Though this is by no means the end of the line, we will
take a break from the weekly blogs but hope to release occasional pieces as evidence is slowly unmasked across the world.
Thanks to everyone who contributed in any way, to our regular readers whose encouragement
and contributions we greatly appreciated. You guys care was we do. Where circumstances allow point doubters to our blogs
or either of the major works, Hidden History, The Secret Origins of the First World War and, just released, Prolonging
the Agony, How the Anglo-American Establishment Deliberately Extended WW1 by Three-and-a-Half Years.
Take care in a world where we are still lied to by governments, as was the case one hundred years ago.
Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor
Establishment historians place great value on the use of primary source evidence. This is described as ‘Narrative
Fixation’ by the heterodox economist Edward Fullbrook  who cites Einstein’s famous aphorism:
you can observe a thing or not depends on the theory which you use: It is the theory which decides what can be observed.’
Professor Fullbrook stated that in his academic
field, by adopting a single point of view and refusing to admit alternative insights, economists deprive themselves of the
means of a fuller understanding of the matters they seek to explain. But it is not just in economics that such limitations
become apparent. The narrative fixation on the dialectical side of scientific development has had, and continues to have,
a deleterious consequence in the human sciences. This involves all of the Humanities and Social Sciences including, as we
see here, History. In any attempt to understand a complex truth, what is required is a multiplicity of points of view –
a width of methodologies and epistemologies – a ‘Narrative Pluralism’ – but academic historians
have a narrative fixation: No documents; no narrative.  In an article, The Frailty of Historical Truth: Learning Why Historians
Inevitably Fail, published by the American Historical Association, Professor David Lowenthal stated, ‘Secondary sources
are ipso facto unreliable.’ 
The fundamental problem in war history, as we and other revisionists have clearly demonstrated, lies in the fact
that it is underpinned by primary sources which are unreliable – not least because so many have been systematically
destroyed, falsified, altered, misrepresented, hidden or ‘lost’. In the absence of reliable primary source evidence,
it is entirely legitimate – indeed it is mandatory on the part of truth-seekers – to look to other means of
establishing what has occurred, what continues to happen and why. Secondary sources/circumstantial evidence are a taboo in
historical research, yet they play such an important role in the criminal law courts and can literally mean a matter of
life or death? In homicide cases or other serious felonies, police detectives act much like historians in searching the
past for evidence. If it is considered that sufficient evidence has been uncovered, the accused is sent for trial before
a jury of his peers.
The gold standard in law courts is direct evidence,
but in the majority of cases there is none and only indirect circumstantial evidence is available. By way of example, direct
evidence is presented if a witness states that she saw the defendant pull out a gun and actually shoot the victim. On the
other hand, if she did not witness the shooting but saw the defendant enter a house with a gun, heard a gunshot and screaming
and thereafter saw the defendant leave carrying the gun, it is circumstantial evidence. If two or more independent witnesses
testify to this, it is very powerful circumstantial evidence.
Circumstantial evidence – and that includes fingerprints and forensic evidence presented by
expert witnesses – allows for more than one explanation. When different strands of such evidence are drawn together
and each corroborates the conclusions drawn from the others, we have every reason to the serious notice. For hundreds of
years attorneys have talked about the ‘cable’ of circumstantial evidence. A cable is made up of many strands
which individually are not particularly strong, but the more strands which are applied to the cable the stronger it becomes.
In many, if not indeed the majority of legal cases, it is this cable of circumstantial evidence which solidly links an accused
to the crime. Juries in the United States and elsewhere are entitled to reach a verdict on such evidence, and Judges are
able to condemn an individual to death on the strength of that verdict. The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that ‘circumstantial
evidence is intrinsically no different from testimonial [direct] evidence,’  yet academic war historians deride
lies, concealment of important evidence, a peer review system that encourages only accounts sympathetic to the Establishment,
and insistence on using only primary source documents (which in reality are generally the remnants which have survived the
Establishment’s cull) are all important elements in the production of fake history.
In the early 1970s, Canadian war historian Nicholas
D’Ombrain began researching British War Office records. He noted: ‘The Registry Files were in a deplorable condition,
having suffered the periodic ravages of the policy of “weeding”. One such clearance was in progress during my
foray into these files, and I found that my material was being systematically reduced by as much as five-sixths.’
 Astonishingly, a large amount of ‘sensitive’ material was actually removed as the researcher went about his
business. Where did it go? He accused the establishment of systematic withdrawal of evidence. Who authorised its removal?
In addition, D’Ombrain noted that minutes of the Committee of Imperial Defence and ‘circulation and invitation
lists’ together with much ‘routine’ correspondence had been destroyed.  That D’Ombrain found five-sixths
of the total files melting away in front of him demonstrated clearly that unnamed others still retained a vested interest
in keeping hidden, genuine evidence of historical record.
On conducting our own research we noted that the official notice in the Public Record Office List
of Cabinet Papers warns, ‘the papers listed … are certainly not the whole of those collectively considered
by Cabinet Ministers.’ The gap, however, is breath-taking. No effort is made to explain why crucial records are missing
or what happened to them. Nothing is included from 14 July until 20 August, 1914. Nothing. This period covered the crucial
two week ‘July Crisis’ in the run up to the First World War, the British declaration of war on Germany on 4
August, and the files remain empty until almost three weeks into the war itself.  It beggars belief that such crucial
Cabinet papers relating to one of the most significant events in British history have disappeared.
While official Cabinet papers for the time frame
do not exist – presumably destroyed (the files at the National Archives at Kew in London were completely empty) we
know what was going on in some detail because Prime Minister Asquith (aka ‘Squiffy’ because it was alleged that
he drank a bottle of cleared each evening) was writing letters to his paramour, Venetia Stanley, and sharing secret Cabinet
details with her. Had Asquith not communicated privately and very indiscreetly to his young paramour, much of what was discussed
at those crucial meetings would be lost to history. His letters of August 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, contain the inner
secrets of what was said by whom in those crucial Cabinet meetings whose minutes were presumably destroyed. The Letters
to Venetia Stanley, essentially Asquith’s love letters  was collated in 1982 and therefore not subject to the post-war
censor. This unquestionably saved the information from being redacted or burned.
When researching later Cabinet Memoranda housed in the National Archives,  pages were found to
be missing. Page 685, which was in a series which included crucial confidential documents about Herbert Hoover’s Belgian
Relief, has been torn out. Despite this, we had more than sufficient evidence to prove that Britain and America were secretly
provisioning Germany through Hoover’s organisation in order to prolong the war. Countless documents are missing, but
in fairness to the librarians and custodians of the Public Record Office, they could only catalogue what was passed to them
from the Cabinet Office, the Foreign Office, the War Office and the Colonial Office. It is not the fault of librarians.
An Australian expert on Gallipoli, Harvey
Broadbent, had a similar experience when researching the archives: ‘… Difficulties lie in the fact that not
all Gallipoli documents seem to be present in the National Archives. There are gaps in document collections of certain events
and at crucial times of the campaign.’  Broadbent, though reluctant to say so in public, harbours suspicions that
the 1915 Gallipoli campaign (where over a quarter of a million allied soldiers and sailors, including many from Australia
and New Zealand, were killed or badly wounded) was deliberately set up to fail by the British and French governments. We
gathered many individual strands of circumstantial evidence on this, wound them in to a very strong rope, and have absolutely
no doubts whatsoever that it was indeed deliberately set up to fail.
The doomed project went ahead to enable greater
geo-political strategies which would benefit the Secret Elite, including post-war control of oil in the Middle East and control
of Palestine. Gallipoli was a disaster for the allies in 1915 and the truth had to be concealed at all costs from the peoples
of colonial Australia and New Zealand or they would have reacted severely against both the ‘Mother country’
and the war. Yet the lies persist, and the Anzacs continue to cerebrate a disaster dressed as a glorious sacrifice; an honour
to Australian and New Zealand youth. Lies, lies, lies.
It is evident that falsification of the history of the twentieth century has involved a wide range
of nefarious subterfuge. Today, the accepted mainstream version continues to be taken as the source for new books and documentaries
in film and television. The ideal of objectivity was abandoned long ago. Highly biased and selective choices were made from
the infinite number of true facts. Some were given a central place, others marginalised. Facts were selected to align with
the narrative which the oligarchs demanded. Many inaccurate, muddled or tainted primary sources were chosen to mislead. A
range of documents might be brought into the public domain with one crucial piece of the jigsaw removed.
This skewed the picture, deliberately. And there were lies,
outrageous lies, levied against anyone who stood as a potential barrier to elite rule and one world government by exposing
the truth. Yet all of that is merely the tip of the rotten iceberg and represents what we can actually recognise when we
scrutinise the given record. Below the surface lie vast quantities of documents removed from public scrutiny and hidden
away in places such as Stanford and Hanslope. It seems possible, if not indeed likely, that other as yet unknown depositories
exist. It is impossible to say how many records remain concealed to this day, or have already found their way into furnaces
in a factual holocaust. As an iceberg in warmer water gradually melts and recedes from the bottom up, so the records decrease
in volume, unseen, unknown and unreported as more and more are selected for destruction. In the age of mass communication
we have less access to the truth about history than the generations before us. This is no mistake.
As in so many other areas, when researching history
a good opening question is: Cui bono? Who benefits from this systematically destroyed, falsified, altered, hidden or ‘lost’
evidence? The Elites, past and present? The court historians whose success is predicated upon conformity?
In the words of Professor Hillel Ticktin, academic economics,
is ‘useless – utterly useless’. So too in any objective sense is academic history. Its value resides only
in supporting the present-day elites who pay the piper and own the pipes.
If Orwell’s aphorism holds true it is imperative that we revise the entire
historical record of the twentieth century. It may already be too late, but we have to dispel pessimism to stand any chance
of taking control of our own future. Much has already been done by revisionists such as Harry Elmer Barnes, Antony Sutton
and Guido Preparata, and not least by Carroll Quigley who provided the signposts we need on this complex journey. But the
ruling elite today are more adept at burying the truth than ever – as witnessed by the vast percentage of the ‘educated’
peoples of the world who remain totally unaware of their existence, or the fact that democracy is a sham. Modern history
in its entirety requires grassroots revision.
There is too another concern. The selection of approved versions of history dictates what is taught in our universities
and schools. Scottish schoolchildren are taught certain aspects of the First World War but all contentious issues are absent
from the syllabus. Attending a conference in Brussels several years ago we learned that Belgian schoolchildren are taught
absolutely nothing about the ‘Committee for the Relief of Belgium’ which was directly at the centre and the
most significant institution in the country’s First World War history. Internationally, university professors and
departmental heads determine the body of knowledge from which degrees are judged. Armed with their prized degrees, those
who progress to a career in history are obliged to teach from the same sacred scripture in schools, colleges or universities.
No one questions this. No one dares. School and college students are then examined on their historical learning and understanding
from texts blessed with institutional approval. Thus, generation after generation, we witness the perpetuation and consolidation
of fake history.
be ludicrous to suggest that all modern historians or war historians are intentionally producing fake history, but they
raise no dissenting voice against those who do. The distressing reality is that brave revisionist historians are a very rare
breed indeed. Academic historians of all colours need to muster their courage to speak truth to power and stop toeing the
Establishment line. The fact that it is not historians but ordinary men and women who are at the vanguard of the historical
truth movement today brings shame to their profession. The verdict of history itself will surely judge them harshly.
1. E. Fullbrook, Narrative Fixation in Economics, World Economics
Association, London, 2016.
2. Dr. John O’Dowd, personal communication.
3. David Lowenthal, The Frailty of
Historical Truth: Learning Why Historians Inevitably Fail, American Historical Association. https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/march-2013/the-frailty-of-historical-truth
4. Holland v. United States, 348 U.S. 121, 75 S. Ct.127, 99 OL. Ed.150 
5. Nicholas D’Ombrain, War
Machinery and High Policy, preface, p.xiii.
7. List of Cabinet Papers, 1880–1914. PRO booklet.
8. Michael Brock, H.H.Asquith letters to Venetia Stanley.
9. Cabinet Papers, 1905-1918 Volume IV ref: FO 899/4.
10. Harvey Broadbent, Gallipoli: One Great Deception? http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-04-24/30630
Together with the omission of crucial documents,
control of the narrative itself is another mechanism for creating fake history. This, ironically, is achieved by applying
the academic principles of historical research which are meant to prevent junk history; the peer review process. Peer review
involves a manuscript or research proposal being read and evaluated anonymously by scholars who are themselves part and
parcel of the system. They may have considerable expertise in the period, subject matter, languages, and documents with
which the author deals, but they have a list of criteria to which the aspiring historical author must bend the knee. And
herein lies the finesse of the overall system which prevents true history emerging. Work which fails to display knowledge
of existing work or fails to provide what they deem as valid evidence, will not be approved. It will be damned as weak,
and appropriate revisions and resubmissions will be demanded.
In other words, the fake history of the approved ‘eminent’ Court Historian has to be
included. Where valid documentary evidence has been destroyed, corrupted, removed, culled and so forth, then the author
is limited to the scraps which have survived. Thus, at a stroke, the permanent withdrawal of primary source documents at
Stanford and Hanslope achieves its aim. Researchers cannot move beyond the parameters created by those who actually determine
what can or cannot be accepted as history. They have to play the peer review game to advance their careers. They are required
to stay on the mainline train and regurgitate that which the elites want us to believe is true history. Those who deviate
or question the process are not tolerated. The only route is the mainline track, laid down by the great universities from
chairs of history funded and controlled by the corrupted system.
According to the American Historical Association, the peer review entails a manuscript or research proposal being read and
evaluated by other scholars with expertise in the time period, subject matter, languages, and documents with which the author
deals. As peers of the author in a specialised field, these reviewers provide analysis to the review boards of agencies
on the scholarly significance of the article: Does the author display knowledge of existing work in the field? Does the
research design, processes and methodologies, for example, conform with professional standards? Does the author advance
an original argument and provide valid evidence to support the work? If particular areas are weak or absent in the presentation,
the peer reviewers suggest revisions that will strengthen the project and call for resubmission before funding is awarded
or a manuscript is accepted for publication. Scholars support the concept of carefully monitored peer review as the fairest
way possible to ensure disinterested evaluation of research. The American Historical Association believes that such peer
review will best serve the American people who fund the research.  Absorb that, please. ‘Will best serve the American
people who fund the research.’ So private funding should be expected to serve the funders. If the state is the funder,
it should serve the state. Believe us, it does.
The peer review process may appear the ideal means by which the quality and honesty of historical
writing are ensured. And it is claimed that although it is not perfect, it is the best safeguard that academic standards
in history have. Reality, however, is different. Well-known, establishment historians who support the status quo are more
likely to be recruited as peer reviewers. In the field of war history especially, it is actually used as a means to sustain
and promulgate the junk history it is supposed to weed out. The ‘competent, qualified and unbiased reviewers’
who ‘best serve the American people’ are, in practice, highly critical of articles that contradict their own
mainstream narratives. They reject them outright. The fact that their narratives and meta-narratives serve the purposes of
Money Power and other elites may be incidental, but is not coincidental, to their epistemological deficiencies. Only official
‘academic’ interpretations and narratives are permitted, and have displaced all other points of view in US and
European universities. Naturally, these other points of view are not conducive to the elite interests and consequently are
effectively outlawed. The mechanism of displacement is the very matter of peer-review. All ‘revisionist’ voices
are starved to death.  We have demonstrated, time and again in our books, how central Oxford University remains the guardian
of establishment history in Britain. Shades of an Orwellian dystopia darken the academic freedoms which have long been touted
as the mark of an advanced liberal society.
Worryingly, similarities with corruption in academic
history and academic medical/pharmaceutical research and reporting appear to be on the increase. Senior academic historians
who have succumbed to the lure of status and position, and sold their integrity for financial rewards are to be found in
many fields. The corruption of science-based medicine and academic history offers striking parallels. Like peer review in
history, the process provides neither an assured filtering process for incorrect findings nor a guarantor of the researchers’
integrity. Professor Richard Horton, editor-in chief of the Lancet – recognised as one of the most highly respected
peer-reviewed medical journals in the world – stated recently that the case against science is straightforward: ‘much
of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects,
invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends
of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.’  History has been faked and science turned towards
darkness. Alarm bells should be sounding across the universe. We continue to be lied to.
These ‘flagrant conflicts of interest’ are
the root of the problem in both history and medicine, with a number of senior academics in both fields labouring not for
the truth, but for lucrative bonuses paid by powerful paymasters with set agendas. Professor Horton added; ‘Scientists
too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world.’ Horton admits that medical journals themselves
are not blameless: ‘Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours.’
 Exactly the same charge can be levelled against even the most prestigious of history journals.
In 2011 the British Medical Journal quoted Dr Marcia Angell,
a long time editor of yet another highly regarded peer-reviewed medical journal, The New England Journal of Medicine: ‘It
is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted
physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly
over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine.” 
In the New York Review of Books, Dr Angell reviewed
the work of whistle blowers in the medical field. She revealed that no one knows the total slush money provided by drug
companies to influence results, but it’s estimated that the top nine U.S. drug companies alone pay out tens of billions
of dollars a year. As a direct consequence, Big Pharma has gained enormous control over how doctors evaluate and use its
products. ‘Its extensive ties to physicians, particularly senior faculty at prestigious medical schools, affect the
results of research, the way medicine is practiced, and even the definition of what constitutes a disease.’ He added
that compromised physicians at the highest levels set the guidelines and treatment recommendations nationally. They sit
on governmental advisory panels, head professional societies and speak at regular meetings and dinners that take place to
teach clinicians about prescription drugs.  Morality is dead. Killed by the greed of the money power.
A recent survey found that about two thirds of academic
medical centres hold equity interest in companies that sponsor research within the same institution. A study of medical
school department chairs found that two thirds received departmental income from drug companies and three fifths received
personal income. ‘Of the 170 contributors to the most recent edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), ninety-five had financial ties to drug companies, including
all of the contributors to the sections on mood disorders and schizophrenia.’ Billions were being spent on unnecessary,
non-efficacious psychiatric medicines that might well be doing more harm than good, even to very young children. For example
the professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, who also held the post of chief of paediatric psychopharmacology
at Harvard’s Massachusetts General Hospital, was largely responsible for children as young as two years old being
diagnosed with bipolar disorder and treated with a cocktail of powerful drugs. The professor’s studies of the drugs
were, as The New York Times summarised, ‘so small and loosely designed that they were largely inconclusive.’
