Right-wing myths with an endless shelf life

Editor's note: I receive all sorts of right wing foolishness by e-mail. This one below, oft-repeated no matter how many times it is shown to be false, is particularly deluded and preys on the fact that many right wingers are uneducated or indeed, semi-literate —   being enthusiasts who entertain only those thoughts, ideas and books that agree with their positions —  hence they end up in a fantasy land of their own devising. It reminds us of the Right wing Republican Senate candidate who declared that women who are victims of a "legitimate rape" will most likely not become pregnant. People who imagine that King Charles I was a noble protector of the rights of Englishmen have had their minds legitimately raped. Received by e-mail:How The Jews Took Great BritainJEWISH BANKERS FROM AMSTERDAM led by the Jewish financier and army contractor of Cromwell’s New Model Army, Fernandez Carvajal and assisted by Portuguese Ambassador De Souza, a Marano (secret Jew), saw an opportunity to exploit in the civil unrest led by Oliver Cromwell in 1643.

A stable Christian society of ancient traditions binding the Monarchy, Church, State, nobles and people into one solemn bond was disrupted by Calvin’s Protestant uprising. The Jews of Amsterdam exploited this civil unrest and made their move. They contacted Oliver Cromwell in a series of letters: 

Cromwell To Ebenezer Pratt of the Mulheim Synagogue in Amsterdam,16th June 1647:— “In return for financial support will advocate admission of Jews to England: This however impossible while Charles living. Charles cannot be executed without trial, adequate grounds for which do not at present exist. Therefore advise that Charles be assassinated, but will have nothing to do with arrangements for procuring an assassin, though willing to help in his escape.”

To Oliver Cromwell From Ebenezer Pratt, 12th July 1647:— “Will grant financial aid as soon as Charles removed and Jews admitted. Assassination too dangerous. Charles shall be given opportunity to escape: His recapture will make trial and execution possible. The support will be liberal, but useless to discuss terms until trial commences.” —Cromwell had carried out the orders of the Jewish financiers and beheaded, (yes, Cromwell and his Jewish sponsors must face Christ!), King Charles I on January 30 1649. 

Beginning in 1655, Cromwell, through his alliance with the Jewish bankers of Amsterdam and specifically with Manasseh Ben Israel and his brother-in-law, David Abravanel Dormido, initiated the resettlement of the Jews in England

Sources: Sources #2: Isaac Disraeli, Life of Charles I, 1851; Hugh Ross Williamson, Charles and Cromwell; AHM Ramsey, The Nameless War; Lord Alfred Douglas, Plain English, 1921; Geoffrey H. Smith, The Settlement Of Jews In England  (end quote)

Michael Hoffman replies: 

This is Anglican propaganda mixed with phantasmagoria which poses the Stuart monarchy as a bulwark against Judaic power and wealth.1. Hilaire Belloc and other partisans assert that King Charles fought the Money Power in contrast with Cromwell. This ludicrous notion is unsupported by the facts: Charles I permitted usury and a high interest rate on loans to flourish in his kingdom (cf. pp. 315-318 of Usury in Christendom). The Church of Rome and the Anglican Church were permitting usury banking operations while putting the onus of usury stigma on radical Protestants. Belloc and Chesterton, who were masters of English prose, used their wordsmithing talents to perpetuate this scapegoating, thereby exonerating Rome and the Stuart monarchy of the financial crimes of which they were guilty, and affixing the names of "miser and usurer" to the Calvinists. We wrote a book about this ruse and will not belabor this point here.2.  King Charles I was executed because he was a corrupt tyrant, not as part of a Judaic plot. The Star Chamber of King Charles I has become the template for every abuse of executive power since his reign. If they are consistent, defenders of King Charles cannot criticize President George W. Bush or any similar despot.3. The Cromwell/Pratt quotes are fabricated. (The hoaxers are so obtuse they have not even written the fake quotations in 17th century syntax).4. "Jews" were not readmitted to England under Cromwell. Cromwell's plan to readmit them was rebuffed by the Puritan Parliament, led by the Puritan William Prynne, one of the staunchest foes of Judaism in the history of the West.Under King Charles I and his minion, Archbishop William Laud, the Star Chamber was a tool of royal oppression, framing, torturing and jailing dissidents. In the 1630s Laud used the Star Chamber to persecute the king's opponents, subjecting them to the pillory and corporal punishment without benefit of a trial by jury, without the ability to confront the witnesses against them and with secret "evidence." Sound familiar?Under King Charles I and Laud, the Star Chamber dispensed punishments that included mutilation, life imprisonment, and huge fines.  Charles exhibited a complete disregard for the common law and immemorial liberties of Englishmen and he paid for his tyranny with his life. The Star Chamber's arbitrary abuse of power and the sadistic punishments it inflicted produced a wave of reaction against it from advocates of common-law courts and from the people. The American constitutional concepts of the Right to Remain Silent and Due Process of Law were enacted partly in reaction to the tyrannical misuse of judicial power exerted by the Star Chamber of Charles I.Sorry to see these right wing hoaxes about Charles I, Cromwell and "the Jews" given an endless shelf life. The level of historical knowledge of the people who lend credence to this stuff is abysmal. They never seem to learn, even when their fixations disguised as history, are shown to be demonstrably false. Perhaps they have more in common with their Zionist enemies than they realize, since "truth is no defense" would seem to be an apothegm favored by both sides. Michael HoffmanRevisionist historianwww.revisionisthistory.org***