THE AUSTIN BOMBINGS ARE FAKE

The Austin Bombings are Fake 

by Miles Mathis

@http://mileswmathis.com/index.html 

First published March 25, 2018 

I lived in Austin for twenty years (until 2000) and my family is still there. I just talked to my brother on the phone, and he was all over this story, trying to sell it to me. I finally told him I didn't believe any of it, and he wasn't happy to hear that. He couldn't understand why I wouldn't believe what the media was telling me. He told me the murderer's parents went to his church. I said, “Yes, and can you verify that? Have you met them? Have you seen them on the list of members?” No. His reply was, “Why would these people lie?” 

We will get to that, but first let us look at the event. As my readers know, I normally let the Youtubers have a go at these contemporary events, then I come in a couple of weeks later and sort through it all. I can't do that anymore, because Youtube has been cleansed in the past few months. It no longer allows researchers to post their work on these hoaxed events. It no longer allows “conspiracy theories”. All that has been forcibly shut down at the request of the government, which should concern you. Yes, there was a lot of crap on Youtube, and most of the research on any given event was worse than useless. However, a good researcher like me used to be able to find a few good links there. It is very discouraging to go to Youtube now and find nothing but government-approved news. I encourage you to boycott Youtube. I think you can survive without your Bieber and Swift videos, cat videos, and Flat Earth promotions. 

That's right: despite shutting down other forms of dissent and so-called conspiracy theories, Youtube is not cracking down on Flat Earth at all. In fact, it seems to be promoting and up listing Flat Earth like never before. That should tell you what to think of Flat Earth. The government seems to have no problem with it. It is an important part of the NASA and SpaceX promotion, as I have shown you before. It acts as the perfect manufactured opposition for NASA and SpaceX. 

So anyway, I guess it is up to me to blow the cover of this one on my own, without any help. First, look at the photos of the alleged bomber above. This event might be subtitled “Fear the Smiling Schoolboy”. No matter how nice and innocent the boy next door might look, he could be a serial bomber, killing people just for fun. Intelligence has been running events like this for centuries. Remember Leopold and Loeb, the two rich white college boys in 1924 who allegedly kidnapped and murdered a local boy just for the thrill? That was the same sort of event, and like this one it never happened. Back then they were just creating a general chaos, to help sell the police force and jails, but now we can see this event as part of the long running project to split the sexes. This will just confirm once again to women that men and boys are dangerous and untrustworthy. If you are a normal heterosexual having trouble meeting someone of the opposite sex, your trouble is not accidental or unplanned. Your misery is part of a long-intended project, one that enriches the billionaires mightily. It was discovered long ago that miserable single people spend far more money on worthless crap than happy couples. 

The Washington Post tells us  the two victims who died in the Austin bombings were Anthony Stephan House, 39, and Draylen Mason, 17, both black men from East Austin. But the big computers have never heard of them. I searched both Intelius and Instantcheckmate. Neither has any listing for an Anthony House of that age in Austin. That is what I expected, given that middle name. It looks like a fake. The middle name is normally spelled Stephen or Stefan. Instantcheckmate has no listing for Draylen Mason, either. In fact, there is no Draylen Mason of any age in the entire US. Meaning, the name is fake. I suspected that as soon as I saw it. Have you ever heard of a person named Draylen? Intelius has a listing for a Draylen Mason in Austin, but his age is not listed. As we will soon see, that is a big red flag. There we are told he has worked at Mason Productions. Sounds like a film studio or something, doesn't it? Since we are told he is a college-bound senior in high school, when did he have time to work for a production studio? Also note the name Mason, as in Freemason. My guess that is not just a coincidence. 

Someone should ask exactly which Austin high school this Draylen Mason was supposed to have attended, and check the files there. My guess is you won't find him. According to a story posted by Jeremy Schwartz at the American Statesman, he is supposed to have gone to East Austin College Prep School. First, notice the name Schwartz, a Jewish name. We could have predicted that as well. Anyway, East Austin Prep didn't exist when I lived in Austin, but it already sounds fishy. A prep school in East Austin with a goal of sending 100% of students to college? For those who don't know, East Austin is the poor side of town. Like many towns of all sizes, Austin is still segregated by color, and the area east of I.35 has always been far more heavily Hispanic and Black. Since even the rich high schools on the west side of town don't send 100% to college, it is sort of strange to see a free public Prep School on the East Side claiming to do so. On the surface, it looks and sounds like a nice idea, I admit, but I am not really buying it. It doesn't fit with my long personal experience of Austin or Austin politics. 

Also strange is that Schwartz says that “according to Mason's Facebook page” he is a senior at that school. Hmmm. So these reporters are getting their information from Facebook, despite the fact the event was local? Wouldn't you expect Schwartz to confirm that with the school, in which case he could write, “according to the school, Mason was a senior there”. Why consult and quote Facebook on this? The newspaper is about 10 minutes from the school, so—given the importance of this story—if I were Schwartz I wouldn't telephone the school. No, I would want to get in the car and drive over there, so I could talk to someone face to face. The fact he is quoting Facebook is incredible. 

What about Mason Productions? A search on that brings up nothing except  Mason Jar Films in Austin. It only has a few clients, but one of those is Ronald McDonald House Charities. Mason Jar is not run by a black family, so I see no family connection to Draylen Mason. If you thought he was working for a family business in the summers, I found no indication of that. The connection once again seems to be the word Mason, as in Freemason. The Post also admits another strange “coincidence”: the Masons and Houses of East Austin are close friends. What are the odds? Anthony House's stepfather is a buddy of Draylen Mason's grandfather, and “both are prominent fixtures in the black community”. So this kid Mark Anthony Conditt kills two people in a city of 2 million, and their families end up being friends? What are the odds?—well, one in a million. 

That indicates one of two things: 1) Conditt knew these people and specifically targeted them for some reason, 2) Conditt knew these people and didn't target them. Meaning, they all knew each other because they were working the same project. They are all accomplices in manufacturing this event. The Post leads you to believe it might be 1), but it is far more likely to be 2). Why? Because, according to the mainstream story, there is no reason for Conditt to be targeting these specific families. But we know there is a reason for these people to be working together: it is part of the general script these days. We know Intelligence is manufacturing many events, and we have seen that some of them are being scripted to increase distrust between whites and blacks. See the Trayvon Martin event, the Charleston event, and so on. So we know the Department of Homeland Security (D.H.S) is paying people to be involved in these hoaxes. Therefore, the best bet is that is what is happening here. It has all the same earmarks as previous fakes, so we should just assume it is another one until proven otherwise. 

Another thing is strange. Mason and House look a lot alike. 

That is the duo published by the mainstream, and there they don't look much alike, I admit. But that has been tampered with. They have stretched both images, to make them look different. The first face has been pulled horizontally, to make it look wider, while the second has been squashed in the same direction, to make it look narrower. They also changed the skin colors, so that they look very different. Here is a better photo of House, also published by the mainstream:

Look how much narrower his face is there, proving they jacked with the first image. So let's compare them again:

Yes, Mason looks a lot lighter, but that is just a difference in brightness. He is not really that light. Just study their features. Are you seeing what I am seeing? They could be father and son. The nose is exactly the same, the face shape is very similar, the eyes are the same, and the mouth is the same. And they both wear glasses. The greatest difference is the eyebrows, but Mason may have been instructed to trim those as well. These could even be photos of the same person, taken 10 or 15 years apart. In support of that, witness this strange photo  I found at CBSAustin.

Draylen Mason is the second one there. So, although he is sold to us now as a precocious bass player, it looks like he is also a 17-year-old black-belt. But we have another problem, since that photo doesn't look recent. If you go to that link, you will see that it looks like it was taken from a framed photo on the wall, which has since become somewhat faded from sunlight or something. That takes time. He also looks a bit older than he does now, which would be impossible if the story we are told is true. How can we have pictures of him looking older than 17 when he died at 17? 

Also notice the flag in the background. That indicates two things. One, this photo is reversed. Two, these people are probably military. The guy to the far right is wearing Vibram five-fingers toe shoes, which were popular about ten years ago, also confirming my theory. They were introduced in 2005 and were semi-popular for about five years. You don't see them much anymore. 

So. . . it looks to me like Draylen Mason and Anthony House are actually the same person. The pictures we see of Draylen Mason are pictures of Anthony House 10 or 15 years ago. He used to shave his head but no longer does. His eyebrows have grown in and he has lost his baby fat. But it is the same person. 

Some might say, “But the Austin police and the American-Statesman wouldn't lie!” Not even worth a reply. 

My brother answered me, “But why would my friends lie?” I am not saying they are lying. I am saying they are repeating what they have been told without verifying it themselves. Same as my brother is doing. I don't think for a second my brother is lying. No, he is just repeating the stories he has heard. Well, that is what those around him are doing. They are all repeating what they have heard on TV or read in the newspapers. Because they are trusting, they don't bother to research these claims, as I am doing. They don't have time for it, and wouldn't like to discover the truth anyway. Most people would prefer to believe what they are told. It is disorienting to discover you are being lied to on a grand scale, and most people would prefer not to have to deal with that discovery. 

