fairly clearly traced because the period is, in the main, one of verifiable history. – Douglas Reed, History of Zionism.

Dominant Social Theme: It is all the fault of the Jews. Get rid of the Jews and the world will be fine.

Free-Market Analysis: Douglas Reed's long suppressed book, the Controversy of Zion, now online and available for download, is receiving more and more exposure. In this article, we will summarize the book – which has only reinforced our belief that the Internet alternative media does the world a disservice when it refers to the larger movement to create a "new world order" via Money Power as a "Jewish" one.

We have argued that labeling this movement "Jewish" in-aptly defines what's going on. Not only that, but modern Money Power seeks to have the label "Jewish" attached to it. It has planned for such an eventuality and uses such charges as an opportunity to label critics as anti-Semites.

Still, alternative media seems to grow ever-more enthusiastic about the term. The "Jewish Illuminati" is said to be behind all manner of disasters. This conflation of Jewish ethnicity and religion with a deliberate system of control and monetary exploitation is dismaying. In fact, it allows others to label investigations of what is really going on as "racist" – just what Money Power may want.

Websites have been set up by Western Intel agencies (ones that work for Money Power) to report on central banking, war-mongering and UFOs. The idea is too undermine criticism of central banks and warring by conflating them with "crackpot" UFO believers. Those who label what is going on in the world today as specifically "Jewish" are, perhaps, furthering the goals of Money Power without the need for such websites.

Who was Douglas Reed? He was, for a while, one of the most respected and best-selling authors in Europe. But after World War II, his interpretation of the world began to diverge from the mainstream media, and he found he could no longer work in his chosen profession. His disdain was requited; he found it increasingly difficult to get published. Here is how Wikipedia describes him:

Douglas Reed (1895–1976) was a British journalist, playwright, novelist and author of a number of books of political analysis. His book Insanity Fair (1938) was influential in publicising the state of Europe and the megalomania of Adolf Hitler before the Second World War. By the time of his death, however, Reed's reputation had become overshadowed by allegations of antisemitism. The Times described him in his obituary as a "virulent anti-Semite." Reed himself claimed that he drew a distinction between opposition to Zionism and anti-Semitism, and was not against the Jewish Race, but rather, was against the Jewish Religion, which he believed was primarily Talmudic, and a master race theology.

He has also been attacked as a holocaust denier; in response, he claimed that he did not deny a German holocaust, merely that it had been exaggerated for "propaganda purposes." A reading of "Controversy of Zion" bears this out. Reed's own perspective, based on what he claims to be first-hand observations, is that claims are exaggerated. Reed never published this book in his lifetime, believing it was futile to try. The Internet has made the publication possible. It is available here: Free Download. (We cannot vouch for the legality and accept no responsibilty; reader, you are on your own.)

The book is ambitious and long; but we will try our best to summarize it below. We don't necessarily endorse any of Reed's conclusions but in aggregate they are certainly unexpected, especially given his mainstream media background and his first-hand knowledge of many of the events he discusses in the final part of the book. As a highly placed working reporter in Europe during the pre-war years, he met Hitler on a number of occasions, and many other prominent people too.

Reed proposes to tell the real story of the Western world through the workings of a small Judean tribe that decided it was made up of God's chosen people (see excerpt above). He writes: "The true start of this affair occurred on a day in 458 BC … On that day the petty Palestinian tribe of Judah (earlier disowned by the Israelites) produced a racial creed, the disruptive effect of which on subsequent human affairs may have exceeded that of explosives or epidemics. This was the day on which the theory of the master-race was set up as 'the Law'."

Reed refers to those who made up the Judean tribe as "Jews." But throughout this article we shall refer to some of them as Pharisees. What Reed seems to show us (fairly clearly, if he is to believed) is that current state of affairs IS Pharisaical.

What is a Pharisee? Well … once upon a time there were Sadducees (who believed the Torah was sacred and even rejected life after death) and then there were Pharisees who welcomed Rabbinic interpretations to written texts. The two "Jewish" sects were violent opponents, historically. The Pharisees won.

Their Rabbinic commentary came to be known as the Talmud, or "roadmap." There are, in fact, two editions of the Talmud; one was composed by Babylonian Jews and one by Jews who lived in ancient Jerusalem. When one speaks of the Talmud, the reference is generally to the Babylonian version.

