Hello, and welcome to the Gold, Goats and Guns Podcast for the second time on November third, twenty twenty five.

My name is Homolawonga.

We have a lot to talk about.

This is episode two thirty seven, and I have with me the great pressure of getting back to discussing with Richard Poe, author and investigativejournalist Richard Poe, who's been on the cast twice before.

And both of those episodes are bangers, folks.

I'm going to tell you right now.

Episodes and one seventy one are apps I think are absolute required listening.

Richard's here to discuss today.

We're going to continue to the discussion about why all roads lead to London.

Richard, how are you?

Just great?

Tom, Great to be back.

It's really good to talk to you.

And as I said to you, you know when we were setting this up, and I'm going to, you know, make the public apology, it's eighteen months between conversations is way too long.

So with that said, what I want to talk about today is this, you know, here we are.

The last time we spoke was March of twenty twenty four.

We were about six months after ten seven, the Hamas attack on Israel.

And you would just published an article before you publish the book of the same name, which is how the British invented communism and blamed it on the Jews.

And the article itself was a lightning wrong for me.

And then of course you were kind of to send me a copy of the book which I read, which I adored.

You know, I've recommended that book to a number of different people.

One of the things I wanted I'm watching now that we're two and a half, for just over two years after ten seven, is what I've been seeing and what I've been arguing for strenuously in public, is that I'm watching the British turn on one of their assets into you know, and burn one of their assets in order to protect themselves and to try and attack Donald Trump and what he's trying to do to change the course of America.

So I was wondering, you know, with that said, I know of all people that I can think of that can give us, you know, the historical perspective on how the British do what my friend Alex Craner likes to call the antjar experiment.

Red ants and black ants, put them in a jar and shake them up.

And then profit off the chaos.

I know you're the person for that in my mind.

So in the inciting incident for your book in that book is a speech by Winston Churchill in nineteen twenty where he was trying to blame basically World War One on the Jews, and you know, knowing full well that he was the one who was actually you know, behind almost all of it.

And like it's like going through the layers of how they structure their campaigns, their geopolitical campaigns, I think is the part that everybody's missing in this conversation because they see the surface level stuff and then they miss all the nuance of what's been going on behind the scenes the entire time.

So why don't we just start there?

I think maybe what people often underestimate is the tremendous power of Great Britain, not only let's say, a hundred years ago the period I was writing about in my book, but today as well, and the fact that so many of these maneuvers, such as for example, you were implying earlier, perhaps the British are throwing Israel under the bus, throwing this nation which they actually created, and perhaps they're throwing them under the bus now by getting behind this sole anti Israel, anti Semitism campaign that's being promoted in social media.

But when I look at it from historical perspective and looking back to the events I discussed in my book, and I will say the title how the British Invented Communism and Blamed it on the Jews, what I see is a parallel where in the nineteen nineteen and nineteen twenty the British government did in fact launch a very similar anti Jewish campaign using the media of that time, and in which Twinston Churchill personally took part, in which they were basically blaming the Bolshevik Revolution on the Jews and saying that the Jews were responsible not only for Bolshevism in Russia, but basically for all radical revolutionary movements which had troubled Europe for the last at that point one hundred and fifty year years.

And so, in one article in particular, written by Winston Churchill himself, who was the War Secretary of Great Britain, he put forth this idea.

He accused the Jews of having fomented and orchestrated the Bolshevik Revolution, and he further accused him of basically being behind all other revolutionary movements in Europe in the last one hundred and fifty years, and so on the surface, that was a devastating propaganda blow against the Jewish people, which had very tragic consequences because Adolf Hitler picked up on it.

This article was written by Churchill in I think it was February of nineteen twenty, and Churchill more or less echoed those same ideas in another writing, Mainkamp, which was published in nineteen twenty five, five years later.

And so one of the very clear things that I noted in my book is the influence over Nazi ideology that was exercised by this intense anti Jewish campaign by the British five years before Hitler wrote his seminal book, his Manifesto.

So what was Churchill trying to accomplish by this?

It turns out that it was really a very temporary campaign.

It only lasted a couple of years nineteen nineteen, nineteen twenty.

And that's one of the reasons why I'm not sure I would read too much into the current anti Jewish campaign, which I think we both agree is emanating primarily from great written and from their you know, they're extremely effective organs of state propaganda.

I think it's emanating from them today just as it was back in nineteen nineteen and nineteen twenty.

And it's one of the reasons I'm skeptical that this is going to have a long lasting effect is because it didn't before it was well.

I mean, of course, if you count Nazism in World War Two and all that, I guess it did, so maybe we shouldn't discount that aspect.

But in terms of what the British were trying to accomplish for their own policy ends, it was very short lived and they stopped doing it after a couple of years, and maybe in a sense they handed off the ball to the Germans after that.

But what they were trying to do, I argue in my book, was they were trying to shift the blame from the Bolsheviks for the Bolshevik Revolution from the jew I mean that is, from the British government, from the British Secret Services to the Jews.

And this is the thing that surprises most people.

They say, what are you talking about?

What did the British Secret Services have to do with the Bolshevik Revolution?

And in fact, they had everything to do with it.

The British government orchestrated not only the Bolshevik Revolution, but a number of revolutions preceding it, and a number of wars and other circumstances preceding it, which all were calculated to weaken the Russian Empire, to weaken the Tsarist regime in a very long term, persistent strategy which had been going on since the early nineties hundreds at least, and which no power on earth ever could have pulled off other than the British Empire.

And so this is one of the arguments that I make in my book which people often don't understand.

They say, oh, Richard, you're just trying to cover up for the Jews.

You know, you're just getting that seven thousand dollars, and you can.

Get It's really a various talking point that's out there today.

