原創翻譯:龍騰網 http://www.339221.live 翻譯:神刀 轉載請注明出處

America’s enemy is England, not Russia. Historically, Russia has been perhaps America’s main Ally; England remains America’s top enemy, just as during the American Revolution


America’s sole enemy during the Revolutionary War (1775-1783) was England. Ever since being defeated in that war, England (controlled by the British aristocracy) has tried various ways to regain its control over America. The British aristocracy’s latest attempt to regain control over America started in 1877, and continues today, as the two countries’ “Deep State” — comprising not only the lying CIA and the lying MI6, but the entire joint operation of the united aristocracies of Britain and the U.S. These two aristocracies actually constitute the Deep State, and control the top levels of both intelligence agencies, and of both Governments, and prevent democracy in both countries. The aristocracy rules each of them. The 1877 plan was for a unification of the two aristocracies, and for the then-rising new world power, American industry, and its Government, to become controlled by the wealthiest individuals in both countries. Franklin Delano Roosevelt had tried to break the back of that intended global-imperialist combine, but he tragically died before he achieved this goal.

自從在那場戰爭中被打敗后,英國(由英國貴族控制)就想方設法想方設法重新控制美國,英國貴族重新控制美國的嘗試始于1877年,一直延續到今天,他們被稱為英美兩國的" 深層國家 "——不僅包括謊話連篇的中情局和軍情六處,還包括英美聯合貴族的整個聯合行動,這兩個層面的貴族實際上構成了 " 深層國家 ",控制著兩國情報機構的最高層,也控制著兩國政府的最高層,阻礙兩國的民主。

富蘭克林 · 德拉諾 · 羅斯福曾試圖打破這個刻意建立起來的全球帝國主義聯合體,但他在實現這個目標之前就不幸去世了。

America’s second war against a foreign power was the War of 1812 (1812-1815), in which the U.S.A., so soon after its own victorious Revolution to free itself from Britain, tried to go even further, and to remove Britain altogether from North America. There still remained, among Americans, some fear that England might try to retake the U.S.A. The historian, Don Hickey, wrote that “In North America, the United States was the only belligerent that could lose the war and still retain its independence. Since Great Britain’s independence was at stake in the Napoleonic Wars, one might argue that the United States was the only belligerent on either side of the Atlantic in the War of 1812 that had nothing to fear for its independence.” Because King George III was still hated by many Americans, the U.S. aimed to free from Britain’s control the British colonies that remained to the north of America’s border, present-day Canada. Most of the residents there, however, continued to think of themselves as subjects of the King, and so the U.S. effort failed. Furthermore, British soldiers, coming down from what now is Canada, actually did manage to to jeopardize America’s independence: they burned down Washington. It wasn’t the King’s subjects north of America’s border who did this; it was British troops. The King’s army did it. Americans did have real reason to fear King George III. America’s continuing independence was, indeed, at stake in that war. That wasn’t merely the perception of the Democratic-Republicans (Jefferson’s Party); there was reality to it.

美國對外國的第二次戰爭是1812年戰爭(1812-1815年) ,這場戰爭中,美國在自己勝利的革命結束后不久把自己從英國解放出來,并試圖走得更遠,將英國從北美徹底清除。
歷史學家唐 · ?;?( Don Hickey) 寫道:
“ 在北美,美國是唯一一個能在輸掉戰爭后仍保持獨立的交戰國。英國的獨立在拿破侖戰爭中岌岌可危,可以說,在1812年的戰爭中,美國是大西洋兩岸唯一一個不用擔心獨立的交戰國?!?

然而,那里的大多數居民仍然認為自己是國王的臣民,因此美國的努力失敗了,此外,從今日的加拿大而來的英國士兵,卻設法破壞了美國的獨立: 他們燒毀了華盛頓。
事實上,在那場戰爭中,美國的持續獨立處于危險之中,這不僅僅是民主共和黨人 ( 杰斐遜的政黨 ) 的看法,也是事實。

During a 25 May 2018 phone-call between the Presidents of America and Canada, America’s ignoramus President — Donald Trump — justified tariffs against Canada partially by saying “Didn’t you guys burn down the White House?” However, King George III’s troops had actually done that, on 24 August 1814 (and destroyed the Capitol building on the same day); and not only did Canada not yet exist at that time, but the King’s troops had done this in retaliation for a successful American invasion into the King’s northern territory — which territory was subsequently to win its own partial independence (after the unsuccessful rebellions of 1837-1838, by the King’s subjects there). Though the U.S. won the War of 1812, in the sense of not losing its independence to England, it failed to free Canada. However, two years after America’s own Civil War (1860-1865), Canada finally won a messy partial independence in 1867.