A U.S. Senator revealed that drug companies, including those that make the drugs the professor advocated for childhood bipolar
disorder, had paid him $1.6 million in consultation and speaking fees. Two of his colleagues received similar amounts. 
But this was by no means limited to
psychiatry. ‘In 2004, after the National Cholesterol Education Program called for sharply lowering the desired levels
of “bad” cholesterol, it was revealed that eight of nine members of the panel writing the recommendations had
financial ties to the makers of cholesterol-lowering drugs.’ It is also evident that many members of the standing committees
of experts that advise the FDA on drug approvals also have financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry. 
Big pharmaceutical companies and the
Money Power are, of course, closely related and their corruption of science based medicine and academic history bear striking
similarities. They have extensive ties to senior faculty at prestigious universities where they fund departmental professorial chairs.
They compromise physicians and historians at the highest level with lucrative bonuses, and highly remunerated lecture tours
where they disseminate the ‘sculpted data’ which harmonises with the false accounts demanded by their paymasters.
The peer review process in both specialities has been thoroughly comprised. It is clear that some senior individuals in the
medical field have sold their honesty and integrity, just as have some senior academic historians, but overall the medical
profession can be justifiably proud of the fact that honest doctors and medical journals are prepared to expose the corruption
and name and shame those involved.
There is, alas, no such response to be found in the academic history profession where not one solitary voice has
been raised against the corrupters or the corruption.
American Historical Association, Statement on Peer Review for Historical Research, (2005). https://www.historians.org/jobs-and-professional-development/statements-standards-and-guidelines-of-the-discipline/statement-on-peer-review-for-historical-research
2. Dr. John O’Dowd, personal communication.
The Hoover Institution at Stanford was not the sole
depository for the concealment and sifting of incriminatory documents. In his book The History Thieves, Ian Cobain,
an investigative journalist with The Guardian newspaper in London, revealed a secret facility just an hour’s
drive north of London. Concealed in dense woodland near the tiny hamlet of Hanslope, lies ‘one of the most secure
facilities operated by any government, anywhere in the world.’ It is an outpost used by Britain’s domestic and
foreign spy agencies, MI5 and MI6 and guarded by a seven-foot-high chain-link fence, just beyond which is a ten-foot-high
fence topped with coils of razor wire. Every few yards between the fences are closed-circuit television cameras and floodlights.
Cobain wrote, ‘Only from the air can the enormous scale of the compound be comprehended, it measures almost half a
mile across … It is a perfect place to bury difficult secrets.’ 
And bury difficult secrets they have. Cobain exposed how millions of files
containing top secret British government documents are kept at Hanslope Park. They date back further even that the First
World War. Some which were recently released, albeit very reluctantly under direct order of the Courts of Law, revealed the
true horrors of British colonial rule in Kenya and elsewhere in the world. The Hanslope documents are among those which
have survived the bonfires. Cobain described how just prior to Malaya’s independence from Britain, five truckloads
of sensitive documents relating to British colonial rule were driven 220 miles from Kuala Lumpur under police escort to
the naval base at Singapore ‘and destroyed in the Navy’s splendid incinerator there’.
Papers at the National Archives at Kew ‘testified
to a worldwide purge of sensitive or damning documentation: there was correspondence that described the laborious burning
of papers; there were telegrams from London giving precise instructions for methods of destruction; there were even “destruction
certificates”, signed and witnessed by colonial officials to confirm that certain classes of documents had been incinerated.’
 Systematic and institutional vandalism aimed at wiping out the truth.
Controversial files relating to Britain’s colonial outrages were destroyed,
and there can be no doubt whatsoever that files incriminating British responsibility for starting WW1, have likewise either
been destroyed or hidden in the vaults at Hanslope. ‘Files have been concealed for years, held where no historian or
lawyer or interested member of the public could find them.’  Many of these documents have been withheld well beyond
the freedom of information time limits for the release of confidential papers. Freedom of Information laws exist, but so
many exemptions are applied that it can still prove impossible to access documents that are a century and more old.  It
is difficult to decide what is the greatest outrage; concealment of the documents or the fact that academic historians and
mainstream journalists have remained totally supine when they should be standing up to the Money Power and creating hell
about this. Ian Cobain is an exception and we are indebted to him.
The fruits of our research very clearly show that the entire mainstream thesis
that Germany was to blame for the war, is a complete fabrication. This leads us to the inevitable but depressing conclusion
that, apart from the few notable exceptions, brave and honest war historians are few and far between. Before the First World
War had even begun, a dedicated team of ‘eminent’ English court historians was brought together at Oxford University
and richly rewarded for creating anti-German propaganda in the form of ‘Oxford Pamphlets.’
They created fake history which blamed a completely
innocent Germany while depicting Britain as the saviour of the free world. It was but the beginning of a great lie. The vast
majority of academics beyond Oxford unwittingly swallowed the great lie, or were too cowed to question it. The ‘argument
from authority’ meant that it was true because an authority figure said so. Little has changed over the intervening
century. To this day Court Historians churn out new books about the First World War. They throw in the odd caveat that Germany
was not solely to blame, but basically rehash the old lies about German guilt.. These books are extravagantly praised by
fellow Court Historians, and puffed and critiqued in the mainstream media as ‘new and radical interpretations’.
It is likely that a number of academics outside the charmed circle recognise the falsehood, but comfortable academic careers,
incomes and mortgages have to be protected. The quiet life is infinitely better to being hounded out of a job and ridiculed
as a ‘conspiracy theory’ crank. We understand that. they have jobs to keep, mortgages to keep, families to feed.
In faking history, lies are created and
truth is twisted or suppressed. Revisionists presenting genuine historical information are fiercely criticised and their
work publicly ridiculed. Quite ludicrously, the ‘anti-Semitic’ pejorative is thrown around like mud today if
one even mentions ‘international bankers’. Our Hidden History has been subjected to attacks on the web by what
some consider to be a paid disinformation agent of the Money Power. Bold revisionist historians such as Professor Harry
Elmer Barnes who stood virtually alone in revealing the true history of WW1, and Professor Antony Sutton and Dr Guido Preparata,
who revealed Wall Street’s role in creating Hitler and WW2, were brilliant American scholars whose careers were ruined
for daring to speak truth about the real holders of power.
we are both retired and now have no careers to protect.
polar opposite of revisionists are the ‘eminent’ historians willing to sell themselves in return for important
professorships, stellar careers, lucrative lecture tours, television documentary productions and book publishing deals. These
are the individuals carefully selected to create false histories. Glowing critiques of their work in the controlled mainstream
media are assured. The odd Pulitzer Prize or knighthood in Britain will be thrown in for good measure. But such acquiescence
to falsehood among academic historians is not simply a modern phenomenon. Classics scholar Professor Peter Wiseman relates
how ancient historiography is plagued by mendacious writings from ‘modest elaboration of fact to outright, even flagrant,
Peter Hoffer, Research Professor of History at the
University of Georgia, explained just how difficult it now is for historical truth to prevail: Lying may be rational or
illogical or both, but it is a subject that cannot be avoided in any philosophy of history for our time. History itself is
replete with lies and lying. The best and worst example is the big lie. The big lie is a simple message of allegedly great
importance. Repeated over and over, despite the piling up of counter-evidence, it has a power that truth cannot deflect
and evidence to the contrary cannot undo … [however], a lie does not have to be all that big to make a difference
in history. 
days such dishonest academics operated under the patronage of Europe’s royal courts and were termed ‘Court Historians’.
They related only accounts that were favourable to the monarchy, no matter how false they might be. The power of royalty
has greatly diminished, but Court Historians remain a significant entity. They remain the intellectual bodyguards of the
State. They shape and defend the ‘official line’ or interpretation on the State’s wars, its presidential
regimes, foreign policy or other key historical events and policies. As a result they enjoy high esteem and recognition in
the mainstream media and academia. As defenders of the status quo they frequently attack and label their critics as ‘conspiracy
theorists, revisionists, isolationists, appeasers, anti-intellectuals, or other bogey men, rather than engage in civil discourse
or discussion. 
There are, of course, more subtle ways of projecting
fake history than the straightforward big lie or concealment/destruction of evidence. John Tosh, Professor of History at
Roehampton University, London, and former Vice-President of the Royal Historical Society, has studied the basics of historiography
and the problems involved in using primary and secondary sources in ascertaining ‘facts’. Tosh related how many
primary sources used in historical works are inaccurate, muddled, based on hearsay or actually ‘intended to mislead’.
Indeed, ‘the majority of sources are in some way inaccurate, incomplete or tainted by prejudice and self-interest.’
 According to Professor Tosh ‘Historical writing of all kinds is determined as much by what it leaves out as by
what it puts in’.  Add that to the fact that so many primary sources have been concealed or destroyed, and the
honest investigator faces a major barrier to the truth.
The late Cambridge University historian, Professor
Herbert Butterfield, warned that omission of important documents from the historical record is not always the fault of historians
employed by government. They can only deal with the material they are given. The processes by which official papers are accumulated
offers government officials and individual Cabinet Ministers the opportunity to cull these before they are handed over.
As Professor Quigley explained, many of these political figures are effectively puppets of the Secret Elite.