The invention of the Talmud roadmap was definitive, Reed believes. Now the Pharisees had a way of controlling the larger Jewish population by promulgating laws that could supersede even the Holy Text (which is actually the first five books of the Hebrew Old Testament).

It is this Pharisaical Mafia that apparently runs at least some "Jewish" life today. For lack of a better description, there are Jews – the manipulated ones – and Pharisees, a closed circle, or so Reed explains. He makes other interesting points. The so-called, infamous ghettos of Europe and Russia were self-imposed. Like the Great Wall of China, the real purpose was to keep people in. Thus, the Pharisees controlled their flock.

We have long pointed out that religious authoritarianism and violence cannot exist without a state; the ghettoes served as a state-within-a-state. It provided, in fact, a government of sorts. This system, he informs us, goes all the way back to Babylon. "The Jews throughout the world recognized the academies in Babylonia as the authoritative centre of Judaism, and regarded any laws they passed as binding."

This was a SYSTEM of control. It has been practiced elsewhere, though Reed does not discuss it. But he makes it clear: For overseeing Pharisees, "emancipation" from prejudice – something the Jewish people apparently want – is steeped in negative connotations. The Pharisees wish nothing to do with it. It is this captive population that has provided the Pharisees with their power through the centuries.

Yet, the word "Jew" is "fraught." The English noun "Jew" is not definable except as "a person of Hebrew race," whatever that means. What is a Jew? And what does the statement "Jesus was a Jew" mean?

It has three meanings according to Reed. First, that Jesus was of the tribe of Judah (therefore Judahite); second that he was of Judean domicile (and therefore Judean); and third that he was religiously "a Jew." (Though there may have been no Jewish religion at the time.)

Race, residence, religion are what made a "Jew." Yet, today, perhaps, there is no constant racial characteristic among "Jews," other than the most controversial of all ethnic backgrounds (the Khazar). The "religious" definition is also questionable because the relationship between a Hasidim (Hasidic Jew) and someone has practiced "reformed Judaism" is surely somewhat tenuous. Finally, there is residence. Here again, is confusion. There are Jews across the world. Are only Jews in Israel true Jews?

In the time of Jesus, there was no "Jewish" (or even Judahite or Judaist or Judean) religion, Reed writes. "There was Jehovahism, and there were the various sects, Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes, which disputed violently between themselves and contended, around the temple, for power over the people."

Reed seems to admit that his use of the word Jew is one of convention. He states: "If today the Zionists are 'the Jews' (and this is the claim accepted by all great Western nations), then the party which in Judea in the time of Jesus corresponded to the Zionists was that of the Pharisees."

Is this a delicate reed? We can see from this language that he decides to adopt the word "Jew" because it is "accepted by all great Western nations." He could have used the convention that a Jew is someone whose mother is a Jew. But, that too, may lead to complications and merely begs the larger question.

Let us move on. Until the early 1700s, the Pharisees had proclaimed governments in exile. When the Pharisees were kicked out of Spain, they found Poland. However, in 1772, proclamations of a central Jewish government ceased. This is Reed's narrative; he believes the reason for the public withdrawal had to do with the beginnings of a revolutionary conspiracy to advance the Pharisees idea of one-world order. But Reed may be missing something.

The Gutenberg Press had around this time spawned the Renaissance and helped spread the Protestant Reformation as well. Is it possible that the spread of literacy along with books and pamphlets contributed to the apparent Pharisees' desire to conceal their activities? Regional wars and exposure of the mendacity of the ruling classes may have made it difficult for the Pharisees to continue in public. Like European royalty itself, the Pharisees perhaps withdrew.

The Talmudic 'centre' also vanished, according to Reed. "Had it remained in the open the source of conspiracy would have been visible," he adds. This is just the point of course, assuming the viability of Reed's narrative. In an era of mass publication, it was just too dangerous.

Now comes another significant, if controversial, idea. Reed explains that after the expulsion from Spain, the Sephardic (Spanish) Jews began to amalgamate (as most Jews may wish to do absent Ghettoes, etc.) and ceased to be a factor in Jewish life. Today, the vast majority of Jews are what Reed calls the "Slav" of the East. These Jews are Khazars, Reed believes. They came out of the Khazac empire. (Note: Modern genetic testing, unreliable as it might be, may show otherwise.)

