The Manufactured Legacy of General Robert E Lee…

DECEMBER 30, 2022

NY Times:West Point to Remove Confederate Monuments From Its Campus

Bronze plaques that depict Gen. Robert E. Lee and other Confederate figures at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point will be placed in storage.

The US Military Academy at West Point in New York State has announced that it will begin removing Confederate symbols from its campus, including taking down a portrait of General Robert E. Lee from the library and removing a bust of him as well. This is being done for the wrong reason, of course — specifically, the Marxist obsession with denigrating the White Man through the never-ending remembrance whine about southern slavery and modern “racism .” Nonetheless, due to my recent epiphany regarding General Lee, perhaps he should cease to be exalted as some sort of von Clausewitz-like military tactician for the ages.

*Note: After the war, Lee was opposed to the building of Confederate war monuments because he felt that such structures would “retard” the nation’s healing and coming together.

This may be as much of surprise for “you guys” to hear for the first time as it was for me — but it turns out that, at the end of the US Civil War, many Southerners (including military men)  actually blamed Lee for losing the war. During the final post-war years of his life and even for several years after his death in 1870, Lee’s record was subject to harsh criticism in both North, South and abroad. It was only the “Lost Cause Ideology” of 1870’s – 1880’s Southern revisionists — a dubious recounting of the war which erased the ambition of certain southern politicians, European intrigue (Rothschild), and the westward expansion of slavery as fundamental factors behind the unprovoked and unnecessary secession declarations of 1860-61— that rehabilitated Lee’s reputation. The revisionists needed a saint, and who better than a “war hero” to posthumously fill that role. By the turn of the 19th century, Lee had been canonized.

According to this school of artificial scholarship, the South valiantly outfought the Union but inevitably lost “The War of Northern Aggression” only because of the North’s superior industrial wealth and manpower numbers — not because of General Lee or Confederate President Jefferson Davis— the latter being one of the founders of Lost Cause doctrine. In reality, many of Lee’s failures were epic. So much so that a “conspiracy theorist”  might even be inclined to speculate if Lee — the former superintendent of West Point who had opposed secession before declaring allegiance to the Confederacy  — was secretly working to preserve the Union. Let’s put the legend and propaganda (and passion) aside and consider the poor performance.

1. Robert E. Lee’s portrait is coming down at West Point. // 2 & 3. Virginia: After the pedestal was defaced by Black Lives Matter Communists, the statue was removed.

1. Jefferson Davis lived until 1889. He actively promoted “Lost Cause” ideology which absolved himself politically, and General Lee militarily. // 2. Stone Mountain Monument in Georgia — a project begun in 1915 and completed in 1972 — depicts Davis in front and Lee right behind him. The figure lagging behind them is General Stonewall Jackson — whose reputation as a skilled commander is truly deserved. Jackson died before Gettysburg after having been shot in the arm by friendly fire, dropped twice from a stretcher, and then contracting pneumonia after his arm was amputated. // 3. St. Robert’s statue was once revered — even though Lee himself would never have wanted it.

WAS LEE A CLOSET UNION MAN?
Lee’s father, Henry  Lee, was an early American Patriot, revolutionary war hero and, later on, a Federalist Party (strong Union) politician. He was very close to George Washington (who had once courted Lee’s mother before she married). It was Henry Lee who famously eulogized George Washington at the latter’s 1799 funeral as “first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen.”

– Robert E Lee // pre-war 1861 letter to his son, George Washington Custis Lee (Step Great Grandson of George Washington)

“As an American citizen, I take great pride in my country, her prosperity and institutions, and would defend any State if her rights were invaded. But I can anticipate no greater calamity for the country than a dissolution of the Union. It would be an accumulation of all the evils we complain of, and I am willing to sacrifice everything but honor for its preservation. I hope, therefore, that all constitutional means will be exhausted before there is a resort to force. Secession is nothing but revolution. The framers of our Constitution never exhausted so much labor, wisdom, and forbearance in its formation, and surrounded it with so many guards and securities, if it was intended to be broken by every member of the Confederacy at will. It was intended for “perpetual union,” so expressed in the preamble, and for the establishment of a government, not a compact, which can only be dissolved by revolution, or the consent of all the people in convention assembled.”