Like I'm looking around going okay, yeah, all right, fine, all right, yeah.

But you know people say that to me, you know, they they they think I'm trying to cover up for some reason or other, and I'm really not.

And in fact, I think it's on page two of my book, I basically concede the point that the Bolshevik movement was disproportionately Jewish in its membership and in its leaders ship, and I cite some reliable sources on that.

I can see the point right up front, and I make it clear I'm not contending that that's not what I'm contending.

What I am saying is that's only half the story.

And the other half of the story is that the Bolsheviks, whoever they were, had absolutely no capability of overthrowing the Russian monarchy, or the Russian Empire, or ultimately the Russian armed forces in the Russian Civil War.

And they had to do all three of those things, and the Bolsheviks had no capability to do that.

They had no resources to do it, they had no training or expertise to do it.

They literally had nothing that would be required to accomplish such a stupendous feet to overthrow the Russian Empire.

They could not do it.

They had no ability.

But the British were able to do it.

They had been working on that very project for three hundred years.

As I explained in my book, they saw Russia as their chief rival, their primary enemy in the world, and they worked literally for centuries to destroy them.

And this campaign to take down Russia reached a special intensity in the late nineteenth century and in the early nineteen hundreds, and just to give an example, one of the most devastating blows that was struck against the Russian Empire was the Russia Japanese War, which took place in what was it nineteen oh four, I think it started nineteen oh four and went into nineteen oh five.

Now that war was totally made in Great Britain.

The British had literally built the Japanese navy for them.

All those Japanese battleships were built in British shipyards, and then the British trained the Japanese how to run them, and then finally the British instigated the Japanese to pick a fight with Russia, which resulted in the destruction of the Russian fleet and the collapse, the near collapse of the Russian monarchy in nineteen oh five, the fomenting of the nineteen oh five Revolution, which forced its arm to create a Duma to create a parliament that was in opposition to him, and which ultimately became the engine of the revolution a few years later.

This was all done by Great Britain, and it was just one of many projects one of many operations they conducted over many years that were like sledgehammer blows against Russian power and Russian stability.

And the Bolsheviks couldn't do that.

The Bolsheviks they couldn't build a navy for Japan, they couldn't train the Japanese how to work that navy.

They couldn't instigate the Japanese government to attack Russia.

Nobody could do that.

In fact, no country on Earth could do that other than Great Britain at the time.

All three of those things that they had to do to make the Russo Japanese War happen were things that Great Britain was uniquely able to do, and nobody else was not, even other empires on the Earth at that time.

It was literally something that only England could do, and they did it, and they did many other things as well.

And so you have the Bolsheviks who were basically intellectuals and in most cases, well really kind of losers in life, you know, maladapted people, people who may have been very smart, but they weren't really very good at doing things in the real world.

These people, if they had not received massive state support from powers such as especially Great Britain, also Germany at one point.

If they had not received this kind of funding and support and supervision from great sovereign powers and great intelligence agencies, they literally would have not been able to accomplish anything in their lives other than sitting around in coffee houses and bickering with each other.

It was the only thing they knew how to do, really, So what happened was the British in their planning for how to defeat Russia, one of the things they did is they looked at the Russian Empire, this vast land mask composed of many different races, many different religions, many different ethnicities.

They examined all the races and ethnicities and religious groups and assessed what their grievances were against the Tsar, against the Russian monarchy.

And then they went in there, recruited them, funded them, trained them, coordinated them, and mate promises to them, if you play ball with us, we will give you x whatever it is you want.

So for the Polish nationalists, the Polish separatists, we will give you a free and independent Poland.

To the Finns, we will give you a free and independent Finland.

Same to the Baltic States, to the Ukrainians to the people in the Caucasian and republics will call them now, they weren't exactly republics then, but to each and every ethnic group they promised something, and the Jews were one of those ethnic groups.

The Jews were a very sizable and important minority within the Russian Empire who had what they thought were grievances against the government, against the Russian Empire, and who also had resources.

They had a worldwide diaspora which included a lot of influential, wealthy and powerful people.

So the Jews were a very promising ethnic group for the British to recruit for this project, along with all the other ethnic groups.

So to the people who say, oh, you know, you're just ignoring the fact that the Jews were participants in this, I'm not ignoring it at all.

I'm simply saying that they were participants in the same way and on the same terms that many of these other ethnic groups who were recruited by the British were.

So for example, if you look at the Polls now, the Polls actually were a real country.

I mean, they had a military, they had a great warrior tradition, a very fierce and warlike people going back for many centuries in Europe, so in some ways they had a lot more to bring to the table in terms of the kinds of help the British needed.

But at the time of the Russian Revolutions, the polls were completely powerless because they had been divided up.

There was no Poland.

Their country had been divided up completely between three great the German, Austrian and Russian Empires, and there was no Poland anymore.

And the Poles were never going to come back from that situation.

Left to their own devices with their country divided up between three such mighty empires as Germany, the Austro Hungarian Empire and Russia, they were not ever going to come back from that.

They were gone, they were done.

The only reason they came back is because the British came in and helped them once again.

By this campaign of many years of softening up the Russian Empire, destabilizing the Russian Empire, infiltrating it, subverting it, sowing the seeds of dissension between all the component subject peoples who lived in the Russian Empire, and then working closely with the Poles themselves directly making them promises, helping them organize their resistance, helping them organize their paramilitary forces which would ultimately become their national army, and then helping them once the revolution finally broke out in Russia, giving them aid and support, diplomatic support, funding, arms, everything that they needed.

And so once the revolution broke out, and I show in my book what you can get to this later, the revolution was totally that is the initial revolution of February nineteen seventeen revolution in which the Tsar was overthrown and the sort of liberal elements led by Kerensky took power.

