Slavery Was Useful
BRITAIN AND BOOTY:
The bulk of this chapter will be taken from a book about the
War of 1812. I must deconstruct the generalities and interpret
the meaning as it relates to our investigation of hegemony and
cronyism or Synarchy. Officers in the wars of these times got a
percentage of the booty their underlings took. They also were
frequently aligned with the enemy or other side as you can see
in the movie Braveheart. The Black Market in modern wars has a
lot of the same kind of thing. This incentive to go to war has a
lot of impact on us still. The British had just taken about
2,000 slaves or ‘runaways’ from near Baltimore to be part of the
workforce in the Canadian Maritime Provinces. As we have noted
already, the American Enlightenment Experiment had come about
when Nobles in America saw their British cousins were freeing
their slaves. It was not the only reason to secede but it was
probably more important than the reasons usually presented in
American immigration exams or schools. Sometimes it is cheaper
not to have to care for your workforce if you have a system that
keeps them in place.
“New Orleans, located a hundred miles up the Mississippi River,
was a particularly tempting target. With a population of almost
25,000, it was the largest city west of the Appalachian
Mountains. It was also the principal outlet for western
commodities, and millions of dollars of produce was blockaded in
the port. Scottish naval officers like Cochrane were known to
have a keen eye for booty, and the British brought large cargo
ships with them to carry off their plunder. (1) Indeed, British
prisoners of war and deserters claimed that the watch-word and
countersign on the morning of the Battle of New Orleans was
‘beauty and booty’. (2)
Initially British officials saw this campaign as a means of
taking pressure of Canada. But by the time the operation got
under way, the objective had changed. General Rosswho was
supposed to lead the expeditionwas instructed ‘To obtain
command of the embouchure [mouth] of the Mississippi, so as to
deprive the back settlements of America of their communication
with the sea’ and ‘to occupy some important and valuable
possession, by the restoration of which the conditions of peace
might be improved, or which we might be entitled to exact the
cession of, as the price of peace.’ Ross was to encourage the
free inhabitants to revolt but was to make no binding promises
about the future. ‘[Y]ou must give them clearly to understand
that Great Britain cannot pledge herself to make the
independence of Louisiana, or its restoration to the Spanish
Crown, a sine qua non of peace with the United States.’(3)
As a preliminary to the main expedition, in May of 1814
Cochrane dispatched a shipload of arms to Indians on the
Apalachicola River in Spanish Florida.” (4)
So we are able to ask a lot of questions at this juncture I
hope.
We know that the race card was being used by Britain in this
war and there are reasons to think that the founding of the
United State had more to do with slavery in the first place than
any Tea Party or taxes. Britain had outlawed slavery a decade
before the US was created. Slavery in Greece was worse than at
any time in the US or elsewhere, although Columbus (an agent of
the Holy Alliance and Hibernian or Alumbrados forces) certainly
did more than most Greek states in this regard. He was engaging
in mass genocide on purpose so I do not consider it mere slavery.
That is not the whole reason for the creation of the United
States and there could be a good argument made for the forces of
the so-called New World Order acting to make the US what it has
become. I have shown the Indians are often agents for the
Synarchists or elite and secret societies in many books and you
can find the Sioux acting on behalf of them in this book. Joseph
Brant and Sitting Bull are part of the same continuum including
the Mediwiwin Society which was Masonic before the arrival of
the explorers and some people think Abraham Lincoln was a
Melungeon. I think the Bairds are similarly connected to the
Huguenots we will see a religious Baird of the 19th Century
wrote extensively about. But all of this intrigue is just the
icing on the cake or superficial factoids of public
sensationalism. The fact is far more sophisticated and the
forces of power are using a ‘play both ends against the middle’
or Hegelian Dialectic.
The British were able to enter Pensacola with the assistance of
the local Spanish officials. But the Spanish did not like Major
Nicholls recruiting slaves and calling on all slaves to rebel
against their ‘imbecile governments’. He then tried to take
Mobile which had been taken by the Americans in 1813. I ask you
to think long and hard about Jean Lafitte and his role as a
Spanish agent at this juncture. Was he really just a businessman
engaged in slavery? Why did he work with the Americans and were
the Spanish not unlike the French in their sale of the Louisiana
Purchase at a high level? I remind you that the Spanish
Government was a mere vassal state for the Vatican since long
before Rodrigo Borgia held the Papal Bull addressing incest over
the heads of Isabella and Ferdinand.
Most important to consider is a secret arrangement between
Britain and Rome that apparently was last expressed at the
Treaty of Verona. This agreement is called the Holy Alliance and
some people think the Maritime Laws are part of it. I am sure
they are a mere and simple example of the whole gambit however.
It is connected with the Treaty of Tordesillas and the make up
of the New World Order. The elite have in fact managed both
sides for far longer than this and therir are certain families
who have used nations as mere fronts for a very long time. It
goes back long before what we call history. Same people - all
the time - in every century for at least the 5,000 years James
Joyce referred to as a ‘nightmare’ as quoted by Campbell in
Gimbutas’ Language of the Goddess.
