My Reviews (hundreds of them!) | My home page

Sorry; Incomplete so far!

Hobbes (1588-1679), Locke (1632-1704), English Civil War, the Jewish Secret Takeover of England—The “Glorious Revolution”

A slightly different view of English material in articles-on-jews.html

The English Civil War Considered in its Outcomes. The 'Civil War' or wars were 1642-1651. A typical formulation of the outcome is the 1688 'Glorious Revolution' or 'Bloodless Revolution'. And the 'Civil War' described as 'between King and Parliament'. Or between 'the aristocracy and the middle class vs the King.' Neither of these mentions Jews, money, or money interests. It is about as convincing as 'the Good War' or as 'ending slavery in the USA' or 'Uncle Joe Stalin'.

My best guess is that Amsterdam Jews decided on the policy of fomenting hate and suspicion between groups in England; these were to be set at each others' throats, Cromwell selected as the nominal leader—with the required acting and oratorical skills, plus such things as love of money and understanding of propaganda. He warred and ruled (as 'Lord Protector') from 1653-1658, his death. There are plenty such people; Churchill for example, Tony Blair, the Clintons, 'Barack Obama', as recent examples.

1561 English RC found Douai college
1564 Pius IV limited scripture reading to those with permission from Bishops or Inquisitors
1568 Holland revolt against Spain
1570 Pius V declare Eli a heretic
1571 Lepanto
1572 Bartholomew's day massacre
1582 Gregorian calendar introduced
1588 defeat of Armada

The point here is that official canons of reading are enforced, and it's likely that they are enforced for reasons which are politically, if not ethically, sound. Starting with Hobbes and Locke, here are four examples:–
[1] Hobbes and Locke are two examples of authors whose works are regarded as important; and 'scholarship' as appropriate in dealing with them. 'Scholarship' often carries the connotation of officially relevant works. So established are they that the concept that they were part of a long-term scheme to enable the Netherlands to invade England in not considered. But that concept can be supported by many pieces of evidence. Books written in English but published in the Netherlands could support the belief. So could any evidence of personal contacts and literary arrangements to the same ends. The sequences of new books and the enthusiasm of their promotion or booking (or whatever expressions of the time were used) supply evidence. The destruction of evidence that books, booklets, and testimony existed at one time, can point the same way. The wording used can be very often a pointer. William of Orange was not usually described as a 'conqueror'. His forces supposedly caused a 'Revolution' or 'Glorious Revolution', not an 'invasion' or 'great impoverishment.
[2] A modern analogy might be 'Pulitzer prizes' for US supposedly factual books, or news items. In practice, some event, which may be a complete fake, is summarised; the nearest description which more or less fitted the narrative is awarded the 'prestigeous prize'. By tradition, authors of a few centuries ago are supposed to be exceptionally learned and lucid. There's generally far less chance of detecting errors than is the case now.
[3] A slightly less modern analogy is the reaction of genuine authors to the facts of anonymity in Jewish-controlled 'news' sources. H G Wells, for example, was indignant that people like himself (most men under 40 have not developed their own philosophy) were replaced by hack writers, though of course they are exactly what Jews want. Bertrand Russell (US Presidents are know to use speechwriters) and Belloc (the modern anonymous press) said much the same. I might be the case that Hobbes and Locke (and Filmer, and Macaulay...) were in effect hack writers, given the main lines of their 'new thought'.
[4] Karl Marx is suggested by Miles Mathis in Marx (2014) as a writer intentionally set out to use German philosophy to split up all German socialist groups, substituting Jewish interests secretly.

Here's an account of the so-called Battle of Medway [From a list copied by Jan Lamprecht on Surprise Battles; Jan didn't seem to realise it's written by pro-Jews]:

Following the start of the Second Anglo-Dutch War [I have no idea whether Cromwell died prematurely, from the plot point of view, and the wars were unexpectedly long], in 1665, the Great Plague began ravaging London, and before long the epidemic had killed about a fourth of the city’s residents. In 1666, the Great Fire of London wiped out much of the beleaguered city’s housing. And in 1667, England again took it on the chin when a Dutch flotilla launched a surprise attack that produced one of the worst—and possibly most humiliating—defeats in the history of the Royal Navy. The audacious Dutch plan, masterminded by political leader Johann de Witt, was conceived to deliver a crushing blow to its adversary and gain the upper hand in treaty talks. After capturing the English seaport of Sheerness, in the mouth of the River Thames, the Dutch fleet—aided by two river pilots who were British defectors—navigated the treacherous River Medway, destroyed a protective iron chain stretched across it, and set upon battleships anchored at the presumed impenetrable ports at Gillingham and Chatham. As it turned out, deep budget cuts had left the English vessels more or less unguarded, and after sacking 13 of them, the Dutch aggressors retreated with two seafaring trophies, including HMS Royal Charles, the Royal Navy flagship.