Thereafter, when the official histories
are read by the public they have no idea what has been suppressed or withheld. It may be that a single document is more
important than all the rest – the exclusion of one document out of three hundred is even capable of destroying the
clue to the whole series. … It has proved possible in the history of historical science for a release of diplomatic
documents to carry students further away from the truth than before, if the release has not been a total one.  On the
role of ‘official’ government historians Professor Butterfield adds: ‘… Nothing could be more subtle
than the influence of upon historians of admission to the charmed circle … a well-run State needs no heavy-handed
censorship, for it binds the historian with soft charms and with subtle, comfortable chains.’ 
1. Ian Cobain, The History Thieves, pp. 101-103.
2. Ibid., pp. 119-120.
2. Ibid., p. 109.
4. 1bid., p. 160.
5. T.P. Wiseman, Lying Historians: Seven Types of Mendacity. http://liverpool.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.5949/liverpool/9780859893817.001.0001/upso-9780859893817-chapter-4
6. Peter Hoffer, The Historians Paradox, The
Study of History in our Time, p.88.
8. John Tosh, The Pursuit of History: Aims, Methods and New Directions in the Study of Modern History, pp.33, 65-66.
9. Ibid., pp. 136-137.
10. Herbert Butterfield, History and Human Relations, pp. 201-209.
11. Ibid., p. 198.
From its conception in 1891, members of the secret society have taken exceptional care to remove
all traces of the conspiracy. Letters to and from its leader Alfred Milner were culled, removed, burned or otherwise destroyed.
 In 2013 we closely examined many of Milner’s remaining papers which are held in the Bodleian Library, Oxford. They
bear witness to the zeal with which much evidence of wrongdoing has been obliterated. Secret dispatches that we know from
other sources that he sent, have disappeared. Incriminating letters penned by King Edward VII – a leading player in
the secret cabal before his death in 1910 – were subject to an order that they must be destroyed immediately on his
death. Admiral Jacky Fisher a Royal favourite, noted in his Memories that he had been advised by Lord Knollys, the king’s
private secretary, to burn all letters sent to him by the king. Fisher consequently burned much of his royal correspondence
but couldn’t bear to part with it all.  Lord Nathaniel Rothschild likewise ordered that his papers and correspondence
be burned posthumously lest his political influence and connections became known. As his official biographer commented, one
can but ‘wonder how much of the Rothschilds political role remains irrevocably hidden from posterity’. 
In Britain crucial primary documents
about the lies and deceit surrounding the First World War through diaries, memoirs and important letters were censored and
altered, evidence sifted, removed, burned, carefully ‘selected’ and falsified. Bad as that may be, it is of
relatively minor importance compared to the outrageous theft of crucial papers from across Europe. In the immediate post-war
years, hundreds of thousands of important documents pertaining to the origins of the First World War were taken from their
countries of origin to the west coast of America and concealed in locked vaults at Stanford University. The documents, which
would doubtless have exposed the men really responsible for the war and their transgressions, had to be removed to a secure
location and hidden from prying eyes. It was the greatest heist of history that the world has ever known.
Herbert Clark Hoover, a corrupt and bullying ‘mining
engineer’ reinvented as a munificent humanitarian and international relief organiser, was the Secret Elite agent charged
with the mammoth job of stealing the European documents. In modern day parlance had it all been recorded on computer, he
was the one who pressed the delete button. He had earlier been tasked with ensuring that Germany had sufficient supplies
of food, without which the war would have been over by 1915. Far from just being the man who saved the Belgian people from
starvation during the war, his so-called ‘Belgian Relief’ agency also fed the German army in order to prolong
the conflict and maximise profit for the banking and armaments manufacturing elites on both sides of the Atlantic.  Hoover’s
American-based organisation raised millions of dollars through loans and public donation, shipped vast quantities of food
and necessities to war-torn Europe and made obscene profits for his backers, yet no documentary evidence of this enormous
enterprise could be found at the end of the war. It had disappeared. All of it. Impossible, surely?
The theft of Europe’s historical documents was dressed
in a cloak of respectability and represented as a philanthropic act of preservation. These documents, it was claimed, would
be properly archived for the use of future historians. The official line was that if not removed from government agencies
in France, Russia, Germany and elsewhere, the papers detailing the extent of Hoover’s work would ‘easily deteriorate
and disappear’.  It was no chance decision that only documents relating to the war’s origins and ‘Belgian
relief’ were taken. No official British, French or American government approval was sought or given. Indeed, like the
thief in the night, stealth was the rule of thumb. On the basis that it was kept ‘entirely confidential’, Ephraim
Adams, professor of history at Stanford University and a close friend of Hoover’s from their student days, was called
to Paris to coordinate the great heist and give it academic credence.
In 1919, Hoover recruited a management team of ‘young scholars’
from the American army and secured their release from military service. They were primarily interested in material relating
to the war’s true origins and the sham Commission for Relief of Belgium. Other documents concerning the conduct of
the war itself were ignored. His team used letters of introduction and logistical support to collect import / export bills,
sales and distribution records, insurance documents and local customs permits amongst a plethora of incriminating evidence.
He established a network of representatives throughout Europe and persuaded General John Pershing to release fifteen history
professors and students serving in various ranks of the American Expeditionary Force in Europe.  He sent them, in uniform,
to the countries his agency was feeding. With food in one hand and reassurance in the other, they visited nations on the
brink of starvation and faced little resistance in their quest. They made the right local contacts, ‘snooped’
around for archives and found so many that Hoover ‘was soon shipping them back to the US as ballast in the empty food
boats’.  Hoover recruited an additional 1,000 agents whose first haul amounted to 375,000 volumes of the ‘Secret
War Documents’ from European governments.  It has not been possible for us to discover who actually funded this
gargantuan, massively expensive venture.
The removal and disposal of incriminatory British and French material posed little or no problem and with the Bolsheviks
in control, access to Russian documents from the Czarist regime proved straightforward. They undoubtedly contained hugely
damaging information on how the assassination of Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo on 28 June 1914 had been orchestrated through
Petrograd, and how Russia’s general mobilisation on Germany’s eastern border had been the real reason for the
war starting. It might appear strange that the Bolsheviks cooperated so willingly by allowing Hoover’s agents to remove
twenty-five carloads of material from Petrograd.  However, when one realises that the international bankers in the secret
society had financed and facilitated Lenin and Trotsky’s return to Russia, and the Bolshevik Revolution itself, it
becomes clear.  The Americans could have what they wanted. This surprising event was reported in the New York Times
which claimed that Hoover’s team bought the documents from a ‘doorkeeper’ for $200 cash.  And some
people think that fake news is a twenty-first century concept.
Removal of documents from Germany presented few problems. Fifteen carloads of material were taken,
including ‘the complete secret minutes of the German Supreme War Council’ – a ‘gift’ from
Friedrich Ebert, first president of the post-war German Republic. Hoover explained this away with the comment that Ebert
was ‘a radical with no interest in the work of his predecessors’. 
But the starving man will exchange even his birthright
for food. Hoover’s men also acquired 6,000 volumes of German court documents covering the complete official proceedings
of the Kaiser’s pre-war activities and his wartime conduct of the German empire.  If Germany had been guilty of
planning and starting the war – as decreed by Court Historians ever since – these documents would have proved
it. Strange that none have ever been released. Had there been incriminating documents, it is certain that copies would have
been sent out immediately to every press and news agency throughout the world proving Germany was to blame. The removal
and concealment of the German archives by the Secret Elite was crucial because they would have proved the opposite: Germany
had not started the war.
1926, the ‘Hoover War Library’ at Stanford University was so packed with archived material that it was legitimately
described as the world’s largest collection of First World War documentation.  In reality, this was no library.
While the documents were physically housed within Stanford, the collection was kept separate and only individuals with the
highest authority had keys to the padlocked gates. It was the Fort Knox of historical evidence, a closely guarded establishment
for items too sensitive to share. In 1941 carefully selected archives were made available to genuine researchers. Over the
previous two decades the unaccountable ruling cabal – the very men responsible for WW1 – had unfettered control
What they withheld from view, shredded, or put in
the Stanford furnace will never be known. Suffice to say that no First World War historian has ever reproduced or quoted
any controversial material housed in what is now known as the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace. Indeed, it
is a startling fact that no war historian has ever written about this utterly astonishing theft of the European war documents
and their shipment to America.
the victor go the spoils and history is part of that booty’, but it is our history. We should be demanding to know
what is hidden from us. The First World War was the seminal event of the twentieth century, and all that followed, including
WW2, came as a direct consequence. The people of Britain and Germany, indeed the world, have a right to know the full extent
of what has been secretly retained, hidden, or posted ‘missing’ regarding responsibility for that war.
1. A.M. Gollin, Proconsul in Politics, p. 551, footnote.
Lord Fisher, Memories and Records, vol. 1, p. 21.
3. Niall Ferguson, House of Rothschild, vol. II, p. 319.
Jim Macgregor and Gerry Docherty, Prolonging the Agony, p. 201 et seq.
5. Cissie Dore Hill, Collecting the Twentieth
Century, p. 1 http://www.hoover.org/publications/hoover-digest/article/8041
6. Charles G. Palm and Dale Reed, Guide to the Hoover Institution Archives, p. 5.
7. Whittaker Chambers, Hoover
8. New York Times, 5 February 1921.
9. Whittaker Chambers, Hoover Library at http://whittakerchambers.org/articles/time-a/hoover-library/
10. Macgregor and Docherty, Prolonging the Agony, p 453 et seq.
11. New York Times, 5 February 1921.
Whittaker Chambers, Hoover Library at http://whittakerchambers.org/articles/time-a/hoover-library/
13. New York Times, 5 February 1921.
14. Hoover Institution, Stanford University at http://www.hoover.org/about/herbert-hoover
Carrol Quigley’s Tragedy and Hope revealed the ambitions
of those whose wealth bought real power:
…The powers of financial capitalism had a far-reaching plan, nothing less than to create a world system of
financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as
a whole.’ 
from any single political interference, this system was controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world
acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be
the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central
banks which were themselves private corporations. Quigley was adamant that ‘Each central bank … sought to dominate
its government by its ability to control treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic
activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.’
