Hope of Israel Ministries (Ecclesia of YEHOVAH God):

Bolshevism and the Jews

by Vladimir Moss & Yuri Maltsev

The unprecedented catastrophe of the Russian revolution required an explanation. For very many this lay in the coming to power of the Jews, and their hatred for the Russian people. For after the revolution of February, 1917 the Jews acquired full rights with the rest of the population, and the (already very porous) barriers set up by the Pale of Settlement were destroyed. Jews poured from the western regions into the major cities of European Russia and soon acquired prominent executive positions in all major sectors of government and the economy.

As Alexander Solzhenitsyn has written, February brought only harm and destruction to the Russian population. However,

“Jewish society in Russia received in full from the February revolution everything that it had fought for, and the October coup was really not needed by it, except by that cutthroat part of the Jewish secular youth that with its Russian brother-internationalists had stacked up a charge of hatred for the Russian state structure and was straining to ‘deepen’ the revolution.”

It was they who through their control of the Executive Committee of the Soviet -- over half of its members were Jewish socialists -- assumed the real power after February, and propelled it on contrary to the interests not only of the Russian, but also of the majority of the Jewish population -- to the October revolution.

Nevertheless, at the time of the October revolution only a minority of the Bolsheviks were Jews (in the early 1900s they constituted 19% of the party).

“At the elections to the Constituent Assembly ‘more than 80% of the Jewish population of Russia voted for Zionist parties. Lenin wrote that 550,000 were for Jewish nationalists. ‘The majority of the Jewish parties formed a single national list, in accordance with which seven deputies were elected -- six Zionists’ and Gruzenberg. ‘The success of the Zionists’ was also aided by the Declaration of the English Foreign Minister Balfour [on the creation of a ‘national centre’ of the Jews in Palestine], ‘which was met by the majority of the Russian Jewish population with enthusiasm [in Moscow, Petrograd, Odessa, Kiev and many other cities there were festive manifestations, meetings and religious services]’.”

The simultaneous triumph of the Jews in Russia and Palestine was indeed an extraordinary “coincidence”: Divine Providence drew the attention of all those with eyes to see this sign of the times when, in one column of newsprint in the London Times for November 9, 1917, there appeared two articles, the one announcing the outbreak of revolution in Petrograd, and the other -- the promise of a homeland for the Jews in Palestine (the Balfour declaration).

This coincidence was reinforced by the fact that the theist Jews who triumphed in Israel in 1917, and especially in 1948 after the foundation of the State of Israel, came from the same region and social background -- the Pale of Settlement in Western Russia -- as the atheist Jews who triumphed in Moscow in 1917. Sometimes they even came from the same families. Thus Chaim Weitzmann, the first president of Israel, points out in his Autobiography that his brothers and sisters were all either Zionists or Bolsheviks.

M. Heifetz also points to the coincidence in time between the October revolution and the Balfour declaration:

“A part of the Jewish generation goes along the path of Herzl and Zhabotinsky. The other part, unable to withstand the temptation, fills up the band of Lenin and Trotsky and Stalin. The path of Herzl and Bagritsky allowed the Jews to stand tall and immediately become not simply an equal nation with Russia, but a privileged one.”

Indeed, the Russian revolution may be regarded as one branch of that general triumph of Jewish power which we observe in the twentieth century in both East and West, in both Russia and America and Israel.

Other Viewpoints

The mainly Jewish nature of the Bolshevik leadership -- and of the world revolution in general -- cannot be doubted. Such a view was not confined to “anti-Semites”.

Thus Winston Churchill wrote:

“It would almost seem as if the Gospel of Christ and the gospel of anti-Christ were designed to originate among the same people; and that this mystic and mysterious race had been chosen for the supreme manifestations, both of the Divine and the diabolical...From the days of ‘Spartacus’ Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany) and Emma Goldman (United States), this worldwide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence and impossible equality, has been steadily growing.

