Why are the Rockefellers Being Scapegoated by Fake 9/11 Truthers?

As usual, I am not presenting a thoroughly documented argument here, because that would require far more time and effort than I can spare. What I want to do instead is reflect on some research I've been doing in my spare time, in particular in my skimming through parts of a book called The Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People.

It is a bit of a tome, and relies to an extraordinary degree on unnamed sources within British and American intelligence services, which means that it could be an utter fraud for all we know. Having read some of it though I think the truth, as usual, is slightly more complicated. In other words, I think that much of what the book reveals is factual, that some parts may or may not be, and that the book by its nature reveals quite a bit about the complex game of cat and mouse between different elements of the western economic and political elite--namely the Zionists and the "not necessarily Zionist" who at times could alternatively be described as "Arabists", "Whites", "Anglos" (American or British), Germans, "Fascists", "WASPs", "conservatives", etc. based on the time period and who is accusing them of what. This is a similar complexity to that which relates group terms such as "Zionists", "Communists", "liberals", "socialists", "Jews", etc. This is not to validate the various associations that the use of these terms by various parties imply, this is simply to lay a conceptual groundwork that can help sort out the conflicts that have through history played out, particularly since the turn of the last century, through the events of 9/11 and beyond with more nuance than the deliberately vague and ambiguous "Satanic New World Order Cult" propounded by Alex Jones and his ilk--i.e. by the fake 9/11 truth movement.

To begin to understand the jumble of claims and counter claims that make searching for the real truth about history so difficult we can simply deconstruct the general "NWO" myth promoted by Alex Jones. What most "Jonesheads" don't realize is that Alex Jones has simply repackaged older claims that until 9/11 were typically associated with the political right wing fringe, and that are not as many would have us believe totally without merit. It all goes back at least to the emergence of the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" but since it seems that the Protocols themselves were written to manipulate people's understanding of the nature of the conflict we can presume that the "real" conflict predates them. My own guess is that the conflict began in earnest with the enlightenment in europe, when people finally started to come out of the religious stupor of the middle ages/dark ages. This led in relatively short order to the rise of the merchant class, to the overthrow of traditional monarchies, to Europeans' settlement of the Americas--in other words to a monumental shift in power relations between European peoples and the rest of the world as well as within individual European countries.

The typical conspiratorial world view usually traces the role of a single force in significant events, though most allow for that force to be taken over from within. Douglas Reed, for one, blames Illuminati infiltration of Freemasonry by one Adam Weishaupt for changing the direction in which the force of the masonic tradition of anti-religious secret association took. This allegedly happened in time for the Illuminati to direct the course of events that culminated in the French reovlution, which Reed and many others see as one of the first victories of a "world revolution". This world revolution persisted, produced Marxism and the Communist movement, and scored another major coup when the Bolsheviks came to power after the overthrow of the Tsar. Whatever the intellectual and ideological origins of Zionsim, i.e. whatever Theodor Herzl's influences and inclinations, we know that with the emergence of the Protocols many people began to associate Zionism and Jews generally with the notion of a long running "world revolution" with the goal of establishing a new world order ruled by a single global government. This powerful accusation colored much of the most critical analysis of national and global events and essentially established a line between what to this day is considered "mainstream" history and political commentary and that which is considered "fringe", "marginal", "beyond the pale", "conspiratorial", etc. Alex Jones has simply followed in the tradition of those who exploit this divide in order to make money. He is not a scholar or journalist as much as a showman and as such serves not to shed light on the root of the modern "liberal/conservative", "left/right" divide. Divided the world is, however, and understanding how and why is crucial to overcoming that division.

Whether one believes or not that there is indeed a single force directing world events in a particular direction, namely towards one world government, there are things that we can fairly easily determine to be factual or not, like 9/11. Understanding who promotes such untruths is one big part of making sense of history and the roles played by different individuals and groups. Also important is understanding how those groups play and are played against each other. For no other reason that it seems to be how the conflict is perceived, it makes sense to begin with groups associated with the left/right paradigm. This brings us to the book I mentioned at the beginning, which claims that there has been a "secret war" waged against "the Jews" by members of the western economic elite, including the Rockefeller family. Since in modern times Jews have been associated with labor rights, liberalism, if not progressivism and communism, they can be said to be fairly squarely on the "left" side of the left/right paradigm. Since the Rockefellers are seen as representing wealth and business interests they are assumed by most to represent the "right" and its positions on wealth, labor, and conservative political values, if not fascism. One of the claims in the book is that Nelson Rockefeller had collaborated with Nazis and as such was blackmailed by Zionists into supporting the creation of Israel which he, as an alleged fascist sympathizer, was in reality opposed to. The book plays with the idea that such people may or may not have disliked Jews, but that in the end what mattered was that oil was money and Arabs had the oil so Zionism had to be opposed.

To those whose understanding of WW2 comes from mainstream sources, this may seem like a reasonable indictment of the Rockefellers. Of course a mainstream understanding of history assumes that the Nazis were evil personified, while a more accurate view would place them in a position no worse than the allies. So we find that the holocaust narrative, for example, the extermination myth in particular, serves to maintain the effectiveness of blackmail that involves suppressing or exposing what role people like the Rockefellers or for that matter Prescott Bush played as war profiteers. War profiteering is generally not considered all that embarrassing, but when it involves collaboration with the most evil regime in the history of the world things change somewhat. Thus we see that a book that is fully on the side of "the Jews" sees no shame in revealing that the Zionists blackmailed Nelson Rockefeller into supporting the Zionist project that (they allege) he otherwise opposed.

TO BE CONTINUED...