The power of the central bank in each instance rested largely on its control of the credit and money supply. In the world
as a whole the power of the central bankers rested very largely on their control of loans and of gold flows.
Professor Quigley explained how, in 1924, Reginald
McKenna, former British Chancellor of the Exchequer and at the time chairman of the board of the Midland Bank, told its stockholders:
“I am afraid the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that the banks can, and do, create money … And they
who control the credit of the nation direct the policy of Governments and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny
of the people.” 
was an extraordinarily frank statement from a man close to the inner circles of the British Establishment. The international
bankers on Wall Street were intimately linked to the Rothschilds in London and Paris. They manipulated the political power
of the state to create and corrupt the Federal Reserve System to gain a monopoly over the money issue through it.
Another important contributor to the unmasking of
the money power, Professor Antony Sutton revealed that ‘The Federal Reserve has the power to create money. This money
is fiction, created out of nothing … In brief, this private group of bankers has a money machine monopoly. This monopoly
is uncontrolled by anyone and is guaranteed profit.’ 
With a magic machine that created money from thin air, the international bankers were able to control
not merely individual politicians, but entire governments. By comparison, controlling the writing and teaching of history
was child’s play. Quigley deliberately revealed the names of the rich and powerful banks and bankers – the Gods
of Money – who were intimately involved. They included N.M Rothschild, Barings, Hambros, Lazard Brothers and Morgan
Grenfell in London.  On Wall Street were J.P. Morgan, Kuhn-Loeb & Co., J.D. Rockefeller and Brown Brothers and Harriman.
 Members of these banks on both sides of the Atlantic ‘knew each other intimately.’ 
Carroll Quigley had been invited by the secret society
to study its membership, aims and objectives, and states he was helped in this by the British historian Alfred Zimmern who
was himself a member of the secret cabal. It appears that Professor Quigley was actually chosen by the secret society to
be its official historian.  He was one of the brightest stars in the galaxy of American academics. As a student at Harvard,
Quigley had gained two top degrees and a Ph.D. He taught history at Princeton University and Harvard before moving to the
School of Foreign Service at Georgetown as professor of history. He was a distinguished member of the American Association
for the Advancement of Science, the American Anthropological Association and the American Economic Association for many
years. He was also a consultant to the U.S. Department of Defence, the U.S. Navy and the Smithsonian Institution. He sat
on the Congressional Select Committee which set up the National Space Agency. This is an outstanding professional record.
Most men or women of ambition would have considered their careers to be crowned by any one of Quigley’s individual
achievements. He had entry to the innermost workings of the powers which controlled the United States. It is vital that
we appreciate that his voice comes form the inside looking out. He knew what was happening and how the system truly worked.
Yet his personal position on these developments
remains somewhat confused. Quigley stated that he admired the society and many of its members and its goals, but not its
methods.  He believed they should abandon secrecy and make their aims and objectives clear to all. This may have been
his downfall. To us it remains an enigma that Quigley said he admired these individuals and their globalist aims of a one
world government controlled by bankers, yet on the very same page stated that their tendency to place power in and influence
into hands chosen by friendship rather than merit, their oblivion to the consequences of their actions, their ignorance of
the point of view of persons in other countries or of persons of other classes in their own country … have brought
many of the things which they and I hold dear, close to disaster.’ 
Did Professor Quigley decide in the end, like his
fellow historian Professor Alfred Zimmern, that the secret society posed such a menace to the world that he chose to expose
it? We shall never know. Unable to ridicule Tragedy and Hope as ‘conspiracy theory’ because of his exalted academic
position and status, those he named decided to bury the book. Immediately on its release, unknown persons removed it from
bookstore shelves in America – ‘faster than exploding Easter bunnies’ as one wit put it. It was withdrawn
from sale without any justification and its original plates were destroyed by Quigley’s publisher, the Macmillan Company.
The publishing company was owned by the family of the Earl of Stockton, Harold McMillan, who was British Prime Minister
1957-1963 and at the heart of the British Establishment. Years later, when a rare surviving copy of Tragedy and Hope was
found and an unknown publisher decided to pirate it, copies began to sell.
Quigley was deeply offended by the suppression of a book which had taken him
twenty years to write. In a 1974 radio broadcast he warned the interviewer, Rudy Maxa of the Washington Post: ‘You
better be discreet. You have to protect my future, as well as your own.’  He revealed in the interview that after
the book was suppressed, for the next six years he repeatedly asked the publisher what was going on. They ‘lied, lied,
lied’ to him and deliberately misled him into believing that it would be reprinted. Quigley stated that powerful people
had suppressed his book because it exposed matters that they did not want known. Universities, academics and the mainstream
media remained silent over his explosive revelations, the destruction of the book, and the disgraceful treatment of one of
America’s top academics.
Unbeknown to them, Quigley had written an earlier
history (in 1949) of the all-powerful secret society titled The Anglo-American Establishment. Though some of the facts came
to him from sources which he was not permitted to name, he presented only those where he was ‘able to produce documentary
evidence available to everyone’.  The book carried far greater detail of the secret society than Tragedy and Hope,
especially on the English side of the Atlantic. It exposed exactly who its members were and their intricate family, banking
and business inter-connections. It revealed how they controlled politics, the major newspapers, and the writing and teaching
of history through Oxford University. It was clearly such an explosive expose of the ruling cabal, and placed him in such
potential danger, that he would not allow it to be published in his lifetime. The book was only released in 1981, four years
after his death. We consider The Anglo-American Establishment to be the most important work of modern history written in
the twentieth century.
relevance of Quigley’s work in the context of fake history derives from the fact that he revealed exactly how the
secret society controlled its writing and teaching through a ‘triple-front penetration in politics, education, and
journalism.’  They did so through their domination of Oxford University, and Balliol College and All Souls College
in particular. They recruited men of ability, chiefly from All Souls and controlled them through the granting of titles
and positions of power. They were thus able to influence public policy and education by placing these individuals at the
apex of public institutions such as universities, shielding them as much as possible from public attention criticism. 
Viscount (Lord) Alfred Milner was the leading player in the society’s growth and development from the late 1890s until
his death in 1925. He gathered around him a brood of talented Oxford men, utterly loyal to the primacy of the British Empire
in pursuit of a new world order. Quigley wrote that no country that values its safety should allow what the Milner group
accomplished; ‘that is, that a small number of men would be able to wield such power in administration and politics,
should be given almost complete control over the publication of documents relating to their actions, should be able to exercise
such influence over the avenues of information that create public opinion, and should be able to monopolise so completely
the writing and the teaching of the history of their own period. 
‘Almost complete control over the publication
of documents relating to their actions’ is, in a nut-shell, how they control history, turn history from enlightenment
to deception. The Secret Elite dictated the writing of history from the ivory towers of academia at Oxford, and what was
taught thereafter in universities, colleges and schools across the land. To this day, researchers are denied access to documents
because the Secret Elite has much to fear from the truth. They ensure that we learn only those ‘facts’ that
support their version of history. They are determined to wipe out all traces that lead back to them, and take every possible
step to ensure that it remains exceedingly difficult to unmask their crimes.
They carefully controlled the publication of official government papers, the
selection of documents for inclusion in the official version of the history of the First World War and all that followed.
Incriminating documents were burned, removed from official records, shredded, falsified or deliberately rewritten, so that
what remained for genuine researchers and historians was carefully selected material. The professors of history who wrote
the false history of the First World War had been carefully selected in the pre-war years by the ruling elite and placed
in chairs of modern history and the history of war at Oxford. These chairs had been set up and fully funded by members of
the secret society whose outrageous wealth was based on their gold and diamond investments in South Africa. Few, if any,
historians elsewhere dared question these “eminent” men at the “world’s leading university.”
This fake history has been ingrained in the minds of generations of British schoolchildren over the past century. Any alternative
view is heresy.
ridicule the Anglo-American Establishment as conspiracy theory due to the late Professor Quigley’s high status, and
clearly concerned that any publicity would simply draw attention to it, the ruling elite decided to bury it. Anyone ignorant
of how tightly controlled the mainstream media is might expect quality newspapers to headline this explosive work and praise
Quigley as a hero for exposing the destruction of the democratic process. He had uncovered and revealed a deep and
very dangerous corruption which posed a grave threat to our way of life. What happened? Nothing. No newspaper or television
station reviewed or commented on his incendiary book. None. It was blanked by ‘official’ history. To our knowledge
and to their shame, no mainstream academic historian has ever written a review of this stunning work. What we must ask is;
was anyone permitted to offer such a critique?
Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, A History of the World in Our Time, p. 324.
2. Ibid., p. 325.
3. Antony C. Sutton,
The Federal Reserve Conspiracy, p. 2.
4. Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, p. 500.
5. Ibid., pp. 529-531.
Anglo-American Establishment, p. ix.
8. Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. xi.
11. Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. x.
