Nobody knows that Zionism appeared as a Marxist movement, a socialist one Zionism is actually a revolution

The instigator was a Jewish Illuminatus and millionaire, Samuel Gom- pers, who had immigrated from England and become the chairman of the

Federation of Trade Unions. Gompers propagated Marx's ideas. (Afton- bladet, 26th June 1986.)

At a workers' demonstration on the 4th of May 1886, an Illuminist provocateur threw a bomb at the police present at the meeting. Five policemen were killed. The police opened fire at the demonstrators, of which a few were killed and many wounded.

The Second International in Paris similarly decided to make May 1st a red-letter day in 1889. The real reason for this decision was obviously one that was better hidden from the masses of non-Illuminati. According to the British historian Nesta H. Webster, the Illuminati also had full control of the activities of the Second International (1889-1899).

Karl Marx died in exile in London on the 14th of March 1883. All sorts

of fair myths were created around his name. In this way he became the patron saint of evil.

After the fall of Communism in Eastern Europe, it has often been claimed that not all the evils, which came with Marxism, were intentional. This was certainly the way Marx had intended his "teachings" to work. The Illuminati Marx and Engels were successful enough to fool entire nations and their demoniac manifesto was to become a cruel reality for millions of unfortunate people.

The Truth behind the Myths

There are many myths about Marx: that he was poor and supported only by Engels, that he was against terrorism, very tolerant, and had no wish to destroy the ideas of others. What was he really like?

According to the most famous myth, Marx had no money and was eco- nomically dependent on his "friend" Engels. In reality, Nathan Rothschild financed him. This was revealed by his close associate Mikhail Bakunin in his "Polemique contre les Juifs" ("Polemic Against the Jews"). Bakunin broke away from Marx and his companions, because "they had one foot in the bank and the other foot in the socialist movement".

The Frankist Illuminati's central slogan was: "No wall is so high that a donkey loaded with gold cannot get over it."

Later, Engels characterised Marx as a monster who was livid with

hatred "as if ten thousand devils had caught him by the hair". Marx's

uncontrolled drinking and his wild, expensive orgies only increased his fury at his environment. All the meetings in Paris had to be held behind closed doors and windows, so that Marx's roaring was not heard out in the street.

Karl Marx had a great craving for the finest foods, and French wine, among other things, was imported for his family's meals. His family had a weakness for expensive habits.

A famous Jewish socialist, freemason, Illuminatus and comrade of Marx, Giuseppe Mazzini, who had known Marx well, wrote this about him: "His heart bursts rather with hatred than with love towards men." Karl Marx was "a destructive spirit". (Fritz Joachim Raddatz, "Karl Marx: Eine Politische Biographie", Hamburg, 1975.)

Marx was an unreliable egoist and a lying intriguer who only wished to exploit others, according to his assistant, Karl Heinzen. (Karl Heinzen, "Erlebtes", Boston, 1864.) Heinzen also thought that Marx had small, nasty eyes "which spat flames of evil fire". He had a habit of warning: "I will annihilate you!"

Marx was not interested in democracy. The editorial staff of Neue Rheinische Zeitung was, according to Engels, organised so that Marx became its dictator. He could not take criticism. He always became infuriated if anyone tried to criticise him. In 1874, when Dr Ludwig Kugelmann merely hinted that if Marx would organise his life a little better he might finish "Das Kapital", Marx would have nothing more to do with Kugelmann and slandered him ruthlessly. When Bakunin accused Marx of seeking to completely centralise power, Marx called him a theoretical nobody.

Karl Marx condemned exploitation of people. He himself exploited everyone near him. He fought all those he could not subdue. Even as a child, he had been a real tyrant. To work was what Marx wanted least of all. He speculated heavily on the stock market, however, constantly losing huge amounts of money. Neither did he show any consideration for the work of others. Many craftsmen he hired had to wait a long time for their pay. His housekeeper, Helen Demuth, worked like a slave in his household for 40 years without any cash pay whatsoever. It does not seem so strange then, that Marx supported slavery in the United States of America. Like his brother Illuminatus Albert Pike, he vented his racist opinions against blacks.