England’s next big attempt to conquer the U.S. was during the Civil War, when England was supporting the Southerners’ right to continue enslaving Blacks and to break away from the federal unx for that purpose (to perpetuate slavery). If the South had won, this would not only have considerably weakened the U.S.A., but it would have placed to America’s south a new nation which would be allied with America’s enemy, Britain, the Southern Confederacy.

英國征服美國的下一次重大嘗試發生在南北戰爭期間,當時英國支持南方人繼續奴役黑人并為此目的脫離聯邦聯邦 ( 使奴隸制永久化) 的權利。

By contrast against England’s support for slavery, and for the breakup of the United States, Russia was a leading global supporter of the U.S., and of its movement to abolish slavery. Under Tsar Alexander II, the Russian Government opposed not only slavery but also serfdom, and thus became immortalized amongst Russians as “The Great Liberator,” for his ending serfdom, which was, for Russia, what slavery was for America — a repudiated relic of a former monarchic absolutism (that Tsar’s predecessors). When the erudite Cynthia Chung headlined on 16 October 2019, “Russia and the United States: The Forgotten History of a Brotherhood” and wrote there about “Cassius Clay,” she wasn’t mistakenly referring to the famous American boxer Muhammad Ali (1942-2016), but instead, quite correctly, to the individual who is far less well-known today but in whose honor that renowned boxer had originally been named, Cassius Marcellus Clay. The namesake for that boxer was quite reasonably referred-to by Chung as having been “possibly the greatest US Ambassador to Russia (1861-1862 and 1863-1869).” This “Cassius Clay” was, indeed, one of America’s unsung historical heroes, not only because this Kentuckian “Cassius Clay” was an extremely courageous champion of outlawing slavery, but also because he became a great asset to his friend Abraham Lincoln’s war to achieve the goal of emancipating America’s slaves. As Wikipedia’s article “Cassius Marcellus Clay (politician)” says, when describing Clay’s role in the “Civil War and Minister to Russia”:

沙皇亞歷山大二世統治時期,俄國政府不僅反對奴隸制,還反對農奴制,因此在俄羅斯人中被稱為“偉大的解放者” ,因為他結束了農奴制,在俄國看來,農奴制對美國來說就是一種否定性的前君主專制殘余 ( 前任沙皇們就屬此列 ) 。
2019年10月16日,博學的辛西婭 · 鐘 ( Cynthia Chung) 發表了題為《俄羅斯與美國:被遺忘的兄弟情誼史》的文章,并在文章中提到了“ Cassius Clay ”( 卡修斯 · 克萊,拳王阿里 ) ,她并非誤指著名美國拳擊手穆罕默德 · 阿里 ( Muhammad Ali,1942-2016) ,而是指另一個人(非常正確),這個人如今遠沒有那么知名,但最初這個稱號指的是他。

這個拳擊手的名字被辛西婭 · 鐘 稱為“ 可能是美國最偉大的駐俄大使 ( 1861-1862,1863-1869 ) ” 。
這位“ Cassius Clay ”是美國歷史上的無名英雄之一,不僅因為這位肯塔基州的“ Cassius Clay ”是廢除奴隸制的極其勇敢的擁護者,還因為他成為了他的朋友亞伯拉罕 · 林肯為實現解放美國奴隸的目標而發動的戰爭的巨大財富。
正如維基百科的條目“ Cassius Marcellus Clay,政治家) ”在描述克萊在“內戰和對俄公使”中的角色時所說:

President Lincoln appointed Clay to the post of Minister to the Russian court at St. Petersburg on March 28, 1861. The Civil War started before he departed and, as there were no Federal troops in Washington at the time, Clay organized a group of 300 volunteers to protect the White House and US Naval Yard from a possible Confederate attack. These men became known as Cassius M. Clay’s Washington Guards. President Lincoln gave Clay a presentation Colt revolver in recognition. When Federal troops arrived, Clay and his family embarked for Russia.[10]

內戰在他離開之前就開始了,當時華盛頓還沒有聯邦軍隊,克萊組織了一支由300名志愿者組成的隊伍,保護白宮和美國海軍造船廠免受南方軍的襲擊,這些人后來被稱為“ 卡修斯 · M · 克萊的華盛頓衛隊”, 林肯總統向克萊贈送了一把柯爾特左輪手槍以示表彰,聯邦軍隊到達時,克萊和他的家人啟程前往俄國。

