Lenin’s Willing Industrialist: The Saga of Armand Hammer, Part 4: The Real King of Oil, and the Importance of using a Bagman

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

Although the definitive biography of the Jewish billionaire Marcel Reich is called The King of Oil, the title probably belongs to industrialist Armand Hammer, for perhaps no one did as much to alter the political and economic geography of the global oil scene than he did. Others may have accumulated more wealth with oil, but few used their wealth to exert such leverage.

As in all of Armand Hammer’s endeavors, the narrative he prefers to tell of how he succeeded in gaining a foothold in the global oil scene is a self-serving fairytale that doesn’t bear close scrutiny. In Hammer, he claims that he managed to outbid the Seven Sisters oil cartel by extending an offer to King Idris to search for an oasis in Kufra, Libya. Just as Armand Hammer ostensibly wanted to feed the Russian peasants so many years before, he would now quench the thirst of an impoverished and tiny Middle Eastern nation languishing in “its medieval poverty” (Epstein 228). This story, which “has all the elements of a fairytale — a good king, a kingdom imprisoned by lack of water, and a wise man who shows the king how to lift the curse from his small kingdom — became the conventional account of how a small, inexperienced American oil company got the richest prize in Libya” (Ibid.).

His narrative of supposed “enlightened altruism” (Epstein 23) hid the fact that he had paid a “multimillion dollar bribe to a key official in the Libyan royal court” (Ibid.). In Hammer’s defense, a certain level of bribery was de rigeur when operating in oil concessions at the time. A “financial editor who specialized in the internal operations of Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, the parent company of Esso Libya” (Blumay 116), told Hammer’s PR flack that any “company involved in the Libyan auction bribes the ministry” but that what distinguished Armand Hammer’s bribe from the usual ones on offer was “the astonishing amount of money that Doctor Hammer threw around” (Ibid.).

Deeper digging revealed that Armand Hammer was using some of the same tricks in his bid to corner the oil market that he had used in the art world. Only this time instead of appropriating funds from unwitting investors or extracting money from a board of executives whose employment depended on Hammer’s whim, Occidental had “underwritten its vaunted Oasis project with Libyan funds” (Blumay 259) without the knowledge of the Libyans. Journalist Christopher Rand’s expose, Making Democracy Safe for Oil, “contended that Occidental had … reneged on promises to the Libyans, overproduced its oil-fields” (Ibid.) and even alleged that John McGuire, a supervisor with Bechtel had his life threatened when he attempted to play whistleblower on Hammer’s doings. Hammer was livid with the accusations, especially considering that information about similar operations of bribery regarding “Occidental’s Venezuelan activities” (Ibid.) was already underway. “Deny everything he says,” Hammer told Blumay, “especially the death threat crap. … Do everything you can to discredit him. I’m going to call the lawyers. If there’s a way to drown this bastard in litigation, I’ll find it” (Blumay 260).

Hammer’s other stroke of good luck in Libya was that a revolution was underway. And just as in Russia, Hammer used a great upheaval to his advantage once again. He ignored the unified front represented by the market price the Seven Sisters were willing to pay and struck a deal with Muammar Ghaddafi after a coup d’état ousted King Idris from rulership. Armand Hammer had shifted the balance of power in the Middle East as assuredly as he had tipped the scales in favor of the Bolshevik government under Lenin some decades before:

With the stroke of a pen, Hammer had acknowledged the ultimate sovereignty of an oil-producing nation over its oil — and had forever changed the geopolitics of oil. After this, the Middle Eastern dominoes began to fall. Once the oil companies had agreed to Libya’s terms, they came under pressure from Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and other Persian Gulf nations. The Shah of Iran, for example, demanded — and received — an even better profit-sharing arrangement. Libya then had Hammer and the other Libyan concessionaires match Iran’s terms. In a matter of months, the control of oil had begun an ineluctable shift from the Seven Sisters cartel to the oil-producing nations. (Epstein 245)

It might seem tempting to infer that Hammer was neutral to the pan-Arab movement sweeping the Levant, or that he did not at heart remain a Jew and loyal to Israel.  But that was not the case. Much as the dossier compiled for a young J. Edgar Hoover revealed in the past, Armand Hammer was still willing to do a deal with the devil, but that would not keep him from offering ultimate loyalty to Shema Yisrael.

***

Hammer was a master dissembler in many respects. Throughout his career, he demonstrated an especially quicksilver tendency when it came to either concealing or brandishing his Jewish identity, based on the audience in attendance or the motive he had in mind.

He tells a massive, verifiably untrue whopper in the early pages of his autobiography, claiming that during his youth in New York City there “was a synagogue next door, but none of the members of my family ever attended services there. Jewish observances had gradually ebbed out of my family’s life by the time I was born; and my parents had, in effect, become members of the Unitarian Church” (Hammer 55).

