News Ticker

Bernard Baruch’s Puppet Generals Plot World War II

Photo of (from left) UK Prime Minister Winston Churchill, financier Bernard Baruch, and then-US-President-elect Dwight Eisenhower. PHOTO: The McMahan Archive

By Mike King

THE REAL HISTORY CHANNEL — For nearly half-a-century, the financier Bernard Baruch (cough cough) wielded immense political power from “behind the scenes.” It was Baruch who, according to Curtis Dall, introduced the future president Woodrow Wilson to New York city political elite “leading him like one would a poodle on a string.” Baruch later exerted similar career-making dominance over ambitious scoundrels such as Winston Churchill and Dall’s father-in-law, Franklin Demono Roosevelt — the two main front protagonists who started World War II, at the behest of Baruch and his fellow Jewish finance mobsters.

Among “conspiracy theorist” historians, Baruch’s decades-long control over scum such as Wilson, FDR, Churchill and Harry Truman is fairly well known. What fewer real historians are aware of, however, is Baruch’s critical role in grooming and promoting the ambitious military men who were needed to eagerly carry out the orders of those political buffers. These traitor generals included John Pershing and Fox Conner of World War I fame, as well as George Marshall and Dwight Eisenhower from World War II.

The following excerpt from “I Don’t Like Ike” (by yours truly) reveals a glimpse of the military component of the Jewish Mafia plot to embroil the United States into a second war against Germany. Soak it in — and then buy the book or pdf. […]

2 Comments on Bernard Baruch’s Puppet Generals Plot World War II

  1. I assure you that Mike King does not think for a second that jews or international bankers financed Hitler or the NSDAP. If so, please give us a link.


    • Rather weak inductive fallacy there that presumes because Mike King makes solid points about American puppets, that he is also correct about no banksters being involved with Hitler. There is no nexus here as one point of view does not connect with the other.

      Acting indignant is also a fallacious argument.

Post a Comment

Winter Watch
%d bloggers like this: