Jewish voices from the past make mincemeat of Zionism and anti-Semitism


“Zionism has always seemed to me to be a mischievous political creed, untenable by any patriotic citizen of the United Kingdom.” – Lord Montague


“Show me one time where a Jew was persecuted in any country because of his religion…. It’s always their impact on the political, social, or economic customs and traditions of the community in which they settle.” – Benjamin Freedman

 by Stuart Littlewood


The latest anti-Semitism witch-hunt being conducted by the Zio-Inquisition in the UK is all hogwash if the statements of two leading Jews are to be believed.

One is the speech by successful Jewish businessman Benjamin Freedman at the Willard Hotel, Washington, in 1961. The other is a letter in 1917 by Lord Edwin Samuel Montague, a prominnent British Jew, disagreeing with the Balfour Declaration.

I had seen neither before.  My attention was drawn to Freedman by reader comments to a recent article of mine on the Balfour Declaration (many thanks ‘Bill Rollinson’ and ‘frog’).

Freedman kicked off his his remarks at the Willard by saying that just before the elections of 1960 Senator Kennedy (afterwards President of the United States) went to New York and delivered an address to the Zionist Organization of America.  “In that address…. he stated that he would use the armed forces of the United States to preserve the existence of the regime set up in Palestine by the Zionists who are now in occupation of that area.

“In other words, Christian boys are going to be yanked out of their homes, away from their families, and sent abroad to fight in Palestine against the Christian and Moslem Arabs who merely want to return to their homes. And these Christian boys are going to be asked to shoot to kill these innocent [Arab Palestinians] people who only want to follow out fifteen resolutions passed by the United Nations in the last twelve years calling upon the Zionists to allow these people to return to their homes.”

And he warned that if the US went to war in Palestine “to help the thieves retain possession of what they have stolen from these innocent people”, no-one would fight alongside Americans as their ally.

Harking back to WW1 Freedman explained that by 1916 Germany had effectively won. Thanks to the success of the U-boats Britain was alone, almost out of ammunition and on the edge of starvation. Germany offered peace terms, and while Britain chewed it over the Zionists of Germany (representing the Zionists of Eastern Europe who wanted to see an end to the Czar) came to London and said: “We will guarantee to bring the United States into the war as your ally, to fight with you on your side, if you will promise us Palestine after you win the war.”

Balfour’s shabby promissory note

How could they make such a promise? “Because the newspapers here were controlled by Jews, the bankers were Jews, all the media of mass communications in this country were controlled by Jews, and they were pro-German because their people, in the majority of cases came from Germany, and they wanted to see Germany lick the Czar…. they didn’t want Russia to win this war.  So the German bankers – the German-Jews – Kuhn Loeb and the other big banking firms in the United States refused to finance France or England to the extent of one dollar.   They stood aside and they said: ‘As long as France and England are tied up with Russia, not one cent!’  But they poured money into Germany, they fought with Germany against Russia, trying to lick the Czarist regime.

“Now those same Jews, when they saw the possibility of getting Palestine, they went to England and they made this deal….  Where the newspapers had been all pro-German, where they’d been telling the people of the difficulties that Germany was having fighting Great Britain commercially and in other respects, all of a sudden the Germans were no good.   They were villains….  Well, shortly after that, Mr. Wilson declared war on Germany.”

Freedman went on to say it was “absolutely absurd” for Great Britain to offer Palestine as “coin of the realm” to pay the Zionists for bringing the United States into the war. But that was the bargain they struck, in October 1916, ignoring pledges made to the Arabs for their help. After they’d done their bit, the Zionists wanted a ‘receipt’ – written confirmation of Britain’s pledge. Hence Balfour’s infamous ‘declaration’, a grubby promissory note addressed to Lord Rothschild.

The way Freedman tells it, when the war was over and the Germans went to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, it was attended by a huge delegation of Jews.  Freedman says he was there. As the Great Powers carved up the losers’ territories – German and Ottoman – the Jewish delegation of course claimed Palestine. “They produced, for the first time to the knowledge of the Germans, this Balfour Declaration.  So the Germans, for the first time realized, ‘Oh, that was the game!  That’s why the United States came into the war.’

“When the Germans realized this, they naturally resented it.  Up to that time, the Jews had never been better off in any country in the world than they had been in Germany.” And that, according to Freeman, is why Jews eventually came to pay such a horrendous price.

On the subject of Jews and anti-Semitism he made the crucial point that the eastern European Jews accounted for 92 per cent of the world’s Jews and were originally Khazars. “It’s ridiculous to call them ‘people of the Holy Land’…. they outnumber all the rest by so many that they create the impression that they are the Jewish ‘race’; that they are the Jewish nation;  that they are the Jewish people. . . and the Christians swallow it like a cream puff.”