12. Ibid., p.15.
14. Ibid., p.197.
The term ‘Fake News’ has only recently entered common parlance, but it has a long
history. Lies masquerading as news are as old as news itself, with royalty, governments, public figures and the mainstream
media purveying it to manipulate public opinion. In an Orwellian twist those very same groups now employ it as a pejorative
term against the alternative media and truth writers and bloggers as way of dismissing inconvenient truths and crushing
dissent. We should all be aware of the state as keeper of the ‘the truth’. “Fake History” is another
powerful weapon that has long been used by those in authority to retain that power by keeping the masses in the dark. As
the late George Orwell wrote:
the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past’.
It is the unelected, unaccountable individuals who control central banking, governments and the mainstream
media, who control the writing and teaching of the fake history that enables them to enslave us. After almost seventy years
Orwell’s observation may appear somewhat clichéd, but it is now more relevant than ever. The highly perceptive
author added: ‘The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their
If we were
able to grasp the truth of our past, could we begin to determine our own future? In the first instance the lies and mythology
need to be challenged by honest history, hard but necessary truths and historical revision. ‘Revisionism’, according
to Joseph Stromberg in an article he wrote about Professor Harry Elmer Barnes, ‘refers to any efforts to revise a
faulty exiting historical record or interpretation.’  Professor Barnes, himself one of the greatest revisionists
of the 20th century, wrote that revisionism has been most frequently and effectively applied to correcting the historical
record relative to wars because ‘truth is always the first war casualty.’  Hold that important statement close.
The emotional abuses and distortions in historical writing are greatest in wartime. Consequently, both the need and the
material for correcting historical myths are most evident and profuse in connection with wars.
The present authors’ long years of research
into the origins and conduct of the First World War of 1914-18 (though it continued until the signing of peace in 1919) demonstrates
just how accurate Professor Barnes understanding was. Mainstream historians tell us that Germany was guilty of starting
WW1 and committing the most barbarous crimes throughout. Proud, virtuous Britain, on the other hand, was forced to go to
war against this German evil to fight ‘for freedom, civilisation and the integrity of small helpless nations.’
It is all a deliberately concocted lie. Patriotic myths and the victors’ wartime lies and propaganda had been scripted
into Britain’s “Official History.” In truth, Britain – or to be more precise, immensely rich and
powerful men in Britain – were directly responsible for the war that killed over 20 million people. Kaiser Wilhelm
II and Germany did not start the war, did not want war and did what they could to avoid it.
But it is not just First World War history that is involved
in the grand deception. Our contention that virtually the entire received history of the twentieth century has been faked,
and requires urgent and complete revision, will raise no eyebrows in enlightened circles. It will most definitely elicit
howls of derision and cries of “impossible” and “conspiracy theory” from the vast majority. Self
interest or cognitive dissonance?
These blogs cannot cover the many thousands of examples of historical falsehoods or omissions we found in our historical
research – our books do that – but it explains how the men behind the curtain actually created fake history.
Their multifaceted approach ranges from the straightforward destruction or concealment of documents and books, to the more
subtle methods of employing Court Historians and the ‘peer review’ system.
Who is responsible for fake history?
Before we examine how history is faked we need to understand who fakes it and
why. In this regard, the most important influences on our work were books by Professor Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope,
A History of The World In Our Time and The Anglo-American Establishment.
The astonishing 1,300 page tome Tragedy and Hope, published in 1966, revealed
the existence of secret society initially created by Cecil Rhodes in London in 1891. Its aim was to expand the British Empire
to all habitable parts of the world. The enlarged empire would be run by wealthy upper class elites and based on English
ruling class values. These people felt obliged to rule the entire world because they considered the vast majority of the
human race was too ignorant to do so themselves. In the decades following Rhodes death in 1902, the secret society evolved.
It became transnational as the singularly British elite merged with the American money-power; Quigley’s Anglo-American
aim to become a world government. The geographical axis moved from London to New York. Later the U.N. was created as one
of its instruments towards one world government. Members of the secret society controlled the United States, the White House,
the Federal Reserve System and Wall Street. They likewise controlled Britain, Downing Street, the Bank of England and the
City, the financial district of London. They ruled from behind the scenes and were not necessarily the major political players
known to everyone. They selected major political figures and funded and controlled them. They would not be the great teachers
or historians, but they decided who would be elevated to the great chairs of learning. They funded historians who wrote
the fake histories. This secret group has been the world’s major historical force since before World War 1 and, according
to Professor Quigley, every major event in history since then has been dominated by them. 
The secret society was…one of the most important historical facts of the twentieth
century. Indeed, the Group is of such significance that evidence of its existence is not hard to find, if one knows where
to look. 
looked, followed the clues, trails and names presented by Professor Quigley and were utterly astonished to find that a secret
cabal actually existed, with unfettered powers in Britain and the United States. Quigley called them the ‘Group’;
we have termed them the Secret Elite, but they are also variably known as the Money Power, the Deep State, the Men behind
the Curtain and so forth. The shocking evidence went much deeper than that exposed by Quigley, and proved to us beyond
all doubt that the individuals involved in the cabal – in both London and New York – were responsible for starting,
and unnecessarily prolonging, the First World War. Through enormous wealth, power and control of Oxford University, they
were able to cover their tracks and fabricate a history which blamed Kaiser Wilhelm II and Germany. A century later, that
fake history is still presented as truth by ‘eminent’ mainstream historians with links to Oxford.
1. Quote from Jeff Riggenbach, Why American History is Not What They
Say: An Introduction to Revisionism, p. 72.
2. Ibid., p. 73.
3. For an excellent summary of the role of the secret
society see G. Edward Griffin’s talk. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynVqPnMQ2sI
4. Carroll Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment, pp. ix-x.
Posted Belgian Relief, Carroll Quigley, Gallipoli, Georges Clemenceau, Herbert Hoover, Kaiser Wilhelm II, President Woodrow Wilson, Secret Elite, Wall Street, Zionism, Zionism in
is the second blog about the recently published Prolonging The Agony.
In a single volume, the real History of how the First World War was deliberately prolonged to the benefi
t of the charlatans, profiteers, and the Secret Elite
can be fully understood.
is impossible to pick any single scandal above the others, but one which has been studiously ignored by the history boys
is the Herbert Hoover and the Commission for Relief in Belgium. This one time American mining engineer and future President
of the United States, previously criticised for rampant dishonesty by the courts in London, was chosen by the Secret Elite
to head an international fraud which was paid for by the Allies and underwritten by the U.S.government. It claimed to provide
food for the exclusive use of the population of Belgium and Northern France which were occupied by the German army.
What we have uncovered is an enormous
double-deal whereby not only did food go to Belgium, food that was often sold for profit, but supplies also went to Germany
directly down the River Rhine. We know that Edith Cavell saw what was happening. As an avid letter writer whose letters
were printed in the Times, she threatened to expose the scandal. This is a story of money, bankers and producers colluding
to reap millions from the desperation of a hungry Europe, and in so doing prolonged the bloody war.
Yet another scandal was the complete farce of the
Gallipoli campaign. Because the Russians had suffered such vast losses on the Eastern Front, the Czar demanded evidence that
war was worthwhile. The promise of Constantinople was the prize which animated him most, and the Gallipoli campaign was
concocted by the Secret Elite to make it appear that a serious effort was underway to attack Turkey and win Constantinople
for Russia. It was set up to fail. You may think this impossible, but Prolonging the Agony provides detailed evidence
that the campaign was an orchestrated farce from start to finish. But it convinced the Russians and kept them in the war.
The Secret Elite had no intention of ever giving the strategically vital port of Constantinople to Russia. Ever. The story
and the needless sacrifice is a disgrace. Indeed Gallipoli was an outrageous and deliberate failure, but it prolonged the
war, as was required. Your reaction to this statement may well be……it can’t be true. Please read the
chapters on this crucial event. They will make you uncomfortable.
And there could have been peace, several times over. But peace was not on the Secret Elite agenda.
When, by 1916, the military failures were so costly and embarrassing some key players in the British government were willing
to talk about peace and discuss what that might mean. This could not be tolerated. The potential peacemakers had to be ditched.
Lloyd George was promoted to prime minister in Britain and Georges Clemenceau made prime minister in France. The unelected
European leaders had one common bond. They would fight Germany until she was crushed. Prolonging the Agony details
how the secret cabal organised the change of government without a single vote being cast. A new government, an inner-elite
war cabinet thrust the Secret Elite leader, Alfred Milner into power at the very inner-core of the decision-makers in British
politics. Democracy? They had no truck with democracy. The voting public had no say. The men entrusted with the task would
keep going till the end and their place-men were backed by the media and the money-power, in Britain, France and America.
The only end they had in mind was Germany destroyed.
The entry of America into the war changed everything. The money men were covered by the Federal Reserve System. They could
print dollars and finance their war in safety. Loans were guaranteed by governments. The American economy was literally
underpinned by the war spending, and all on the back of the ordinary citizens and taxpayers. Millionaires blossomed. Poverty
for the many grew. Even the election of Woodrow Wilson in 1916 was tainted by doubt. The manner of his re-election is ignored
in mainstream accounts. It all hinged on California and the recount was itself tainted with corruption.
