PDA

View Full Version : The Top Mason.


stompk
10-18-2008, 10:39 AM
http://i37.tinypic.com/qywtuv.gif

Queen Elizabeth II is "The See", or what the eye at the top of
the pyramid represents.


Most British honours encompass the whole United Kingdom, but the topmost three each pertain to one constituent nation. The Order of the Garter, pertaining to England, is senior in age and precedence; The Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle pertains to Scotland; and the now-dormant The Most Illustrious Order of St Patrick pertains to Ireland. New appointments are always announced on St George's Day, 23 April, Saint George being the patron saint of England
...
The Most Noble Order of the Garter is an order of chivalry, or knighthood, originating in medieval England, and presently bestowed on recipients in any of the Commonwealth realms; it is the pinnacle of the honours system in the United Kingdom. Membership in the order is limited to the sovereign, the Prince of Wales, and no more than twenty-four members
...
Throughout the 20th century, women continued to be associated with the Order, but except for foreign female monarchs, they were not made companions.[9] In 1987, however, it became possible to install "Ladies Companion of the Garter" under a statute of Queen Elizabeth II.[10]

Order of the Garter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_the_Garter)


The Order of the Garter is the parent organization over Free Masonry, world-wide. When a man becomes a 33rd Degree Mason, he swears allegiance to that organization, and thereby to Prince Charles.

United States Presidents and the Masonic Power Structure. freemason,jesuit,illuminati,presidents,trilateral commission,council of foreign relations,skull and bones,hell fire club,satanist, (http://www.heart7.net/uspresidentasmasons.htm)


The Order of the Garter is the secret inner group which is an elite group within the Order of St. John of Jerusalem which is the British part of the Knights of Malta. The Knights of the Garter are the leaders of the Committee of 300.

Knights of Malta (http://www.whale.to/b/knights_q.html)

Who is the Committe of 300? Who controls this powerful group of people?


This committee of 300 is modeled after the British East India Company's Council of 300, founded by the British aristocracy in 1727. Most of its immense wealth arose out of the opium trade with China. This group is responsible for the phony drug wars here in the U.S. These phony drug wars were to get us to give away our constitutional rights. Asset forfeiture is a prime example, where huge assets can be seized without trail and no proof of guilt needed. Also the Committee of 300 long ago decreed that there shall be a smaller-much smaller-and better world, that is, their idea of what constitutes a better world.

The myriads of useless eaters consuming scarce natural resources were to be culled. Industrial progress supports population growth. Therefore the command to multiply and subdue the earth found in Genesis had to be subverted. This called for an attack upon Christianity; the slow but sure disintegration of industrial nation states; the destruction of hundreds of millions of people, referred to by the Committee of 300 as "surplus population, " and the removal of any leader who dared to stand in the way of the Committee's global planning to reach the foregoing objectives. Not that the U.S. government didn't know, but as it was part of the conspiracy, it helped to keep the lid on information rather than let the truth be known. Queen, Elizabeth II, is the head of the Committee of 300.
http://i35.tinypic.com/qs3yvn.gif


So if QE II is head of the 300, and the Order of the Garter controls them, who controls the Order of the Garter??


Order of the Garter is the core of the Committee Of 300 (aka Olympians). Queen Elizabeth II is the leader of this organization.

Order Of The Garter. george bush,prince charles,order of the garter,order of the bath,queen,lord rothschild (http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/orderofgarter.htm)

BlueAngel
10-18-2008, 09:01 PM
Okay, okay, we get it.

You want the Queen be in control of something.

So, now it's Freemasonry since WE'VE proven that the Money Masters control the Global economy and she doesn't.

stompk
10-19-2008, 11:04 AM
The London foreign exchange market is the largest in the world with a $753bn foreign exchange turnover each day (31% of the global share and more than New York and Tokyo combined)), London has 43% of the global foreign equity market, 70% of all eurobonds traded in London(oh the irony), London has $643bn daily turnover in 'over the counter' derivatives (42% of global share). There are 242 foreign banks in London (for comparison a city like Sydney has 34) and 519 foreign companies are listed on the London Stock Exchange, London is home to 75% of Fortune 500 Companies and is home to more than 150 of europe's top 500 companies. If it were a country, the London metropolitan area would be the 13th largest economy in the world - higher than the GDP of nations like Holland and Australia. That's all pretty impressive and it's only the half of it.

London - Ratings and Reviews of London, England. (http://www.rateitall.com/i-8020-london-england.aspx)

Who really controls American policies?


Queen Elizabeth II of England, in all her munificence, has conferred an honorary knighthood on Alan Greenspan. This is in recognition of his "outstanding contribution to global economic stability and the benefit that the UK has received from the wisdom and skill with which he has led the US Federal Reserve". Although, as he is not a UK citizen, he is denied the amusement of calling himself Sir Alan Greenspan (thus firmly remaining Mr Greenspan), he does now have the pleasure of appending the letters KBE to his name, making him a noble Knight Commander of the Order of the British Empire.

Central Banking Publications - Newsmakers - (http://www.centralbanking.co.uk/newsmakers/archive/2002/aug09.htm)



he islands of the Caribbean have long played a key role in the British Empire's assault against the United States. The Brits set up the offshore banking centers in the Caribbean to pave the way for the explosion of narcotics out of Ibero-America, then used the proceeds from the dope trade to take over the U.S. financial system. The result of this cultural, political, and financial warfare by the Brits and their pirates of the Caribbean is the creation of the largest financial bubble in world history, a giant casino which is now collapsing.

The most important of the Caribbean offshore financial centers is the Cayman Islands, a British Overseas Territory run by a royal governor appointed by Queen Elizabeth II.

Dead Crocodiles Found Beached on the Queen's Cayman Islands (http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2007/3437crocodiles_queen's_island.html)

stompk
10-19-2008, 11:29 AM
From the Queens very own website


As Head of State, The Queen undertakes constitutional and representational duties which have developed over one thousand years of history.

