The Mystery of Ephraim

Excerpts from

Unz Review by Larry Romanoff ~ November 26, 2022 // The City of London by Wikipedia

You may be surprised to learn that the city of London and the City of London are two very different things, related to each other mostly by historical accident and geographical proximity, and co-existing today in a rather complicated power system in which the City of London appears gloriously victorious.

First, the City of London, a small area of about one square mile in size, was established as a haven by the Khazar “Jews” during their extermination from Khazaria nearly 1,000 years ago, and was named ‘London’ at the time. And yes, I know the Romans had been there first.

The city of London, with the Bridge and Harrods, and the fish and chips and the people driving on the wrong side of the road, was established much later, adopted the same name, and gradually expanded with population until it completely surrounded the Jewish enclave of the City of London.

You can see the positions and relative sizes from the map. When you read about “The Lord Mayor of London”, you are not reading about the chief executive of the city, but about the chief executive of the City. The City of London Corporation, with its square mile directly in the center of London, obviously owns some very expensive real estate, this in addition to a great deal of other property also in the city center, but this amounts to only perhaps $10 billion in total and, as we will see, is trivial.

The local authority for the City, namely the City of London Corporation, is unique in the UK and has some unusual responsibilities for a local council, such as being the police authority. It is also unusual in having responsibilities and ownerships beyond its boundaries.

The corporation is headed by the Lord Mayor of the City of London (an office separate from, and much older than, the Mayor of London). The Lord Mayor, as of November 2021, is Vincent Keaveny. (Wiki: City of London)

The City of London is effectively an independent city-state * existing inside greater London. However, its nature is unique and complicated. It is not so neat and tidy as is the Vatican for example, which is clearly a separate sovereign entity nestled within the city of Rome.

Still, the City of London has its own government and police force, makes its own laws and levies its own taxes. It has its own flag, crest, and ceremonial armed forces. I have seen one reference stating that the City also has its own port. I could not find an independent confirmation of this, but it would fit the pattern and the City does have some responsibilities for London ports, so this is plausible.

If true, it would be stunning because that would mean that the City could bring in products of any kind including currency, precious metals, cocaine, and also people, without the permission or even knowledge of UK customs and immigration or the UK government.

The City is the center and home base of the world’s banking and insurance industries. It is the home of the Bank of England (which was supposedly privatised but is still Rothschild-owned), the home of Lloyd’s of London, and the literal head office of many of the world’s major banks (some of which you know and many of which you have never heard of).

It still contains the home office of the former British East India Company, which was always a Khazar Jewish company and undoubtedly the greatest criminal organisation in the history of the world – up to that time – and whose archives are still closed to the world for good reason.

The City of London is also the home of the oldest Masonic Temple in the world. Our history books tell us that the origins of the Freemasons are lost to history, but that’s not really true. Freemasonry was a Jewish cult that was formalised in the City in the early 1700s.

The legal-political relationship between the City of London and the UK is a bit murky. On one hand, the City is at least theoretically subject (or can be made subject) to at least some UK legislation, although in practice this seldom if ever has happened for reasons I will describe below.

On the other hand, the City is so sovereign that the King of England himself is forbidden by both UK and City law to even enter the City of London without first obtaining a “special invitation” which process is too complicated to bother discussing. The invitation ceremony is not required by law, but the invitation itself is.

Readers may not be aware that democracies can have “flavors”, the UK version being one such with a very distinct flavor. In this case, on the floor of the British Parliament, directly facing the Speaker of the House, is a special chair.

Think of it as a kind of throne. The person occupying this chair is a representative of the City of London, attended by six lawyers. His purpose is to monitor all debate in the British Parliament and to scrutinise in exhaustive detail all proposed and drafted legislation to determine any possible effect on the “interests” or operations of the City of London, and to take appropriate action if such interests are affected.

The “appropriate action” inevitably results in the legislation being killed. This is not necessarily done by force, but by what we might term “lobbying”, sometimes by extortion, and often simply by an all-pervasive influence on British Politicians.

Many believe the City puts its interests above those of the nation, and of course they are correct, evidenced by a long string of such legislative “victories” over Parliament. “For almost 1,000 years, the City of London Corporation has resisted virtually every attempt by monarchs, governments or subjects to rein in its vast financial wealth and influence. Such is the Corporation’s political and economic influence that today some suggest the British state, rather than controlling the Corporation, is in fact subservient to it.”