In further reference to Marx's housekeeper Helen Demuth, it can be said that on June 23, 1851, she gave birth to a baby boy whose father's name was Karl Marx. The father wanted to know nothing about Henry Frederick Demuth, however, so the boy was given up to a fosterhome. The case of the disowned son later became an embarrassment for the Bolshevik leaders in Moscow, so Joseph Stalin classified as secret those letters between Marx and Engels, where this affair is too apparent. {Viikkolehti, 11th of January 1992.)

Marx collected information about his political rivals and opponents. He delivered the notes he made to the police, believing it to be of advantage to him. Paul Johnson states this.

Marx preached about a better society but did not care about any morals. Neither did he care about cleanliness. This had a bad effect on both his health and his contacts with other revolutionaries. He suffered from boils for 25 years. In 1873 these boils caused him a nervous breakdown leading to tremors and violent fits of rage. He never ate fruit or vegetables.

Marx as a Publicist

As a publicist, Marx "borrowed" all of his slogans. It was Jean-Paul Marat who formulated the phrases "Workers have no fatherland!" and "The proletariat have nothing to lose but their chains!" He took the slogan

"Religion is the opium of the people!" from the Jewish writer Heinrich Heine. Karl Schapper originally came up with "Workers of the world,

unite!" Neither was the "dictatorship of the proletariat" one of Marx's

ideas - Louis Blanqui was author of it.

In 1841, the Jewish Illuminatus Clinton Roosevelt published his book "The Science of Government, Founded on Natural Law", in which he based his doctrines on Weishaupt's teachings. Six years later, Marx used Roosevelt's principles to write his Communist Manifesto. In this cunning work, he made propaganda for these Illuminist plans: the abolishment of private property, family, nationalism and patriotism, the right of in- heritance, religion and all morals. Marx and Engels state indirectly that a world government must be introduced for the sake of the workers. The holy book of the socialists, "Das Kapital", published on September 2, 1867, is especially revealing since this work shows not only that the

author was a careless and incompetent theorist, but also that he was a downright liar. Paul Johnson demonstrates this in his book "The Intel- lectuals". In 1867, "Das Kapital" sold only 200 copies in all Germany.

Thus Marx wrote about the situation of the weavers in Silesia without having spoken to any of them. He wrote about industry without having visited a single factory in his life. Marx even refused Engels' offer to visit a cotton factory.

Marx met some workers for the first time in 1845 in London and at the German Workers' Educational Association. These were mostly cultivated, self-taught workers and craftsmen who disliked Marx's violent opinions. They would have preferred to see their situation improved gradually by way of reforms and social development. Marx felt contempt for them and wanted the intellectuals of the middle classes as support for his apo- calyptic ideas about the destruction of capitalist society. Marx later did all in his power to keep socialist workers out of influential positions in the International. For the sake of appearances only, a few were allowed to remain on various committees.

Marx's most violent conflict occurred when he met the labour leader William Weitling in 1846. Marx accused Weitling of having no doctrine. According to Marx, one could not act in the best interests of the workers without a doctrine.

Only the first part of "Das Kapital" was written by Marx. Engels wrote the rest under instructions from Marx. Only the eighth chapter of part one, "The Working Day", deals with the situation of the workers. "Das Kapital" is in no way a scientific analysis, since Marx presented only facts, that supported his theories. The material was not only a biased selection, it had also been falsified and distorted to suit Marx's opinions.

He used only one single source to claim his theory, Engels' "Die Lage der arbeitenden Klassen in England" / "The Condition of the Working Class in England", published in Leipzig in 1845. Engels, the son of a cotton producer, knew only about the German textile industry and nothing of note about this industry in other countries. His knowledge of the situation of miners and agricultural labourers was negligible, yet he wrote about the mining and agricultural proletariat.

Two careful researchers, William O. Henderson and William H. Chalo- ner, made a new translation of Engels' book in 1958, editing it and checking his sources and the original texts for all his quotations. Their

analysis virtually annihilated the objective historical value of the work and showed it for what it really was: political propaganda. Engels made a

selection suitable for his work from obsolete facts from the years 1801- 1818, never indicating that this was the case. There were also falsi- fications and misquotations amounting to a total of 23 pages (over 5 per cent of the book's 354 pages). Henderson and Chaloner demonstrated with

their analysis that Engels had not been honest in his researching. So Marx used a work of that calibre as the only source of his statements and conclusions. He was fully aware of the falsifications, since the German economist Bruno Hildebrand had already revealed most of them

in 1948, and Marx had been informed of the criticism.

