The Signs of the Times – part 26
Originally posted, Jan. 8, 2013.
Quotes of the Times:
“And this is good old Boston.
The home of bean and cod
Where the Lowells talk only to Cabots,
And the Cabots talk only to God.”
‘The Boston Toast’ by John Collins Bossidy.
“When we sold the Heathen nations rum and opium in roll,
And the Missionaries went along to save their souls”.
‘The Old Clipper Days’ by Julian S. Cutler.
“If the trade (in opium) is ever legalized, it will cease to be profitable from that time. The more difficulties that attend it, the better for you and us.” Directors of Jardine-Matheson, (Hong Kong, Trading Company).
“A New England ancestry than which one more distinguished could hardly be named.” Rev. E.S. Lines (bishop of diocese of Newark, and president of the Newark Historical Society), referring to the ancestry of William Huntingdon Russell.
In the attempt to take over and destroy America, the Jesuits have, for a long time, had powerful allies within America. In order to understand who these allies are and why they would work together with the Jesuits, we need to go back to the establishment of the American colonies, which were originally part of the British Empire.
When Princess Diana gave birth to two sons, for the British royal family, it was said partially in jest, that she had done her duty and produced “an heir and a spare.” All aristocratic families were/are obsessed with the necessity of creating a male heir to carry on the family name and preserving the family fortune. [Do you remember Henry VIII and his six wives – all for the sake of producing that vital male heir]. Since infant mortality was high in former times, as many ‘spares’ as possible were also welcome in case of the death of the first-born.
However, it was always a problem to know what to do with all the ‘spares’ – the usual custom was for the younger sons to become officers in the army or navy or alternatively to join the church as priests. However, as the British Empire expanded several other attractive alternatives became possible. For example, there was a growing demand for colonial administrators – but the greatest opportunities were in the area of trade and commerce. The ‘spares’ were provided with capital and sent off into the world to seek their fortunes (and the fortunes of their families) – the most popular destinations were India and America. Great fortunes were made by these people, and the creation of great family dynasties were nurtured and preserved by the accumulation of wealth.
When the American colonies revolted against the Empire, the loyalty of the ‘spares’ and their descendants, were firmly on the side of the Empire – when the Empire lost the struggle, it is assumed that most of these people all fled to Canada – but many also remained. One of the areas that became a bastion for these pro-British Americans, was that part of New England that constitutes the states of Connecticut and Massachusetts in general, and in particular the city of Boston. Even today Boston is well-known for its dynastical families such as the Lowells and the Cabots (and many more). Locally, they are known as the ‘Boston Brahmins’ (after the highest class in the Hindu caste system – they even have their own distinctive accent). Nationally, they are known as the ‘Eastern Establishment’ and the ‘Untitled Aristocracy.’ Internationally, they are known as the ruling class in America. What is not known (or rather what has been forgotten), is that these people have never been republicans (i.e. they have never been supporters of the American constitution or the American political system). Their first loyalty is not to the Republic of the United States of America. Their first loyalty is to their own families (including their aristocratic connections in England). And their instincts are aristocratic, not democratic – they despise everything to do with democratic forms of government. Like all those who are aristocratically inclined they believe they are ‘born to rule.’ These people make natural allies for the Jesuits – they share the same philosophical outlook, they share the same goals, and they share the same hatred for the Republic of the United States of America. [Their treasonous inclinations were on evidence during the war of 1812 (against Britain) when the ‘Essex Junto’ (named after a county in Massachusetts) advocated the succession of New England from the Union, in favour of Britain. The ‘Essex Junto’ was made up of the ‘untitled New England aristocracy’ – they were never prosecuted for their treason].
If we examine just one of these ‘untitled New England’ families, we will be able to understand the profound influence these pro-British (and anti-American) families have had, and continue to have, over the entire spectrum of American society. The family we will choose to study is the Russell family. The family with, “a New England ancestry than which one more distinguished could hardly be named.”
The Russells were originally ‘de Roussel’ from Normandy, in France. They won their aristocratic spurs when they crossed the English Channel with William the Conquer in 1066. After the Norman Conquest, Hugue (Hugh) de Roussel was appointed Marshall of England, (the office of Marshall was to manage the horses and to protect the Monarch). This is the beginning of the Russell aristocratic line – and if their New England ancestry was distinguished, their close connection to the English crown was even more distinguished.
In order to come down to modern times, we must jump several centuries to 1842, when we find Samuel Russell in possession of what Wikipedia calls “the largest and most important American trading house in China…” called Russell and Company. Samuel Russell was a drug smuggler. He made his fortune by trading goods in Turkey for opium, and then trading the opium into China for the much sort after China tea, silk and porcelain. Samuel would have made even more money if he could have bought his opium in India and then went to China. But unfortunately for Samuel (and all the other American traders and drug smugglers) India was a part of the British Empire and the British had a monopoly on Indian opium and they were the main players, in the opium for Chinese tea, silk and porcelain trade.
