How the British Invented George Soros, Color Revolutions and Communism: Noor Bin Ladin Interviews Richard Poe
How the British Invented George Soros, Color Revolutions and Communism: Noor Bin Ladin Interviews Richard Poe
Discussing Poe's latest article, "How the British Invented Communism (and Blamed It on the Jews)"
SUMMARY: In my latest article, “How the British Invented Communism (and Blamed It on the Jews),” I explain how the British secret services developed “color revolutions” as a technique for defeating larger, more populous, nations, from within. I offer evidence that the French and Russian Revolutions were both “color revolutions” instigated by Great Britain, and that communism was created by British intelligence as a weapon to subvert rival governments abroad, and to curb the power of the middle-class “bourgeoisie” at home. Noor Bin Ladin discusses these topics with me in her very first video podcast (her earlier ones were audio only). I was honored to be chosen for the pilot video. Thank you, Noor! Taped April 18, livestreamed April 22, 2023. — RICHARD POE
TRANSCRIPT
How the British Invented George Soros, Color Revolutions and Communism: Noor Bin Ladin Interviews Richard Poe
Noor Bin Ladin: Hey, Richard.
Richard Poe: Hey, Noor. How you doin’?
Noor Bin Ladin: Great, thanks. It’s great to be here with you for the first video podcast of Noor Bin Ladin Calls.
Richard Poe: I’m so excited.
Noor Bin Ladin: Yeah, it’s great to have you back. I mean, for those who follow me on Twitter and who have been listening to the podcast in the audio format, they’ll be very familiar with you and will know a lot about your work already, but I thought it would be very fitting, considering our close collaboration, that you would be first for the video format. Also considering that I really wanted to talk to you about your latest article which you published earlier this year. [0:42 minutes]
Richard Poe: Sounds good.
Noor Bin Ladin: Yeah. As I like to refer to you, for those who are finding out about you for the first time, you’re the OG Regime Fighter, and you’ve been calling out the globalists since the early ‘80s, as I’ve mentioned also previously, and I had actually asked you to pull up the very first article where you were denouncing the globalists and you very kindly went back into your archives and found that piece of work you did, which I have right here, and it was for the Syracuse New Times, your first newspaper job, and it was entitled “The Dilemma of Democracy,” and you were basically calling out the Trilateral Commission. So we’re talking about three decades ago, four, four decades ago. [1:39 minutes]
Richard Poe: It’s hard to believe so much time has flown…
Noor Bin Ladin: And since then you’ve done amazing work…
Richard Poe: …yet all the issues are so similar today.
Noor Bin Ladin: Sorry. Go ahead.
Richard Poe: Well, thank you very much. Thank you, thank you. You know, I, as we’ve talked about before, Noor, my original goal in life was to be a novelist, and I kind of fell into being a journalist because it seemed a more practical thing to do. But, once in that field, my model was really the so-called underground journalists of the Sixties underground press. I tried to be as much like them as possible, or at least as I thought they had been, in the sense of being independent people who spoke truth to power, quote unquote, people who exposed the deep state fearlessly and without self-censorship. [2:44 minutes]
And I have tried to do that as much as I could, in my life, but of course I discovered quickly what every journalist discovers, the truth that George Orwell told us long ago, in his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, that there really is no underground, there is no resistance. It’s all been coopted, compromised, penetrated, and, of course, you may remember, in Nineteen Eighty-Four, the main character Winston Smith, he tried to make contact with the underground, the Brotherhood, I think it was called, and it turned out the whole outfit was run by the secret police, the Thought Police. [3:31 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: And, unfortunately, that’s really not just a figment of Orwell’s imagination. That’s how it really works in our world today. And so I slowly but surely came to grips with that truth, and I came to grips with the truth that, if I was going to work as a journalist, as a writer, as anything in the media field, I would have to be like everybody else, to some extent, controlled opposition. There’s really no way to avoid it. [4:03 minutes]
If you work in the field of media, there are things you may say, and there are things you most definitely cannot say. So, I’m very complimented that you call me the OG Regime Fighter, and I have tried to fight for the truth, as much as I can, but it’s, I’m afraid it’s been a bit sporadic, because it’s not always possible. [4:26 minutes]
You try, here and there, to say a little bit more than you’re allowed to say, and you usually get in big trouble. Sometimes you get fired. And you keep on going. [4:41 minutes]
But basically, since I was, I think, 25 years old, I’ve worked, pretty much, in the media, solely, as a working journalist, as a professional writer, in different capacities. I’ve worked in magazines, newspapers. For about ten years of my life, I was actually a full-time author. I had a very good publisher who believed in me and they just kept giving me book deals, and that was my work, for about ten years, was just writing books and nothing else, and that was a wonderful thing which very few writers get a chance to do. [5:24 minutes]
So I’ve been around. I’ve seen every end of things, in the media, just about. And I ended up working at a think tank. It was the David Horowitz Freedom Center, as it’s now called, and there I co-wrote a book with my then-boss David Horowitz, and that book came to be, well, that book was called—and still is called—The Shadow Party. [5:55 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: And it was co-written by me and David Horowitz, and it was the first book to expose George Soros and his role in color revolutions around the world, in overthrowing governments in various countries. [6:12 minutes]
And what happened is, the book got picked up by Glenn Beck, and he made a three-part series about it called “The Puppet Master.” [6:20 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: This was in 2010, when “The Puppet Master” was aired on Fox News, and I was featured on the show. I was interviewed. And Glenn, bless his heart, he just promoted the hell out of our book on the show, very kindly. And the show was a big hit. The first part, I think, hit a record audience, what then was a record audience for Glenn, of about 3 million, I think. [6:52 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: And it was a real sensation. But it got Glenn in a lot of trouble. A little while later, he was actually kicked off Fox News. And he later more or less admitted, and others leaked it out, that “The Puppet Master” was the main reason he was fired. Fox made some efforts to conceal that fact. A couple of Fox executives came out with books where they said there were other issues with Glenn, his entrepreneurial activities, and he wasn’t getting along with people, and his attitude, and so on and so forth, but it turned out that was all nonsense, as those of us close to the situation were well aware. [7:40 minutes]
He was kicked off Fox News because of his Soros coverage, primarily. There’s no question about it. And he more or less, Glenn, that is, more or less admitted that to me in a later interview on his network GBTV. [7:57 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: So just by fate, happenstance, circumstance, this little story that I’d just been pursuing, this story of George Soros, which I began writing about in the early ‘90s, it just seemed to [unclear] bigger and bigger and bigger, and cause more and more trouble for all kinds of nice people. [8:23 minutes]
I didn’t actually think it was going to happen that way. You know, when you’re young, you think, if you tell, speak truth to power, is the phrase, and you think that’s what you’re supposed to do, especially people of my generation. We grew up with the legend of Woodward and Bernstein who supposedly brought down the evil ogre Richard Nixon through their fearless reportage, and it turns out they themselves, Woodward and Bernstein, were simply instruments of the deep state themselves. [9:02 minutes]
And the bringing down of Nixon was far from a triumph of democracy, it was an attack upon American democracy. [9:12 minutes]
But these were icons of our generation, and we believed, at least partly, in that. [9:26 minutes]
But it’s, well, I don’t quite know how to say this. I’m always mindful of how young people will take things, and I certainly wouldn’t want to discourage anyone from being idealistic and from speaking truth to power, so to speak, but really it’s not something you can do lightly. You know, it’s, when you speak to power, speak truth to power, that is, power does speak back, and it speaks back very forcefully. [10:03 minutes]
And, well, all you can do, I suppose, for those of us who believe in, let’s call it fate, all things happen for a reason. And so, the twists and turns of my life, as strange and incomprehensible as they sometimes seem to me, they always seem to wind their way back to the same path, which is writing about George Soros, and here I am doing it again, in my latest articles. [10:42 minutes]
And I just wrote an article recently called, “How the British Invented George Soros,” in which I’m really trying to get to the fundamental issue of who really pulls Soros’s strings, who really controls him. And it’s my belief that that’s the British Establishment, kind of a counterintuitive finding, for most people, but once you look into it, you see the evidence is very strong. [11:13 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Yes, I’d really like to invite listeners to listen to our first two conversations, which I’ll of course link in the description box. But, to come back to your more recent work, because we covered, you know, that part of your career where you first exposed George Soros, in our earlier calls, but, for the past couple of years, you’ve published a series of articles entitled, I mean, they start with, “How the British,” so I have the list here. The first one was “How the British Invented Globalism,” “How the British Sold Globalism to America,” “How the British Invented Color Revolutions,” “How the British Invented George Soros,” which you just mentioned, and the two latest ones, which are, “How the British Caused the American Civil War,” and “How the British Invented Communism,” which I think we’ll spend most of our time dedicated to that article, in this conversation, but just to put it in context for readers and bouncing off what you just said, you’ve really been focusing on looking at the roots of where we are today, where America finds herself today, and we can really clearly trace it back from the U.S. Revolution to today, having its, how would you say, how the British actually have been meddling, from the start, in undermining the United States… [12:53 minutes]
Richard Poe: Yes.
