100 years to the day after the Balfour Declaration, the New York Times has finally published its long-awaited exposé revealing the hideous truth behind the phenomenon of Zionism. But that story does not appear on the front page. Instead, it is in the science section.
NYT has discovered that the sea slug Cratena Peregrina (like the Zionist entity) practices “kleptopredation.” That means it isn’t content to just rob you. It eats you as well. (Or vice versa, depending on how you look at it.) As the Times explains:
Think of it like wielding a living (EDIBLE -KB) fishing rod. Or eating a turducken. Whichever your preferred analogy, kleptopredation — using one prey item to obtain another prey item — falls outside ecologists’ traditional classifications of feeding behavior. There’s predation, and there’s so-called kleptoparasitism (when one animal takes food from another animal, like a pack of hyenas stealing a fresh kill from a lion). But kleptopredation is something new.
Or maybe not so new. Kleptopredation precisely describes what the Zionists have done to the British and US empires and their prey, starting with Palestine.
100 years ago, the Balfour Declaration enshrined the most audacious act of kleptopredation in human history. The Rothschild Zionists manipulated the world’s then-biggest predator, the British, into devouring prey it otherwise never would have captured (the Ottoman Empire including Palestine).
A few decades later, the Zionist kleptopredators employed massive terrorism against the big-predator UK to force it to withdraw from its kill. The Zionists have been eating Palestine alive ever since.
Since devouring Palestine, the Zionists have also gobbled up not only the entity formerly known as the British Empire, but its successor, the US Empire, as well.
Below are extracts from Laurent Guyenot’s book From Yahweh to Zion (to be published in English this January) offering some of the details surrounding the kleptopredacious Balfour affair.
From Yahweh to Zion
by Laurent Guyénot
From chapter six, “The Imperial Matrix”
In October 1916, England was on the brink of defeat. The submarines invented by the Germans had given them a decisive advantage, wreaking considerable havoc on the supplies of the Allies. Germany proposed a just peace, based on a return to pre-war conditions without compensation or redress. It was then that anti-Zionist Prime Minister Herbert Asquith was dismissed from power following a press campaign and replaced by David Lloyd George, who appointed Arthur Balfour as foreign minister. Lloyd George and Balfour were Christians influenced by dispensationalism in favor of Zionism.
Arthur Balfour signed a letter dated November 2, 1917, addressed to Lord Lionel Walter Rothschild, president of the Zionist Federation (and grandson of Baron Lionel de Rothschild, financier of the Suez Canal under the influence of Disraeli) stating that his government would “view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object.” …
… According to a report of the Palestine Royal Commission of 1937, Lloyd George explained the deal in those terms: “Zionist leaders gave us a definite promise that, if the Allies committed themselves to giving facilities for the establishment of a national home for the Jews in Palestine, they would do their best to rally Jewish sentiment and support throughout the world to the Allied cause. They kept their word.” Churchill confirmed this, as did Rabbi Emanuel Neumann of the Zionist Organization of America: “Britain, hard pressed in the struggle with Germany, was anxious to gain the whole-hearted support of the Jewish people. […] Britain’s need of Jewish support furnished Zionist diplomacy the element of strength and bargaining power which it required to back its moral appeal.” What is left implicit in these declarations is that the Balfour Declaration was a pledge given by the British government to the Zionist movement in exchange for its efforts to bring the United States into war.
The United States had proclaimed its neutrality in August 1914, the day of Great Britain’s declaration of war against Germany. President Woodrow Wilson was re-elected in 1916 on the slogan “He saved us from the war” and the promise to continue in that direction. On April 2, 1917, he declared to Congress that the United States was in a state of war and announced that the objective of the war was “to establish a new international order.” Why did Wilson reverse course and renege on his promises? At the approach of the war, a little more than thirty years after Disraeli’s death, an extremely efficient Zionist network had been set up across the two sides of the Atlantic. Nahum Sokolow, a stakeholder in these deep politics, testifies to this in his History of Zionism: “Between London, New York, and Washington there was constant communication, either by telegraph, or by personal visit, and as a result there was perfect unity among the Zionists of both hemispheres.”
Among the architects of the secret diplomacy leading to the Balfour Declaration, Nahum Sokolow praises very specifically “the beneficent personal influence of the Honorable Louis D. Brandeis, Judge of the Supreme Court.” Louis Brandeis (1856–1941), descended from a Frankist family (adepts of kabbalist Jacob Frank), had been appointed to the highest level of the judiciary in 1916 by President Wilson, at the demand of Wall Street lawyer Samuel Untermeyer who, as rumor has it, blackmailed Wilson with letters to his mistress Mrs. Mary Allen Peck.
…Brandeis and Frankfurter belonged to a secret society dedicated to the Zionist cause and named the Parushim (Hebrew for “Pharisees” or “Separated”). Sarah Schmidt, professor of Jewish history at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, described the society as “a secret underground guerilla force determined to influence the course of events in a quiet, anonymous way.” At the initiation ceremony, each new member received for instructions: “Until our purpose shall be accomplished, you will be fellow of a brotherhood whose bond you will regard as greater than any other in your life—dearer than that of family, of school, of nation. By entering this brotherhood, you become a self-dedicated soldier in the army of Zion.” The insider responded by vowing: “Before this council, in the name of all that I hold dear and holy, I hereby vow myself, my life, my fortune, and my honor to the restoration of the Jewish nation. […] I pledge myself utterly to guard and to obey and to keep secret the laws and the labor of the fellowship, its existence and its aims. Amen.”
