The City of London, by Larry Romanoff - The Unz Review
You may be surprised to learn that the city of London and the City of London are two very different things, related to each other mostly by historical accident and geographical proximity, and co-existing today in a rather complicated power system in which the City of London appears gloriously victorious.
First, the City of London, a small area of about one square mile in size, was established as a haven by the Khazar “Jews” during their extermination from Khazaria nearly 1,000 years ago, and was named ‘London’ at the time. And yes, I know the Romans had been there first. The city of London, with the Bridge and Harrods, and the fish and chips and the people driving on the wrong side of the road, was established much later, adopted the same name, and gradually expanded with population until it completely surrounded the Jewish enclave of the City of London. You can see the positions and relative sizes from the map. When you read about “The Lord Mayor of London”, you are not reading about the chief executive of the city, but about the chief executive of the City. The City of London Corporation, with its square mile directly in the center of London, obviously owns some very expensive real estate, this in addition to a great deal of other property also in the city center, but this amounts to only perhaps $10 billion in total and, as we will see, is trivial.
The City of London is effectively an independent city-state * existing inside greater London.   However, its nature is unique and complicated. It is not so neat and tidy as is the Vatican for example, which is clearly a separate sovereign entity nestled within the city of Rome. Still, the City of London has its own government and police force, makes its own laws and levies its own taxes. It has its own flag, crest, and ceremonial armed forces. I have seen one reference stating that the City also has its own port. I could not find an independent confirmation of this, but it would fit the pattern and the City does have some responsibilities for London ports, so this is plausible. If true, it would be stunning because that would mean that the City could bring in products of any kind including currency, precious metals, cocaine, and also people, without the permission or even knowledge of UK customs and immigration or the UK government.
* In performing a search the other day, I was first met with a notice in capital letters telling me “The City of London is not a sovereign state”, followed by a small avalanche of websites all doing “fact-checking” and “misinformation-debunking” to assure me the City of London was NOT an independent anything. There is hardly a sign more certain that we are onto something important, than when 25 Jewish websites leap up to tell us “There’s nothing to see here”.
The City is the center and home base of the world’s banking and insurance industries. It is the home of the Bank of England (which was supposedly privatised but is still Rothschild-owned), the home of Lloyd’s of London,  and the literal head office of many of the world’s major banks (some of which you know and many of which you have never heard of). It still contains the home office of the former British East India Company,   which was always a Khazar Jewish company and undoubtedly the greatest criminal organisation in the history of the world – up to that time – and whose archives are still closed to the world for good reason. The City of London is also the home of the oldest Masonic Temple in the world. Our history books tell us that the origins of the Freemasons are lost to history, but that’s not really true. Freemasonry was a Jewish cult that was formalised in the City in the early 1700s.
The legal-political relationship between the City of London and the UK is a bit murky. On one hand, the City is at least theoretically subject (or can be made subject) to at least some UK legislation, although in practice this seldom if ever has happened for reasons I will describe below. On the other hand, the City is so sovereign that the King of England himself is forbidden by both UK and City law to even enter the City of London without first obtaining a “special invitation”, which process is too complicated to bother discussing. The invitation ceremony is not required by law, but the invitation itself is.
Readers may not be aware that democracies can have “flavors”, the UK version being one such with a very distinct flavor. In this case, on the floor of the British Parliament, directly facing the Speaker of the House, is a special chair. Think of it as a kind of throne. The person occupying this chair is a representative of the City of London, attended by six lawyers. His purpose is to monitor all debate in the British Parliament and to scrutinise in exhaustive detail all proposed and drafted legislation to determine any possible effect on the “interests” or operations of the City of London, and to take appropriate action if such interests are affected. The “appropriate action” inevitably results in the legislation being killed. This is not necessarily done by force, but by what we might term “lobbying”, sometimes by extortion, and often simply by an all-pervasive influence on British Politicians.
Lobbying and/or Extortion
There are many news articles available on the kind and extent of the lobbying done by the City to ensure compliance from the UK Parliament. The City’s financial services group spends well over $100 million per year on wining, dining, bribing, and sexually satisfying, UK politicians and regulators. One place for dining is the opulent Guildhall, which even high-level guests describe as “intoxicating” because of the sheer power sitting in that room.