Noor Bin Ladin: …from the very inception of the country. So, that’s been the main body of your work. [12:59 minutes]
Richard Poe: Yes, that’s what I’ve been writing about lately, and it’s all building up to a book that I’m writing on, I’m calling it the history of globalization. That’s not the title, but that’s the subject. [13.13 minutes]
But, you know, when people, Noor, think about this word “globalism” or “globalization,” generally they don’t think of Great Britain. They usually think, well, a few years back, when David Rockefeller was still alive, if you thought of globalization, you thought, “David Rockefeller!” He was kind of the media symbol of this thing called globalism. And you definitely mainly thought of Americans and American billionaires of one sort or another, maybe with a few British royals thrown in, who popped up at the Bilderberg conferences now and then. [13:53 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: But what I’m doing is taking, let’s call it a fresh look, at this whole concept of globalism and saying, well, what is it really, and when did people start talking about this, and who started talking about it, from the beginning? Just wipe our minds clean of all this contemporary propaganda on YouTube and Twitter, and all this sort of conspiracy literature that we’ve had for the last few decades…
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: …and just look at the conventional history. What does it tell us? Well, it becomes very clear, first of all, that globalism, this thing that we now call globalism, this idea of establishing a world government which rules the entire planet, this idea was first put forth, in practical, modern form, by the British. It first emerged in Victorian England, and it quickly was adopted by certain factions in England, especially the Fabians, the Fabian socialists. And these groups, as well as other allied and interlocking groups, such as the group around Cecil Rhodes, the Rhodes Trust, and the so-called Round Table, which was part of the Rhodes group, there were a number of these factions that emerged in England, all pushing toward the same end, which was basically to push for the expansion of the British Empire and to make sure that, when the inevitable happened, and really, in the late 19th century, it seemed inevitable to most people that the British Empire was going to completely encompass the world, and ultimately control the world. [15:58 minutes]
And so the idea of globalism was anticipating this British control of the world. It was the question of how is it going to work? How is it going to be organized? How will it be administered? [16:12 minutes]
And the British, having gotten a head start on everybody, and really having been the ones who created this edifice of global government in the first place, they naturally took the lead, and they had the prerogative to plan and decide how are we going to organize this thing that we’re building, this global trade system, this global financial system, this global system of administration that controls the entire planet. [16:44 minutes]
And the best plan that emerged from this, a plan which is usually attributed to a guy named W.T. Stead, he was a very prominent British journalist. He worked as a journalist. I’ve read that he was actually an intelligence operative, a very high-level one, in British intelligence. He was certainly something much more than a journalist. He was a leading planner of imperial policy, and worked at a very high level with the very top figures in the British Establishment. [17:27 minutes]
And he wrote a book in 1901 called The Americanization of the World, in which Mr. Stead basically argued that, in order to keep its predominant position in the world, in order to keep its place of power, Great Britain would have to actually merge with the United States. [17:53 minutes]
They foresaw that the US would emerge as a global superpower. And Stead understood that England could either be a rival of the United States, and that wasn’t going to end well for England, they could foresee even then, or England could manage a process of merging with the United States, to create a global, English-speaking superstate that would be basically under British control. [18:23 minutes]
By taking the initiative in making this happen, the British would ensure that they controlled it. And this is very important for people to understand, because I think most people, if they think on this question at all, they understand that, because of NATO, and because of the Five Eyes intelligence treaty, just because of all these transnational treaties and transnational institutions that have been set up, especially after World War II, I think most people understand that the United States and Great Britain are locked together in all kinds of complex institutional frameworks, to the point where they don’t completely exist as independent countries. [19:24 minutes]
But I think most people, if they think about this at all, they assume the US is dominant, simply and for no other reason than the fact that we’re bigger. And bigness does not mean dominance. There are a lot of big countries in the world. Brazil is one. India is a pretty big country. China is a big country. Russia is a big country, getting smaller all the time, but it’s a big country. There are a lot of big countries in the world. Canada is a big country. Bigness does not equal power in this world. It never, ever did. [19:57 minutes]
Great Britain, at the very height of its power, was always a small country, with a small population, and resource-poor, and the British model of power was never based on being big, or on having a large land army, or on having a large country, with a lot of natural resources. [20:18 minutes]
The British learned to be powerful as a small country, and the lessons that they learned over many centuries of being a small country amidst a world dominated by much physically larger countries, these lessons that the British learned, they still know these lessons today, they still put them into practice, and they still know how to make them work. [20:46 minutes]
And my contention, as I have argued in this series of articles you cited, is that the British are managing the United States in the same way that they have managed the whole rest of the world, for many centuries. [21:03 minutes]
They have basically merged with the United States, in exactly the way that W.T. Stead suggested that they merge with us, back in 1901, in the sense that we are now locked together by permanent military treaties, by permanent economic treaties. Our interests are locked together. [21:30 minutes]
But, even more important than that, and I know there are some people who will disagree with me on this, but I think the real secret weapon of Great Britain, the way that they are able to control the United States, and this is what I’m basically arguing, that we are under their control, rather than the other way around. [21:57 minutes]
England is often described as an obedient lapdog or poodle of the United States, and we are supposedly the hyperpower which tells everybody else what to do. But it is my argument that Great Britain successfully implemented the plan of W.T. Stead, that England planned and managed a merger with the United States, over a long time, and that, because the British were the ones who planned it, because they are the ones who implemented it, they had the jump on us, and they had the initiative, and they were able to set up the system along their lines, in ways that worked for them, not necessarily so much for us, so that we now have a system where the United States uses its tremendous wealth and military power to police the world, relieving Great Britain of this burden. [23:00 minutes]
You see, this whole plan of W.T. Stead emerged out of discussions in the late 19th century among British elites where they recognized as early as, at least 1882, there’s a book by a guy named Seeley—I think he published it in 1882—in which Seeley argues that the British Empire, as presently constituted at that time, was unsustainable, and he pointed out that it was a very far-flung empire with colonies on many different continents, and very difficult, for that reason, to defend, because it could be attacked at any point, and yes, Britain had a very powerful navy that could quickly run to the rescue of any colony that got in trouble, but the mere fact that the Empire was spread out, that it was an ocean-going empire, and that there were British garrisons, armed forces spread out across the world and isolated from each other, this made it vulnerable to attack, in ways that other empires were not. [24:13 minutes]
And Seeley, in particular, pointed to the growing empires of Russia and the United States, which then were land empires, they were growing by expanding their territory organically from the center and moving out into contiguous lands, and getting bigger and bigger, but with their lands all connected together. And Seeley pointed out that empires of this sort were innately easier and less expensive to defend than the British Empire, and that ultimately Britain was going to have to face Russia and the US as enemies, and that England would lose this battle, precisely because of its, the vulnerability, the way that its colonies were spread out around the world. [25:07 minutes]
And so, this kind of talk, there’s a great deal of it, and it all, I’m not going to say it all happened in public, but a lot of it happened in public, through published books like the one I’m describing, and it was from this talk, from this realization about the unsustainability of Britain’s model of empire, that plans were made. [25:32 minutes]
And by the turn of the 20th century, these plans were very solidly in place, and they were being pushed by various groups, such as the Rhodes Group, the Round Table, the Fabians, and so on and so forth. [25:48 minutes]
And these plans were, from the standpoint of the British, they were extremely practical, and they were good plans. You know, from the standpoint of British self-interest, they were logical, and you might even say it was the right thing to do, for them, theoretically, is to join forces with the United States, to arrange things, to set up institutions, transnational institutions that would give Britain the controlling power over the United States and over joint decisions. [26:29 minutes]
And, for example, to this end, certain think tanks were created after World War I. They created a think tank whose name escapes me, but then they split it into two groups. One was called Chatham House, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, in London, and one was called the Council on Foreign Relations, the CFR, in New York, and they were really two sister organizations. They had formerly been a single organization, formed in 1919. By 1921, they were two different organizations, but they were considered sister organizations which had the same purpose. [27:12 minutes]
They were a backchannel for coordinating the foreign policies of the United States and Great Britain, and again, it was entirely the British who had taken the lead and the initiative in setting up these organizations, and they set them up in such a way as to ensure British dominance over the whole setup. [27:36 minutes]
And this system of Chatham House and the CFR working together to coordinate US-UK policy, this system continues to function today, and it continues to be the basis of, not only US-UK relationships, but really the organization of our entire world, because the English-speaking superstate which W.T. Stead envisioned has come to pass. The world we live in is the world that he imagined. [28:15 minutes]
And I pointed out, in some of my articles, the strange coincidence that, in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, Orwell’s world that he describes is, you might say, dominated by a country called Oceania. And Oceania, according to Orwell, was a country formed by the combination, the merging of the British Empire with the United States of America, to form this new country, Oceania, which was a socialist or a communist country, in Orwell’s vision, and had become a dreadful dystopia, where everybody was spied on, nobody had freedom of speech or freedom of thought, and everyone was dreadfully unhappy and treated like beasts. [29:10 minutes]
So Orwell’s vision of the future was strangely similar to the vision of the future being put forth by serious British statesmen such as Stead and Rhodes and all the rest, and I don’t think that’s an accident. [29:28 minutes]
I think we actually see this a lot in British statecraft, where creative writers, novelists, such as George Orwell and H.G. Wells, they kind of bestride both worlds. On the one hand, they’re artists and they write novels and poems and such things, but they also often work in intelligence… [29:50 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: …and in the government, and they have very deep connections to the actual policy-making machinery of the state. [30:00 minutes]
And this is part of the very efficient, very compact organization of the British state, which is, it’s really a marvel of organization. [30:13 minutes]
And again, this brings us to the heart of why are the British able, as a small country, to dominate us, a large country, and it’s because their media system and their intelligence system and their government system and their school system, everything… [30:34 minutes]
Noor Bid Ladin: Financial…
Richard Poe: …all works together…
Noor Bid Ladin: Financial system…
Richard Poe: Their financial system. Yes, it all works together to keep everybody coordinated very tightly and focused on the same ends, in a way which really doesn’t happen here in the United States. It’s a very focused system. [30:54 minutes]
And I will say that British intelligence, in my opinion, is the best intelligence in the world. They are the best, the most powerful, the most ruthless intelligence agencies in the world, and there is no other competitor. [31:18 minutes]
And so, when people talk about who is a superpower, who is the hyperpower, who is the hegemon, I personally do not believe that how many ballistic missiles or how many hypersonic missiles or how many aircraft carriers you have are the determinants of who is the most powerful. [31:39 minutes]
The most powerful is the one which has the most effective and the most ruthless intelligence services. Because an intelligence service which is ruthless and which will stop at nothing, and which will use any form of coercion and blackmail, has a power beyond other intelligence services which may hesitate to go that far. [32:09 minutes]
And so, one of the ways that the British conceal their power, and they do consciously conceal their power, very wisely, is they portray their own intelligence services as being incompetent. It’s a very interesting way of playing possum.
[32:29 minutes]
And, so often, when I make a statement like this, and I’ll say, well, you know, British MI6 is really the best in the world, people will say, “No, that’s nonsense. What about the Mossad? What about the KGB?” Or the FSB, as they call it now. This idea that somehow the Israelis or the Russians or some other mysterious people are infinitely more competent than the British, and the British are supposedly just these bumbling fools who are always getting their top people compromised by the Russians. [33:11 minutes]
I don’t believe any of that. I think all of that is a propaganda narrative which is meant to make British intelligence seem ineffective and weak, when it is exactly the opposite. [33:24 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: In the same way that the propaganda works to portray Britain as the lapdog of the United States.
