This publication is not for neophytes; although I have added a few footnotes, comprehension does presuppose a certain familiarity with the major players of the world conspiracy and with the relevant literature. I have tried to avoid referencing the text extensively, because although such a procedure may be considered more scholarly, reading a plethora of footnotes can be a drag, and tends to interfere with the readerís continuity. A selected bibliography is provided in Appendix A.
This publication is based on day one of a two-day seminar held at Wembley Conference Centre and on a half hour off-the-cuff interview with Eustace Mullins. Although all the dialogue which appears herein has been transcribed accurately, it has been subject to severe editing and some of it has been transposed. This is solely for the readerís benefit - to ensure continuity and to aid comprehension. None of the three people interviewed has been wilfully traduced, and, unlike the Guardian and other publications of the ďqualityĒ press, I have not put words into anyoneís mouth. Having said that, any mistakes of inference or of fact are of course entirely my own.
The interview with Eustace Mullins is, I am afraid, woefully inadequate, due mainly to limitations of time and a dearth of research material on his background. I would particularly have liked to have pushed him on The Rabbiís Speech and his publishing of anti-Jewish ďhate literatureĒ, for, even if one takes Mr Mullins at face value as the likable rogue he undoubtedly is, some of his earlier work is simply inexcusable. (1)
I have been involved with the extreme right since the start of the eighties, and since 1988 I have been researching various aspects of right wing ideology in some considerable depth, none more so than conspiriology. The standard knee jerk reaction to any mention of the ďworld conspiracyĒ from the mainstream media is one of contempt, sneering and derision. Those in the media who are more informed are apt to trace any mention of world conspiracy to the Protocols of Zion. Inveitably, charges of anti-Semitism follow, and any further attempt to discuss this difficult subject meaningfully becomes futile. Yet when one examines the evidence and arguments amassed by conspiriologists, dispassionately, one realises that the smears, sneers and derision do not even begin to attempt to refute the conspiracy theory of history, for as one author has pointed out, it canít be refuted. (2)
On the weekend of January 9-10 1993, the Global Deception Conference was held at Wembley, London. There was considerable advance publicity for this conference; if my memory serves me correctly, I heard about it towards the beginning of November 1992. When I read the blurb on the advertising flyer I immediately recognised the name Eustace Mullins: ďWith 40 years of continuous research and with more than 35 books to his credit, Eustace Mullins...is the worldís premier conspiracy historian.Ē
Although I was aware that he had written on the Federal Reserve, his name was more familiar to me as an anti-Semitic propagandist and fabricator of the worst possible sort. I had not, and at the time of the first edition, read any of his books. (3) In spite of my interest in conspiriology, as soon as I saw the name Mullins on the list of speakers, my first inclination was to run a mile. I remembered the phrase: Jews mass poison American children - which I had come across in my researches into anti-Jewish fabrication the previous year. I figured that anyone who wrote something as perverted as that (of which more anon), had to be totally off his trolley. And frankly, the other speakers booked for this conference - the main theme of which appeared to be AIDS - didnít look any more promising. It was only much closer to the conference date that I decided I would attend on one day and hear what Mr Mullins and his fellow cranks had to say. And, I thought, if I could interview him in person, there might be a pamphlet in it.
I attended the conference on the Saturday, and, after queuing up to buy a ticket, arrived in the auditorium a couple of minutes into Dr Streckerís first presentation. On the way in I met Lady Birdwood, and we exchanged a few words. I made a mental note to introduce her to Mullins if I could. Ticket sales for the event were disastrous. Organiser Seal, who had spent a colossal sum staging the event, was angry with the press for the way they had apparently boycotted the conference. This morning she was livid with the Guardian which, she claimed, had libelled her the previous day. (4) This is par for the course for the ďqualityĒ press as much as for the tabloids. Naturally, Seal and others saw the hidden hand behind this smear and the silent treatment, but a much more plausible explanation is the usual press arrogance, sarcasm and wantonness. It is also likely that Seal, in spite of her public relations background, has herself to blame as much as the media for poor ticket sales.
Any event of this size has to be properly advertised, and I had the distinct impression that she hadnít hyped it up as much as she could have. It is simply not good enough to send out press releases here and there, and, I feel, if she had been more forceful with the various sections of the press: minority, left, homosexual, extreme right, psychics...she would have sold a lot more tickets. It might also have helped to stage a publicity stunt or two. This notwithstanding, she didnít get any favours from any quarter, and it is likely that the media was forewarned about her other speakers besides Mullins. I must admit, if Iíd known in advance what Terziski and Summers were going to talk about, I might not have bothered coming myself.
Two things which did rather surprise me were that ďrent-a-mobĒ didnít try to stop the conference, and the fact that ethnic minorities were well-represented, especially Moslems. (5) This country has a long and shameful history of communist orchestrated violence against ďfascistsĒ, and later, racists. Since the 1930s when Oswald Mosleyís Blackshirts were attacked by well-organised gangs of ďanti-fascistĒ thugs, Jew and Gentile, (6) right down to the present when groups such as the Anti Nazi League (a front for the mindlessly violent Trotskyite Socialist Workers Party) and others have used unrelenting pressure against the British National Party and their fellow travellers, it has been all but impossible for anyone on the ďextreme rightĒ to hold public meetings without being subjected to intense harassment. This harassment manifests itself in many ways, from violence and intimidation by ďanti-fascistsĒ to the banning of meetings and the proscribing of public buildings to ďfascistsĒ.
When someone with Mullinsí appalling record as an anti-Semitic propagandist attempts to enter the country, the first group which always screams its head off is Organised Jewry, which manifests itself in Britain through the Board of Deputies of ďBritishĒ Jews. Fortunately, even the Zionists are beginning to wise up, and instead of furious lobbying and delegations to Downing Street, they waived all protest. Mike Whine of the Board of Deputies described Mullinsí views as ridiculous. (7)
The interest by non-whites, particularly the blacks who attended, was, I felt, directly related to the alleged AIDS cover-up. Although right wing conspiracy theories may be frowned on - not just the ďanti-SemiticĒ ones - left wing groups are none too shy about formulating their own conspiracy theories, which are often as ridiculous as those of the extreme right. The Black Muslims, for example, are into flying saucers and all sorts of mystical garbage.
My impression of Mary Seal and Keith Mears is that they are not in any sense extremists, rather they are sincere people who have come to some rather startling conclusions about the cause of world unrest. Seal claims to have been reading conspiracy literature for twelve years, but admits that she is not well up on UFOs. And obviously she has never come across Philip Klass. (8)
Why I ever thought of giving this event a miss Iíll never know, but eventually, realising that this was a golden opportunity to put a world-famous anti-Semitic propagandist on the spot, I decided to go to the conference come what may, though I thought it would be a good idea first to seek a commission from a publication to make the event worthwhile. After having a literally disastrous four years or so freelancing, I am loathe now to write for any publication, but I contacted one, New Moon, a relatively new ďJewish events magazineĒ, and went to Finchley to meet one of the editorial staff, Jack Shamash, who has worked on the Jewish Chronicle and seemed, rightly in my opinion, to hold that paper in as high esteem as does the British National Party.
I gave Shamash an anti-Semitic pamphlet Iíd received from a contact: The Guide To Non-Kosher Food Shopping. (9) He thought it was a riot, and, after photocopying it, pinned the front cover on his office wall! He said that New Moon doesnít pay freelances, which was my second run in with Jewish financial hegemony and mendacity that week. (10) Unperturbed, I suggested to Shamash that he might be able to place an interview with Mullins for me with one of the dailies. Later still, I received a phone call from a character called Guy Ogilvy of RASP, whoíd been given my name by a political contact, and he said heíd be interested in a piece on Mullins and a news piece on the conference. (Eventually he reneged on the commission, a not uncommon experience for me, and I sued the magazine in the County Court). Then came the conference and the presentations: first Strecker, then Mullins.
