THE LUSITANIA AFFAIR

25 Mar, 2015

Note: My new book International Bankers, World Wars I, II, and Beyond has gone to press. It has a total of 560 pages.


2015 marks the hundredth year of the Lusitania affair. Lusitania was a ship that was attacked by a German U boat on 7 May 1915, less than a year after the outbreak of World War I. Whether it was the German torpedo that sank the Lusitania or something else that caused it to sink rapidly is also discussed in the following pages. When the ship was sunk it was carrying passengers from New York to Liverpool. It was flying a British flag and had set sail from New York Harbor, a week earlier, on May 1. The number of passengers on board totaled 1918 according to the passengers list, and included 171 U.S. citizens. The ship was sunk off the Irish coast, not too far from Britain. Almost 1200 people died in this attack, including 128 Americans (the various numbers differ somewhat when one checks various authors).

The sinking of Lusitania was the most significant incident of sinking of a civilian ship by German U boats, though it was neither the first nor the last incident of its kind. Its significance lay in the fact that, on account of the large number of casualties, it created an uproar in U.S.A. and Britain where the Zionist-controlled media whipped up anti-German sentiments and created a psychological environment that contributed significantly to the U.S. decision to eventually enter the war on the side of the Allies two years later. This incident sowed the seeds of the subsequent U.S. entry into World War I. The New York Times, as usual, was in the forefront of whipping up sentiments for war against Germany and informed discussion of why and how the incident took place was scuttled. Facts were concealed from the people of the U.S.A. and the world at large. Nobody in the “mainstream” media seemed to raise the question as to whose interest was served by such a tragedy. Nobody seemed to raise the question as to why were U.S. citizens traveling on the ship of a nation at war.

Investigators have finally been able to uncover facts about this tragic affair, but the world at large is still not fully aware of the fact that the passengers on board the ship were deliberately sacrificed by the British and American governments. They were used as human shields to whip up sentiment against Germany in U.S.A. and Britain and in other countries. The American authorities colluded in this matter on account of the pressure exerted on them by Zionists, who controlled the media and had direct access to the White House, working in tandem with international bankers who controlled the money line of both Britain and the U.S.A. The international bankers had plans to pave the way for the creation of Israel as well as a supra-national organization through which to eventually establish a One World Government under their ruthless control.

The sinking of Lusitania had a background. Since Germany depended on food imports from abroad, Great Britain imposed a naval blockade in order to starve the German nation and thereby affect its fighting capability. Britain imposed this naval blockade early in the war, on November 3, 1914 by declaring the North Sea a theatre of war. The blockade of neutral ports by Britain was utterly illegal but the U.S. did nothing about it, save protesting feebly. This feeble protest was meant more for domestic consumption. The feeble U.S. protest was tantamount to practically a clean chit to Britain to go ahead with the blockade. This attitude of the U.S. government was due to influence of Zionists and agents of international bankers over President Wilson. As stated by Douglas Reed, President Wilson was held “captive” by Zionists such as Col. Edward Mandel House [1]. Col. House was a banker and it is well known that he was a Rothschild agent. In fact his father was also a Rothschild agent.

In response to the British naval blockade, the Germans announced on February 4, 1915 that with effect from February 18, 1915 (i.e. almost three and a half months later), the entire English channel along with territorial waters of Britain and Ireland would be considered a war zone. One must appreciate the fact that the Germans waited for three and a half months before imposing a counter blockade. Had the United States played an active role in defusing the matter, a lot of bloodshed could have been avoided. The German Admiralty notice read as follows (reproduced from New York Tribune of February 5, 1915):

The waters around Great Britain and Ireland, including the whole of English Channel, are declared a war zone from and after February 18, 1915.

Every merchant ship found in this area will be destroyed, even if it is impossible to avert dangers which threaten the crew and the passengers.

Also neutral ships in the zone are in danger, as in consequence of misuse of neutral flags ordered by the British government on January 31 and in view of hazards of naval warfare it cannot always be avoided that attacks meant for enemy ships endanger neutral ships.

Shipping northward, around Shetland Islands, in the eastern basin of the North Sea, and in a strip at least 30 nautical miles in breadth along the Dutch coast is endangered in the same way.