Another curious thing we hear at The Washington Post is in the video there, which begins with a clip of an interview of Conditt's next-door neighbor Mark Roessler. Of all the things Mark Roessler could be talking about and the Post reporting, here is what he says: 

You see it on TV, it's national news, what are the odds? In fact I have a better chance of winning the lottery, I think, than living next door to this guy. 

Ask yourself why he would say that, and when he did say it, why The Washington Post would choose that and only that to publish? There is no newsworthy content to that quote, so even if you got that on film, why publish it? I will tell you why: because it makes the event and the interview seem random. It makes everything seem like just a bit of unexplainable bad luck. When in fact, it is just the opposite. Mark Roessler is another crisis actor, and his job is to make you think he isn't. So that is why he said that, why it was in the script, and why the Post published it. 

If you don't think Roessler is suspicious, just wait. He has a page at LinkedIn, with a photo that matches the guy on video at the Post. It says he works in biotechnology. The neighborhood he was photographed in looks lower middle class, so there is no match there. People who work in biotech are normally middle or upper-middle class. They don't have neighbors with their porches falling off (see photo below). At Intelius, we learn more: he works for Luminex Corporation. Taking that back to the sidebar at LinkedIn, we see his colleagues work in Information Technology there. You will say, “So what? He works for a big scary biotech firm. Big deal”. But wait. I first searched on “Luminex CIA”, getting nothing on the first page; but then I searched on “Luminex DHS”, and guess what, I immediately got a big hit! See  this press release from 2010 from NorthropGrumman, which is entitled 

Northrop Grumman begins delivery of key assay technologies for DHS's BioWatch next-generation biological detection program. 

This is in regards to a DHS contract for the development of bio detectors for Homeland Security applications. What applications? Allegedly, air monitoring for bio hazards, I suppose as released by terrorists. Guess who is on NorthropGrumman's BioWatch team? Luminex Corporation of Austin, TX. So, I found a pretty short link between Mark Roessler and DHS, just as I expected to. I bet you didn't think I could find it so easily, but this is what I do. 

It is also worth reminding you who Northrop-Grumman is. It is the 5th largest defense contractor in the world. It reported revenues of $24.5 billion in 2016. It is most famous for manufacturing the B2 bomber, for which you as a taxpayer were billed about $1 billion apiece. N.G also manufactures the large Global Hawk drones, which cost about a quarter-billion apiece. It has a contract to train the Iraqi Army. It provides defensive radar for the entire UK, at a cost of 1.2 billion a year. Back in the 1960's, it built the Apollo Lunar Module. In 1996 it acquired Westinghouse. In 2000 it acquired Federal Data Corporation, at the time the largest IT company in the US. In 2015, N.G was chosen to develop the B21, an even more expensive long-range bomber. N.G is the primary contractor for the James Webb Space Telescope, a $9 billion project that is so expensive Nature has called it the “telescope that ate astronomy”. As of 2017 it was 1800% over budget, with taxpayers picking up the bill as usual. And guess who is the CEO and President of N.G. . . Wes Bush. If you believe he isn't related to George Bush, you need to cut down your dosages. At least seven top dogs at N.G worked for the Bush II administration, including Paul Wolfowitz, Dov Zakheim, Lewis Libby, and Shawn O'Keefe (director of NASA). N.G is linked to 52 Superfund Toxic Waste Sites. They had to move out of Bethpage, NY, after totally nuking the area with chemicals. Same for Glen Cove, Long Island. N.G has been found guilty of overcharging the government by billions. 

But back to the story at the Post. There we are told Conditt was living with two friends in a house he had renovated with his dad. But we have previously been told Conditt was living in a hotel in Round Rock. As usual, they can't keep their stories straight. We also see footage of the house he allegedly renovated with his dad. It is a dump. It looks like it was renovated by termites and rats. The front porch looks like it is about to fall off onto the ground in a heap. 

I hate to think what it looked like before they “renovated” it. We are also told Conditt had been a member at the Austin Stone Community Church. So that does not match the story my brother has heard locally. My brother does not attend Stone Community Church. Yes, it is possible Mark Conditt was attending a different church than his parents, but it is unlikely. They were not estranged and he had not married or converted to some other denomination. 

Next, we are told by Police Chief Brian Manley that “We are never going to put a ration behind these acts”. Mr. Manley, ladies and gentlemen, graduate of the George Bush school of the English language. But how would he know that we aren't ever going to be able to find a reason for the acts? Shouldn't he let his officers investigate for more than two days before he jumps to that astonishing conclusion? Unless that is part of the script: the scriptwriters want this to be an irrational act, since it causes more fear that way. 