This was totally coordinated by Great Britain and from the British embassy in Petrograd.

And this I show very clearly in my book.

But before I go into that, So once that revolution was instigated, and then the British continued to stabilizing the country after the liberal forces of the Duma took over, allowing the Bolsheviks to take over.

Once those two revolutions happened, especially the Bolshevik Revolution, then all the separatists immediately declared independence Poland, Finland, the Baltic States, the States, and the Caucauss Ukraine, many many states, the whole Empire just suddenly broke apart.

All these different territories, these provinces declared their independence, and many of them had very substantial armies.

All of them were being encouraged, equipped, funded, and otherwise helped by the British and played off in many cases against each other and against the Russian government and against the white Russians who were also being supported by the British.

And so here we have the real event that caused the Bolshevik takeover.

It wasn't the revolution that caused the takeover.

It was the Russian Civil War because when the boat when the Bolsheviks, Please, if you have any questions.

Or yeah, I'm getting there, that's interesting, just but go ahead and keep going, Okay.

So the Russian Civil War is where the rubber really met the road.

That's where the Bolsheviks actually took over.

And that was the one place where it becomes totally obvious that the British were the deciding force.

Because the Bolsheviks were led.

They appointed as their commander in chief Leon Trotsky, a guy who never served in the military in his life, had zero training or knowledge of military things, and they made him the commander of the Bolshevik forces by land and sea, and he supposedly won this gigantic Russian Civil War, which went from well, let's say roughly from nineteen eighteen to let's say nineteen twenty two.

It actually continued till nineteen twenty four, but it was largely over by nineteen twenty one.

But this war went on three, four or five years, depending on how you want to calculate it.

And this was a huge war.

Ten million people died in this war, ten million.

And it was a war in which the Reds were fighting against the whites, the Bolsheviks against the counter revolutionaries, who were the white Russian forces, basically the remnants of the Tsar's Army led by the Tsar's generals, battle hardened troops who had fought all through World War One for the Tsar troops who were really really knew how to fight, and they in addition to those white Russians, they were all the separatist armies I mentioned, all the different elements who are trying to break away from the Empire, all fighting against the Bolsheviks.

And then in addition, the Allied armies of intervention, because as early as nineteen eighteen, the Allies began putting troops on the ground in Russia.

They came in through the northern port of archangel The British, primarily sixty thousand British troops were stationed in Russia, as well as many troops from other nationalities.

There were thirteen thousand Americans.

There were basically troops from every Allied country, including Japan.

Japan actually had the most, and I believe they had if I remember right upwards of three hundred thousand Japanese troops because they had ambitions, Yes, they had ambitions in the east, and they went to take over the eastern part of Russia.

So there were all these foreign troops plus all the separatist troops from all the separatists areas, plus the White Armies, which are estimated to be as much as three hundred thousand, and the Allied armies were about two hundred thousand minus the Japanese contingent the separatists.

I don't know what the number is there, but just the Bolsheviks were basically limited to two cities.

They had Petrograd, they had Moscow, and they had some surrounding areas, and they had whatever Red militias they could muster.

But they were surrounded.

They were completely surrounded, hopelessly outnumbered, totally ill equipped, and completely helpless with all these enemy forces, Let's say in nineteen eighteen, early nineteen nineteen, all these enemy forces closing in around them, advancing on them.

And how did they win?

And their commander, the only commander they had, was Leon Trotsky, who was an egghead.

He was a guy who was coffee house debater and with literally no expertise to do anything else.

How did they do it?

And the answer is that the British helped them.

The British helped them in two ways, by hindering all the opposing forces and not allowing them them to finish off the Bolsheviks, and then by giving the Bolsheviks various kinds of support secretly covertly under the table, while openly pretending to support the anti Bolsheviks, but actually hindering them.

And I call this process the Vietnam before Vietnam, because we as Americans, at least those of us who are boomers, you know, we can remember this strange time.

I was just a kid in the sixties, but I remember very well the strange of circumstances of the Vietnam War.

Where there were these you know, these guys in pajamas, you know, the Vietcong, and they were supposedly beating us and all of our might and all of our equipment and all of our aircraft and everything we and you know, this is when the world was still run by the World War II generation, right, And I remember the shock of my parents.

They just couldn't understand it.

How are these guys in pajamas beating the United States of America And we have this whole mythology.

Well, it's because they of the purity of their hearts and the justice of their cause.

And you may remember, Tom, this was back in the I don't remember if it was the seventies or the eighties, but everyone started talking about this book by this General Yapp who had supposedly been the great military genius who won the Vietnam War for the North Vietnamese.

And I read this guy's book.

Everyone was talking about it.

At a certain point, it were all over the media saying, oh, this book.

Every American commander needs to read this book to find out how they beat us and how they won.

I read this book.

It was just pure kindergarten level communist agate prop There was nothing in this book that made sense about military strategy or anything else.

It was just all about, oh, the you know, the the proletariat united with the peasantry and this and that.

I mean just really really commsamol level, a grade school level communist propaganda of the most basic, silly type.

And that's what was in this guy's book.

And everyone was, including our American leaders and military people and intelligence people, were pretending this was a brilliant book that just totally explains why they beat us, And it was nothing of the sort.

It was not, and it didn't explain anything.

It was all a fraud.

And so there was no there was no great military strategy, that there was no secret to why the Communists beat us in Vietnam.

It wasn't a secret at all.

It was the very thing that Joe McCarthy and Richard Nixon and all those other anti communist leaders of the nineteen fifties said from the beginning.

They said that it was our own people who betrayed us.

And you may remember the whole anti communist movement of the nineteen fifties began with the question who lost China.

This is what got people up in arms.

Initially was the fact.