There are well over 100 different City organisations and more than 800 people involved in securing stability, secrecy and a tax-free status for the City’s operations.  These groups are repeatedly successful in reducing banking and insurance taxes that save them billions. They are also notably successful in killing proposed legislation for any kind of oversight or “watchdog” effort wanting to police not only banking activities but also quoted companies on the London Stock Exchange. They have even successfully killed a pension plan intended for low-paid and temporary workers. I have no idea how or why this proposed legislation would have affected the “interests” of the City, but they felt it did, and the legislation was scrapped. 
Many believe the City puts its interests above those of the nation, and of course they are correct, evidenced by a long string of such legislative “victories” over Parliament. “For almost 1,000 years, the City of London Corporation has resisted virtually every attempt by monarchs, governments or subjects to rein in its vast financial wealth and influence. Such is the Corporation’s political and economic influence that today some suggest the British state, rather than controlling the Corporation, is in fact subservient to it.” According to the Financial Times, “. . . because the corporation is entitled to special tax and legal privileges, this renders it an offshore island inside Britain and a tax haven in its own right, and gives those who own businesses within its borders a distinct upper hand over everyone else.” But it is also true that the Jews in the City have UK politicians so much in their pockets that even the UK Prime Minister will lobby against any regulation that might handicap the City’s financial crimes. The UK Labor party tried at one time to obtain election within the City, to have the power to repair some excesses from the inside, but failed.
The City, Tax Havens, and Money Flows
The City of London is indeed a “tax haven”. This is not particularly germane to our main topic so I won’t dwell on it other than to state that the Jewish bankers who run the City do so in conjunction with almost all the world’s tax havens, with money flowing through those labyrinths in ways to disguise forever the source and ownership of funds. It is not a secret requiring quiet discussion that nearly all the world’s narcotics money comes home to the City to be laundered by the Jewish banks, notably the HSBC but others too. Equally, it is widely acknowledged that dictators, oligarchs, legal and illegal arms dealers, bank robbers, jewel thieves, sex slavery kingpins, and criminals generally will naturally funnel their money to the Jewish banks in the City for laundering, for anonymity, and for privacy and security. For hundreds of years, the City has been the safe depository of Jewish funds obtained from slave trading, tax farming, looting, opium and narcotics trafficking, and also the temporary haven for funds when Jews were expelled from various countries over the centuries.
To be sure, not all the money flowing through the City is from illegal criminal activity. About half of the daily $4 trillion in normal foreign exchange trading flows through the City’s Jewish banks, as do nearly 50% of the world’s derivative trading and 70% of Eurobond trading. And the London Stock Exchange is still the fourth-largest in the world, with much of this processing being legitimate and thus providing a good cover for the balance.
However, due to the unique relation between the City of London and the UK, the tens of trillions of dollars that flow into and out of the Jewish banks in the City each day do not appear in UK capital flows or transaction records and there is thus no way to know how much money enters, passes through, and leaves the City, nor is there any way to know the source or application of those funds. Whatever the original intent of the financial design of the City by its Jewish owners, one clear result is that the entire design is tailor-made for the benefit of organised crime of every nature. Currencies, gold and precious metals, financial certificates, are run through an enormous labyrinth of tax havens and then simply disappear into the black hole of the City’s Jewish banks, the secrecy fully-protected by the City’s “unique relationship” with its host country.
”Behind it all lies the City of London, anxious to preserve its access to the world’s dirty money. The City of London is a money-laundering filter that lets the City get involved in dirty business while providing it with enough distance to maintain plausible deniability . . . a crypto-feudal oligarchy which, of itself, is. . . captured by the international offshore banking industry. It is a gangster regime, cloaked with the “respectability” of the trappings of the British establishment. . . . guaranteed protection. No matter just how nakedly lawless their own conduct.” “The City is often now described as the largest tax haven in the world, and it acts as the largest center of the global tax avoidance system. An estimated 50% of the world’s trade passes through tax havens, and the City acts as a huge funnel for much of this money.” Here is an important website that contains many links related to the City of London and its use of tax havens to launder money.
The hydra was one of the most fearsome monsters in Greek mythology, a multi-headed snake descended from a long line of terrible beasts, possessing deadly poisons and with the power of regeneration. A rather accurate description of the City of London today and its Jewish Khazar denizens, at least by some measures. The City of London is also the mother of all tax havens and is unquestionably the home of all the world’s dirty money today.
Here are several references that describe the City of London as “A Global Spider’s Web of Deceit” , one by the UK Guardian claiming that “Shrinking the City is the only way to stop the world’s criminals flourishing in the UK” , and two others of interest. 