As Minister to Russia, Clay witnessed the Tsar’s emancipation edict. Recalled to the United States in 1862 to accept a commission from Lincoln as a major general with the unx Army, Clay publicly refused to accept it unless Lincoln would agree to emancipate slaves under Confederate control. Lincoln sent Clay to Kentucky to assess the mood for emancipation there and in the other border states. Following Clay’s return to Washington, DC, Lincoln issued the proclamation in late 1862, to take effect in January 1863.[11]
Clay resigned his commission in March 1863 and returned to Russia, where he served until 1869. [3] He was influential in the negotiations for the purchase of Alaska.[12

作為駐俄公使,克萊見證了沙皇的解放詔書,1862年,克萊被召回美國,林肯委任其為聯邦軍少將,但他公開拒絕接受林肯的委任,除非林肯同意解放受邦聯控制的奴隸,林肯派克萊去肯塔基州評估那里和其他邊境州的解放情緒,克萊返回華盛頓后,林肯于1862年底發表了《 解放奴隸宣言 》,并于1863年1月生效。

Thus, this friend of both “The Great Liberator” and “The Great Emancipator” helped them both. As Blake Stillwell well summarized in his 16 October 2015 article “How Russia guaranteed a unx victory in the Civil War”, Ambassador Clay knew and personally shared the deeply shared values between the heads-of-state in both the U.S. and Russia, and he thereby persuaded Tsar Alexander II to commit to join the U.S. in a war to conquer England if England would overtly and actively join the U.S. South’s war against the United States. Tsar Alexander II thus stationed Russian warships in New York City and San Francisco during the Civil War, so as to block England from actively supporting the Southern Confederacy, which England had been planning to do. Probably no single country was as helpful to the unx cause as was Russia, and this was not merely for purposes of power-politics, but very much for democratic and progressive principles, both Lincoln’s and that Tsar’s — their shared Enlightenment goals for the world’s future.

這位“偉大的解放者”,正如布萊克 · 斯蒂爾韋爾在2015年10月16日的文章《俄羅斯如何幫助聯邦在內戰中取得勝利》中總結的那樣,克萊大使熟知并親自在美國和俄羅斯兩國國家元首之間分享了深刻的共同價值觀,他說服沙皇亞歷山大二世承諾一旦英國公開積極介入美國的戰爭,俄國將加入美國對抗英國。


As Chung’s article also noted, the friendly relations between Russia and the United States had started at the time of the American Revolution, and Benjamin Franklin (who then was America’s Ambassador to France) was key to that.
In 1877, the future British diamond-magnate Cecil Rhodes came up with his lifelong plan, to unite the aristocracies of Britain and the U.S. so as to ultimately conquer the entire world. His plan was to be activated upon his death, which occurred in 1902, when the Rhodes Trust began and created the core of a spreading movement at the top levels of finance in both countries, including the Royal Institute of Foreign Affairs, a.k.a., Chatham House, in London, and then the Council on Foreign Relations in NYC (RIFA’s U.S. branch), both of which institutions became united with the European aristocracies in the Bilderberg group, which started in 1954, and which was initiated by the ‘former’ Nazi Prince Bernhard of Netherlands, and David Rockefeller of U.S.; and, then, finally, the Trilateral Commission, bringing Japan’s aristocrats into the Rhodesian fold, in 1973, under the aegis of David Rockefeller’s agent and chief anti-Russian strategist, Zbigniew Brzezinski. (Nelson Rockefeller’s chief anti-Russian strategist was Henry Kissinger.)
There are also other significant offshoots from the Rhodes Trust — it’s the trunk of the tree, and Cecil Rhodes seems to have been its seed.

辛西婭 · 鐘文章也指出,美國獨立戰爭時,俄國與美國的友好關系就已經開始了,而本杰明 · 富蘭克林(當時他是美國駐法國大使)是其中的關鍵。
1877年,未來的英國鉆石大亨塞西爾·羅茲 ( Cecil Rhode s) 提出了一個他畢生為之努力的計劃,即聯合英國和美國的貴族,最終征服整個世界。

他的計劃是在他死后啟動,這發生在1902年,當時羅茲信托基金開始運作,并在兩國金融界高層中掀起了一場聲勢浩大的運動,創造了一個擴散運動的核心,其中包括“ 皇家外交事務研究所” ( 譯注:Council on Foreign Relations,即美國外交關系協會 )。

這兩個機構通過1954年成立的“歐洲彼爾德伯格俱樂部 ”(Bilderberg Group)與歐洲貴族聯合起來,這個組織是由前納粹、荷蘭王子伯恩哈德和美國的大衛 · 洛克菲勒發起的。
最后,1973年,在大衛 · 洛克菲勒的代理人、首席反俄戰略家茲比格涅夫 · 布熱津斯基的庇護下,三邊委員會將日本的貴族收入麾下。( 納爾遜 · 洛克菲勒的首席反俄戰略家是亨利 · 基辛格 )