*Note: 100,000 southern men volunteered and fought for the Union.

In the June 1969 issue of Civil War History (Volume 5) University of South Carolina professor, proud southerner and renowned historian Thomas L. Connelly  — attacked Lee’s legacy thusly:

“No single war figure stands in greater need of reevaluation than Lee. One ponders whether the South may not have fared better had it possessed no Robert E. Lee.”

Connelly’s 1969 essay was immediately scorned and ridiculed. But the argument that Lee — being out-manned — should have taken a more defensive posture and thus drawn the North into difficult southern terrain makes perfect sense. Instead, he was too often on the offensive and in full frontal assault manner. This resulted in unnecessary heavy casualties and demoralization. All that the Confederacy needed to confirm itself as a separate country was a stalemate. The burden was on the North to defeat and physically occupy the South — an achievement which came after too many losses were suffered by unnecessarily offensive southern forces.

Civil War Historian James McPherson put it this way:

“The South could ‘win’ the war by not losing. However, the North could win only by winning.”

Under Lee’s command, the Army of Northern Virginia racked up a total of 209,000 casualties. That’s 55,000 more than Ulysses S. Grant, who’s been criticized for “butchering” his men. Lee’s unnecessarily offensive strategy, and various other lost opportunities and blunders (here) and (here) — doomed the Confederacy to defeat. Lee burned through men faster than recruitment and the unpopular Confederate draft could replace them.

1 & 2. Thomas Connelly (1938-1991, no photo available) authored many scholarly books on the US Civil War of 1861-1865 — including “The Marble Man” (a title mocking the immortalizing of Lee by statues). Connelly maintains that it was not until the 1880’s that certain southern cliques transformed Lee into the invincible general and, later still, a southern and even a national hero. // 3. Criticism of Lee is still frowned upon in academic circles both North & South — liberal and conservative; but the case of the Correctionist Historians is indeed compelling.

Of all Lee’s blunders, the most damaging and decisive occurred at The Battle of Gettysburg in the opening days of July of 1863. On the third day of battle, in what shamefully became known as “Pickett’s Charge” — (I say “shamefully” because General George Pickett was not responsible for ordering the reckless charge and never forgave Lee (nor spoke to him again) for having ordered it) — Confederate troops were ordered to advance across an open 3/4 mile long field, into the teeth of heavy Union artillery and gunfire.

Lee issued the charge order against the advice of several subordinates. The repulse of “Pickett’s Charge” resulted in more than 6,000 casualties on the rebels — turning the tide of both the battle and the war itself. Lee was severely and properly criticized by military contemporaries and the southern press. What the heck was Lee doing — again, against the advice of subordinates — invading the northern state of Pennsylvania anyway? Even if Lee had won at Gettysburg, the depleted rebel force would eventually have had to retreat southward anyway.

The 1880’s propagandists not only continued to unjustly tag the demoralizing fiasco as “Pickett’s Charge,” but also scapegoated General James Longstreet’s execution of the attack for its failures — another underhanded deflection which Connelly and many modern military strategists find laughable. In a 2006 paper, a Department of Defense research center described Lee’s effort at Gettysburg as a “blunder” that “doomed the hopes of the Confederate States of America.”

The late military historian Edward Bonekemper III — author of “How Robert E. Lee Lost the Civil War” — spoke about Lee’s faults for many years. Early on, he faced much resistance, but before his death in 2017 remarked:

“Now people don’t get nearly as emotional as they used to. They are more open to hearing that there is another side to the story.”

Monuments may fall. But mythologies take a bit more time to undo.

LEE’S CHARGE!

Lee’s name has been scrubbed clean from responsibility for the demoralizing disaster of “Pickett’s Charge” at Gettysburg — leaving Pickett & Longstreet to take the blame for a charge — and a battle — which should never have taken place.

A Confederate soldier of Gettysburg in a letter to his sister:
(misspellings his)

“We got a bad whiping  . . . they are awhiping us . . . at every point. . . . I hope they would make peace so that we that is alive yet would get home agane . . . but I supose Jef Davis and Lee don’t care if all is killed.”  