George Monbiot wrote an excellent article for the UK Guardian where he quoted Nicholas Shaxson’s Treasure Islands, stating that “the Corporation exists outside many of the laws and democratic controls which govern the rest of the United Kingdom. The City of London is the only part of Britain over which parliament has no authority.” His last comment may not be entirely true although it does work that way in practice. Monbiot says further that “the Corporation acts as the superior body” (superior to the UK Parliament), and that part is definitely true. Monbiot begins by writing, “[The City is] the dark heart of Britain, the place where democracy goes to die, immensely powerful, equally unaccountable.”
Monbiot cites Clement Attlee’s lament that “over and over again we have seen that there is in this country another power than that which has its seat at Westminster.” He continues that “The City has exploited this remarkable position to establish itself as a kind of offshore state, a secrecy jurisdiction which controls the network of tax havens housed in the UK’s crown dependencies and overseas territories. This autonomous state within our borders is in a position to launder the ill-gotten cash of oligarchs, kleptocrats, gangsters and drug barons.” All of that is very true, and the power of the Jews within the City have made impossible any effective regulation of global finance, American firms like AIG and Lehman Brothers simply moving to the City of London to carry out their off-balance-sheet criminal machinations that bankrupted so many people. American and other firms have often utilised the “services” of the City to evade the financial laws of their own governments. The City is, in real terms, a vast criminal enterprise run by gangsters.
It doesn’t seem widely-known that immediately prior to its financial collapse Lehman were selling their corporate bonds “backed by the full faith and credit of Lehman Brothers”, to unsuspecting investors who had no idea the bankruptcy was already virtually in motion. I don’t know where all these bonds were sold, but I know that billions of dollars of them were disposed of in Hong Kong, the money from these sales apparently disappearing into the bowels of the City of London.
Joseph Stiglitz also railed against the Jews in the City, telling UK legislators, “. . . these people are just using your rule of law to protect money they have stolen in other countries . . . From a global point of view, you are aiding and abetting theft.” A British MP said that the City of London is “a magnet for dirty money”. At the same time, the government’s Anti-fraud Minister resigned because the Jews in the City had once again killed legislation to combat economic crime by the City, saying that “nobody [in the UK government] cared about stopping kleptocrats, oligarchs and organised crime lords stashing their loot in the UK.” And another article telling us how the City remains a safe haven for all the world’s dirty cash. Here is another interesting article from the UK Guardian, with a 5-step guide telling how the Jews in the City can help you get away with stealing millions.
One indication of this is the UK’s Official UK Companies Register that is littered with fake names, because no identity checks are required. One corporation is registered, for example, in the name of “Holy Jesus Christ”, with his stated occupation as “creator”, his nationality as “Angelic” and his country of residence as “Heaven”. Another is in the name of “Adolf Tooth Fairy Hitler”, with a City sales firm in the name of “Donald Duck”, and so on. The UK government claims it hasn’t the resources to police the corporate registry, but the truth is they permit it to continue because it serves nicely the purposes of the gangsters in the City. Controlling legislation was proposed, but the Jews in the City had it killed.
An article in the Eurasia Review called the City of London ”A Parasites’ Paradise, Or The Best Criminal Sanctuary Money Can Buy”. “London has become the center of global financial capital by engaging in long term large scale active collaboration with multi-billion-pound drug, arms, people smuggling and sex-slave cartels. The [Jews in the City] specialize in laundering funds from the Mexican, Colombian, Peruvian, Russian, Polish, Czech, Nigerian narco-kings. . . white slavers have their “private bankers” at prestigious City banks . . . kleptocrats, lifelong billion-dollar tax evaders, fleeing from their pillaged homeland.” It continues that “The City Boys” welcome “every gangster / oligarch”. It continued by stating, “The London Sanctuary for the world’s richest plunderers and parasites offers unprecedented services, especially protection from extradition and criminal prosecution at the site of their crimes.”
“Nowadays, . . . the City of London is an anachronism of the worst kind. The Corporation, which runs the City like a one-party mini-state, is an unreconstructed old boys’ network whose medievalist pageantry camouflages the very real power and wealth which it holds. The City of London Corporation ranks as a political power without rival in Britain, possibly in the world. It has used its power to exert enormous political influence to resist regulation and extract tax exemption. It has fostered criminality by ensuring that the City ranks amongst the least accountable of financial centers on the face of the earth.” The TaxJustice website calls the City of London “A state within a state; the most powerful self-interested political lobby in the world.”