Dr Streckerís speech was certainly impressive. It was of a purely scientific nature, and its theme was that because AIDS is a syndrome rather than a disease, and because of its complexity, the possibility of its having arisen naturally is so small as to be unthinkable. To wit, AIDS is a man-made disease, the only question about its origin worth asking being: was it released into the environment intentionally or did it escape by accident?
When Strecker began his presentation there could have been no more than a hundred people in the auditorium. His thesis developed along these lines. AIDS arose out of an attempt to create cancer in the laboratory. AIDS, in spite of its main method of transmission, is not a sexually transmitted disease, but a blood-borne pathogen. It does not grow in the venereal tract, and is transferred by the macrophages in the cells, something which has major implications for vaccine development.
All this sounds sound enough, although one can of course nit pick over the meaning of STD etc., but his claim that AIDS will decimate Africa and India, and the unreasonably high rate of infection for the United States does not seem to be consistent with what is actually happening. (11)
Strecker though went much further than even this. He claimed that in 1975 a scientist predicted the spread of a pandemic cancer, and that scientists were already growing such viruses. He cited the well-documented (and quite scandalous) Tuskegee syphilis experiment in which hundreds of rural Southern black men were left untreated in order to monitor the progress of the disease. (12) He also mentioned brainwashing experiments by the CIA and the Federal Government, and claimed that court judgments have been given against the authorities in these matters.
All the above is quite plausible, certainly the suggestion that the CIA or the Federal Government (or an arm of them) would not engage in such dirty tricks is even more absurd, and medical trials are a reality. (13)
However, the claim that AIDS has been deliberately engineered as a weapon of mass destruction borders on the surreal and should not be entertained without a far higher degree of proof than that adduced by Dr Strecker. Moreover, this claim has distinct parallels with one particular piece of anti-Semitic garbage which Mr Mullins churned out in the 1950s. (14) And although the New World Order is anything but a fantasy, the people involved in it are concerned primarily with manipulating the financial system and undermining our human rights and civil liberties, not with wiping us out in so direct a manner. Eustace Mullins was the second speaker, but before I return to him I will mention the ravings of Vladimir Terziski, the nonsense of David Summers, and the interesting if speculative claims of William Cooper.
According to the blurb on the flyer for the Global Deception Conference, Vladimir Terziski holds a BSc. in Physics and an MSc. in both Sociology and Electronics. He is quoted as saying that: ďIn my research as a physicist I have arrived at the unexpected conclusion that anti-gravity is extremely easy to produce without any Sci-Fi hardware...Ē
He also arrived at some other and far more startling conclusions. Namely that the Nazis had developed flying saucer technology and that they had established bases on Antarctica and the Moon. Hitlerís merry men reached the Moon in 1938 apparently. Terziski said they also had a time machine, but Iím not quite sure that he meant a Doctor Who type affair. It was difficult to understand exactly what he did mean, or to take him seriously at all, especially when he went on about Nazis building flying saucers for the Peron government in Argentina after the War, and the quite astounding claim that a team of Nazis and Japanese had crash-landed a flying saucer on the planet Mars in 1945. This craft was said to be the size of a football field. The thing which made my mind up not to come back for more of the same the next day was his claim that he would produce ďevidenceĒ that the British had landed on the Moon in the 1890s! He also went on about crop circles and other preposterous nonsense. Remember, this guy is a highly qualified scientist with two degrees in hard sciences.
To be scrupulously fair to Terziski, he did produce some interesting photographs of gyroscopes. His claim that 90% of UFOs have rotational symmetry on a vertical axis was far less impressive than the claim that the faster you spin a gyroscope, the less it weighs. I couldnít help feeling he was confusing weight with mass here, but if it is true that clocks run slower next to gyroscopes, this could certainly open up fruitful lines of research.
How come all this hasnít been made public before? Simply because the invisible government of the New World Order has masterminded a massive disinformation campaign through the tabloid press. He called this government the Illuminati (15), for want of a better word, and said this group had also bankrolled the Nazis, whom he suggested were in the pay of Satan. Whether or not this was a metaphor, it was too much for a certain Mr G_____, a geriatric nationalist whom I have come across before. [John Gaster (now deceased)]. At this point he stood up and lambasted Terziski, calling him a dirty liar and telling him to name the real culprits: the International Jews!
For all his talk, Terziski does not appear to know the secret of anti-gravity himself, but he is, in my humble opinion, unquestionably sincere. I cannot say the same for David Summers.
According to the conference advertising leaflet, David M. Summers is an Australian journalist with the Australian News Syndicate. Over the past nine years he has travelled in over fifty countries - nice work if you can get it. In at least two of those countries, Summers claims not only to have seen UFOs but to have photographed them personally. He claims to have observed one of these craft - the one he saw in Pakistan - for a total of 75 minutes. As well as his own dubious photographs, Summers showed a number taken by a gentleman named Meier. (16) These were of an Adamski-type (17), and by all accounts Meier is a latter day Adamski clone. He is said to be an invalid with one arm. Anyone who gives more than a secondís notice to his claims must have half a brain.
Meierís photos, which, if my memory serves me correctly, Summers claimed had either not been refuted or had been authenticated, are too absurd for words. One showed a giant tin apparently hovering over a tractor. Meier has had a number of close encounters, and, naturally, his contacts speak to him in German. What else could one expect from Nazis? A 1979 photograph, which may or may not be one of Meierís, shows a craft emblazoned with a swastika, and Nazis in the cockpit!
Commenting on the lack of clarity of most UFO photographs, Summers claimed this was due to the fields around the saucers! This is a good one. But Meierís photos were far from unclear, rather they were too good to be true.
When I spoke to Seal later, I asked her why she had invited a couple of obvious cranks like Terziski and Summers. This part of the conversation went as follows:
Question: You believe all the UFO stuff?
MS: No, I donít believe theyíre extraterrestrial craft.
Question: Do you believe all this stuff about UFOs at the South Pole and all that? Itís garbage.
MS: Iím sorry, I know nothing about UFOs at the South Pole; Iíve never looked into that question, and itís quite possible it is garbage. I had him [Vladimir Terziski] come over to explain anti-gravity propulsion (as a physicist). Of course, heís done his own research, and heís presented part of that research... [Later, Seal denied that she had ever said she knew nothing about UFOs and claimed that she had been looking into this subject for some time, as obviously she has, but I think this is just as obviously a misunderstanding on her part and refers specifically to the claim that UFOs emanate from the South Pole].
Question: But all the stuff heís said about UFOs landing on the Moon...
MS: I do believe that NASA has got a secret space programme, that I do believe.
Question: But [David Summers] mentioned the MJ-12 saucer crash documents. They are proven fakes. (18)
MS: Those are fakes. He mentioned them within the context of his whole speech to show the amount of disinformation which is deliberately being pushed.
Question: And he claimed to have seen [and photographed] UFOs on more than one occasion.
MS: David, yeah.
Question: I donít believe that; I think heís a bare-faced liar.
MS: Why do you say that?
Question: Itís pushing the point a bit, isnít it?
MS: What would you say if I told you Iíd seen a UFO, would you believe me?
Question: You saw a flying saucer?
MS: I saw a flying saucer.
Question: How many times?
MS: I saw one in daylight, then I saw [a] light and then I saw another object.
Question: But did you see a flying saucer?
MS: I saw something resembling the classic mother ship shape out of which came three objects.
Question: He [David Summers] also virtually authenticated George Adamski, who was the most brazen, bare-faced liar who ever lived.
MS: No, he hasnít authenticated George Adamski; he has made the point that the Adamski craft is exactly the same as the Nazi-developed craft.
Question: But Adamski was a bare-faced liar.
MS: Adamski was working for the FBI, and I have documents to prove it.
Question: He was working for the FBI?
MS: Of course. He was spreading disinformation. I have documents to prove that Adamski was under the influence of the FBI, and he was deliberately spreading the extraterrestrial myth.