As for Semites, “The Christians talk about people who don’t like Jews as anti-Semites, and they call all the Arabs anti-Semites.  The only Semites in the world are the Arabs.  There isn’t one Jew who’s a Semite.  They’re all Turkothean Mongoloids.  The Eastern European Jews…. they brainwashed the public.”

And he neatly disposed of the anti-Semitism kerfuffle by saying: “Show me one time where a Jew was persecuted in any country because of his religion.  It has never happened.  It’s always their impact on the political, social, or economic customs and traditions of the community in which they settle.”

No such thing as a Jewish nation

An earlier bombshell had been dropped by Lord Montague, only the second Jew to serve in a British cabinet. Coincidentally he was Minister of Munitions in 1916 when, according to Freedman,  Britain was running out of ammunition.

In August 1917, while the Palestine deal was still being discussed but before Balfour issued his Declaration, Montague penned a memorandum to the British Cabinet headed ‘On the Anti-Semitism of the Present Government’.

He said he wanted to place on record his view that the policy of the British Government was anti-Semitic because it would provide a rallying ground for anti-Semites in every country in the world.

“Zionism has always seemed to me to be a mischievous political creed, untenable by any patriotic citizen of the United Kingdom. If a Jewish Englishman sets his eyes on the Mount of Olives and longs for the day when he will shake British soil from his shoes and go back to agricultural pursuits in Palestine, he has always seemed to me to have acknowledged aims inconsistent with British citizenship and to have admitted that he is unfit for a share in public life in Great Britain, or to be treated as an Englishman.”

He said those who indulged in the Zionist creed were spurred by the oppression of Jews in Russia. He assumed “Zionism meant that Mahommedans and Christians were to make way for the Jews and that the Jews should be put in all positions of preference and should be peculiarly associated with Palestine in the same way that England is with the English or France with the French, that Turks and other Mahommedans in Palestine will be regarded as foreigners….

“When the Jews are told that Palestine is their national home, every country will immediately desire to get rid of its Jewish citizens, and you will find a population in Palestine driving out its present inhabitants, taking all the best in the country, drawn from all quarters of the globe.”

He argued that there was no such thing as a Jewish nation, and it was no more true to say that a Jewish Englishman and a Jewish Moor are of the same nation than it was to say that a Christian Englishman and a Christian Frenchman are of the same nation. He wanted Jews in the UK to be regarded, not as British Jews, but as Jewish Britons.

Montague was well aware of the unpopularity of the Jewish community. “We have obtained a far greater share of this country’s goods and opportunities than we are numerically entitled to…. Many of us have been exclusive in our friendships and intolerant in our attitude, and I can easily understand that many a non-Jew in England wants to get rid of us….”

As for the Balfour Declaration itself he felt the Government was carrying out the wishes of a Zionist organisation “largely run by men of enemy descent or birth” and had thus “dealt a severe blow to the liberties, position and opportunities of service of their Jewish fellow-countrymen”. Furthermore, he said, “I would be almost tempted to proscribe the Zionist organisation as illegal and against the national interest.”

His message to Lord Rothschild was that the Government should help Jews in Palestine enjoy liberty of settlement and life on equal terms with the inhabitants of that country who hold other religious beliefs, but go no further.

I wonder what either of them would say if they’d lived to see the situation today on both sides of the Atlantic where Zionist bully-boys run amok, and the degradation of the Holy Land where indigenous Christian and Muslim communities are still horribly abused and dispossessed by incomers with no ancestral connection with the region.

I wonder too how Benjamin Freedman would react to finding that the US was still handing Israel billions of Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars and military equipment “to help the thieves retain possession of what they have stolen”.

How many of us share Lord Montague’s subtle distinction between American Jews and Jewish Americans, or in our case British Jews and Jewish Brits?

And how many agree with Freedman that it’s the impact Jews have on the customs and traditions of the community in which they settle, rather than their religion that causes problems?

The words of Benjamin Freedman and Lord Montague reinforce what we’ve heard from other knowledgeable sources.  The truth is out there for those who bother to listen.

All content herein is owned by author exclusively.  Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians or Veterans Today Network (VT).  Some content may be satirical in nature. 
All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT.
About VT - Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy


  1. So called “Joos” are loyal to none, no country, no other group, but themselves and their god “money” and material things. And I really doubt that they are even loyal to their own people as we saw in history. Guess why they wanted their own “homeland” ?

