PROPAGANDA IN THE NEXT WAR
Originally published in 1938
This particular book Propaganda In The Next War formed part of a series of eight volumes entitled The Next War, which were first published in England in 1938, but it is, perhaps, the most important of them all, for it exposes the thinking behind propaganda which is still prevalent to this day. Even though it was written, at a time when the military hardware and delivery systems were light years ahead of what they were when Nicolo Machiavelli wrote The Prince, this particular tome mirrors his thinking exactly. Today, Henry Kissinger, might well be regarded as the inheritor of the mantle of both Captain Sydney Rogerson (this book’s author), and the arch strategist Machiavelli, who would, I feel sure, be gratified at seeing the implementation of his thinking executed on so grand a scale at the World Trade Centre this September.
So who was Captain Sidney Rogerson and what was his agenda? His entry in Who’s Who describes him as a: “Publicity and Public Relations Consultant and author. Born 22nd of October 1894. Son of the Reverend S. Rogerson. B.A. in Modern History 1916; Served in the European War; Commissioned in the West Yorkshire Regiment 1916-1919. Demobilised in 1919. 1923-30 was Publicity Manager for the F.B.I (Federation of British Industry); Joined I.C.I (Imperial Chemical Industries) in 1930; Publicity Controller I.C.I Ltd., 1932-1952. Publicity and Public Relations Advisor to the Army Council, War Office, 1952-3-4. Hon. Col. 44th (Home Counties) Infantry Division. Signals Regiment T.A., 1955. Publications: Twelve Days, 1933: Last of the Ebb, 1937: Propaganda in the Next War,1938: Old Enchantment, 1938: Our Bird Book, 1946: Both Sides Of The Road, 1949.
His book Twelve Days was a narrative history of warfare during The Great War in the Somme during the winter of 1916, a history read by both Winston Churchill and Anthony Eden in August 1936. So Rogerson, was a man with first hand knowledge of warfare and the value of propaganda in winning that particular confrontation. Which, he used to great advantage, in compiling this important study. Of particular interest are his observations about the Japanese “tactlessly” dumping their shoddy goods in I.C.I’s traditional markets, which made it much easier to arouse hostilities towards them.
An issue, not mentioned specifically by Rogerson, concerning the causes of World Wars 1 and 2, and the one Winston Churchill recognised as the main flash point was money or, more to the point, a lack of it. Money which was created by what he referred to as our “hideous, convoluted monetary system” which prevented sufficient money from being placed in circulation. Rogerson, as the Publicity Controller for what was, at the time, the world’s largest chemical corporation was very much alive to the threat that Japan and the other axis powers posed to, not only I.C.I., but to all the members of the Federation of British Industries. They were trapped on the treadmill of debt which they could not get off, as Germany was desperately trying to do. As members of the F.B.I. – conditioned by the propaganda of the banks - they found it difficult to recognise that the conditions which caused most, if not all wars, were due, to what Keynes referred to as: “The deficiency of effective (domestic) demand.” In other words, insufficient money in circulation to “satisfy the purchasing requirements of consumers,” which was further exacerbated by those other insane notions that a country has to either: “export or die,” or that it can have either “guns or butter” but not both, even when it has failed to satisfy the needs of its own domestic population.
Archbishop William Temple correctly defined the problem in 1942: “The trend towards war is inherent in the internal economy of the modern nation. The essential evil in the ordering of European life has been the inversion of the proper relations between finance, production and consumption…”
As Winston Churchill pointed out to Lord Robert Boothby. “The unforgivable crime of Germany, before the second world war, was her attempt to extricate its economic power from the world’s trading system and create its own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit”.
In the wake of the demolition of the World Trade Centre by terrorists – and no one can deny that it was a terrorist act – it is important for us to bear in mind that the events may not have been carried out by Osama Bin Ladin or the Taliban, but by forces much closer to home. The incredible evidence this book contains and the picture it paints of the thinking and machinations of Britain towards her allies prior to World War 1, show how radically and speedily they changed to suit – what Lord Palmerston regarded as our permanent interests in the run up to World War 2. Of particular importance, to all segments of society, regardless of their country, race or religion, is the evidence it contains about Palestine, and how propaganda played a significant part in the defeat of Germany in World Wars I and II, and the role it continues to play in all conflicts where the end justifies the means.