Question: What documents are these?
MS: They are Freedom of Information documents that prove that the FBI had connection with Adamski [which] went on [for] four or five years.
Question: His campaign went on a lot longer than that, didnít it? He wrote three books. (19)
MS: Disinformation. Disinformation all the time.
Question: So you think there are flying saucers...
MS: I think that governments have got highly classified top secret technology which they wonít make known because they have their own agenda.
According to all the speakers who mentioned UFOs - Terziski, Summers and Cooper - they operate on independent gravitational fields, whatever that means. They have to overcome the G Forces generated by making 90 and 180 degree turns at fantastic speeds. Obviously if there were living beings aboard, then, as we understand the laws of physics, they would be mashed to pulp. This is not to say that we cannot rewrite the laws of physics as we understand them, but before we overturn the enormous body of scientific evidence which tells us that such things are impossible, we will need much stronger evidence than was presented here.
Summers stated uncategorically that UFOs exist, and that many UFO groups are run by intelligence agencies and by New Age groups, ie liars and cranks. The Roswell incident was yet another example of disinformation by the Illuminati. [Donít forget, we have to call it something.]
The really unfortunate part of Summersí presentation was that when he started to talk about plain, old-fashioned deception and disinformation, he made a great deal of sense. All the disinformation on UFOs was, he claimed, part and parcel of the campaign to destroy human rights and civil liberties worldwide. Undoubtedly there is a lot of disinformation in the UFO movement, but most of it comes from cretins like Summers rather than from covert CIA and NSA operations and the like. Summers quoted extensively from the Spotlight and dragged in the New World Order, the CFR etc.
UFOs are a political bombshell, he said, one of the greatest geo-political secrets of our times. More kids die each year than all the Jews who died in the Nazi concentration camps. (20) So what is the point of all this? UFOs are being used as a deliberate ploy by the conflict managers and peddlers of crisis to enslave us in a world supra-government.
Crisis management is not a new idea, it is one which is peddled all the time by the state paternalists and other collectivists. It goes something like this:
The problems we face are not just difficult, they are virtually insurmountable. The only way we can solve them is by sacrificing all our civil liberties and subjecting all our business and social activity to state control.
As I said, the argument is not a new one; itís sinister, devious and mendacious as well as fallacious, but is it a conspiracy? (21)
This view is shared by William Cooper (of whom more anon), Mary Seal, Keith Mears, and, undoubtedly, a great many other people.
Question: You say thereís this campaign to convince us that weíre under attack from outer space?
Mary Seal: Yeah.
Question: Thatís not a new idea, that was actually mooted in a novel called Wild Card back in 1974. (22)
MS: Yes, this idea has been going on since the 30s, War of the Worlds.
Question: What do you think we should do about it? Do you think the root of all evil is the financial system, credit creation?
MS: Of course it is, and the root of all evil is also advanced technology, because when you have advanced technology, you can control people, you have the superiority over them. So really the whole crux of the question is the UFO phenomena [sic] in all this; you look into the UFO phenomena and everything else suddenly makes sense.
David Rockefeller must laugh up his sleeve when he hears talk like this. For all his ridiculous talk and clever photomontages, Summers did say one or two things that were worthwhile, particularly the way police powers have been greatly increased in the United States under the pretext of fighting the ďwar on drugsĒ. The same thing has of course happened here, and the media still relentlessly pursues this red herring under the guise of rooting out the wicked drugs barons instead of asking what right the government has to decide what you can shove up your own nose.
William Cooperís presentation was a curious mixture of unsubstantiated speculation and undeniable fact. As well as talking, he showed a film about mysterious goings-on at a secret US Air Force base in the Nevada Desert. Both the film and his talk dragged on and on, but there can be no doubt that under all the speculation and hype, there is something going on.
The Stealth fighter aircraft is no flying saucer, although it certainly looks like one from the right angle, and there is definitely something happening in the desert which the US Government does not want the people to know about. (23) One very interesting point Cooper made was the campaign against CFCs. Ozone depletion, he said, is a myth, and backed up this claim with quotes from scientists.
On 26th September 1992, the Libertarian Alliance held a conference on the Environment, and concluded much the same. The explanation mooted for the environmentalist panic at the LA conference was that the ecology movement has been taken over by demagogues, collectivists, paternalists and careerists. Cooper though had a very interesting (and plausible) conspiratorial explanation: the patents for CFCs are running out! (24)
At the end of the first day of the conference, members of the audience were invited to question the speakers. Unfortunately, this resulted in a number of lunatics assailing the platform, including one woman who referred to the ďmiracleĒ at Fatima, and a man who claimed (or at least postulated) that Hitler had thirteen lamas in the bunker with him when he committed suicide.
A pigmented gentleman (as David Irving would say), who was obviously a Moslem, asked if he understood correctly that certain Jewish people were behind the New World Order. In short, was this the Jewish world conspiracy again? Fortunately, Cooperís answer was as sensible as Terziskiís presentation had been absurd.
There is a conspiracy, and there are Jews involved. There are also people of other faiths and none involved. The Jewish grocer down your street is just as much a victim as you. Mary Seal put it much the same way when I spoke to her earlier:
Mary Seal: You can trace all these people [the CFR, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg Group], but itís nothing to do with the Jews or the Catholics...
Question: The reason it looks like the Jews is because there have been a lot of Jews involved in it.
MS: Of course.
Question: Many people think that if there is a conspiracy with fifty members and ten of them are Jews...
MS: Itís not a Jewish conspiracy...I think the Jewish people are being used by these people, I do believe that, and I do believe that they will suffer as much as we will when this New World Order comes in.
Mullinsí thesis was that modern governments cannot survive without an external threat, and that since the time of the Russian Revolution, and indeed before, the conflict managers and empire-building bureaucrats have consciously manufactured one external threat after another.
World War I was fought for economic reasons, Germany was taking British markets. The latter claim is unquestionably true, as is the claim, often made by other writers, that the Versailles Treaty set the world on course for World War II. There was no mention as yet, nor indeed in Mullinsí entire speech of Jews (as Jews), and it should be noted that this interpretation of history is not incompatible with mainstream Marxism. The idea is that ďImperialismĒ wants/needs war. The most cursory examination reveals this argument to be deeply flawed. What Imperialism wants is markets, and the only reason it wants markets is because of a serious flaw in the financial system: the acute deficiency of purchasing power. Why else should any nation want to sell capital and consumer goods when its own infrastructure needs developing and improving, and when its own citizens can benefit from the consumer goods it can produce in abundance?
Rightly or wrongly, Mullins blamed the Bank of England for World War II. He mentioned the Jekyll Island conspirators and the institution of the Federal Reserve - something which has since been documented by many authors. (25) During the First World War, the House of Morgan financed the British government, and the British Secret Service rather than the Jews were behind the Bolshevik Revolution. With the Bolshevik seizure of power, Russia was removed from the world scene as a competitor for foreign markets, a theme also emphasised by Sutton, and, indeed, Sutton goes further, suggesting that not only was the Soviet Union removed as a competitor, but that it was reserved as a captive market for the monopoly capitalists. (26)
The Sutton revelations make this clear, indeed, this is the ugly fact that lies behind the myth of the Cold War. Forget all the talk about ďWe will bury youĒ, forget the race to the Moon, forget the dirty tricks of the KGB and the CIA, forget the phony Cuba missile crisis and the arms race, forget all the dross about the communist menace, the reds under the bed and the ďEvil Empire of the Soviet UnionĒ, this was all just window dressing. The true facts are very different: the Soviet Union would never even have existed, much less survived, without the explicit financial and technological assistance of the United States and the rest of the ďFree WorldĒ from the Bolshevik seizure of power to the present day. Whatever the politicians say, whatever the intellectual prostitutes of the controlled media say or donít say, whatever the Socialist Workersí Party or the KGB itself believe, the Soviet Union was made in the USA and has existed by dint of hand-outs disguised as peaceful trade since its inception. (27) Early in his speech, Mullins made the statement: ďYour greatest enemy - no matter what your nationality - is your own government.Ē
If you are an American, that is certainly true. It is only a pity that he did not say this forty years ago instead of attempting to lay all the blame on the Jews. What is one to make of Mullinsí British conspiracy angle of the Bolshevik Revolution? Certainly the Americans, the British and the Germans aided the Bolsheviks. As Sutton has written, ďHistorians must never forget that Woodrow Wilson ...made it possible for Leon Trotsky to enter Russia with an American passport.Ē (28)
As well as the dubious activities of the Warburg brothers, Mullins claimed that Lenin was poisoned by Stalin, and later in his speech he likened the Democrats and the Republicans to the Trotskyite and Stalinist wings of the Bolsheviks. Thatís what Irangate was all about. It was the Washington equivalent of the Moscow show trial. This appears to have caused some confusion, to my fellow researcher at least, but he did not mean that the Democrats and the Republicans were literally communists.