Richard Poe: Yes, exactly. And what I’m saying is that this idea of Great Britain as the lapdog, what I’m saying is that I think it’s the relative power of the intelligence agencies, perhaps more than any other factor, I mean, you mentioned finance, of course, but that too is under the power of the intelligence agencies, because what the intelligence services do is they control people, and if you control people, you control everything. It’s all about the control of people. [34:12 minutes]
And the way people are controlled is not through persuasion, to some extent, through bribery, but mostly it’s through blackmail and coercion. This is the main way that people are controlled. This is the most effective way to control people. [34:30 minutes]
And so one of the ways that the British portray themselves and allow themselves to be portrayed as bumbling fools in the intelligence arena is this whole Cold War-era narrative that supposedly the British were helpless to stop the Russian KGB from recruiting their people, and there were always these high-level defections going on. [34:59 minutes]
But I don’t really know if that was due to British incompetence or if that was on purpose, if the British allowed, if the British actually consciously had a different relationship with the Soviet Union than we did. [35:16 minutes]
Because there’s a famous quote by Winston Churchill from 1945, towards the end of World War II, where he basically said, when this war is over, we English are going to be in big trouble. We’re going to be caught between two great powers, the Soviet Union and the US. [35:36 minutes]
And he was basically saying that, from the British standpoint, these were both equal threats, that the British, going into the Cold War, saw the US as a threat, and they saw the USSR as a threat, and their job, in their minds, was how to balance these threats against one another. [35:59 minutes]
And I believe there was a great deal of intelligence activity that went on during the Cold War, by the British, that basically had to do with the British deliberately playing off the Russians against the Americans, and playing off the Americans against the Russians, in a game which the British call balance of power. [36:19 minutes]
Because this is how British statecraft has always worked, through the centuries. [36:25 minutes]
The way this small country has survived and thrived, is when they see two big powers, like the Soviet Union and the United States, their idea isn’t so much, let’s take sides with one of them to defeat the other, although they may do that for a short period of time, but their idea is that both are enemies, and that both must be defeated. Both must be broken up eventually. And you can play them off against each other for awhile, but eventually you will have to defeat them both. [37:02 minutes]
Because a small country like England cannot exist in a world of giants. It would be like a mouse among giants. And so their very survival strategy, you might call it their strategy of evolutionary survival, which they have devised over the years, is to engage very aggressively in a form of statesmanship which brings them face to face with the greatest powers in the world, by which they get the largest powers to attack and fight each other. [37:42 minutes]
And I want to point out that this practice of ensuring the so-called balance of power, this is something that was observed back in 1917 by the great Sun-Yat-Sen. He was the first president of the Chinese republic. He’s considered the father of the Chinese republic. [38:10 minutes]
He wrote a book in 1917, I forget the name of it, but, in this book, he stated that when England reaches out to another country to make friends, it’s not because they really want to be your friend. It’s because they want you to attack a third country. [38:36 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: What England typically does, they’ll befriend one country—Country A, let’s call it—and then they’ll get Country A to attack Country B. And then, once Country A has defeated Country B, and Country B is weak, and Country A is very strong, as the victor, then the British will switch sides. Then they’ll approach Country B and say, “Well, Country B, look how small you are, and all those mean people in Country A just beat you up, let’s help build you up, and help you attack Country A.” [39:11 minutes]
And Sun-Yat-Sen spelled this out in his book. He said, this is the heart and soul of British statecraft, is they keep the most powerful countries in the world fighting each other, so that the British are aways there in the middle, and benefitting from the wars they create, and from the so-called balance of power they create, by making sure that nobody ever actually does become the hyperpower or the global hegemon, as the United States supposedly is right now. [39:45 minutes]
So I’m simply citing Sun-Yat-Sen because he was a brilliant and very well-respected man, and he’s saying exactly the same thing that I’m saying. I didn’t make this up. This fact is well-known to many knowledgable people throughout history, and it’s one of the reasons why the French, centuries ago, decided to call England… [40:19 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: …perfidious Albion, because, it was for precisely this reason, because they were perceived as being treacherous. [40:28 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: So, uh… [40:30 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: This is a great segueway for your latest article, “How the British Invented Communism.” But before we get into that, I just wanted to add, you know, from my research and everything that I’ve learned from you in our many conversations and your writings, it is very obvious that the United States was transformed by the British into a complete vassal state, and the period you describe, you know, following Stead’s book, the first quarter of the 20th Century is really when they were able to roll out and implement that plan, especially under the Woodrow Wilson administration, as we’ve discussed, you know, a few times before, you and I…
Richard Poe: Mm-hm.
Noor Bin Ladin: …especially with the creation of the Fed. But there is one example, I think, that really illustrates everything you’ve just described, in terms of how they control people, and how they infiltrate and then get their agenda implemented, and also in terms of how they are so brilliant at propaganda, because even to this day, everybody believes that the League of Nations, which was really the first attempt to a world government, was a Woodrow Wilson project, and you’ve done such incredible research, even finding correspondence at the time between Colonel Mandel House and this character Grey—you’ll be able to explain it, I hope so, in just a second—you know, how they actually used Woodrow Wilson as a mere actor or propagandist for the project, when, in fact, it was completely being devised back in the UK. [42:20 minutes]
Richard Poe: Well, yes, and I want to emphasize that what you’re saying is absolutely true, that there was a turning point specifically during the Woodrow Wilson administration, but it’s important to understand that our problems with Great Britain are basically permanent problems. They have existed since the Revolution. I mean, obviously, they existed before the Revolution, which is why we fought the Revolution. [42:54 minutes]
The problem was, the principal problem was, the real cause of the Revolution was, that there was a very lopsided balance of trade that was enforced by imperial trade policy, where basically the British, at that time, did not allow Americans to engage in any manufacturing whatsoever, and especially we could not manufacture anything for export overseas. [43:21 minutes]
As a result, we had to be a colonial country which raised crops, food, provided other raw materials, sold them to England at a low price. England used its industrial might to create manufactured products, and then sold them back to us at a very high price. [43:45 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: That’s a simplified way to put it, but the result was an extremely lopsided balance of trade, and this was really the fundamental cause of the Revolution. [43:54 minutes]
But what happened immediately after the Revolution, when we had supposedly become an independent country and could then set our own trade policies, the British immediately hit us with a trade war…
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: …where they dumped huge quantities of very cheap goods onto our markets, destroyed all of the fledgling US manufacturing that had been set up, and threw the country, this new country, newly independent country, into total chaos, total financial collapse. And various parts of the country immediately wanted to secede. This was right after the Revolution. [44:35 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: And so, everything was there, the British ability to destabilize our trade arrangements, to destabilize our banking and finance, and ultimately to physically destabilize our country, by nurturing secession movements. [44:53 minutes]
Because when everything goes to hell like that, it’s very easy for people to start saying, “Let’s just break up this country. That state over there is having trouble. Let’s take our nice state and break it off over here.” We’re hearing that now, in terms of “national divorce.” That’s the new name for this very old phenomenon. But, from the beginning, the secessionist tendencies in our country have always been a result of these destabilization operations that were perpetrated by the British. [45:24 minutes]
And so, up to, let’s say, the 1840s, in our country, this was not a secret. These things that I’m talking about now were openly discussed, openly written about, openly spoken about by politicians. [45:41 minutes]
Every politician in the US, up to the 1840s, let’s say, was anti-British. The only question was how are we going to deal with this British question? [45:49 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: Everybody knew that the British were hostile to the United States, and that their goal was somehow to destabilize our country, to physically break up our country, and to weaken our country, and ultimately to regain colonial control of our country. [46:15 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: This was assumed and known, right up to the 1840s, until something happened where the British stopped being the focus of our attention, and, by the 1850s, Americans had been manipulated, by British agents, I will say, primarily, into hating each other so much, we forgot about the British, and it was all about the Northerners against the Southerners, and soon we had the Civil War. [46:45 minutes]
But the fact is, the whole secession movement, the Southern secession movement, in particular, and there’ve been others. The first secession movement in our country was the New England secession, which was also instigated by British agents, shortly after the Revolution. [47:05 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: But they finally struck pay dirt with the Southern secession movement. That’s where they found the strongest roots, to put down these ideas. [47:17 minutes]
And a guy named Thomas Cooper is credited historically with being the first so-called “Southern American” to propose that the South should break away from the Union, for all the reasons that we’re now familiar with. And he made this proposal in a speech of 1828. [47:28 minutes]
Now this Thomas Cooper was an Englishman. He was born in England, he was educated at Oxford, and his first assignment, apparently as an intelligence operative of some sort, he was sent to France to stir up the French Revolution. [47:55 minutes]
And, in one of my articles we’re going to be talking about, I discussed how Britain was actually responsible for the French Revolution. And this guy Thomas Cooper was a very important and effective agent in stirring up the French Revolution. [48:11 minutes]
After that successful mission, he was sent to the United States. He moved to South Carolina. He became a very important person, a judge, and he knew a lot of people, including many of the Founding Fathers of the country, who respected him, and then he got up in 1828 and he said this country is hopeless, it’s had it, it can’t last any longer. Let’s just break it up. And, with those words, he started the Southern secession movement. And the guy was an Englishman. [48:44 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: And a lot of people just don’t realize this. He was not only an Englishman, but he was obviously an English intelligence agent, because he had done the same thing in France. And there are other reasons for determining, or, at least, let’s say, proposing that he was an intelligence agent, just because of who he associated with, who his milieu that he came out of in England, was full of known intelligence operatives. It’s pretty clear that that’s what he was. [49:20 minutes]
But, in any case, so this was a constant, constant irritant, let’s call it, in all of American history, even before Woodrow Wilson, and the Civil War itself, as I wrote in my article, “How the British Caused the American Civil War,” was clearly provoked by the British, and their plan, along with their French allies, was to split up the country into many pieces, not just two, and basically recolonize it. [49:53 minutes]
And this is all, none of this is speculation. This is all hard, recorded history which has simply been ignored and swept under the carpet. And I and other writers, through the years, have been slowly putting back the story of what really happened during the Civil War. [50:14 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Yeah, when you look at the pieces and you see, from the moment of the Revolution, up until 1913, and the Woodrow Wilson administration, you can see, if you look at it as a timeline, all the different ways they’ve tried to regain control over the United States, and, as you said, they even went so far as to instigate the Civil War. Then, in parallel, you had all the talks about a central bank, and they tried as well very hard throughout the 19th Century to implement a central bank system in the United States and they finally succeeded with the current system, which is the Federal Reserve System, again, with this date…
Richard Poe: Yes.
Noor Bin Ladin: …of 1913. [51:00 minutes]
Richard Poe: Yes, so let’s fast-forward to the Woodrow Wilson administration. The outstanding fact about the Wilson administration is that the Wilson White House was penetrated and run by British intelligence. [51:20 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: The closest advisor to Woodrow Wilson was a guy named Colonel Edward House. Now, this Colonel House was from Texas. His father was an Englishman. He came from England, he and his wife. They became very successful in Texas, and then, during the Civil War, House’s father, the father of this Edward House, became an extremely powerful and important blockade runner. He had a whole fleet of ships that was running cotton to England, and bringing back British arms to arm the Confederacy. So he was basically a British agent, and acting as such during the Civil War. [52:13 minutes]
And this Mr. House, the father, sent all of his sons to English boarding [schools], including Edward House. And so this was the strength of his tie that he had with his native country, that he wanted his sons to be brought up English, to the extent of actually sending them to English boarding schools. [52:37 minutes]
So Edward House somehow became the closest confidant to Woodrow Wilson, and he had what many thought of as a kind of Svengali-like hold upon him. Some people get very kind of mystical about this. They suggest somehow he was able to hypnotize or exercise mind control over Woodrow Wilson, in some metaphysical sense. [53:05 minutes]
Now I don’t know if that’s true or not, or even what it means, but, be that as it may, the impression was that this House controlled Woodrow Wilson, this Edward House had a control over the man that nobody could explain, and nobody could break. [53:24 minutes]
He held no official position in the Wilson administration and yet he was always there. He had access to Wilson that nobody else had. He could tell Wilson who to hire, who to fire, what to do, what not to do. [53:39 minutes]
And this Edward M. House was a British agent. He had a very close friendship with a guy named William Wiseman who was the station chief, he was the British station chief for the British secret intelligence service in the United States. [54:02 minutes]
And this Wiseman, I believe he lived in the same apartment building as Colonel House and, in the biographies that I’ve read, their relationship is described as being very close, very affectionate, very warm, I mean, all kinds of words are used. [54:25 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: They would holiday together.
Richard Poe: Well, yes, and, on at least one occasion, House, Wiseman, and the President himself, Woodrow Wilson, actually took a holiday together, which was very unusual. [54:44 minutes]
So House used his Svengali-like influence over Wilson to bring this Wiseman into Wilson’s circle, which, in and of itself, was a very ill-advised and suspicious thing to do. So I don’t have any hesitation at all in calling Edward House a British agent. [55:12 minutes]
He was clearly acting as an agent of influence for the British. He was reporting directly to the US station chief for British intelligence, as well as directly to the British Foreign Office. He wrote directly to Sir Edward Grey, the Foreign Secretary. His published correspondence shows that he discussed every matter of importance with Sir Edward Grey directly. [55:40 minutes]
So he was basically keeping the British Foreign Office informed of what Wilson was doing, getting advice from them as to what he should do. [55:53 minutes]
And in 1915, Sir Edward Grey wrote to House and said, let's start a League of Nations, and let's have President Wilson be the one to propose it, because it would be much better received if people thought of it as an American idea instead of a British one. And so House said sure, I'll set it up. And he did. He set it all up. [56:18 minutes]
Wilson dutifully and obediently did as he was told. He made speeches. He wrote writings. And he did exactly as Sir Edward Grey wanted him to. He pretended that this was his idea.