Manley also calls Conditt a “challenged” young man. Again, Manley doesn't seem to be up-to-date on the English language, since that would now mean Conditt was mentally retarded (to use the old term) or physically challenged—as being in a wheelchair or something. There is no indication Manley meant anything like that. 

In a linked article by Eli Rosenberg at the Washington Post, we learn more about Conditt. But first, note the name Rosenberg. This story seems to be pushed by Jewish interests, as usual. Next, we are told Conditt was recognized by police from Fedex video footage, but that would be impossible given the footage. The guy in the footage is stockier than Conditt, and is wearing a baseball cap over either long bleached blond hair or a bleach-blond wig. No clear shots of his face are achieved. Conditt does not have blond hair, and it is not long in any photos. He is small and thin in all photos. This is a problem, because  here US Representative Michael McCaul from Texas—Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee—says Conditt's license plate was pulled from that Fedex store somehow. But they would have to have both interior and parking lot video for that, and would have had to match Conditt to his car that way. Since there is no way they could have matched Conditt from that video—even if they had previously identified him—the story doesn't scan. He didn't use his real name there, and they admit that, so they couldn't have matched him that way. You will say he grew his hair out and bleached it, but we know that isn't the case. The local news has now published video of Conditt from Fryes electronics just a few days before the first bombing. In that video, Conditt has short dark hair. 

Also convenient that Conditt allegedly taped a 25-minute video confession on his cellphone right before his capture. That makes no sense. If you think the police are closing in, you either run or hide. You don't tape a 25-minute video confession and then rig a bomb in your car. A bomb isn't a great way to prevent yourself from being captured. A poison pill would be a lot quicker and easier. A pistol would be the next choice, I guess, not a bomb—which might fail to explode or fail to kill you. But say you did want to go out with a big bang: you wouldn't rig it in your car, would you? The odds are, you are going to be captured at home, not in the car. If you are captured anywhere but in the car, the rigged car won't help you, will it? Besides, if you don't want to be captured, suicide by police should be fantastically easy these days. From the older stories we are told, all you have to do is point a cellphone at them, or a garage door opener, or a screwdriver, or a banana, and they will shoot you dead. 

The next problem I see is with the footage from the capture and death of Conditt. His old red SUV has apparently been rammed by an unmarked white van from the rear, with two other unmarked vehicles to the side. This makes no sense to me. These don't look like APD vehicles, FBI vehicles, or any other sort of law enforcement. 

Since when are top suspects rammed by unmarked white vans? Shouldn't we see some sort of obvious law enforcement on the scene? How did Conditt even know he was being chased by law enforcement, and not flesh-eating zombies in a white van? 

This also doesn't match what we are told at that WNDU link above: 

Authorities say Conditt blew himself up overnight as a SWAT team approached his SUV in a motel parking lot outside of Austin. 

Does that look like a hotel parking lot to you? Do those vehicles look like SWAT to you? SWAT's local budget must have been cut, if they are ramming people in old unmarked vans. 

They also can't seem to agree on how old Conditt is. Some stories say 23, others say 24. 

And here's another problem. On the 21st, the Pflugerville police finally gave us an address for Conditt's house, which surprisingly doesn't match the yellow house previously given. It is now a blue house, though equally small and run-down. But what I found curious is something I discovered by backing out of a Google map of the area. I found a UPS store about two blocks away. So why was Conditt targeting and using Fedex? If he was going to take the time to use a blond wig disguise, why not use it at the nearby UPS store? He just liked to burn gas and money, I guess. Another clue as to why they chose this location is that the Austin Executive Airport is about three miles away. This allows the “500 federal agents” involved in this event easy access to the crime scene, allowing them to fake it with no inconvenience to themselves. We have seen that these guys love to run their projects within spitting distance of a military base, or here, a small airport. 

Even better, we also learn from this latest police announcement that Pflugerville City Hall just happens to be within a two-block radius of the crime scene, since the female police chief says it is inside the inner perimeter of the closed-off area. What? Yes, that's right: I checked it out, and Pflugerville City Hall is one block away from the crime scene on 2nd St! However, Google Maps does not mark City Hall. It marks Comerica Bank and Hanover's Draught House, but does not let a viewer know City Hall is there. If you don't find that suspicious, I don't know what to say. What are the odds this guy Conditt would be living one block away from City Hall? 