Mullinsí claim that the Fed is run from London is not entirely convincing. 53% of the stock of the Federal Reserve is owned by banks chartered in London was what he actually said, but added that it is an hereditary monopoly that is controlled from London.
Some of his claims in connection with the Second World War are extremely interesting, but if they are to be taken seriously, they will require a very high degree of proof, which in all likelihood will never be forthcoming. (29) Mullins claimed that Hitler never wanted war with Britain, which, in spite of the lies which still saturate the controlled media, is a fact that cannot reasonably be disputed by serious historians. (30)
However, his claims that the Anglo-German Fellowship duped Hitler into war and that he attacked Stalin in 1941 because of this are highly speculative. And what are we to make of the claim that Charles Lindbergh was married off to one of the conspiratorsí daughters to keep him out of the way and that the kidnap and murder of the Lindbergh baby was all part of the same plot?
However plausible are these claims, the claims Mullins makes about himself are far less so; in many ways they are self-serving:
His book, Secrets of the Federal Reserve was, he said, commissioned by Ezra Pound, who paid him ten dollars a week to write it, while still incarcerated. (31) This is undoubtedly true, and it may be true also that Mullins was under surveillance by the FBI for 33 years, but this needs some qualification. (32)
He joined the staff of the Library of Congress, and, he claims he was sacked because he was writing for the Social Crediter. This does not ring true. (See interview). He also made the curious claim that Major Douglas did not understand that taxation is an instrument of social control. Anyone who reads Douglas will realise how absurd this claim really is.
The suggestion that J. Edgar Hoover tried to have him, Mullins, ďnutted offĒ because he wrote to the press accusing the FBI of being a tool of the communists may indeed be well-founded, but anyone who seriously believes the FBI to be a communist front probably deserves to be nutted off.
Although many of his claims may sound outrageous (to the uninitiated), his speech was totally free from anti-Semitism. Before the recess, I caught up with Mullins and told him that I would like to interview him at length. I told him that I was covering the conference for a Jewish magazine but that I myself am not Jewish. I also told him that I was researching into conspiriology myself. He agreed willingly and we went in search of somewhere to conduct the interview. We ended up in his dressing room. Here then, with additional notes, is what he had to say:
Question: May I ask how old you are, sir?
Eustace Mullins: Iím seventy years old.
Question: You donít look it.
EM: Thank you. People tell me that.
Question: Youíre the protegť of Ezra Pound?
EM: I am, the last living protegť as a matter of fact, and of course you know four of his protegťs got the Nobel Prize, but I havenít yet. [Laughing.]
Question: Iíve only ever found one of your books in the British Library, thatís your biography of Pound which I was looking through the other day. (33)
EM: I donít have distribution in England, but I should have. Iím negotiating with a couple of publishers because I think thereís quite a market here.
Question: Which publishers?
EM: Routledge Kegan and, I forget the other one; Routledge Kegan are quite interested.
Question: Have you tried any of the other distributors: Historical Review Press or Bloomfield Books? (34)
EM: No, I havenít, I wonít be able to pursue those things but I hope to come back in a few weeks and get something going. I think my books are ready to be distributed here.
Question: I havenít actually read any of your books, but I have read a fair amount of conspiracy theory: Gary Allen and people like that.
EM: These are spin offs from me. Gary Allen ordered all my books before he wrote his books, and frankly attributed his work to me [in early printings] but later he dropped it out.
Question: Was that None Dare Call It Conspiracy?
EM: Yes, in early editions he quoted extensively from my work, but later that was eliminated. I pretty much pioneered in the development of this World Order conspiracy after World War Two through Poundís work. Pound had already worked on it thirty years or so himself.
Question: I havenít read much Pound but I have read a fair amount of Douglas and I am very sympathetic to his ideas. Have you come across Kitson at all? (35)
EM: Oh yes, Pound put me onto Kitson, Douglas, all those people.
Question: What about Mrs Emery in the United States?
EM: Mrs Emery, that name does ring a bell.
Question: The Peopleís Party back in the 1890s.
EM: I donít go back that far with the populists. Most of the people I work with in the States today call themselves populists. Clinton is calling himself a populist. [Laughing.]
Question: I found a small book of hers called Seven Financial Conspiracies Which Have Enslaved The American People; it was published in 1892. (36)
EM: I think I encountered that book at the Library of Congress quite a few years ago. Itís quite an interesting book. I did most of my research at the Library of Congress. There I came into contact with a lot of sources that I would not have found elsewhere.
Question: Itís nearly as big as the British Library, the Library of Congress, isnít it?
Question: What university did you graduate from?
EM: Washington Lee, which is called the Princeton of the South. It was founded by Washington and Lee, both of whom would have been hung for treason.
Question: Youíve published about thirty-five books?
EM: Yes, covering a multitude of subjects, pamphlets and so forth. There are actually fifteen books available now in bound form of which The Federal Reserve was one of the first, then The World Order, Curse of Canaan, Writ for Martyrs and Murder By Injection, each of these exposes a different conspiracy. Iíll be talking tomorrow about the medical conspiracy.
Question: I donít know if Iíll be here tomorrow. Who publishes your books?
EM: I self-publish, self-distribute because thereís no publishing house in the United States which would publish these books.
Question: Not even the Noontide Press?
EM: I work with Noontide; Noontide is distributing my books but I still prefer to keep on publishing myself.
Question: Who finances them?
EM: I finance all my books out of my cash flow; they sell very well.
Question: Are you a man of independent means?
EM: No, actually I live on my books and on my income from speaking and so forth. (37)
Question: Do you have any connection with Willis Carto and company? (38)
EM: Yes, theyíre one of the main distributors of my books. Iíve know Willis since 1952. They do promote my books and have publicised me quite a bit over the last several years.
Question: You have been called an anti-Semite.
EM: Oh yes, regularly, Ezra Pound was also called an anti-Semite. And in fact Ezra, in his radio broadcasts, did become quite anti-Jewish in the late forties, because he felt that the Jews had played that role and had instigated the War. He probably over-emphasised that, but at the same time he never had any prejudice against working with Jewish poets like [name unintelligible] and Stephen Spender and so forth. (39) Many Jews came to visit Pound during [unintelligible but probably a reference to Poundís incarceration after the War].
Question: Personally I donít believe Pound was an anti-Semite.
EM: No, he wasnít an anti-Semite, and neither am I myself.
Question: I would have to take issue with that. [If youíre no longer an anti-Semite] you have been. Tell me about The Rabbiís Speech.
[See Appendix C for the full text of The Rabbiís Speech and A Racial Program For The Twentieth Century.]
EM: The Rabbiís Speech was brought to me, and I felt it was an important document which should be released, and it was released, and actually was translated in Europe by Einar Aberg of Sweden, and he flooded the continent with it, many thousands of copies. Actually, now that you mention it, I havenít heard of that in many years. It came out in í52.
Question: Itís been republished fairly recently.