Note the rather suspicious events, which revisionists look at.
[1] The so-called 'Great Plague 1665-ish. Coincidence?
[2] The so-called 'Great Fire' 1666
[3] The use of inside traitors; anonymous, here
[4] The preceding 'deep budget cuts' leaving ships 'more or less unguarded'. Certain to be Jewish financial pressure

Probably 1666 was a target date, based on Jewish superstitions. The underlined link is to Donny Ahzmond's piece on Miles Mathis's site, re-identifying—this must certainly have been known before—the actual starting-point and subtext of the fire. Here's a link from 2012, on St Paul's and the Blitz, suggesting something similar.
There must have been fightbacks against the Dutch, and Jews, though the stories must have mainly been buried. The whole exercise depended on Jewish money, tremendous expenses, and recovery of money from the public with the installation of the national debt, plus long-term echoes as impoverishment bit, and the new money paid out to new aristocrats. The length of time from the 'civil wars' to the 'Restoration' of 1660 was about 18 years. The length of time from invasion to the legal establishment of the 'Bank of England' in 1694 about 34 more years. The total 52 years may have been calculated so that few living British people understood the full picture.

I'm trying here to pin down propagandists, ready to appear when the wars were over. Something analogous to 1945, though of course far less extensive.
[1] Levellers Putney Debates book review. These events look like controlled opposition.
[2] Thomas Hobbes Leviathan, or The Matter, Forme, Power of a Common-Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civill (1651) and Behemoth: The History of the Causes of the Civil Wars of England (1662). The dates refer to printed editions, which must have been approved. Printing was a serious business; unpublished manuscripts circulated between interested parties, and in those days there was no 'general post' to everyone.
Hobbes' Leviathan's title page showed the state, in the shape of the King, made up of a composite of the subjects. It's an absurd idea, though nobody ever says so. Possibly it may have been designed to make royalty seem dangerous and self-inflated.
Hobbes wrote on divine right. Kings not historically overwhelming important; consider Barons at Runnymede etc. Another author, Filmer exaggerated kingly importance too. Probably this was to encourage absurd self-inflation of kings, with the aim of promoting wars. His book Behemoth on the 'counsels and artifices by which they were carried on from the year 1640 to the year 1660' of course doesn't include Jews. (And seems to have been renamed the History of the Long Parliament]
[3] John Locke In Russell's History of Western Philosophy has more pages than any other philosopher, including Plato and Aristotle. Some indication of the importance traditionally attached to Locke in Britain.
Two Treatises of Government (1690) (and the Hollis edition of 1764, published in the American colonies).

I'd suggest the philosophical material is unimportant, to give an air of intellectuality or formality. Like Berkeley and Hume, it was fodder for chattering types directed away from serious issues.

Bibles, Religion and Disputes from English Civil Wars to the "Glorious Revolution"
1550 is roughly the midpoint between 1066 and 2021, the present. The period we're looking at is at the cutting edge of something like half a millennium past. Some people will think it's all past and gone; some will imagine nothing about their supposedly-sacred beliefs have changed; I'm trying to get people who've been deliberately mis-educated to understand the influence of so-called Jews, which is greater than almost everyone seems to understand. So, please, read this article and try to see how the English-speaking world has been massaged, coerced, and beaten into what we have now.

wells: A very important thing for us to note is the role played by this emperor in the unification and fixation of Christendom. Not only was the Council of Nicaea assembled by Constantine the Great, but all the great councils, the two at Constantinople (381 and 553), Ephesus (431), and Chalcedon (451), were called together by the imperial power. And it is very manifest that in much of the history of Christianity at this time the spirit of Constantine the Great is as evident as, or more evident than, the spirit of Jesus. A second great autocrat who presently emphasised the distinctly authoritarian character of Catholic Christianity was Theodosius I, Theodosius the Great (379-395). He handed all the churches to the Trinitarians, forbade the unorthodox to hold meetings, and overthrew the heathen temples throughout the empire, and in 390 he caused the great statue of Serapis at Alexandria to be destroyed. Henceforth there was to be no rivalry, no qualification to the rigid unity of the Church. wells in crux ansata. Jews all but written out. 1 Overview Roman Catholicism and Jews
I need to start with the beginning of Roman Catholicism, when the Roman Empire was failing. Many people feel attracted to that Empire; in Victorian times, school books were written praising the Romans for the honour of invading their countries. Probably in times when people are part of empires, people feel sympathetic to other, remote, empires.
The Jews at the time seem to have been the 'Phoenician Navy', operating ships for freight and profit. I'm assuming here some typical algorithms of Jewish behaviour: Jews act as a distributed nation, split typically among major cities, and not arranged in a geographical space enclosed by borders, adjoining other tribes, towns, countries, or nations. Generally, countries understand their own areas, but do not know how Jews operate—their total wealth, total population, main centres, or main languages. It's absolutely essential to understand this simple point: many people, including supposedly great thinkers, have not understood it. It follows that their total power, expressed as total wealth and population and assets, is mysterious and may be summoned at any time. And it follows that treaties and agreements and secrets are liable to be made without full understanding. And it follows that local people in towns can strike deals, after the fashion of Leagues and Guilds and Freemasons.
And it follows that, if there's a need to strike back, Jews can be weakened by cutting links between groups of Jews, simultaneous attacks on them, persuading collaborators to reveal what they know and get them to change sides, and weakening them financially, information-wise, and asset-wise.

