Rouble Nationalization – the Way to Russia’s Freedom. Nikolay Starikov

Читать онлайн.
Название Rouble Nationalization – the Way to Russia’s Freedom
Автор произведения Nikolay Starikov
Жанр История
Серия
Издательство История
Год выпуска 2011
isbn 978-5-459-01703-8



Скачать книгу

month later. It would be interesting to find out where, because it would shed light on many things…

      I do not know much about the following years of the founder of the 'printing machine' in France. But I do know what happened to the founder of the Bank of England. As we remember, William III of Orange, the English king, had a deal with bankers. And he kept his promises. Possibly because his death was also very timely. In March 1702 he passed away in the Kensington Palace of… (not again?!) injuries he got as a result of a fall off his horse.[93] Could this have happened? Yes. Only two facts seem suspicious: the similar death of the Duke of Berry and the official reason of William's death as it was announced. What was it exactly that caused his death? William died of pneumonia, which was a complication to a broken shoulder, which the King broke when he fell off the horse. Who would have thought that a broken shoulder can start pneumonia? What is the connection between a fracture and pneumonia? It is all rather interesting, is it not? And rather suspicious, too…

      The founder of whatever it is, is needed for a figurehead. It is this king that signed all the laws that the bankers needed, he gave them everything they needed at the time. The following kings would receive the established system as legacy. And the secrets of William's agreements died with him and his descendants were left with the King's stern look from the full-dress portrait. The Bank of England would be a given entity for the new monarchs, certain legacy and an irreversible decision of their ancestor.[94]

      It was high time they started thinking of further steps in establishing world hegemony. There had always been one means to achieve that – by declaring a war. The British elite, led by bankers, added another one to the world's geopolitical arsenal, and it was special operations. Both should be generously accompanied with money, seeing that now it was made out of nothing. The War of the Spanish Succession was the beginning of a long way of the 'printing machine' to the July morning in 1944 in Bretton Woods, where the pound sterling passed the baton to the dollar. When it was time to change location the 'printing machine' moved overseas where it was more secure.

      But before that there was WWI which destroyed the golden rouble and the golden Deutsche Mark. They were followed by the currencies of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the Ottoman Empire. Only one step was left till the world supremacy, only one world war. And the scenario of the Second World War which was written in London was very different from the one that happened in reality.

      …And the most important rule is that there are no rules.

      3

      Six Spy Stories, or The Amazing Adventures of Ribbentrop in Russia

      The Englishman is superior to the German in one respect – that of pride. Only the man who knows how to give orders has pride.[95]

Adolf Hitler

      Analysing results of battles I inevitably came to the conclusion that it was not only courage of infantry and audacity of cavalry and artillery that determined the result of many battles but mostly this damned invisible weapon called spies.

Napoleon Bonaparte

      It is always pleasant to fight with someone else's fists. The advantages are numerous: all the losses are incurred by someone else's economy all the crimes are committed by someone else's army. Another country spends the money, another people exhausts its economy. And can you fight without stressing your own economy? No, this is simply not possible. Military expenses can bring any successful nation to its knees. This is the reason why it has always been important to enter a war last. Therefore, no matter how you look at it, it is good when someone else is fighting instead of you. This country buys weapons and equipment, food and other goods. During wars prices always grow, factories always work at their full capacity, the economy develops – and all of this happens to the country which is not at war, of course.

      But this is not the most important thing. The most important thing is that gold flows in the right direction. In order to start a 'printing machine' on a global scale, to get an unprecedented emission of hard currency flowing, it was necessary to eliminate the possibility of creating a currency secured by gold. For this purpose it was required to use up practically all the world's reserves of the yellow metal. Such a possibility could be provided by a world war and preparations were being made. A new hegemony of a global currency was to crown an unprecedented war, where any power capable of resistance would be ground to dust. Millions of Europeans were to perish so that all nations would agree to abandon their sovereignty.

      But there was one problem. The advantages of standing aside and joining the fight at the last moment were too obvious. As well as the disadvantages of a gruelling war. Therefore, there would be no fools willing to start a war. Everyone wanted to be 'second'. So, what should be done in such a situation? One should help someone else to be 'first'…

      Practically everyone must have heard of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. Have you ever wondered why all other treaties are called treaties and only the treaty of non-aggression between Germany and the Soviet Union persistently called a pact? And why Western historians and our liberals keep trying to paint this document and the story of its execution black? Because this pact crossed out the scenario of a world war drawn up in London. History started developing in a completely different direction. By a miracle the Anglo-Saxon world retained its hegemony over the planet; this miracle was Hitler's unrestrained Anglophilia…

      But let us move on to the facts. When you next hear someone say that Stalin is to blame for initiating the Second World War, that it is the pact with Hitler that helped it to begin, remember that these are all lies.[96] If one studies the facts scrupulously enough, one will realise that it is simply impossible to blame the USSR for initiating the Second World War. Therefore, one could only assert the latter maliciously or out of ignorance.