1 & 2. Edward Bonekemper III — a military historian who caught flak for daring to critique Lee’s decisions. // 3. General George Pickett of “Pickett’s Charge” infamy. His name was eternally dirtied for a disastrous bloodbath which he opposed — yet still bears his name, not that of the exalted “Marble Man” who ordered it.

A Long, Strong Thread

For many of us, our understanding of Native American history ends up a bit simplified. We hit a few major milestones in our history courses, bounce through some examples from entertainment (for better or worse), then watch it fade into the background without it impacting our lives.

But we’re missing so much! The umbrella term “Native American” refers to an immensely diverse history of Indigenous peoples who lived everywhere from the Arctic to the southern tip of South America over tens of thousands of years. And while that’s a far more complex history than can fit in a single month’s worth of attention, we can start expanding our perception by considering just a few of the lasting contributions Native Americans have made to society.

	Checks and Balances: Brian McKenna, anthropology professor at the University of Michigan-Dearborn explains that when the thirteen colonies were fighting, Onondaga leader Canassatego encouraged them to set boundaries to distribute power. He shared the Iroquois Great Law of Peace as an example on how to set checks and balances. In fact, Benjamin Franklin invited the Iroquois Grand Council of Chiefs to speak to the Continental Congress in 1776 to give advice.
	Corn: Author and historian Patrick J. Kigler reminds us that corn was carefully cultivated by Indigenous peoples from wild grass into an edible crop 10,000 years ago. Later, Native Americans taught Europeans how to grow it. And it’s far from the only food source adapted from the Indigenous peoples of the Americas. From Peruvian potatoes to chocolate from the Mayans to staple crops like beans and squash, Kigler estimates that 60 percent of our foods originated from Native American origins.
	Kayaks: Designed by the Inuit of the Arctic, kayaks—small, narrow boats with a sealed cockpit—were originally built using wood or whale bone frames covered by animal hides. Today, “the design is still essentially the same,” says Dr. Gaetanna De Gennaro, supervisory specialist at New York’s National Museum of the American Indian and member of the Tohono O’odahm tribe.
	Snow Goggles: The Inuit are also who we can thank for the predecessor to today’s sunglasses. They used goggles made from wood, bone, antler, or leather to prevent overexposure to sunlight as it reflected off the snow. De Gennaro says, “They’d put a slit in there, to simulate the way that you can squint. It cut down on the ultraviolet rays that got into the eyes.”
	Raised-Bed Agriculture: Mentioned in Emory Dean Keoke and Kay Marie Porterfield’s book, American Indian Contributions to the World, Indigenous peoples from South and Central America made advancements in enriching soil for use in raised garden plots. Called “chinampas” and used in lakes or on swampy land, this technique is a forerunner to today’s raised-bed vegetable farming.
	Topical Pain Relievers: Keoke and Porterfield reference a range of anesthetics and topical pain relievers in their book: jimson weed ground into a plaster for use on abrasions, capsaicin from hot peppers for topical pain relief, and teas brewed from American black willow bark which contains the chemical salicin, an active ingredient in modern aspirin.
	Syringes: While the technology didn’t appear in European nations until the 1850s, Native Americans used syringes fashioned from animal bladders and hollow bird bones to inject medicines into the body.

When it comes to managing the impact humans have on our planet and the mounting effects of climate change, Professor McKenna says the Iroquois have some advice: “The Iroquois have the seventh generation principle, which dictates that decisions that are made today should lead to protecting the land for seven generations into the future.”

Take Away: If your understanding has been narrow, this year’s Native American Heritage Month is the perfect time to begin expanding your perspective. As Dr. De Gennaro says, “People don’t realize the ingenuity or the knowledge that native people had, and continue to have about the world around them.”

Who Blew Up the Hindenburg?

The legendary Hindenburg disaster of 1937, which occurred right here in New Jersey, along with, shall we say, “Geo-political” issues eventually brought about the demise of Zeppelin — structures which had been the great pride of Germany .