There is much more, including the Rothschild Bank’s financing of Zionism and the atrocities continuing in Palestine since prior to the founding of Israel, all through and under the auspices of the Jews in the City of London.  Also, Sinhalanet had an article you might find interesting, in which it is claimed that “three corporations run the world: City of London, Washington DC and Vatican City”, and that together they control politicians, economies, and 80% of the world’s wealth.
The King of England Meets His Master
North Americans seldom pay much attention to news details in the UK and might not be aware of the recurrent brief media campaigns about “Should the Monarchy be Abolished?” These normally emerge abruptly without warning or apparent cause, listing all the usual issues of a monarchy being an anachronism, the British Royal Family being a useless appendage to government, a needless expense, and so forth. They disappear equally suddenly, all the UK media silencing their peeps at the same time. These little campaigns are not accidents; they are “reminders” or, in some cases, a warning, by the gnomes controlling the City of London that they have the power to work the UK public into a frenzy on command and also the influence to introduce and push through Parliament a vote that would indeed disband the monarchy. This would leave the “King” and all his princelings not destitute or homeless, but alone, shunned, and unemployed.
Look at the photo of (then) Prince Charles and Evelyn de Rothschild, with smug Rothschild poking Charles in the chest. That is a very aggressive gesture, and not something one would do to a superior. Can you picture yourself walking up to your boss or the Chairman of the Board, poking him in the chest and saying, “I have something to tell you”? Definitely not. We would do this only to a distinct inferior, and someone we were bullying, almost treating with contempt. The gesture is not only to accentuate a point but is a kind of threat, one we might imagine a policeman making when issuing an order. From the photo, the relation between these two men is quite clear. We can’t know the topic of conversation but Rothschild is essentially telling Charles “this is how it is, and you don’t have to like it”.
But why wouldn’t Rothschild poke that little twerp in the chest? Charles is nothing to him, a convenient nuisance, a bit of a public shield, but no more. Rothschild has wealth that Charles can barely fathom, and power exceeding that of Charles by orders of magnitude, including over the UK Parliament and UK public opinion. Both men know Rothschild could dethrone the “King” at any time, that Charles as a Royal exists only at the Jews’ pleasure. Charles, the supposed “King of England”, can’t even enter Rothschild’s home or place of business without a specific invitation. How subservient can you be? It is the several Rothschilds, Sebag-Montefioris and others similar who are considered the real “royalty” of England, Charles, Andrew, Edward, being puppet-caricatures.
Who Owns the City?
Well, the entity is described as “The Corporation of The City of London” but, since this is a privately-owned company, we have no shareholder list. I am told there are 13 Jewish families who are central to this enterprise, the Rothschilds being the first among these. The City may well operate as a corporation in some senses, but could be more accurately described as a typical organised-crime family who are Lords of their own mini-state and effectively operate with virtually absolute impunity throughout the world. This impunity resolves primarily from their financial power, but secondarily from the political power and influence obtained by that financial power. It is hardly a secret that national governments like the US, the UK, France, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, Canada and others are fundamentally and essentially Jewish-controlled states, with that control emanating from the City of London.
If we think of Jeffrey Epstein and his sex-entrapment enterprise that flourished for decades, it makes sense that the City of London would have been the source of the planning and financing. Epstein’s operation was definitely Jewish and worldwide, and there is no other candidate body in the world with an interest in controlling the politicians of all nations, at least not by that dirty means. If we think of the world’s mass media which is largely and increasingly Jewish-owned, and which is vitally necessary for the propaganda to control the standard narrative, it makes sense that increasing media control would arise primarily from this same source. This would clearly account for the development of the social and Internet media, almost dictating the necessity for the creation of a Google, a Facebook, a Wikipedia, an Instagram, a Telegraph, and the takeover of Twitter.
There is something else here, dealing with the intelligence agencies, primarily the CIA and Mossad although MI5 would almost surely fit into this. I have a copy of a document that was released by the CIA under a FOIA request. It is not a CIA document and it is not clear why it would have been in the possession of the CIA. The document is not redacted, but the original author is not identified. The salient point of this document indicates the existence of a group somewhere within the CIA that operates independently, acting under the auspices and authority of the CIA but with its own purpose and agenda unrelated to the remainder of the organisation. The document maddeningly lacks precise details but the implication is that this group does not report to any part of the CIA and that its activities may not even be known by the CIA executive. I had read of, or heard rumors about, such a group before, but this was the first bit of documented evidence of it.