Now, what is this event about? They aren't seriously selling Conditt as a gay hater, a black hater, antifa, a far right wingnut, a Trump supporter, a gun enthusiast, or any of the other common goats. But if we study the report at the Washington Post, we see something strange. They take the time to interview and quote a Rey Casanova from Pflugerville, 42, who, with his wife, used to buy everything online and have it delivered. But they stopped doing that, because “you don't know what's going to come in the mail”. 

That is your primary clue right there. Ask yourself why the Washington Post, the CIA's own hometown newspaper, would take the time to interview and quote this guy. Well, again, that name looks fake. The male name is normally spelled Ray, not Rey. And Casanova is a bit too obvious, too, isn't it? I guess his middle name is Honeyboy? What it looks like to me is that someone is targeting Amazon and maybe Fedex with this event. Some billionaire has probably just placed some put options on Amazon and Fedex, and he wants to guarantee a big payout. Either that, or he just wants to make a quick profit on a turnaround. So he waits for the Amazon and Fedex stocks to tank temporarily after this event, at which point he will buy. When the stocks go back up in a couple of months, he will sell, making an easy profit. Are you beginning to see how easy it is? When your family owns not only the stock markets, but the media and the DHS, you can manufacture events for any purpose. 

Say your name is Rockefeller, and you are tired of playing golf and buying Rolls Royces this week. Since your family runs Blackrock/Blackstone, the biggest investment firm in the world, all it takes is one call to make anything happen in the market you like, as big as you want it. And since your family also owns the media and the Intelligence agencies, another call will get you any event you like, within a matter of days or weeks. Both CIA and DHS have all the Hollywood connections they can handle, and they can fake an event using the latest technology. So if you have ordered millions in put options on Fedex, say, you can include them in your event at the snap of your fingers. Just have your boys take some film of a Fedex store and some Fedex trucks, and then include those images in the media presentation. Nothing could be easier. The public will make the connection between that bad man and Fedex, the stocks will tumble, and you are millions richer. Beats the hell out of another 18 holes,doesn't it? 

And this answers our first question: why would these “normal” people like Conditt be involved in such a hoax? Well, do you know how many wannabe actors there are in a town like Austin? People with no talent who will never have an opportunity to do any real acting? People desperate for attention or money? Austin is known as a third coast, and it is simply stiff with actors who want to be part of any possible action. If you are one of those people and CIA or DHS comes to you with a check for $10,000, hiring you to be part of a “harmless little fiction where no one gets hurt”, what are you going to say? Are you going to walk away? Most people wouldn't walk away, and you know it. 

I will be told these leads like Conditt would have to disappear for a while. He can't be seen in Austin with that name, can he? Yes, but how hard is that? It is a big country and people's memories are short. All he has to do is change his first name for a few years and move to another state. No one will be the wiser. He doesn't even have to legally change his name, wear a disguise, or go into hiding. We have seen in many big events the major players are back in the limelight—sometimes back on TV—within a couple of years, with a minimal amount of disguising. See my paper on O. J. Simpson, where we found Nicole back on TV in a few years, despite supposedly being dead. She didn't even have to change her last name. She just colored her hair and pretended to be her own sister. 

Which brings us to another point of this event. They admit that 500 federals agents came to Austin to track down this one guy. And who paid for them to do that? You did, as a taxpayer. The FBI and ATF and SWAT teams are funded from the national treasury. So you are footing the bill for this entire event. Just as with the military, these guys at FBI and ATF have to justify their paychecks, and they do it mainly now by faking events like these. I say now, but they have been doing it for a long time. Most of the famous events you know about were also fake, like Waco,the Unabomber, Ruby Ridge, Oklahoma City, and so on. They were all manufactured, just like this current event. Kaczynski, Koresh, McVeigh, and all the rest were just agents themselves, and they aren't dead and aren't in jail. They were just relocated. All these events serve the same double-duty: keeping the populace frightened and entertained and keeping the budgets of FBI, ATF, CIA, and DHS fat. If you haven't figured that out by now, you simply aren't paying attention. I have done all the research for you and laid it all out so that you can easily see it, so you have no excuses left. 

I would expect some updates to this paper, as my readers chime in with their own evidence. There are some other good researchers out there, and now that Youtube has shut them down, they may come to me.

http://mileswmathis.com/austin.pdf 

PART 7 OF 7: :CONJURING HITLER: HOW ENGLAND AND THE U.S. MADE THE 3RD REICH:

Conjuring Hitler How Britain and 
America Made the Third Reich 
By Guido Giacomo Preparata


6 

Conclusion 

Yet it is necessary…to feign, greatly, and to dissemble, for men are so simple, and so prone to obey the exigencies of the moment, that he who deceives will always find someone ready to be deceived. 