Since the British had already blockaded ships for Germany, the Germans were within their rights to retaliate. The Admiralty notice quoted above is very clear and leaves no ambiguity. The Germans however underestimated the capacity of the British oligarchy to be brutal and utterly unprincipled when it came to Germany. The British oligarchy, controlled by the international bankers, had been planning the war for more than a decade and a half at least, if not earlier. The mutual destruction of Germany and Russia was one of their major goals. The British decided to lure Germany into sinking a ship that was apparently civilian, that was carrying U.S. citizens as passengers, but was in fact loaded with ammunition. Winston Churchill, a Freemason and a Zionist, and perhaps other members of his Zionist Masonic fraternity, thought up this diabolical and brutal scheme. Citing various sources, Richard Sanders writes [2]

British Admiralty leader, Winston Churchill, had already commissioned “a study to determine the political impact if an ocean liner were sunk with Americans on board. ” A week before the incident, Churchill wrote to the Board of Trade’s president saying it is “most important to attract neutral shipping to our shores, in the hopes especially of embroiling the U.S. with Germany.”

In fact, in the Intimate Papers of Colonel House, the following conversation between Sir Edward Grey, Britain’s Masonic Foreign Secretary, a member of the Fabian Coefficients Dining Club, and Col. House is given (cited by Epperson from Colin Simpson’s book Lusitania, published 1972) [3]

Grey: What will America do if the Germans sink an ocean liner with American passengers on board?

House: I believe that a flame of indignation would sweep the United States and that by itself would be sufficient to carry us into the war.

It is significant that Col. House, Churchill and Grey were Freemasons and while Col. House was a direct Rothschild agent, Sir Edward Grey was under the deep influence of Lord Haldane, who has listed Baron Rothschild as one of his closest friends. In fact a bedroom was permanently reserved every weekend for Lord Haldane at the Tring Park mansion of the Rothschilds [4].

It has been pointed out that the Lusitania was loaded with six million rounds of ammunition when it set sail from New York Harbor. The Germans had already gotten wind of the fact that Lusitania was being loaded with ammunition and was therefore a legitimate target. Probably Britain ensured that the Germans got the information of ammunition being loaded on Lusitania. In order to avoid deaths of U.S. citizens the German embassy in U.S. sent an advertisement to about 50 papers well in time, warning potential passengers not to travel on the Lusitania. The advertisement was killed under pressure of State Department officials. The State Department was by then dominated by agents of international bankers, who had several years earlier set it as a target to fill the State Department with their own men so as to take the U.S. into a war that they had already planned [5]. Only the Des Moines Register published the advertisement, but Iowa is not an East Coast State. The advertisement issued by the Imperial German Embassy, Washington D.C. on April 22, 1915, read as follows [6]:

NOTICE! TRAVELERS intending to embark on the Atlantic voyage are reminded that a state of war exists between Germany and Great Britain and her allies; that the zone of war includes the waters adjacent to British Isles; that in accordance with formal notice given by the Imperial German Government, vessels flying the flag of Great Britain, or any of her allies, are liable to destruction in those waters and that travelers sailing in the war zone on ships of Great Britain and her allies do so at their own risk.

Jim Marrs writes:

The other papers pulled out the ad because of intervention by the U.S. State Department. Government officials cowed editors by claiming that, due to the possibility of libel suits, they should first obtain approval by State Department lawyers.

If the advertisement was sent to 50 or so major papers of U.S.A., then the editors of these papers must have been aware of the content of the ad even if it was scuttled by the State Department. After all, the State Department must have communicated with the editors to prevent its publication. Then why was there almost no discussion of this warning in the newspapers when the Lusitania was hit? There must have been some collusion between the editors and the U.S. authorities to suppress the truth in this matter. The Germans had every right to attack the ship. There is a rather defiant headline in the New York Times of May 2, 1915: Sails Undisturbed by German Warnings.

As stated by Gary Allen [7]:

Submarine warfare was a phony issue. Germany and England were at war. Each was blockading the other country. J.P. Morgan and other financiers were selling munitions to Britain. The Germans could not allow those supplies to be delivered any more than the English would have allowed them to be delivered to Germany. If Morgan wanted to take the risks and reap the rewards (or suffer consequences) of selling munitions to England, that was his business. It was certainly nothing over which the entire nation should have been dragged to war.

The Lusitania, at the time it was sunk, was carrying six million pounds of ammunition. It was actually illegal for American passengers to be aboard a ship carrying munitions to belligerents.