Julius and Rose Hammer were Russian-born Jews who debated whether they should ultimately pursue a specifically Jewish form of Bolshevism or foster a secularized, non-Shtetl-oriented internationalist socialist revolution. Unitarianism was never on the agenda. Armand Hammer’s supposed Unitarian identity was a post-hoc, hastily constructed lie that he fabricated to make sure that his Jewishness didn’t create too many problems for him while siphoning oil from the grounds of the Middle East. It was a spur-of-the-moment thing, designed more to assure that his head remained attached to his neck than anything else. His brother Victor Hammer expressed his concerns to Carl Blumay: “Armand may not accept the fact that he was born Jewish … but that’s not going to matter to the Libyans. He could be kidnapped or murdered while he’s in Libya. Like it or not, he’s got to watch his step” (Blumay 97). After conferring with his brother Victor and seeing the wisdom in his counsel, Armand decided to pick a faith. He used some employees as a sounding board. “The Libyans have funny ideas about Jews,” Hammer began, “and I don’t want them to think I’m Jewish. I think I should join a church. Name some religions” (Ibid.). His executives rattled off some faiths. “Methodist … Roman Catholic … Presbyterian … Baptist … Unitarian ….” (Ibid.). Armand paused at that point and asked, “What’s Unitarian? … Look it up” (Ibid.).

Armand was not only trying to avoid being murdered or kidnapped with his impulsive conversion. He was also intent on controlling the fallout from a story that appeared in the March 1966 edition of Arab Oil Review, “which described his Jewish background and the efforts he had made in the 1950s to raise money for Israel — which was essentially accurate” (Epstein 231). Hammer would eventually do everything he could to help Israel, and would later confess that he had been secretly attending meetings there (and had even recommended specific doctors and medical treatments to Menachem Begin), but for the time being he needed the oil that was flowing from Libya:

Hammer went on to defend himself against the ‘malicious lie’ that he was Jewish and a supporter of Israel: “I have never been in Israel and never have been a member of any organization that collects contributions for Israel, nor have I or any company I have been associated with had any business dealings with Israel. Therefore, you can see how sinister this unfounded rumor is.” (Epstein 231)

Long after he had gotten what he needed from Libya (but before the neocons attacked the nation under the guise of progressive leadership during Obama’s tenure), Hammer would drop the unitarian charade and embrace his Jewish identity. Even more importantly he would use the store of knowledge he had acquired wildcatting in the oil business to try to help his homeland. From the final pages of his autobiography:

Today we have nearly half the State of Israel under license, and for the first time in the country’s history, systematic seismic work has been carried out. By January 1987 we will have begun drilling and we will discover whether God put oil into the substrata of Israel, just as he did with her neighboring countries. The seismic work looks very encouraging-and our geologists are optimistic. John Kluge, an investor in the Israeli oil venture and a longtime friend of mine, asked that I give at least one week’s notice before any drilling takes place. A Jewish friend of his will make a special prayer for our success in finding oil. It is certainly worth a try! On another front, Occidental is working with Israel Chemical, Ltd., the Israeli chemical conglomerate, on several notions, and while nothing has been consummated yet, it looks likely that we will reach an agreement soon. If we can find oil in Israel, and help increase the base of Israel Chemical’s economy, we can transform Israel into a self-sufficient state much less exposed to the vicissitudes of world politics. Muammar el-Qaddafi may not think that a very admirable ambition, but the prospect fills me with joy. (430)

Hammer’s dedication to Israel was, like his dedication to the communist project, not solely about money. Armand Hammer used his influence in the service of Israeli/Jewish politics, especially with the Russians, in order to give his fellow tribesmen a bit of victor’s justice that they might not have enjoyed without his intercession. In Hammer, the Doctor brags that “the Israeli government asked me to help obtain some documentation crucial to their case against the Nazi war criminal known as Ivan the Terrible” (431). The suspect, accused of operating gas chambers at Treblinka and killing thousands of Jews, was John Demjanjuk. He claimed not to be the man they sought, but the Israeli government didn’t believe him and looked for proof that he was the alleged Ivan the Terrible. Armand Hammer offered to grease the skids using his longstanding Soviet connections:

The Soviets had the documentation — the original SS identification card of ‘I.N. Demjanjuk’ — but would not release it to the Israelis. I explained the situation to Anatoly Dobrynin, and in December 1986 he presented me with the document the Israelis needed for prosecution. When I forwarded it to Vice Premier and Deputy Foreign Minister Shimon Perez, he and the entire government were elated. Besides thanking me personally for my “tireless efforts on behalf of the State of Israel, the Jewish people and the cause of justice and human rights the world over,” he wrote: “Please convey our appreciation to the Soviet authorities for their cooperation in the effort to bring Nazi war criminals to justice.” (Hammer 431)

Hammer promised the Prime Minister of Israel that he would give his warm regards to Anatoly Dobrynin and Mikhail Gorbachev, in the hopes that the extension of goodwill would serve as “ an opening wedge to further cooperation between the two governments” (Hammer 431).

Hammer’s about-face regarding his Jewish identity (and his activism on behalf of the Jewish state) serves as an object lesson regarding a theme that has been touched on at The Occidental Observer in the past. The fact that a powerful Jew does not openly embrace explicitly Jewish philanthropic causes and stresses his universalism ad infinitum does not mean that he won’t make a return to his Jewish roots at some point, and put the full brunt of his wealth and power into a project he previously feigned indifference toward.