Machiavelli, The Prince (XVIII, 3) 

‘E sono tanto semplici gli uomini…’ 

The elimination of the German menace of 1900 cost Britain dearly: her empire, her military and economic strength. Yet the English-speaking idea, the imperial creed, and the cultivation of the oligarchic bent were all traits that she bequeathed upon her natural, insular heir: they live on in the American establishment. Britain’s was a conscious decision; she knew the risks involved. 

The present geopolitical policy of the United States is a direct and wholly consistent continuation of the old imperial strategy of Britain. It is that unmistakable cocktail of aggression, subversion and mass murder waged at the vital nodes of the landmass, from Palestine and Central Asia to the gates of China, in Taiwan and Korea, that seeks to undermine any movement towards a confederation of nations capable of turning the continental base into a Eurasian league of socio-political cooperation and defense (against Anglo-American assault). 

It took two world conflicts to destroy the German threat. World War I was a conventional siege in which the British empire sacrificed roughly 1 million men – the first bloodletting that shook the establishment to its foundations. In the second round, which was necessary given that World War I had in fact left the Fatherland unscathed, no such effusion would have been tolerable – Britain would sacrifice 400,000 soldiers in World War II. So deception was employed on a major scale to trip the Nazis into the inescapable war on two fronts. 

That such was the intention at Versailles may not be doubted – the astonishing prophecy of Veblen is there to attest it. Though this is not to say that schemers of the Round Table expected the engineers of the Final Solution. As has been argued throughout this book, they rather conjured a reactionary movement that could then be attracted into the Russian swamp. Which was sinister enough. 

The position of Bolshevik Russia is assuredly one of the greatest enigmas of the affair. Even its origin is most mysterious. But one thing is certain: never, either during the interwar period or even in the course of the Cold War, did the Soviet Union play directly against the West – that is why Egyptian President Anwar Sadat thought it ‘an imaginary foe.’ Rather, it appeared to mimic the slow motions of an enormous circus bear, whose tamer was elsewhere – a buttress in the Orient that slumped studiously, shifting its weight around to keep the Eurasian union in check. Otherwise the Trebitsch affair, the German-Bolshevik ‘secret’ entente, the terrorist agitprop of the K.P.D, the sabotage of the common front with the German Socialists for the ultimate benefit of Hitler, the extraordinary massacre of the leadership of the Red Army, and Stalin’s appeasement, are inexplicable: Stalin played always in line with the geopolitical designs of Britain. Besides, the Bolsheviks owed virtually everything to the West: the deposition of the Czar, the timing of Rasputin’s death, the political void after Kerensky, the slush funds – German and otherwise – the double-crossing of the Whites, capital equipment, giant investments, military know-how… 

When the hyperinflation climaxed in 1923 the natural candidate for leading the Radikalisierung at home came in full view. Of all the rabblerouser's of Germany, Hitler was not only the most charismatic but also the most fervently pro-British: for Britain he was almost too good to be true. That Professor Karl Haushofer was the inspiration for Hitler’s British fancy is by no means unwarranted. And Haushofer was himself a mysterious character, of whom we should know infinitely more.* What is certain, however, is the idiocy behind the claim that Hitler assembled the Nazi philosophy and geopolitical plans in the raving solitude of his disarrayed bedroom. 

* Like Prisoner No. 7 of the Spandau fortress – the man said to be Rudolf Hess – in 1987, Haushofer, too, seemed to have been assassinated, along with his wife, by the British Secret Services on the ides of March of 1946 (for instance, this presumption has reappeared in Martin Allen’s The Hitler/Hess Deception, p. xviii).

The Wall Street Crash triggered by Norman was the signal that Germany had in fact completed her first informal Five-Year- Plan; thereafter it became a foregone matter that Hitler would become Chancellor. Yet Germany was more resilient than what the British stewards could have imagined: throughout Weimar she would never give the Nazis more than 1 out of 3 votes, and that only under the most catastrophic of social circumstances. But by 1933, with further ‘tightening from outside,’ the circle was closed. 

The weave of Britain’s interaction with the Nazis consisted in fact of one of history’s most astounding exploits of choral dissimulation, which unraveled for more than a decade (1931–43). The problem, however, was  that this was no swanky gimmick but a deliberate tampering with forces that were ‘other’ – and Veblen, again, intuited this eerie drift as early as 1915. Britain courted fire and in the end wished for a holocaust – which came. That of the war, and that of the Jews. 