The Khazars once ran one of the largest empire the world has ever known in Russia and Eastern Europe. At one point, their ruler was anxious to find a way to make the empire more cohesive. He decided to pick a new religion and the one he chose was Judaism. So they say …

It was the aggressive Slavian Khazar-Jews under the direction of the Pharisees that would provide impetus for the modern-day "Jewish" movement. Ironically, if Reed is to be believed, the Jewish vision of a homeland would be realized with a "Jewish race" that was entirely un-Jewish in any sense of the word. Still, today they are called "Jews."

Ironically, Reed's theory found a reverberation (before his book was available) in 1951, in a book by professor John O. Beaty entitled The Iron Curtain over America. It claimed that "Khazar Jews" were "responsible for all of America's — and the world's — ills "beginning with World War I." (Wikipedia) Others have labeled the Khazar theory of modern Jewishness as profoundly anti-semitic and estimated that no more than 12 percent of the Jewish population could be related to Khazars, if that.

The Western takeover by the Pharisees continued, post-Reformation. Reed links Oliver Cromwell to the Pharisaic invasion of the West. Cromwell, in addition to ridding England temporarily of royalty, engineered the "return" of the Pharisees and money lending. As a result, Reed writers, "Jewish emissaries from Amsterdam were urgently dispatched to England to discover whether Cromwell might be of Judaic descent! Had their research yielded positive results, Cromwell might have been proclaimed the Messiah."

Around this time, illuminism up-rose. Reed discusses it in some depth and makes it clear he believes it is related to the "secret centre" of the Pharisees. Reed also discusses the French Revolution, which is widely held by conspiratorial historians to be an Illuminati production. "Nothing else so clearly showed, to me, that the line from Illuminism in 1789 to Communism today is but a line of inheritance; the same organization pursues the same aim with the same methods and even with the same words."

Later on in the narrative, Dr. Theodor Herzl appears. Once at the forefront of Jewish nationalism, he comes across as a surprisingly sympathetic character. He was finished as a leader when he obtained a portion of Uganda as a "new home." He was shunned; the Pharisees wanted no other home but Palestine. Anything else challenges the religious texts on which the Pharisees rely for their authority.

It was only during the Sixth Congress of his World Zionist Organization that poor Herzl met his fate. "It came in the form of a compact mass of Russian Jews …The huddled Jewish throngs … cast themselves on the floor in the traditional attitude of mourning for the dead or for the destruction of the temple. One of them, a woman, called the world-famous Dr. Herzl 'a traitor' and when he was gone tore down the map of Uganda from behind the speakers' dais." Dr. Herzl died soon after of "cardiac sclerosis," still in his mid-40s. His movement persisted.

The Pharisees continued their attack on the West. Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto is recognizably Illuminist. The famous Johann Wolfgang von Goethe was likely influenced. The infamous Protocols emerged somewhat later and caused a sensation. They are said to be a Russian intelligence forgery. Reed doesn't think so: "What is the most striking characteristic of the Protocols? The answer is knowledge of a rare kind, embracing the widest field. The solution of this 'mystery', if it is one, is to be found where this uncanny knowledge, on which prophecies now literally fulfilled are based, can be shown to reside."

In America, Henry Ford had his Dearborn Independent paper publish a series of articles about the Protocols. He later apologized after threats from some of his car dealerships to disengage. In 1955 a Munich printer who reproduced the Protocols reportedly had his business confiscated. In England, publishers were attacked if they sponsored it. In Switzerland they were sued.

Reed writes, "Comparative study of the Protocols and [Illuminati] papers leads to the strong deduction that both derive from a common and much older source. They cannot have been the product of any one man or one group of men in the period when they were published; the 'uncanny knowledge' displayed in them obviously rests on the cumulative experience of eras. In particular, this applies to the knowledge of human weaknesses, which are singled out with analytical exactitude, the method of exploiting each of them being described with disdainful glee."

How do the documents deal with war? Reed provides the following: "it is indispensable for our purpose that wars, so far as possible, should not result in territorial gains … The chief result of the First War was to establish revolutionary-Zionism and revolutionary-Communism as new forces in international affairs, the first with a promised "homeland" and the second with a resident State. The chief result of the Second War was that further 'territorial gains' accrued to, and only to, Zionism and Communism; Zionism received its resident State and Communism received half of Europe."