***

It should be added at this point that neither George Soros, Mark Zuckerberg, nor any other wealthy and powerful Jew one cares to name demonstrated Armand Hammer’s specific fluency as a sociopath. Hammer was known for his ability to cry on cue, and it was not abnormal for mortal foes to emerge from meetings with him totally converted to the Doctor’s way of thinking. It was a hypnotic brand of charisma which he claimed to have admired in Vladimir Lenin, and which seemed to rub off on him after his time with the dictator in Russia. It was this talent for socially engineering people (when bribery or threats weren’t involved) that allowed him to mostly avoid paying for his crimes in a court of law. The closest he came was when fallout from the Watergate investigation proved that some of his kingmaking machinations had technically been illegal, since he had circumvented new laws regarding the disclosure of campaign contributions exceeding a certain amount. Even then, however, Armand Hammer found a scapegoat whom he convinced the take the rap.

Tim Babcock, the former governor of Montana, was recruited by Hammer and used as a bagman to make illegal campaign contributions on behalf of the Doctor. He had this to say about his role as a fall-guy: “Whenever I work for someone, I’m as loyal as I can be. Unfortunately, in this case I was too loyal” (Blumay 287). President Lyndon Johnson’s advisor, Marvin Watson, commenting on the affair said that “there are some people who know something but say the opposite, and then convince themselves that the lie is the truth. If they were hooked up to a lie detector machine, their lies couldn’t be detected because they’ve done such a good sell job on themselves. That’s the way it was with Armand” (287).

Even spreading the blame among loyal employees, however, and with one of the most formidable legal teams ever assembled, Armand Hammer was forced to plead guilty to violating campaign contribution laws during Richard Nixon’s reelection campaign.

Hammer went to absurd lengths not only to avoid doing any jail time, but even to avoid appearing in the courtroom. According to his own account in Hammer:

I was seventy-six years old, had suffered intermittent bad health for more than twenty years and had twice submitted to major surgery within the previous three years. In addition, I was under immense strain in my business life, between boardroom battles, the crazy menace of Oxy’s Libyan connection and the fathomless complications of doing business with the Soviets. (413)

Thus, “to be confronted at such a time with the threat of a criminal conviction was more than my heart could stand. It didn’t quite give out, but it gave notice of a desire to quit” (Hammer 413). Hammer claimed that under “no circumstances, said my doctors, was I to go through the strain of a trial. It could, quite literally, kill me” (Ibid.).

Public Relations wizard Carl Blumay had to keep many plates spinning to both accommodate his boss’s lavish demands and to keep the truth of Armand Hammer’s good health secret during the ongoing trial. He managed to keep the name of the hospital where Armand Hammer was staying under wraps, and “to discourage eyewitness accounts, Hammer was allowed no visitors” (Blumay 276). Concealed from public scrutiny that could undermine his claims to be at death’s door, “Armand Hammer ran Occidental from his hospital bed. Executives memoed him continually and received speedy replies. Whenever he called me, he sounded fine and on top of everything. Usually, when I called him, I got a busy signal and I left a message with the floor nurse. One day she remarked that Armand ‘was the busiest patient they ever had’” (Ibid.). Armand Hammer’s wife Frances corroborated this account, complaining to Carl Blumay that her husband was “‘running me ragged’ … It seemed nobody believed that Armand was seriously ill, but no one was going to voice that opinion out loud” (Ibid.).

Victor Hammer described his brother’s ability to deceive others, claiming “‘Armand’s natural sense of drama allows him to seem a great deal sicker than he really is. … If he can put himself to sleep at will and wake up exactly when he wants to, you can imagine how good he is at making himself look like he’s at death’s door. He was betting on the fact that no doctor was going to put a seventy-seven-year-old man with chest pains and shortness of breath into an even more stressful situation’” (Blumay 277).

After spending six weeks in hospital feigning mortal illness, Hammer pleaded guilty to violations of the Federal Campaign Contributions Law. After discovering he would receive no jailtime, he “returned to the hospital unaware that reporters were watching … waved away the wheelchair and strode into the building,” (Blumay 281), capping the afternoon literally dancing “a little victory jig once he thought he was out of view” (Ibid.).

The Jewish tendency to plea for sympathy and feign weakness to better conceal strength was another weapon Hammer managed to produce from his toolbox to avoid paying any substantial price for his crimes. The worst that could be said about his conviction on election fraud charges is that it stymied his desire to be Time magazine’s Man-of-the-Year and his campaign to win the Nobel Peace Prize. That he even considered himself a candidate for the latter is a stunning example of his hubris, though perhaps even worse men have not only been nominated but have won the award.

Go to Part 5


Works Cited

Blumay, Carl. The Dark Side of Power: The Real Armand Hammer. Simon & Schuster, 1992

Epstein, Edward J. Dossier: The Secret History of Armand Hammer. Random House, 1996.