"It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Nesta Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the nineteenth century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire. There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others” (Illustrated Sunday Herald, 8 February 1920).

Douglas Reed writes: “The Central Committee of the Bolshevik Party, which wielded the supreme power, contained 3 Russians (including Lenin) and 9 Jews. The next body in importance, the Central Committee of the Executive Commission (or secret police) comprised 42 Jews and 19 Russians, Letts, Georgians and others. The Council of People’s Commissars consisted of 17 Jews and five others. The Moscow Che-ka (secret police) was formed of 23 Jews and 13 others. Among the names of 556 high officials of the Bolshevik state officially published in 1918-1919 were 458 Jews and 108 others. Among the central committees of small, supposedly ‘Socialist’ or other non-Communist parties… were 55 Jews and 6 others.”

The Jewish Richard Pipes admits: “Jews undeniably played in the Bolshevik Party and the early Soviet apparatus a role disproportionate to their share of the population. The number of Jews active in Communism in Russia and abroad was striking: in Hungary, for example, they furnished 95 percent of the leading figures in Bela Kun’s dictatorship. They also were disproportionately represented among Communists in Germany and Austria during the revolutionary upheavals there in 1918-23, and in the apparatus of the Communist International.”

According to Donald Rayfield, in 1922 the Jews “reached their maximum representation in the party (not that they formed a coherent group) when, at 15 per cent, they were second only to ethnic Russians with 65 per cent.”

The London Times correspondent in Russia, Robert Wilton, reported: ”Taken according to numbers of population, the Jews represented one in ten; among the commissars that rule Bolshevik Russia they are nine in ten; if anything the proportion of Jews is still greater.”

On June 9, 1919 Captain Montgomery Shuyler of the American Expeditionary Forces telegrammed from Vladivostok on the makeup of the presiding Soviet government: “...(T)here were 384 ‘commissars’ including 2 negroes, 13 Russians, 15 Chinamen, 22 Armenians, and more than 300 Jews. Of the latter number, 264 had come to Russia from the United States since the downfall of the Imperial Government.”

Writes David McCalden:

"Both British and American diplomats in Russia at the time sent back reports describing how the vast majority of the Bolsheviks were Jewish. Reproductions and excerpts appear in the comprehensive Six Million Reconsidered by William Grimstad. Page after page of frank admissions by Jews themselves and by on-the-spot observers prove beyond any shadow of doubt that Bolshevism was Jewish from top to bottom" (Exiles from History, p. 32).

A Jewish Revolution

The Jews were especially dominant in the most feared and blood-thirsty part of the Bolshevik State apparatus, the Cheka, which, writes Brendon, “consisted of 250,000 officers (including 100,000 border guards), a remarkable adjunct to a State which was supposed to be withering away. In the first 6 years of Bolshevik rule it had executed at least 200,000. Moreover, the Cheka was empowered to act as ‘policeman, gaoler, investigator, prosecutor, judge and executioner’. It also employed barbaric forms of torture.”

So complete was the Jewish domination of Russia as a result of the revolution that it is a misnomer to speak about the “Russian” revolution; it should more accurately be called the Russian-Jewish revolution.

That the Russian revolution was actually a Jewish revolution, but at the same time part of an international revolution of Jewry against the Christian and Muslim worlds, is indicated by an article by Jacob de Haas entitled “The Jewish Revolution” and published in the London Zionist journal Maccabee in November, 1905:

“The Revolution in Russia is a Jewish revolution, for it is a turning point in Jewish history. This situation flows from the fact that Russia is the fatherland of approximately half of the general number of Jews inhabiting the world...The overthrow of the despotic government must exert a huge influence on the destinies of millions of Jews (both in Russia and abroad). Besides, the revolution in Russia is a Jewish revolution also because the Jews are the most active revolutionaries in the Tsarist Empire.”

Why Were the Jews the Most Active?

