November 19, 2017
Organized Jewry acts as Rothschild Proxy
William Aberhart (1878-1943) was Social Credit Premier of Alberta from 1935-1943.
He tried to break the Rothschild monopoly on money creation, As Robert K
demonstrates, Organized Jewry behaved as a proxy for the Rothschilds, defending
their fraudulent monopoly on government credit by the most ruthless means.
by Robert K
(henrymakow.com)
Henry, you say you are "alarmed that political freedom--free speech and the right of peaceful assembly-- has been curtailed in Canada, making it sound as if this is a new phenomenon. Your regular commentary belies this impression.
Janine Stingel's study Social Credit: Anti-Semitism, Social Credit and the Jewish Response (McGill-Queen's University Press, 2000), which grew from her doctoral thesis, reveals with candour the covert methods used decades ago by Jewish organizations to subvert the Social Credit government of the Province of Alberta (first elected in 1935) and its less remarkable foray into federal politics.
In her introduction, she credits the "exhaustive work" on Social Credit by Louis Rosenberg of the Canadian Jewish Congress with enabling her to write the book (p. xiv). As I have been unable to find references to Rosenberg's work in this area on the Internet, I suspect that his gargantuan efforts were clandestine as far as the wider Canadian public is concerned. Note that Stingel had privileged access to the National Archives of the Canadian Jewish Congress, which at the time she is concerned with had concluded that Social Credit was its "most serious public relations problem" (p. 5).
The Social Credit parties, Albertan and federal, in the 1930s and 1940s captured the attention of Canadian and American Jewish organizations because of the evidence of what Stingel terms, without definition, "anti-Semitism" among their ranks. This led to proposals for multifaceted covert methods of "battle" (p. 6), and attack "by all means, fair or foul" (p. 123, words of Wolfe Margolus) against Social Credit (presumably covered under the rubric of the "fight against our common enemy", phraseology used in a joint resolution of the Canadian Jewish Congress and B'nai Brith in 1938--p. 29) including:
employing private detectives to collect information to blacken the reputations of key Social Credit leaders (p. 123);
targeting certain key Social Credit leaders for defeat in their ridings (p. 123); funnelling money to the rival (Socialist) CCF party (p. 124);
bringing criminal charges on the basis of seditious libel and defamatory libel (p. 110);
meeting with the American Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Congress and the American Jewish Committee for advice on how to deal with the Social Credit phenomenon in Western Canada (p. 118);
closely monitoring Social Credit speeches, correspondence, and memoranda (p. 118);
accumulating "all data" shedding discredit on Social Credit parliamentarians or supporters (p. 118);
discrediting the party leaders by means of "a constant barrage of literature" (p. 118);
getting the American government to bar Member of Parliament Norman Jaques from the USA and "us[ing] this widely for publicity purposes" (p. 118);
looking into obtaining a formal censure of Jaques in the House of Commons (p. 118);
investigating whether the Canadian Legion could be persuaded to protest the Social Credit platform (p. 119);
finding churches, trade unions and other political parties wanting to "obliterate" Social Credit (p. 119);
undertaking "smear campaigns" (p. 120, recommended by the ADL);
infiltrating disreputable people into the Social Credit movement (p. 120, recommended by the American Jewish Committee).
Of course, all these schemes--none of which Stingel finds fault with on ethical grounds--were intended covertly to subvert the expressed political preferences of the people of Alberta.
BTW, if Stingel cannot substantiate her unreferenced and never-before-heard-of assertion that near the end of his life the founder of Social Credit, Major C.H. Douglas, was "hospitalized and diagnosed as certifiably insane" (p. 16), McGill University clearly has a duty to withdraw her doctoral status and to censure all who approved her thesis. But, given the scandalous record of this institution (e.g., CIA/MKUltra experimentation), I'm not holding my breath waiting.
