← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · edward gibbon
Thread ID: 5975 | Posts: 4 | Started: 2003-04-04
2003-04-04 20:39 | User Profile
I find that many are unaware that Jews have long interfered with American policly and done so to advance their interests. They care very little or at all for the goyim ostensibly their countrymen. The quoted sources are from my book War, Money and American Memory: Myths of Virtue, Valor and Patriotism [url=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0788184792/qid%3D1022776139/ref%3Dsr%5F11%5F0%5F1/102-9675860-7271313]http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/078...9675860-7271313[/url] 1-800-782-3833
Yet, for those who remembered the Russo-Japanese War of 1904 the attack without a declaration of war by the Japanese fleet at Port Arthur should have been ample warning. On February 13, 1904 the New York Times commented "the point that the Japanese violated international law in going to war without a formal declaration would be of no importance if the Czar had not dignified it in raising it to the Russian people" and added "the practice of initiating war by formal declaration has gone out". These snide remarks followed by three days an editorial in the same paper where the attack was described "as a matter of naval strategy and tactics, this prompt, enterprising, and gallant feat of the Japanese arms will be memorable as the first practical vindication of the theoretical fighting value of the destroyers". Lest anyone think these opinions were confined to the editorial board of the New York Times the letter from Theodore Roosevelt to his son Teddy Jr. on February 10, 1904 should be illuminating: "between ourselves- for you must not breathe it to anybody, I was thoroughly pleased with the Japanese victory, for Japan is playing our game". In conversation with the German Ambassador von Sternburg on March 21, 1904 he confided "it was in our interest the war between Russia and Japan should drag on, so that both powers may exhaust themselves"...
A look at the editorial pages of the New York Times illustrated clearly why America favored Japan. The mirage of free and open trade with Asia, particularly the Chinese Empire, had much to do with our preferences. The editorial noted that nine years previously Japan had won by arms the right to dictate peace to China. It may be a small surprise to some that in those days the New York Times was capable of some ethnic slurs that would never appear in today's paper. Chinese ineptitude and distaste for war were noted and contrasted sharply with the Japanese who were lauded. The Chinaman was not a favorite of the editors. Japan demanded the Liau Tong Peninsula with clear notification that all nations would enjoy the commercial advantages she demanded for herself. Yet, Russia with support from other powers, namely Germany, France, and England, prevented Japan from occupying the peninsula and took it for herself. The New York Times professed Japan would let all mankind in the peninsula, and Russia would keep all mankind out. "Whatever is gained by Japan is gained by mankind, and whatever is gained by Russia is lost to mankind." were the sentiments of the New York Times. In an analogy so beloved by Americans the Japanese actions were explained as an attempt to set up a Far Eastern version of the Monroe Doctrine. The Japanese were instructed that for their own preservation they must make the independence of China and Korea a fundamental part of her policy.
These days most scholars and certainly most people forget the pride that progressive American institutions had when the Japanese demonstrated mastery of newly learned western methods. The New York *Times* lauded the Japanese on their practice of enlightened principle and their judgment in taking the best and rejecting the worst in western civilization. According to the New York *Times* the Japanese had shown themselves intelligent, enterprising, ingenious, and industrious with rare executive and constructive talent. Further, the editorial board complimented them on their bravery and their rich endowment of warlike qualities, ***[color=red]but noted that the Japanese have not been quarrelsome or reckless[/color]***. The reader should be reminded that at the time the editorials were lauding the Japanese the Boy Scouts had yet to be founded, and one must wonder if Baden-Powell had been inspired by the knights of Bushido.
The Japanese like turn of the century vigilantes were busily fighting for the extension of trade and the suppression of selfish trade monopoly. No western nation could match the selfless devotion of the Japanese to principle. The New York *Times* cautioned the Japanese if they abandoned this devotion, they may sink to the level of European nations and become grasping, bellicose and untrustworthy. The level of the United States was not given by that paper.
[color=red]The desire by some American Jews to provide a large sum of money or even to send a warship to Japan when they fought Russia provoked an anguished reply by the editors. The first part was that any answer to the Russian treatment of Jews within the lands of the Czar should be based not on limited racial or religious grounds, but on issues which affect the whole country, presumably meaning the United States[/color]. The New York Times bluntly stated "the inspiring motive of our desire for the success of Japan is our inborn sympathy for the cause of freedom, enlightenment, and progress of which Japan is distinctly the champion in this contest". The second part of the objection to sending a warship to Japan by American Jews was that it would be about the worst service they could do for Russian Jews who desired to live in peace and security in their homeland. The provocation of sending a warship to the enemy of the Czar just might provoke cruel savageries had not been given sufficient thought by those advocating the gift of arms to the Japanese.
