Anglo-German competition for Zionist support in WWI

On the general subject of us-uk vs. europe or an anglo-american axis
dominating the continentals (and rest of world), and following on the
verification done on this list re the Julius Caesar quote, could anyone
authenticate the excerpt "David Lloyd George, Memoirs" below,
which is now circulating on the net?

its burden is to show that in the closely matched struggle of WWI,
key jewish support was bartered for palestine to the first bidder

also is it true that David Lloyd George was hired as legal counsel for the
World Zionist Organization starting in 1906?

sorry to bother you but i'm a long way from the nearest research library!
and we want to refer to the source below in a pending publication

[i intend to use this source to show, among other things, that Germany
really was stabbed in the back. not to justify hitler's excesses of course;
i have other sources that show he was sponsored indirectly by the same
american financial "elite" that sponsored the bolsheviks.
Some sources are footnoted at http://www.petitiononline.com/stoputsh/

A related unverified allegation is that Clemenceau, who pushed for the
mad peace treaty of Versailles, was a British agent. Any feedback on
that would be welcome too.

what i am going to try to show is that an anglo-american cabal more or less
planned the calamities known as the first half of the 2oth century, both for
private profit and as a continuation of the strategy of divide and conquer,
called by them the balance of power.

I feel this is very topical now that only the us-uk axis supports an
unprovoked attack to grab the iraqi oil fields, and it should be addressed
to avoid more of the same calamities recurring in the 21st century]

---------------

David Lloyd George, Memoirs of the Peace Conference, Volume II, New
Haven, Yale University Press 1939; (ch. XXIII).
{p. 722} The next factor which produced a momentous change was the
decision to come to terms with Jewry, which was clamouring for an
opportunity to make Canaan once more the homeland of their race. There
are more Irishmen living outside Ireland than dwell in the old country.
Still, Ireland is the homeland of the Irish people. No one imagined that
the 14,000,000 of Jews scattered over the globe could find room and a
living in Palestine. Nevertheless this race of wanderers sought a
national hearth and a refuge for the hunted children of Israel in the
country which the splendour of their spiritual genius has made forever
glorious.
It seems strange to say that the Germans were the first to realise the
war value of the Jews of the dispersal. In Poland it was they who helped
the German Army to conquer the Czarist oppressor who had so cruelly
persecuted their race. They had their influence in other lands - notably
in America, where some of their most powerful leaders exerted a
retarding influence on President Wilson's impulses in the direction of
the Allies. {ed. - before the Balfour Declaration} The German General
Staff in 1916 urged the Turks to concede the demands of the Zionists in
respect of Palestine. Fortunately the Turk was too stupid to understand
or too sluggish to move. The fact that Britain at last opened her eyes
to the opportunity afforded to the Allies to rally this powerful people
to their side was attributable to the initiative, the assiduity and the
fervour of one of the greatest Hebrews of all time: Dr. Chaim Weizmann.
He found his opportunity in this War of Nations to advance the cause to
which he had consecrated his life. ...
{p. 723} Propaganda on both sides probably played a greater part in the
last war than in any other. As an illustration I might take the public
declarations we made of the Allied intention to liberate and confer
self-government on nationalities inside the enemy Empires, - Turkey,
Germany, and Austria. These announcements were intended to have a
propagandist effect, not only at home, but also in neutral countries and
perhaps most of all in enemy countries. ...
{p. 724} The Balfour Declaration represented the convinced policy of all
parties in our country and also in America, but the launching of it in
1917 was due, as I have said, to propagandist reasons. I should like
once more to remind the British public, who may be hesitating about the
burdens of our Zionist Declaration to-day, of the actual war position at
the time of that Declaration. We are now looking at the War through the
dazzling glow of a triumphant end, but in 1917 the issue of the War was
still very much in doubt. We were convinced - but not all of us - that
we would pull through victoriously, but the Germans were equally
persuaded that victory would rest on their banners, and they had much
reason for coming to that conclusion. They had smashed the Roumanians.
The Russian Army was completely demoralised by its numerous defeats. The
French Army was exhausted and temporarily unequal to striking a great
blow. The Italians had sustained a shattering defeat at Caporetto. The
unlimited submarine campaign had sunk millions of tons of our shipping.
There were no American divisions at the front, and when I say at the
front, I mean available in the trenches. For the Allies there were two
paramount problems at that time. The first was that the Central Powers
should be broken by the blockade before our supplies of food and
essential raw material were cut off by sinkings of our own ships. The
other was that the war preparations in the United States should be
speeded up to such an extent as to enable the Allies to be adequately
reinforced in the critical campaign of 1918 by American troops. In the
solution of these two problems, public opinion in Russia and America
played a great part, and we had every reason at that time to believe
that in both countries the friendliness or hostility of the Jewish race
might make a considerable difference. ...
{p. 725} The support of the Zionists for the cause of the Entente would
mean a great deal as a war measure. Quite naturally Jewish sympathies
were to a great extent anti-Russian, and therefore in favour of the
Central Powers. No ally of Russia, in fact, could escape sharing that
immediate and inevitable penalty for the long and savage Russian
persecution of the Jewish race. In addition to this, the German General
Staff, with their wide outlook on possibilities, urged, early in 1916,
the advantages of promising Jewish restoration to Palestine under an
arrangement
{p. 726} to be made between Zionists and Turkey, backed by a German
guarantee. The practical difficulties were considerable; the subject was
perhaps dangerous to German relations with Turkey; and the German
Government acted cautiously. But the scheme was by no means rejected or
even shelved, and at any moment the Allies might have been forestalled
in offering this supreme bid. In fact in September, 1917, the German
Government were making very serious efforts to capture the Zionist
Movement.
Another most cogent reason for the adoption by the Allies of the policy
of the declaration lay in the state of Russia herself. Russian Jews had
been secretly active on behalf of the Central Powers from the first;
they had become the chief agents of German pacifist propaganda in
Russia; by 1917 they had done much in preparing for that general
disintegration of Russian society, later recognised as the Revolution.
It was believed that if Great Britain declared for the fulfilment of
Zionist aspirations in Palestine under her own pledge, one effect would
be to bring Russian Jewry to the cause of the Entente.
It was believed, also, that such a declaration would have a potent
influence upon world Jewry outside Russia, and secure for the Entente
the aid of Jewish financial interests. In America, their aid in this
respect would have a special value when the Allies had almost exhausted
the gold and marketable securities available for American purchases.
Such were the chief considerations which, in 1917, impelled the British
Government towards making a contract with Jewry.
Men like Mr. Balfour, Lord Milner, Lord Robert Cecil, and myself were in
whole-hearted sympathy with the Zionist ideal. The same thing applied to
all the leaders of public opinion in our country and in the Dominions,
Conservative, Liberal, and Labour. There were only one or two who were
not so favourably inclined to the policy.
==
posted to frameup@yahoogroups.com by Dick Eastman