    • BTW every believe system is a fiction. If one wants to live a fiction none should hinder them as long as he/she/it respects the fiction of others undisturbed.

    • If have read 1984 in school in the 1970th and I was a catholic myself until I found out what they had done to humanity. So plz don´t tell me what to believe.

    • Religion is nothing more than mindcontrol story taken of the heavenly bodies brought to earthly persons and make people subversive to the so called elite as their gods. Look at the bible and compare it to the 12 signs of stars and the solar planets.

    • What about the star of Bethlehem ? What about several star constellations in old Testament ? The world is much older than those history riggers wanted to tell us. And remember the Star of David ?

  2. When “mandatory peacekeeping” in Palestine/Israel was outsourced from Britain to USA, British establishment surely celebrated. (Just like Obama would throw a champagne party if by some twist of events Russia or anyone else would take the next “protector of Israel” tenure). God has indeed blessed British with so much land, title, and influence that it is hardly imaginable how they managed to mess up in Palestine. Surely a “rich in spirit” establishment the Brits they are. It only takes what, two or three generations to claim a homeland, whatever and wherever it may be? The UN pins and flags have its price in money unfortunately. Hardly in anything else, especially concerning the “great” nations. UN membership (which defines modern statehood) for many is like buying a huge family crest and amblem as so to mingle with the “greats” like Britain and USA. I would love to think that Britain had very little to do with stealing the Palestinian land. All this that Palestine is going through New Zealand and Australia (whatever the name was before) went through for decades or a century.

    • Please understand that Shrimpton’s crazy views where the ‘evil Hun’ are responsible for everything and there is a strong nostalgia for the days of empire are not at all common in modern Britain and do not represent the views of the vast majority of Britons.

    • Yes, the older generation of Brits will not entertain any notion that WW2 was not as orthodox history says it was. The younger generation are a little more receptive, but I fear it will be another generation or two before they are really ready to learn the truth. I am unusual among Britons in my views on Germany, national socialism and the history of the 20th century, but that is due to a years long illness where I kept my mind active by reading everything I could get my hands on on the subject of the two world wars. Also, having lived on the continent and having some very good Hungarian and German friends opened my eyes a lot, they started me off on the path to learning the real history and I carried that on during my illness.

      My personal belief is that nations, religions etc are artificial divides and all people are just that, people. The only division I make is between ‘them’ and ‘us’ with ‘them’ being the tiny 0.1% monied ruling elite and ‘us’ being everyone else. They do not care about us, do not value our lives, are happy to dispose of us by the tens of millions, therefore, I, in return, do not value their lives and would gladly dispose of them against the nearest wall or from the nearest tree, that would be only fair and proper imho, especially if one believes in the principle of the greater good, as I do.

    • That’s a good idea about Siberia, there is that lovely patch of desolate steppe Stalin defined called the Jewish Autonomous Oblast, that would be a fitting place to deport these people to.

    • Seems some people always need a “beloved enemy” whom they can hold accountable for their own faults and crimes. It is called “projection”. And veh,veh you took him away from them so they must look into the mirror.

  3. Supposedly:

    A civil war between the Ultra Orthodox and Zionist Jews has been playing since at least the Balfour declaration. The receipt for Palestine that occurred behind the scenes of WWII. NY is saturated with supposedly anti-Zionist Orthodox Torah followers. Since their only job is the study of the Torah and whatever else is a religious right they use welfare to exist in the most expensive city in the US. Its nice they care, really.
    Israeli Ultra Orthodox Jews are regularly targeted by both the government forces and anyone confusing them with Zionist Jews who dress exactly the same: complete with goofy fedoras and black suits with white shirts and that hair cut.

    If these Torah followers have been at conflict with the Zionists they share a lot of the same traits with both coalesce in the same idea. Take government tax money to exist. I say revoke the legality of a two state entitlement and send all of them to Israel to sort out the whole affair. Its not our war and we cant afford either. Lets make NY great again.

  4. Stu, a lot of people can’t seem to get their head around that Great Britain was a world power back in the turn of the twentieth century, and owned 95% of the world, The sun never sets etc…

    America at that time, although a sleeping giant, was about where Australia sits today. It took the second world war to come alive.

    Interesting that no debate seems to be recorded about any discussion on accepting Germany’s magnificent offer. Anyone who died after 1916, know who to blame. Of course this couldn’t be seen by the public, so a cover story had to be produced, ahh, the sinking of the Lusitania will do.

    When I inform people of Israels role in 911. they tell me how could a small country do that, I remind them of small Britain ruling the world.

Comments are closed.