Well known for his gruff, self-assertive manner, Lord Palmerston made Britain’s long-term intentions towards other countries and their natural resources absolutely clear when he declared that: “We no longer have permanent principles, but permanent interests, which we pursue to the exclusion of all else.” And, unfortunately, nothing has changed since he made this astonishing admission. Lord Palmerston entered parliament as John Henry Temple, a Tory, in 1807, and was Secretary of War from 1809 to 1828, before joining the Whigs. As the Whig foreign secretary 1830-34; 1835-41; and 1846-51 he helped to secure Belgian independence and worked against Russian influence in the east. During his premiership (he was Prime Minister between 1855-58 and 1859-65) he attempted to take Britain into the American Civil War on the side of the South. He defeated the Sepoy revolt during the Indian Mutiny in 1857 to 1858, and spoke out in favour of Italian Nationalism.
For the past one hundred years, or so, these “permanent interests” have included the control of the oil and gas reserves of a sizeable proportion of the world’s known resources and any new ones that are discovered. A policy heartily endorsed by Winston Churchill who openly, and unashamedly declared: "We must become the owners, or at any rate the controllers at the source, of at least a proportion of the oil which we require…”
This policy, regarding the oilfields of Mesopotamia (present day Iraq) proposed by Churchill in 1913 was fully endorsed by a British Royal Commission, which completely agreed with his policies. We should not forget the admission of T.E.Lawrence in his ‘Seven Pillars of Wisdom’ that his “betrayal”, of the Arabs, was a “regrettable” but necessary device in arriving at a “cheap and speedy victory” in order to protect Britain’s “petroleum” interests in “Mesopotamia.” Which resulted in the ‘Red Line Agreement’ and the official carving up of the oil wealth of the Islamic world following permanent dismemberment of the Turkish Caliphate and the ushering into existence (through terrorism and deception) the two “Secular: Zionist States of “Modern” Turkey and Israel.”
Churchill’s view was shared by Sir Arthur Hirtzel, Head of the British government's 'India Office Political Department. Who, in 1919, made the following recommendation, which clearly came to pass: "What we want to have in existence, what we ought to have been creating in this time is some administration with Arab institutions which we can safely leave while pulling the strings ourselves; something that won't cost very much, which the Labour government can swallow consistent with its 'principles, but under which our economic and political interests will be secure. [.....] If the French remain in Syria we shall have to avoid giving them the excuse of setting up a protectorate. If they go, or if we appear to be reactionary in Mesopotamia, there is always the risk that [King] Faisal will encourage the Americans to take over both, and it should be borne in mind that the Standard Oil company is very anxious to take over Iraq."
No one, with any real knowledge of the present situation in Afghanistan or the Middle East is under any illusion that the present crisis is all about oil and other hydrocarbons which is the holy grail for the likes of Bush, Kissinger, Enron, Unocal, and Standard Oil – for which also read Rockefeller, the Council on Foreign Relations, the U.N. and NATO.
Muslims, like most rightly thinking people, not only reject terrorism but reject any kind of violence that may be used as a means of furthering any political agenda. For this very reason we should never lose sight of the fact that: “war is politics by other means.” It is, therefore, important to be fully aware of the evidence given by John J Maresca, a Vice President of the giant Unocal Oil Corporation, to the Committee on United States Interests in the Central Asian Republics hearings before the Sub-committee on Asia and the Pacific of the Committee on International Relations House of Representatives, One Hundred Fifth Congress Second Session February 12, 1998, and whilst I am not saying that Unocal played a part in the WTC incident, both it and its allies stand to benefit from the opportunity that its demolition and the smoke screen conveniently provides for “Big Oil” to impose a government of their choice on the people of Afghanistan and the rest of Central Asia. We saw this in Iran, when the CIA toppled the democratically elected government of Mossadeg, in favour of General Zahidi, who was favoured by both the Americans and the British, because he was, in the words of Sir Samuel Fall: “vain, plausible and thoroughly untrustworthy”.
THE STATEMENT OF JOHN J. MARESCA, VICE PRESIDENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, UNOCAL CORPORATION
“Next we would like to hear from Mr. John J. Maresca, vice president of international relations, Unocal Corporation. You may proceed as you wish:
Mr. Maresca. “Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's nice to see you again. I am John Maresca, vice president for international relations of the Unocal Corporation. Unocal, as you know, is one of the world's leading energy resource and project development companies. I appreciate your invitation to speak here today. I believe these hearings are important and timely. I congratulate you for focusing on Central Asia oil and gas reserves and the role they play in shaping U.S. policy. I would like to focus today on three issues.
Ø “First, the need for multiple pipeline routes for Central Asian oil and gas resources.
Ø Second, the need for U.S. support for international and regional efforts to achieve balanced and lasting political settlements to the conflicts in the region, including Afghanistan.
Ø “Third, the need for structured assistance to encourage economic reforms and the development of appropriate investment climates in the region. In this regard, we specifically support repeal or removal of section 907 of the Freedom Support Act.