There are inward duties, with The Queen playing a part in State functions in Britain. Parliament must be opened, Orders in Council have to be approved, Acts of Parliament must be signed, and meetings with the Prime Minister must be held.

There are also outward duties of State, when The Queen represents Britain to the rest of the world. For example, The Queen receives foreign ambassadors and high commissioners, entertains visiting Heads of State, and makes State visits overseas to other countries, in support of diplomatic and economic relations.

As 'Head of Nation', The Queen's role is less formal, but no less important for the social and cultural functions it fulfils.

The Monarchy Today > How the Monarchy works > The role of the Sovereign (http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page4683.asp)


he Queen is also Fount of Justice, from whom justice in the United Kingdom derives, and has important relationships with the Armed Forces and the established Churches of England and Scotland.

In addition to her role in the United Kingdom, The Queen has a special role to play in the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, which are dependent territories of the English Crown.

BlueAngel
10-20-2008, 12:33 AM
Hypothetical:

Okay, agreed.

The QUEEN controls all.

Now what?

BlueAngel
10-20-2008, 12:37 AM
Should I jump the next plane to England and give the Queen 50 lashes with a wet noodle?

Basically, our country is a communist nation.

The wealth rests with the very few.

We wait in line to buy toilet paper; we borrow from and are in debted to the Money Masters who finance our lives; we work like slaves to repay them and we are taxed on the money we make in order to help them RUN our country.

They do nothing.

WE do it all for them.

KSigMason
10-22-2008, 08:48 PM
This must be something that happens in Britain. It is true that many Royal family members are Masons, but I don't know how high it goes. It is different in America though, we are autonomous.

moriahmountaineer
10-23-2008, 05:29 PM
From the Queens very own website


The Monarchy Today > How the Monarchy works > The role of the Sovereign (http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page4683.asp)

I can't see where it says anywhere in that that she's Top Mason!

And there's one small detail I feel you may have overlooked - Masons are usually men. The Queen isn't. Otherwise, as the saying goes, she'd be a King.

stompk
10-25-2008, 10:20 AM
I can't see where it says anywhere in that that she's Top Mason!

And there's one small detail I feel you may have overlooked - Masons are usually men. The Queen isn't. Otherwise, as the saying goes, she'd be a King.


In 1994 Robert Mugabe, President of Zimbabwe, was made an honorary Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath by Queen Elizabeth II. This means he can put the letters KCB behind his name, but cannot use the title “Sir”. Since then, Robert Mugabe has gone from freedom fighter and leader of a liberation movement to dictator, despot, thug and tyrannical leader of one of the most brutal and murderous regimes in the world.

FT.com | Willem Buiter’s Maverecon (http://blogs.ft.com/maverecon/category/international-trade/)

I continue to show proof. You have shown....nothing.

moriahmountaineer
10-25-2008, 11:31 AM
In 1994 Robert Mugabe, President of Zimbabwe, was made an honorary Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath by Queen Elizabeth II. This means he can put the letters KCB behind his name, but cannot use the title “Sir”. Since then, Robert Mugabe has gone from freedom fighter and leader of a liberation movement to dictator, despot, thug and tyrannical leader of one of the most brutal and murderous regimes in the world.
FT.com | Willem Buiter’s Maverecon (http://blogs.ft.com/maverecon/category/international-trade/)

I am confused :confused:

You see, I didn't realise Mugabe was a Freemason, either, but I still can't see what the Queen knighting him has to do with her being a Freemason.

And I read that link of yours, and it just seemed to be a load of stuff about the City - it didn't mention Freemasonry anywhere, either.

Clearly, I'm being very dim, but if you'd point it out a bit more clearly, I'd understand a bit better.
I continue to show proof. You have shown....nothing.
No, you're right, I haven't. I am very sorry about that :(, but if you would be kind enough to tell me what I should be showing you, then maybe I can try and sort that out. Unless it'd be rude, obviously.

stompk
10-25-2008, 11:52 AM
No, you're right, I haven't. I am very sorry about that , but if you would be kind enough to tell me what I should be showing you, then maybe I can try and sort that out. Unless it'd be rude, obviously.


Please state your connection to Freemasonry, and therefore the Queen.

moriahmountaineer
10-25-2008, 12:17 PM
Please state your connection to Freemasonry, and therefore the Queen.
:confused: WTF?? Would you prefer it if I did have a connection to Freemasonry, or should I not have a connection to Freemasonry?

And how would any connection to Freemasonry I might have mean that I was connected to the Queen?

(I have just noticed, though, that I have some money in my pocket which has her face on it. Does this make me a Freemason?).

stompk
10-25-2008, 11:29 PM
:confused: WTF?? Would you prefer it if I did have a connection to Freemasonry, or should I not have a connection to Freemasonry?

And how would any connection to Freemasonry I might have mean that I was connected to the Queen?

(I have just noticed, though, that I have some money in my pocket which has her face on it. Does this make me a Freemason?).

"I have no affiliation with the Queen" would suffice.

moriahmountaineer
10-26-2008, 04:15 AM
"I have no affiliation with the Queen" would suffice.
But I can't say that. And I still don't understand why I need to.

stompk
10-26-2008, 11:06 AM
But I can't say that. And I still don't understand why I need to.

That's all I needed to hear.


On January 22, 1783 Congress ratified a contract for the
repayment of 21 loans that the UNITED STATES had already received dating from February 28, 1778 to July 5, 1782. Now the UNITED STATES Inc. owes the King money which is due January 1, 1788 from King George via France. Is this not incredible the King funded both sides of the War. But there was more work that needed to be done. Now the Articles of Confederation which was declared in force March 1, 1781 States in Article 12 " All bills of credit emitted, monies borrowed,and debts contracted by, or under the authority of Congress, before the assembling of the United States, in pursuance of the present
confederation, shall be deemed and considered a charge against the United States, for payment and satisfaction whereof the said United States, and the public faith are hereby solemnly pledged."