Reed writes a good deal about British Prime Minister Arthur Balfour and Winston Churchill, both whom advanced the cause of the Pharisees by creating a political reality that would allow the "Jews" to return to a "homeland" carved out of Palestine. This is eventually what occurred, though displaced Palestinians haven't taken it too well.

Another individual who was instrumental in the Pharisees 20th century rise to international power was "Colonel" Edward Mandel House. Colonel House (who was never really a Colonel) controlled the foreign policy of President Woodrow Wilson until the end of World War I when Wilson fired him in 1919. House helped create one of the worst treaties in world history, the infamous Treaty of Versailles.

Many historians claim this treaty, which in effect was an attempt by the Allies after the war to fund their war debts and destroy Germany as the leading economic power in Europe, had far ranging implications – including the rise of Hitler and National Socialism during the 1930s and much of the Middle East conflict the world faces even today.

President Wilson referred to Colonel House as his "brain" and there are indications that House was an agent of foreign entities, specifically the City of London's vastly powerful banking families who were then – as now – working to form a new world order. House fulfilled his duties to them admirably, if this was the case, by helping involve the US – first in World War I and then in the League of Nations.

Colonel House seems to be a prime example of how the one-world conspiracy gained additional power in the 20th century by using secretive agents of influence. House was an elitist who believed in rule by the elite. In his life, he apparently lived a lie and the legacy of his death was the further undermining of American liberty.

Reed makes startling points in his discussion of the Russian Revolution. He claims it was primarily a Pharisaical affair, in which various elements competed. The Jews in Russia were divided into three groups, he explains. The first group wanted emancipation, which was what worshippers in Europe were gaining. They wanted to leave the ghetto and Talmudic law behind.

The remainder split another way. They either believed in world "communist" revolution or world "Zionist" revolution. For the latter group, full "emancipation" would only be achieved "when a Jewish nation was established in a Jewish state." Both these trends were reflected in the 20th century and the Pharisees instigated them.

Reed believes that the Communist revolution and its further terror was primarily Pharisaical. This might explain the tie-in to Wall Street funding that Edward Griffin explored in his monumental book, The Creature From Jekyll Island. And later to Anglo-American elite funding of Hitler.

Reed makes other interesting points. One is that Adolf Hitler may have been kidnapped at some point before he rose to power and brought to Russia. The imputation is that Hitler acted as he did under the sway of the Russian Pharisees that controlled the Soviet Union. (Reed's view.) Reed also claims – via first-hand reporting – that there was a good deal of Jewish (Pharisaical) influence over Germany's concentration camps. These in fact, mimicked Russian ones, he suggests.

He is also clear that many of Hitler's actions were not aimed specifically at the "Jews." His famous book burnings in the 1930s destroyed books of all sorts, not just Jewish books. Concentration camps included many different kinds of ethnic groups – not just "Jews." Reed is especially emphatic that it was impossible for six million "Jews" to have died in these camps. The census numbers do not support it, he writes:

The victims were in the great majority, certainly much over ninety percent, Germans, and a few were Jews. This reflected the population-ratio, in Germany and later in the countries overrun by Hitler. But the manner of reporting in the world's press in time blocked-out the great suffering mass, leaving only the case of the Jews …

All these statements are false. The measures against the Jews did not outstrip the terror against other groups; the Jews were involved in a much larger number of others. The reign of terror did not begin on January 29, 1933, but in the night of the Reichstag fire, February 27. No 'burning of Jewish books' was ordered; I attended and reported that bonfire and have looked up my report published in The Times, to verify my recollection …

A mass of "Marxist" books was burned, including the works of many German, English and other non-Jewish writers (my books, had they then been published, would undoubtedly have been among them); the bonfire included some Jewish books. the "brunt" of the terror was not borne by Jews, nor were the concentration camps 'filled with Jews'. The number of Jewish victims was in proportion to their ratio of the population.

Reed claims that the Allies war effort was deliberately crafted to give the USSR control of Eastern Europe. The idea (as we have discussed) was to set up a faux Cold War that would further militarize the West and drain it of its freedoms.

Much of the rest of Reed's tale is well known to students of directed history. The UN was set up to advance Pharisaical aims of a new world order and World War II itself ended up primarily advancing such. "When the smoke of battle cleared only three purposes had been achieved, none of them disclosed at its start: the world-revolution … had advanced to the middle of Europe; Zionism had been armed to establish itself in Palestine by force; the 'world-government', obviously the result which these two convergent forces were intended to produce, had been set up anew in embryo form, this time in New York."

