I watched his WW1 documentary and he refuses to acknowledge the Balfour declaration and its implication. He just steps over any mention of Zionism and Israel. I wonder with him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeSVCx9X_ZY

Look at the comments, people are waking up to possible controlled oppositions. historically speaking, the balfour declaration was THE central piece of state legislation that allowed for the creation of the state of israel: even the current lord rothschild himself admitted as much in a recent BBC interview! if james therefore relativises the declaration (and, by extension, the central influence of zionist lobby groups and zionism itself) we must ask ourselves who do we believe: james, or lord rothschild himself? above all, we must also ask: why is james choosing to downplay the zionist hand...and to whose advantage? hmmmm...

Here's my take on Corbett's denial, after observing and analyzing Corbett's work in this respect for more than two years, and since I posed the Jewish Question to him for Q4C a couple years ago. He's clearly not just avoiding talking about Jews for expediency purposes - censorship, offending listeners, avoiding the anti-semite label - rather it runs much deeper than that. This video, I think, is his attempt to quell the rising tide of awareness of the Jewish Problem related to Jewish/Zionist power in the US and world today, and the rising tide of awareness of his avoidance of that subject. So he does this Q4C which allows him to sort of address a couple questions on this subject, but he does so with the same kind of sophistry as he did when I posed to JQ to him back in Dec '16, and here is his response to that: /watch?v=6NuLWCHvkc8&t=3116s (That's on youtube; I have to delink it to avoid their "spam filtering")

In order to really understand what he's doing there you have to read the entire question I posed and not the extremely-edited version he presents; he does not at all have to interpret my question as he says. Some clues to this behavior can be found in the history of his worldview, which is at the heart of this documentary. One of the sources of his worldview is of course G. Edward Griffin, seemingly his mentor, and here is Ed's version on the JQ from an interview last year: /watch?v=POAPQrl0Zfk&t=696s

So basically the same thing, essentially a false claim that Jews don't have an ideology, don't have Jewish ideas. So let's go deeper into Griffin's history, back 50 years when he made a documentary called The Capitalist Conspiracy, which he did as a member of the John Birch Society. Anyone who hasn't listened to this absolutely should, because you will see the roots of Corbett's WWI documentary all through it. Griffin goes into Quigley's Tragedy and Hope in detail, and credits' fellow Bircher W. Cleon Sousen's book The Naked Capitalist, which is very heavily based on Quigley's T&H; another notable Bircher book based on Quigley is Gary Allen's None Dare Call It Conspiracy. The basic Bircher enhancement or twist on Quigley (who disparaged what the Birchers did with his work) is claiming the heart of secret power, their take on his roundtable, is the Illuminati. An interesting moment in the film is this, where Griffin quotes a piece from Churchill: /watch?v=udWXFC2sWU8&t=2229s

If you look up the actual passage being quoted it's from a piece called Bolshevism vs. Zionism and a section entitled International Jews. But Griffin has carefully edited that to erase any reference to Jews and substitutes a bracketing of the Illuminati to imply Churchill was talking about them. This is what immediately precedes what Griffin quoted: "In violent opposition to all this sphere of Jewish effort rise the schemes of the International Jews. The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race. Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new." And he's not the only Bircher to do this, the falsifying of this quote seems to be part of JBS dogma. So what is the Corbett connection to the JBS? Well, if you do a search of his website for the JBS you only get one hit, a 2011 piece, a crashes of convenience piece on KAL 007. Bircher Larry MacDonald died in that crash, and here's where Corbett gets into that and the JBS: /watch?v=aiNVtL__XNA&t=1788s

Now, it strikes me as incredibly incurious for Corbett to muse on Griffin's possible connection to the JBS without actually doing a quick search on his past, and at least today it would only take seconds to confirm Griffin was a long-time Bircher. And only a couple years before he made that film he was employed as a speechwriter for Gen. Curtis LeMay when he ran for VP on the 3rd-party ticket with pro-war segregationist AL Gov. George Wallace; if you don't know who LeMay was consider this interpretation: /watch?v=vuP6KbIsNK4 Anyway, as far as I know that's it for the Birchers at CR, not another mention of the JBS in the last 7+ years. And yet this Quigley-Bircher history and worldview would appear to be at the heart of his own worldview and of this documentary. And it also seems to be the basis of other sources for the film, like the book Hidden History and of course the contribution of Richard Groves at TragedyandHope, another guy who treats Griffin like an elder wiseman and not the charlatan he is. What this doesn't fully answer is Corbett and the JQ. But at the most generous it might be said that he avoids it because the foundation of his work is built upon a mainstream academic who even in the '60s probably wasn't going to talk about Jews, and the interpretation of that by a group, the JBS, who are known to be JQ avoiders or even deniers. And of course all of this foundation is from a time just before the dramatic rise in power of the Jewish/Zionist deep state faction, when the faction in greatest power was the one dating back at least to the end of WWI, what I call the WASP Rockefellerist CFR faction. That piece of the deep state is essentially what Quigley defined as the entirety of the deep state more than 50 years ago, and in that sense Corbett seems to be, like the proverbial generals, fighting the last war and losing, slavishly maintaining that definition. But that would be ignoring all of his sophistry and lies to claim that is all that's going on here, there must be more. Oh, and i should mention that two weeks after I posed the JQ to him he cancelled my membership without a word. He's a charlatan like griffin and a lying neo-Bircher.