So, here, "public faith" was "solemnly pledged" to King George via France (Ben Franklin helped this happen)


The next underhanded move was the creation of The United States Bank in 1791. This was a private Bank of which there were 25,000 shares issued of which 18,000 were held by those in England. The Bank loaned the United States money in exchange for Securities of the United States


End then to the meat of the meal


Great Britain to this day collects taxes from the American people. The IRS is not an Agency of the United States Government.


More specifically, the British Monarchy.

moriahmountaineer
10-26-2008, 11:17 AM
That's all I needed to hear.



So, here, "public faith" was "solemnly pledged" to King George via France (Ben Franklin helped this happen)



End then to the meat of the meal



More specifically, the British Monarchy.
And...?

stompk
11-12-2008, 06:43 PM
And,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDwkXVkD1p8

BlueAngel
11-12-2008, 08:56 PM
Yeah, let's argue over who the top Mason is.

Like it matters.

Okay, we've figured it out.

The Queen is the top Mason.

Guess that solves all the world's problems.

KSigMason
11-12-2008, 11:41 PM
The Queen is the top Mason.
Yeah...again, no she's not.

BlueAngel
11-12-2008, 11:47 PM
Yeah...again, no she's not.

Oh, for goodness sakes.

Learn to recognize MY sarcasm and HUMOR.

I could care less who the top mason is and could care even less spending time arguing about it.

Oh, I get it.

You're the TOP MASON.

KSigMason
11-13-2008, 12:53 AM
Oh, I get it.

You're the TOP MASON.
Damn right

BlueAngel
11-13-2008, 11:55 AM
Damn right

:rolleyes:

stompk
11-13-2008, 06:27 PM
I am confused :confused:

... I didn't realise ...


... I'm being very dim ...

I am very sorry about that :(


No need to apologize.

I've tried to make the subject as simple and clear as possible.

Maybe I could dumb it down for you a bit.

The Queen leads the fight on Earth against those who would choose spiritual wealth over materialistic wealth.

The Queen is the product of centuries of positioning people in power and wealth, in and attempt to enslave those who would lead a much happier, easier existence if they weren't led down the wrong paths (deliberately I say) by the dumb bitch.

stompk
11-19-2008, 06:55 PM
Originally Posted by moriahmountaineer
No, you're right, I haven't. I am very sorry about that , but if you would be kind enough to tell me what I should be showing you, then maybe I can try and sort that out. Unless it'd be rude, obviously.



Mt. Moriah Lodge No. 37
ANCIENT FREE & ACCEPTED MASONS OF TEXAS

Complete with the eye of their god, Horus

Whore (http://www.samliquidation.com/whore.htm)

Is in just me, or are the Masons sneeky little bastards.

BlueAngel
11-19-2008, 06:59 PM
Whore (http://www.samliquidation.com/whore.htm)

Is in just me, or are the Masons sneeky little bastards.

Pimp.

:eek:

KSigMason
11-19-2008, 07:53 PM
Complete with the eye of their god, Horus
Actually that is the All Seeing Eye which is a common Christian symbol depicting the one and only God.

The Queen leads the fight on Earth against those who would choose spiritual wealth over materialistic wealth.
And the Masons are her army fighting the fight? One of the first things you learn in the Freemasons that it is not the worldly wealth or honors that make men great, but what's inside (their values, morals, how they hold themselves, etc).

stompk
11-20-2008, 07:11 PM
One of the first things you learn in the Freemasons that it is not the worldly wealth or honors that make men great, but what's inside (their values, morals, how they hold themselves, etc).

Do you really need a secret society to learn these things?

Your secrets will be exposed. I hope you are prepared to live with them.

KSigMason
11-20-2008, 09:02 PM
Your secrets will be exposed. I hope you are prepared to live with them.
Why do you have to expose them? Why are you so afraid? You seem to let fear rule your life. We have done nothing wrong or sinister.

justgroovy
11-21-2008, 11:59 AM
Will you not even entertain the idea that perhaps because you are still a low man on the totem pole (Worshipful Master is still not a 33 degree) you aren't privvy to everything that happens in the Masons?

KSigMason
11-21-2008, 05:08 PM
Will you not even entertain the idea that perhaps because you are still a low man on the totem pole (Worshipful Master is still not a 33 degree) you aren't privvy to everything that happens in the Masons?
I will say I am not privy to Scottish Rite Masonry (which is the 33rd side). For the Blue Lodge (Craft Masonry) I am privy to all it's doings as well as the York Rite. Unless you are in the group you wouldn't have a full grasp of everything. If a 33rd member comes into the Lodge he is just another member and must be respectful to the Worshipful Master. In the Scottish Rite a 33rd may be in charge, but you also have to realize we elect our leaders. Even to become a 33rd you must be invited by the Council (as far as I know). Freemasonry isn't a pole that ends with the 33rd. It's a tree with branches going off from the trunk (or Craft Masonry/Blue Lodge).

BlueAngel
12-04-2008, 10:39 PM
I will say I am not privy to Scottish Rite Masonry (which is the 33rd side). For the Blue Lodge (Craft Masonry) I am privy to all it's doings as well as the York Rite. Unless you are in the group you wouldn't have a full grasp of everything. If a 33rd member comes into the Lodge he is just another member and must be respectful to the Worshipful Master. In the Scottish Rite a 33rd may be in charge, but you also have to realize we elect our leaders. Even to become a 33rd you must be invited by the Council (as far as I know). Freemasonry isn't a pole that ends with the 33rd. It's a tree with branches going off from the trunk (or Craft Masonry/Blue Lodge).

It just sounds, well, just sounds, so weird.

"If a 33rd member comes into the Lodge he is just another member and must be respectful to the Worshipful Master."

I dunno.

Who the hell wants to have the title of a Worshipful Master that demands people be respectful to you.

That, folks, is just plain WEIRD and these men are involved in CHILDREN's charities and ORPHANGES.

makaveli
01-18-2009, 01:09 PM
STOMPK:
Yes indeed you seem to have nailed it down this is it she runs everything but I wonder how did you come to this conclusion? For I had to investegate the rothschilds, the vatican, the jesuits, freemasonary, track down the lineage of the royals, and even read about ancient egypt for it was possible for me to connect these dots together people who only have seen the documentary the moneymasters of obviously exposed to only on aspect of a much grander conspiracy. People who buy everything eric phelphs says also have a one sided view. How did you come to this conclusion?