Hammer, Armand and Neil Lydon. Hammer: The Armand Hammer Story. Perigee Trade, 1988.

17 replies
  1. T
    T says:

    As a child during the ‘Cold War’ era post Vietnam War I had heard about Armand Hammer. What I couldn’t understand at the time was why it was that the capitalist US, a country that was supposed to be in a near perpetual state just short of a hot war with the communist Soviet Union, had a capitalist businessman whom for many decades (ie seemingly forever) that appeared to be without the slightest restraint flitting freely back and forth between the US and USSR and making profitable personal business deals with the ‘enemy’. I couldn’t understand, if this was all so, why this was tolerated and it caused at the time a bit of cognitive dissonance.

    Since that time I’ve gotten a bit wiser about these things.

    I would have to think things like that and other oddities such as the capitalist US practically giving nationalist China over to the communist bloc in the late 1940’s would cause ‘true believers’ in the economic system of capitalism and in the US political history as its taught in the public schools and colleges cause to question what the exact nature of ‘ the Cold War between the worlds’ two great super powers’ in reality was. Similarly, one would think it would cause anyone of a true believing ‘red’ persuasion to question things when Jane Fonda can sit in a North Vietnamese AA battery during the war (1972) for propoganda photos and upon returning to the US face no official legal sanctions…at the time the reds no doubt thought they were ‘winning’.

    Now some four decades plus later you can go into any US Walmart and buy underwear made by Vietnamese cheap laborers, the sons and daughters of NVA soldiers just like the ones surrounding Jane in her propoganda pics.

    It seems likely people have been ‘played’ on a mass scale and neither ‘Capitalist’ nor ‘Red’, the children of the 1776 and 1789 Revolutions respectively, was expected to or for that matter even allowed to win ultimately, but ‘convergance’ of the two has been the intention all along, just as the Ford Foundation representative testified to government officials when questioned back in the 1950’s.

      • T
        T says:

        Fits right in with the rest of it Trenchant. July 1972 was the very same month that Jane Fonda was in Hanoi getting her picture taken and also a time when the US was still actively engaged militarily with North Vietnam. Those massive 1971-1972 grain deals the US government was making with the USSR, a supporter of North Vietnam which was a client state of theirs, would help to ensure that the NVA SAM missile battery crews based in around Hanoi would be well fed as they shot down US B-52’s during the Christmas bombings of 1972.

        From Trenchants link (emphasis mine)

        In July of 1972, however, the United States government signed a three-year agreement with the Soviet Union under which the Soviets agreed to purchase large amounts of grain from the United States. The Soviets made additional grain purchases from grain exporters. The Soviets used $750 million of credit supplied by the United States, plus $500 million of their own hard currency, to purchase corn, wheat, and soybeans..

        Some Jane Fonda summer 1972 North Vietnam vacation pics linked below made while visiting a certain ‘must see’ Hanoi tourist destination…

        https://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images;_ylt=AwrTHQbDlxVaKzQALhtx.9w4;_ylu=X3oDMTByNWU4cGh1BGNvbG8DZ3ExBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw–?p=jane+fonda+hanoi+aa+photos

        • Pierre de Craon
          Pierre de Craon says:

          It’s well past time to get over this silly, childish Jane Fonda hangup. A pretty girl with daddy issues—bloody well founded ones at that, from all reports—Jane did immature and foolish things with the full support and encouragement of (((our true enemies))). One would do far, far better to focus on the crimes and atrocities, past and present, of the younger John McCain—or even on the compromises and sellouts of his daddy, the admiral (cf. daddy’s role in the Liberty betrayal).

          Jane was, in short, more exploited than exploiting. Jumping on the Hanoi Jane bandwagon fifty years down the line is, I suggest, the mark of someone who does not genuinely have the interests or the well-being of the white and Christian frequenters of this site at heart.

          • T
            T says:

            Huh. Making mention in two posts about Jane Fonda as part of illustrating a much larger point within a single solitary thread of a very large website wherein I’ve made numerous entries upon other subjects hardly constitutes ‘a hangup’ or ‘jumping on a bandwagon’. You’re ad hominem allusions made to questionable loyalties on my part regarding both whites and Christians I’d tend to think are really quite beneath you. As for Jane Fonda I suppose I give her quite a bit more credit than you do seeing her as a grown woman in her 30’s then, albeit with problems as many people have, and a tough old gal now, who can ‘take it’. As with the rest of it you’re entitled to your opinion. All in all your comments in the previous post in the context of things have been of an almost perverse religious, race, and sex baiting nature.

            Is this out of the blue attack upon me on your part in reality about the discussion we had some months back about the US Civil War, where you had expressed some irritation at the expression of my views? Surely you are still not upset with me in my ‘agreeing to disagree’ with you in that matter and in my thinking when violence was forced upon each ‘sides’ population in that incredibly stupid and destructive war that the general public, north and south, being placed in a nearly unwinnable and impossible situation, and the vast majority not for the most part involved in chattel or wage slavery (ie cheap labor, so called), nor profiting from these put in place by diktat slave systems of the south and north respectively, the conflict between these two slaves systems being what the war was in reality about, a truth that dare not be spoken in the United States, but rather suffering greatly from them, should have turned their guns on the elites and hangers on who unlike them were profiting from it at the larger public’s very great expense, rather than turning the guns on each other and being slaughtered needlessly to the tune of six hundred thousand.