But why were the Jews the most active revolutionaries? What was it in their upbringing and history that led them to adopt the atheist revolutionary teachings and actions of Russia’s “superfluous young men” more ardently than the Russians themselves? Hatred of Christ and the Christians was, of course, deeply imbedded in the Talmud and Jewish ritual – but the angry young men that began killing thousands of the Tsar’s servants even before the revolution of 1905 had rejected the Talmud as well as the Gospel, and even all religion in general.

Donald Rayfield writes:

“The motivation of those Jews who worked for the Cheka was not Zionist or ethnic. The war between the Cheka and the Russian bourgeoisie was not even purely a war of classes or political factions. It can be seen as being between Jewish internationalism and the remnants of a Russian national culture...

“...What was Jewish except lineage about Bolsheviks like Zinoviev, Trotsky, Kamenev or Sverdlov? Some were second- or even third-generation renegades; few even spoke Yiddish, let alone knew Hebrew. They were by upbringing Russians accustomed to a European way of life and values, Jewish only in the superficial sense that, say, Karl Marx was. Jews in anti-Semitic Tsarist Russia had few ways out of the ghetto except emigration, education or revolution, and the latter two courses meant denying their Judaism by joining often anti-Jewish institutions and groups.”

This can be illustrated from the deathbed confession of Yurovsky, the murderer of the Tsar: “Our family suffered less from the constant hunger than from my father’s religious fanaticism...On holidays and regular days the children were forced to pray, and it is not surprising that my first active protest was against religious and nationalistic traditions. I came to hate God and prayer as I hated poverty and the bosses.”

At the same time, the Bolshevik Jews did appear to sympathize with Talmudism more than with any other religion. Thus in 1905 the Jewish revolutionaries in Kiev boasted that they would turn St. Sophia cathedral into a synagogue. Again, in 1918 they erected a monument to Judas Iscariot in Sviazhsk, and in 1919 -- in Tambov! Perhaps the strongest evidence of the continued religiosity of the Bolshevik Jews was the fact that when the Whites re-conquered Perm in 1918 they found many Jewish religious inscriptions in the former Bolshevik headquarters – as well as on the walls of the basement of the Ipatiev House in Yekaterinburg where the Tsar and his family were murdered.

The Role of the Talmud

While officially rejecting the Talmud and all religion in general, the revolutionaries did not reject the unconscious emotional energy of Talmudic Judaism. This energy was concentrated in a fiercely proud nationalism, a nationalism older and more passionately felt by virtue of the fact that the Jews had once supposedly been the chosen people of God. Having fallen away from that chosen status, and been scattered all over the world by the wrath of God, they resented their replacement by the Christian peoples with an especially intense resentment. Roma delenda est -- Christian Rome had to be destroyed, and Russia as “The Third Rome”, the Rome that now reigned, had to be destroyed first of all. The atheist revolutionaries of the younger generation took over this resentment and hatred even while rejecting its religious-nationalist-historical basis.

L.A. Tikhomirov wrote:

“It is now already for nineteen centuries that we have been hearing from Jewish thinkers that the religious essence of Israel consists not in a concept about God, but in the fulfillment of the Law. Above were cited such witnesses from Judas Galevy. The very authoritative Ilya del Medigo (15th century) in his notable Test of Faith says that ‘Judaism is founded not on religious dogma, but on religious acts’.

“But religious acts are, in essence, those that are prescribed by the Law. That means: if you want to be moral, carry out the Law. M. Mendelsohn formulates the idea of Jewry in the same way: ‘Judaism is not a revealed religion, but a revealed Law. It does not say ‘you must believe’, but ‘you must act’. In this constitution given by God the State and religion are one. The relationships of man to God and society are merged. It is not lack of faith or heresy that attracts punishment, but the violation of the civil order. Judaism gives no obligatory dogmas and recognizes the freedom of inner conviction.’