EM: Has it really? I havenít seen that.
Question: It was published by Lady Birdwood. Have you heard of Lady Birdwood? (40)
EM: Oh yes, Iíve heard of her. Has she republished it?
Question: Yes. [And she believes every single word of it!]
EM: Iíll be damned.
Question: A Racial Program For The Twentieth Century.
EM: Yes, oh the Israel Cohen [book - which never existed!]. Well, that again was something that was done a long time ago, and it keeps popping up. And I have no connection with anybody whoís reprinting or distributing any of these things at the present time.
Question: Where did you obtain that from?
EM: I got that at the Library of Congress, I think itís in the Congressional Record, Iím not sure. It goes back a long way. [Laughing.]
Question: Let me put this to you as diplomatically as I can. The Rabbiís Speech and Israel Cohenís A Racial Program For The Twentieth Century are notorious anti-Semitic fabrications, the products of a sick, diseased mind. Yours.
EM: Really. [Laughing.] Thatís a rather harsh decision. I couldnít agree with that.
Question: Okay, letís try some other stuff: Jews Mass Poison American Children.
EM: Gosh, I donít even remember that one. Youíre going back about forty years. At my age I donít remember things as well as I did.
Question: This was published in June 1955. Iím taking this from page 215 of ANTISEMITIC PROPAGANDA: An Annotated Bibliography and Research Guide, by Robert Singerman, published by Garland, (1982).
[See Appendix B for Mullinsí entries in this bibliography.]
EM: Iíve never seen that.
Question: Youíve got a few entries in it.
EM: Have I? A lot of things pop up...I will say that a lot of things have been circulated with my name on them. [Mullins laughed here and tried to make a joke out of it.]
Question: Do you deny that you wrote an article on the Salk vaccine?
EM: I wrote an article on what?
Question: On the Salk polio vaccine?
EM: I may have. That again is going far back. As you see, my books over the last twenty-five years donít deal with anything [like that] because I went into deeper research on other subjects and I was no longer interested in those things.
Question: The Biological Jew, which was published circa 1968, is another of your works, I believe. I havenít seen it but itís been described as a nasty little book. Perhaps youíd like to tell me why it isnít nasty.
EM: Interestingly enough, that whole theory came to me from Joe McWilliams, who was also called an anti-Semite. He was a leader of a Christian front back in the forties in New York City. (41) He was an Irish Catholic and he had practically all of the Irish policemen in New York City as members of his group. And he developed this theory that Jewish people over the years had developed a parasitic method of life, [battening] on their host and so on. So I developed that, I did some work on parasitism at the Library of Congress, and it was a viable theory, and I published this book in 1968. Itís never been republished, but itís still floating around.
Question: You think Jews are parasites?
EM: This was a study of Jews in European history as a parasitic organism, and Pound himself believed that, he thought that the ghettos were a sort of parasitic enclave in the cities of Europe, so it was certainly a theory worth pursuing, and I pursued it, though Iíve never done any more on it [sic] since 1968. (42)
Question: I donít know about parasitic, though theyíre certainly paranoid, but with certain people [like you] around, theyíve every right to be.
Your book, Mullinsí New History of the Jews was described by no less a person than A.K. Chesterton as rabidly anti-Semitic in Candour magazine in an article entitled THIS MAN IS DANGEROUS. (43)
EM: Oh yes, I saw that, and interestingly enough, not long after that, A.K. Chesterton wrote to me appealing for me to help me collect royalties from a publisher - we had the same publisher [Serpico?] of California - so after attacking me like this, a few weeks later Chesterton writes to me asking me to do anything I could [sic] to help him collect royalties from Serpico, which no one could collect royalties from Serpico [sic], there was nothing I could do. But I thought it was chutzpah on his part, first he denounces me, then he asks for my help.
[The fact that Chesterton asked him for help (if he did) hardly mitigates the tone of the article, which was spot on. Incidentally, I personally believed the Israel Cohen quote was genuine for many years because it seemed just the sort of stupid, asinine thing a Jewish communist would say. Readers of Socialist Worker will understand why.]
Question: Money talks the same language. Now, you said you were hounded by the FBI and that you were kicked out of the Library of Congress because of your researches.
EM: I was under daily surveillance for thirty-three years, my file shows that. And I was fired by direct FBI intervention, but they were sent over by Senator Herbert Lehman who was at that time National Chairman of the Anti-Defamation League.
Iím still battling the ADL by the way, I have a thirty million dollar lawsuit going against a newspaper in the States now on that same thing.
Question: Leaving aside the fact that the ADL is a somewhat feisty organisation, it was reported in a book, They Never Said It, by a person whose name escapes me, that you were sacked by the Library of Congress for distributing anti-Semitica. (44)
EM: No, thatís totally false, the record shows thatís totally false because I actually sued the Library of Congress for reinstatement, and in their denial of reinstatement, they did not mention that, which they certainly would have, if that had been the case. Iíve never seen that claim anywhere in print. Itís totally false. I have all the documents relating to my dismissal, which was as a probationary employee. And that was never mentioned as a cause; what they said was that I had been writing for the Social Crediter, but they did not say that it was anti-Semitic. The Social Crediter had articles which were critical of the Jews, but mainly it was not what youíd call an anti-Semitic newspaper.
Question: I donít believe Douglas was an anti-Semite.
EM: No, he was not, and the Social Crediter was not an anti-Semitic paper. I think itís out of print now, but Iím not sure.
Question: In 1968 you published My Life in Christ, which is described by Singerman as ď90 pages, explains how Marxist Jews and the Mafia control the FBI and the CIAĒ.
EM: Yes, in fact that theme is further developed in my book A Writ For Martyrs which is much longer, which contains 120 pages [reproduced from] my FBI file.
Question: Impeach Eisenhower?
EM: That was a pamphlet; I was a pamphleteer in those days, and this lady had published this little paper in Chicago, and I wrote some rather inflammatory things for her at that time.
Question: Like: Eisenhower is a willing tool of his Jewish advisers, all of whom are international communist agents?
EM: Well, that was the [headline] on this thing which was put on by this lady - the editor - she was very, openly anti-Semitic. She actually put some of these headlines on my articles, which were inflammatory. At that time I was working with her, and she was pretty much running it the way she wanted to.
Question: Who was she?
EM: Mrs Lyrl Clark Van Hyning, and the paper was called Womenís Voice: We The Mothers United For America. These were the mothersí groups who went to Washington and picketed Roosevelt because he was trying to get us into the Second World War. In other words, these mothers did not want their sons killed in foreign wars. So they were approaching it from a very personal standpoint.
[This ladyís name was mistakenly given as Lyrl Park Van Hyning in the first edition. Her outfit appears to have been called ďWe the Mothers Mobilize for AmericaĒ, though this mistake was probably mine].
Question: You also wrote for Christian Vanguard?
EM: Oh yes, I was [unclear] for Christian Vanguard for years; that paperís defunct now.
Question: It is [or was] a grotesquely anti-Semitic paper; Iíve seen it. (45)
EM: Christian Vanguard was actually a Christian identity newspaper which published most of the articles on Christian identity. It reprinted Dr Wesley Swift, Dr [unclear], but they did have, I guess you would say, anti-Jewish articles from time to time. That paper is defunct now.
[Christian Vanguard may have been its name, but there was nothing Christian about it, although it was definitely in the vanguard of extreme anti-Semitism. Issue 50 was a Julius Streicher ďMemorial EditionĒ, February 1976, a 16 page translation of the repulsive May 1934 issue of Streicherís hate sheet Der StŁrmer. (46)]
Question: I read an article in it by Ben Klassen which made out a very strong case against the Federal Reserve, but it was all Jews, Jews, Jews. [This article was actually published by Klassen himself and is listed by Singerman, page 324 (op cit) as The Brutal Truth about Inflation and Financial Enslavement. The Federal Reserve Board, the most Gigantic Counterfeiting Ring in the World, published by the Church of the Creator, Lighthouse Point, Fla, (1979), 16 pages.]
