ON THE NORTH AFRICAN CAMPAIGN OF WW2

Many people have wondered why the British fought so long and hard for control of North Africa during World War II. One may well add that the same force was at work in America, once it was drawn into the European Conflict. Why would the British commit their military forces to fight to control a vast stretch of land that may be described as largely either desert or jejune terrain? Would it not have been better to allow the Germans to dilute their forces and waste their energies in this “God-forsaken” land? Indeed, maybe the whole of Nazi Germany might have migrated to North Africa, as a horde of Neo-Vandals. Stranger things have happened. All one needs for this to occur is a strange, visionary leader. Recall for a moment the ill-fated Jim Jones Nation’s migration to the jungles of north South America.

What then would lead the British to expend the blood of their young men in a struggle over desert dunes? Is it an inborn Quixotic trait (also affecting many American leaders) that leads the British lords into an apparently absurd strategy?

The answer is “Sic Et Non.” The avaricious British lords will expend any amount of yeoman blood for personal enrichment. They will pretend to be shocked by such a statement, but historical trends suggest it. Yet, truly, it is nutty ideas that really seize the moment” with the British lords.” In the case of the British it is the religious convictions that developed around the turn of the twentieth century in many of their leaders, such as Lord George, that Jews were party to the Abrahamic Covenant, that the Judean lands must be restored to the Jews prior to the restoration of the Kingdom of God, that Jews will then be converted to Christianity, and then the path will have been made smooth for the return of the King, Jesus Christ. The “conversion of convenience” of Disraeli must have seemed to be a hopeful sign to them.

Parenthetically, America today has the same sort of leadership, buttressed by religious leaders such as the late Rev. Jerry Falwell and Pastor John Hagee, whose benighted hordes all follow the same general line as Lord George and his crowd.

Further, by the turn of the twentieth century there was a very powerful class of Jews influencing policies. Subsequently, Captain A.M.M. Ramsay [tossed into jail for his troubles] and Nesta Webster [British historian, cited by W. Churchill, whose books are banned in Canada] remarked that “we have lost control of our country.” These Jews were generally supportive of the Zionist movement. They and their American brothers had advised the british lords that they would get America into World War I, if the British would secure for them a protected right to return to the “Holy Lands.”

An agreement was struck, leading to the Balfour Convention of 1917. Lord George thought it well to send a letter to the very powerful head of the British branch of the Rothschild family, assuring him on the issue. This action accorded with the Zionist plan for Palestine. The Balfour Convention was one of the first major steps to the protected return of the Jews to the area then known as the British Mandate, or Protectorate, of Palestine, which was under British control. Sir Mark Sykes stated, “we shall be there by conquest and shall remain.” The Balfour Declaration envisioned an establishment of a Jewish homeland. After World War II, this was accomplished in 1948.

By dent of terror by Jews against the British, as well as against the Palestinians, the British were convinced of the wisdom of leaving things in the “good hands” of the Jews of the new state of Israel (sic). Jews then began the process of  “ethnic-cleansing” and expropriation of land and other property belonging to the Palestinians or possessed by them for many scores of years.

Naturally, powerful Jewish influence in Great Britain played a role in the British Exodus from its responsibility.

Compare Britain’s tenacious fight with the Nazi German forces in North Africa with its wimpy retreat from ragtag bands of Jewish terrorists. Certainly, the wounds of World War II had not entirely healed for the British leaders. America must have been a lobbying force, arguing for the British to pull out and leave the Jews to establish order in their new country. Of course, as the world has come to see that has not come to pass. Part of the reason for this is that the state of Israel (sic) keeps expanding.

The logic that brought France and England into a state of war with Germany, due to German expansion into Poland, does not seem valid when applied by Arabs nations in connection to Jewish expansion. Arab resistance is not perceived as a form of flattery to the British leadership.

With all this in mind consider the “nightmare” situation of a Nazi Germany in control of the “Holy Lands.” Given their view of Jewry dwelling within German jurisdiction, the longed for, and/or plotted, return by Jews to Palestine would seem further away than ever before. The Return was a necessary step in the Jewish climb to their destined role of collective Messiah of the World, which reign would embrace the Restoration of the World.

Hence, the fierce struggle by the British (and later Americans) to prevent the creation of a Hitlerian German Mandate.

In considering all this one is struck by the sheer zaniness of the thinking of the leadership of both Great Britain and the U.S.A. It is chastening to recall that they think of themselves as the “best and brightest” amongst their respective people.

All rights reserved. Nomoonnight, 2009. 

Resistance, of course, develops where “conquered people” don’t choose to accept their conqueror’s “new status quo.”