            Surely, you’re not holding a grudge towards me about that? I certainly don’t hold a grudge towards you.

          • Pierre de Craon
            Pierre de Craon says:

            Is this … attack upon me … in reality about the discussion we had some months back about the US Civil War[?]

            No. But thanks for reminding me, at some length, that you are still flogging that dead horse.

            It’s about the portrayal of Jane Fonda as supreme villainess fifty years down the road—long past the point where anyone has an excuse for doing so. Nor is it difficult to discern that her alleged villainy continues in very widespread use as a distraction; specifically, to discourage the easily distractable from looking at the war and the buildup to it with unclouded, unjaundiced eyes.

            Vietnam was a childhood memory for you. For me it was a central life event. Under the circumstances, I see no reason to sit still through a dozen or so hours of Ken Burns’s propaganda on PBS or several unconsidered paragraphs in a 10,000-word block of copy hereabouts.

      • T
        T says:

        Again, Pierre, my two posts mentioning Jane Fonda as merely a portion of a much larger point in a solitary thread on a huge site is hardly ‘the portrayal of Jane Fonda as supreme villainess’ on my part, nor do I happen to think that she was. Most anyone soberly reading the entries I contend would tend to think the same.

        Re ‘the dead horse’ comment I can only disagree, and then too, how can something be ‘dead’ if it wasn’t alive to most in the first place, though it certainly should be. People everywhere should have a solid awareness of chattel slavery and its trade’s heir apparent, wage slavery (ie ‘cheap labor’) and the accompanying ‘mass immigration’, being the very basis of the ideology of multiculturalism. People everywhere should have an awareness that the ‘immigrant’ within the multicultural society performs exactly the same role and function the chattel slave did within the chattel slave holding society. They should be fully aware that the chattel slave owner and the hirer of the wage slave ‘immigrant’ are driven by the exact same self centered/short sighted financial motivations and utter disregard towards one’s own people when both of these persons refuse to pay the local labor costs to employ one of their own and instead import someone not their own to do the work that cost less. People everywhere, particularly in those places where multiculturalism has only made limited inroads, should know this and the history behind it. Sadly they do not, and I don’t understand the ‘logic’ of someone fighting against them being made aware.

        Anyhow, besides seeing content and ascribing motivations to people’s posts that aren’t even there I can only conclude you also are of an overly sensitive sort.

        And, though entirely unintentional on my part, my previous posts regarding the US Civil War (and now Vietnam I suppose) must have really gotten your goat. Not handling that unsolicited reaction in an appropriate or healthy manner you then respond with adhominems and allusions created with the intent of character assasination that are unbecoming of anyone.

        You’ve commented recently along the lines of having consciousness of one’s actions and having an awareness about ‘the moral agency to consciously do harm and evil’, which I think is something every people should work on. As an individual you might work on having more of that awareness and ‘consciousness’ yourself.

  2. Yeoman Archer
    Yeoman Archer says:

    Tzoah Rotachat (Boiling Excrement)
    If ever a Talmudian met or exceeded the requirements for the Talmud’s highest accord, “to be honored by placement in Boiling Excrement”, Armand Hammer is the one!
    Oh, you’ll say, that’s not true, it’s a curse. Maybe … but like all the Satanic things about the Talmud, the information you get from (((them))) was / is created to deceive. For example their refusal to eat the “Holy Pig”.
    Talmudians continue to brag about their 5778 years of subjugation of the “other”, while simultaneously crying, “poor me.”
    One of their consistent deceptions is to use the letters j.e.w. to describe themselves, knowing that the uninitiated will believe them to be the pre-messiah Christians of the Christian scriptures.
    Throughout time this has been Satan’s favorite tactic and why it is more appropriate to call them Talmudian. Over the last seventy years I have seen them use the identity of, atheist, agnostic, “I’m not religious” and like Hammer passing themselves off as Unitarian or Buddhist or some such. In the end they always turn back to a Talmudian rabbi for their funeral.

    Consider this (((wiki))) info piece:
    “Tzoah Rotachat Boiling Excrement
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tzoah_Rotachat
    “Tzoah Rotachat (Heb.: צוֹאָה רוֹתֵחַת, tsoah rothachath — “boiling excrement”) in the Talmud and Zohar is a location in Gehenna (Gehinnom) where the souls of Jews who committed certain sins are sent for punishment. This form of punishment is cited as being of extreme nature, if not the most extreme, in the sense that those individuals sentenced there are not given relief even on Shabbat, and are not released after the standard twelve-month period.
    “Contents
    “Babylonian Talmud
    “The Babylonian Talmud lists the cause for a Jew being sent to Tzoah Rotachat as “all who scoff at the words of the wise men (i.e. Chazal) is judged in Tzoah Rotachat”. The Talmud Bavli also hints that the punishment has more of a physical implication to it. Rashi writes that he who engages in “excessive scoffing” (the exegesis here involves switching the “ה” of “להג” and replacing it with a “ע”, as they both are one of the five guttural sounds) (the former part of the verse) is met with the second part of the same “straining of the flesh”, essentially being judged excessively (straining) of his.[1]
    “The presence of Jesus the Nazarene in boiling excrement is one of the disputed references to Jesus in the Talmud.[2] Onkelos raises up Yeshu by necromancy,[3] and asks him about his punishment in Gehinnom.[4][5] Jesus replies that he is in “boiling excrement.”[6]”

    As we say in the military; “Read It and Weep!”

