Scoop has an Ethical Paywall
Work smarter with a Pro licence Learn More
Top Scoops

Book Reviews | Gordon Campbell | Scoop News | Wellington Scoop | Community Scoop | Search


‘In Terrorism We Trust’: The Anglo-American Brotherhood

‘In Terrorism We Trust’: An Established Tradition of the Anglo-American Brotherhood Since 1915

by Steve Edwards AKA Snoopman
11 September 2013

Snoopman News Editor’s Note: This article outlines long historical processes that have been shaped by an Anglo-American Brotherhood. It draws the connection between their clandestine efforts to destabilize Syria since 2011, and a well-established pattern of Anglo-American state-sponsored terrorism used to convert uncooperative countries into ‘free markets’ since the 1960s. It then contextualizes Obama’s Blitz speech at St Petersburg within a matrix of the Anglo-American Brotherhood’s clandestine plots that embroiled not only America in World War I and II, but also their deliberate build up of the Nazi war machine for the eventual goal of world domination. This article also sketches the culpability of the Anglo-American Fraternity’s involvement in 9/11 and the 7/7 London bombings. Lastly, it clarifies why any expectation that the Anglo-American dominated media system would boldly communicate this clandestine history of the Anglo-American Brotherhood is logically flawed.

A Plan to Bomb Syria into a ‘Free market’ Utopian Future?

In recent weeks, the United States’ executive branch of government has found it hard to gain support for a war on Syria following gas attacks in a suburb of Damascus. The Obama regime has blamed the gas attacks on the Al Assad regime. Many critics have pointed out that because the United States government justified its second War on Iraq on claims it fabricated with the United Kingdom government, the world is justifiably suspicious of the current case for military intervention in Syria’s civil war. To recap, America’s second War on Iraq started in March 2003, based on deceptive claims that the Saddam regime had: weapons of mass destruction stockpiles, aided Al Qaeda in the 9/11 terror attacks and was a threat to the security of the United States.

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading

Are you getting our free newsletter?

Subscribe to Scoop’s 'The Catch Up' our free weekly newsletter sent to your inbox every Monday with stories from across our network.

It took the world’s major media outlets until late 2005 to force an admission from George W. Bush that his administrations’ claims about Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction were false, and a further 10 months to get the US president to admit that there was no connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11. This failure by the world’s major media outlets, dominated by a pro-Anglo-American worldview, occurred because they ignored the lesson that at least 15 million people, who protested the impending War on Iraq, were trying to teach. The massive worldwide demonstrations of February 15 2003 occurred because people everywhere did not believe the claims of the Bush and Blair governments. The major news outlets’ belated challenge, and their subsequent failure to stay on the story to pressure for prosecutions of key players in the George W. Bush and Tony Blair regimes for conspiring to make war, bares much cause for skepticism over a potential air raid on Syria.

The pro-Anglo-American world media system is ignoring a long-range plan to destabilize the Syrian government. This war plan is part of a broader Middle East war plan. As former US General Wesley Clark disclosed in 2007, he learned in November 2001 that Pentagon war planners had a plan “to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and finishing off [with] Iran.” Despite US president Obama and US secretary of state John Kerry outlining a war plan that would allegedly not involve ‘troops on the ground’, NATO Special Forces from Britain, France, Qatar, Turkey and the United States have laid a quiet siege on Syria beginning in mid-March 2011. As Global Research and Russia Today have reported, these agent provocateurs have been supplying rebel forces with arms, ammunition and communications equipment inside Syria’s borders, in contravention of international law. This antagonism also contradicts the pro-Anglo-American world media’s picture of a civil war, wherein they have reproduced the perception that only state militaries had access to the neurotoxin, sarin gas. Indeed, the very justification for a NATO ‘humanitarian intervention’ relies on the world not knowing that NATO forces have been supplying Islamic fundamentalist fighters to take out a government of an Arab country.