It was bad enough that somehow Stalin had taken over half of Europe, but then China suddenly fell to the Communists, and people were saying, how did this happen?

What happened?

That was the question who lost China?

And the answer that Joe McCarthy and all these anti communist crusaders came up was they said, it was an inside job.

It was our own people handing China over to the Communists.

That these scruffy revolutionaries led by Mao Maotseetung simply did not have the capability to overthrow Tchang Kai Sheek and his and the extraordinary support that he had from the West, or that he supposedly had that he used to have, and all of a sudden that support was withdrawn and it was given to the Communists.

And this was the basis of the McCarthyism, as it's called, and the whole anti communist movement of the nineteen fifties was people waking up to this astonishing and horrifying fact that our own people had betrayed us to the Communists for reasons unknown.

And this is why now today when you have people and we still have them even now in the in the era of Twitter and x and social media, we still have people leading the old propaganda that says, oh, how dare you, how dare you promote conspiracy theories?

Don't you realize that's that's, you know, a completely maladaptive way of looking at things, and it's obviously so untrue and you must have psychological problems.

And so we you know, we still have this this idea that if you say something that's different from the mainstream what the mainstream media or mainstream academia is telling you, that you must be doing it for deep seated emotional and psychological reasons.

And this whole attitude, this beating up on conspiracy theorists quote unquote and saying they're doing something wrong or they're doing something that shows they're unbalanced mentally.

This harks back to the nineteen fifties.

This is when they started pushing that idea very hard.

And it was precisely because the message of Joe McCarthy at l was getting traction with the mass of the people.

People were understanding he's right.

The communists couldn't have done this by themselves.

People in our own government let them do it.

And so what I'm saying in my book how the British invented Communism and blamed it on the Jews.

What I'm saying in that book is perfectly consistent with the later anti communists in the nineteen fifties and sixties.

It's perfectly consistent.

It's giving the same message.

It's saying that if you look at the history of communism all the way back to the very very beginning, you find the same thing.

You find that it's the ruling classes of the leading Western powers who made it happen, who allowed it to happen, and that these scruffy bands of revolutionaries and Red Guards or whoever, they simply didn't have the ability to do these mighty feats that are attributed to them.

They absolutely didn't.

And what's funny versus Dan and pop in here just a seconds say, this is why, you know, I changed my view on how I saw American politics, you know, starting with about halfway through the first Trump administration.

You know, previously that I would argue that I was, you know, pretty kind of typical anti you know, so disappointed by my own country that I would, you know, I would rather criticize it for imperial behavior rather than look as to how was it possible that we got to this point, And slowly over time it became no, no, we're just run by vandals.

These people aren't incompetent.

We're being run with Our country is being run by traders and you know, at every level and so and it became very obviously the Biden hunter that these people were just that was my entire argument throughout the entire time, was that, oh, these people were just selling us out to someone else.

And then when you asked them, when you go through the when you go through the okay, so who would they be selling.

Us out to?

Well, that's telling us out to Israel.

It wasn't Israel that that ran the Russia Gate thing that didn't go through the massade and of the massade might have been involved in it, but I all went through m I six because I don't want to g c h Q.

Right, Why why would they want to get rid of Trump?

Why would they want to do that?

What's the It doesn't make any sense.

Trump's a middle of the road you know from Bye bye Bye by common you know, us calculus, political calculus.

The guy's a centrist.

It's not even all that interesting, right, Like, why would you what?

So what about Trump was so threatening?

I mean, he was pro Israel and probably you know, the most pro Israel freaking president that we've had since I don't know Reagan, Like why would he you know, I'm probably even like misstating that one.

But you know why what is so threatening about Trump that he had to be taken down, that he had to be turned into you know, creamsickle hitler for you know, for lack of a better term, And like now you have to you know, the historyonics surrounding Trump, we're so over the top that it calls attention to the fact that the history onics are just so over the top, and you ask yourself why he's not even all that interesting rights as a political figure.

But when you dig into all of the policy prescriptions, you dig into what he was actually wanting to do, there's only one group of people whose power he actually threatened.

You start talking about NATO paying its own way, you start talking about the UN climate.

Change and this and that, none of that is an expression of quote unquote Jewish power unquote.

That's a thumb.

This is all coming directly out of the European you know, sitting at London, access of control through through the banking system and through the regulatory instead of the post World War two institutions.

Now the counter to everything you said so far, and I'm going to play Devil's advocate even though I don't believe it, and I'm making this a fear, which is to say the following.

Well, you do know that when you say British, you actually mean Jews.

Okay, I've heard that.

You know.

Hell, I used to say it, right, I've come you know, when I didn't understand the nuance of all this stuff, when I was on the path to trying to make a better model of how the world actually operates.

At one point, Yeah, I was one of those guys.

And I'm not that guy anymore, because you know, when the truth is put in front of you and you have the data that contravenes that.

Again, how can this let's put let's make it simple.

How can this shitty a little country have so much power over the entire world.

It's the same role.

That you've that you know, you asked that question is no different than the model that you've already put on the you've already put on the table for everybody to understand.

How did the Bolsheviks win.

They won by getting support.

How are you Why is Ukraine in the position that's in today because it's been getting un egregious levels of support?

Why is Iron an antipode to Israel?

Because all of these things.

And when you stop and you start stripping away the layers of the bullshit and the media vernier of this is the story you're supposed to believe in, you start to realize, no, the world is far more complicated than you think that it is so, and this story has played itself out, and this little psychodrama has played itself out many, many, many many times.

So in some ways, what I learned most from reading first your article and then your book was that the concept of the color Revolution, which is what you described early in this in the podcast you're describing the lead up to the Bolshevik Revolution, that period from nineteen oh five to nineteen seventeen, that was the laying the groundwork for what you would consider a color revolution we would consider it today.

And you know, and I've gotten to the point now where I go back and I look at the eighteen forties and the eighteen fifties here in the United States over slavery and I'm like, oh, look, it's the Color Revolutionary Playbook over and over again.

Once you get the blueprint, you can start overlaying.

And maybe it's not a one to one overlay, but when every time it's the British Foreign Office involved in, it quite kind of hard to, like, you know, not see the pattern.

Well, yes, and I I was about to say something else, but you when you brought up the American Civil War as an example of this kind of British essentially color revolution and uh and uprising and revolution a civil war which is artificially created by the destabilizing activity of foreign intelligence agencies, let's define it that way.

I happen to be writing my next book on that subject, which is coming out imminently.

It's the working title is Who Killed Lincoln?

The Case against England?

So I mean we can get into that later.

Yeah, happy to go, Happy to go there.

I know a couple, I know a couple of ladies over at Promethean Action that will agree with you.

We'll go ahead, right, But before before I go off on that tangent, I just want to take advantage of that moment to mention my forthcoming book.

But what I wanted to say about this just to reinforce this idea that the British did the Bolshevik Revolution in some ways.

In some ways my strongest source on that I relied very heavily on a British historian named Martin Gilbert, who was the official biographer for Churchill, approved and appointed by the Churchill family, and he wrote and essentially an official multi volume biography of church on all his achievements, which was approved by the family and would have been approved by Churchill himself.

So some people look at that and say, oh, well, that was totally biased in Churchill's favor.

Yes, absolutely it was, but that's what made makes it all the better for my purposes, because to me, drawing on Martin Gilbert's work is almost like bringing back Winston Churchill from the dead and having him speak for himself.

That's essentially what it is.

This was a guy who was officially appointed to do that, to be Churchill's apologist to all of human history, and he did a massive, multi volume work with absolutely exhaustive consummate research and sourcing, massive sourcing, much of it from archives not available to the general public or even to scholars.

So it was it was a massive you could say, propaganda effort to give Churchill a chance to explain himself to history.

And why that's good for me is because I can through through this work, I can say, well, look, Winston, since we've got you back from the dead to speak for yourself, how did we lose Russia?

How did that happen?

How did how You were the War Secretary during the Russian Civil War?

You were actually personally in charge of the Russian Civil War, and the British War Office was running that war.

They were remember, they had just won World War One and they had become the most powerful country in the world.

But the British were They had sixty thousand troops on the ground in Russia.

They had immediately sent forty thousand troops to seize the Caucasian oil fields, and they brought all these other troops in.

And Churchill was in charge of the whole shebang.

He was running all of those separatist movements I was talking about.

He was running the whole Allied intervention force.

The British were leading it.

He was running the White Russian Armies.

Russians were being funded, armed and supported in every way by Great Britain.

They didn't dare make a move without checking with the British War Office?

Is it okay if we do this?

Is it okay if we do that?

Winston Churchill was running that the entire massive theater of the Russian Civil War throughout its duration, and he was personally responsible and personally in a position to bring forth from that conflict any result that he wanted.

He had the power to do it because there was no other power.

There were just all these other powers competing with each other on Russian territory, that there was no Russian government.

The Bolsheviks, as I described, were just one of these many forces, and they had nothing gave them any advantage.

So through this work of Martin Gilbert, we can say, Winston, how did you blow this?

How did you let the Communists win?

And Churchill gives us an answer.

He says it very clearly.

He says, the Prime Minister Lloyd George did not allow me to defeat the Bolsheviks.

On the contrary, Lloyd George made very clear on multiple occasions in writing that he wanted the Bolsheviks to win, and he most definitely did not want the white Russians to win.

Churchill, and I believe him.

Churchill wanted the white Russians to win.

He was rooting for the white Russians and that was basically his job.

And if you read the history books, it says that the British and the whole Allied intervention force which the British were leading, was supposedly there to help the Russian the White Russians win and to defeat the Bullsheviks.

But Churchill himself, through his official biographer, says no, that's not what was happening at all.

Churchill says, I was trying to do that.

I was trying to fight the Bolsheviks.

I was trying to help the white Russians to win.

And Lloyd George, in his war cabinet meetings was clearly saying no, Winston, I'm not going to let you do that, because I want the Bolsheviks to win.

So this comes right from the horse's mouth, from Winston Churchill himself.

You can take it or leave it.

You can say, oh, well, maybe that's just church of defending himself, but it's massively documented, massively documented.

I relied very heavily on that book, in those portions of my book where I discussed the actual executive decisions made in the British government to help the Bolsheviks win.

And just to give you an example of the type of decision that Virtual was describing and that he was accusing Lloyd George of doing so.

For example, at one point Admiral Genie General Janikin was advancing from the south, a white Russian commander.

He was coming up from Ukraine from the Ukraine and advancing on Moscow, and Churchill wanted to give him all kinds of support logistic and otherwise, including economic support by opening up trade with those areas under Jenkin's command so that he could get money, which they always needed.

And Lloyd George totally nicks the idea.

He says, Janikon is an arch reactionary type of person.

We can't trust him.

He's not with the program.

He'll probably set up a military dictatorship we don't want, or he might put in he might bring back the Romanov dynasty and have a constitutional monarchy, and we don't want that either.

Lloyd George was absolutely on the record in writing saying he does not want to bring back that czar in any form, even in the form of a liberal constitutional monarchy.

He was totally committed to letting the Bolsheviks win, and there is circumstance after circumstance like this where something Winston Churchill wanted to do was mixed by Lloyd George always on those grounds.

No, we can't have those white Russians win because they're conservatives, because they're Trump, you know, basically, And.

Well, it's interesting we bring all that up.