The influence of Judge Brandeis on Wilson was only one element of a complex system of influence. One of its transmission belts was the closest advisor to the President, Edward Mandell House, known as Colonel House even though he never served in the army. According to his biographer, House said of Brandeis: “His mind and mine agree on most of the questions.” Wilson declared: “Mr. House is my second personality. He is my self. His thoughts and mine are one.” Colonel House’s second name was taken from a Jewish merchant from Houston, one of the most intimate friends of his father, who was of Dutch descent and changed his name from Huis to House upon emigrating to the United States. His brother-in-law, Dr. Sidney Mezes, was Jewish. House perhaps belonged to those descendants of the Marranos who maintained a secret attachment to Judaism even after the annexation of Texas in 1848.
Be that as it may, House’s role in favor of the hidden powers was decisive on more than one occasion, including the ratification of the Federal Reserve Act (discreetly passed by Congress on December 23, 1913), which placed the American currency under the control of a bankers’ cartel: “The Schiff, Warburg, Kahn, Rockefeller and Morgan families placed their trust in House. When the Federal Reserve legislation finally took definitive form, House was the intermediary between the White House and the financiers.” House published an anonymous novel in 1912 entitled Philip Dru: Administrator, whose hero Selwyn is the avatar of the author (he resides at Mandell House). He is assisted by a “high priest of finance” named John Thor, whose “influence in all commercial America was absolute.” Thor reads backwards Roth (which makes one think of the Rothschilds), but the banker who in reality weighed most on the presidency of Wilson, in concert with House, was Bernard Baruch, who was appointed in 1916 to the head of the Advisory Commission of the Council of National Defense, then chairman of the War Industries Board, and was the key man in the American mobilization for war. He did not exaggerate when he once declared before a select congressional committee, “I probably had more power than perhaps any other man did in the war.”
It is easy to imagine how President Wilson, an idealistic and naive scholar, was manipulated to drag America into war. But the hidden counselors’ grip on the president is only one aspect of the power that Zionism began to acquire over American foreign and military policy. Another important aspect is the manipulation of public opinion. It should be emphasized that while the overwhelming majority of Americans were opposed to entry into the war until 1917, American Jews who had been integrated for several generations were no exception. Among them, Zionism had only very limited and discreet support. They believed that Israel was doing very well in the form of a nation scattered throughout the world; they feared that the creation of a Jewish state would attract a suspicion of “double loyalty” to their community; and they had no desire to emigrate to Palestine. Reform Judaism, the most visible current in the United States, had not officially denied its status as a religion or affirmed any nationalist aspiration. Chaim Weizmann explains in his autobiography that in order to obtain financial contributions from certain wealthy Jews, it was necessary to deceive them by evoking a “Jewish cultural home” (a university) in Palestine rather than a state: “To them the university-to-be in Jerusalem was philanthropy, which did not compromise them; to us it was nationalist renaissance. They would give—with disclaimers; we would accept—with reservations.” Moreover, the majority of American Jews from the old German and Dutch immigrants were rather favorable to Germany in the European conflict.
It is thus a mistake to believe, as is often written, that in exchange for the Balfour Declaration, the Zionists mobilized “American Jews” in favor of war. The Balfour Declaration was signed after the official US entry into the war, and was not made widely public until 1919. The entry of the United States into the war was rather the result of a series of coordinated actions behind the scenes by a highly structured and powerful transatlantic network, including a core of bankers (some linked to the Rothschilds) and some influential newspaper directors, with those of The New York Times and The Washington Post playing major roles.
 Sarah Schmidt, “The ‘Parushim’: A Secret Episode in American Zionist History,” American Jewish Historical Quarterly 65, no. 2, December 1975, pp. 121–139, on ifamericansknew.org/history/parushim.html.
 Robert Edward Edmondson, The Jewish System Indicted by the Documentary Record, 1937 (archive.org), p. 9.
 Quoted in Alan Hart, Zionism, The Real Enemy of the Jews, vol. 1, op. cit., p. 117.
 Alfred Lilienthal, What Price Israel? (1953), Infinity Publishing, 2003, pp. 21, 18.
 The American Zionist, October 1953, quoted in Alan Hart, Zionism, The Real Enemy of the Jews, vol. 1: The False Messiah, Clarity Press, 2009, p. 90.
 Nahum Sokolow, History of Zionism (1600–1918), vol. 2, 1919, pp. 79–80, quoted in Alison Weir, Against Our Better Judgment: The Hidden History of How the U.S. Was Used to Create Israel, 2014, k. 387–475.
 Gene Smith, When the Cheering Stopped: The Last Years of Woodrow Wilson, William Morrow & Co, 1964, pp. 20–23.
Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror.
He also has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS, and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications.
Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin; where he ran for Congress in 2008. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, author, and talk radio host.