Syria, along with Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran got on the Pentagon’s hit list because they were neither members of the Bank for International Settlements, the central banks of central banks, nor were they members of the World Trade Organization. This meant that they were not under the control of their jurisdictions and, therefore, their financial and trade systems were not sufficiently liberalized. Without a ‘free market’ economic framework in place, huge banking and industrial transnational corporations would not be able to economically exploit these countries for their natural ‘resources’, including humans.

The United States insists that oil be traded in US currency, which is controlled by a Wall Street-Federal Reserve banking cartel. Thus, in order to introduce ‘free market’ economic frameworks to mostly benefit what I call an Anglo-American Brotherhood, a US-led NATO-Israeli sponsored armed insurrection has been the means to gain control of numerous governments in the Arab world. In Syria’s case, it is aligned with oil-rich Iran, which supplies oil to Russia and China and is nearing completion of a gas pipeline to the Arabian Sea port of Gwadar, in southwest Pakistan that will supply China. Additionally, in July 2011, Iran, Iraq and Syria, agreed to build an oil pipeline that would, in effect, make Syria a ‘Pipelineistan’ route to the Caspian Sea, the Black Sea, Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean.

In support of my argument that an Anglo-American Brotherhood’s business is making wars as a means to gain control over resources in order to make money (and control populations through its own banking system), I will outline its secret history back to the early 1890s. First, I will correct popular perceptions about America’s post-World War II military interventions.

Why the Anglo-American Brotherhood Fights

In his 2006 documentary, Why We Fight, Eugene Jarecki demonstrates the United States has engaged in acts of terror to overthrow democratically elected governments nearly every year since 1945, all over the world. Made primarily for an American audience, Why We Fight compellingly argues that elites that comprise a US Military-Industrial-Think-tank Complex do not care about the loss of life, whether they are civilians or military personnel, foreign or domestic. The United States is an empire that fights wars to secure resources for its transnational corporations. Through a collection of expert interviews, Jarecki’s documentary argues that America’s military and transnational corporations have built numerous new bases in the Middle East and Central Asia regions, since launching its ‘global war on terror’ after the terrorism of September 11 2001. In other words, the key insiders that comprise a US Military-Industrial-Think-tank Complex care only about the projection of military power because wars and other acts of terror make new jurisdictions safe for ‘free markets’. In short, the Anglo-American Brotherhood is pursuing a ‘global neocolonial project.’

Indeed, as Canadian journalist Naomi Klein argues in her 2007 book The Shock Doctrine, when the ‘free market’ economic framework was field-tested in the mid-1960s to mid-1970s, US-backed terrorism was required to clear the opposition for the ‘economic shock treatments’ that followed. Five countries – Brazil, Indonesia, Chile, Uruguay and Argentina – pursued a developmentalist economic framework and were all subjected to US-supported military juntas and/or CIA-backed coups. The perpetually ‘developing’ countries had demanded Western technology so they could ‘develop’, as a ‘fair trade’ for having supplied the raw materials for the ‘long post-war boom’. Here, it is worth considering that terrorism is the use of violence or the threat of the use of violence to advance a political agenda. When terrorism is properly defined, it becomes clearer why it is vital to the projection of American state power that terrorism is commonly perceived as heinous acts only conducted by either networks of stateless criminals, dictators, or other ‘rogue states’ (with no connections to Western ‘democracies’). To counter this myth, Klein shows the link between the spread of ‘free markets’ in far-flung places and the use of terrorism by the US, which has persisted into the 2000s. She argues that the United States government resembles a venture capitalist providing seed funds to the Complex.

We, therefore, all need to interpret US president Barack Obama’s Blitz comment made on September 6 2013 at the G20 summit in St Petersburg as propaganda. Obama compared the American mass populaces’ reluctance to be embroiled in another Middle East war with their forebears’ during the Nazi-era. Prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor, ‘the American people’ were largely opposed to rescuing Britain from Nazi aerial bombings or the Blitz. Obama’s Blitz comparison was propaganda, not simply because the Complex has no empathy for ordinary humans being maimed and killed, whether by gas attacks abroad, or by terrorism occurring on ‘American soil’. Rather, it is because an American president and other leading state actors can only make this kind of manipulative claim because the true history of Anglo-American antagonism to foment the conditions for World War I and II is not widely known.