Edward Snowden, in an article titled “The CIA is not your friend”, made reference to this as well. He wrote that after the creation of the CIA, “Within a year, the young agency had already slipped the leash of its intended role of intelligence collection and analysis to establish a covert operations division. Within a decade, the CIA was directing the coverage of American news organizations, overthrowing democratically elected governments (at times merely to benefit a favored corporation), establishing propaganda outfits to manipulate public sentiment, launching a long-running series of mind-control experiments on unwitting human subjects . . . and interfering with foreign elections.” 
This is a very large topic with so many interwoven threads that even a very long article could scarcely do it justice, but I wanted to raise one point about the secrecy, the agenda, and the lack of a CIA reporting chain. As one example, it had been reported in several places that neither the US Congress nor the White House had any knowledge of the “CIA’s” MK-ULTRA program. I covered this in much detail in a previous article on MK-ULTRA. During Congressional hearings on an unrelated matter, one witness brought a colleague who began testifying on a bizarre mind-control program that was unknown to that date, which led to the exposure of MK-ULTRA – and the rapid destruction (so they said) of all related documents. The important point is that this enormous and horrific program, spanning decades, escaped external attention. MK-ULTRA was entirely a Jewish program. I have a list of the top 30 lieutenants of MK-ULTRA, from Gottlieb down, and all are Jews. This is not in dispute, and in fact I believe that of the top 50 or 60 people, only two or three at the most are not Jews. The question is how it would happen that an internal group of the “American CIA” would have had such a determined interest in such a horrific program and would have staffed it entirely with Jews.
A similar concern arises from the Congressional hearings conducted on the exposure of the “CIA’s” program, again spanning decades, of assassinating some 150 world leaders and senior politicians. Upon examination of the evidence of all those assassinations, it is by no means clear that many, or even most, of them would have been of any benefit to the US government. In fact, like the worldwide gold thefts conducted by the US Treasury Department in the 1930s, or the hijacking of Iraq’s oil today, it is easier to believe these were carried out on behalf of the “secret government” to the benefit of, and masterminded by, the City of London. Looking back on so many world events, it is by no means certain that any part of the US government would have had any interest in, or seen any benefit in, those activities. I can only speculate here, but if we assume all those activities, programs and events were carried out at the instruction of the gnomes in the City of London, everything seems to make sense, like a jigsaw puzzle where all the pieces fit perfectly together to make an overall picture.
We can recall that Jeffrey Epstein was spared from his first arrest because “he is intelligence” and “above your pay grade”. But as I pointed out above, there is no way the US CIA would have created a worldwide sex-entrapment scheme with or without the knowledge of any part of the US government. There would simply be too great a lack of both interest and benefit to any part of the US, and the only conclusion I can see is that it must have originated in the City of London where it would fit perfectly into the overall picture. In a similar context, the Boer Wars make no sense if we attribute them to Britain, yet England did send in her army to commit astonishing crimes and atrocities with no benefit whatever to England. But when we understand that this was done on order from the Jews in the City of London to take over all South Africa’s gold and diamond mines for a Rothschild, then all the pieces fit and everything makes sense.
Again, there are perhaps hundreds of articles and many books about the CIA importing heroin and cocaine and generally trafficking in drugs. Now, I have no illusions about the chastity of the CIA, and I’m sure many of their staff are sufficiently evil to do just this. But it doesn’t compute. It certainly is possible, but it doesn’t make sense that the “American CIA” would, entirely on its own account, become so deeply involved in international drug-running. But the Jews in the City of London cut their teeth on narcotics trafficking; in fact, this was the source of much of their initial fortunes. The Khazar Jews have always been among the world’s biggest drug dealers. Thus, if we attribute the drug trafficking to this central “private” core in the CIA that reports to the City of London, all the pieces fit together and everything makes sense. This would even explain why the HSBC is repeatedly fined so heavily in the US for laundering drug money; this is what the HSBC was created to do 150 years ago, and its headquarters are in the City. Even the small pieces fit perfectly.
Think again of the “CIA” assassination program. There is no way that the CIA by itself, rogue group or otherwise, would decide to kill 150 Presidents, Prime Ministers and other high government officials which, in the most part, would have no benefit whatever to the US. And no CIA group, rogue or not, would take it upon themselves to kill the Secretary-General of the UN, again with no apparent benefit to the US. But if we insert into this equation the political hegemony ambitions of the Jews in the City of London, the pieces again fit snugly together.