It is worth digressing here to examine the China trade in more detail. The wealth of the British Empire rested on its ability to transport the trade of the world in British ships – legislation was passed in Britain and around the Empire to insure a near monopoly on international trade. [The wealth of the present American Empire is dependent on the same arrangement – the only difference being that international trade is ‘carried’ by the American dollar].
The British system had several key hubs. The first hub was the cotton producing southern states of America. Cotton was a key ingredient in the industrial revolution. The cotton was shipped to England, where it was made into textiles. The textiles were shipped all over the world, but especially to India, which had a huge population and was hence a huge market. [Before India became a part of the British Empire it had a vibrant textile industry of its own, but the British destroyed it by imposing high taxes and tariffs on the industry. The British then encouraged the production of opium in India for smuggling/trading into China].
The reason the British (and Americans) became drug dealers is because there was a huge demand (worldwide) for Chinese products, but the Chinese (having a long tradition of insularity and disdain for foreigners), did not want anything to do with the ‘barbarian’ Europeans, and they were not interested in importing British or American industrial or manufactured goods. The Chinese were willing to trade for gold and silver (and sometimes the Americans were willing to use gold and silver), but the British were not willing to pay for Chinese products with gold and silver and they forced the Chinese to take opium.
When the Chinese became aware of the nefarious effects of opium addiction they made the opium trade illegal. The British responded by using their navy to bombard the coastal Chinese cities until the Chinese relented. The Chinese tried a second time to ban opium and to free themselves from the dominance of the drug dealers, but again the British responded by destroying Chinese cities. Historically, these opium fueled confrontations between China and Britain are called ‘The Opium Wars’ (The First Opium War 1839-1842 – the Second 1856-1860). The British Empire was, in large part, being funded by drug dealing. At this point in history, opium was the single most traded commodity in international trade – it occupied the position then, what oil occupies now – just as we have oil wars now – they had opium wars then.
This imposed imperial ‘trading’ arrangement which was so lucrative, naturally attracted competitors. The most successful competitors were American ships sailing out of the cities of Boston and Salem, in the state of Massachusetts. [These port cities have had a long history of trading with China and it is known locally as ‘The Old China Trade’].
The first American trading ship arrived in China in 1784 (one year after American independence). Samuel Russell arrived in Canton, China in 1819. Initially, he started trading on behalf of another company called Edward Carrington & Company and again according to Wikipedia Samuel traded in “various goods and products including opium, an extremely profitable activity despite being outlawed-yet protected by foreign forces.” Samuel Russell was a drug dealer – but so was everyone else – and the armies and navies of various European nations (but especially Britain) were there to ensure the trade in opium continued uninterrupted.
But Samuel did not do it all on his own, there were other ‘Boston Brahmins’ in China as well (including the Cabots and the Lowells). John Perkins Cushing was in China even before Samuel Russell, arriving there in 1803. John Cushing’s mother was a Perkins (another Boston Brahmin family), and John Cushing went to China to manage the Perkins Company (which was already established there). This company (Perkins and Company) later merged with the Samuel Russell run company, of Russell and Company, making Russell and Company the dominant American Company in China. [Thus we see that the Boston Brahmins are very much inter-related both through business links and family ties – and because of these intimate links, all of their fabulously fabled fortunes originated with the opium drug trade].
Drug smuggling Samuel Russell had a cousin called William Huntington Russell. William was an academic. He spent two years studying in Germany (1831, 32), attending various German universities (the home of the Jesuit inspired Illuminati). Upon his return to America in 1832, he immediately founded the secret society of ‘The Order of Skull and Bones’ at Yale University. [Yale has been intimately entwined with the Russell Family – Noadiah Russell being one of the founding trustees of the university]. [The name of the University comes from one of its greatest benefactors, Elihu Yale. Elihu worked for the East Indian Company rising to the position of Governor of Madras. His fortune, some of which he gave to Yale University, came from the opium drug trade]. [The legal entity that administers Skull and Bones and owns the society’s assets is called The Russell Trust Association]. [Harvard University, being that other elite school for ‘the untitled aristocracy’, was also endowed with money from the opium drug trade].
The influence of Skull and Bones over American affairs can be demonstrated by pointing out what was foisted on the American people during the 2004 Presidential Elections – both candidates were from ‘the untitled New England aristocracy’ and both of them were members of Skull and Bones. [George W. Bush wrote in his autobiography: “In my senior year I joined Skull and Bones, a secret society; so secret, I can’t say anything more.” When both John Kerry and George Bush were asked by a TV show host what it meant for the American people, that both presidential candidates were members of Skull and Bones Kerry replied: “Not much because it’s a secret”]. Meet the Press, August 31, 2003.