The ‘Bolshies’ took the shock of the German offensive and paid with 20 million dead, half of them civilians. This was probably a price that Tukhachevsky was not willing to see his people pay. Nor should it ever be forgotten that 3.5 million German civilians had perished by the end of this game. 

If it is true that the British stewards intrigued at Versailles to conjure a reactionary movement that would feed on radicalism and be prone to seek war in the East; if it is true that the Anglo-Americans traded heavily with and offered financial support to the Nazis, continuously and deliberately from the Dawes loans of 1924 to the conspicuous credits via the Bank of International Settlements in Basle of late 1944;1 if it is true that the encounter in Cologne of January 4, 1933, in von Schröder’s manse was the decisive factor behind Hitler’s appointment as Chancellor; if it is true that such financial support was accorded to make Nazism an enemy target so strong as to elicit in war a devastating response – retribution that would make the Allied victory clear-cut and definitive; if it is true that appeasement was a travesty since 1931; if it is true that Churchill refused deceitfully to open a western front for three years, during which the expectation was that the Germans would find themselves so hopelessly mired in the Russian bog as to make the British closing onslaught from the West as painless as possible; and if it is true that Hess brought with him to Britain plans for evacuating the Jews to the island of Madagascar, for such was the last policy pursued by the German government before adopting the Final Solution – 2 a plan which clearly was given no sequitur; if all the foregoing is true, then it is just to lay direct responsibility for incubating Nazism and planning World War II, and indirect responsibility for the Holocaust of the Jews, at the door of the Anglo-American establishment. 

Clearly, the last 60 years have been devoted by the restless and most faithful archivists of the empire, seconded by a legion of no less devout academics, publicists and film-makers, to deny each of the above statements in the most categorical fashion. 

To begin, Veblen’s review is literally ignored: on Versailles Keynes is still the adopted ‘classic.’ 

‘It is of course an exaggeration,’ we read in textbooks, ‘to claim that the Dawes loans set in motion foreign lending by the United States…’;3 rather, these loans are depicted as a yet another wave of little nest eggs from America in search of a good yield, and some ‘corporate greed’ on the side – but nothing more. 

The Crash and the crisis? Those, intimated an acclaimed Nobel Prize winner, were but the product of the ‘somewhat fortuitous combination of structural factors and monetary policy errors.’4 

On the other hand, we are also told that the collapse of the gold exchange standard and the surreal devaluation of the pound were due to ‘an inescapable error…of the British who knew not the size of the problem they labored under’:5 that is to say that the British Governor was too ‘intermittently ill’ to be able to look after his messy construction, and ‘even when well, he was distracted by other pressing matters…’6 Yet one wonders what those ‘other pressing matters’ could be... 

Thus of Montagu Norman – admittedly the greatest central banker of the modern era, who spent a quarter of a century leading the most powerful financial outfit of his age – we should be satisfied with a caricature featuring him as psychopathic Scrooge of the old school, with only a shaky grasp of modern financial dynamics. 

Von Schröder? Schröder counts for nothing, we hear: ‘he was merely a partner in a medium-sized provincial bank…’7 

As to that revolting show known as British ‘appeasement’ of Hitler, they tell us it was the misguided policy of an ‘imbecile Foreign Office’8 that sought to combine ‘morality and expediency’ in reaching an agreement with what, alas, proved to be an intractable interlocutor.9 And the latter day trumps of the Peace Party who deliberately prolonged the war to gain time? Their cynicism is excused on the grounds that the empire was fighting for its own survival, 10 when in fact it was sacrificing millions to extricate itself from the bloody mess it had forged since 1919. 

And the Wehrmacht: was it indeed a strong, luxury item, fitted to its teeth with materials of the highest quality? Of course not, retorted the ‘American’ Schacht: ‘Foreign investigations – some conducted with extreme accuracy– on Germany’s financing of warlike expenditure have shown unanimously how thoroughly inadequate our rearmament, and thereby how insubstantial the attending financial outlay has been.’11 This is from the self-apologetic post-war production of the individual who, for his sixtieth birthday in 1937, had been hailed by the hebdomadary publication of the German army, the Militär-Wochenblatt, as ‘the man who made the reconstruction of the Wehrmacht possible.’12 And the damage the Wehrmacht could inflict did not escape the record, irrespective of the falsehoods that Schacht hawked, lying and recanting ignominiously at Nuremberg to save his skin and the name of his protectors. He hid behind the following lies: (1) The Nazis came to power by means of self-financing, (2) the army was of a shoddy make, (3) the Hitlerites violated the economy, and (4) the Nazi economic experiment was a failure as a whole. 