So this is really fast, fascinating, right, So now let's go back to what we said where we started the podcast, which was the article by church in February twenty, nineteen twenty where he then blamed the Bolshevik revolution on the Jews.

So close that loop for us if you will, like, so, you know, if Churchill was stymied on this, right then you know and we know, and you make the argument in the book, if I remember correctly, you make the argument.

That he knew damn well that it wasn't the Jews that did this, right then why you know, if.

This is the case, then something here is not computing.

So as then asked the questions, Okay, so what changed or what forced Churchill?

What pressures was he under at that point in order to you know, make that statement of the world, which then effectively, you know, was picked up by Hitler and YadA yadayada, like all the things that we've talked about already in the podcast.

Sure, well, what happened is after World War One, the Russian nobility, is it, a number of Russian nobles started coming forward and telling what they knew and basically telling the story that the British had deceived them and betrayed them, that the British had enlisted their support.

And this includes members of the Russian royal family.

Basically the whole royal family was betrayed.

Sar Nicholas the second behind his back.

They were all going to the British and they were all being courted by the British ambassador, a guy named George Buchanan, and he was telling them, oh, look your cousin Nicky over there.

He's just a retrograde, reactionary conservative.

He doesn't understand the glories of liberalism like you guys do.

And basically what he promised them.

And again it was one of these situations where it was the Trump factor, you know, one hundred years before Trump, where he was the British ambassador was saying to these Russian noblemen and noble women.

He was saying look, your cousin Nikki, he's Trump, He's he's uh, he's a reactionary, he's a conservative.

We don't want that.

You you want to you want to be able to hold up your heads with all your fellow aristocrats in the advanced Western countries.

So you have to stick with us.

We're going to overthrow Niki and we're going to create a constitutional monarchy with liberal values such as we have in the in the West, and then you can be just like us.

And so the the Russian royal family and the Russian nobility generally generally were extremely receptive to this message.

They that's what they wanted.

They didn't want to be the bad guy of Europe anymore.

They didn't want to be always getting beaten up in the British press, specifically for being old fashioned and Nostogian not with it.

They wanted to be the cool kids on the block, and they wanted to be liberals, and they wanted to have a liberal government.

And this is what the British promised them.

And they betrayed their cousin, their relative the Grand dukes and the Grand duchesses.

They were all playing this game with the British and they betrayed him, and so when the Tsar was overthrown in February of nineteen seventeen, some call this the Conspiracy of the Grand Dukes because it was basically a palace coup.

It was the Tsar's own relatives who betrayed him to the Duma, and they back got behind the Duma as the new power in Russia, and they helped the armed forces to see that they should give their allegiance to the Duma, to the Parliament, not to their own relative, the Tzar.

This is how the Tsar was overthrown.

It was by the British embassy getting the Tsar's own family to betray them, but then to betray him, that is, but then after the Russian nobles played ball with the British in this way, after they betrayed the Tsar helped to overthrow him.

Then they were betrayed.

The British betrayed them next by bringing in the Bolsheviks or allowing the Bolsheviks in, and the Bolsheviks basically exterminated the Romanov dynasty.

Anyone they could get their hands on.

They killed them men, women, and children, but especially the male heirs.

They went on a program of exterminating them.

And again this is often you know, with these with the new anti Semites, the new anti Semitism, they'll say, well, this shows how terrible and barbaric these Jewish Bolsheviks were that they did this.

But again it's the Bolsheviks were one component in this gigantic British war machine, this gigantic British we can call it a color revolution, although we often think of color revolutions as being bloodless conflicts.

And this was a conflict in which ten million people died, the Russian Civil War, but the British were in charge of it.

And I'm convinced that all of the atrocities of what is called the Red Terror, the killing of that are the systematic hunting down, an extermination of the Romanov dynasty, the slaughtering of anybody in opposition.

I believe this all took place with the approval and even with the assistance of the British government, because for the simple reason that the British were always in a position to stop it if they wanted stop it, and they didn't.

And at one point after another, as Winston Churchill himself describes through his official biographer, every time there was an opportunity to stop it, the British chose not to stop it.

So anyway, that's a long winded introduction to my answer to your question.

So why did Churchill blame it on the Jews?

Because the Russian aristocrats began to speak out after World War One.

They were publishing books, articles, they were saying, hey, the British told me this, and then they had My whole family got wiped down and they so they were telling their story and it was starting to get uncomfortable for the British.

They were being accused of what they really did.

So I believe that Winston Churchill working with the official propaganda organs of the British Empire, people who had been during the war, with Wellington House, the War Propaganda Bureau, all these institutions.

I discussed this in my book.

I name names.

You can see the same people who were running the wartime propaganda apparatus were the same people who were helping Churchill do the anti Jewish campaign after the war.

They were the same individuals and it was a massive, massive campaign.

So Churchill was writing articles, giving speeches saying the Jews did it.

The Jews caused the Bolshevik Revolution.

They caused all these revolutions, and then they published the Protocols of the Elders of Zion for the first time in a British edition, and this was clearly done.

The people who did it, the translators and everybody connected with that project were all British military intelligence people at a very high level.

And they published this book and they translated the Protocols of the Elders of Zion into English and they came out with a very prestigious English edition which was published through a prestige press in England that was known for doing work for the British Crown, for doing books like well, the Anglican Prayer Book, the King James Bible, the things that were Crown copyrights owned by the Crown.

They this was one of the prestigious houses that published that sort of book, and they're the ones who were chosen to publish this book, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and it was massively promoted the rollout of this book through the British press and positively promoted while Churchill was out there, you know, making clear to the people that he personally endorsed this idea that a Jewish cabal, had invented communism, had done all these communist revolutions, all revolutions going back to the French Revolution and even the attempted revolution of the Bavarian Illuminati back in seventeen seventy six.