“Christianity says: you must believe in such-and-such a truth and on the basis of that you must do such-and-such. New Judaism says: you can believe as you like, but you have to do such-and-such. But this is a point of view that annihilates man as a moral personality...”

Thus Talmudism creates a personality that subjects faith and truth to the imperative of action. That is, it is the action that is first proclaimed as necessary -- the reasons for doing it can be thought up later. And this corresponds exactly both to the philosophy of Marx, for whom “the truth, i.e. the reality and power, of thought must be demonstrated in action”, and to the psychological type of the Marxist revolutionary, who first proclaims that Rome (i.e. Russia) must be destroyed, and then looks for an ideology that will justify destruction. Talmudic Law is useful, indeed necessary, not because it supposedly proclaims God’s truth, but in order to secure the solidarity of the Jewish people and their subjection to their rabbinic leaders. In the same way, Marxist theory is necessary in order to unite adherents, expel dissidents and in general justify the violent overthrow of the old system.

So the Russian revolution was Jewish not so much because of the ethnic composition of its leaders as because the Satanic hatred of God, Christ and all Christians that is characteristic of the Talmudic religion throughout its history was transferred -- by spiritual rather than genetic heredity -- from the nationalist Talmudic fathers to their internationalist atheist sons.

The Tremendous Toll

Russian President Vladimir Putin would like to ignore the Bolshevik Revolution. Putin reportedly told his advisers that it would be unnecessary to commemorate the occasion. He knows better -- it is nothing to be proud of.

Lenin’s coup on November 7, 1917, opened a new stage in human history. The horrors of twentieth-century socialism -- of Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, and Pol Pot -- were the offspring of 1917. Seventy years earlier, Marx and Engels predicted the overthrow of bourgeois rule would require violence and “a dictatorship of the proletariat...to weed out remaining capitalist elements.” Lenin conducted this “weeding out” using indiscriminate terror, as Russian socialists before him had done and others would continue to do after his death.

The late Rudolph Rummel, the demographer of government mass murder, estimated the human toll of twentieth-century socialism to be about 61 million in the Soviet Union, 78 million in China, and roughly 200 million worldwide. These victims perished during state-organized famines, collectivization, cultural revolutions, purges, campaigns against “unearned” income, and other devilish experiments in social engineering.

In its monstrosity, this terror is unrivaled in the course of human history.

Lenin’s coup on November 7, 1917, the day Kerensky’s provisional government fell to Bolshevik forces, opened a new stage in human history: a regime of public slavery. Collectivist economic planning led to coercion, violence, and mass murder. Marx and Engels had defined socialism as “the abolition of private property.” The most fundamental component of private property, self-ownership, was abolished first.

Stalin introduced Article 12, which permitted that children age twelve and older be sentenced to death or imprisonment as adults.

Wholesale Destruction

The Jewish Marxists’ biggest targets have always been the family, religion, and civil society -- institutional obstacles to the imposition of the omnipotent state. With the Bolsheviks in power, Lenin set out to destroy them.

Murder of children became a norm after he ordered the extermination of Tsar Nicholas II, his wife Alexandra, and their five children. Millions of families were rounded up and forcibly relocated to remote and uninhabited regions in Siberia and Kazakhstan. Hundreds of thousands of children died of starvation or disease during their journey into exile and were buried in mass unmarked graves.

In 1935, Stalin introduced Article 12 of the USSR Criminal Code, which permitted that children age twelve and older be sentenced to death or imprisonment as adults. This “law” was directed at the orphans of victims of the regime, based on the belief that an apple never falls far from the tree. Many of these kids, whose parents had been jailed or executed, were commonly known as bezprizorni, street children. They found themselves living in bare, dirty cells in a savagely violent gulag, where they were mixed with dangerous criminals and were brutalized and raped by guards and common criminals.