KSigMason
01-18-2009, 03:23 PM
That, folks, is just plain WEIRD and these men are involved in CHILDREN's charities and ORPHANGES.
Yeah, charities horrible. [/sarcasm]

BlueAngel
01-18-2009, 07:38 PM
Yeah, charities horrible. [/sarcasm]

You've quoted me OUT OF CONTEXT.

Never said "charities" were horrible.

I said, it was weird that anyone would want to be referred to as a Worshipful Master and that an all male organization heavily involved in children's charities concerns me.

If you're so bored that you have to quote me out of context in order to make up a comment to reply to, I suggest you get busy with your children's charities.

KSigMason
01-18-2009, 11:14 PM
You've quoted me OUT OF CONTEXT.

Never said "charities" were horrible.

I said, it was weird that anyone would want to be referred to as a Worshipful Master and that an all male organization heavily involved in children's charities concerns me.

If you're so bored that you have to quote me out of context in order to make up a comment to reply to, I suggest you get busy with your children's charities.
I just donated my tax return to the Knights Templar Eye Foundation...a "whopping" $3600.00. So since we are all male we shouldn't do charity to avoid suspicion?

BlueAngel
01-19-2009, 09:01 PM
I just donated my tax return to the Knights Templar Eye Foundation...a "whopping" $3600.00. So since we are all male we shouldn't do charity to avoid suspicion?

As long as the all male FRATERNITY doesn't have any direct contact with children (i.e., orphanages), and only DONATES money to children's charities, I think you'll avoid suspicion, but I highly doubt that's where it ends.

I still consider the charitable aspect to be a cover.

KSigMason
01-19-2009, 09:26 PM
As long as the all male FRATERNITY doesn't have any direct contact with children (i.e., orphanages), and only DONATES money to children's charities, I think you'll avoid suspicion, but I highly doubt that's where it ends.
So the Shriner's hospitals are not needed. Anyone that has gone to a hospital has got their treatment free of charge. You are so pessimistic that you have to see something dark about charity.

I still consider the charitable aspect to be a cover.
And without proof it's just an irrational belief and word of it is defamation.

BlueAngel
01-19-2009, 09:41 PM
So the Shriner's hospitals are not needed. Anyone that has gone to a hospital has got their treatment free of charge. You are so pessimistic that you have to see something dark about charity.


And without proof it's just an irrational belief and word of it is defamation.

It is apparent that you have a problem with reading comprehension or purposely misconstrue that which I speak.

I have no clue why you insinuate that I said the Shriner's hospitals aren't needed.

I refer you back to my original comment.

I am an OPTIMIST.

If I weren't, I wouldn't be where I am today.

I said in my previous comment that I still think the charitable work is a cover.

It's not defamation.

It's my opinion and I don't need proof.

KSigMason
01-20-2009, 12:04 AM
It is apparent that you have a problem with reading comprehension or purposely misconstrue that which I speak.

I have no clue why you insinuate that I said the Shriner's hospitals aren't needed.
No direct contact. Only donates money. The charity is a cover.

As long as the all male FRATERNITY doesn't have any direct contact with children (i.e., orphanages), and only DONATES money to children's charities, I think you'll avoid suspicion, but I highly doubt that's where it ends.

I still consider the charitable aspect to be a cover.

I am an OPTIMIST.
And yet you are suspicious of the Masonic charities.

It's not defamation.
DEFAMATION - An act of communication that causes someone to be shamed, ridiculed, held in contempt, lowered in the estimation of the community, or to lose employment status or earnings or otherwise suffer a damaged reputation. Such defamation is couched in 'defamatory language'. Libel and slander are defamation.

LIBEL - An untruthful statement about a person, published in writing or through broadcast media, that injures the person's reputation or standing in the community. Because libel is a tort, the injured person can bring a lawsuit against the person who made the false statement.

BlueAngel
01-20-2009, 12:10 AM
No direct contact. Only donates money. The charity is a cover.




And yet you are suspicious of the Masonic charities.


DEFAMATION - An act of communication that causes someone to be shamed, ridiculed, held in contempt, lowered in the estimation of the community, or to lose employment status or earnings or otherwise suffer a damaged reputation. Such defamation is couched in 'defamatory language'. Libel and slander are defamation.

LIBEL - An untruthful statement about a person, published in writing or through broadcast media, that injures the person's reputation or standing in the community. Because libel is a tort, the injured person can bring a lawsuit against the person who made the false statement.

Oh, please.

Give it a rest.

I'll state my opinion about Freemasonry as I so desire regardless of your posting of the definition of DEFAMATION.

Ooooh, I'm scared.

Shall I repeat:

I have a PROBLEM with an ALL MALE FRATERNITY that is exclusively involved in children's charities.

You've admitted the charity is a cover.

LOOK ABOVE!

KSigMason
01-20-2009, 12:18 AM
Well, for an optomist, you have a dark/negative outlook.

Shall I repeat:

I have a PROBLEM with an ALL MALE FRATERNITY that is exclusively involved in children's charities.

You've admitted the charity is a cover.
I guess you shall. It's not exclusively giving charity to children. We have a few others. No I didn't admit it was, I was reiterating your stance on the Shriners. Now who's misconstruing who?

makaveli
01-20-2009, 01:48 PM
Ksigmason and blueangel: is it your fulltime job to argue with eachother and thereby ruin every possible tread you can find???

KSigMason
01-20-2009, 03:09 PM
Ksigmason and blueangel: is it your fulltime job to argue with eachother and thereby ruin every possible tread you can find???
How are we ruining it? BlueAngel is my opposite on this thread...well, one of them at least and we argue our side.

This quote really sums up BA and me:

Barbossa: So what now, Jack Sparrow? Are we to be two immortals locked in an epic battle until Judgment Day and trumpets sound?
Jack Sparrow: Or you could surrender.