Marx used misquotations himself. He misquoted William Gladstone and the economist Adam Smith. He even misquoted official reports. The two researchers from Cambridge showed in their examination "Comments on

the Use of the Blue Books by Karl Marx in Chapter XV of "Das Kapital" (1985), that Marx had not only been careless but had intentionally falsified Paul Johnson came to the same conclusion: that one must be sceptical about all of Marx's texts and that one could never rely on his assertions. For example, Marx claimed that railway accidents had become more frequent whereas the case was exactly the opposite.

The Moral Bankruptcy of Marxism

According to blind Marxists, of whom there are plenty in Sweden, Marx stood for humanism and human values, liberty and belief in mankind. They probably have not read the following lines about Marx by Friedrich Engels: "Who is chasing with wild endeavour? A black man from Trier, a remarkable monster. He does not walk or run, he jumps on his heels and rages full of anger..." (Marx and Engels, "Selected Works" in German, supplementary tome II, p. 301.)

The exiled Estonian non-socialist writer Arvo Magi stated in a radio

programme that Marx was not a terrorist who wished to destroy the ideas of others. But he was! Marx tolerated no ideas but the Illuminist ones which were later known as Marxist. Marxism merely gave the dark

Illuminist powers a hypocritical method and a verbose phraseology, which

they could use to justify any kind of enormity they committed. Since this doctrine was unscientific, they would never in all their attempts be able to put the Marxist theories into practice.

What the Marxist regimes really wanted was to treat their subjects with such violence that they eventually lost all feelings of mercy and humanity towards their fellows. The Marxists also took all the proceeds of workers' produce by paying them too little or nothing at all for their work. In this way the Marxists developed modern slavery. Shall we ever be able to understand the extent of crimes of the Marxists against the natural order?

Everywhere, where these bandits have come into power, it has led to the advance of state criminalism and gangsterism. It would be futile to hope for anything else. Those dictators forced their slaves to act against nature, and the slaves answered with lies, theft, cruelty, hypocrisy and laziness.

Certain judges of Marxism try to claim that those who can interpret the doctrine correctly have not yet reached power. How is it that only Marxists who interpreted the doctrine wrongly came into power? And what kind of hell can we expect when the "true interpreters" of this doctrine eventually reach power?

Marxism became what it had to become. Nothing else could be expected from such a brutal, primitive doctrine, which leads straight into the arms of demonic forces. According to Buddhism, what matters is the good path, not the good goal. What you do is of importance, not what you say. If you walk the evil path, as do the Illuminati, you will never reach the good goal. If you walk the good path, you will finally reach the good goal. This is why there is no such thing as good violence.

You cannot build anything on evil. It is like building upon the sand. Those who try are deceiving themselves. Neither is it possible to reform an absurd religion, a truth emphasised by the Italian philosopher Filippo Giordano Bruno four hundred years ago. I believe that an attempt to do so is an unpardonable crime.

Fanatical Marxists believed that something could be built on an ideology composed entirely of lies. It is just as impossible to have the state control all that happens within a society. Most of those who later became subjects of the Marxist states also knew that the introduction of Marx's ism was a terrible crime against humanity.

Few people know, however, how all this happened and why. For, as the former President of Columbia University in New York, Nicolas Butler,

pointed out: "The world consists of three types of people. First, the smallest group - those who put plans into action. Then the second, slightly larger group, who see what is happening. Last, the great majority who never knew what happened."

After the collapse of the Marxist regimes in Eastern Europe, some start- ling facts about the hidden history of Communism have been unearthed. Most of these facts have never been presented to the Western European or American public. There is simply no wish in Europe or America to throw out the remaining myths about Marxism. In some countries, however, the

epoch of Marxist lies has come to an end. Professor Albert Meinhold at the University of Jena (formerly in East Germany) symbolically threw out a sculpture of Marx from one of the corridors of the university. In

justifying his action, Meinhold said that, although Marx had been

conferred the degree of Doctor of Law at the university (in his absence), a large part of humanity had suffered from such terrible evils in the name of Marx and Marxism that his memory was therefore nothing to honour (Svenska Dagbladet, January 28, 1992). Marx was, in other words, thrown into the dustbin!