Bombing the World into Freedom: World Wars One and Two

As William Engdahl argues in his books, A Century of War and Gods of Money, an American oligarchy has maintained secret alliances with their British counterparts not only to provoke war through covert acts of terror, but also through economic warfare. This alliance between what I call the Anglo-American Brotherhood, is maintained with the subterfuge of sophisticated propaganda.

Their first venture in clandestine operations was undertaken as a means to embroil the United States in the European war that commenced in 1914, as Colin Simpson argues in his book, The Lusitania. On May 1 1915, an armed auxiliary cruiser class military ship called the Lusitania, set sail from New York across the Atlantic carrying a cargo that included six million rounds of ammunition that were illegally supplied by the J.P. Morgan Company. The British ship was sunk off the coast of Ireland on May 7 after a German U-Boat fired one torpedo. Because the ship was built as a cruise liner that could be commandeered by the Royal Navy in time of war, and had been re-registered as a military vessel after a re-fit in 1913, the civilian passengers were unaware that they were about to be used as cannon fodder.

Unknown to the captain of the Lusitania, a British destroyer called the Juno, was called off its escort mission. Winston Churchill, who at the time was First Rear Admiral of the Navy, issued an order in October 1914 that British merchant ships were to ram or fire at German U-boats. By Churchill’s own admission, his order would coerce German U-boats to make their attacks fully submerged. Churchill reasoned that it would raise the probability that the German U-boats would mistake a neutral Great Power’s vessel for a British ship and therefore Britain would gain more Allies to fight Germany. Although 1195 people died in the sinking of the Lusitania, the expected “flame of indignation” did not “sweep America … into the war”, as president Woodrow Wilson’s agent provocateur, Colonel Mandell House, put it in his private papers. As G. Edward Griffin notes in his book The Creature from Jekyll Island, the propaganda did not work as the key protagonists expected.

To gain America’s entry into what became known as World War I, the United States government demonized Germans in the minds of the American public. On 13 April 1917, president Woodrow Wilson tasked a Committee on Public Information with a pro-war mission to persuade ‘the American people’ because Britain’s two-front war with Germany was unraveling due to mutiny in an exhausted Russian Army, Britain’s ally. The American oligarchy, around the orbit of the Morgan banking and industrial dynasty, was faced with financial ruination because it had advanced the European Allied Powers with $1.5 billion in credit, and had underwritten $5 billion in supplies. If the Allied Powers had lost and Germany had been able to control the Eurasian landmass (the Middle East and Central Asia), which the British coveted, then they would be unable to service their loans. Consequently, the American oligarchy would have been unlikely to realize their covert plans to dominate the world. To this end, the propaganda manufactured by the Committee on Public Information included fake images of German soldiers bayoneting Belgian babies.

Across the Atlantic, the British oligarchy deliberately created the conditions to make war with Germany well before 1914, and devised a two global war strategy, with their American counterparts’ conscious help. As assistant professor of political economy at the University of Washington, Guido Giacomo Preparata, demonstrates in his book Conjuring Hitler, Germany’s industrial strength was perceived as a threat to the waning British Empire. To correct this intolerable situation, the British oligarchy pursued an encirclement strategy over the entire Eurasian landmass to ‘lock out’ the rival European power. Indeed, the British oligarchy long had a belligerent policy for making war against the strongest power of continental Europe by making secret agreements with the second strongest power. By 1907, the British oligarchy had sealed a Triple Entente agreement with France and Russia, which bound these powers to fight Germany if it was at war with Britain. The British oligarchy was intent on preventing Germany completing a railroad to Baghdad, and thus, gaining a trans-continental link to a major source of oil that would rival the British and French-controlled Suez Canal route. A consensus, traceable back to early 1890s, drove the ambitions of Britain’s oligarchy to reignite the British Empire. The British oligarchy were (and still are) bound by a fraternal brotherhood of London clubs, comprised of bankers, diplomats, officers and the aristocrats.