BlueAngel
01-20-2009, 09:18 PM
Well, for an optomist, you have a dark/negative outlook.


I guess you shall. It's not exclusively giving charity to children. We have a few others. No I didn't admit it was, I was reiterating your stance on the Shriners. Now who's misconstruing who?

Sorry, but because I have a problem with an all MALE organization involved exclusively in children's charities, doesn't mean I have a dark/negative outlook.

You weren't reiterating any stance I have on the Shriner's, because I've never expressed one.

You're misconstruing again.

BlueAngel
01-20-2009, 09:20 PM
Ksigmason and blueangel: is it your fulltime job to argue with eachother and thereby ruin every possible tread you can find???

What is your problem?

We don't ruin every thread.

KSigMason
01-20-2009, 09:25 PM
Sorry, but because I have a problem with an all MALE organization involved exclusively in children's charities, doesn't mean I have a dark/negative outlook.
You are automatically suspicious of a group because it's all male, that is a negative outlook. There is no proof of wrongdoing by the Shriners.

You weren't reiterating any stance I have on the Shriner's, because I've never expressed one.

You're misconstruing again.
I said you believed the Shriner's were a cover because you did indeed say it:
I said in my previous comment that I still think the charitable work is a cover.

KSigMason
01-20-2009, 09:27 PM
What is your problem?

We don't ruin every thread.
Did you enjoy my quote?

BlueAngel
01-20-2009, 09:32 PM
You are automatically suspicious of a group because it's all male, that is a negative outlook. There is no proof of wrongdoing by the Shriners.


I said you believed the Shriner's were a cover because you did indeed say it:

I've never mentioned the Shriners and I don't have a negative outlook because I happen to think that an all male organization involved exclusively in children's charities is weird.

You must be glued to your computer.

You're not accomplishing anything here.

You said Freemasonry's involvement in children's charities is a cover.

BlueAngel
01-20-2009, 09:33 PM
Did you enjoy my quote?

No.

I don't enjoy anything you write.

KSigMason
01-20-2009, 09:37 PM
Someone's feeling a bit nasty tonight. [hiss]

BlueAngel
01-20-2009, 09:44 PM
Someone's feeling a bit nasty tonight. [hiss]

No.

Not nasty.

Just honest.

You asked a question.

I responded honestly.

What are you?

A knat?

KSigMason
01-20-2009, 11:10 PM
Nope just a man defending his beloved Order with the shield of Truth. Temperance regulates me, Fortitude protects me, Prudence advises me, and Justice vindicates me.

BlueAngel
01-20-2009, 11:54 PM
Nope just a man defending his beloved Order with the shield of Truth. Temperance regulates me, Fortitude protects me, Prudence advises me, and Justice vindicates me.

Keep repeating that.

Repetition is key when it comes to mind control.

Seems your ORDER has conditioned you to do your own brainwashing.

Swat, swat.

KSigMason
01-21-2009, 12:35 AM
Keep repeating that.

Repetition is key when it comes to mind control.

Seems your ORDER has conditioned you to do your own brainwashing.

Swat, swat.
And you keep your head in the sand dwelling in ignorant bliss.

BlueAngel
01-21-2009, 12:52 AM
And you keep your head in the sand dwelling in ignorant bliss.

I dwell in reality.

Care to join me?

BlueAngel
01-21-2009, 12:57 AM
Heads up.

KSigMason
01-25-2009, 07:54 PM
Heads up.
7 Up

BlueAngel
01-25-2009, 08:42 PM
7 Up

Tails, down.

What say you, KSigMason?

http://www.clubconspiracy.com/forum/f36/satans-demons-attacked-me-last-night-4421.html

BlueAngel
01-25-2009, 10:51 PM
Didn't think you'd have a come back.

Heads up, I win.

Tails down, you lose.

KSigMason
01-26-2009, 01:07 AM
Didn't think you'd have a come back.

Heads up, I win.

Tails down, you lose.
Well, here's a cookie.

BlueAngel
01-26-2009, 01:52 AM
Well, here's a cookie.

I don't want nor do I need a cookie.

What say you about your brother who proclaims that he worships Lucifer?

aussietinfoilhat
04-30-2009, 09:18 PM
http://i37.tinypic.com/qywtuv.gif

Queen Elizabeth II is "The See", or what the eye at the top of
the pyramid represents.


Order of the Garter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_the_Garter)


United States Presidents and the Masonic Power Structure. freemason,jesuit,illuminati,presidents,trilateral commission,council of foreign relations,skull and bones,hell fire club,satanist, (http://www.heart7.net/uspresidentasmasons.htm)


Knights of Malta (http://www.whale.to/b/knights_q.html)

Who is the Committe of 300? Who controls this powerful group of people?



So if QE II is head of the 300, and the Order of the Garter controls them, who controls the Order of the Garter??


Order Of The Garter. george bush,prince charles,order of the garter,order of the bath,queen,lord rothschild (http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/orderofgarter.htm)

It's interesting that you used the term 'The See'. You stole that from Roman Catholicism, the term for the Vatican is in Latin, 'the Holy See'. Stop stealing religious stuff and applying it to fraternal organisations. Especially when you seem to know little about either.

stompk
05-24-2009, 09:17 AM
It's interesting that you used the term 'The See'. You stole that from Roman Catholicism, the term for the Vatican is in Latin, 'the Holy See'. Stop stealing religious stuff and applying it to fraternal organisations. Especially when you seem to know little about either.

I know more than you think. The See (Queen Elizabeth II), The Holy See (the Pope) and the un-Holy See (Satan). There are three pyramids, a trinity against God.

makaveli
05-25-2009, 03:24 PM
stompk :
after doing many research I can confirm you are absolutly right,
however next time try to inform those who care for the truth instead
of fighting the likes of Ksigmason as you can see it's quite useless

however could you please share some more information on why
you believe the queen is the head of everything cause I'd like
to hear more about your arguements

BlueAngel
05-25-2009, 04:42 PM
stompk :
after doing many research I can confirm you are absolutly right,
however next time try to inform those who care for the truth instead
of fighting the likes of Ksigmason as you can see it's quite useless

however could you please share some more information on why
you believe the queen is the head of everything cause I'd like
to hear more about your arguements

Just because Stompk believes that the Queen is the head of everything, does not make it so.