Hindenburg Disaster May 6, 1937

Paul von Hindenburg, left, and Adolf Hitler ride in an open car during a parade in Berlin, Germany, May 1933

Hitler shows his respect for the hero of World War I who, at the time, was the most honored man in Germany

The New York Times (February 27, 2020):

Berlin Drops Hindenburg’s Honorary Title for his Role in Nazis’ Rise:
State government strikes former president off list, citing his 1933 act of appointing Hitler as chancellor.

He led Germany’s army in World War I and served for nearly a decade as the country’s president, but thanks to his role in Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler’s rise to power, Paul Von Hindenburg is an honorary Berliner no more.

Oh well. It was only a matter of time before (((they))) could kill the historical personage of Paul Von Hindenburg — whose namesake airship became even better known than he was.

A Zeppelin airship takes its name from German Count Ferdinand Von Zeppelin — a German General and inventor whose company — Luftschiffbau Zeppelin (LZ)–led the development of the rigid flying machines in the late 1800’s / early 1900’s. After the great success of Zeppelin’s design, the word “zeppelin” became used to refer to all rigid airships.

Zeppelins were first flown commercially in 1910 by Deutsche Luftschiffahrts-AG (DELAG) — essentially the world’s first airline service. By the outbreak of World War I in 1914, DELAG had made more than 1,500 flights. During the war, the German military made use of Zeppelins for bombing and scouting.

1. Count Ferdinand von Zeppelin (1838-1917) // 2. 1900: The first flight of the 420-feet-long”LZ 1″ (shown above a large boat) // 3. By 1910, DELAG was flying the Zeppelins (now over 700-feet long) commercially.

The defeat of Germany in 1918 (engineered by Jewish Marxists at home and Jewish Globalists & Zionists from the outside) slowed down DELAG’s business substantially. In 1919, DELAG’s airships were surrendered under the terms of the vicious Treaty of Versailles which had been imposed upon a disarmed Germany. The treaty also prohibited the Germans from building more airships. An exception was made to allow for the construction of a single airship for the US Navy — a transaction which spared DELAG from total extinction and bought the company some more time.

In 1926 the restrictions on airship construction were lifted at a time when some of the oppressive monetary reparations of the Versailles Treaty were restructured. Work was then started on the construction of the airship, Graf Zeppelin (775 feet) — named after the Count. The company was revived and, during the 1930s, the airships Graf Zeppelin and the larger Hindenburg (803-feet) operated regular transatlantic flights from Germany to North America and Brazil.

To enhance revenue, the zeppelins carried transatlantic mail from the United States to Europe. Special postage stamps were minted and sold for this purpose — but the practice was suddenly discontinued (by the U.S.) and the unsold zeppelin stamps were destroyed by the Post Office (a most unusual act which enraged many stamp collectors (here)) Although neither Hitler nor FDR were in power in 1930, could the sudden discontinuation and strange destruction of the stamps have been the result of a general hatred of Germans held by some people already embedded within the federal bureaucracy? Probably.

1. In 1919, the Allies ruined Germany at Versailles — not only seizing land, money, colonies, people and resources from Germany, but also banning its amazing airships. // 2 & 3. DELAG managed to hang on until the ban was lifted in 1926. In 1930, the U.S. Postal Service issued special air-mail stamps for letters shipped to Europe aboard the Graf Zeppelin — but suddenly discontinued the service and destroyed the remaining stamps which could still have been sold to collectors.

The spire of the Empire State Building was originally designed to serve as a mooring mast for the jaw-dropping 750-foot-long marvels of German engineering. But it was found that high winds associated with such high-altitude moorings made the Manhattan mooring idea too impractical. The airships did pass over Jew York during the 1930’s. After 1933, the zeppelins came with Hitler’s Swastika flag on the tail as street-level onlookers gave the “Sieg Heil” salute. “Oy vey!”– the “usual suspects” — who had already, in 1933, “declared war” upon Germany — must surely have shrieked.

The legendary Hindenburg disaster of 1937, which occurred right here in New Jersey, along with, shall we say, “Geo-political” issues eventually brought about the demise of Zeppelins — structures which had been the great pride of Germany — both before and during the righteous reign of Hitler.

The preceding account is pretty much standard knowledge. But there is a little bit more to the story that (((they))) don’t want you to know about.