EM: Ben Klassen was very violently anti-Semitic, Iíve never worked with him. Later, he started his own newspaper called Racial Identity.
Question: Racial Loyalty.
EM: Racial Loyalty - Iíve never [had anything to do with that].
Question: Harold Covington described it as Racial Toiletry. (47)
EM: Harold Covingtonís an FBI agent, [thatís been] known for many years.
Question: Heís living in East London at the moment. (48)
EM: Is he really? He circulated some very violent smears against me. [Laughing.]
Question: With respect, Mr Mullins, with respect to your earlier career, he wouldnít have had to try very hard. Do you deny that you wrote Jews Mass Poison American Children?
EM: I donít recall that article at all.
Question: On the Salk vaccine.
EM: I think there again that was a headline which Mrs Van Hyning put on it, and that that was not what the body of the article was about. When you go back forty or so years itís difficult to remember. And these were very small circulation magazines which had about fifteen hundred circulation throughout the United States.
[The fact that the circulation of such publications is very small gives the lie to the wilder claims of Organised Jewry that there are Nazis lurking behind every bush. But it in no way mitigates the content of the articles.]
Question: You donít consider yourself an anti-Semite?
EM: Not at all, in my latest book, Murder By Injection, I attribute practically all the directions of my research - not that I used any of their material - to Maurice Beal [sic?], Dr Robert Mendelsohn and Dr Emmanuel Josephson [sic?], and I knew the last two very well. These were three Jewish...
Question: Robert Mendelsohn published a book called Dissent In Medicine. (49)
EM: Yes, he died very suddenly of a heart attack. [He was] a lot younger than I am; a lot of people think he was done in. He was appearing on a lot of national TV shows. He was a licensed MD, [and] a member of the AMA, and he had begun to expose some of the abuses of the medical profession, and he really was an iconoclast, and my impression was that Robert Mendelsohn was a very brilliant, able fellow, and he began to do this out of a sort of snobbery...because he was contemptuous of the other doctors, Jews and non-Jews, that he had to work with. Thatís why he began to criticise them. (50)
Question: Do you believe Jews are parasites?
EM: Parasites? Uh, no, as I say, this was a theme that I developed in 1968 in that one book. Iíve never referred to it again and in fact there is nothing about Jews in my last five books in the past twenty years simply because I moved into larger spheres, the world order...
Question: And you realised that the Jewish question is a red herring?
EM: Itís a red herring. The only mention of Jews as I say is that I mention that the direction of my research was guided by these three Jews, and theyíre the only people that I mention in the book. They were largely responsible for my writing that book.
Question: Do you believe that communism is Jewish?
EM: No, I covered that in my talk today. Communism had a sort of native Russian wing under Stalin and a more international Jewish wing under Trotsky, and the international Jewish wing under Trotsky pretty well took over the Republican party of the United States in 1980 under the guise of neo-conservatism.
Question: You donít believe that communism is a poison spread by Jews?
EM: No indeed. Even though Karl Marx was Jewish, Trotsky was Jewish and so forth. They say Lenin was a Jew... [Marx may have been descended from the rabbinate, but his credentials as an anti-Semitic propagandist are a matter of record though largely (and pragmatically) forgotten today.]
Question: No. (51)
EM: But I donít consider that a particularly Jewish operation.
Question: You do realise that the two outstanding intellectual opponents of communism this century were both Jews: Ayn Rand and Ludwig von Mises? (52)
EM: Oh, well, I would say that Ayn Rand was not so much anti-communist as a native American conservative who believed in the free market system. [Ayn Rand was actually born in Russia.]
Question: Do you believe in the Jewish world conspiracy or the world Zionist conspiracy?
EM: Well, there definitely is a worldwide Zionist movement which is conspiratorial and which manifests itself in many ways through the depredations of Mossad and the Anti-Defamation League, [the latter of] which I come into personal contact with quite frequently. Most of the attacks on me here in England have come through the Anti-Defamation League; that is an international organisation, so that certainly would be an international Zionist conspiracy because I have never been in England, my books have never been circulated over here, and suddenly when I come here, there are these virulent articles that I am a sinister lunatic and so forth, which of course is pre-judgment... (53)
Question: Okay, I wonít push you on the authorship of Israel Cohenís Program and The Rabbiís Speech, but do you believe they are genuine?
EM: They were certainly brought to me under good auspices.
Question: By whom?
EM: By someone who came to me through the embassy...
[He pretended that he couldnít remember.]
Question: You do accept that there is a tremendous amount of anti-Jewish fabrication circulated by anti-Semitic groups?
EM: Strangely enough I find that thereís practically no anti-Semitic provocation in the United States at the present time. Almost all the old anti-Semitic newspapers have disappeared: Womenís Voice, Common Sense and so forth. I donít consider Willis Cartoís Spotlight an anti-Semitic publication.
[Possibly he misheard fabrication for provocation.]
Question: No, but the Protocols of Zion is still in circulation; surely you donít believe that to be true?
EM: The Protocols of Zion were proven before a court in Berne, Switzerland, to be a forgery. And a forgery is an unauthorised copy of something which does exist. If you sign my name, that does not mean that my name doesnít exist, it means that youíve forged my [signature]. So from that standpoint, that theyíve been officially, legally found as a forgery, I would have to say that there is some basis for them somewhere.
[This is the sort of specious argument which the more ďsophisticatedĒ anti-Semitic propagandists use. It is nothing more than a semantic fallacy because the word ďforgeryĒ when used in this sense clearly refers to a fabrication.]
Question: Have you read Herman Bernsteinís refutation? (54)
EM: No, I havenít.
Question: Bernstein traces the Protocols to Maurice Jolyís Dialogues In Hell, and proves conclusively that they are a plagiarism of this work.
EM: Joly, yes, Iíve heard of that, but I havenít gone into it that deeply.
Question: Do you accept that the Protocols were used to incite hatred against the Jewish people?
EM: By the secret police?
Question: By organised Jew-haters. By the fellow travellers of Henry Ford, and by anti-Semitic propagandists to this day.
EM: Henry Ford believed them to be true, and Henry Ford was not a dummy by any means.
Question: I donít doubt that, but we can all be wrong. Weíve just seen a university graduate in there telling us that the Nazis flew to Mars at the end of the War and that they had a secret military base on Antarctica. So you donít have to be a fool to believe rubbish.
EM: No, thatís true. I think too people always look for melodrama, and perhaps the Protocols were a bit of melodrama which excited Henry Fordís interest. Hitler had Fordís photograph on his desk.
Question: By organised Jew-haters. By the fellow travellers of Henry Ford, and by anti-Semitic propagandists to this day.
EM: Henry Ford believed them to be true, and Henry Ford was not a dummy by any means.
Question: I donít doubt that, but we can all be wrong. Weíve just seen a university graduate in there telling us that the Nazis flew to Mars at the end of the War and that they had a secret military base on Antarctica. So you donít have to be a fool to believe rubbish.
EM: No, thatís true. I think too people always look for melodrama, and perhaps the Protocols were a bit of melodrama which excited Henry Fordís interest. Hitler had Fordís photograph on his desk.
Question: Yes, he did. Now can we talk a bit about the real conspiracy?
Question: The Federal Reserve conspiracy is a reality. The Fed is a private banking institution, itís run for profit for a small clique of international financiers, thereís no doubt about that. How can we get rid of the Fed?
EM: In my book The World Order, in the last chapter, I point out very decisively that all of these operations: pitting Christians against Jews, and various nationalities against each other, are manipulated by the World Order in order to maintain their control.