And, just because you are in agreement with Stompk that the Queen controls everything due to your many years of research that verifies Stompk's assumption that the Queen of Enlgand controls all, does not make it so either because you have not provided the forum with any information related to your many years of research that proves this assumption.

Please provide for the forum the information you possess after many years of research that verifies Stompk's claim that the Queen of England controls all.

Thanking you in advance,
BlueAngel

aussietinfoilhat
05-26-2009, 01:16 AM
I know more than you think. The See (Queen Elizabeth II), The Holy See (the Pope) and the un-Holy See (Satan). There are three pyramids, a trinity against God.

Can you provide ANY citation to any reputable source that the Queen of England has EVER been referred to as 'The See', or Satan as the 'Un-Holy See'? The Holy See is an instance of engrish interpretation of Latin and is nonsense in an English context for the most part; but The See and the Un-Holy See makes even less sense in Latin subtext.

I understand that you truly hold this to be factual and the truth and I can tell there's no point in trying to talk you into seeing a shrink and all, but I am truly curious as to how you've fabricated this belief system and where these additional elements come from and how you feel they tie in to the 'illuminati' or whatever evil band 'run the planet' and oppress you in some way.

aussietinfoilhat
05-26-2009, 01:18 AM
stompk :
after doing many research I can confirm you are absolutly right,
however next time try to inform those who care for the truth instead
of fighting the likes of Ksigmason as you can see it's quite useless

however could you please share some more information on why
you believe the queen is the head of everything cause I'd like
to hear more about your arguements

After doing many research I can confirm you are absolutely making things up. What research? Where? What sources? What publications have you written on the subject? Are you talking about personal research--something one cannot even submit to a poor source like wikipedia without being reverted as puff--or are you talking legitimate empirical research?

Please, share your research with us before claiming you have found that someone's conspiracy theory is true. :)

stompk
05-26-2009, 09:52 PM
Looks like we got spammed by another freemason.

stompk
05-30-2009, 08:59 AM
stompk :
after doing many research I can confirm you are absolutly right,
however next time try to inform those who care for the truth instead
of fighting the likes of Ksigmason as you can see it's quite useless

however could you please share some more information on why
you believe the queen is the head of everything cause I'd like
to hear more about your arguements

Mak, the Queen fits the prophecy.

The banking system is the beast. The freemasons are the current knights templer.

The Queen rides the beast. She is head of the worlds financial systems. She is royalty to even the Rothschilds of the world, and all of the worlds debt through a giant computer system located on the Isle of Man. The Queen is Lord of Man, or called that anyway.

VISA, is the mark of the beast, or better yet, the main tool of the beast. VISA is not just a card, it's a network, with tenticles in every part of the world. And everytime someone uses their network, VISA gets 4-10+% cut, which is routed to the computer network located on the Isle of Man, where the worlds oldest parliment is located.

Purple, and gold. Purlple meaning the color of royalty, and she is cloaked in it. There are even pictures of her wearing a purple robe holding a gold cup. You see, the Queen doesn't necessarily need to control the financial systems, she just needs to get her cut of every single transaction that goes on on earth.

And, that, makes her the most powerful person in the most powerful position on earth. Now we see King Charles coming to power, who is the Red Dragon.

http://i39.tinypic.com/2i7x1sz.jpg

BlueAngel
05-30-2009, 09:39 PM
Purple, and gold. Purlple meaning the color of royalty, and she is cloaked in it. There are even pictures of her wearing a purple robe holding a gold cup.


As if the Queen needed to be cloaked in purple to display her royalty.

She wears the title of QUEEN.

I'm certain that word in and of itself depicts Royalty whether she is wearing a purple robe or not.

Please, Stompk.

Spare us your silly COLOR coded conspiracies.

makaveli
05-31-2009, 02:57 PM
After doing many research I can confirm you are absolutely making things up. What research? Where? What sources? What publications have you written on the subject? Are you talking about personal research--something one cannot even submit to a poor source like wikipedia without being reverted as puff--or are you talking legitimate empirical research?

Please, share your research with us before claiming you have found that someone's conspiracy theory is true. :)

I'll post it within a couple of hours is that OK with you mr sceptic???

BlueAngel
05-31-2009, 10:41 PM
I'll post it within a couple of hours is that OK with you mr sceptic???

Your post was at 3:57 P.M. and it is now 11:43 P.M.

Seems your running behind schedule.

theconspiracist
06-01-2009, 07:28 AM
Have you noticed that our Nation's Capitol was built around the Freemasons ? They have left many of their marks all over the city ! Even that pentagram that looks satantic is intentionally there for a reason. They wanted everyone to know what they stood for. And, I am not saying they were some satanic ritualistic cult. But so were the Priory of Sion (at least, that is what they were accused of back then).

BlueAngel
06-01-2009, 11:45 PM
Have you noticed that our Nation's Capitol was built around the Freemasons ? They have left many of their marks all over the city ! Even that pentagram that looks satantic is intentionally there for a reason. They wanted everyone to know what they stood for. And, I am not saying they were some satanic ritualistic cult. But so were the Priory of Sion (at least, that is what they were accused of back then).

Yes, we've noticed.

There are many threads on this board about our Nation's Capitol and the many marks they have left depicting their allegiance to Freemasonry.

To be a True Conspiracist is to realize that what you have referenced is of no importance.

It means nothing.

It cannot prove anything.

It is a waste of time to even contemplate.

They leave their "MARK" for you so that you spend your time trying to connect it to something that might provide evidence of their immoral acts, but it never will.

FYI, I'm a survivor of MKULTRA/Project Monarch.

A government/CIA sponsored mind control program.