“Mr. Chairman, the Caspian region contains tremendous untapped hydrocarbon reserves. Just to give an idea of the scale, proven natural gas reserves equal more than 236 trillion cubic feet. The region's total oil reserves may well reach more than 60 billion barrels of oil. Some estimates are as high as 200 billion barrels. In 1995, the region was producing only 870,000 barrels per day. By 2010, western companies could increase production to about 4.5 million barrels a day, an increase of more than 500 percent in only 15 years. If this occurs, the region would represent about 5 percent of the world's total oil production. One major problem has yet to be resolved: how to get the region's vast energy resources to the markets where they are needed. Central Asia is isolated. Their natural resources are landlocked, both geographically and politically. Each of the countries in the Caucasus and Central Asia faces difficult political challenges. Some have unsettled wars or latent conflicts. Others have evolving systems where the laws and even the courts are dynamic and changing. In addition, a chief technical obstacle, which we in the industry face in transporting oil, is the region's existing pipeline infrastructure. Because the region's pipelines were constructed during the Moscow-centred Soviet period, they tend to head north and west toward Russia. There are no connections to the south and east. But Russia is currently unlikely to absorb large new quantities of foreign oil. It's unlikely to be a significant market for new energy in the next decade. It lacks the capacity to deliver it to other markets...From the outset we have made it clear that the construction of the pipeline we have proposed across Afghanistan could not begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders, and our company. "
Mr. John J. Maresca, vice president of international relations, Unocal Corporation
As is well known, the owners of Standard Oil and its allies have always coveted the oil and gas reserves of the world and have used every trick in the book to own or control its supply. In his Reminiscences, John D. Rockefeller, the owner of Standard Oil (ESSO), informed us that the entire American administration – including the CIA, and its Armed forces were at its disposal to achieve what it could not otherwise achieve by fair means or foul: “One of our greatest helpers has been the State Department in Washington. Our ambassadors and ministers and consuls have aided to push our way into new markets to the utmost corners of the world...”
As Garry Allen also points out in his: The Rockefeller File, pages 159-160: “American foreign policy has meant billions of dollars for the Rockefellers. It has been paid for in many cases by the blood of our soldiers and in every case by the sweat of our tax payers”. A point further confirmed by Washington reporter Jack Anderson in 1967: “...the State Department has often taken its policies right out of the executive suites of the oil companies. When Big Oil can’t get what it wants in foreign countries, the State Department tries to get it for them. In many countries, the American Embassies function virtually as branch offices for the Oil combine...The State Department can be found almost always on the side of the ‘seven sisters’ as the oil giants are known inside the industry...”
To which Allen further adds: “ Just as the Rockefellers make sure that their capos (men) are running “our” perennially disastrous foreign policy, you can bet your last devalued dollar that the Rockefeller Mafia controls the national and international money game. The Rockefellers have made the Treasury Department virtually a branch of Chase Manhatten Bank.”
This global control of oil - through the power of money enforced by an army of military bailiffs - began in the late 1880’s with the decision made by Admiral Jack Fisher that the British Fleet would convert to oil as its primary fuel which, under the policy of “strategic denial”, would then belong to Britain and be denied, where ever possible, to all others.
1913. As usual most of our foreign policies were, and still are, driven by booty not duty: "We must become the owners, or at any rate the controllers at the source, of at least a proportion of the oil which we require…”
This policy, proposed by Winston Churchill, was endorsed by a British Royal Commission, which fully agreed with his policies towards Iraq (Mesopotamia), in 1913.
1919. "What we want to have in existence, what we ought to have been creating in this time is some administration with Arab institutions which we can safely leave while pulling the strings ourselves; something that won't cost very much, which the Labour government can swallow consistent with its 'principles, but under which our economic and political interests will be secure. [.....] If the French remain in Syria we shall have to avoid giving them the excuse of setting up a protectorate. If they go, or if we appear to be reactionary in Mesopotamia, there is always the risk that [King] Faisal will encourage the Americans to take over both, and it should be borne in mind that the Standard Oil company is very anxious to take over Iraq."
Sir Arthur Hirtzel, Head of the British government's 'India Office Political Department. 1919
1947. "Our strategic and security interests throughout the world will be best safeguarded by the establishment in suitable spots of 'Police Stations', fully equipped to deal with emergencies within a large radius. Kuwait is one such spot from which Iraq, South Persia, Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf could be controlled. It will be worthwhile to go to considerable trouble and expense to establish and man a 'Police Station' there." British Foreign Office, policy memo, 1947
The following confirms what Presidents Jefferson, Lincoln and Jackson feared would happen when Corporations became “enthroned” and worked upon the prejudices of the people in order to maintain their grip on power and the world’s resources.