1. Swastikas flying over New York drove (((them))) crazy! // 2. 1937: The horrible explosion and crash was broadcast live via radio, and then shown on pre-TV news reels (generally seen by movie-goers before the show starts) // 3. Hard to imagine — given what was to come in a few years — that Americans saluted the flag-draped coffins of the fallen Germans.

1. The Hindenburg was a massive structure and engineering marvel, but passenger space was limited. // 2 & 3. The dining room offered spectacular views, slow moving views.

Begun in 1932 and finally launched in 1936, the Hindenburg Airship — named after Paul von Hindenburg — measured an astounding 803 feet — but its beautiful interior could only accommodate about 100 people, a number which includes the well-to-do passengers and crew. General Hindenburg, we should note, was the respected World War I general and later president of Germany who — in order to break the contentious multi-party gridlock that was crippling Germany — named, albeit somewhat reluctantly, Hitler as Chancellor in 1933.

1. Marshall Hindenburg had died in 1934, at age 87 — but the zeppelin bearing his name immortalized him. The Jews and Communists HATED Hindenburg for enabling Hitler’s rise in 1933, and then granting him Emergency Powers to thwart a Communist revolution soon afterwards. // 2. A 1933 KPD (German Communist Party) poster blares: “An End to This System,” and depicts an ominous Red threat aimed at Hitler and Hindenburg (in pointy military helmet).

Prior zeppelins had always been designed to stay afloat using helium — a gas which is not flammable. At the time, however, helium was only available in industrial quantities from plants in the United States. Despite a U.S. ban on the export of helium under the Helium Control Act of 1927, the Germans designed the Hindenburg to use helium in the belief that the US government would license its export. But that assumption was made before FDR and his Jewish-Marxist gang took over America in 1933.

Some important background context….

1. Jewish pressure to destroy Germany began years before the actual second world war started. // 2. 1933. Daily Express (London): “Judea Declares War on Germany.” // 3. 1933 / NY Daily News

When the designers learned that FDR’s administration would not allow helium to be shipped to “Nazi” Germany, the Hindenburg was re-engineered to use hydrogen for its lift instead — a gas which is flammable. The man responsible for denying helium to Germany was Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes — a fanatical German-hater and FDR Marxist. Though the German engineering geniuses were still able to construct a very safe airship — because hydrogen was flammable — there now existed an opportunity for an “accident” with a plausible “explanation” for it.

On May 6, 1937, at the very moment that the Hindenburg was docking before an awed crowd at Lakehurst, NJ, the grand airship burst into flames and crashed, killing 35 of the 97 passengers & crew. “Static electricity” was blamed, yet the Hindenburg had previously endured direct lightning hits! The true cause of the explosion remains unknown to this day. But the unusual amount of news reel cameras present that day, the helium embargo, the timing of the mysterious ignition just as the ship was mooring, the hyping of the idiotic “static electricity” theory, and the anti-German hysteria being whipped up by the press all combine to suggest that the Hindenburg disaster was actually an act of sabotage. Theories ranged from an on-board fanatic-bomber to an incendiary rifle-bullet fired from the nearby woods. The incident shattered confidence in Germany’s zeppelins and marked the end of the airship era. How conveeenient, rriigghhtt.

And now, more than 80 years after the dramatic killing of the Hindenburg Airship, (((they))) are still out to kill Hindenburg’s name — even though the Marshall, being of an aristocratic background, was never actually a true supporter of Hitler’s populist movement.

Paul Von Hindenburg — no longer to be honored.

1. A suspicious blast — at the exact moment of mooring with the cameras filming — destroys Germany’s Airship industry. // 2. It was FDR’s Jewish Secretary of the Interior, Harold Ickes, who would not permit helium exports to Germany. // 3. FDR with the mighty Ickes.

Fort of Castillo San Cristóbal: Built to Defend Against the English, Dutch and Marauding Pirates

Puerto Rico is a unique island with stunning scenery as well as a complex history and fascinating culture. It was part of the Spanish Empire for approximately 400 years and there are many reminders of the long Spanish occupation of the island, the most impressive of which is the fort of San Cristóbal, located in the capital of San Juan. This is regarded as the biggest military fortress in all the Americas and is a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

The Spanish History of Castillo San Cristóbal

In 1521, the Spanish founded the present-day city of San Juan, not long after Columbus reached the Americas, and they established a series of fortifications to protect their new settlement. It was originally known as Puerto Rico and ultimately it gave its name to the entire island.