WE don't look to those who weren't incarcerated in a mind control program to verify the existence of same or the reality of "satanic ritual abuse."

Only those persons who were victims can do so and ONLY those persons who rescued victims from this "cult" can verify the same because they possess inside information and evidence of a victim's incarceration.

iHIMself™
06-02-2009, 05:38 AM
To even suggest the Queen holds the highest position on Earth, is ridiculous, and, quite frankly, don't want to read it come off your tips again.

The US has ALWAYS been a nation built from foreign money. As if independence actually meant independence. Get real. But like the US, Britain too was built from foreign money.
Let me explain.

The Queen is German. The Prince is Greek. Let's just leave it at that.

The US may represent Rome, but the true power lied with the Greeks, representing the Brittish. The Greeks wrote History. The Romans perverted it. The Brittish developed the World. The US exploited it. Who are the Britts? Who were the Greeks? The word Greek doesn't even exist in the Greek language. What? It's Hellas, Hellenic. Why did the Romans refer to them as Greek? What real power was behind the birth of civilisation? How far back does this Illuminati go? Free Masonry? The trilateral commission? The Ashkenazi Jews?
Could it be just possible, that there were ALWAYS powerful families in positions that could influence humankind? And shouldn't there be? Are you a communist? Should we all be equal?

Sorry I.....................................went off in my own little tangent there. I'll shut up now.

stompk
06-05-2009, 05:52 PM
To even suggest the Queen holds the highest position on Earth, is ridiculous, and, quite frankly, don't want to read it come off your tips again.

Seriously?

The Queen holds the highest position on Earth, she is the See. She is the woman that rides the Beast.

Now, kiss my butt.

KSigMason
06-05-2009, 06:39 PM
Seriously?

The Queen holds the highest position on Earth, she is the See. She is the woman that rides the Beast.

Now, kiss my butt.
Where does the Bible talk about the Queen riding the Beast?

BlueAngel
06-05-2009, 06:42 PM
Where does the Bible talk about the Queen riding the Beast?

Who cares whether the bible says the Queen rides the Beast and whether or not the Queen holds the highest positon on earth?

Not I!

KSigMason
06-05-2009, 06:46 PM
True.

BlueAngel
06-06-2009, 12:28 AM
True.

We agree.

See.

Miracles do happen.

KSigMason
06-21-2009, 02:16 PM
Have you noticed that our Nation's Capitol was built around the Freemasons? They have left many of their marks all over the city ! Even that pentagram that looks satantic is intentionally there for a reason. They wanted everyone to know what they stood for. And, I am not saying they were some satanic ritualistic cult. But so were the Priory of Sion (at least, that is what they were accused of back then).
Actually not all the streets connect to make a pentagram.

makaveli
11-03-2009, 05:42 PM
Your post was at 3:57 P.M. and it is now 11:43 P.M.

Seems your running behind schedule.

lol I completely forgot its now months to late lol I post up a new thread discussing hierarcy.

BlueAngel
11-03-2009, 11:22 PM
lol I completely forgot its now months to late lol I post up a new thread discussing hierarcy.

Even though you have quoted my comment completely out of context, it's never too late.

makaveli
11-04-2009, 08:11 AM
Even though you have quoted my comment completely out of context, it's never too late.

how did I quote your comment out of context???

Out of the Box
11-04-2009, 08:44 AM
Britain has been under control of the Rothschild bankers since their infamous scam in 1815. The British monarch is just another puppet of theirs.

EireEngineer
11-04-2009, 09:07 AM
Britain has been under control of the Rothschild bankers since their infamous scam in 1815. The British monarch is just another puppet of theirs.
Funny, you would think that they would do a better job of keeping their puppet in power then? The monarchy has little power these days.

Out of the Box
11-04-2009, 09:14 AM
Funny, you would think that they would do a better job of keeping their puppet in power then?

I guess you're unaware of the fact that "elected" officials beyond a certain level of authority (local politicians are kept out of the loop) are mere puppets too.

The monarchy has little power these days.

As I said, they're just puppets.

makaveli
11-04-2009, 09:27 AM
Britain has been under control of the Rothschild bankers since their infamous scam in 1815. The British monarch is just another puppet of theirs.

You say that brittain is under controll over the rothschilds but could you please tell me on what information you base the fact that the royal family itselve is their puppet. Like I have mentioned in my illuminati hierarchy tread the financial conspiarcy goes back to pre rothschilds times and so to the occult secrets and knownledge. Are you saying that the rothschilds have taking over the illumininati? If so then why aren't the brittish kings taking it back. Looking at their ruthless history it does seem like a thing they would do.

Out of the Box
11-04-2009, 09:35 AM
You say that brittain is under controll over the rothschilds but could you please tell me on what information you base the fact that the royal family itselve is their puppet.

This article (http://www.londonnet.co.uk/royals/2008/may/queen-helps-out-rothschilds.html) shows how intimate the queen is with the Rothschilds.

Like I have mentioned in my illuminati hierarchy tread the financial conspiarcy goes back to pre rothschilds times and so to the occult secrets and knownledge.

There are most definitely ties to freemasonry and the Knights Templar, but it's quite a complex web of intrigue.

Are you saying that the rothschilds have taking over the illumininati?

Pretty much.

If so then why aren't the brittish kings taking it back.

They were never in control in the first place. The oligarchs (whom you call "Illuminati") represent a different faction who originally were enemies of clergy and arristocracy but who graduately took control of the institutes they had created. During the last two centuries, they've taken over both the Vatican and Western-European governments.

makaveli
11-04-2009, 09:37 AM
This article (http://www.londonnet.co.uk/royals/2008/may/queen-helps-out-rothschilds.html) shows how intimate the queen is with the Rothschilds.



There are most definitely ties to freemasonry and the Knights Templar, but it's quite a complex web of intrigue.



Pretty much.



They were never in control in the first place. The oligarchs (whom you call "Illuminati") represent a different faction who originally were enemies of clergy and arristocracy but who graduately took control of the institutes they had created. During the last two centuries, they've taken over both the Vatican and Western-European governments.

which olichars are you talking about the venatian?