But it clearly wasn't. [56:39 minutes]
The League of Nations was an old, old, British idea, which, we can see the beginnings of it right after, during and after the Congress of Vienna of 1815, once Napoleon was defeated and the British had basically become the masters of Europe, they started setting up systems and thinking, okay, how are we going to wield this great power? How are we going to administer this great “informal” empire, by which I mean, the formal empire being the colonies they directly controlled, but the informal empire being countries like France, which was now basically a vassal of England, having been thoroughly defeated by England. [57:29 minutes]
So how are they going to administer this? And they began, at that time, setting up systems. [57:37 minutes]
Noor Bin Ladin: Yeah, I think the earliest time we found when we were researching was around 1810, 1812. There was a conference in London, I believe. Remember? We had looked that up online…
Richard Poe: Yes. Yes, that's right.
Noor Bin Ladin: …once during our calls.
Richard Poe: You found that for me and thank you very much. That was a really important piece of the puzzle, because, before you brought that to my attention, I had been able to trace back the League of Nations planning only as far back as, I think, the 1860s, I'd found a mention of it. But, as you get closer and closer, into the 1870s, eighties, nineties, it becomes very, very explicit. And you see all kinds of what we'd now call NGO’s, pressure groups being set up, specifically in England, to push for global government. And, of course, a global government controlled by Britain. [58:26 minutes]
And, at the very outset of World War One, within days literally of the declaration of war, H.G. Wells wrote an article called, I think he called it “The War to End All Wars,” something like that, a phrase, which was later mistakenly attributed to Wilson, by many people, and it was actually written by H.G. Wells who, in addition to being a science fiction writer, was also a secret operative of Britain's War Propaganda Bureau, known as Wellington House. And it was in this capacity that he wrote this article calling for a global government. [59:06 minutes]
And he expressly wrote in his article and his subsequent pamphlet, which was published a few months later, he expressly said that, through this “Peace League,” as he called it, Britain could control the world, quote-unquote. And he made no bones about the fact that this was its purpose, that peace was merely a fig leaf. World peace was merely a pretext for setting up what was, in reality, an instrument of British power. [59:42 minutes]
And so, it was this plan which had been expressly proposed by H.G. Wells in 1914—H.G. Wells, again, being a secret operative of Britain's War Propaganda Bureau—he was the first to publicly propose it, in its final form, as an arrangement that would be made at the conclusion of hostilities of World War One. [1:00:15]
This proposal came from H.G. Wells. It did not come from Woodrow Wilson. And H.G. Wells, in turn, was building upon generations of proposals by British government-controlled or government-sponsored NGOs of various sorts. So it was a thoroughly British idea from the get-go. [1:00:36]
Noor Bin Ladin: And if I just may interject, because you mentioned the Congress of Vienna, and 1814 and 1815, and, if you look, you know, a hundred years later, with the proposal for the League of Nations, Geneva was chosen as the headquarters for this world government. And if you look back a hundred years earlier, when we first find the plans or discussions around a world government a hundred years earlier, Switzerland was made to be neutral, during the Congress of Vienna, in 1814-1815, led by the British. [1:01:19]
And if you look at, in parallel, what was happening in Switzerland—and you mentioned, as well, the creation of these NGOs in the aftermath of the Congress of Vienna—the first, truly international body of cooperation was headquartered in Switzerland, in Geneva as well, which is Henri Dunand’s Red Cross, which was, you know…
Richard Poe: Mm-hm.
Noor Bin Ladin: …the precursor to all these NGOs that we see today, that were created throughout the 20th century, as part of the globalist infrastructure to roll out their agenda. [1:01:58]
Richard Poe: Yes, Noor, that’s exactly correct, and, as you said, this whole idea of Swiss neutrality was a British idea. It was part of the British plan of globalism, which was already being implemented as early as 1815. And so the British, at those negotiations at the Congress of Vienna, they wanted to create Switzerland as a neutral platform for all kinds of globalist operations that they wanted to launch from that country. And they wanted to use Switzerland as kind of a, let’s say, maybe a temporary capital of globalism, which would be protected from outside interference by its neutrality. [1:02:50]
And so, in some weird sense, and I don't want to offend the good people of Switzerland by saying this, but, in some weird sense, modern Switzerland itself is a creation of British policy. [1:03:06]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: And I understand it goes back to the Middle Ages and William Tell and all these things, but Switzerland, as we know it today—this neutral country, which is somehow seen as the beacon and wellspring of all peaceful globalist things in the world—nobody thought of Switzerland that way before 1815. This was an idea that was created by the British for purely propagandistic purposes, and to use Switzerland as a platform for their propaganda and intelligence activities. And it has been so used ever since. [1:03:47]
Noor Bin Ladin: And Richard, just, you know, for the anecdote, what is so wicked about their plans is that they included it in the final agreements, but they only ratified it after they attacked France through Switzerland. So it was already ready and good to go, but they only ratified it once they used Switzerland to attack France from there. [1:04:13]
Richard Poe: Well, it's very practical. The British are very practical people. And they're very good at what they do. And that's why they've gotten so far. [1:04:28]
Noor Bin Ladin: But this is something we should explore in another call or maybe we should write about it together, Richard, but the relationship between Britain and Switzerland, because I agree with you and I've learned a lot from you, and you’ve sent me into some great research from our conversations. But there is clearly a relationship there. [1:04:51]
And also through our research, we saw the relationship between Switzerland and Britain during the revolution, the US revolution…
Richard Poe: Mm-hm.
Noor Bin Ladin: But I think we should talk about this another time. [1:05:02]
Richard Poe: Sounds good. Sounds good. And I just want to say, in terms of the question you asked before, I want to finish answering that. You mentioned the Fed as being a great watershed in the destruction of American liberty. And that too happened in 1913 during the Woodrow Wilson administration. And there, the British agent Edward House was extremely instrumental in bringing that about. We see this guy House involved in every nefarious activity of that time. He was behind setting up the Fed. He was behind setting up the Council on Foreign Relations, and its partnership with Chatham House, after World War One. He was behind, as we mentioned, getting Woodrow Wilson to support the British idea of the League of Nations. He was a very nefarious character. And he was absolutely a British agent. There is no other way to describe or understand his relationship with the British Foreign Office and with British intelligence, except that they were running him. [1:06:19]
Noor Bin Ladin: Yup. Now I think we did a, a good first part of the conversation where we talk about the United States and Britain and the infiltration of the United States by the British. And you also touched upon how Britain has been instrumental in pitting different powers against each other in order to maintain this balance, as you mentioned it. And it's also very clear that that's what they were doing at the turn of the 20th century, between Germany, who was one of their greatest foes and greatest threats, and Russia. And so, if you can tell us a bit more about that, and then I really think we should go into your latest article, which I have here and I'll show the audience, called “How the British Invented Communism.” And I had it printed out ‘cause I don't really like reading long-form articles on the computer, but this is what it looks like. I forgot to ask the printer to do it on both sides. [1:07:30]
It's a long read, but it's absolutely fascinating, A, if you love history like I do, and, B, if you want to understand how we got to where we are today, because it's very much the same tactics and it's very much the continuity, even with regards to what's happening right now in the manufactured crisis with Ukraine. By reading this article, you'll understand the roots of the different conflicts between the superpowers and the role that the British have played. And it's no coincidence that Putin, President Putin, referred to the, I believe it was the attack on Nord Stream, as an Anglo Saxon plot and not an American plot a few months ago. So if you can talk about this article and how it relates to what is happening today would be great, and I just want to add just one more thing. This reads like a incredible novel. You just can't put it down. It's full of intrigue. And it's so well sourced and, again, with the correspondence between Queen Victoria and members of her government, it's just fascinating. I enjoyed it so much, Richard. [1:08:57]
Richard Poe: Well, thank you, Noor, you're always so kind, and, uh…
Noor Bin Ladin: Well, it’s true. It's really the truth. That's why I can't seem to tweet about your work enough, because people will really gain so much reading it, as I have.
Richard Poe: Well, let, let me say this in preface to answering your question. There's a lot of loose talk, and you can see it out there on Twitter right now, coming from policy people, policy wonks we used to call them. I don't know if that word is still used. But people in think tanks. Saying things like, the core of US policy, of traditional US policy, is to make sure that no hegemon arises on the continent of Asia. Okay. That's one statement that's constantly being made, that traditional United States policy has been to prevent specifically Russia or China from becoming too powerful in Asia. [1:10:07]
And another statement that's been made, and I forget the guy who said this, I forget his name, but he said that America's “primordial” policy, in Eurasia has been to prevent Germany and Russia from getting together and thus becoming a threat to US global domination. And he used the word “primordial,” but then when you begin reading his article, you realize, by the word primordial, which means from the very beginning, what he really means is since 1945. [1:10:47]
So I want to start right there, because this is how our history is being rewritten constantly. Whether it's being done wittingly or unwittingly, our history is constantly being written in such a way as to create the illusion that our goals, that America's goals, are the same as England's goals, and always have been.
So, for example, it has always been the goal of England, as I wrote in my article that you just kindly praised and showed to the viewers—and that article is called “How the British Invented Communism (and Blamed It on the Jews)”—but it really covers a much wider subject, which is why the British, for hundreds of years, did everything in their power to contain and restrain the power of Russia, and specifically, towards the end, to keep the Germans and Russians from getting together. This was a British policy for centuries. It was a British policy for centuries before any such thing as the United States of America even existed as a twinkle in anybody's eye. [1:12:11]
And so, if you want to talk about primordial, this idea of preventing the rise of an Asian hegemon, and preventing Russia from getting together with Germany, these are not American ideas. Americans literally couldn't even think in such terms, wouldn't even see any reason to think in such terms until maybe after World War One, certainly after World War Two, at which point we had entered a permanent military alliance with the British Empire, and were basically obliged to take on all the British policies as our own policies. [1:12:57]
So now, decades later, when everybody who was alive then is dead, just about—nobody remembers anymore how this happened—we have these policy guys coming out on the Internet and saying, “Oh, well, it's been our traditional American policy from the get-go to try to keep Germany and Russia apart, and to prevent the rise of an Asian hegemon. What do I mean by primordial? Oh, I mean, since 1945.” [1:13:27]
Well, 1945 is not primordial, not by any dictionary definition of the word primordial. In the United States, such a young country as ours, primordial might mean George Washington crossing the Delaware to fight the Hessian mercenaries at Trenton. Well, they were Germans. The Hessian mercenaries hired by Britain were Germans sent over to fight us in the Revolutionary War. Why was George Washington crossing the Delaware to fight them? [1:14:00]
What was George Washington thinking of while he crossed the icy river? Was he thinking, “We've got to beat those Germans in Trenton. Otherwise, they're going to get together with the Russians and sign a treaty, and that might threaten our interests in the Balkans! Oh, wait a second. I'm not British. I'm George Washington.” [1:14:20]
I mean, seriously, I'm joking, but, if you take these statements we're getting about America's primordial interest to their logical conclusion, that's what they would have to mean. George Washington would have to be crossing the Delaware thinking, “We must stop Germany and Russia from getting together. We must save the Balkans. We must protect the trade routes to the east. And therefore, that's why I'm going to Trenton to fight the Hessians.” Well, that's not why Washington fought the Hessians. He fought the Hessians because they were working for the British, because the British hired the Hessians to defeat our efforts to become independent. [1:15:01]
So to speak of these European intrigues of keeping Germany and Russia apart as if this was the primordial interest of the United States of America, since when? It's just ridiculous and preposterous. And these people who write these things, they go to all these fancy schools of diplomacy and foreign policy, and then they write this stuff. [1:15:26]
Noor Bin Ladin: And then even without going so far back, I mean, until, and even during the First World War, the United States was an isolationist country. Quote, isolationist. That's the term that they were using to kind of put a negative spin on it. But the United States didn't want to get involved in conflicts overseas. [1:15:52]
Richard Poe: Well, yes, yes. Exactly. And also as late as World War II, you know, there's a book called Desperate Deception…
Noor Bin Ladin: That’s a good title.