The Soviet Union was the first state to have as an ideological and practical objective the elimination of religion or, in other words, physical extermination of religious people. With Lenin’s decree of January 20, 1918, nationalization of the church’s property began: cathedrals, churches, church grounds, and all buildings owned by churches were looted, and valuables (gold, silver, platinum, paintings, icons, historical artifacts) were either stolen by Communist atheists or sold to the West via government agents, communist sympathizers, and fellow travelers such as American business tycoon Armand Hammer, who met Lenin in 1921.

To be religious often meant a death sentence. The goal was the state’s absolute monopoly over thought by means of a secular religion, socialism. Almost all clergy and millions of believers of all (traditional) religions were shot or sent to labor camps. Seminaries were closed, and religious publications were prohibited.

Marxism-Leninism pretended to be “scientific socialism,” the universal explanation of nature, life, and society. However, deviation from its ideology, especially traditional “bourgeois” science, was punishable by death. The scope of the persecution of scientists was a real genocide.

An Abject Failure

After seventy-four years of mayhem and misery, the Jewish Bolshevik Revolution failed. The biggest country on Earth, with abundant natural resources of all kinds, could not meet the basic needs of its citizenry. The system had no means to rationally allocate resources in the absence of property rights and the market institutions that rely on them.

Ideas have consequences. From my own life in the Soviet Union, which ended the same year that Vladimir Putin reported on the collapsing Berlin Wall for his KGB bosses, I can attest to the truth of Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises’s statement that socialism amounts to a “revolt against economics.”

Yet, socialism still has sympathizers in the West. Many Americans believe that socialism is good, whereas communism, fascism, and Nazism (National Socialism) are violent and anti-democratic. A public-opinion survey published last year proved that general assumption: 43 percent of respondents younger than thirty had a favorable view of socialism; only 32 percent had a favorable view of capitalism. This is a powerful warning. The anti-capitalistic mentality has brought suffering and mass murder in all socialist countries and has reduced standards of living and the quality of life in mixed economies.

The Soviet Union is now gone, as are the huge statues of Marx and Lenin that littered the East, but ideas have consequences, and no body of ideas attracted a greater following than Marxism-Leninism. A Russian aphorism says, “The only lesson of history is that it teaches us nothing.” For too many people this is as true as ever.

The Long-Term Consequences

Since Vladimir Lenin’s Jewish Bolsheviks overthrew the Russian government and established a communist dictatorship the world has never been the same.

Of all the legacies left in the revolution’s wake, the worst is a wrecked Russia. Seventy years of communism devastated the country. The Soviets did modernize things, but at what a price?

Richard Pipes says the Russian Revolution killed 9 million people. Robert Conquest believes that at least 20 million and probably as many as 30 million people perished in the Great Terror. If “unnatural deaths” are included, that number could be as high as 50 million. [As we have previously seen, Rudolph Rummel puts the death-toll to be about 61 million in the Soviet Union This has been confirmed by Alexandr Solzhenitsyn.]

This horrible record of mass genocide is exceeded only by another communist dictatorship, Maoist China (with Jewish assistance), which destroyed between 44.5 to 72 million lives (according to Stephane Courtois). And let’s not forget the “killing fields” of Cambodia in the 1970s.

Communists could kill people, but ultimately that is not why they and the Soviets failed. Nicolas Eberstadt estimated that the life expectancy of Russians in the 1980s was six years lower than in Western Europe. Infant mortality was three times higher, and death rates were rising for every age group.

Russians looked westward and were appalled by their own poverty. Whatever the West had -- freedom and wealth -- that was what the Russians wanted. The Soviets had failed to deliver on their grand social promises. More than any other reason, it was this fact that brought down the Soviet Union.

Unfortunately, that’s not the end of the story. Russians still live with the historic devastation caused by communism. Despite their freedom to travel, and the benefits of an economy mostly fueled by energy exports, they are stuck with the old legacies of communism. Every day they face the corruption and poverty caused not only by authoritarian rule, but by the social habits and structural problems created by communism.