1913. "We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the world - no longer a Government of free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men."
NOTE PLEASE MAKE FONT SMALLER: President Woodrow Wilson, following the establishment of the privately owned Federal Reserve System in 1913.
1941. "If war aims are stated which seem to be solely concerned with Anglo-American imperialism, they will offer little to people in the rest of the world. The interests of other peoples should be stressed. This would have a better propaganda effect."
Private memo from The Council of Foreign Relations to the US State Department, 1941
1998. "The U.S.A. has supplied arms, security equipment and training to governments and armed groups that have committed torture, political killings and other human rights abuses in countries around the world."
Amnesty International ["United States of America - Rights for All] October 1998
If the United Nations continues to fail to exercise its mandate in the interests of the whole of humanity, then its supporters and critics would appear to be correct in their assessments of its aims and objectives. Furthermore, as the Rockefellers and Standard Oil provided the land for the United Nations and much of its initial funding it seems unlikely that their intentions for the organisation were - at any stage – honourable or humanitarian; and explain why Israel and the United States are never brought to task for their continuous rejection of any U.N. resolution deemed “hostile to their interests” – For which read Rockefeller, Standard Oil, et al.
Ø David Ben Gurion, Time Magazine, August 16th 1948: “The United Nations is a Jewish Ideal”.
Ø Harry Klein, New York Jewish Lawyer: “The United Nations is Zionism”. In ‘Zionism Rules The World’.
Ø United States Congressman James B. Utt: “The United Nations has strict double standards which guide it through its devious treacherous path to world domination.”
Ø James Paul Warburg, to the United States Senate on February 17th, 1950: “We will have world government, whether or not we like it. The only question is, whether world government will be achieved by conquest or consent.”
Ø Ramsey Clark the Former U.S. Attorney General under President Lyndon Johnson made absolutely clear: "The greatest crime since World War II has been U.S. foreign policy."
Ø General David Sharp a former United States Marine Commandant 1966: "I believe that if we had and would keep our dirty, bloody, dollar soaked fingers out of the business of these [Third World] nations so full of depressed, exploited people, they will arrive at a solution of their own. And if unfortunately their revolution must be of the violent type because the "haves" refuse to share with the "have-nots" by any peaceful method, at least what they get will be their own, and not the American style, which they don't want and above all don't want crammed down their throats by Americans."
In 1799, Thomas Jefferson gave the following warning, which has been ignored, along with other good advice right up to the present day: “Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day, but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, unalterable through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing us to slavery.” Subsequently referred to as: “the conspiracy theory”.
If America does not heed these warnings, she may well become, (as predicted by David Ben-Gurion in Look magazine and Life magazine of January 1962): “A Welfare State with A Planned Economy” with Jerusalem as the centre of a United Nation’s World Government at whose disposal will be a world police force – NATO.
However there is good news and bad news. As Muhammad, the last Prophet foretold: “When Dajjal – Anti-Christ – fails to bring the whole world under his control, through his machinations and false beliefs – the Christian nations will gather under 80 banners to try and bring peace to the world, but would betray the world and bring about its ultimate destruction.”
But before they do, according to the Qur’an, the second coming of Christ must occur. According to the Hadith a brief period of peace will ensue during which time a resolution of the differences that created the schisms amongst Christ’s followers will be accomplished and those that exist between the Muslims and the Christians will also be resolved resulting in a grand alliance between Al Mahdi and Christ Jesus, the son of Mary peace be upon them both, who will be followed by sincere believers from both camps. In spite of the machinations envisaged by A.J.Quinnell in his – The Mahdi – in which M16 and the CIA collude to bring to power a Mahdi of their own choice to control the Muslim world and all its mineral resources - the final outcome is already known with the ink on the page is already dry – the only choice remaining is the camp to which we choose to belong – are we to found among the forces of Christ, or the forces of anti-Christ?
David M Pidcock
The Institute For Rational Economics
Lest we forget! In a Congressional speech in the United States Senate on April 25th 1939, recorded in the Congressional Record, 76th Congress, Vol.84, No.82, pages 6597-6604, Senator Gerald P. Nye, of North Dakota, said:
"There has been published a series of works under the title 'The Next War.' One of the volumes in this series is entitled 'Propaganda In The Next War.' This particular volume was written by one Sidney Rogerson. I have been unable to obtain any trace of his background or of his connections; but the editor-in-chief of all these works, including the one entitled 'Propaganda in the Next War' is a man whose name is recognised the world over as an authority in Great Britain. He is non-other than Capt. Liddell Hart, associated with the London Times, a writer and a military authority in Europe. The following are quotations from this authority:
'For sometime the issue as to which side the United States would take hung in the balance, the final result was a credit to our propaganda [i.e. British]. There remain the Jews. It has been estimated that of the world Jew population of approximately 15,000,000, no fewer than 5,000,000 are in the United States; 25% of the inhabitants of New York are Jews. During the Great War we bought off this huge American Jewish Public by the promise of the Jewish national home in Palestine, held by (General) Ludendorf to be the master stroke of allied propaganda, as it enabled us not only to appeal to Jews in America but to Jews in Germany as well."'