The professional literature on the topic has latched onto the Schachtian fabrications with fervor: of the German army it is still said that it was ‘a chaos of competing organizations,’ worsened by ‘Hitler’s paranoid style.’13 Nazi work creation, instead, is described as a ‘fragmented’ and ‘decentralized’ endeavor, which owed nothing to Nazi leadership other than ‘coercion.’14 Even the obvious commentary to the steep, sudden boost that Germany experienced after January 1933 in employment, production, and welfare – namely, that such an exceptional recovery after so much misery was a willed feat propitiated by the financial elites of Germany and Anglo-America in collusion with the Hitlerites – has been drowned in a preposterous and interminable debate as to whether, in fact, the Nazi boom was more the bitter fruit of luck than of deliberate intervention and efficient economics.15 

It naturally behooves the establishment to circulate the old superstition that there had been a ‘fortuitous turnaround in the second semester of 1932,’16 a ‘natural economic upswing,’ whose wind, so the fantasy goes, Hitler luckily caught in his own sails. This noxious fable disposes in one blow of all the thorny issues that bristle in the biennium of 1932–33: namely, the foreign financing of the Nazis, their rigged election to the Chancellery, and the decisional forces behind the full-blown resumption of economic activity under the Third Reich. 

Moreover, Nazi economics, fueled by its potent blend of free enterprise, communitarian appeal, industrial brilliance, deep ecology, re-distributive policies, anti-plutocratic invective, hi-tech virtuosity, tight regulation, monetary swiftness, and efficient planning, is clearly a phenomenon that comforts no one: neither the Liberal apologists of business nor the doctrinaires of the Left, and not even the anarcho-reformers of regionalism – it is a deep embarrassment for it features too many traits that are dear to them all and is thus better left unmentioned, or at the very least, distorted.

All the more so as the Allies had sunk massive investments in the Third Reich. And this was not done for the cynical sake of profits, but in view of the future reconstruction of Germany under the American aegis – the clubs were already gazing two steps ahead. That Hitler, in time, would lose the war, was understood – and this despite the reprieve the Nazis were afforded by such economic ‘help.’ Eventually, in 1949, when Germany was torn along the East–West divide, the new Federal Republic was not asked to pay any reparations in cash: it surrendered in kind a mere 4 percent of its industrial capacity. The securities of the German absentees were temporarily sequestered by the occupying Command; the giant industrial combines of the past were broken into smaller concerns and reintegrated into the Common Market of Europe, which was, by way of the new clearings, the IMF, and Marshall Aid, solidly anchored to the outlets of the American empire. Now Washington had Germany and the Meditarranean, along with the Pope, whose absolution it bought by refurbishing the bank of the Vatican with millions of dollars earmarked for pro-American action.17 

And the Shoah? The Anglo-American elites vetoed the Schacht Plan of late 1938. In May 1939, the United States – the future home of much Holocaust museology – would not even offer sanctuary to 1,000 wealthy Jews whom Hitler had allowed to ship out of Hamburg.18 Nothing came out of the Madagascar Plan, and when the SS penetrated the Russian forests, Churchill allowed them in fact, for his own ends, three long, uninterrupted years to set out on their ‘task,’ presumably knowing the intentions of the black squads even before they began.19 

The sheer amount of lies perpetrated by the Anglo-American establishment against its public in order to preserve the myth that World War II was a ‘good’ war, won for a just cause, is incalculable. The proof lies in the myriad of classified files documenting the vital phases of this intrigue, which to this day remain unavailable to the public eye – for reasons of ‘national security,’ they say. 

In sum, the Allied elites have told a story. The story that the Germans have always been disturbers of the peace; they disturbed it once and were punished for it, although a little too harshly. Out of such blundering castigation, an evil force materialized out of nowhere – a force whose evil greatly exceeded the petty severity of the Allies that caused such evil to emerge despite themselves. And, the story goes, the evil of this force grew to be such that a violent global conflict became necessary to uproot it. 

More than a cock-and-bull story, this is an insult. And what is worse, every day more and more people, for the sake of psychological tranquility, choose to believe it. Because individuals, as the loathsome Machiavelli put it in his ‘classic’ vademecum for subhuman conduct, are ‘simple’ and willing to trust the word of the constituted authorities. Constituted authorities, which we think embody our will, when in truth they are nothing but high battlements hiding oligarchy and lies, both of which must come to an end.

THE END

Notes
http://cnqzu.com/library/Philosophy/neoreaction/Guido%20Preparata/Conjuring%20Hitler%20-%20How%20Britain%20and%20America%20made%20the%20Third%20Reich.pdf