Overview of Jews and Roman Catholics
In my view, Jews adopted a policy of consecutive funding of invasions [see map of spread of Christianity] in which collective Jews in turn use invaders to install a system with taxation of the country. Jews were symbiotically supported by Catholics, who insisted that 'usury' was a monopoly of Jews; in turn, the Church collected tithes and donations and top-ups from Jews. And note that Roman Catholicism had a system of opposition to heresy, which in fact is not very different from Jewish systems if they get supremacy.

Note on Islam
The sudden rise of Islam amazed many commentators (for example Bertrand Russell in his book Power: Mohammed added nothing to the knowledge or to the material resources of the Arabs, and yet, within a few years of his death, they had acquired a large empire...). We must add to our list of Jewish algorithms the use of frontmen, fakes, crypto-Jews, forged documents, and so on.

Note on Khazars
Without taking sides on the issue of genuine Jews and Khazars, note the importance of supposed genuine Jews. There's the problem of who counts as genuine: Maternal descent? Race? Circumcision? Writings? Family traditions? 2 catholicism and jews switching sides? 3 books, printing, bible 4 books english writers may be fronts - hobbes book looks simple instructions as per tutor 5 c of e and propaganda weekly cp bbc daily 7 English writers as fronts for jews 9 note dates of Locke books 10 importance of protocols because times change; consider 9/11 where timed explosions needed for controlled demolition. And info on camera and sound essential for blackmail as in Epstein. And techniques of insurance. cp 1492 Chemor, chief Rabbi of Spain, wrote to the Grand Sanhedrin, which had its seat in Constantinople, for advice, when a Spanish law threatened expulsions ... make your sons merchants that they may despoil, little by little, the Christians ... make your sons doctors and apothecaries, that they may take away Christians' lives. ... make your sons canons and clerics in order that they may destroy their churches. .. arrange that your sons become advocates and lawyers, and see that they always mix in affairs of State, that by putting Christians under your yoke you may dominate the world and be avenged on them so must have been similar thing in netherlands, eg how to kill charles. 11 probable aims of jews and look at concealment and censorship and self-satisfaction and permanent burden of lies. nuke website stuff on london fire add note on early freemasons to spreadsheet english heritage note nicean council 325 AD establishing basis for christianity... wells' historical view jewish list of '100 best nonfiction books' in guardian newspaper - why do jews like it? Sounds like a jew; look at his life and of associates long life: includes entire 30 years war 1640-1660 long parliament end of elizabeth I / 'glorious revolution' and charles II/ end of henry viii 'divine law' fire, plague, Bank of England British Empire in americas? Russian empire and 'russia' reformation reformation 39 articles 1562? irish articles 1615? bronte jane eyre e.g. Reason having come forward and told in her own quiet way, a plain, unvarnished tale, showing how I had rejected the real, and rabidly devoured the ideal — I pronounced judgment to this effect: divine right of kings ?jewish top-down protocols and russia; similar with netherlands, just bits remaining. Similar in England, presumably. Needed because the law aggressive viciousness of the talmud has to be updated for eg printing. at present time, insurance law allows damage to buildings/ laws on ? allow penalties for child sex etc as per chap with island the bible in english any mention of sabbath day any mention of lords prayer wording esp debt

DEPRAVING THE LORD'S SUPPER
IN DEROGATION OF THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER
EDWARD WIGHTMAN 1611 ['Last person burnt for heresy in England..']
GEORGE FOX 1656
HOBBES 1666
9 WILLIAM III/

1640: ELEMENTS OF LAW, Hobbes (Circulated in MS) 1642,1647: DE CIVE, Hobbes 1651: LEVIATHAN, Hobbes 1655: DE CORPORE, Hobbes 1656: QUESTIONS CONCERNING LIBERTY NECESSITY AND CHANCE, Hobbes 1666: DIALOGUE BETWEEN A PHILOSOPHER AND A STUDENT OF THE COMMON LAWS OF ENGLAND, Hobbes 1668: BEHEMOTH, Hobbes. History of 1640-1660 Long Parliament 1672?: Hobbes' autobiography in Latin 1678: DE MIRABILIS PECCI.., Thomas Hobbes Being the Wonders of the Peak in Darby-Shire russell religion and science [Only four pages of double columns: names and topics such as:—Acosta, Father Joseph/ Prof Alexander/ Descartes/ Eratosthenes/ Father Clavius/ Gadarene swine/ various Popes like Calixtus III, Innocent VIII and so on/ Hitler/ Hobbes/ Hegel/ Hell/ Lecky/ Lightfoot/ Playfair/ Pope/ Rameses/ Siena/ quantum mechanics] moncure conway John Minor. A bachelor past middle age, he devoted himself to his aged and blind mother and to studies. Having occasion to call on him, he proposed a walk. We crossed the bridge of Stafford, strolled on the Washington farm, and talked on philosophy. He smiled at the phrase "dark ages," and thought that in the centuries so labelled there were some of the best heads that ever lived. For himself (Minor) Hobbes was final.