We examine the emergence of Zionism as a factor in the
political world. From the first years of the twentieth century we have unmasked the close relationship between Zionism and
the British and French Rothschilds. The background to the Balfour Declaration shows how far the British cabinet was willing
to support the Zionist ambitions for Palestine. This was NOT, as it is portrayed, a simple message from the British Foreign
Secretary to the head of the Rothschild family in Britain. It was the product of years of scheming and political pressure
that eventually won there backing of the Secret Elite. And prolonging the war here was also important. Before the Zionist
claim over Palestine could have any pertinence, they had to buy time to establish institutions and boost investment. The
immense duplicity the British government and the connivance of the American administration is explained in full. And it
raised serious questions about loyalties.
While the Russian Revolution might appear to have little to do with prolonging the war, it did. Did you know that
the last foreign politician to meet the Car before he abdicated was Secret Elite leader Alfred Milner? Co-incidence? What
transpired between the two? Milner’s behaviour and report when he returned to London was so strange that one has to
conclude that he had much to hide.What promises were whispered to Czar Nicolas before he abdicated? Worse was to follow.
The raping of Russia by the money-men who financed the Bolsheviks, links Wall Street to the Kremlin… and of course,
since Russia had decided to end the war with Germany, the promise of Constantinople was revoked. For ever. How convenient.
When Germany surprisingly sought an Armistice to
find grounds for Peace in 1918, it was on the basis of President Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points. The myth history
here is deplorable. Historians and journalist continue to this day to claim that the First World War ended on 11 November,
1918. It did not. Germany was undefeated on the field of battle. Beaten but not crushed. In a move which has been airbrushed
from official history, the Allies, mainly Britain, continued to apply a full and complete blockade of Germany so that for
the next eight months hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of their women and children were starved to death. The rise
of Bolshevism in Germany became so dangerous that even war hawks like Lloyd George realised that Germany had to be allowed
to survive in a much reduced state. Finally the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, never ratified by the American Congress,
were so damaging that the causes of the Second World War were literally sewn into the fabric.
Prolonging the Agony is unique. It details the
lies and malpractice through which an evil war was prolonged. The old order in Europe was swept aside and it shows how the
new order emerged from a joint Anglo-American Establishment. It merged the Secret Elite in Britain with the Morgan-Wall
street powers through joint policy making by a self-appointed group of ‘right-thinking’ men. We name them. We
also acknowledge the impressive work of Professor Carroll Quigley in initially exposing the machinations of the evil men
who aimed to take over the new world order.
And then they stole our history. Literally. All
of the evidence of the gross malpractice, the profiteering, the lies and the propaganda about the cause of the war and about
the running of the war was swept up and taken away from its European roots. All of the pre-war papers and documents which
would have shown how far the Kaiser went to try to avoid war, disappeared. The vast quantity of international permits and
papers about the running of the American Relief in Belgium, high-jacked. The key Russian diplomatic evidence sold
for a pittance was removed to America. Taken under instruction by the organisation set up by Herbert Hoover, it was removed
to Stanford University and there what remains of the evidence lies under lock and key. Our history. Our truth. To be fair,
our governments also burned, redacted, removed, shredded and otherwise abused the historical fact by destroying evidence
of their malpractice and lies. Prolonging the Agony details as much of this destruction of history as we currently know.
Breve and persistent journalists continue to push for sight of all documents. Historians do not.
You have to give time to this frank exposure. You will
have questions to ask. You will be angered at the waste of life and the selfishness of the rich and the powerful dynasties.
You will want to ask again and again how they managed to sweep such a litany of wrong-doing under the proverbial carpet.
You will be alarmed at the manner in which we have been lied to; at the stolen history; at the way in which you have been
misled. After ten years of constant research and inquiry, we still are.
Prolonging the Agony puts into your hands the awful truth behind a
war which could have been brought to a reasonable conclusion in 1915. The cost in human terms of all that transpired from
1915-1919 is so horrendous, that it has been studiously kept from us. Even 100 years later, the lies persist. Read this book.
There is much more to it than has been outlined here. Consider the implications. Be angry.
Now available from Trineday Publications in the
USA and though Amazon across the world. We are delighted to announce that our German publishers, Kopp Verlag will undertake
a translation in German, and our French publishers, Editions Nouvelle Terre, are currently considering a similar decision.
We are lied to. We know that more than ever today, but the lies and misrepresentations about the first
World War have been accepted as truth. Arm yourself with the awful facts.
Part Two in the Hidden History series by Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor.
At last, having spent ten years working together on the origins and
management of the First World War, our second book, Prolonging the Agony, How the Anglo-American Establishment Deliberately
Extended WW1 by Three-and-a Half Years, has been published, and is available to our readers from TrineDay in the U.S.
and Amazon and other book sellers across the world.
It had never been our intention to divide the history into two parts, but our original publisher,
Mainstream of Edinburgh, convinced us that it was the best way forward. Mainstream was sold to Random House shortly after
Hidden History, The Secret Origins of the First World War was published, and this proved problematic for us. Random House
declined to either promote the book or take up the option for our second book. However sales remained strong and Hidden
History was translated and published in both German and French. A Swedish edition is also currently being considered. To
our delight TrineDay in Oregon offered to publish Prolonging the Agony and we are indebted to Kris Milligan and
his team for encouraging and supporting us. It is heartening that within weeks of the book’s release, both the German
and French publishers have indicated that they will also be publishing it.
So what is it about?
the Agony lays before the reader a vast amount of evidence which reveals how enormously rich and powerful men in Britain
and the U.S. deliberately prolonged WW1 while reaping even greater fortunes from it. It retraces the major lies and malevolent
propaganda generated in Britain and America to justify war against Germany, and the reason it was prolonged beyond the spring
of 1915 in order to crush her. The Secret Elite, the cabal which worked endlessly to bring war to Europe with a view to
creating a new world order, was responsible. To cover their tracks, the elites and their agents ensured that a false history
was created to justify all that happened. Prolonging the Agony deconstructs that false history page by page.
It examines in detail how the British government
borrowed on an unprecedented scale from Wall Street bankers to fund the munitions of death. The links between leading players
– such as the Rothschild banking family and their JP Morgan banking associates on Wall Street – were formalised
to a point where the British economy was literally handed to this money-power cabal. We demonstrate the extent of the anti-German
lies and propaganda emanating from Oxford University, the academic home of the Secret Elite in Britain, and how it lead
to millions of young British men enlisting to fight under totally false pretences . Winning the hearts and minds of the American
public, so that they aligned with the financiers, proved a more difficult task, but the fact that the United States would
enter the war was guaranteed from the outset by their place-man in the White House, President Woodrow Wilson and his minder,
Edward Mandel House.
Lies concocted in 1914 to blacken Germany in
every way are still circulated today as fact. This False History lives on through the British Court Historians who repeat
the nonsense. We prove absolutely that while Nurse Edith Cavell – the great British heroine of the war who was executed
by a German firing squad in Belgium in 1915 – was indeed a brave patriot, she was secretly and intimately associated
with a Belgian spy ring linked to the British Secret Service. Edith Cavell and her Belgian associates helped repatriate hundreds
of British and French soldiers who were stranded behind enemy lines in the first months of the war. They also passed vital
information about German deployment to the War Office in London. But Edith threatened to endanger the secret agreements
about food supply by revealing the scandal through he connections with the Times. For generations that fact was
buried so that her execution would look like an act of brutality by the German commanders against an innocent, humanitarian
nurse. The truth is otherwise.
a similar vein, lies and propaganda were circulated about the sinking in 1915 of the ocean liner Lusitania by a
German U-boat. Received history turned this act into German malevolence in order to cause outrage in America and swing public
opinion there towards the Allies. 1,195 lives were lost including 140 Americans. Only now, after sustained detective work
by Mitch Peeke and his Liverpool team in tracking down the cargo manifest of the Lusitania, are the authorities
in both Britain and the U.S. obliged to admit their complicity in creating and maintaining false accounts of the sinking.
The recently uncovered manifest proves that the ‘passenger liner’ was secretly carrying many thousands of rounds
of ammunition and tons of U.S. explosives to Britain. It also proves that the German authorities were right. Britain and
America were flouting the clear-cut regulations about neutrality. Their well-publicised advice to passengers to avoid the
Lusitania was both justified and ignored. Shockingly, elements within the British Admiralty knew full well that
the German U-boat was waiting in the exact path of the Lusitania as she passed the southern coast of Ireland, yet
withdrew her naval escorts and failed to warn her captain. Why? We believe they were complicit in the sinking for their
Bad as this was, our sustained research through
documents, records, and published books and texts which were dismissed in the post-war years, turned our dismay to utter
disgust. Again and again we found secret agreements, understandings, practices and deliberate actions taken in order to
prolong the war and prolong the agony. And it is this fact, which was repeatedly stated from many quarters during the conflict,
which hit us hardest.
have amassed proof of the unprecedented scale on which the war was unnecessarily prolonged. It could have been drawn to
a conclusion by December 1915 and millions of victims would have been spared the misery of mutilation or horrendous death.
But the war was prolonged mercilessly so that profits would surpass the dreams of Midas and Germany crushed as a rival.
Amongst many disturbing examples, Prolonging
the Agony examines the scandal of the French Briey Basin iron and steel mines and forges which the French army could
either have occupied on the first day of the war or destroyed, in order to stop them falling into German hands. Despite
repeated calls for the French army to destroy the forges, the French authorities would not allow it. An expedition to bomb
the forges was slapped down by the French High Command. Who gave the orders? Who made the profits? To whose instructions
was the French government answerable? It was a scandal which has been swept under the carpet to avoid accountability. Had
Briey been destroyed, Germany would not have had the raw materials and munitions to fight beyond 1915.