Question: Iíll tell you something: there are two factions of the so-called anti-fascist movement in this country. The pro-Zionist faction is led by a man named Gable, who claims to be Jewish. He is of Jewish origin, and he is a proven agent of MI5. It did occur to me sometime ago that anti-Semites arenít the only people who noticed that there are a lot of Jews involved in the communist movement, and people like Gable are deliberately selected, as a red herring. (55)
EM: There again thatís now ancient history, the number of Jews who were involved in communism. Of the first commissars in Soviet Russia, I think three hundred and twenty were Jews or something like that. As I say, that has now become irrelevant, but I do think that people were acting on a valid premise. Congressman John Rankin of Mississippi stood up on the floor of Congress in 1940 and said that 96% of American communists are Jews. And no one challenged him, and no oneís ever challenged him to this day. Thatís a pretty high figure but there again J. Edgar Hoover probably gave him that figure. J. Edgar Hoover was always in the background feeding information but never taking a stand himself.
[This is the same J. Edgar Hoover whom Mullins would have us believe allowed Marxist Jews to run the FBI!]
Question: When you talk about Jews here though youíre talking about racial Jews as opposed to religious Jews. Have you ever seen a communist wearing a skull cap?
EM: No, I havenít, but [regarding] the racial/religious division, you will find that quite often Jewish people will overlook that and ally themselves very quickly against any threat to Jewish people. They do generally overlook their differences to defend themselves against a common enemy. Anyone who they think is anti-Jewish.
Question: Anyone they donít like, in other words?
EM: Anyone they donít like, or consider as a threat.
Question: Another ďanti-Semitic mythĒ is that of Jewish media control, yet at one time, every studio in Hollywood was owned by Jews. Thatís a fact, isnít it?
[It is indeed a well-documented, indisputable fact, one which is always met with specious charges of ďanti-SemitismĒ. See for example, The Jewish Image in American Film (Appendix A) or the embarrassingly titled: An Empire of their Own. (56)]
EM: Very much so. Not only were they owned by Jews, but they were financed by Jewish bankers in New York, principally Kuhn Loeb and Lehman Brothers [who] up till 1940 pretty much controlled the purse strings of every movie produced in Hollywood. Thatís a matter of record. So, the Jewish producers in Hollywood were answerable to the Jewish bankers in New York.
Question: There is though a fallacy here. [And one that is by no means obvious.] This is that because a lot of Jews work in the media, that they all control it, and that because a lot of Jews are rich, they all are. (10)
EM: Most of the Jews that Iíve met are not rich. The rich Jews donít associate with me, but most of the Jewish people that I have met throughout my career have been of very modest means.
Question: Antony Sutton, youíre familiar with his work?
EM: Very much so, yes.
Question: He cited your work in Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler, and appears to have come to the reluctant conclusion that there is a [world] conspiracy.
[No, he didnít cite Mullinsí work in this book; this was my mistake! What he does do in Chapter Twelve, Conclusions, is to pose the question: Is the United States Ruled by a Dictatorial Elite? He then compares the consistency of the theses of five Revisionist authors including Gary Allen, (None Dare Call It Conspiracy) and Carroll Quigley, (Tragedy and Hope). He does though list Mullinsí The Federal Reserve Conspiracy in the bibliography to his own 1977 monograph, The War on Gold. (57)]
EM: A Jewish conspiracy?
Question: A conspiracy.
EM: I know Tony quite well, and Tony himself never touched the Jewish question with the tip of a pole, and in fact in none of his books or his lectures will he discuss this situation.
Question: In Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution he makes it clear that it was Gentile interests that financed Trotsky and co. (58)
EM: Yes, very much so.
Euestion: And that the whole Jewish conspiracy thing was put up as a red herring.
EM: Yes, you see, the first recognition of the Bolshevik regime by the rest of the world: England and America in particular, it was all Jewish, so it was quite easy to draw the inference that the communists were Jewish because they did not know who the backers were.
Question: In other words it was raceless capital?
EM: I make all this clear in The World Order, that theyíre constantly manipulating all the forces in the world against each other in any way that they can. If they can get Jews fighting each other or Jews fighting Christians, thatís fine, thatís what they want.
Question: Conflict management?
Question: In The Most Secret Science, Archibald Roberts lists eight banks which own the Fed, seven of which have Jewish names. (59) What are they doing to get rid of the Fed?
EM: Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Thereís no movement at all. Roberts got some of the legislatures to [table] resolutions, thatís over a twenty year period, and heís pretty much inactive at the present time. As far as I know, nothing is being done. As far as I know, Carto is sponsoring bills in Congress to audit the Fed, which I donít see will have any effect one way or the other. It might even give them legitimacy, putting them under official government audit, which will make the people believe that they are indeed official government institutions.
Question: How much is the US National Debt?
EM: Four trillion dollars.
Question: So who owns that debt?
EM: Japan owns one third of it.
Question: When you say Japan, what do you mean?
EM: The Japanese bankers.
Question: What would happen if this debt were to be annulled overnight?
EM: I donít think this would have any effect at all. The repudiation of debt simply means that it continues to be rolled over or amortised by other means. There is never a total repudiation.
Question: Why not? Surely that would be possible.
EM: Total repudiation would mean that all of the paper would become worthless immediately, and this is never the case. It continues to be traded, itís scaled down, thatís what happens.
Question: The point is that weíve been fed this idea by the enemies of freedom that money has to come into circulation as debt.
EM: Yes, thatís the old Babylonian system, five thousand years old.
Question: If the debt were to be completed repudiated, youíd have debt-free dollars.
Question: Under the current system, if the government wants say a billion dollars, it goes to the bankers who float a bond and the money is created as a debt to the bankers.
EM: Yes, thatís right.
Question: But all the government has to do is issue its own notes [or credit].
EM: Oh definitely, the Constitution Article 1, Section 8, provides for that - Congress shall have the right to issue money. The Founding Fathers thought they were giving us debt-free money, but the banks were issuing national bank notes, which were interest-bearing notes. Then Lincoln issued the greenbacks, which were non-interest bearing notes. He was assassinated. John F. Kennedy issued non-interest bearing notes, and he was assassinated.
Question: Kennedy actually did issue non-interest bearing bank notes?
EM: Yes, Iíve seen them, theyíre all around. Kennedy issued US Treasury notes.
Question: You believe this was the reason he was assassinated?
EM: The movie JFK and L. Fletcher Prouty, whose book the movie is based on, Fletcher is very intimately connected with the military-industrial complex, and he felt that the trigger was Kennedyís resolve to pull out of Vietnam because there was no point in it, [the Vietnam War]. Outside of the military-industrial complex wanting it, nobody else wanted it. So they simply killed him. Itís more likely that he was killed over Vietnam than over the Federal Reserve, but it certainly could have been both.
Question: Who do you think killed him?
EM: Definitely the CIA and the Mafia working together.
Question: The CIA and the Mafia working together?
EM: Mark Lane has been on national television many times in the States and has said baldly that the CIA killed Kennedy, and no oneís ever really refuted that. (60)
Question: Do you believe in the "Holocaust"?
EM: I think the ďHolocaustĒ probably was exaggerated, the number of casualties. In fact now theyíve scaled down the number of [Jews allegedly killed in Auschwitz] from four million to one [million].
Question: One and a half million?
EM: One and a half.
Question: Do you believe in the gas chambers?
EM: All the evidence that Iíve seen and the new evidence thatís coming out now [indicates] that the gas chambers were built after the War. The Simon Wiesenthal Centre of course continues to promote the old hard line....My brother actually went to Dachau concentration camp...two years ago; he brought back a photograph on the wall, a big photograph saying THESE GAS CHAMBERS WERE NEVER USED AS GAS CHAMBERS.
Thatís what the tourists see when they go to Dachau, that there were no gas chambers used to exterminate people, and so when you have all these things, then I certainly think you have to take a hard look at all these claims which are quite fantastic and say letís look into it further.
[Simon Wiesenthal is, of course, the famous ďNazi hunterĒ. For a slightly more objective view of Wiesenthal, the reader is referred to pages 120-2 of The Journal of Historical Review, Volume Five, Number, One, 1984. (61)]
Question: While weíre still on the subject of the Jews, did you write a pamphlet called Jewish TV: Sick, Sick, Sick!?