      It was not until 1st April, 1939 that Hitler, who had had no plans for a war against Poland, ordered them to be drawn up.[97] Fall Weiss, which was accepted ten days later, specified the date of the strike against Poland – 26th August, 1939. That means that in April, when there had been no negotiations between the USSR and Germany, Hitler was already planning to destroy Poland and was planning to do so in August. The text of Hitler's plan contains the following phrase: 'Russia's interference, if it were capable of it, would still be very unlikely to help Poland…'[98] This suggests that in April 1939 Hitler saw the USSR as his potential enemy. What does it mean? It means that when setting the date of the beginning of the war, the Führer was not guided by signing a pact with Russians. What is more, no one in Germany could even have dreamt of such a pact back in April 1939. The USSR signed the non-aggression treaty with Germany on 23rd August, 1939. It would seem that it should have let Hitler off the leash and one would have expected the Germans to proceed with their plans concerning Poland straight away. And yet, they did not. Two days after executing the treaty with the USSR, the German leader altered his plans and changed the planned date of attacking Poland. On 25th August, 1939, Hitler postponed the invasion until 1st September, 1939. After signing the pact in Moscow, Hitler changed the date of the beginning of the war. AFTER that! Thus, we can see that in defining the date of the first strike Hitler was always guided not by his arrangements with the USSR but by completely different motives.

      And now let us try to dot all the is and cross all the t's. Let us pose one direct question: did the non-aggression treaty executed between Hitler and Stalin make defeating Poland easier? The honest answer is: it certainly did. And now let us pose another direct question: would Hitler have declared war on Poland without a non-aggression pact with the USSR? The facts say unequivocally that he would have done. Preparations for war were going at full speed and did not depend on negotiations with the Kremlin.[99]

      Now, another couple of questions. What is the main task of the leader of any nation? Is it the prosperity of their own country and people or the prosperity of a different country and people? What is more important for this leader, saving their own people from participating in a war and avoiding



<p>93</p>

http://encyklopedia.narod.ru/bios/gov/ko nigen/england/stewart/william3/william3.html.

<p>94</p>

Do you know who William Ill's heir was? This is quite interesting. Apparently, William III, who dethroned James II, was married to James's daughter called Mary Stuart. The defeated king had two daughters, and the second one was called Anna. This charming creature publicly betrayed her father and joined her sister's husband under the 'influence' of John Churchill, who later became her 'blue-eyed boy'. William of Orange and Mary had no children, and therefore Anna Stuart became the heiress to the throne. Just like in mathematics, changing the order of addends (kings) did not change the sum (the right for the throne) for this girl.

<p>95</p>

Statement of 22.07.1941 (Adolf Hitler, Norman Cameron, R. H. Stevens, Hugh Redwald Trevor-Roper. 1941-1944: His Private Conversations. Enigma Books, 2000, P. 11).

<p>96</p>

Do not help those who lie to you – they always try to draw you into the field of emotions and not facts. Take a small step – say the there was no Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, there was just a non-aggression treaty between the USSR and Russia.

<p>97</p>

Please note that Hitler, according to historians, was going to conquer the whole world but for some reason half a year before the beginning of the war he still had no plans to attack Poland which would be the starting point. The Fiihrer will start the war without any aggressive plans against England or France. This is a rather strange aggressor, is it not? Or Hitler was for some reason convinced that London would not protect Poland.

<p>98</p>

NarochnickayaN. A., Falin V.M. The Score of the Second World War. Who started the war and when? Moscow: Veche, 2009. P. 76

<p>99</p>

It was not by accident that I give you a brief story of swift rapprochement of Germany and the USSR in August 1939. Dates are essential here. This is what the chief of the German Army General Staff, France Haider, wrote in his diary on 15 August, 1939: 'No changes are expected until the evening of 19 August. No changes in operation of public transport until 22 August… The cancellation of the party rally should be kept secret… The location and time of strikes, the date of the surprises remain unchanged'. (Haider E War private journal of Generaloberst Frans Haider… [United States] : A.G. EUCOM, 1947.). That means that the Germans were working hard on preparing their offensive operation against Poland. Despite the fact that on 15 August, 1939 there was no pact with Russians – there was not even a draft, no negotiations are being held. There was nothing and yet the German military machine was actively preparing for war. Even on 4 August there was no certainty that Stalin would change his opinion concerning Germany. This shows in the cable from the German ambassador, Schulenberg, from Moscow: "The Soviet Government is actually more inclined to improve the relations between Germany and the USSR, but the old mistrust towards Germany is not yet extinct. My general impression is that the Soviet Government is determined to sign an agreement with England and France…' We can read this… in Churchill's book. (Churchill W. The Second World War. Volume 1: The gathering storm. London: Cassell, 1964). But contemporary liars in history only try to sound plausible to the ignorant. They appeal to emotions. But once you open a book, even by Churchill, who was not particularly friendly to Russia, all accusations dissolve as mist in the morning. Do not believe liars in history. Read books and judge for yourself.