Churchill himself accused him of this and in doing so, and he cited certain authors such as Nesta Webster, who was a famous conspiracy author of that time, who had massive connections with the British intelligence and propaganda apparatus of Her brother was a big British intelligence guy, and her father was a huge British banker, very one of the most powerful men in the country.

She was obviously establishment all the way this Nest Webbs, but she wrote these conspiracy books in which she promoted the idea that occultic secret societies were the moving forces behind most historical events, including the French Revolution and other revolutions.

So she was mostly blaming the Freemasons and the Illuminati, and particularly a clique of German occultists who she claimed had taken over the Masonic Lodgist But under the influence of Churchill, who was promoting her from his lofty place as War Secretary directly under his influence, she started changing her story and putting more emphasis on the Jews, and instead of blaming these German occultists who were working for the Prussian monarchy, that was her original theory that she put forth in her book on the French Revolution.

Under Churchill's influence, she started saying, yes, it was the German occultists and the Prussian monarchy, but also the Jews, and the Jews were working with them, the Jews with their agents.

And with each success of one of her books, the Jewish element got stronger and stronger because she was taking her cue from Churchill and the other British propagandists, and so what they were covering up was not only the British role in the Bolshevik Revolution, but in all these other revolutions that preceded it.

Because what I showed in my book and in my up forthcoming book Who Killed Lincoln, I go even more into depth on the nuts and bolts of this British color revolution apparatus that actually did the French Revolution.

It actually they actually the British actually, I don't know if I can quite say they caused the French Revolution and the initial one in seventeen eighty nine.

They were certainly, they certainly had a hand in it.

But much more importantly and decisively, the British hijacked the French Revolution.

They brought in the worst elements, the extremists, the Jacobins, who did the reign of terror and who killed the king and Queen.

And this accusation was made by, among others, Thomas Jefferson, who was US ambassador to France.

He was the first US ambassador after the American Revolution, replacing Benjamin Franklin in that role, and Jefferson was there in seventeen eighty nine when the revolution broke out.

He and the Marquis de Lafayette were actually complicit.

They were partially complicit in sparking the revolution.

They actually supported the idea of trying to push King Louis the sixteenth into adopting a constitution and having a constitutional monarchy.

So they were actually doing that, and then they found their plans foiled by the strange force of these so called Jacobins and these Jacobin clubs, from whom emanated the reign of terror, the guillotine, and eventually the murder of the King and Queen.

So Jefferson himself said, the British were behind it, speaking from a position of knowledge, and he accused several of the radical leaders who waged the Reign of Terror of being on the British payroll.

And he spoke very certainly about this.

But it's not just Jefferson.

There's other evidence as well, such as it's very clear that the British had set up a massive infrastructure of what we now called what we would now call them NGOs, of supposedly independent groups which had been created by citizens and were not supposedly run by the government.

But these were groups which had such names as the London Revolution Society, the London Correspondent Society, and these groups were the French liberals, the ones who got the French intellectuals who got behind the revolution.

They worshiped these British reformers, these English groups that were pushing for republican revolution all over the world, and the French naively just adopted this British program from this British line and really kind of worship to these people.

And to the point where the British the French started an emulation of these British groups.

The French started their own parallel groups with the similar names.

There was a revolutionary society in Paris that they created, and then they created these Jacobin clubs.

They called them Glube de Jacobin, and they used the English word club to describe them as a specific and deliberate reference to the club, the political clubs in England that they were imitating.

They were so proud that they were taking over the English example that they wanted everybody to know it, because they felt that now we're on the side of the Angels, we're going to be liberal like the British.

And the British did the same thing to the to the French that they later did to Russia.

They recruited all the liberals, They used the liberals to give them an in, to give their agents and their operatives an inn into the French government, into the French elite, and then they betrayed the French people by giving them an extremely illiberal government and a blood bath.

So the Russian Revolution was kind of a repeat of what they had already done in the French Revolution, and both times British operations, and then of course there were all the revolutions in between which Churchill was talking about blaming the Jews on them, which were especially the revolutions of eighteen forty five, I mean eighteen forty eight, excuse me, where the whole continent of Europe suddenly exploded in revolution.

And I show, I think pretty convincingly in my forthcoming book Who Killed Lincoln, that the these eighteen forty eight revolutions were personally masterminded by Lord Palmerston, who was the Prime Minister at that time.

And Palmerston was an extremely powerful figure in that he ran the British foreign policy for well off and on almost continually for thirty five years because he was he did two terms as Foreign Secretary, two terms as Prime Minister, and so during this whole period he was really setting all the policy, the foreign policy, and he was running this tremendous spy network all over Europe and also America.

And the cover for his spy network was a network of they're sometimes called secret societies, but there was a network of these societies.

They were revolutionary secret societies.

The first one was called Young Italy, was formed an Italian revolutionary named Giuseppe Mazzini, who was a British agent, as I think I show convincingly in my book, and he started Young Italy, which was supposed to organize revolution in Italy and moving towards the unification of Italy, which was a British goal.

They wanted to unify Italy to be a counterweight against the influence of France and Austria, which were basically running Italy because it was all broken up into small pieces, so it was easy for these other powers to run.

The British wanted to unify Italy and have a balance of power between Austria, Italy and France, lessening the power of France and Austria.

So Giuseppe Mazzini and the other Italian patriots such as Garibaldi who came out of Mazzini's movement, He was one of Mazeni's followers.

These were all these people were all run from London.

The whole movement was on from London.

And after Young Italy, Mazzini then found a Young Europe and then started creating spinoff groups in every country Young France, Young Germany, Young Poland.

There was a Young England, and there was a Young America.