In fact underwater explorations carried out 50 years later established absolutely beyond doubt that Lusitania was indeed carrying ammunition and therefore the Germans were within their rights to have torpedoed it. In her book Deanna Spingola states [8]:

The Lusitania, according to underwater exploration fifty years later, carried a hull full of ammunition. The arms dealers and the British sacrificed almost 1,200 lives to hide their contraband. The Germans were well aware of this, and were within their international rights to attack an arms-carrying enemy vessel. The British, not the Germans, were responsible for the passenger deaths on the Lusitania, as they disguised a warship as an ocean liner. They used a neutral flag to cover their arms trafficking. Gregg Bemis who financed the salvaging operation, told the British press, “Now that we've found it, the British can't deny that there was ammunition aboard.” He said there was literally tons and tons of ammunition, all marked as food commodities. He said, “That's what sank the ship ...those four million rounds of .303s...

In fact it has been noted by writers that the Lusitania was set up in such a way as to ensure that it would definitely be torpedoed. Apparently Wilson knew of the fate of Lusitaniabefore hand and apparently had, according to author Simpson, many “sleepless nights” over it. But he was such a captive of the international bankers that he did not do anything about it - nothing to save even American lives. As quoted by Sanders [9]:

British Naval Intelligence Commander, Joseph Kenworthy, said: “The Lusitania was sent at considerably reduced speed into an area where a U-boat was known to be waiting and with her escorts withdrawn.”

Patrick Beesly’s history of British naval intelligence in WWI, notes: "no effective steps were taken to protect the Lusitania.” British complicity is furthered by their foreknowledge that: U-boat commanders knew of the Lusitania’s route; a U-boat that had sunk two ships in recent days was in the path of the Lusitania; although destroyers were available, none escorted the Lusitania or hunted for U-boats; the Lusitania was not given specific warnings of these threats.

For a ship as large and as well known as Lusitania, the removal of escort naval ships could not be coincidental, keeping in view Churchill’s strategy to have a ship carrying U.S. passengers aboard sunk by German Navy. The foreknowledge that Wilson had also establishes complicity of the U.S. and British governments.

There are other facts about Lusitania that were concealed from the public. It was presented to the public as the fastest luxury liner whereas it served a double purpose. Apparently it had very powerful engines and could travel at speeds of 25 knots per hour. It had already won the Blue Ribbon for the fastest Atalantic crossing. However, based on the books of Colin Simpson (The Lusitania, 1972) and of Hickey et al (Seven Days to Disaster, 1982) it has been pointed out that [10]:

The British Admiralty had secretly subsidized her construction and she was built to Admiralty specifications with the understanding that at the outbreak of war the ship would be consigned to government service. As war clouds gathered in 1913, the Lusitania quietly entered dry dock in Liverpool and was fitted for war service. This included the installation of ammunition magazines and gun mounts on her decks. The mounts, concealed under the teak deck, were ready for the addition of the guns when needed.

Ref. [10] also mentions that when the Lusitania was struck by a torpedo there was a “mysterious second explosion ripped the liner apart.” The ship sank within 18 minutes. The log of the German U boat U 20 records that only one torpedo was fired. Captain Schweiger of the U20 noted that the torpedo hit was accompanied by an unusually large second explosion.

Jim Marrs states [11]:

Survivors and later investigations revealed that the German Torpedo did not sink the Lusitania. Its destruction was caused instead by a secondary internal explosion, most probably tons of stored explosives and ammunition.

Apparently some of those traveling on the ship had received anonymous telegrams warning them not to travel on the Lusitania. One of these was the famous Vanderbilt, who died in the attack.

A sample of the media coverage of the Lusitania incident is given below [12]. On May 8, 1915 the New York Times had the following (seven column) headlines across the entire page: LUSITANIA SUNK BY A SUBMARINE, PROBABLY 1000 DEAD; TWICE TORPEDOED OFF IRISH COAST; SINKS IN 15 MINUTES; AMERICANS ABROAD INCLUDED VANDERBILT AND FROHMAN; WASHINGTON BELIEVES GRAVE CRISIS AT HAND. These headlines comprised four lines. In fact the entire front page carried various news related to the Lusitania. The following day, on May 9, The New York Times further increased the number of torpedoes, and mentioned in the headline that three torpedoes had hit the Lusitania. The heading went as follows: “Hit by Three Torpedoes”. The Daily Oklahoman carried the following 7 column head line: MORE THAN 1,400 LIVES BELIEVED LOST WITRH TORPEDOED LUSITANIA. The 7 column headline of the Washington Post read: LINER LUSITANIA SUNK BY GERMAN LINER; FLEET RUSHES TO AID. Boston Journal carried the headlines: HUNDREDS OF LIVES ARE LOST ON TORPEDOED LUSITANIA. The Seattle Star carried the full page headline: LUSITANIA SUNK BY GERMAN SUBMARINE; 1400 FOLK ABOARD. Monrovia Daily News, California, had the headline (May 7, 1915): Liner Lusitania Is Torpedoed Today off Coast of Ireland.