Over time the settlement became known as San Juan. Its population grew and it prospered which attracted the attention of pirates. In 1595, the English under Sir Francis Drake attacked San Juan and destroyed some of its fortifications. Not long after, in 1598, the town was occupied and sacked by the English once again. The Spanish garrison was besieged in the local fort and they were eventually forced to surrender. Later, in 1628 the Dutch attacked San Juan from the landward side and the town was once again badly damaged. After this attack the Spanish colonial government decided that San Juan needed to be better defended and Castillo San Cristóbal was established.

The Construction of Castillo San Cristóbal

The entire construction took place over a period of 150 years. The Spanish governor built a small redoubt or fort on the hill known as San Cristóbal (Saint Christopher). Along with the fort San Felipe del Morro , it was designed to protect San Juan.

In the 1760s, San Cristóbal was greatly expanded to protect the growing city. The chief engineers of the project were Tomás O’Daly and Juan Francisco Mestre. The construction, a vast undertaking, took place between 1766 and 1783.

The fortification of San Cristobal’s immense walls

Not long after it was completed, the stronghold was badly damaged by an earthquake but was quickly repaired. The fort was key to the successful defense of San Juan in 1787 when the Spanish and Puerto Rican garrison repelled another English attack.

During the Spanish American War, the fortress came under attack from US warships. San Cristóbal’s guns fought a day-long battle with the USS Yale before surrendering, and Puerto Rico became a US territory in 1898. It was later occupied by the American army during WWI and they built observation towers at the site during WWII.

What to See at Castillo San Cristóbal?

A steep ramp leads to the gates of the historic fortress as San Cristóbal overlooks the sea and San Juan. The site is a large one and it stretches over several hectares. It was modeled on the European forts designed by Vauban, a French military engineer who’s considered to be a genius.

San Cristóbal, like other Vauban-inspired forts, is in the form of a hexagon, with a bastion or stronghold at every corner. This was to create dead-zones around the fortress so that the gunners on the walls had a clean line of fire.

The old gate at the east end of Castillo de San Cristobal 

The walls of the fortress are still intact and there are many observation posts, known as guerites, along the walls. They hang over the walls of the fortress and the oldest one dates from 1634. One of the posts, known as the Devils guerites, is believed to be haunted.

Other features of the fortress are cannons, a moat, and various bunkers. There is an impressive square at the heart of the fortress. The fortress also has some well-preserved examples of 19th century coastal artillery.

A portion of the tunnel system that runs beneath San Cristóbal 

The original builders installed a vast cistern in the fortress which is used to irrigate the surrounding area which is a national park. A large maze-like tunnel complex under the stronghold, built to make it more difficult for attackers to seize the site, was used for storage and communications.  

Getting to Castillo San Cristóbal

San Cristóbal is not far from San Juan. An entrance fee is required to visit, and organized tours are available. While some areas of the walls are not open to the public, nearly all the complex can be visited. There is a small museum with exhibitions from the long and dramatic history of San Cristóbal which is situated in beautiful parklands. A range of accommodation is available nearby.

Elizabeth is Dead — Charles is King

What’s next for “The House of Windsor?”

SEPTEMBER 09, 2022

NY Times:


The Queen’s Death Comes at a Moment of Great Uncertainty for Britain

Long an Uneasy Prince, King Charles III Takes On a Role He Was Born To

Queen Elizabeth II, like her great great grandmother, Queen Victoria, reigned (in theory) over Great Britain for many years — close to 64 and 71 years respectively and 135 of the past 182 years — with a few shorter-lived Kings reigning briefly in between. Of course, the real power “behind the throne” of the far flung colonial empire that is no more was not the British Monarchy, but rather The House of Rothschild which seized the island’s finances following the “Napoleonic Wars” and, in the ensuing decades, took control of its media and parliament. By the time Queen Victoria (of the German House of Hanover) was crowned in 1837, the monarchy was not only politically detached from the parliament, but the parliament itself danced to Rothschild’s tune. Two-time Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli was openly linked to the Rothschild’s, as was political leader Randolph Churchill – Winston’s alleged father.