The British Fraternity’s biggest fear was that Germany would forge an alliance with Russia. Drawing Germany into a two front-war would ensure Germany would be smashed, and its remnant society would be ripe in the inter-war years for financial and economic attack. The two-front war strategy would also ensure that Germany would weaken Russia. In the inter-war period, the Bank of England’s governor, Montagu Norman, managed the collapse of the Germany economy, by masterminding an unstable web of debt, speculation and international trade between 1925 and 1931. Norman did this as part of a broader, older plan hatched by the British Fraternity to conjure a political foe in the German Republic that could be provoked to make war and, thus, in the ensuing conflict wreck Britain’s two strongest rivals on the European continent, Germany and Russia.

Since the American capitalist oligarchy and elites that comprised the US state saw the opportunity to emerge from these global conflicts as the world’s dominant military and financial empire, they devised their own belligerent strategy. In Gods of Money, Engdahl draws on excellent scholarly work to disclose that the Wall Street banking and industrial cartel did not stop at financing the Allied Powers in the European war that became World War I. Because this criminal group was left intact, they were free to make bigger and bolder plans. As Engdahl, and Anthony Sutton, in Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler, make clear, the American Fraternity deliberately financed the Nazis. The Wall Street banks included: the Chase National Bank (now JP Morgan Chase); the Schroeder-Rockefeller Company; Manhattan Bank; National City Bank of New York (now Citibank); the New York Trust Company; V. A. Harriman & Co. and Dillon & Read.

Furthermore, Engdahl and Sutton along with Charles Higham in Trading with the Enemy and Edwin Black in numerous books, including Nazi Nexus, demonstrate that some of America’s leading industrial corporations supplied the fascist regime with patents, technologies and materials, in order to ultimately gain from the destruction of the Third Reich’s war machine. These corporations included: International Business Machines (IBM), Rockefeller’s Standard Oil cartel, General Motors, General Electric, DuPont, Dow Chemical and International Telephone and Telegraph (IT&T). Without the technologies and co-investment from American industrial and banking corporations, the Nazis could not have: motorized their army; flown bombers and fighter planes; manufactured explosives on an epic scale; and exploited information to make the inevitable Holocaust as horrific as it became.

Yet, these two global wars were ostensibly fought to uphold the value of ‘freedom’ that the ‘free world’ was meant to regard highly. As Preparata points out in Conjuring Hitler, both global conflicts resulted in the destruction of 70 million lives. In light of these revisions of the official sanitized history, Obama’s reference to America’s Nazi-era reluctance to be embroiled in a war with Britain needs to be considered as an encoded threat. Recall that the Anglo-American Brotherhood actively helped build-up the Nazi war machine, so that they could re-order the world at the end of the global conflict. Remember also that the American Fraternity supplied the Nazis with the technology to build and fuel bombers that terrorized London. It is, therefore, hypocritical to infer that Al Assad is a new Hitler without contextualizing how Hitler was conjured.

Obama’s Blitz reference made at St Petersburg may also have been a tacit threat to the Russia government, because the American oligarchy did not limit itself to bankrolling World War I. Wall Street bankers also financed the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, which led to the Russian Czar’s abdication at Petrograd (now St Petersburg). By supporting the removal of the Russian monarchy, the American oligarchy hoped to be the eventual benefactors of the vast industrial conglomerates constructed by a strong communist state.

Because there is a long-historical continuity underpinning the clandestine activities that bond the Anglo-American Brotherhood, the US president’s Blitz reference was a potent signal to those most-attuned to tacit threats, state actors with top security clearances to access the secret histories of the world’s major powers.