According to the Financial Times, “. . . because the corporation is entitled to special tax and legal privileges, this renders it an offshore island inside Britain and a tax haven in its own right, and gives those who own businesses within its borders a distinct upper hand over everyone else.”

But it is also true that the Jews in the City have UK politicians so much in their pockets that even the UK Prime Minister will lobby against any regulation that might handicap the City’s financial crimes. The UK Labor party tried at one time to obtain election within the City, to have the power to repair some excesses from the inside, but failed.

However, due to the unique relation between the City of London and the UK, the tens of trillions of dollars that flow into and out of the Jewish banks in the City each day do not appear in UK capital flows or transaction records and there is thus no way to know how much money enters, passes through, and leaves the City, nor is there any way to know the source or application of those funds.

“Behind it all lies the City of London, anxious to preserve its access to the world’s dirty money.”

“The City of London is a money-laundering filter that lets the City get involved in dirty business while providing it with enough distance to maintain plausible deniability . . . a crypto-feudal oligarchy which, of itself, is. . . captured by the international offshore banking industry.”

“It is a gangster regime, cloaked with the “respectability” of the trappings of the British establishment. . . . guaranteed protection. No matter just how nakedly lawless their own conduct.”

“The City is often now described as the largest tax haven in the world, and it acts as the largest center of the global tax avoidance system. An estimated 50% of the world’s trade passes through tax havens, and the City acts as a huge funnel for much of this money.”

The King of England Meets His Master

North Americans seldom pay much attention to news details in the UK and might not be aware of the recurrent brief media campaigns about “Should the Monarchy be Abolished?” These normally emerge abruptly without warning or apparent cause, listing all the usual issues of a monarchy being an anachronism, the British Royal Family being a useless appendage to government, a needless expense, and so forth.

Look at the photo of (then) Prince Charles and Evelyn de Rothschild, with smug Rothschild poking Charles in the chest. That is a very aggressive gesture, and not something one would do to a superior.

Can you picture yourself walking up to your boss or the Chairman of the Board, poking him in the chest and saying, “I have something to tell you”? Definitely not. We would do this only to a distinct inferior, and someone we were bullying, almost treating with contempt.

The gesture is not only to accentuate a point but is a kind of threat, one we might imagine a policeman making when issuing an order. From the photo, the relation between these two men is quite clear. We can’t know the topic of conversation but Rothschild is essentially telling Charles “this is how it is, and you don’t have to like it”.

But why wouldn’t Rothschild poke that little twerp in the chest? Charles is nothing to him, a convenient nuisance, a bit of a public shield, but no more. Rothschild has wealth that Charles can barely fathom, and power exceeding that of Charles by orders of magnitude, including over the UK Parliament and UK public opinion.

Both men know Rothschild could dethrone the “King” at any time, that Charles as a Royal exists only at the Jews’ pleasure. Charles, the supposed “King of England” can’t even enter Rothschild’s home or place of business without a specific invitation. How subservient can you be? It is the several Rothschilds, Sebag-Montefioris and others similar who are considered the real “royalty” of England, Charles, Andrew, Edward, being puppet-caricatures.

“Moreover take thou up a lamentation for the princes of Israel,” Ezekiel 19:1 — This chapter in Ezekiel is a lamentation; notice it started at the beginning with a lamentation and at the end it says:

“And fire has gone out from a rod of her branches, which hath devoured her fruit, so that she hath no strong rod to be a scepter to rule.’ This is a lamentation and shall be a lamentation,” Ezekiel 19:14; for the princes of Israel; but who are the princes of Israel?

And this from Ezekiel 11:1 these are not those who administer his temple, but further out; that is, rulers and governor; cities chiefs; mayors and their rich and influential: “princes” of a city; and the likes of Bill Gates, George Soros, Michael Bloomberg, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk and Rupert Murdoch; but most important, the Rothschilds, who spanned many generations centered in the City of London; these are the princes of Israel.

~ by Joel Huan on December 11, 2022.

Posted in Ephraim, Manasseh, UK, US