Another bitter legacy is totalitarian terror: Starting with the Great Terror of the Bolshevik Revolution, a terrible precedent was set. Now the gates were open for others to mobilize mass violence in the name of revolution.

It matters not whether that revolution was communist, fascist or jihadist, the use of terror to revolutionize society is an historical precedent established by the Jewish Bolsheviks (and the French revolutionaries before them).

For much of the 20th century the developing world was beset with countless social revolutionaries who, like the Soviet Union, tried to use the gun and the central planning office to modernize their societies. The results were nearly always the same -- poverty and more human misery.

Most of the 88 countries that score “repressed” or “mostly unfree” on The Index of Economic Freedom are either communist, former communist, or of some variation of a socialist economy. They are also the world’s poorest nations. Even countries that were never officially communist, like Egypt and Greece, but which adopted socialist economic policies, are today among the poorest and most corrupt.

Closer to Home

Turning closer to home, what has been the impact of the Russian Revolution on America? The alliance against Nazi Germany in World War II was the biggest event. It created a sense that communists can’t be all bad if they can help us defeat the worse enemy, fascism.

This positive war experience with the Soviet Union of course quickly disappeared in the Cold War. But oddly, the legacies of the Russian Revolution and communism live on in their impact on American liberalism. Today communism and crude Marxism are dead in America (except for some university departments and extremist political circles). But some of its core ideas -- refashioned by the cultural New Left of the 1960s -- is very much alive in the American liberal mind.

Inspired by Neo-Marxists such as Antonio Gramsci, Herbert Marcuse, and Frantz Fanon, the New Left of the 1960s dropped the proletariat and abandoned the stodgy old men in the Kremlin. Instead, they adopted the hip new mantle of sexual and other forms of liberation in the name of equality. They also updated Lenin’s theory of imperialism by making colonization mainly about race.

Thus was invented identity politics and radical multiculturalism, which are today the mainstays of American liberalism. Most liberals who believe in these causes think they have nothing whatsoever to do with their Neo-Marxist roots; in fact, they go to great lengths to dismiss as mere paranoia what the intellectual history of these ideas plainly shows to be true.

The New Left’s attempt to distance itself from the old left of communism was brilliant politics. It enabled liberals to disown all the evil created by “their side of history.” They could now argue with a straight face that all that genocide and misery wrought by communism “has nothing to do with us.” Socialism is a noble idea that has never been truly tried. The oppressions of the Soviets were excesses born not of evil intent, but of too much enthusiasm. Socialism could be made democratic through elections, but the old authoritarian ideal of radically remaking society was preserved.

Thankfully, democratic socialism made this break with communism. But it doesn’t change its intellectual origins and historical associations. Frankly, neither does it change the fact that any attempt to socialize an economy involves forcefully taking something away from people. Illiberal coercion is the original sin of both socialism and communism.

The Russian Revolution may have died the day the Russian government took down the hammer and sickle flag over the Kremlin. And, yes, the crude Marxism of the Soviet era is dead as well. But we still live to this day with the legacy of the Russian Revolution. Not only in North Korea. Not only in China. Not only with the poverty communism and socialism caused in the developing world.

We live with it as well in the myths of our own politics. Perhaps by the 200th anniversary of the Russian Revolution in 2117, these myths will be retired as well, like the hammer and sickle 130 years before.

Footnote by John D. Keyser:

The present king of the United Kingdom is a direct descendant of biblical King David and inheritor of the divine rulership over the House of Israel. David's descendants were promised rulership over an expansive global empire: "...thou shalt reign over many nations, but they shall not reign over thee" (Deuteronomy 15:6). We have seen this fulfilled in history.