What is the truth of the so-called blockade of the North
Sea passages which allegedly starved Germany of its resources? A truly brave and remarkable small fleet comprising very
old vessels, none of which was built for the high seas task, sat out in the unforgiving Atlantic and North Sea to stop all
contraband getting into Germany from August 1914 onwards. What happened? Virtually every ship they brought into port under
escort was allowed to continue its journey by order of the Admiralty in London. Yet the public and parliament believed that
Germany was being starved of its war necessities. They believed the lie because Winston Churchill said a full blockade was
in place and that Germany would surrender in nine months.
The inner-elite of the British cabinet had no intention
of ending the war until Germany was crushed … not just beaten. The facts presented are drawn from archived evidence
and Admiralty papers. Our thesis endorses and builds on the outrage expressed by the Admiralty’s representative in
Scandinavia during WW1, Naval Attaché Rear-Admiral Consett. He detailed how the Allies were secretly supplying
Germany through Scandinavian ports and prolonging the conflict. Had a blockade been properly undertaken the war would have
ended by 1915. What was a going on? Prolonging the Agony explains precisely that.
We also raise the issue which is omitted from mainstream
analysis: where was Germany procuring her vital oil supplies? She had no natural reserves herself, and her access to oil
could easily have been stopped. Our book investigates the multiple abuses in oil provision and traces the ownership of these
oil fields. The compliance of the owners and shareholders, British and American, demonstrated the importance of war profits
at any cost.
To hell with your countrymen who had to
In our next blog we will outline the
impact of other major influences and agencies who had a vested interest in Prolonging the Agony
So many questions remain unanswered.
You will have your own. Do not give up on them. An issue which needs considerable examination is Woodrow Wilson’s
“Fourteen Points.” With hindsight it ranks as one of the greatest mirage’s of all time, for it never was
anything more than a clever deception, the lure which the Kaiser and his advisors swallowed. They made the devastating mistake
of trusting the American government. What were they thinking? The Germans knew about Britain and France’s dependence
on America, of the blatant lies which sank the Lusitania, and every other scandal, yet they were apparently willing to put
their faith in Woodrow Wilson. Certainly the Americans had kept them fed through the abuses of the Belgian Relief program,
and the Rockefeller/Rothschild axis ensured that their oil supply was not interrupted, but once the United States joined
the war against Germany, surely the blinkers should have fallen?
But desperate times demanded
desperate action. The promise of a just peace was too powerful for the Kaiser’s government to ignore. The German offensive
from March to June 1918 is said to have pushed the allied armies on the Western Front closer to disaster than at any time
since the first battle of the Marne in 1914 but this last throw of Ludendorff’s dice was frustrated by “the
enormous acceleration of the arrival of American troops.”  Like exhausted prize fighters who had fought to a standstill,
the Allies and Germany stood in their corners feigning a readiness for the next round. But while Britain and France had
almost limitless reserves on hand from America, Germany was truly spent. Wilson’s Fourteen Points appeared as the
basis for a just and honourable settlement. It was a triumph of deceit over justice.
Truth is that Germany had sought a just peace many times since
December 1914. The Allies simply did not want to know in 1915, 1916 and 1917. In fact, they did not want to know in 1918.
There is ample evidence that preparations for war on the Western Front in 1919 and 1920 was discussed and anticipated by
the British War Cabinet. The American presence changed every dynamic. Time was on the Allied side.
The failure of Woodrow Wilson’s
Fourteen Points to gain international support sucked the last breath of hope from the German leaders. Wilson had no power
to stop his proposals being picked apart at Versailles, and returned to America a sick and disillusioned man. He had fulfilled
his mission for the Elites by revoking his election stance of 1916 and bring- ing America into the war. He had confused
the German leadership with his “idealism” and upset his political enemies in America by proposing a League of
Nations  which was nominally adopted in the eventual Treaty of Versailles. Though the troubled, one might say dysfunctional,
history of the League of Nations extends beyond our timescale, its very proposal caused the U.S. Congress to twice reject
the Versailles Peace Treaty.  A cross section of American Senators were so determined to have no truck with Wilson’s
League of Nations that they declared the Treaty ‘dead to stay dead’.  These words might well have served as
an epitaph for Wilson’s political career. Having surrendered a devastating stroke in October 1919, his candidacy for
a third term in office was rejected by the Democratic Party.
What too of Russia? When one
considers the sacrifices made by the Russian people in their war against Germany, their absence at Versailles ought to have
caused some embarrassment. For three long years Russia had battled the German and Austrians, inflicting great losses but
absorbing even more. Undoubtedly the Russian front was critical. Without it Paris would have fallen in August 1914. 
The long-standing promise that Russia would annex Constantinople and the Straits once Germany was destroyed was effectively
and conveniently annulled when the Bolshevik government made peace with Germany in 1918. Lloyd George raised the hitherto
unasked question of Russian involvement in the peace process in January 1919,  but there was no coherent or consistent
agreement from a divided Supreme Council. Alarming tales circulating in Paris of the barbaric Red Terror unleashed by the
Bolsheviks, were dismissed as exaggeration by Lloyd George.  Indeed. The British prime minister was a master at dissembling.
Basically he lied as and when necessary and his Memoirs are a masterclass in self-promotion. The all-embracing role of the
British and American bankers was another factor which was not to be mentioned. What mattered in the end was that Constantinople
remained outside Russian control and Russia no longer threatened Persia, India or a redrawn map of the Middle East.
History is not
a just series of eras or neatly constructed timelines with-in which commentators try to explain events or construct their
own given narrative. History lives and breathes and never stands still. It is our past and determines much of our future.
Events, decisions and consequences ensure that it will always remain a fascinating basis through which we better understand
where we currently are and how we got here. But the historical record is incomplete. It has been tampered with, remastered
and abused by those with much to hide. Where there are gaps, suspect the motivation.
Do not fall prey to the subtle weasel words of those who throw their hands in the air and claim that our narrative cannot
be entirely proved because the evidence is no longer available. We know how these people work. Their operative DNA is now
so transparent that any knowledgeable person will dismiss their protestations on the volume of circumstantial evidence alone.
But they hide behind the pejorative cry of “conspiracy theory,” a convenience which protects the guilty. Year
by year, even as we worked on this book, acknowledgements have been quietly conceded about Edith Cavell’s spy ring,
on the RMS Lusitania’s real cargo manifest, of the gross over-exaggerations of the Bryce Committee. Yet the great lies
persist and are regurgitated in the mainstream media.
Our books cover a period between 1890-1919 because within that timescale
a group of elite politicians, influential power-brokers, rich financiers, determined opinion-moulders and their academic
entourage made a concerted move to create a new world order under their control. In 1890 it was driven by upper-class English
values and British domination of world trade, politics and influence. By 1919 clearer bonds between the Anglo-American Establishment,
and the exhausting, deliberately pro-longed war, had moved the new world order towards an Atlantic Alliance and the enduring
‘special relationship’ between Britain and the United States.
And we do not accept that 1918 should be recognised as the
year in which the war ended. We have clearly demonstrated in previous blogs that the fighting stopped but the economic war
continued. It is essential that everyone understands that even 1919 was not an end-point. There was no sense of “job
done.” Indeed not. What happened in 1919 was just another stepping stone, a building block towards a new order in
the world. National boundaries changed in many parts of Europe.
New territorial responsibilities
(the talk was of Mandates) were allocated to the victors. New countries were shaped. Economic interests were, as ever, to
the fore. Old disputes re-emerged around lucrative parts of the dismembered Ottoman Empire. Germany had been defeated, humiliated
and abused, but Germany survived. The politicians who disgraced humanity by claiming that the world war had saved civilisation
escaped the scrutiny of justice. They wrote their memoirs, accepted their rewards, and lived well on the profits that ensued.
Above them, the controllers of real power did not break step. They simply marched unchallenged along their chosen route.
If you feel that
you now have a keener sense of who these people were and are, engage in Quigley’s challenge. He stated that ‘the
evidence of their existence is not hard to find, if one knows where to look.’  They remain behind the scenes, influencing
politicians and policy, buying public opinion, rewarding their own, falsifying media reports and protecting themselves from
public scrutiny. History will continue to be controlled by them for as long as criticism can be ignored. You can shake this
comfortable establishment set-up by continuing to question official versions and never allowing yourself to be easily satisfied
with so-called truth.
Everything that we have described is a series of building blocks. The Secret Elite has metamorphosed into a much
more modern phenomenon with the same objective – to be that new world order. The evidence of their existence is not
hard to find.
Report of the Committee of Prime Ministers. Preliminary Draft. appended to the min- utes for the Imperial War Cabinet
32B, 16 August 1918. p. 167.
3. The League of Nations was an international organization, created in
1920 as part of the Treaty of Versailles. Though first proposed by President Woodrow Wilson as part of his Fourteen Points
for a just peace in Europe, Congress refused to endorse the proposal.
Firstly on 19 November 1919, then again on 19 March 1920.
5. New York Times, 20 March 1920.
6. Margaret Macmillan,
Peacemakers, Six Months That Changed the World, p. 71.
7. FRUS, vol. 3 pp. 581-4.
8. National Archives, CAB 29/
9. Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment, pp ix-x.