* Note:We say “alleged” because Winnie’s mom, Jenny Jerome, was abed-hopping trollop of the lowest order – but I digress.

Apart from not at all embodying the political power of Rothschild’s Island, neither lady — nor any of the men in between — ever really boldly asserted themselves in terms of expressing opinions on matters political or economic. The only exception was King Edward VII (Elizabeth’s uncle). Edward’s previous praise (while still a prince) of Hitler had already placed him in the cross-hairs of “the usual suspects.” Soon after ascending the throne in January, 1936, Edward continued to cause a stink in parliamentary circles with words and actions that were interpreted as “interference in political matters.” During a tour of poverty-stricken villages in South Wales, for example, Edward commented that “something must be done” for the unemployed coal miners. This simple empathetic comment, uttered during the Great Depression, was actually criticized as an attempt to guide government action — even though he had not  proposed any policy. 

In December of 1936, after less than one year as King, Edward was forced to abdicate the crown to Prince George, his stuttering brother and Elizabeth’s father — the phony pretext being that he was married to an American divorcee, Elizabeth Wallis Simpson. You see, the planned war with Germany would be impossible to pull off with an outspoken “pro-Hitler” King on the throne.

1. Queen Victoria was of the German Hanover line. // 2. Victoria’s spouse, 
Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, came straight from Germany. // 3. In 1917, the First World War caused King George V (Victoria & Albert’s grandson and first cousin to both Kaiser Wilhelm of Germany and Tsar Nicholas of Russia) to officially change the family name from the German “Saxe-Coburg & Gotha” to the current “Windsor.” 

Edward VIII had an activist streak and a political bent — including admiration for Hitler — which could not be tolerated. A pretext was cooked-up to force his abdication in 1936. The following year, Edward visited Hitler with his American wife. Just look at how both of them light up in his presence.

This bit of history brings us to the new King, Charles. Unlike Victoria and Elizabeth, but very much like his granduncle Edward, Charles has not been one to shy away from making political statements and openly advocating for policy changes. Heck — Charlie makes Edward seem shy in comparison! However, unlike Edward, Charles has always remained in good standing with both the UK Judenpresse and the parliamentary class. Why the double standard, you ask?

It’s very simple. Goofy Charlie’s political forays — specifically his advocacy of the Climate Con and his condemnation of Vlad the Bad —  align perfectly with those of “The House.” It’s not that royals aren’t allowed to dabble in politics. If the political posturing is “correct,” then a prince, a queen, a king etc may speak as he please, provided it pleases Rothschild and the Global Crime Syndicate. Unless the White Hats have this creep (who, for all we know, may have had his ex-wife, Diana, murdered) under some sort of submission, expect to hear more nonsense coming from the pretend “king” of England. It’s also possible that, as King Charles, he may decide to finally keep quiet on these matters, especially since his brother, Andrew, was hooked up with Mossad pedo-sex-traffickers Epstein & Maxwell. Either way, we hope he will keep his stupid mouth shut. Better yet, we’d like to see someone shut his treasonous mouth, literally.

The Queen is dead. Short-lived be the King.

* This just in from reader Tom K: The number of days between Q’s very first post on October 28, 2017 and the Queen’s death is 1776 — the year during which the American colonies declared their independence from the Britain of Queen Elizabeth’s great great great great grandfather, King George III. Coincidence?

1. A Global Warmist // 2. A Putin-hater // 3. Not many people can get away with disrespectfully sticking a finger in Charles’s chest. Rothschild can!

Your Life Is At Stake By Following The Herd

Most people have little to no conscious awareness of why they do the things they do. Their behavior is on auto-pilot 99% of the time as their subconscious mind steers them toward meeting its own needs.

It doesn’t matter to the subconscious if its mistaken and the behavior is self-destructive or even dangerous, so long as it thinks it is fulfilling its basic drive to keep you safe amongst your tribe.