EM: I may have, I donít know, as I said, I was doing a lot of pamphleteering. I used to turn out those things in a few minutes, and itís quite possible I did, but then again youíll find that this was thirty or forty years old.
[Mullins adopted this apologetic attitude every time he was questioned about his anti-Semitica. Does this signify remorse, perhaps?]
Question: There was no orchestrated campaign to keep you out of the country. Mike Whine of the Board of Deputies of British Jews was quoted in Time Out magazine; he said your ideas are so mad theyíre laughable. Normally they try to keep people [like you] out. They kept ZŁndel out, for example.
EM: ZŁndel they considered a more direct threat because heís a German, so heís going back and forth between Germany and Canada, but by my position in the States, having no affiliation with any political party or any large movement, I donít think theyíre [too concerned].
Question: How can we get rid of the Fed and the Bank of England?
EM: The Bank of England is supposed to be nationalised, so it belongs to the people. You canít do anything about the Bank of England.
Question: Weíve got a National Debt as well.
EM: Of course, whenever you have a Central Bank youíll have a National Debt; thatís what a Central Bankís created for. When the Bank of England started operation in 1694, you started to have a National Debt soon after that, and then there was war finance, they financed wars and built up a healthy debt to the Bank, and youíve been [struggling] under that load ever since.
Question: The point though is that the debt is owned by the bankers, isnít it?
EM: Oh definitely, always, because people have no ownership of the debt. In the States, a widow can buy a T bill for ten thousand dollars, and you can say that sheís a part owner of the debt, but actually what she has is a banking instrument, a negotiable instrument of the bankers themselves. Itís worth ten thousand dollars only in law as the bankers agree that it can be paid.
Question: Could we form pressure groups to get rid of the Fed?
EM: Thatís a start, you want pressure groups.
Question: We could get rid of the debt if we tried. Politicians donít seem to understand it, they donít even seem to realise it exists. You might just as well be talking about flying saucers on Mars.
EM: The politicians are practical...All their funding comes from bankers. You have wealthy people who give ten thousand or a hundred thousand dollars to politicians, but by and large their funds come through the banks one way or another. As long as that situation exists, the politicians are not going to take up [this issue] in any serious way.
Question: You didnít mention the role of the Bilderberg Group or the Trilateral Commission in your speech.
EM: The Trilaterals are simply another instrument of the World Order of the bankers. You have the Council on Foreign Relations, the Royal Institute of International Affairs...these think tanks. These think tanks exist solely to present palatable programmes to the people of what the bankers want to accomplish. Naturally they canít say ďWe want to do this for ourselvesĒ, so they present them as programmes to improve the infrastructure, to improve education and to borrow more billions of dollars from the bankers to achieve these goals, and most people fall for it.
Question: One last word on anti-Semitism. If we get rid of the anti-Semitic element, can we reform the financial system for everybodyís benefit?
EM: In the States thereís actually very little anti-Semitism anywhere because itís been made totally unfashionable by the bankers themselves. Anyone who criticises Jews [they say] wants another ďHolocaustĒ.
Question: The point is that anyone who criticises the bankers is implied to be criticising Jews.
EM: Not in the States.
Eustace Mullins, thank you very much.
This was the end of our interview. Later, I introduced Mr Mullins to Lady Birdwood. Lady Birdwood, this is Mr Eustace Mullins, the author of The Rabbiís Speech: I said. No, he discovered it, she said. Itís a complete fraud, isnít it, Mr Mullins? There never was a Rabbi Rabinovich. At this point, a certain geriatric interjected that heíd always maintained that The Rabbiís Speech was a fraud.
This was the person who had nearly been ejected from the meeting for standing up during Vladimir Terziskiís presentation and lambasting him for calling the Nazis Satanic. Youíre a dirty liar! Why donít name the real culprits? The international Jews! And here he was in his Dalek-like staccato, denouncing The Rabbiís Speech. ďThe whole thing is absolute rubbish!Ē Is this the ďselective anti-SemitismĒ that Henry Ford was supposed to have practised? ďIím absolutely against that; communism and Zionism are not identical forces...they might on certain levels cooperate, but theyíre aetiologically totally disparate.Ē
The reality is that a lot of people who are in no sense of the word anti-Semitic, believe in the world Jewish conspiracy or the Zionist world conspiracy, for there is good prima facie evidence for it. In the United States if not in Britain, Jews can in some sense be said to control the media, and they have certainly had pretty much their own way with regard to US foreign policy over the past four and a half decades. This though has been more of a partnership between the Israelis and the fascists who have hijacked the State Department, than overt Zionist manipulation. (62)
Then there is the embarrassing plethora of Jewish names associated with banking, big business and the mysterious quasi-secret power elites which somehow never get a mention in the mainstream press, a press which is fiercely proud of its independence, remember?
However, on closer examination, the Jewish/Zionist conspiracy does not hold water, although there is certainly dirty work afoot here. We conclude this section with the rest of the Mary Seal/Keith Mears interview.
As already stated, Seal was less than happy with the Guardian. Had she been libelled? No, but ďThere wasnít one word they printed which was true.Ē !!!
Fabricated everything she said; so whatís that if not libel?
Question: Do you know about Mr Mullinsí background?
Mary Seal: Yes.
Question: Do you know about the anti-Jewish publications heís done: Jews Mass Poison American Children?
Question: You know all about that?
Question: Are you happy with that?
Question: Was pressure put on you to stop him coming?
MS: No, no, there was no pressure at all put on me to stop him coming.
Question: Do you think heís an anti-Semite, now?
MS: No, heís not now...Iím not saying he definitely was, I think he took that road many years ago because obviously of his research [sic] he found out certain facts, but now if you read his book youíll realise heís not anti-Semitic.
Question: He did fabricate The Rabbiís Speech and the Israel Cohen quote to start with.
MS: I donít know about that; heís suing the people who said that: the Anti-Defamation League.
[So he says.]
Question: Back in the 1950s, thatís well established, that was the [real] reason he was sacked by the Library of Congress.
Keith Mears: I would like to say regarding Eustace Mullins, if heís gone down one road, and heís found that itís the wrong road, heís done the right thing...I was involved with religion for twelve years; you canít condemn me for my beliefs then, and the fact of the matter is now weíre not working on beliefs, because everybody who works on a belief system is led up the wrong path. So the only way to identify which is right and which is wrong...is to look at the evidence...
Question: Dr Streckerís presentation was probably the most controversial; the line he took was that it [AIDS] has been deliberately manufactured. From what Iíve read recently I certainly think itís possible that AIDS was developed in the laboratory by accident...
MS: Why is it that Third World nations have got the highest incidence of AIDS? Why is it that eighty percent of the black belt of Africa is involved?
[Keith Mears claimed at this point that Strecker had in his possession documents that proved that AIDS had been made to order.]
MS: The virus was requested, and there was money allocated to develop it.
Question: A couple of months ago, the Libertarian Alliance held a conference on AIDS - Dissenting Voices - in which it was claimed with fairly impressive medical evidence that the spread of AIDS in the West has been almost purely amongst homosexuals, and in Africa, places like Uganda, it has spread purely because of the war-like conditions.
MS: You see the point in all of this is that nobody is saying: believe us. All we are saying to you is we are presenting facts which we have researched personally. Itís up to you to make sense out of those facts. Check them out. There are lots of things that canít be proven...All we are doing is providing peopleís own research, documents to back certain of those contentions, point out certain anomalies which exist in the way our economy is, the way governments are manipulated by the international banking system, so on and so forth. Facts that anybody can check out.
Back To Cover
Back To Update And Acknowledgments
To Conclusion And Afterword
To Appendix A: Bibliography
To Appendix B
To Appendix C
To Notes And References
Back To Baron Pamphlets Index
Back To Site Index