THE UNKNOWN VLADIMIR ULYANOV

We have all been led to believe that Vladimir Ulyanov was born in Simbirsk on the 22nd of April 1870. According to the latest enquiries, however, his date of birth had been changed to that date. (Akim Arutiunov, "The phenomenon Vladimir Ulyanov/Lenin", Moscow, 1992, p. 126.) An investigation is currently under way to find out when the man was really born.

Stalin copied his great teacher and, like him, changed his date of birth. Officially, he was born on the 21st of December 1879, but he was actually born on the 6th of December 1878. The newspaper Izvestiya revealed this state secret on the 26th of June 1990. Both Lenin and Stalin wished to prevent their true natures being revealed by the aid of horoscopes.

Napoleon also falsified his date of birth for astrological reasons. It was not suitable for a French emperor to be an Aquarian, so he changed the date to the 15th of August (1769), in order to officially become a Leo.

It is generally known that Lenin's official biography has been falsified throughout. Despite this, a decision was made to publish a still more effective version of the myth. So the libraries were purged of all the Lenin biographies printed before 1970.

Who was Vladimir Ulyanov-Lenin really? The history of Russia is written by its murderers, a fact which the director Stanislav Govorukhin stresses in his documentary "The Russia We Lost" (1992). A heavily censored version of this film was shown in Sweden.

Lenin's Kalmuck father, Ilya Ulyanov, was a school inspector. Both of his grandfathers ended up in mental institutions. Lenin's mother Maria (maiden name Blank) was of a noble family and daughter of a rich landowner. Maria Blank's father, Israel, was born in 1802 in Staro- konstantinovo in the province of Volynia.

In 1820 Israel Blank planned to study at the Medical Academy of St. Petersburg together with his brother Abel, but state universities were

closed to Jews so both Israel and Abel were baptised into the Russian Orthodox Church. Israel was given the new name of Alexander, his brother Abel became Dmitri. Alexander's patronymic also became Dmitri (it was actually Moses). In this way, they were both allowed to enter the Medical Academy. The Blank brothers graduated in 1824. Alexander Blank became a military staff doctor and a pioneer of balneology (the study of healthy baths) in Russia.

The writer Marietta Shaginyan, who in the 1930s learned about Lenin's Jewish roots, was warned not to make this information public, for it was a state secret. (The periodical Literator, No. 38, 12th of September 1990, St. Petersburg.) It was possible to publish these facts only in 1990. Until then the Blank family had been presented as "Germans".

Lenin's mother spoke Yiddish, German and also Swedish, the latter of which she taught her daughter Olga, who intended to study at the University of Helsinki. Maria Blank's maternal grandmother was called Anna Beata Ostedt, born in St. Petersburg in a family of goldsmiths who had immigrated from Uppsala (Sweden). Maria Blank's maternal grand- father, the notary Johann-Gottlieb Grosschopf, came from a family of merchants in Germany. Maria Blank's paternal grandparents were Jews. Lenin's paternal grandfather was a Chuvashian and his paternal grand-

mother, Anna Smirnova, was a Kalmuck.

This made Maria Blank at least half Jewish, for only her father was a full Jew. Hans W. Levy, chairman of the Jewish community of Gothen- burg, has declared: "Everyone who was born of a Jewish mother is a Jew." (Svenska Dagbladet, 22nd of July, 1990.) Some researchers, however, have intimated that also the Grosschopf family was Jewish. If so, Lenin must be regarded as a Jew, for then his mother was a Jewess.