John Cornelius writes [13]:

There was strong American reaction to the sinking of the Lusitania, both popular and diplomatic, and the U.S. came close to breaking off diplomatic relations with Germany. A meeting between the German ambassador and President Woodrow Wilson on June 2 had the effect of calming matters for a time, but an exchange of diplomatic notes occurred. The second American note, of June 10, led to the resignation of the American secretary of state, William Jennings Bryan, who believed that neutrality required that American citizens be forbidden from traveling on ships bearing the flag of being any belligerent nation. And, in fact, Americans could perfectly well have traveled on American, Dutch, or Scandinavian vessels.

The conduct of William Jennings Bryan was most honorable. He stood for American neutrality and when he saw that Wilson was not neutral he resigned. Today, in the eyes of history, he stands tall and Wilson and others appear very small. Wilson was a stooge, a mere puppet in the hands of the Rothschild agent Col. House. Wilson must be condemned in the eyes of history for having been a tool in the hands of international bankers, who dragged the U.S. into what has eventually become perpetual war. The U.S. has been fighting wars abroad ever since and its armed forced have murdered more human beings in the past one hundred years than any other power in history. The killing spree seems to reach new levels with each passing decade. Wilson is also guilty of having handed over the Federal Reserve to a set of international banker families enabling them to control the United States of America for their own hideous purposes.

In England The Times commented:

...the hideous policy of indiscriminate brutality which has placed the German race outside of the pale. The only way to restore peace in the world, and to shatter the brutal menace, is to carry the war throughout the length and breadth of Germany. Unless Berlin is entered, all the blood which has been shed will have flowed in vain.

But the whole incident was a set up - it was set up by the British Admiralty under Churchill. It was not the Germans but the Anglo-American leaders who planned the entire incident and who take the medal for brutality. Should Churchill be tried posthumously for having used civilians as human shields? Should President Wilson be tried posthumously for allowing it to happen even when he knew there were Americans on board?

 


REFERENCES:

[1] Douglas Reed: The Controversy of Zion; Bridger House Publishers Inc., 2012,
p 242.

[2] Richard Sanders: How to Start a War: The American Use of War Pretext Incidents; Global Research, August 19, 2014
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=28554

[3]: A. Ralph Epperson: The Unseen Hand: An Introduction to the Conspiratorial View of History; p 258. This book may be downloaded at: http://www.911truth.ch/pdf/Epperson-the-Unseen-Hand-an-Introduction-to-the-Conspiratorial-View-of-History-1994.pdf

[4] A.N. Field: All These Things; 1936, p 70.

[5] See Edward Griffin: The Hidden Agenda (Part One); www.realityzone.com/hiddenagenda.html
The Hidden Agenda (Part Two); www.realityzone.com/hiddenagenda2.html

[6] Jim Marrs: Rule by Secrecy, William Morrow paperbacks, p 188. Also see the images of newspaper cuttings on Google by searching: Lusitania newspaper headlines.

[7] Gary Allen: None Dare Call It Conspiracy; first published 1971; 2013 reprint by Dauphin Publications Inc., p 51

[8] Deanna Spingola: The Ruling Elite: The Zionist Seizure of World Power; Trafford Publishing; p 442, 443.

[9] Richard Sanders ref. [2] above

[10] The Sinking of the Lusitania,1915, Eye Witness to History, www.eyewitnesstohistory.com (2000).

[11] Jim Marrs: Ref [6] above, p 188

[12] See the images of newspaper cuttings on Google by searching: Lusitania newspaper headlines.

[13] John Cornelius: The Hidden History of the Balfour Declaration; Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, November 2005, pp 44-50;
http://www.wrmea.org/2005-november/special-report-the-hidden-history-of-the-balfour-declaration.html

facebook