It surely is a ‘Sign of the Times’ that presidential candidates (and other political candidates) can stand for elections in a republican/democratic society (where everything is supposed to be transparent and open), and yet they openly confess membership in a secret shadowy world, that, the voting public is not allowed to know anything about. It should be obvious that membership in such an exclusive and elitist secret society such as Skull and Bones does not fall under the category of “not much” – when it comes to consequences for the American people and the world at large. Republican and democratic principles are meant to be about legitimate choice – in the 2004 election there was no genuine choice – if you voted for tweedledum or tweedledee – you ended up with the same thing – Skull and Bones.
To be continued…
God bless, Bruce Telfer.
For further information go to: http://www.minormusings.com/Index.html
Extra Note: The Russell penchant (and expertise) for creating secret societies is evident in the creation of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Charles Taze Russell founded the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watchtower (the proprietary organisation than owns and administers the JW sect) in 1881. From the beginning of the movement there has been much speculation about the origins of the JWs and especially whether C. T. Russell was a freemason or not. The fact that C.T. Russell was buried in the Rosemont United Cemetery (just outside Pittsburgh), with a pyramid adjacent his headstone, and on the pyramid Masonic symbols – perhaps this should be enough evidence to conclude, that he was involved with occult secret societies. [The Watchtower publications often feature occult symbolism – the purpose of which is to alert the ‘adepts’ or the ‘initiates’ (those high ranking secret society members) of the true nature of the organisation].
Extra Note: It would be naïve to believe that the ‘powers that be’ should abandon something as lucrative as the drug trade. After all, it is not only lucrative from a purely monetary point of view – but it can also be used as a form of warfare by another means, as is demonstrated by what happened to China. [The whole social fabric of China was weakened by the opium drug trade – and deliberately so, because it enabled the ‘powers that be’ to control China]. That the ‘powers that be’ have not relinquished control over the drug trade is evident with what has recently happened with ‘The Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC) – the largest of all the European Banks.
First some more history: the British involvement in India was originally in the hands of a private company called the ‘East India Company’ – this company was in India purely for profit. It was this company that was behind the opium drug trade into China (it is this company that was so powerful that they could call upon the British Imperial war machine to back their plans and goals – such as the two Opium Wars against China). It was during the first Opium War that Britain annexed the island of Hong Kong and used it as a trading post into China (still its role today). The Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC) was established in 1865 to facilitate trade between China and England – which was of course largely trade in opium. Did the HSBC ever cease to be involved in the drug trade – NO! [The same tactics (the use of drugs) that were used to destabilize China are now being used to destabilise America. The only difference is that the drug of choice is no longer opium, but its more powerful derivative heroin, along with cocaine and its derivatives. (Other countries are also severely hurt in the process, such as Colombia and Mexico – but they are just ‘collateral damage’ – the real target is America)].
The HSBC has recently been found guilty of ‘laundering’ the profits of the illegal drug industry. After an extensive investigation by the American Government, the bank has been fined $1.2 billion – but nobody is going to jail. The latest development is that the bank and the government have done a deal. The deal is called a ‘deferred prosecution agreement’ (DPA). What this ‘agreement’ means is that not one of the guilty executives at the bank will be prosecuted – no one will be held accountable. The New York Times informs us, that state and federal officials “decided against indicting HSBC in a money-laundering case over concerns that criminal charges could jeopardize one of the world’s largest banks and ultimately destabilize the global financial system.” NYT Dec. 10, 2012. Which means that, the ‘too big to fail banks’ are also ‘too big to prosecute.’
But wait, the executives did get one punishment – they are going to have their bonuses delayed! – not denied – just delayed]. [The shareholders will be paying the fine – but they probably won’t mind, after all the bank’s profits for the previous year were $22 billion]. However, other commentators are not so generous with their assessment of the ‘slap on the hand’ as The New York Times. Matt Taibbi, financial journalist at Rolling Stone wrote a representative piece expressing the outrage many feel (please excuse the colourful language, some of it is deleted):
“Wow. So the executives who spent a decade laundering billions of dollars will have to partially defer their bonuses during the five-year deferred prosecution agreement? Are you ******* kidding me? That’s the punishment? The government’s negotiators couldn’t hold firm on forcing HSBC officials to completely wait to receive their ill-gotten bonuses? They had to settle on making them ‘partially’ wait? Every honest prosecutor in America has to be puking his guts out at such bargaining tactics. What was the Justice Department’s opening offer–asking executives to restrict their Caribbean vacation time to nine weeks a year?… What’s the appropriate penalty for a bank in HSBC’s position? Exactly how much money should one extract from a firm that has been shamelessly profiting from business with criminals for years and years? Remember, we’re talking about a company that has admitted to a smorgasbord of serious banking crimes. If you’re the prosecutor, you’ve got this bank by the *****. So how much money should you take? How about all of it? How about every last dollar the bank has made since it started its illegal activity? How about you dive into every bank account of every single executive involved in this mess and take every last bonus dollar they’ve ever earned? Then take their houses, their cars, the paintings they bought at Sotheby’s auctions, the clothes in their closets, the loose change in the jars on their kitchen counters, every last freaking thing. Take it all and don’t think twice. And then throw them in jail.” Rolling Stone, Dec. 13, 2012.