In Russia, it was revealed that Lenin's paternal grandfather Nikolai

Ulyanov (Kalmuck) had four children with his own daughter Alexandra Ulyanova (who was disguised as Anna Smirnova before the authorities). Lenin's father Ilya was born as the fourth child when Nikolai Ulyanov was 67 years old. (Vladimir Istarkhov, "The Battle of the Russian Gods",

Moscow, 2000, p. 37.) Ilya Ulyanov married the Jewess Maria Blank, whose paternal grandfather Moisya Blank had been prosecuted for several

crimes, including fraud and extortion. Inbreeding probably played a big role in making Vladimir Ulyanov-Lenin so perverted: his extreme aggressiveness was hereditary and he was born with substantial brain

damage, he had several nervous breakdowns, three strokes and was bisexual. He was also a psychopath.

German was spoken in the family, a language Vladimir Ulyanov knew better than Russian. In every questionnaire, Lenin wrote that he was a writer, yet his Russian vocabulary was very limited and in his pro- nunciation he stressed words inaccurately. He had very little knowledge of Russian literature, but enough to harbour an intense dislike of Fiodor Dostoyevsky's works.

It was characteristic of Lenin that he gave different information about the year of his entrance into the Party in different Party documents. In the first questionnaires, he claimed to have joined in 1893, but on the 7th of March 1921, at the Tenth Party Congress, he stated in the delegate's questionnaire that he had become a Party member in 1894. (Akim Arutiunov, "The Phenomenon Vladimir Ulyanov/Lenin", Moscow, 1992, p. 116.) In one of his writings, comrade Ulyanov claimed to have joined the Party in 1895 ("Collected Works", Vol. 44, p. 284). How could he be a member of a party, which did not even exist? The Russian Social Democratic Workers' Party was founded only in March 1898. It seems that anything was possible for Lenin.

According to the official myth, Lenin had been expelled from the university, but the special archives of the Central Committee state clearly that Vladimir Ulyanov himself asked the Principal of the University of Kazan for permission to leave his studies in 1887.

According to the Bolshevik myth, he was expelled to the village of Kokushkino in the province of Kazan for taking part in student revolution- ary activities. Actually, he went to live on his maternal grandfather's estate in Kokushkino after leaving university, an estate which the Tsar had given Alexander Blank. Lenin's grandfather Blank owned the whole village. Later, Lenin lived with his aunt in Kazan, a fact which Lenin himself has written about. Lenin's grandfather also owned another estate (98 hectares) in the village of Alakayevka near Samara.

There is nothing left of the real facts in Lenin's official biography. This can be ascertained by studying formerly secret documents, which have recently been released.

The kind-hearted people fell for the myths about Lenin. Marie Laidoner, the widow of Estonia's former Commander-in-Chief Johan Laidoner, wrote in her memoirs that if Lenin had lived in 1940, the

Estonians would not have been treated so inhumanely. According to the central myth, the terror and oppression were started only in the 1930s by Stalin, This was also claimed by an editorial in the Aftonbladet on the 6th of June 1989.

The Soviet propaganda mythology claimed that his parents consciously educated Lenin to be a Messiah who would lead the proletariat from their captivity in Egypt, as Karl Radek (actually Tobiach Sobelsohn) wrote in Izvestiya in the spring of 1933. Lenin's mother actually wanted him to be a landowner.

The Leninist propaganda had a massive effect on Homo Sovieticus. In an opinion poll in December 1989, 70 per cent of those asked (2700 took part) believed Lenin to be the greatest personality in history. (Paevaleht, January 4, 1991.) Another opinion poll was held in January 1991 where only 10.3 per cent of those asked thought Lenin was a negative person, whilst over half of them believed the October Coup to have been a

historical mistake.

This is why nothing upsets orthodox communists so much as revelations about Lenin. They refuse to abandon their icon-like picture of Lenin, since Christianity was replaced with Leninism as early as in the 1920s when the whole doctrine was canonised. In the beginning, the sailors called Lenin "Little Father".

Lenin used all sorts of tried and tested idiocies. One example: "Work books" of the kind used with natives in the colonies were used from June 1919.

Lenin had few ideas of his own. Even the idea of the land decree was an inheritance from the left-wing Social Revolutionaries. Among his own stupidities were the so-called April Theses which do not correspond with reality since economic independence is impossible without political freedom.

At least Vladimir Ulyanov understood that Marxism lacked all scien- tific value. He had whispered to the Jewish businessman Armand Hammer: "Armand, Armand - Socialism is never going to work!" (SvenskaDagbladet, August 30, 1987.)