Then, during World War I, the U.S. and Russia were, yet again, crucial allies, but this time England was with us, not against us, because Britain’s aristocracy were competing against Germany’s. The Marxist Revolution in Russia in 1917 terrified all of the world’s super-rich, much as they had been terrified by America’s enemy is England, not Russia. Historically, Russia has been perhaps America’s main Ally; England remains America’s top enemy, just as during the American Revolution.the failed revolutions in Europe during 1848, but this in Russia was a revolution for a dictatorship by workers against the middle class (“the bourgeoisie”) and not only against the aristocracy; and, so, it was no Enlightenment project, and it certainly wasn’t at all democratic. Furthermore, Germany during World War I was even more dictatorial than was England. Indeed: Kaiser Wilhelm II initiated the World War in order to maintain and continue the ancient tradition of the divine right of kings — hereditary monarchy (the most retrogressive of all forms of governmental rule, hereditary rule). And Germany was threatening America’s ships, whereas England was not.


1848年歐洲革命失敗,但在俄羅斯,這是工人對中產階級 (“資產階級”) 的獨裁革命,而不僅僅是對貴族階級的獨裁革命,因此,這不是啟蒙運動,當然也不是民主運動。

U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt was an exception to the almost universal hatred of Russia amongst U.S.-and-allied aristocracies: he recognized and acknowledged that though Joseph Stalin was a barbaric dictator, Stalin was a deeply committed anti-imperialist like FDR himself was, because Stalin led the Communist Party’s anti-imperialist wing, against Trotsky’s imperialist wing. Stalin advocated passionately for “communism in one country” — the doctrine that the Soviet unx must first clearly establish a thriving economy within the country and thereby serve as a model which would inspire the masses in capitalist nations to rise up against their oppressors; and that only after such a communist model of success becomes established can communism naturally spread to other countries. FDR was absolutely opposed to any sort of imperialism, and he had passionate private arguments against Winston Churchill about it, because Churchill said, “There can be no tampering with the Empire’s economic agreements,” in reply to FDR’s “I can’t believe that we can fight a war against fascist slavery, and at the same time not work to free people all over the world from a backward colonial policy.” And, afterwards, FDR said privately to his son Elliott, contemptuously against Churchill, “A real old Tory, isn’t he? A real old Tory, of the old school.” FDR’s post-war vision was for a United Nations which would possess all nuclear and all other strategic weapons, and which would control all aspects of international law, and nothing of intranational law (except perhaps if the Security Council is unanimous, but only as being exceptions). Each of the major powers would be allowed to intervene intranationally into their bordering nations, but only so as to prevent any inimical major power from gaining a foothold next door — purely defensive, nothing else. This would have been very different from what the U.N. became. It’s something that the gullible Truman (who knew and understood none of that) was able to be deceived about by Churchill, and, even more so, by the then-General, Dwight Eisenhower, because both of them were committed imperialists and aimed to conquer Russia — and not only to end its communism. The crucial date was 26 July 1945, when Eisenhower convinced Truman to start the Cold War. Then, on 24 February 1990, U.S. President George Herbert Walker Bush established the policy of the U.S. since then: that when the Soviet unx would end its communism in 1991, the U.S. and its allies would secretly continue the Cold War against Russia, until Russia becomes conquered so as to be part of the U.S. empire, no longer an independent nation. This is continuation of Cecil Rhodes’s plan: the U.S. doing the British aristocracy’s bidding to lead in conquering the entire world.

美國和盟國貴族幾乎普遍仇恨俄羅斯,但美國總統富蘭克林 · 德拉諾 · 羅斯福是一個例外:他認識到并承認,雖然約瑟夫 · 斯大林是一個野蠻的獨裁者,但斯大林是一個堅定的反帝國主義者,就像羅斯福本人,因為斯大林領導的反帝國主義派別,反對托洛茨基的帝國主義派別。

羅斯福堅決反對任何形式的帝國主義,而且他私下里也強烈反對溫斯頓 · 丘吉爾,因為丘吉爾在回應羅斯?!拔也幌嘈盼覀兡艽蛞粓龇磳Ψㄎ魉古鄣膽馉?,同時又不致力于把全世界的人民從落后的殖民政策中解放出來 ”時說,“ 帝國的經濟協議不能被篡改?!?
后來,羅斯福私下里對他的兒子埃利奧特輕蔑地說,“ 他就是一個真正的老保守黨,錯不了,一個真正的、老派的保守黨份子?!?br />
羅斯福的戰后愿景是建立一個由所有擁有核武器和其他戰略武器的國家共同控制國際法的聯合國,而不存在一國之法 ( 也許在安全理事會一致同意的情況下除外,但只是例外 ) ,每個大國將被允許對其周邊國家進行內部干預,但只是為了防止任何敵對大國在隔壁站穩腳跟----純粹是防御性的,沒有別的。