From 9/11 to 7/7: the Anglo-American Brotherhood ‘Moving Forward’

The threat is not that the Anglo-American Brotherhood would aerial bomb St Petersburg or London. As if. Like any criminal group of psychopaths, the key to the Anglo-American Brotherhood’s power over their intended victims (the hapless masses of the world) is subterfuge. To this end, the Anglo-American media system plays a vital role to reproduce propaganda that pervades the world’s news. This subterfuge is no more evident than in the cover-up of the sophisticated terrorism that underpinned 9/11.

Fortunately, the world is waking up to the fact that the nineteen 9/11 hijackers were simply patsies in an epic-scale plot that could not have wrought the spectacular destruction that unfolded without meticulous planning by criminal actors within the United States government. Indeed, numerous scholars, journalists and professionals contest the official 9/11 terrorism narrative. Together their citizens’-initiated 9/11 investigations argue that the core official claims are implausible. Their investigations vary according to expertise, such as technical studies of: the near-free fall speed collapses of the three towers that imploded at the World Trade Centre; tracking the four hijacked flights; and presenting the more likely suspects. Among this group of 9/11 investigators, are individuals such as Kevin Ryan, Ian Henshall, Rowland Morgan, Mike Ruppert and Webster Tarpley, who posit that deep state criminal actors occupied key leadership, technical and planning positions within the United States corporate world and state apparatus, and orchestrated the terrorism of September 11, 2001. Furthermore, author of 9/11 Synthetic Terror Webster Tarpley, has found that there were up to 46 terror drills and war games that occurred on September 11 2001. These exercises provided the necessary cover for criminal actors within the state-corporate nexus to make the drills and games go live.

Similarly, the London bombings of 7 July 2005 are also distinguished for having terror drills that went live. A 7/7-terror drill script envisaged trains bombed by terrorists at three stations, Edgware, Aldgate and Piccadilly. These train stations are exactly where all three London Underground attacks occurred. (According to numerous reports, the probability of coincidence is infinitesimally close to zero). The news media, however, downplayed this admission made by the head of a crisis management company, Visor Consultants’ Peters Powers, who stated on BBC Radio 4 and television that his company was “running an exercise … in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning.” As in the United States, a July 7th Truth Campaign has emerged in the United Kingdom in the absence of a serious independent investigation into the ‘7/7’ terrorism plot. As with 9/11, the evidence of the ‘7/7’ terrorism points to a conspiracy designed by key insiders between the British state apparatus and private firms.

In this way, Obama’s air raid reference also conjures the spectre of another ‘surprise attack’. 9/11 was not the first time that the US government played dumb when planes attacked targets within the Continental United States. Here, it is important to counter popular cultural memory, that still holds that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7 1941 was unprovoked, and a surprise. In his book Day of Deceit, Rob Stinnett argues compellingly that a secret inner circle around president Roosevelt had conspired with the British and Dutch governments to cut off crucial supplies of oil, steel and aviation lubricants to Japan. This strategy, embarked upon in early 1941 after US military code-breakers successfully deciphered Japanese diplomatic and military encrypted communications in December 1940, was intended to draw the United States into another global war. In order to emerge as controllers of the world’s dominant military and financial power, the American Brotherhood knew that the American public would need to be sufficiently angered into unwittingly supporting their war activism. Therefore, the encoded meaning embedded in Obama’s reference to the London Blitz can also be read as a tacit endorsement of more home-baked terrorism, should it be deemed necessary.

Breaking the Trance-like Walk into a World Totalitarian State

Because every state in the world failed in its duty to test the official 9/11 story, the Bush regime was able to launch a ‘global war on terror’. Indeed, 9/11 was used to justify increases in state surveillance worldwide. Yet, it needs to be remembered that when the mainstream media could no longer ignore the Bush regime’s justifications for America’s second War on Iraq were false, major news outlets everywhere, however, also failed to seriously question whether the reasons for the broader war – the Global War of Terror – were also false. Similarly, because every state in the world also failed in its duty to test the official 7/7 story, the Blair regime was also able to reduce civil liberties and expand state surveillance.

It is, therefore, truly ironic to consider that in today’s ‘free market’ era, the world’s most callous centralized planners hark not from communist or fascist regimes of the 20th Century, but rather from the capitalist plutocracies of Britain and America. It is small wonder then that a vital propagandist project to key insiders that comprise the Anglo-American Fraternity is that their true history remains secret. In that regard, it is crucial that no major media outlets print or broadcast a major retraction of the official reasons for the causes of World War I and II, and the terrorism conducted by the United States and United Kingdom since 1945. Otherwise, people would likely conclude that even if the Al Assad regime was actually responsible for the gas attacks, it would be but another monstrous act conjured by the Anglo-American Fraternity to justify war for covert purposes.

It is also ironic that the Anglo-American media have mentioned that president Bashar Al Assad’s government is struggling with a Muslim Brotherhood that comprises the rebel forces. Their long historical links to the Anglo-American Brotherhood are ignored. In his book, Terrorism and the Illuminati: A Three Thousand Year History, David Livingstone argues that the Muslim Brotherhood was created a British agent and Freemason called Hasan al-Banna. Founded in Egypt in 1929, the Muslim Brotherhood was set up as a network of agent provocateurs, or terrorists, in Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Iraq. They were aligned with the Nazis. Allen Dulles, a 33rd Degree Freemason, who headed the US Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the forerunner clandestine organization to the CIA, during World War II, smuggled Nazis through ‘ratlines’ out of Germany to South America and the Middle East after the war. Indeed, the CIA supplied the Muslim Brotherhood’s Egyptian branch with over one hundred Nazis to train its police and army in the mid-1950s. Furthermore, as the CIA head, Dulles created the Banque de Commerciale Arabe, based in Lausanne, Switzerland, for the Muslim Brotherhood.

Therefore, we cannot rely on the Anglo-American Media Complex to retract the official sanitized versions of the Anglo-American Brotherhood’s history. To assume the Anglo-American Media Complex would pro-actively do this would be akin to the natives of the New World expecting the Vatican’s Congretatio de propaganda fide (or The Office for the Propagation of the Faith) to notify them that the Catholic Church’s hierarchy had deviously devised a ‘discovery doctrine’ called terra nullus. This ‘discovery doctrine’ justified conquest by claiming that the heathen inhabitants of the New World were too ‘primitive’ to be considered ‘sovereign’ because they lacked Christian mythology and therefore had no legitimate legal or political status. Similarly, the secret history of the Anglo-American Brotherhood reveals a new ‘discovery doctrine’ that I call terra terror.

Of course, the natives of the New World had no knowledge of the Vatican’s Congretatio de propaganda fide. But, nor did they did not expect its missionaries to reveal information that would be so damning to the Great White Race’s power structure that it would collapse. It is crucial that people everywhere see the Anglo-American dominated media as the new missionaries who provide cover for the psychopaths that run the world, the British and American Fraternity. Pertinently, manufacturers of propaganda do not mind if their propagandist communications are spoken by ignorant puppets or informed ones, so long as it is convincing to those who believe in puppets, the naïve masses, or muggles. As such, we need the bi-pedal muggles that currently walk trance-like upon Planet Dumb-dee-doo to pay attention to those of us communicating at the grass-roots level, lest Planet Earth falls into the grip of a slickly marketed world totalitarian state.


Steve Edwards recently graduated with a Masters in Communication Studies from AUT University in New Zealand. His thesis titled “It’s the Financial Oligarchy, Stupid” was a media study of the 2007-2008 global financial crisis and bank bailouts. By day, he works as a freelance TV news editor. By night, he snoops.

© Scoop Media

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading
Top Scoops Headlines


Join Our Free Newsletter

Subscribe to Scoop’s 'The Catch Up' our free weekly newsletter sent to your inbox every Monday with stories from across our network.