Richard Poe: Yes. It's about British covert operations during World War II. The British were allowed to operate very extensive intelligence networks here in the United States, whose purpose was to spy on and to persecute and to run covert ops against the antiwar movement, which was then called the America First movement, because the America First Movement was extremely popular in America, at that time. Entering the war on behalf of England was extremely unpopular. And so the British were allowed by Franklin Roosevelt and his men to operate here and to persecute US patriots who didn't want to enter the war. Now… [1:16:54]
Noor Bin Ladin: And this was also happening during the First World War. Woodrow Wilson was also…
Richard Poe: Yes.
Noor Bin Ladin: …after those who didn't want to go fight during the First World War and they had to manufacture events such as the sinking of the Lusitania, in order to get support of the American population to go into the First World War. [1:17:28]
Richard Poe: Yes. I'm not that knowledgeable about the Lusitania situation, though it’s perfectly plausible what you said. But the point I wanted to make though about this book, Desperate Deception—and I apologize to the author whose name I can't remember—I always like to give fellow authors their credit. But he's a British author [CORRECTION: the author of Desperate Deception, Thomas Mahl, is American] and he did a very fine job in this book. It's very honest, very thorough. And it's not always, doesn't always look very nice for the British. [1:18:04]
But one of the things he said in that book, which is really fascinating, is he said that the American establishment was very eager, that is, the top people in Washington, were very eager to join the war and to go along with the British plans, but they didn't know how. He said they didn't know how to do the dance, I think is the way he put it. But the British knew how. And the British showed them. [1:18:35]
So what he was actually revealing and saying are two things. One, that the British took the lead. The British were the teachers. The Americans, even as late as, let's say, 1940 is the era he’s talking about there, even after having fought and won World War I, the Americans did not know how to play the game of war, how to play the game of contriving and concocting a casus belli, a cause of war, a reason to mobilize the people to go to war, a reason for the people to accept the mass sacrifice of their sons, hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of their sons, for a war they didn't understand. The Americans did not know how to do that, at least not for a cause as nebulous as what World War II seemed to be to most Americans at that time. [1:19:42]
The Americans did not know how to do it. They wanted to. The American elites wanted to because…
Noor Bin Ladin: The elites. Yeah.
Richard Poe: …they knew they were all going to make money. They were all in the British pockets anyway, since the Woodrow Wilson administration. They all wanted to go along with it, says the author of Desperate Deception.
But they didn't know how.
And those words are not only true, but extremely revealing. This is the story of the US-UK special relationship, is that, it’s not that we Americans—and especially our elites—it's not that we're angels. It's not that we're innocent. We're just as nasty and greedy as anybody else, and especially the elites—just as corrupt as anyone else. But our elites didn't, they… as corrupt and greedy as they were, they didn't know how to do it. They didn't know how this game was played. [1:20:46]
The British had been playing this game for centuries and they knew how to do it. And they taught us. They taught our elites. They taught us everything. They taught us the art of propaganda. They taught us the art of intelligence. They taught us the art of war.
They taught it to us. And they taught us the art of global government. This is an undeniable fact. But this fact has been erased from our consciousness, through a deliberate and conscious rewriting of history, so that people today are not taught in school, and even high-level policy makers, such as those I was quoting before, they’ll say ridiculous things about America's “primordial interests” going back to 1945, and completely ignoring the fact that 1945 was not that long ago, and there was nothing primordial about it, and, if anything happened in 1945, it was the British successfully completing this merger of the UK and the US which they had been planning since at least the 1880s and maybe much longer (your finding with the Congress of Vienna coming to mind). [1:22:11]
So I think that's what it comes down to, is that knowledge is power. So if we want to think crudely and say, well, look, the United States is bigger than England, so therefore we must be the dominant one, if you want to think like that, if you want to think like a child, then yes. Let's pretend that the US is the hyperpower and the US controls everything. [1:22:41]
But if you understand that what really controls the world, what really controls people, what really controls institutions is knowledge—knowledge and experience, and knowing how to do things—then it's very clear that the United States, and the US people, the US personnel, even at the highest levels, have never been in a position to dominate the UK. [1:23:12]
The UK always had the jump on us. They had a headstart in setting this whole thing up. It was their idea from the first place to set up a global government. They set it up the way they wanted to, in a way that worked for them, and they, and they alone, know how to work it, even to this very day. [1:23:30]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: That's how things work. You know, there's an old saying in marketing, “First to market owns the market.”
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: So I don't know who came out first, Crest or Colgate, but, in marketing books, you see this concept all the time. If you come out with two simultaneous products, Coke and Pepsi, Crest and Colgate, whatever, the one that is first to market will tend to remain in the lead, no matter what, just because they were there first, just by sheer inertia. There's something really powerful about being the first one. [1:24:10]
And the US was not, not only failed to be the first into the global arena, of global empire, we weren't even close to being the first. We weren't even in the running. We never even got there, except by the express invitation of our British cousins, inviting us to join them. [1:24:34]
And why did they invite us to join them? For the same reason that Sun-Yat-Sen set forth in his book in 1917. He says, when England approaches you and offers friendship, it's not because they want to be your friend. It's because they want you to fight somebody. That's what Sun-Yat-Sen wrote in 1917. And what have we had ever since we were approached, ever since the British extended to us this hand of friendship, roughly in the 1890s? What have we had since then? We've had one war after the other, on behalf of Great Britain. Sun-Yat-Sen called it. He was absolutely right. They extended the hand of friendship to us because they wanted us to fight wars for them. Pure and simple. It's just that simple. [1:25:25]
Noor Bin Ladin: And President Trump called it during one of his interviews, which we shared on Twitter. He said, “How did we become the watchdog or the policemen of the world after World War II?” He asked that question. [1:25:41]
Richard Poe: Yes. And Trump, I would say uniquely, in modern times, certainly in my lifetime, spoke out very strongly against this policy of what we now call endless wars. And the British reacted very strongly against that. And I've put up some of their official documents on my Twitter feed. They were horrified that Trump would say such things and, and even more horrified that he might actually implement them. They wanted him to go along with all their military agendas and with all their climate change agendas and everything else. And the fact that he was apparently not going to do that was sufficient reason for them not only to oppose him, but actually to run covert operations against him. [1:26:42]
And so we see, for example, in the so-called Russiagate hoax, where supposedly information was intercepted which indicated that Trump was a Russian agent. This came directly from the British eavesdropping agency GCHQ, according to an article in The Guardian. The GCHQ itself bragged and boasted that they had intercepted some information showing that Trump was being controlled by the Russians, and they claimed in this article, which came out back in 2017 sometime, they claimed in this article that they reported it to the then-head of the CIA, who ignored them for months. They claimed that it took a lot of lobbying on their part to get the CIA to listen to them. [1:27:44]
Now, I don't know if any of that's true. But that's what GCHQ told The Guardian. And they were very proud of it and felt they were doing something good, or they pretended they believed they were doing something good. But what they were actually doing was running a counterintelligence operation against an American president. [1:28:08]
And, even when you tell this to Americans, most Americans really aren't too surprised or shocked or disturbed by this, because, quite often, what you'll get as a response is they'll say, “Well, the UK isn't really a foreign country, is it? It's really just a vassal of the United States. They just do whatever we tell them to do.” [1:28:37]
So this is part of the British propaganda narrative that has been deeply implanted in our minds. It is the ultimate cover for British intelligence operations that, even when they're exposed, or even when they're leaked deliberately to the media, the British themselves are never blamed for them. They can come right out and say, well, we were spying on President Trump, but people say, well, the CIA must've told them to do it. It's just assumed. It's automatic. [1:29:09]
Noor Bin Ladin: In the exact same way with this so-called pandemic and the labs and COVID-19, everybody's just dismissing the Eco Alliance element and saying that it was made by the Americans, completely disregarding Peter Dasczak and what they were doing. [1:29:29]
Richard Poe: Right. And I've done some tweeting on that, as you know.
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm. Yeah.
Richard Poe: And EcoHealth is basically, now EcoHealth was the outfit that was actually supervising the gain of function research in Wuhan. So, if anyone, if indeed the virus was created at Wuhan, and if indeed it was created by this gain of function research, which seems to be the case, EcoHealth is the one that did it. EcoHealth is a British outfit. It's incorporated in the United States for fundraising purposes, but its parent company is British. And its president Peter Dasczak is British. And its entire agenda is British. [1:30:14]
And every time you see EcoHealth described in the media, they say a “US-based company,” and they'll describe Peter Dasczak as a US-based scientist. He lives in New York now. There have even been a lot of leaks saying that Peter Daszak is Ukrainian. There’s a lot of false news on the Internet saying he was born in Ukraine. And he wasn't. He was born in greater Manchester, England. And his father was Ukrainian. I believe his mother was Welsh.
But he's never referred to as British and yet he totally was. He was born and raised in greater Manchester, and he works for this British NGO called EcoHealth which was incorporated in the U.S. for fundraising purposes. [1:31:10]
And then people say, “Oh, well, look at all the American money. Look who funds them. That will tell you all there is to know.” Well, the British policy towards the United States since, let's say since primordial times… [1:31:29]
Noor Bin Ladin: [Laughs]
Richard Poe: …since before the American Revolution, has been how to squeeze money out of the stupid Americans.
Noor Bin Ladin: Exactly.
Richard Poe: I mean, squeezing money out of the Americans has been the great British national pastime since the 17th century. And they're very, very good at it. And we fought the Revolution…
Noor Bin Ladin: This is so important. To this day…
Richard Poe: Yes.
Noor Bin Ladin: To this day, it's how to squeeze and siphon the country, the US.
Richard Poe: Yes, yes, exactly. And whenever the British do something, their first move is, how can we get some money out of the stupid Americans? Now, I'm not saying, again, that we Americans, that we’re angelic or innocent. Far from it. We're perfectly capable of any evil that anybody else is, but, how can I say this delicately? The British, Noor, they're just…
Noor Bin Ladin: I think…
Richard Poe: …smarter than we are. They’re just smarter than we are. [1:32:38]
Noor Bin Ladin: I think it’s important for the audience to know that when we say the British or the Americans, we're talking essentially about the leadership and the elites of those countries, that rule over them, over these countries. [1:32:53]
Richard Poe: Well, yes, of course, of course. That's what we're always talking about.
Noor Bin Ladin: Yeah.
Richard Poe: But you know, I've noticed that, when people say the Americans did this, the Americans did that, they're never so fastidious about which Americans they’re talking about.