這將與“ 聯合國 ”的情況大不相同,這也是好騙的杜魯門 ( 他對此一無所知,也完全不明白) 被丘吉爾欺騙的原因,更是被當時的將軍德懷特 · 艾森豪威爾欺騙的原因,因為他們都是虔誠的帝國主義者,目標是征服俄羅斯。

關鍵的日子是1945年7月26日,當時艾森豪威爾說服杜魯門發動冷戰,然后,在1990年2月24日,美國總統喬治·赫伯特 · 沃克 · 布什制定了美國的政策:
當蘇聯在1991年解體時,美國及其盟友暗中繼續對俄羅斯進行冷戰,直到俄羅斯被征服,成為美帝國的一部分,不再是一個獨立的國家,這是塞西爾 · 羅茲計劃的延續:美國按照英國貴族的要求領導征服整個世界。

On 14 August 1941, at the time when FDR and Churchill formed the Atlantic Charter and were planning for a joint war against Hitler, they agreed to form the “UKUSA Agreement”, a “secret treaty” between those two countries, which became formalized on 17 May 1943 as the “BRUSA Agreement” and then on 5 March 1946 under President Truman became officially signed, and its contents finally became public on 25 June 2010. It was/is the basis of what is more commonly know as “the Five Eyes” of the Cecil-Rhodes-derived (though they don’t mention that) foreign-intelligence operations, uniting UK and U.S. intelligence as the core, but also including the intelligence-operations of the other Anglo-Saxon English-speaking colonies: Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. India and other ‘inferior races’ of English-speaking countries (as Rhodes and Winston Churchill viewed them) weren’t included. For examples: the UK/USA joint effort to produce the death of Julian Assange (and seem likely to succeed soon in doing that) became part of this UK/USA working-together, as have also been the UK/USA sanctions against Russia regarding the trumped-up cases and sanctions against Russia concerning Sergei Magnitsky in 2012 and Sergei Skripal and the “Russiagate” charges against Donald Trump in 2018. This full flowering of the Rhodesian plan is also publicly known as “the Special Relationship” and as “the Anglosphere”.

1941年8月14日,正值羅斯福和丘吉爾制定《大西洋憲章》,并計劃對希特勒發動聯合戰爭,他們同意形成“英美協定”(UKUSA) ,這是兩國之間的一個“秘密條約” ,1943年5月17日正式成為“布魯薩協定”(BRUSA),后在杜魯門總統的領導下于1946年3月5日正式簽署,其內容終于在2010年6月25日公開。
它是塞西爾 · 羅茲計劃派生的 ( 盡管他們沒有提到 ) 外國情報行動的“ 五眼聯盟 ”的基礎,以聯合英美兩國的情報為核心,但也包括其他盎格魯撒克遜英語殖民地的情報行動:加拿大、澳大利亞和新西蘭。

印度和其他英語國家“低等種族”( 正如塞西爾 · 羅茲和溫斯頓 · 丘吉爾所認為的那樣 ) 沒有包括在內。
英國和美國聯合制造朱利安 · 阿桑奇之死的行動 ( 看起來很快就會成功) 就是英國和美國合作的一部分,英國/美國2012年針對謝爾蓋 · 馬格尼茨基(Sergei Magnitsky)的無中生有的案件和對俄羅斯的制裁,以及2018年謝爾蓋 · 斯克里帕爾(Sergei Skripal)和唐納德 · 特朗普的 "通俄門 "指控也是英國/美國聯合計劃的一部分。
這種羅德西亞計劃(Rhodesian plan)的全面開花也被公開稱為“ 英美特殊關系”(The Special Relationship)和“盎格魯圈”。

譯注:羅德西亞計劃,Rhodesian plan,中文互聯網沒有任何相關信息(很奇怪),根據基督教科學箴言報(The Christian Science Monitor)2002年的一篇文章此計劃是西方針對羅德西亞 ( 津巴布韋獨立前的稱呼 ) 政權更迭的一系列經濟、金融、貿易制裁和國際排斥等措施。此處應為泛指“制裁”。

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

本文作者為調查研究歷史學家埃里克 · 澤斯,近期出版作品《 差距:1910-2010年民主黨與共和黨的經濟記錄》和《基督的腹語:創造基督教的事件》。