It has often been reported that the late Queen Victoria knew of her direct line of descent from the Biblical King David. Two mainstream British publications, the Leeds Daily News and Vanity Fair Magazine both reported on this in 1894, as reported at the time in the British-Israel journal, The Banner of Israel, vol. 18, pages 298, 409, 482. The classic book on the subject, The Royal House of Britain An Enduring Dynasty is an excellent resource detailing the British royal family's descent from King David, prepared originally by the Rev. F.R.A. Glover with the assistance of Queen Victoria.

The following appeared in Vanity Fair of July 19, 1894. What Vanity Fair wrote was this:

"When a certain Mr. [F.R.A.] Glover, a clergyman of the Anglican Church, addressed the Queen on the subject about the year 1869, her Majesty sent for him to Windsor, and to his astonishment, informed him that what he thought he had been the first (with infinite research) to discover, had been known to herself and the Prince Consort for many years. The Queen then caused the Royal Family tree, which is a very sacred object to her Majesty and her sons and daughters, to be shown him; and here Mr. Glover found various missing links that he had been vainly seeking. David's name he discovered engrossed at the root of the tree, and the name of Victoria in a remote topmost branch; yet, for all that, in an unbroken straight line, all other lines having apparently ended centuries ago."

The Banner of Israel reported on the Queen's royal biblical descent as follows:

"We are glad to know that Queen Victoria has faith in one phase at least of the modern story of the lost tribes. If she cherishes the belief that her ancestors were of the House of David, then to make that belief valuable or 'a sacred possession to her Majesty,' she must know why a Judahite monarch must needs reign over the House of Israel forever. She must know that her throne is as secure as the throne of God Himself because He guaranteed it and promised that 'David shall never want a man [or woman] in his sight to sit on the throne of the House of Israel' (I Kings 8:25, R.V.; Jeremiah 33:17, 26, R.V.; 2 Samuel 7:25, R.V.)

"Herein is granted to the House of Israel a splendid blessing, since it conveys to them the assurance that they shall ever remain under a monarchy, that monarchy being already the oldest in Europe, and destined to last forever, according to the prophecies just quoted...we rejoice to think that her Majesty shares our belief to some extent in reference to our nation's identity with the lost tribes."

While Tsar Nicholas II of Russia, his wife Alexandra, and their five children, Olga, Tatiana, Maria, Anastasia, and Alexei were brutally murdered at Ipatiev House, on Tuesday, July 16, 1918, their execution didn't wipe out the Romanov bloodline entirely; their modern relatives include members of British royal family, including King Charles and Princes William and Harry.

The late Prince Philip is related to the Romanovs through both his mother and his father. Philip is the grandnephew of Alexandra Romanov, Nicholas II's wife, and the last Tsarina of Russia. He is also a cousin to the Russian royal family (more on that below). Philip's children and grandchildren, including William and Harry, are therefore related to the Romanovs too.

In fact, when the remains of two of the Tsar's children, thought to be Maria and Alexei Romanov, were found in a field in 2007, it was Prince Philip's DNA that was used to identify them, news which was revealed in 2016.

To add another British connection to the Russian Imperial family, Queen Elizabeth's first cousin, Prince Michael of Kent, is also uniquely related to the Romanovs. He's the grandson of Grand Duchess Elena Vladimirovna of Russia, who was a first cousin of Nicholas II.

The Queen, Prince Philip, and all of their descendants are also related to the Romanovs through Queen Victoria, as she was Tsarina Alexandra's grandmother. Alexandra's mother was Victoria's second daughter, Princess Alice. Queen Elizabeth is a great-great-granddaughter of Queen Victoria and Prince Philip is Victoria's great-great-grandson.

In fact, it is Queen Victoria's connection to the Romanov's that links many members of European royal families to the doomed Russian royals. Victoria is known as the grandmother of Europe as her children married into royal families across the continent. Similarly, given that Nicholas II and Alexandra lived during a time when royalty almost exclusively married royalty, Russian royals found their way into a number of ruling families in the 19th century. King Constantine II of Greece's great-grandmother was a Romanov grand duchess for example, and so the Greek royals, including Princess Olympia, are all distant relatives of the Romanov family as well.