    • Charles Frey
      Charles Frey says:

      After his release from Reichert Island prison, Bernie Madoff
      arrives at a gigantic pool, with the huge sign Tzoah Rotachat
      over its portal. Hm— not so bad ! – as the multitude is just millimeters above the surface: he joins them seconds before the loudspeaker announces : ” Your three minutes of stretching are up. Sit down again “.

      • T
        T says:

        Charles, on a change of subject, you write a great many highly interesting and intriguing posts at this site and like others I have thoroughly enjoyed them. As with many, and I’d presume with yourself to some degree, I do think the present terrible state of things has an explanation that has multiple aspects to it, the understanding of which helps to explain how all of this came to be. To be sure this multi-faceted explanation includes multiple peoples some of whom do have more responsibilty than others for the present increasingly dystpopic state of affairs…ie a Tagalog tribesman of the Philippines and his or her power elites have had a lot less to do with it than certain other groups and their power elites.

        In that light, regarding the more purely Anglo-Saxon aspect of these things, I am curious if yourself or any of your German contacts within Germany proper (and I’d include Nemmersdorf sp? here if he happens to come across this query) have any familiarity with the Anglo-Saxon ideology of the ‘New Rome’ which can be traced in its origins to 16th century Elizabethian Britain and which entails within it the belief that in the future the UK and in particular British North America (ie the present day United States) will form the center of a future global empire, the New Rome?While one can find fairly often very broad comparisons of the US with ancient Rome in the media which use the term, ie ‘is the US the New Rome?’, it is much rarer to hear public talk on radio or TV about a specific Anglo-Saxon ideology with that name attached with the definition I’ve provided here. In fact, I’ve only heard it talked about once on the radio as an actual ideology on one of the lesser of the two primarilly esoterically themed North American late night talk shows, and not seen it discussed at all on television. On the internet the Anglo-Saxon ideology of the ‘New Rome’ has only very limited discussion and that of a very recent vintage. To top it off though I’ve seen or heard nothing on tv or radio of an 1853 book entitled The New Rome produced by the major US establishment publisher GP Putnam (now Penguin) and written by two individuals from out of Germany, a Thomas Poesche and Charles Goepp. The book in its opening pages describes its contents as a ‘horoscope’ and ‘a map of the future of mankind’, and ‘what must be’. Bearing in the mind the book was written approximately only fifty years after the death of G Washington, it outlines succinctly step by step how the US and Britain in the future are to first reunite (as the writers indicate had been planned all along from before the 1776 Revolution ) to form a nearly unstoppable power bloc, that the center of power of the British Empire will then move from England to the US, and that the first thing this future US/UK bloc is to do in the quest for global empire is conquer and gain control of Germany which is identified as the center of power upon continental Europe…ie ‘ the hearth stone of Europe’ as the two writer’s put it. Lest any forget, Germany is even as I write this under US and UK military occupation as it has been since the conclusion of WWII. The book then describes that immediately following this conquest of Germany there will begin a great struggle specifically between the US and its allies and Russia and its allies, and that while this struggle will be centered upon Europe it will simultaneously encompass the entire globe. Most remarkably the writers declare it will be US air power and its domination thereof that will tip the hand in favor of the US over Russia’s vast land armies, and that, along with a hinted at ‘backdoor’ attack upon Russia’s Pacific Ocean bordered region, the US does ultimately prevail in the struggle. The US and Britain will then have acquired for themselves ‘the empire of the world’.

        One of the writers, Thomas Poesche, was a ’48er, and after hiding out for awhile in Germany after the failed revolution, proceeded onto London (a city which seems to figure quite often and regularly in these things) where it’s thought he stayed for approximately a year or so ensconced amongst other various European revolutionaries and their circles, before proceeding onto the US where he would then meet Charles Goepp and the two would write The New Rome and have it published in 1853. While the two were both clearly quite intelligent, in particular Poesche, I have doubts that two very young 20 somethings would have had on their own the geopolitical foresight to write the book they did and my suspicion is that while Poesche was resting up as it were in London he was introduced to some very knowledgeable (if not powerful) people who ‘filled him in’ on plans for the world and that may have well have already been largely complete in their conception from the years immediately prior to the 1776 Revolution, a time when the British Empire already was approaching something close to a global hegemony. And that this person or persons ‘commisioned’ Poesche to write the book and have it published in the US by GP Putnam, a major US publisher with one of its two primary offices then located in London…the other being in New York City. And why would those that do these things tell us openly, if at times somewhat coded or shrouded, what they are planning to do beforehand? As with a lot of it, I think in large part this is about themselves. It’s so that they can help rationalize their actions, no matter how abonimable or even criminal those actions might well be, by telling themselves ‘we tell people beforehand what we are going to do, and yet they don’t stop us.’…as if that makes it all okay.