After the war, "the Zionists struck at once," bisecting Palestine on April 9, 1948 when a group of activists "utterly destroyed" an Arab village. Reed claims this was "an exact and literal fulfillment of 'the Law' laid down in Deuteronomy (which, the reader will recall, is the basic Judaic law but was itself an amendment of the original Mosaic law of the Israelites). This was the most significant day in the entire story of Zionism … Thereon almost the entire Arab population of Palestine fled into the neighbouring Arab states."

Reed's summary: "Only the denouement remains, fiasco or fulfillment. It is a grandiose plan, and in my estimation cannot succeed. But it has existed for at least 180 years and probably for much longer … The conspiracy for world dominion through a world slave state exists and cannot at this stage be abruptly checked or broken off; of the momentum which it has acquired it now must go on to fulfillment or failure. Either will be destructive for a time, and hard for those of the time in which the dénouement comes."

We can see how the above narrative departs from mainstream history in numerous ways, many of which we have previously discussed. (If Reed were alive today, we have no doubt where he would lay the blame for 9/11 and the subsequent "war on terror".) But the larger timeline of the modern one-world conspiracy (however it exists) can be placed hypothetically at the inception of the Illuminati some 300 years ago, which is earlier than Reed puts it. What is the "Illuminati?" Maybe its rituals are part of an unspoken "Talmud" – the part that is preserved in top rabbinical lore but is not apparently to be written down. Others have claimed it is Gnostic revisionism.

But let us return to a main point. As we have argued in these pages many times, what the alternative media blames on the "Jews" ought to be aimed at the Anglo-American (Jewish) elite and their enablers. What Reed provides for us, actually, is another name for those who are involved in modern Money Power: Pharisees. Again, to be clear, our use of the word Pharisee as we would apply it today involves the West's great central banking families and their religious, corporate and military enablers.

Are these Pharisees Jewish? They seem to worship much differently than those "below" them. What is a Jew, in fact? (We return to that question.) According to Reed almost all Jews are Khazars. Yiddish, which Reed does not mention, is supposedly a Khazarian dialect, not mangled Hebrew. But even if there were no Khazars, we can see from Reed's recitation that what has persisted for thousands of years (since Babylon) is not a race, not even a "people" but a SYSTEM.

It is in its upper ranks a system of control based on liturgy (if Reed is to be believed). Israel itself may be seen in part as a re-inflation of the old ghetto; in fact, there are plenty of "Jews" that believe Israel is a mistake. What is going on regarding the Internet's alternative news media is in our view destructive. Get rid of every "Jew" on earth and the SYSTEM would remain.

Such a system (not the religion! … some of our elves have Jewish backgrounds) can only be extirpated by education and free-market thinking. it is as Reed describes it a false system, one enabled first by states-within-a-state and now by what may be seen as a theocracy with regional or globalist ambitions. (Supposedly, the Rothschild's Supreme Court building is built to a size beyond what Israel requires.)

The Jewish religion is a noble one, as noble as any other; thus the trouble comes when the religion is animated by the power of the state. Theocracies are always troublesome, as they use force to demand a monopoly of belief. Fortunately, in the longer-term this doesn't matter so much. We know from the Austrians that authoritarian governments deprive people of valid price information, causing the political monopoly to collapse. This is happening in China and America today. The crumbling of authoritarianism is being abetted in our view by the truth-telling of the Internet. Still, it is unnecessary and, often, tragic.

It is interesting that Reed does not seem to mention the words "central banking" in his book. He seems oblivious to the economic ramifications of the workings of Money Power, and its fundamental engine. There is another chapter to be written (not in Reed's book, however) about how the great Venetian banking families apparently traveled to England and inter-married with British royalty. These are the real Pharisees. Their lives, even perhaps their religion, has little do with that of the average "Jew." They are seemingly the "controllers."

After Thoughts

How can one write a whole book on this subject without mentioning central banking or even the Rothschilds who have been prominently intertwined with this sort of history for centuries (and the creation and ongoing support of Israel as well)? As extensive as is his book, these lapses, purposeful or not, give us pause. Also, he calls the system he has portrayed "Zionist" but it is NOT a Zionist system, which is nationalist. It existed long before Israel. It is surely Pharisaical. We refer to those involved as the "Anglo-American power-elite."