Who started WWI?

To start with I will observe the traditional custom of referring to the protagonists by their national identification and where pertinent by their leaders but then as now all decisions were taken by groups of powerful and wealthy men who took great pains to avoid any public attention.

To begin then, we are taught that a bunch of Serbian terrorists from a small and little supported terror group [does this sound familiar?] sneaked into Bosnia and murdered the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne during a well publicised state visit.

Naturally the Austro-Hungarian Emperor was unhappy but unjustifiably he presented the Serbians with a harsh ultimatum that we are told represented the end of Serbian independence, much along the lines of ultimatums that the other powers often delivered to third world countries when they were planning to expand their empires.

Naturally Russia the champion of the regional Slavic peoples responded by threatening Austro-Hungary with war unless she retracted. Austro-Hungary then sought support from Germany before sending her forces against the Serbs. Russia declared war on Austro-Hungary and Germany declared war on Russia.

France then honoured her treaty with Russia and declared war on Germany and Austro-Hungary. Germany responded by declaring war on France and instigating the Schlieffen Plan violating Belgium neutrality bringing Great Britain into the war.

That at least is what we are taught.

But closer inspection reveals the following.

The so called insignificant Serbian terrorists were supported and financed by the Serbian secret service who were in turn supported and financed by the Russian secret service. The implication is naturally that the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand was financed and planed in Russia.

Why?

Well, the Great Game played out in the Far East between Britain and Russia had come to a mutually agreed end meaning that Russia would have to look elsewhere for her warm water port and the most suitable spot happened to be the Balkans. Control of the Balkans, however, was considered crucial to the survival of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. To gain a warm water port in the Mediterranean Russia would have to defeat the Austro-Hungarian Empire and gain control of the Balkans, something that Germany would not accept.

Therefore, the plot to assassinate the Archduke was designed to draw Austro-Hungary into war but Russia would've known that any war with Austro-Hungary would by definition include war with Germany and Russia could not defeat Germany alone.

France bore a desire for revenge against Germany for her crushing defeat in the war of 1870-1871 which culminated on the creation of the German state and for the subsequent loss of Alsace-Lorraine, a bitter pill in the mouths of all Frenchmen. Rather conveniently France was Russia's ally against German aggression. France would, therefore, be committed to attack Germany if Germany declared war on Russia.

So what of Great Britain? Britain had no such treaty with France or Russia but she did act as guarantor for Belgium neutrality, although both Britain and France did have plans to invade Belgium if there was ever a war with Germany. In fact Viscount Grey, the British foreign secretary had secretly agreed to come to France's aid should she ever be attacked by Germany. This wasn't a treaty and had never been presented as such before the full British cabinet let alone Parliament, although Prime Minister Asquith was aware along with several need to know military officers, it was in fact just a gentleman's agreement but one that the French based all their military operations on. But the question is why did the British foreign secretary enter into such an informal agreement? The answer is quit simple, before German unification Great Britain was the premier industrial power of the world but by the early 20th Century Germany was rapidly catching up and winning more of the global markets, as was America. Something had to be done to ensure British economic power remained to ensure the defence of the Empire. War with America had been considered but was not an option, which just left the removal of German competition.

If this were true how could it be achieved and who actually planned it?

For the who we need look no further than the secret elite. We all know the real power lays behind the curtain, with the wealthy industrialists, the financiers, the rich banking families, the so called elites; these are the people who make all of the decisions and pull all the strings via powerful lobby groups.

So then, how was Germany duped into declaring war first? Obviously after the assassination the Austrians would respond but before they did they would've put out feelers with the other super powers of the day especially Russia. It would've taken little effort to convince the Austrians of general sympathy with their loss and understanding that some form of ultimatum would have to be delivered, after all the heir to the Austrian throne had been assassinated and all monarchs are aware how tenuous their position can be but everyone also knew that the Austrians would always check that they had the support of Germany before doing anything. The key then was to convince the Kaiser that the rest of Europe's elites supported Austrian indignation to the extent that any ultimatum would be acceptable. This could be achieved via sympathetic and encouraging noises from King George and Tsar Nicholas, both cousins of the Kaiser.

Once confident of British and Russian sympathy for the Austrian position the Kaiser would've offered support to the Austrian ultimatum which they would've duly delivered to the Serbs. Then the trap begins to close on Germany and the Kaiser.

Russia declared the ultimatum unreasonable and secretly partially mobilised against Germany; this was the crucial part of the puzzle. Germany could not fight both Russia and France, a war on two fronts was impossible hence the Schlieffen Plan. Germany's only hope of victory was always to knock France out of any war before the Russians managed full mobilisation. To achieve this Germany would have to declare war before Russia began mobilisation against Germany giving her a presumed 2 to 4 weeks to achieve victory over France before shifting her armies from West to East to meet the Russian hordes. A secret Russian partial mobilisation against Germany threatened the success of the Schlieffen Plan.

Then what of Britain; would she intercede if Germany invaded Belgium to get at France? The Kaiser believed he had received assurances from King George that Britain would remain neutral in any European conflict regarding the assassination of the Arch-Duke, was he wrong or had he been deceived?
Austria, having received assurances of German support, declared war on Serbia, Russia declared war on Austro-Hungary and began full mobilisation against Germany should Germany come to Austro-Hungary's support. Germany discovered that Russia was already several weeks into her mobilisation plans and declared war on Russia. France began mobilisation but withdrew her armies from the Franco German border. Germany was now tied into a fixed plan, she could not move her armies to face Russia and leave a fully mobilised France on her flank. Germany, therefore, declared war on France and initiated the Schlieffen Plan in its revised form. When German troops crossed Belgian borders Britain declared war on Germany.

So now we must address our original question, who started WWI? We know who wanted the war and the benefits they would gain. It is clear that the war did not serve German interests; in fact German trade and economic power was growing very fast without the need for war. In fact Germany was merely supporting an ally. France got what she wanted, the return of Alsace-Lorraine, Britain got what she wanted, German industry was reduced and her navy was scuttled. Further the Jewish lead communist revolution left Russia a big loser and of course the cherry on top - Germany was smashed and left in economic and political chaos.

But as I stated at the beginning, this just identifies nations which are generally made up of the 99%, i.e. the masses who generally speaking are not the big winners, they are in fact usually the big losers, the big winners are the financial winners, the businessmen, the shareholders, the financiers, the rich elites, the top 1% of families headed by the richest of them all, the Rothschilds.

To enable WWI to be fought for 4 long years countries had to raise money, lots of money and the biggest banking family, now as then, was the Rothschilds. They had financial houses in all of the main protagonist countries, they literally financed Governments and Monarchs and they bankrolled all sides in the nightmare of WWI. If they had refused funding then no nation could've raised enough money to continue the war and there would've been an armistice much sooner, possibly 1915, but the Rothschilds kept providing the funds to both sides and the war dragged on and on.

One more question needs to be answered, where did the Rothschilds and the other bankers get their money from? WWI cost Billions at a time when such a sum was inconceivable. Well then as now the private banks were able to create loans to the government without any physical credit at all, just the promise to pay.

There was one other little spoken of result from the war, the promise of a homeland for the Zionists. In order to ensure victory the British foreign secretary had provided Barron Rothschild with the Balfour declaration in return for American support and further finance.

So who started WWI and why? Who gained - clearly the 1% and the Zionists, who lost clearly the 99% on all sides.