The bottom line is that since Queen Victoria could trace her royal line back to the Judahite King David of Israel, so too could Tsar Nicholas II of Russia -- which brings up an interesting hypothesis.

Since the murderer of the Tsar was Jewish, this perhaps underscores the ancient antagonism between the Israelites and those Edomite Jews that the Messiah excoriated in John 8:20-47. The brutal murder of the Tsar's family strengthened this perspective. Writes Victor Shnirelman:

"Therefore, it is worth scrutinizing how this murder was treated by those who carried on the investigation, and how it was interpreted afterward. The Czar and his family -- including his wife Empress Alexandra and their five children: Olga, Tatiana, Maria, Anastasia, and Alexei -- were murdered at night between July 16 and 17, 1918, in Ekaterinburg, a town in the Ural Mountains. The area was seized by the Czechoslovaks and the White Army one week later and soon the investigation began.

"Admiral Kolchak assigned Nikolai A. Sokolov to be the investigator under the command of General Mikhail K. Diterikhs. They were assisted by the British journalist Robert Wilton who was familiar with Russia and worked for The Times newspaper. These three men produced the first extensive narratives about the murder of the Czar's family, which form the foundation of all other accounts. In particular, Diterikhs and Wilton promoted the idea of 'ritual murder,' and Diterikhs did his best to demonstrate the special character of the murder of the Czar's family as it aimed at destroying the Romanov dynasty who were the 'Lord's Anointed,' which 'affected the national and religious outlook of the people.'

"Diterikhs emphasized the Jewish participants in this murder. He believed in their "world plot" and their role as an 'awful world power' that possessed an unusual 'racial energy.' He pointed to the high number of Jews among Soviet leaders and claimed that, despite their declared internationalism and atheism, they aimed to destroy Christianity and leave Judaism alone. To be precise, he made this accusation against a small group of Jews who followed godless socialist teachings about acts of atrocity rather than the Jewish people as a whole. It was this teaching that led to the 'brutal murder of the Czar.'

"Robert Wilton followed General Diterikhs in many details and, likewise, blamed the 'Semites' for the atrocities. He referred to the ethnic composition of the Soviet authorities, where, in his view, 'Jewish domination' was evident. He viewed Yacov Sverdlov, born to Jewish parents in 1885, as the 'Red czar' and argued that it was his Jewish agents who directed the murder of the Czar's family. Both Diterikhs and Wilton claimed that shortly before the murder all ethnic Russians were removed from the Ipatiev house where the Czar's family was kept so they would not impede the 'implementation of the Jewish affair.' Both of them accepted the falsehood that the victims' heads were cut off and transported to Moscow.

"In reality, they were shot and bayoneted alongside four of their servants in the cellar of the Ipatiev house and then thrown down a mine shaft in Koptyaki Forest before being dug up and reburied with sulphuric acid; Alexei and Maria were burned and buried separately. Diterikhs and Wilton also noted several bizarre inscriptions on the wall in the cellar where they were shot: a quotation from Heinrich Heine's poem Belshazzar ("On this very night Belshazzar was killed by his servants"), four obscure signs and several long lines with numbers, which, in their view, explicitly pointed to the 'ritual murder.' Wilton linked the 'mysterious signs' to Jewish Kabbalah" (The Murder of Czar Nicholas II and its Interpretation by Russian Orthodox Fundamentalists).

Regardless of whether this was a "ritual murder" or not, the fact remains that the death of the Tsar was planned and carried out by the Jew Yakov Yurosky with the reported approval of Yacov Sverdlov and, of course, Lenin himself. This probably was an unknowing embodiment of the hatred that existed -- and still exists -- between the Edomite/Khazarian Jews and those of Israel. As a descendant of the royal House of Judah, Tsar Nicholas II was sitting on a throne of David like his cousin King George V in England.