It is true this is speculation on my part. I cannot supply proof of these assertions. I have simply cobbled them together from logic and circumstantial evidence.
Caution is Advised
Certainly, these people are ruthless. There is no shortage of evidence that they will destroy anyone who challenges them and will kill anyone who threatens to expose or frustrate their plans. And this doesn’t apply only to Gentiles. They are equally ruthless to their own. You have read what they did to Dominique Strauss-Khan . It is important to note that this man was the Managing Director of the IMF and almost surely the next President of France, and yet he was very much an outsider, far from the center of power. As I mentioned in my article, he confided to his wife and others that “they are out to get me”. To use such terminology, we can understand these were not people who were close to him, but who were at the same time far above him, and he was clearly hoping he might be sufficiently insignificant they might just ignore him. He was wrong.
Jeremy Corbyn was similar. Former leader of the UK Labor Party, Corbyn earned the enmity of the Jews in the City and they destroyed him. He was permanently tainted as an anti-Semite, and absolutely trashed for his disobedience to the Jews and his good intentions toward the British people. The Labor Party state firmly that Corbyn will never again cross their doorstep because he is now “too toxic”.
There was another matter, with newspaper headlines some years back of “Amschel Rothschild Commits Suicide”. This man, a 6th-generation banking Rothschild, was slated to take the reins from his cousin Sir Evelyn Rothschild, as chairman of N.M Rothschild & Sons. His body was found by a chambermaid in a Paris hotel room. But there was nothing about this that made any sense. The first policeman on the scene told reporters that Rothschild was found with a rope around his neck attached to a bathroom fixture upon which he supposedly “hung himself”, but the policeman said he tugged on the rope and the entire fixture detached from the wall. He said there was no way the man could have hung himself because the fixture could support no weight, that the rope had been tied there afterward. That policeman quickly disappeared and the story was totally scrubbed from the Internet. I saw an email copy from Rupert Murdoch, instructing all his newspapers to state this “as a suicide, if you mention it at all”.
The official stories that followed, were all nonsense, too pathetic to even be termed lies. The UK Mirror was typical, saying “. . . it seemed the real noose around Amschel’s neck was his fortune of £18million”, that “huge riches and influence have not always brought great happiness”, and that of his great fortune “You could describe it as a gilded millstone”. His “great fortune of £18million”? That would buy two Ferraris, one Bugatti, and leave enough loose change for a bucket of Häagen-Dazs ice cream, but this “gilded millstone” led to such depression the man hung himself. Another story was that the man was depressed at the death of his mother, and so he hung himself. Others, and there were many, were equally stupid. Of all people, the Rothschilds would have had the influence to put nearly the entire Paris police force on the case and hunt every clue to the ends of the earth. But they didn’t. They simply told many foolish lies and buried it.
I do not know what really happened, but I have to say that when reading the initial police report and then the frenetic cover-up stories, my instinctive reaction was that this had to have been “a family hit”. We will never know. And it might not have been the first. Can you imagine committing suicide by slitting your own throat? Why not? The Rothschilds do it. According to the Jewish Telegraph Agency, “Nathaniel Rothschild, second son of the first Lord Rothschild committed suicide by cutting his throat. The specific reasons for the deed are not revealed.” Nor are the reasons revealed for the stupidity of the method. Of all the options available for killing myself, cutting my own throat would not be my first choice. Here are some media reports. Decide for yourself.    
Where Do We Go From Here?
Nowhere, so far as I can see. Many readers like to see a solution offered. There is one. If King Charles could collect sufficient courage and a single-minded resolve, he could deal with it. He could commandeer the UK media and explain the situation to the people in a way that they could understand. If he were to do that, he would surely have the support of the entire country, and also of the military. Now, the UK army is admittedly nothing much, but even they have the military might to launch an all-out assault on an unprotected one square mile of urban landscape. Gather all the missiles and artillery, and completely demolish the City of London. Leave no stone resting upon another, and kill anything that moves. If the head and brain of the hydra are thus killed, the body would slowly die too. But this is a dream.
Mr. Romanoff’s writing has been translated into 32 languages and his articles posted on more than 150 foreign-language news and politics websites in more than 30 countries, as well as more than 100 English language platforms. Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He is one of the contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new anthology ‘When China Sneezes’. (Chapt. 2 — Dealing with Demons).