And I showed in my book that it was from this Young America branch of the Mazzini network that the whole conspiracy to cause the Civil War to cause, the secession and then ultimately to kill Lincoln all came out of this Young America group, which was part of this Palmerston's network.

Interesting.

So I mean, I'm as I'm listening to you talk, and and I've been and I've been purposefully not interrupting you because I wanted to let you lay out, you know, as many of your arguments as you would like here, because I think this is these are aspects of history.

Whether I can push back on them or I can't push back on them, I'm not going to attempt to try.

It's for the listeners to, you know, do with what they will.

But what I'm going to say is, as I'm listening to you speak, I'm just watching the I'm just seeing the parallels everywhere today, all over the United States.

I don't care if we're talking about the United States, we're talking about this place, where that, Germany, France, what does Russia.

It's all the same thing, over and over and over again.

And you know these are you know, you you talk about you know the revolutions of eighteen forty eight, and all I could think it was the Arab spring under Obama.

Like I mean, it's the same thing and we know this the same right.

And we know the Muslim b otherhood is the City of London creation, and we know all these things, and so you know it's it's and they're doing they're running the same playbook here in the United States right now.

The point made way back at the beginning of the podcast, I think it is the most important part here, and I think we should probably high it up here now and I'll just bring you back on the show and we'll talk about this again after your book comes out, because I can't wait to have you go through that as well as the following, which is that listen to think about everything that Richard's talked about, and then go back to what he said at the beginning, which is that they pick on the groups that have a grievance, and they build that grievance into a thing, and they turn it into a and they turn it into something real they think a nebulous grievance, and they turn it into a political movement, and then they use that as a means by which to start setting groups against each other domestically.

And we can do we can do the math now, folks.

I don't need to paint that fucking picture for you, and just like we don't just like we can do the same math on what they've done in Ukraine between Ukrainians and Russians by you know, over and over and over again.

And that is the that is your that is your your receipt, as it were, that you're never going to get a you know, the rigs are never going to stand up and say, yeah we did it, Yeah it was us.

They're never gonna admit it.

They're never gonna, you know, we're never gonna no one's ever gonna put them in court and prove it or this or that anything else.

This is for history.

This is the way things work.

And we have to be savvy enough to be able to not stare, not be, not be hypnotized by the shiny thing being dangled in front of us.

And look at who's holding the thing, the shiny thing that's being dangled in front of us, and what bothers me is I can see it very clearly.

Now you start going through this young Europe, young Italy, young Germany, Young America, and now we have the and now we have this rapidly anti Israeli, anti Jewish America first group running around radicalizing the next generation of being Americans.

And I can see it.

I call bullshit on it.

I know where that's coming from.

And I don't care if I'm wrong about it.

I'm gonna be flying Frank And honest, that's not your job, Richard, That's my job.

My job is to be the you're the historian, You're the it's my job to be the the call bullshit on all this.

And that's what I'm seeing.

And you know, from ten eight, twenty twenty three, ten seven happens a bunch of you know, Hamas attacks Israel.

On ten eight, I start watching the entirety of the social media space landscape change overnight, after thirty years of us not being allowed to complain about the Jews and anyway it matters to perform, all of a sudden, every every third rate, anti semi imaginable is getting amplified across every social media algorithm there is on the planet.

Yeah, and I'm asking why.

And I've been watching it just play itself out for two years now.

And you know who works for whom and this and everything else.

You know, it's all a very complicated mess.

What's that in Yahuo's role at this point, God, God's only no right.

You know what's Qatar's role at this point?

God's only no right.

My point is is that what I'm seeing from Donald Trump's perspective, and when I'm seeing the Trump administration execute on is calling no, I know where this all comes from, and he's going after the source this time.

And that's why I think he went and met with the king, and that's why I think the king itself, I think the crown is in play for the first time in a long long time.

I'm watching him flip one of their biggest assets, Qatar, to his call.

I'm watching him become the most.

Powerful politician in Israel and not give the Israelis everything they want either.

I'm watching all of these things play themselves out.

And then I'm watching how he's attacking in the financial markets, which I don't want to go into here.

I don't think it's germained in this podcast, but I talked about it in a variety of different places.

When you put what Richard's talked about today with the things that I've been noting in the in the Great Game of Global Capital, I think a pretty compelling picture emergence.

So what's actually going on now and we'll see if we're right ultimately.

But I think this has a been This has been a fascinating thing.

Is there anything else you wanted to touch on before we to kind of close everything out that we might have not gotten out the door here?

I think we covered all the bases, tom.

Okay, okay, So as always tell everybody where they can find you, where they can find your work, and we'll go from there.

Well, you can find my books on Amazon and wherever good books are sold.

I'm going to say the titles again.

Sure, how the British invented communism and blamed it on the Jews.

That's my book which is currently out.

It's coming out in German in a few days as a matter of fact.

And my forthcoming book, which will be out in a few weeks is it's called Who Killed Lincoln?

The Case against England.

Looking forward to that as well.

I'm looking forward to reading that one.

And of course you are you still writing on substack?

Oh yes, that's right, I'm on substack, and of course I'm on X at real Richard Poe.

I have website Richard pow dot com.

Sure I think that covers it.

All, right, excellent as well as always, Richard, thank you very much for your time and your diligence on these things and for to help, you know, eliminate part a part of history that a lot of people don't want people to know about.

And it's you know, history is complicated.

You know this is not the only angle on history, but you know we need to, you know, show this one versus the one that we begin on a daily basis, and then we you know, get a nice complicated picture of messy human affairs.

So with that said, on TfL twenty set TfL seventeen twenty eight on Twitter, Patroon slash gold ghost guns, which is how we pay the bills around here.

And with all that said, you all be well, and you take care and keep your stick on the eyes.

Born Born fil d