        Anyhow, I have seen some of the war time newsreels shown to German audiences and have been impressed with some of them in their speaking about the fight against ‘plutocracy’ and another that really jumped out at me which spoke about ‘the conspiracy between London and Moscow’…ie allusions of the relationship between Capitalism and Marxism. But, I have seen nothing about an awareness of the New Rome ideology Charles Frey and that is where I am curious if yourself or Nemmersdorf had ever run across it in your circles. Thanks for any assistance in that matter.

        At the bottom of this entry I’ve posted several links, the first being to a thread I made some years back at another site which explored the contents of The New Rome and has a free online link to the book, which though a bit dry at times it’s filled with juicy morsels for the reader. The book can be read in a single sitting of a few hours. The link below that is to a fascinating 37 page booklet published in 1912 in the US by the German ancestried writer Julius Goebel Jr entitled A Political Prophecy of the 48ers in America. The booklet provides something of a German perspective in his analysis of The New Rome and provides both the biographies of Poesche and Goepp, it’s two writers, and the historical background of the writing of the book itself. Goebel couldn’t understand why Poesche would write of a glorious future for the US and UK and then have Germany’s future to be underfoot of those two powers and that Poesche seemed entirely okay with that…Goebel wrote it off as pique on Poesche’ s part due to the failure of the 1848 Revolution in Germany. As an aside the particular copy of the manuscript by Goebel I’ve linked to here was as notate on its inside cover was donated by Paul Pelz, the principal architect of the US Library of Congress, and whose sister had married Poesche. Pelz’s father had been a prominent 48er in Frankfurt before fleeing to the US.

        A curious historical fact and bearing in mind that the origins of the Anglo-Saxon New Rome ideology of a future global empire to be centered upon British colonial North America has been traced to Elizabethian England…the land upon which Washington DC is now built was indeed called ‘Rome’ (circa 1663 onwards) complete with it own Tiber prior to the capitol city’s construction as documented in the links below.

        ‘Yet, about 150 years later, in 1804, Tom Moore, the poet, 25 years of age, spent “near a week” with Mr. and Mrs. Merry [also with my grgrgr Aunt Marcia Burnes Van Ness–BP], the family of the early English minister, in Washington. Later, in a note to his Epistle to Thomas Hume, Moore gave his ideas of the infant city, and then wrote the following rhyme on the Capitol City of that date.’

        the second Rome

        ‘In fancy, now, beneath the twilight gloom,
        Come, let me lead thee o’er the second Rome
        Where tribunes rule, where dusky Davi* bow,
        And what was Goose creek once is Tiber now;
        This embryo Capital, where fancy sees
        Squares in morasses, obelisks in trees
        Which second-sighted seers, even now adorn
        With shrines unbuilt and heroes yet unborn.’

        https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/the_new_rome_or_the_united_states_of_the_world_1853

        https://archive.org/details/politicalprophec00goeb

        http://www.genealogy.com/forum/surnames/topics/pope/3903/

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiber_Creek#

        • T
          T says:

          If there was any truth to the ideology of the ‘New Rome’ having any influence amongst the Anglo-Saxon people, particularly amongst powerful elements of the elites, one might expect there to be some subtle hints of this here and there…ie the land chosen to construct Washington DC on being called Rome or the publication of a book called The New Rome in 1853. Are there some other hints of this ideology that can be found?

          Yes, there are.

          From an article published in the United States in 1958 in the very US establishment publication Time magazine.

          Diplomacy: The New Rome

          Flying into the U.S. from the far ends of the earth, a flock of foreign statesmen last week demonstrated that the roads which once led to imperial Rome and London now converge on Washington. Unlike their counterparts in the days of the Caesars and the Gladstones, they came not as satraps but as friends. But each of these ambassadors to the new Rome had a plea or a complaint…

          From the deciphered account of the US (Union) chief of military intelligence Lafayette Baker in what if correct amounts to his last will and testament found recorded within the margins of an 1864 British army journal. Baker supposedly was involved with War Department Secretary Edward Stanton in a plot to assassinate Lincoln involving predominantly northerners in part due to a quest for power but also their desiring a hard peace with the south…Booth was in this scenario the smallest part of it ultimately, a tool, but his participation would ensure the south got the entirety of the blame and the desired hard peace. Baker would in time be poisoned with beer laced with arsenic it is thought provided by his brother in law Walter Pollack who was still working in army intelligence…this all to stop Baker from possibly talking.