"To persuade her (the United States) to take our part will be much more difficult, so difficult as to be unlikely to succeed; It will need a definite threat to America, a threat, moreover which will have to be brought home by propaganda to every citizen, before the republic will again take arms in an external quarrel... The position will naturally be considerably eased if Japan were involved, and this might and probably would bring America in without further ado. At any rate, it would be the natural and obvious object of our propagandists to this, just as during the Great War they succeeded in embroiling the United States with Germany. Fortunately with America, our propaganda is on firm We can be entirely sincere, as our main plank will he democratic one. We must clearly enunciate our belief in the democratic form of government, and our firm resolve to adhere to it. Our minor propaganda will aim at attaching the support of important sections, such as the Jews, probably by the declaration of a clear-cut policy on Palestine, and of our intentions, if victorious, to put an end to anti-Semitic persecutions and of the Roman Catholic community in similar terms...In the realm of the moving picture industry we may be able to depend on the natural bias of the United States film manufacturers in favour of Great Britain as opposed to Germany, Japan, or Italy, and on their command of the machinery of international film distribution. This will be an asset both with the stock entertainment picture and the news reels."
George Armstrong informs us that at the time of him writing “The Rothschild Money Trust” in 1940, that: "The President has dispatched the fleet to the Pacific. This is for the purpose of war with Japan. It can be of no other purpose. If Japan will only torpedo one of these boats, the Jewish Press, the Jewish Radio and the Jewish Cinema the do the rest. The Jewish Admiral Taussig stated to a Congressional Investigating Committee that 'War with Japan is inevitable, [The Rothschild Money Trust, page 64]
He goes on to state that: "They 'bought-off the huge American Jewish Public' with the promise of Palestine, and with them they bought the powerful metropolitan Jewish press and the Wilson Administration, says George Armstrong, in his The Rothschild Money Trust. But the next time it would require an act of aggression in line with Rogerson’s suggestion; a suggestion that eventually came to pass.
Miles Copeland, in his autobiography: 'The Game Player [pages 68-69] confirms that president Roosevelt allowed the (Japanese to destroy America's Pacific Fleet and hundreds of his own people. Having broken Japanese codes, they already knew of the impending attack on Pearl Harbor. Copeland’s new boss informed him about the meeting between CIA-Admiral Sidney Sauers and president Harry Trueman. When Sauers promised that America would never again suffer an attack like Pearl Harbour, Trueman said that he obviously had not received his secret briefing, otherwise he would have known that "President Roosevelt got the intelligence, and he decided to let the Pearl Harbour attack happen as a way of arousing an otherwise apathetic populace."
From the Diaries of U.S. Secretary Stimson, we find recorded in: “President Roosevelt and the Coming Of The War 1941 – A Study In Appearances & Realities”, by Charles A Beard, Yale University Press, the admission that he, together with General Marshall, Admiral Stark, Knox, Hull, and Roosevelt were all sitting in the Oval Office, on the 25th of November, one full week before the attack on Pearl Harbor, wondering: “how to manoeuvre the Japanese into firing the first shot without allowing to much danger to ourselves…” So much for the Day of Infamy Speech which was written long before the actual event. For Roosevelt, unlike Churchill: “did not role his own speeches.”
Therefore, the success of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, was entirely due to the fact that it was part of a much wider, long-term plan, which served the strategic interests of the black propagandists - a plan and a process which is still in force today. It occurred because, as Truman understood and Roosevelt stated: “Nothing happens by accident. If a thing happened it happened because it was planned that way…”
When the evidence finally emerges about the real identity of the masterminds behind the events of September 11th, it seems hard to imagine that George W Bush Jr, along with a sizeable contingent from his entourage and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, will be able to escape impeachment for what could justifiably be termed Slaughtergate 911. Particularly when linked to the collapse of Enron, the possible winding up or “shredding” of Arthur Anderson and as the basis for the sequel to the movie ‘Wag The Dog’, for, as someone quite rightly remarked – The Plot Sickens.
January 27th 2002