By March 1910 the New York *Times* had revised its opinion of the Japanese. Admitting that it would be folly to speak of gratitude in the conduct of diplomatic affairs, the New York *Times* admonished the Japanese for their conduct in Manchuria. [color=red]***They reminded the Japanese that the reason they were able to wage war upon the Russians was the willingness of American bankers to lend money when Europeans would not.***[/color] When time came to negotiate the peace treaty with Russia, Japan was verging on exhaustion. The clear opinion of the New York *Times* was [color=red]*that if the war had continued for six months or a year, Japan would have been the loser.*[/color] It was not unreasonable for the United States which had furnished the money for their war and whose President Roosevelt had intervened at an opportune time for Japan should have received better treatment from the Japanese. Ever prideful of their position to serve as conscience for America, the New York *Times* had expressed deep concern to the affront to Japan when San Francisco excluded Japanese children from school. Then they discovered Japan had a law of exclusion the same as the United States and exercised her rights to bar foreigners from her institutions. To this day the Japanese continue to do so.**
Was it right to unleash Japan on an unsuspecting world? You may not make friends, but you are telling the truth when you insist the Japan of Hirohito killed more people and conquered more territory than the Germany of Adolf Hitler. As ever the skullduggery of Jews has been forgotten. I suspect Russians may remember it. Perhaps we should likewise.
2003-04-04 21:00 | User Profile
Lesson to be learned: Gullible, big-footed yankees, unable to mind their own affairs, spread Jew rule. 1904-2004 (1861-2004?). How dare Rebels, Japs, Gerries, Arabs, or anyone else, rule their own back yards.
2003-04-04 21:03 | User Profile
I remember reading somewhere that our good friend Jakob Schiff (you know the one that finaced the Bolsheviks with a cool 20mil) also made cut rate loans to the Japanese during the Russo-Japanese war.
2003-04-08 21:09 | User Profile
If you use a google search for "jacob schiff" and "japan", you will find the following comments.
From the Forward [url=http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.04.04/arts1.html]http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.04.04/arts1.html[/url]
When Russia launched its ill-fated war against Japan the next year, America's leading Jewish philanthropist, investment banker Jacob Schiff, volunteered to underwrite Japan's war bonds and personally financed Russia's defeat. Schiff and other prominent Jewish business figures entered a series of negotiations that led three years later to the formation of the American Jewish Committee, arguably the world's first modern human-rights lobby. President Theodore Roosevelt greeted the committee's formation by inviting its best known figure, the former diplomat Oscar Straus, to become his secretary of commerce and labor, the first Jew to serve in an American cabinet. And not a word about color-blind meritocracy: "I want to show Russia and some other countries," Roosevelt wrote to Straus, "what we think of the Jews in this country."
From the virtual Jewish-American Library [url=http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/biography/schiff.html]http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/biography/schiff.html[/url]
**Schiff was prominent in floating loans for the U.S. government and for foreign nations. He took great delight in floating a spectacular bond issue of 200 million dollars for Japan to help them in their war with Czarist Russia, 1904-1905. Schiff was angered and infuriated with the anti-Semitic pogroms and policies of the czar. Helping Japan fight Russia was one of his methods of striking back at anti-Semitism. **
From First Things [url=http://216.239.53.100/search?q=cache:eaOZD3zlxQ8C:www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9512/reviews/japanese.html+jacob+schiff+japan&hl=en&ie=UTF-8]http://216.239.53.100/search?q=cache:eaOZD...&hl=en&ie=UTF-8[/url]
**On an entirely different level, historical developments, particularly financier Jacob Schiff's fervent fundraising on behalf of Japan during the Russo-Japanese War, contributed to a fascination with what seemed to be the Jews' astounding business talents and powerful worldwide networks. **
From the Jewish Encylopedia [url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=317&letter=S]http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp...id=317&letter=S[/url]
Schiff's firm was chosen to float the large stock issues not only of the Union Pacific and allied companies, but also of the Pennsylvania Railroad, the Baltimore and Ohio, the Norfolk and Western, and the Missouri Pacific railway companies, the Western Union Telegraph Company, and many others. It subscribed for and floated the three large Japanese war loans in 1904 and 1905, in recognition of which the Mikado conferred upon Schiff the Second Order of the Sacred Treasure of Japan. He was also received in private audience in 1904 by King Edward VII. of England.
Obviously American interests were of no concern to Schiff. Only the interests of Jews mattered. Some things never change.