          In new Rome there walked three men, a Judas, a Brutus and a spy…

          ‘I am constantly being followed. They are professionals. I cannot fool them. In new Rome there walked three men, a Judas, a Brutus and a spy. Each planned that he should be the king when Abraham should die. One trusted not the other but they went on for that day, waiting for that final moment when, with pistol in his hand, one of the sons of Brutus could sneak behind that cursed man and put a bullet in his brain and lay his clumsey [sic] corpse away. As the fallen man lay dying, Judas came and paid respects to one he hated, and when at last he saw him die, he said, “Now the ages have him and the nation now have I.” But, alas, fate would have it Judas slowly fell from grace, and with him went Brutus down to their proper place. But lest one is left to wonder what happened to the spy, I can safely tell you this, it was I…’

          ‘…There were at least eleven members of Congress involved in the plot, no less than twelve Army officers, three Naval officers and at least twenty four civilians, of which one was a governor of a loyal state. Five were bankers of great repute, three were nationally known newspapermen and eleven were industrialists of great repute and wealth. There were probably more that I know nothing of.’

          Lafayette C. Baker

          http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,863882,00.html

          http://spartacus-educational.com/USAbaker.htm

          http://www.beyondweird.com/conspiracy/cn11-20.html

          • T
            T says:

            From a now defunct website this is an excellent description of the historical Anglo-Saxon ideology of the ‘New Rome’. It goes a long way in helping to explain why so little about it is known by the general public and why only the most subtle of hints of its existence in general appear in the mass media. As the transmission of the ideology in the Anglosphere countries has been largely within the confines of a secret society, ie Freemasonry, and a primary tenent of the belief system is that the US separation from Britain due to the 1776 Revolution is as planned to be but only temporary, in the future the US and UK are to reunite to form a nearly unstoppable front towards the world…it makes perfect sense in that context that provided the research of some is correct that a person such as Union army intelligence chief Lafayette Baker would know of it and possibly reference it in a British arms journal.

            Freemasonry and the Roman Spirit

            Study of the ideas of the leaders of these forces within Freemasonry reveals that their dream, intention and plan was to create out of Britain and America a New Rome, a new World Empire, a new uniformity of thought and lifestyle that would embrace the whole world. To this end, a new state, the United States of America, was established, the first “world state”…

            Both in Britain and in the USA in the 18th and 19th centuries, aristocratic, oligarchical and anti-democratic forces working within the hierarchical structure of Freemasonry ensconced themselves within the political establishments of those countries – to what end ? Study of the ideas of the leaders of these forces within Freemasonry reveals that their dream, intention and plan was to create out of Britain and America a New Rome, a new World Empire, a new uniformity of thought and lifestyle that would embrace the whole world. To this end, a new state, the United States of America, was established, the first “world state”, made up of immigrants from all over the world rather than just from one ethnic community – a New Atlantis as intended by the British Elizabethan occultist John Dee, adviser to the Virgin Queen, and by Francis Bacon, James I’s Chancellor, and ruled by a scientific priestly elite. This is how the Freemasons of the Revolutionary and post-Revolutionary generations saw themselves…

            He goes on…

            The Temple and the Roman Imperial Spirit

            The Jerusalem Temple and Imperial Rome: these are what have linked Freemasonry with the New Rome of the New World Order since the days of the Templars, who based their esotericism on the symbology of the Temple of Solomon which they had learned in the Crusades. Their very name was associated with the Temple, and many of Freemasonry’s rites too are based on the Temple of Solomon. The god-given esotericism of ancient Israel was thus conjoined with what was essentially an imperial Roman will to power. Today we see again an alliance between those forces that lead the Jewish people and those that lead the New Rome; indeed the State of Israel today, just as in Herod’s day, is a client state of an Imperial Rome, the only difference being that, unlike Herod’s kingdom, without the aid of the New Rome, the modern State of Israel would very likely not have survived.

      • Yeoman Archer
        Yeoman Archer says:

        @ Charles,

        “as the multitude is just millimeters above the surface: he joins them seconds before the loudspeaker announces : ” Your three minutes of stretching are up. Sit down again “.”

        At this point, the army version has a muted voice from way off on the other side of Hell saying: “Don’t … make … ripples.”

        • Charles Frey
          Charles Frey says:

          The army version is too kind. My personal version at least gives them a mouthful and renders them blind; insofar blindness was not a pre-condition, assigning them there in the first place.

          • Pierre de Craon
            Pierre de Craon says:

            … blindness was not a pre-condition …

            Thank you, Charles, for your typically apt and plainly stated insight. I do not understand why so many commenters prefer to obsess on the theme of the Jews’ sickness or psychopathy or what you will in preference to crediting them with the moral agency to consciously do harm and evil, especially but by no means exclusively to those they publicly profess to hate or despise. The very idea of free will gets precious little respect in these threads.

          • Charles Frey
            Charles Frey says:

            Pierre, I will write this very small, in the hope that the moderator won’t see me using the reserved space for this essay as a letter-drop, to ask you to look at my replies to you at the end of Karl Nemmersdorf’s essay, now gone down the archive chute. My replies regard ‘Nam and the fate or rather happy ending of that naked young ” napalm girl “.

Comments are closed.