Noor Bin Ladin: Absolutely, it’s…
Richard Poe: And…
Noor Bin Ladin: Infuriating.
Richard Poe: When you mentioned, right, but, with the British, somehow there's a different rule. I get this reaction a lot. People will say, “Well, Richard, a lot of what you're saying is true, but you're not talking about the real British people or the English. You're talking about those money-grubbing bankers in the city of London. You're not talking about the Anglo-Saxon people of England who are very honorable and nice and would never, they would just never, never.” [1:33:43]
I often have to address this because it's always brought up, and I say, well, I'm not going to say it's the bankers in the city of London or exclusively them. I don't think it is.
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: But, yes, of course, I'm not talking about all the people in England. But why do we even have to say that? I mean, obviously I'm not talking about all the people in England or the British Isles. I mean, it’s… [1:34:16]
Noor Bin Ladin: But it’s something they latch onto to try and distract from the message.
Richard Poe: Yes. Yes. It's just a distraction, but what I noticed, they don't do it when they're talking about us.
Noor Bin Ladin: No.
Richard Poe: They say the Americans did this, the Americans did that. The Americans should do this, the Americans should do that. And just recently, some British politician got up and said the Americans need to pay reparations—to Great Britain—for creating COVID. You know, this was just, I don't know, a month ago. And he didn't say only some Americans should pay reparations [laughs]…
Noor Bin Ladin: And he didn’t mention Eco Alliance.
Richard Poe: Yeah, he didn’t mention Eco Alliance, and he didn’t say…
Noor Bin Ladin: EcoHealth Alliance. I’m sorry.
Richard Poe: He didn't say, “I'm not saying all Americans should pay reparations. I'm just saying those particular individuals in the Washington beltway who may be found to have been directly implicated in COVID.” No, he didn't say that. He said all of us have to pay reparations for this, completely ignoring the fact that the British themselves were deeply complicit in it. And, as far as my research tells me, they appear to have been the initiators of the whole project, as indeed the British have been the initiators of all population control agendas since the time of Thomas Malthus in the 18th century. [1:35:45]
I mean, this has been a British obsession for centuries, and for obvious reasons, because Britain is a small, overpopulated island. Americans, on the other hand, have had this huge wilderness of North America, which was very sparsely populated, and, you know, the idea of overpopulation just wasn't that big in our minds. [1:36:11]
Again, it's not that…
Noor Bin Ladin: No
Richard Poe: …we’re nicer or better than the British people, but their situation, you might say, even compelled them to start thinking in terms of population pressures at a much earlier date than we ever did. And yet when you read… [1:36:30]
Noor Bin Ladin: Yes, but this, as well, is something that I believe to be manufactured as a reason to take over all the resources, but, Richard, we’ve been now talking for an hour and a half. People after this call will understand how I can spend four or five hours on the phone with you on Skype, discussing so many things and learning from you. But I really do want to get to this. [Holds up bound copy of article, “How the British Invented Communism (and Blamed It on the Jews).”] [1:37:00]
Richard Poe: Oh, okay. I'm sorry.
Noor Bin Ladin: No, don't apologize.
Richard Poe: Well, do we have… an hour and a half. My goodness.
Noor Bin Ladin: No, but let's continue, but I would say maybe we do another half hour or so, but I really want us to get into the article.
Richard Poe: Okay. Absolutely. Well, the article is called, “How the British Invented Communism (and Blamed It on the Jews).” And basically what I showed in this article is that, in 1920, the British government itself launched a huge anti-Jewish propaganda campaign spearheaded by Winston Churchill. [1:37:44]
Churchill in, I think it was in February of 1920, wrote an article in the Illustrated Sunday News, a British paper that time. I don't know if it still exists. But he wrote a big long article in which he basically said that the Jews were taking over Russia and turning it into a communist inferno, a communist hell. And he was very explicit in saying that the people responsible for this were Jews. And he added the detail of saying that they were atheistic, primarily “atheistical,” “international” Jews, as opposed to religious Jews whom he deemed to be good. [1:38:35]
So he drew a dichotomy between “good” Jews, who were religious, and “atheistical” quote-unquote “international” Jews, whom he deemed to be bad, and taking part in this communist revolution. [1:38:52]
Now, at that time, of course, Britain was pushing Zionism. Britain had made this agreement to form a Jewish state in the Middle East. So part of Churchill’s agenda in this article was he was saying the good religious Jews should go and form a Jewish state in Palestine, in cooperation with the British empire, but these bad Jews, supposedly, these Jews who were supposedly bad, according to Churchill, who were raising hell in Russia and creating a Bolshevik state, needed to be fought and defeated. [1:39:33]
Now the big lie of this article—and Churchill certainly knew it was a lie—is that these “bad Jews,” as he literally called them, these “atheistical,” “international” Jews, quote-unquote, who were causing problems in Russia and forming a Bolshevik regime, and fighting a great civil war at the time, in 1920—it was the reds against the whites, the communists against the anticommunists—and the big lie which Churchill concealed from the public is that the Bolsheviks, the ones he called “bad Jews,” were being supported by the British. They had been infiltrated by British intelligence long before the Revolution and were, in some sense, possibly being, it might not be going too far to say they were being run by British intelligence. And Churchill knew that. [1:40:38]
And the reason the British were doing this was because they wanted to overthrow the Tsar. Although the Tsar was a British ally in World War I, the British had for hundreds of years had a terrible rivalry with the Russian Empire. They were trying to stop Russian expansion. They were always trying to stir up revolts among the various subject peoples of the Russian Empire, and they were especially trying to keep the Russians from getting access to warm water ports, ports that were open during the winter, because they didn't want the Russian fleet, especially the Black Sea Russian fleet, to be able to travel at will into the Mediterranean Sea and challenge British control of the Mediterranean, which would mean that British control of the Suez Canal was threatened, British control of the trade routes to the East would be threatened, and these trade routes to the East which had long been important, since ancient times, because they meant trade with India and points east, these trade routes had become even more valuable by the time of World War I, because they had discovered oil, very rich oil fields in Persia, what we now call Iran. [1:42:03]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: And Russia had the northern part of Persia under its zone of influence. Great Britain had the southern part of Persia, and there was a neutral zone between them. So, long story short, the British wanted to get control of Persia and all of its oil fields. They also wanted to get control of the Russian oil fields, which were primarily in the Caucasus. And so, for this and other reasons, they backed the Bolsheviks. [1:42:32]
First of all, there were two Russian revolutions. The first one was essentially a palace coup where the Tsar’s own relatives actually colluded with the British to overthrow him and replace the Tsar with a liberal, democratic regime run by the Russian Duma. But it was really an oligarchy run by the liberal Grand Dukes, who were relatives of the Tsar, and they were all led by a man named Sir George Buchanan, who was the British ambassador at the time. And he's the one who organized this whole thing. [1:43:14]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: And this accusation against Buchanan was first made publicly by a Russian noblewoman, and her name was Princess Paley. She was the wife of the Grand Duke Paul, who was one of these liberal conspirators. So her family, her husband, her stepson, and various others, they were actually involved with the British. They had been directly involved with the plot to basically trick Tsar Nicholas into giving up his crown. That's kind of a complicated story, but he was initially told that he only had to agree to a constitutional monarchy. And then somehow he was compelled to sign an abdication instead. This whole intrigue, which was carried out with the direct collusion of the Tsar’s closest relatives, many of them close heirs to the throne, working with the British embassy. So this Princess Paley, her husband Paul was one of those conspirators. They were directly involved in working with the British to overthrow the Tsar. [1:44:29]
But Princess Paley later decided that the British had betrayed her because what the British had promised was a constitutional government, where liberal values would be respected and everybody would be free and modern and democratic and all those wonderful things that we continue hearing today every time a war breaks out, we're told that's the goal. But instead of getting all that liberalism they were promised, they got the Bolshevik Revolution, which was led by a guy named Leon Trotsky, who was, in fact, a British agent. [1:45:09]
He had been recruited by British intelligence at some point. We're not exactly sure in what year, but it could have been as early as 1917 or even earlier. But, in 1917, Trotsky was in New York working as a journalist. The revolution broke out in Russia on March 15th. That's when the Tsar abdicated. Trotsky rushed to go to Russia. He got on a ship. He was arrested by the British in Halifax. He was imprisoned in an internment camp for a month. And then, for reasons unknown, the British SIS, this guy Sir William Wiseman, whom I mentioned before—the very same one who had been working with Colonel House to basically run Woodrow Wilson as a British asset—this same William Wiseman ordered the release of Trotsky, so he could go to Russia and lead the revolution. And he did. [1:46:14]
Noor Bin Ladin: Fascinating.
Richard Poe: So Trotsky led the revolution successfully. He installed the Bolshevik regime. Lenin was put in power, but everybody knew and acknowledged that Trotsky was the driving force. And not only did Trotsky lead the actual coup on the night of the Bolshevik Revolution, but he was then put in charge of the Red Army and the Red Navy and, under his command, the Russian forces beat the White forces, during the Russian Civil War, which went on for five years and killed an estimated 10 million people.
So there is absolutely no question. For this and many other reasons which I discussed at length in my article, it is very clear that the British were up to their eyeballs, playing both sides against the middle, in both Russian revolutions and in the Russian Civil War. And it was in the British power to determine who would take over in Russia. It was their call. And they could have installed anybody they wanted to. [1:47:25]
At one point, the British had 60,000 troops stationed in Russia during the civil war, and they had 200,000 total foreign troops, who were basically, I don't think they were formally under British command, but everybody knew the British were running the show. They were there because of the British urging them to be there. There were American troops, I think 13,000 of them. It was a British operation all the way. [1:47:56]
And the British always, from the very beginning, had the power to end it anytime they wanted and to install whatever sort of regime they wanted to. And I think that I argued successfully, in my article, building on the work of historians before me, who I think have proved all these things very definitively, that the British really did install the Bolshevik regime and they did it in order to eliminate the Romanov dynasty, to eliminate Tsar Nicholas II. [1:48:33]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: There's no question that the prime minister Lloyd George, when he had the opportunity to support monarchist forces among the White Russians who wanted to bring back the monarchy, Lloyd George was totally against that. England was a monarchy, but he did not want a monarchy in Russia, and he was very, very clear about that. And he would not support monarchists. [1:48:56]
He would not support nationalists. Because nationalist Russians would want to keep the Russian Empire together, and it was the British goal to split up the empire into pieces. They split off Poland into an independent country. They split off Finland. They split off the Baltic states and they temporarily split off Ukraine and various parts of the Caucasus. [1:49:21]
The original British goal was to split off the whole Caucasus and turn it into a British protectorate, so they would have control of the Caucasus oil, in addition to control over Persia, which they gained through the Russian Revolution. [1:49:38]
They abandoned that plan after awhile, for some reason. I guess they felt a little too overextended. But, at one point, the British had, I believe they had 40,000 troops in the Caucasus. That was their largest deployment and they were there expressly for the purpose of taking control of the Caucasus oil fields. And they eventually abandoned that plan. I suspect that possibly they made some kind of commercial deals with the Bolsheviks that enabled them to profit from those oil wells some other way. That would normally be how they handle things. [1:50:16]
Noor Bin Ladin: And they were also busy in the Middle East.
Richard Poe: Yes, well, they basically took control of Iran. That was the big prize. And that was a huge prize. That was the first major Middle Eastern oil strike, was the discovery of the Persian oil, and Trotsky—again, who I think I convincingly have argued was a British agent—one of the first things Trotsky did when he took power, his first position was the foreign minister, or foreign commissar, he called himself. And within days of taking that position, he unilaterally surrendered all Russian claims in Persia, which were worth millions upon millions. He just gave them up. And the British took them. He gave them up to the British knowingly. And the British took over all the Persian oil. It was one of the greatest prizes of World War I, and the British got it thanks to Trotsky. [1:51:23]
And then Trotsky, it was also Trotsky personally, he got a local commander in Mumansk, this Northern Arctic Sea port where the British had been bringing in supplies throughout World War I, and Trotsky arranged for the commander of Murmansk, a guy named Yuryev, to contact the British fleet—which was hanging around Murmansk, waiting for their opportunity—to contact them and invite them to land and to help defend Murmansk supposedly against the Germans. [1:51:57]
And so, in addition to Trotsky turning over all the Persian oil fields to the British within days of his taking power, he very shortly afterwards invited the British and their whole Allied Expeditionary Force of many countries to land in Russia. All this was done by Trotsky. He was an amazingly valuable agent for the British…
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: …an extraordinarily valuable agent. And, in fact, he was convicted in the Moscow Treason Trials of 1937 and 1938. The Stalin regime accused Trotsky of being a British agent, and brought forth witnesses, one of whom was a Soviet diplomat named Christian Rakovsky, who said that he had been approached in London by the British MI6 and they had blackmailed him, using some kind of forged letter, and recruited him as a British agent. [1:52:59]
So Rakovsky claims that he then went back to Moscow and confronted Trotsky of having colluded with British intelligence to set him up this way. And he claims that Trotsky admitted it. Trotsky said, yes, I'm sorry. We had to do this forged letter as a pretext, but basically you and I are both working for British intelligence now. This is what Rakovsky testified at his treason trial. [1:53:27]
Now, Trotsky was found guilty in absentia. He wasn't in the country at the time. And this was a Soviet show trial. I'm not saying that it's the most reliable source of information, but there's plenty of independent evidence that corroborates this. And so the chances of Trotsky not being a British spy are almost zil. [1:53:54]
And another thing was that after he was released from Halifax by Sir William Wiseman, the head of MI6 in the United States, he went to Russia and there he had many British handlers who kept track of him. And one of these was Claire Sheridan. She was a British sculptress who posed as a Bolshevik sympathizer. But she was actually, according to some very reliable sources, she was actually a British spy. And, in fact, she was a first cousin of Winston Churchill. And she was not only Churchill's first cousin, but of all his relatives, she was the closest to them. It’s said they were like brother and sister. [1:54:48]
And so she, on the pretext of sculpting Trotsky's portrait, allegedly seduced him, became his lover. Apparently he was quite taken by her, and he even begged her to accompany him on his armored train as he went to the front in Poland. He was trying to fight the separatists in Poland at that point. [1:55:12]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: And she excused herself. She had other business to go to, other Bolsheviks to seduce, I think.
Noor Bin Ladin: [Laughs]
Richard Poe: Okay. [Chuckles] I'm not saying that as a joke. She cut a wide swath through the Bolshevik leadership of the time. She seduced quite a few of them…
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm.
Richard Poe: …in addition to Trotsky. But she was Winston Churchill's first cousin, and, according to reliable sources, was a British spy. So anyway, it's all very interesting and fascinating, but, lest we get lost in all those entertaining details… [1:55:50]
Noor Bin Ladin:
I was going to say, who needs Netflix when you have Richard Poe articles like this?
Richard Poe: [Laughs] Well, thank you. But seriously, lest we get lost in the entertaining stuff—as entertaining as it sometimes is—the real point is, ever since then we’ve had this idea that this thing called communism is our greatest threat in the world. And it is indeed a threat, but how can we fight this threat if we don't understand what it really is? And what I think I succeeded in proving in my article, “How the British Invented Communism,” is that the British have been engaged, for at least 200 years, maybe more—but certainly since the French Revolution and before—have been engaged in this business that we now call color revolution. And, in my article, I called this the British secret weapon. [1:57:00]
And again, it's one of the many ingenious adaptations that the British had to make to being a small country, which never had a large enough population to field great armies, as some other countries did. And so they had to develop all kinds of techniques and technologies to compensate for their small size and to enable them to “punch above their weight” is a term they like to use a lot. And one of the most important of these is the ability to subvert other governments and overthrow them by creating fake revolutions, by using their extremely capable secret services to co-opt existing revolutionary movements, or to simply create revolutionary movements from scratch, and to penetrate and control those revolutionary movements to act on behalf of British interests, to overthrow governments, which are deemed enemies of the British Empire and to replace them with governments that are at least realistically expected to obey orders from London, which doesn't always happen quite the way they want. But the British appear to have perfected this art to a level of skill that I can't see any other example, by any other country. [1:58:43]
And it appears, and I argue in some detail in this very same article—part of the reason it's so long—I go back through history to give the basis of what they did in Russia. And I go back to the French Revolution…
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: …and show how the British were actually responsible for that. I show how communism arose from certain French revolutionaries, in particular, one Gracchus Babeuf…
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: …who was recognized even by Marx and Engels themselves as being the originator of what they thought was true communism. [1:59:21]
Noor Bin Ladin: That's what we're taught in school and everything, that it's Marx and Engels who were the fathers of communism. So that was definitely something that I learned in this article, this Babeuf character. [1:59:33]
Richard Poe: Yes. Marx and Engels literally never claimed to be the inventors of communism. They would have been laughed at if they had claimed such a thing in the 1840s. Everybody knew that communism had been around before these men were born. Everybody knew it. And so, yes, they did a lot of work. They wrote books. They added a lot of features and fine tuning. But what appears to be the case with many of the French revolutionaries, as well as with Marxs and Engels later, is that they were under British control, or they were under British influence. [2:00:22]
And I can't get into all the details, but when Marx went to England, he made the acquaintance of a Scottish nobleman named Urquhart, David Urquhart, who was an arch-reactionary who wanted to bring back the feudal system and all the aristocratic privileges of that day. And, to make a long story short, Urquhart and a few other aristocrats were part of this movement called Young England. And the Young England movement was offered by certain elements of the British aristocracy as a solution to the injustices of the industrial age. [2:01:14]
Everybody knew in England by the 1830s, 1840s that industrialization had created some terrible problems, that people were leaving the countryside, coming to the cities en masse, and men, women and children were working around the clock in these dreadful factories, and being terribly treated, poorly paid, under the most dreadful conditions. And so the aristocrats of Young England rose up and said this is happening because we've gotten away from the old feudal ways. In the old days, everybody was a serf, and your master, your feudal lord, took care of you and fed you and clothed you, and gave you a place to live and made sure you had work, and everybody had what they needed, even though you didn't really own anything, you didn't own your own land, you didn't own your own house… [2:02:16]
Noor Bin Ladin: Sounds familiar.
Richard Poe: Yeah, you didn't own anything. But you were happy.
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: [Laughs]
Noor Bin Ladin: Sounds very familiar.
Richard Poe: Yes. Yes. The more things change, the more they stay the same. [2:02:30]
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: Of course somebody owned something. It just wasn't you and me. It was the people at the top. (2:02:40)
Noor Bin Ladin: The overlords.
Richard Poe: Yes. So these aristocratic landowners came forward and said we're here to help. Look at these terrible conditions. This is all caused by the middle classes, the middle-class bourgeoisie who had emerged in the late middle ages and became shopkeepers and what have you, and made money and they basically broke the feudal system. Supposedly. So these Young Englanders came forth and said, it's all the fault of those money-grubbing middle-class people, and if we just get rid of them, then we can go back to the way it was. And everyone will be happy. [2:03:25]
Now Marx made common cause with this man Urquhart. And, in fact, the communists and socialists of that day in England, in general, made common cause with these aristocratic Young Englanders, because they both agreed that the great enemy of civilization was the bourgeoisie, the businessman, the middle class, not the landed aristocracy. They both agreed that, if the bourgeoisie could be eliminated, then you could have a wonderful society of landowning aristocrats and very poor people being taken care of by these landed aristocrats in a kind of patriarchal fashion, and this would be better than the industrialized world that Marx and Engels critiqued. [2:04:18]
Noor Bin Ladin: Build back better.
Richard Poe: Yes. Yes, exactly. So, for this reason, an alliance formed between the aristocrats of Young England, as the movement was called, and the socialists and communists, and this was the basis of the collaboration between Urquhart and Marx. They were part of a much larger movement of communists and socialists collaborating with aristocrats to stamp out the bourgeoisie, to stamp out the middle class. And, if you read the works of Marx, there's no question the people he's going after are the bourgeoisie. He clearly says that the feudal aristocrats are no longer a problem because they were supposedly overthrown by the bourgeoisie and they basically no longer exist. They no longer have power. No need to worry about them. [2:05:15]
So this was an alliance that was formed. And in the late 19th century, a guy named Alfred Milner, who later became part of the Rhodes group that I spoke about earlier, he actually became the head, he was the heir of Cecil Rhodes in taking over this movement of Imperial Federation, which became known as the Round Table.
Noor Bin Ladin: Mm-hm.
Richard Poe: And this was—just to remind you—this was a program to create a world global government, basically under the authority of the English-speaking world. [2:05:58]
Noor Bin Ladin: Yeah.
Richard Poe: The idea was to incorporate the United States into the British Empire and create an English-speaking superstate, which would control the world.
Now, this man, Alfred Milner, when he was just a young student, he was in his twenties, in 1882 or ‘83, I think. I forget which. Maybe 1882. He gave a lecture in which he stated that basically that England's greatest secret weapon was socialism. And he praised Karl Marx.
Noor Bin Ladin: Mmmm.
Richard Poe: It was the last year of Marx's life. He praised Karl Marx by name as a great genius and he praised socialism as having been responsible for England’s great success, and for its anticipated success in the future, because, he said, that, by giving the people some form of socialism, that England was able to prevent revolution, whereas other countries—he named France and Germany, for example—he said the things that radicals and socialists in France and [Germany] of 1882, the things they were seeking at that time, he said, we've had here in England since 1834. [2:07:18]
And what he meant by that reference was the New Poor Laws, so-called, of 1834, and also the various Factory Acts that had been passed in England throughout the 19th century. These Poor Laws and Factory Acts were meant to ameliorate the condition of the working class, shortening their work hours, putting curbs on child labor, setting up a system of work houses, and so forth and so on. [2:07:49]
And so Milner argued that, by giving socialism or socialist programs to the lower class, basically the upper classes could avoid revolution and continue being as upper-class as they wanted to be. And the only problem, Milner said, was that pesky middle class, who were always insisting upon freedom and rule of law and the freedom of the individual to do this and that, and this was the great disturbing force in the world, was the middle-class, because the lower classes would be very happy to accept their handouts through these socialist programs. The upper classes would be very happy to allow these handouts, which didn't cost them very much, but it was always that pesky middle class that wanted freedom and democracy and just all these pesky, unrealistic things that the upper and lower classes didn't want. [2:08:55]
And so we see this anti-middle-class, anti-bourgeois attitude very consistently throughout the 19th century, both through the aristocratic movements and through the so-called leftwing movements, the socialist movements, the communist movements. The villain was always the middle class. It was always the bourgeoisie. Because what they were both aiming for, whether they even consciously realized it or not—and I'm sure many of the revolutionaries may not have realized—but what it was all working towards was a new feudalism. And this is what I argued in my latest article, “How the British Invented Communism.” And it's what I've argued really in this whole new series of articles. And… have we run out of time? [2:09:49]
Noor Bin Ladin: And this is exactly what we see today. When we look at the events of the past four or so years, especially. Like looking really at the, close to us in terms of time, the so-called pandemic followed by the manufactured crisis in Ukraine, has been all about destroying the middle class and installing this feudalism system 2.0. [2:10:16]
Richard Poe: Yes. And, I'm not sure. Do we still have time?
Noor Bin Ladin: Yeah, we can start wrapping up. It’s been two hours and 10 minutes, but don't feel rushed, but…
Richard Poe: Oh my gosh.
Noor Bin Ladin: I think we did a good, how do you say, overview? And we're slowly coming towards the end. But it fits perfectly, so just feel free to…
Richard Poe: I just realized I had started saying a point and didn't finish it, about Princess Paley, whose husband was Grand Duke Paul, the uncle of Nicholas II. So this Princess Paley is very important in my article because she actually wrote a book, I think in 1924, where she accused the British and she accused, in particular.
Sir George Buchanan, of fomenting the Russian Revolution. And she really knew what she was talking about, as I explained, because she had been at the heart of these intrigues. [2:11:15]
And so, this accusation, that had been made very publicly by a very prominent member of the Russian Royal Family—and she published it in France, where she was in exile at the time—it was because of this type of accusation, which had been, these accusations had been seeping out for some time, but, for this reason, this is why the British Establishment in 1920 went to such lengths to accuse the Jews, in particular, of being the primary fomenters of the Russian Revolution. That was the point that I wanted to make. And it's not to say that the Jews weren't involved in the Bolshevik Revolution. Obviously they were… [2:12:02]
Noor Bin Ladin: But they weren't the chief instigators.
Richard Poe: Well, the point is they had no power to overthrow the Russian government themselves. That's the point. However many Jews were involved with Bolshevism or however nuch money may have come from overseas to help them, they had no physical power to overthrow the Tsar, and to set up a constitutional government through the Duma, and then to overthrow that government through a coup, and then to wage a five-year civil war with the Russian military, in which 10 million people died. There weren't any Jews in the world who had the capability. Of pulling off this physical feat, especially the civil war. [2:12:57]
You know, doing the coup where they took over Petrograd, now called St. Petersburg again, that was nothing compared to the next five years where they had to conquer the entire country against huge armies under these White generals, who had been the same generals who had served the Tsar. They had to defeat the Russian military. [2:13:20]
They could not do this without the help of the British government, and this is the real point. And that's why, when Winston Churchill put out this article and the whole British government backed him up on this. They put out a report in April of 1919. It was called the Bolshevik Atrocity Blue Book and it, basically, this came out from the British Foreign Office, and they basically said that the Jews were behind the assassination of the Tsar, and behind all of the atrocities of the Red Terror. And, again, whatever true facts may have been in that report, the fact is that the Jewish people, or whatever faction of the Jewish people supported the Bolsheviks, simply did not have the power to conquer the Russian Empire. [2:14:19]
But the British Empire, working through its elaborate intelligence networks and even putting boots on the ground during the Russian Civil War, the British Empire and its allies, yes, they had the power to do it. And this is the great secret, it’s the great untold story of the Russian Revolution and the Russian Civil War, is the part that Great Britain played in it. And it was the decisive part. [2:14:52]
And Churchill, in that same article, he said, not only have the Jews fomented this revolution in Russia, but they have fomented every revolution in Europe, throughout the entire, for the last 150 years. And he mentioned the French Revolution. He mentioned the Bavarian Illuminati of Adam Weishaupt, and, he implied, all the 1848 revolutions. And so that's why I went back, in my article, I was curious, I was saying, what possessed Churchill to make such an extravagant claim in the year 1920? And I'm convinced that, in both cases, his blaming the Russian Revolution, really, almost exclusively, on the Jews, and then blaming all these other revolutions on the Jews, I believe these were cover stories. They were intelligence narratives to cover for British intelligence activity in Russia, in France, in the revolutions of 1848. He put forth a cover story that a Jewish cabal had done all these revolutions when, in fact, it was primarily the British secret services who had done them. [2:16:10]
And so I think this article that Churchill wrote in 1920 was really a big cover story for a long history of British intelligence operations, implementing what we now call color revolutions. And I think, it appears the British invented this very potent weapon of destabilization and color revolution, or at least they developed it to a very high degree, higher than it had ever been developed before and used it with great success, from the French Revolution to the Russian Revolutions, and I'm sure beyond to the present day. [2:16:54]
And it is my contention, as you know—and I've written about this as well—that the troubles we're experiencing in America today appear very likely to be caused by similar sorts of British operations, which are now targeting our country.
And why target our country? Well, for the same reason, Sun-Yat-Sen explained back in 1917.
First the British go to country A, and say, why don't you attack country B for us? Then, when country B has been defeated, and country A is now the most powerful in the world, then they build up another country to attack country A, so they don't become too powerful. And what do we see happening right now? We see China suddenly built up to be a superpower, which supposedly is able to rival the United States. And how did this happen?
Well back in the early Nineties, Lord William Reese-Mogg, a man whom I have dubbed “the man who created George Soros”—and you can read about him in my article, “How the British Invented George Soros”—but this man… [2:18:09]
Noor Bin Ladin: Who was also a proponent of feudalism 2.0, as you also wrote about.
Richard Poe: Yes. Yes, exactly. And Rees-Mogg, who was one of the most renowned and influential British journalists of his time—he died in 2012—he led a campaign through the press to encourage Western investors to pour money into China, for the express purpose of building up China into a global superpower that would rival and surpass the United States in power. And he wrote this in his column in The Times of London, and I've tweeted about this quite a bit. [2:18:57]
He absolutely laid on the table what he intended. He said power is moving from West to East and we must help it move. We must drain power from the West, and pour it into the east, so the East becomes paramount. And he said to any nervous investors, he said, if you're nervous that it's a communist country and they may not follow the rules of investment, they might keep your money. He says, no, they're not going to do that. He says, I can assure you that anybody who helps this Chinese regime, they need this offshore capital so much that anybody who gives it to them, they will be treated like gold. And the Chinese will make it worth your while. He was saying this openly, from the pages of The Times of London. [2:19:47]
And, in addition, he was saying most of this money will have to get to China through offshore banking havens, what we call dark money today. And he was saying, and he used as an example, George Soros and his Quantum Fund, which is domiciled in the Netherlands Antilles, and Rees-Mogg, in the early Nineties, used Soros and his Quantum Fund as an example. He says, this is an example of the kind of institution that will be very useful in siphoning money into China for this noble purpose of building up China into a global superpower which will rival the United States. [2:20:33]
So now we're being told, oh my gosh, China is so powerful and now we're going to have to fight them. And everyone has forgotten that only 30 years ago, Lord William Rees-Mogg was the world's leading cheerleader exhorting the global investment community to cause this Chinese threat to happen. [2:20:59]
And how short our memories are, and how terribly we suffer. And how terribly we must pay for having short memories and not remembering how these situations came about in the first place. [2:21:15]
And that's why I'm very much devoted now to going back in history and trying to go to the root of these situations that we find ourselves in now today, because you don't have to go back very far to see how it happened. And once you start looking at the original primary documents, and realizing what really happened, you see that our history books have been doctored and edited in such a way as to make it impossible for us to understand our own history, and therefore to understand our own present. [2:21:53]
Noor Bin Ladin: There's a reason why I call you the OG regime fighter, Richard, and we owe you a tremendous debt for doing that work. And I cannot stress enough to the listeners how meticulous you are in going and finding those source texts and original texts to uncover what they've tried, they, the globalists, the British, what they've tried so hard to suppress as part of their rewriting of history and their propaganda and psyops that have led us to this point. [2:22:31]
Richard Poe: Well, thank you for that, Noor. We all have to do our part. We all have to do our bit. I hope what I'm doing is useful.
Noor Bin Ladin: Tremendously useful.
Richard Poe: I guess we'll all find out sooner or later. Things seem to be coming to a head. We're all going to find out how useful we are pretty soon, or maybe how useful we aren't. [Chuckles]
Noor Bin Ladin: No, but I agree with you. We all have to do our bit, however we can. In any case, I can speak for myself, but I learned so much from you, whether from reading your work, as I mentioned earlier, and I'm very privileged to be able to have many calls with you both off and on air, because it definitely contributes to my understanding of where we are today. So thank you for everything, Richard.
Richard Poe: Always a pleasure and an honor.
Noor Bin Ladin: And I love tweeting with you and doing our little things over there too. It’s fun.
Richard Poe: Oh, me too. Yes.
Noor Bin Ladin: We have to have some fun. We have to have some fun, so…
Richard Poe: Absolutely. Absolutely.
Noor Bin Ladin: You’ll have to come back on soon.
Richard Poe: I await your invitation. I am…
Noor Bin Ladin: Anytime.
Richard Poe: Thank you.
Noor Bin Ladin: We’ll do it again. I hope everybody will enjoy our conversation. I have no doubt they'll enjoy listening to you speak, Richard, and I'll put some links in the description box. Obviously, all your articles from this series “How the British…” can be found on your Substack, RichardPoe.substack.com, but everything will be down below, so don’t worry, for the listeners.
Richard Poe: And, of course, I’m…
Noor Bin Ladin: Is there anything else we should share or is there anything else you want to mention, like Twitter?
Richard Poe: Well, I'm on Twitter, @RealRichardPoe. I have a website, RichardPoe.com. I have a book called The Shadow Party about George Soros that I co-wrote with David Horowitz.
Noor Bin Ladin: Yeah, that we mentioned at the beginning. Yeah, just before we wrap up for the anecdote and we tweeted about it the other day, but, in that book, you were the first to talk about the DA's and how Soros was infiltrating the US by funding these DA's and other infiltration tactics, and you identified that the first Soros-backed DA was in Albany, New York. But that was 20 years ago now. So this has been going on for a long time, and this is information that is now becoming more and more widespread. And it was very interesting, there was this map circulating on Twitter the other day that showed all the different points where Soros DA's are in place, in office, and that Albany one wasn't even there. So who knows actually how many there are, as we pointed out on Twitter.
Richard Poe: Right. Right.
Noor Bin Ladin: So yeah, The Shadow Party, I’ll link to that, of course, your website, Twitter, and your Substack. So all of this will be down there, and our previous phone conversations.
Richard Poe: Well, thank you again, Noor. It's been a great pleasure.
Noor Bin Ladin: Thanks, Richard. I'll see you offline. Bye.
Richard Poe: Bye bye.
Noor Bin Ladin: Bye
[2:26:02]
Richard Poe is a New York Times-bestselling author and journalist. He co-wrote with David Horowitz The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Sixties Radicals Seized Control of the Democratic Party. Poe is presently writing a history of globalism. His work is available at richardpoe.substack.com, RichardPoe.com, and @RealRichardPoe.
The Jews and the British Empire - Lesley Fry
https://archive.org/details/FRYLesleyTheJewsAndTheBritishEmpire1935/page/n1/mode/2up
Richard, any chance you can include audio in your essays. I read most of them either in your website or Lew Rockwell but wish I could listen to them while I drive, cut grass workout,.... sorry for being so lazy. Thanks, Jim