We’re hard-wired for social conformity, even when doing so may present an immediate danger to our safety. This phenomenon is well-known, and is illustrated in a social experiment overseen by psychology professor Dominic Abrams in which researchers attempt to answer the following question.

“Behaving differently from your group can make you an outcast. But what would you do if you knew your group was entirely wrong? Would you, for example, sit in a burning room, just because everyone else does?” – Dangerous Conformity

In a hotel room rigged with hidden cameras and microphones, participants in a staged internet marketing event attempt to influence the survival instincts of another by pretending to ignore smoke and smoke alarms in a conference room with eight people.

In short, when the participant was alone in the room when the smoke appeared, their survival instincts kicked in and they left the dangerous situation quickly, even abandoning their possessions.

When the participants was in the room with seven other people who pretended to ignore the smoke, the participant did nothing, staying in the room on an average of thirteen minutes, long enough to have killed them in a real fire.

“I was looking for some sort of reaction from someone else, even just the slightest little thing that they’d recognized that there was something, you know, going on here. For me, to knod of react on that and then do something about it, I kind of needed prodding.” ~ Participant

In 1979 a scenario like this played out in real life in a Woolworth’s department store in Manchester, England. About 500 people were in the building when a fire broke out, which ultimately killed ten and sent forty-seven to the hospital.

Investigators found that the majority of deaths occurred in the restaurant where people simply did not evacuate, presumably because of the ingrained and group behavior of waiting to pay the check.

“Now everybody’s looking at the smoke, but in some ways that gives the group even more influence. After all, if everybody can see the smoke and no one’s panicking, well, it’d be crazy of him to do it to.” ~ Psychology Professor Dominic Abrams

One lesson here is that when people are alone they tend to take responsibility for themselves, however, when part of a group, a person tends to figure out which behavior is the most acceptable to the others, look for the expectable scripted behavior, not embarrass themself by taking the lead, and defer to the norm of the group, even when the norm is dangerous.

Another lesson is that our behavior isn’t scripted by the conscious mind. Instead, behavior is mostly governed by the subconscious mind. If we lack the self-awareness and knowledge of how we choose our behavior, the more likely it is that we will mimic those around us, parrot what everyone else is talking about, and go along with anything just to get along, even at the risk of our own lives.

Today we are witnessing a dangerous manifestation of this. Heavily influenced by 24-hour news and social media culture, masses of people are frozen in the face of overwhelming pressure to conform, forgoing consideration of their own health, wellness and personal conviction, and refusing to object to ever greater control measures.

Many of the ideas to approach our current situation don’t make rational sense, and will certainly create ever-growing dangers for ourselves, however, not wanting to suffer the embarrassment of taking action, so many fail to react to the greater dangers being presented and move toward conformity with the herd.

This concept is twisted even further when you mix in the presence of authority, as demonstrated by Phillip Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment conducted in 1971. Zimbardo’s experiment showed us just how quickly and easily people will conform to the roles of master and subject.

In 1963, Stanley Milgram’s also famous social psychology research showed how a uniform as benign as a lab coat and a clipboard is enough to create a sense of authority amongst others, and that people will consciously physically harm others just because an authority figure instructed them to do so.

This has disturbing echoes in today’s world where all of a sudden so many people feel compelled to demand what medicines another takes, and some even support the idea of severely restricting the freedoms of those who do not conform.

Constantly scanning the environment for clues on how to best fit into its tribe, the aim of the subconscious mind is to be a non-threat to others and to adopt the average behavior of those around. This means that an individual can be compelled to act against his/her own interests in the subconcious’ drive to seek security within its tribe.

At the personal level, manifestations of subconsciously following dangerous herd behavior include all forms of self-sabotage and self attack. Commonly, these take form as poor eating and spending habits, the deterioration of the physical body, dependence on a dangerous medical establishment for health, and deference to psychiatry for mental wellness.

So many people are living as their lesser selves today, constantly pulled down by the average behavior of a sick and dysfunctional tribe.

The most fulfilling lives are those self-directed by our own creativity and our own ambition, and though you may honestly desire to self-actualize into your most powerful self, unless you are aware of how your unconscious mind influences you and pits you against yourself for its own survival, you’re going to have a hard time overcoming the incredible influence of nature.