Out of the Box
11-04-2009, 09:59 AM
which olichars are you talking about the venatian?

Predominantly Jewish banking and corporate dynasties like the Rothschild, the Rockefellers, the Warburgs, the Morgans, the Khuns, the Loebs, the Cohens, the Schiffs, the Oppenheimers or the Carnegies.

makaveli
11-04-2009, 10:08 AM
the article shows only the queen visiting the a rothshild I knew that already it doesn't reveal any further information about what kind of relationship they have. If I'm not mistaking one rothshild used to play polo with charles and they were nice friends + there is also the story of a rothshild being murdered

MOGUL DISTORTS ROTHSCHILD DEATH; POLICE SAY AMSCHEL WAS MURDERED (http://www.beyondweird.com/conspiracy/cn08-68.html)

This shows if true that their either is great instabily in the rothshild family or that he was silenced by higher power. If you believe its not true and he indeed suiciced then there is nothing really wrong even billionaires can suicide. But if it true its either one of those two scenario's come to mind.

Beside is Mi6 loyal to the Rotscilds? I rather believe the monarchy. It's unlikely to suggest they are paid off as they aren't really that rich (directors as far as I know) and the royals also haves literly millions of dollars/pounds etc. Id doesn't matter how much billions you have or if you print money Mi6 is the most valueble asset as it can assasinate you and paper money can't. Like I said a rothschild assasinated who cares nobody as we have seen from the supposed suicided but if a royal dies... well look at Diana and the immense impact that had. This ALWAYS leaves them in a position of adventage. If if they had taken over the royals who easily got it back with their enourmous intelligence influence and status, prestige that would sire loyalty all over the place.

Besides if the Rotshilds run the game then why are they involved in organisations which are headed and controlled by the royals (pilgrim society, le cercle by brittish aristocracy, freemasonry). And besides this the marriage between jewish banking and european protestant royalty took place long before the rothshilds appeared on the scene when the venenation jewish mercintile moved their riches to amsterdam and eventually to london. Even elizabeth I (where intelilgence agencies started) first tried to get them to come to london but it failed. To imply that the rotshilds have taken over would mean that the powefull hesse, brunsick, hanoverian and orange dynasties simply stopped fighting for power. This is strange since in my opinion the entire protestant reformation was largly politcal to get away from the powers of the vatican and habsurg (Grand design, rosicrucian enlightment by francis yates) and now they simply surrender to (no disrespect) a couple of rich jewboys? Notice that before the arrival of the rothshilds the hessian family (which launched the rothshilds) went to great efforts to emancipate jews in masonic lodged with the Asiatic Brethern. The oranges (of hessian descend) gave jews a save haven in amsterdam and then moved them to London.

The entire centuary before the arrival of the rotshilds the royals have been working closely with jewish bankers, intermarrieing (most notably brittish aristocracy) and trying to intergrate them into the societies. Looking from this perspective the relationship between jewish bankers and the royal protestant families have always been good and almost never hostile since they helped each other out. So from this perspective and the overall trends it seems to me strange to suggest that the rotshilds dominate period over everyone. If one dominates, it has to be in a friendly and by everyone accepted way else there would be constantly internal fighting as we have seen in the middle ages.

Besides this I also put some questionmarks to the story that the rotshilds gained their riches by fraudulant markt speculation. As researcher and former Mi6 agent John Colemen claims the wealth of the rothhilds had nothing to do with their great financial instinct it was merely 'theft by conversion' meaning that the hessian prince gave them his money to avoid accusations of fraudulant behavior with his money. Simple as that. The other stories are merely specualation and are simply not proven, in my opionion to hide the fact that the rothsilds money is simply royal money. They just manage it and can enjoy some of it. If they fail to do their job right and become a treath to the entire system of intelocking royalty, secret societies and banking families and they are strangled in their bathroom and the world media is silence about it.

makaveli
11-04-2009, 10:34 AM
Predominantly Jewish banking and corporate dynasties like the Rothschild, the Rockefellers, the Warburgs, the Morgans, the Khuns, the Loebs, the Cohens, the Schiffs, the Oppenheimers or the Carnegies.

as anthony sutton showed in his book about the skull and bones the rockerfellers where put their by the families of the skull & bones and not the other way around. The warburgs have worked together with morgan affiliated bussinues elements to finance hitler. Check out his boooks about Verenigte Stahlwerke, IG Farben and other cartels that where directly financed by wallstreet warburgs, rockerfellers etc. And Hitler himselve was trained in england as is sister in law (I believe) talks about in her diary (you can find a tread about this on this board). The books can be donwloaded freely from the internet.

The entire hitlertarion philosphy came from mystic sects which go beyond rotshilds in the pasts. The royals worked hard to put him there in combination witht he bankers this shows that they are on the same page first and second it shows and wanted to bring the philosphy out in the world. This philosphy came from royalty and it goes back to ancient mystery religions its even becoming mainstream information as you can find detailed scientific studies about it all over the internet how renaicaince, templaris, freemasonry etc take knowledge from egypt.

The Royals used to have the knowledge, secret societies to keep it alive and develop it and the riches.
The Royals now have the knowledge secret societies and the financial elements have been outsourced to the jewish banking dynasties. The reason for this is quite obvious: every royal family claimes descendecy from old testemant patriachs. So in a way the royals are the Jewish kings and the jews are the elite interbreeding knights who controll porn, movies, wealth etc all for the kings who are busy with more important issuese then money and all gentile people are the workers who are debtslaves to the chosen race of god.

Now I;m not saying that what I say is 100% truth but when you look it from a bigger perspective and line up all the information you see the combination of royals and jews is quite friendly and strong. If the rothshilds wanted they could have started a communist revolution in brittain and usher in the NWO right then and their but its not their call as it would remove the most important players: the royals.

Some people are saying follow the money. I say follow the knowledge. As the movie MATRIX RELOADED accuratly portrays: the knowledge is with the merovingians. They didn't call that character Amshel now did they?

Out of the Box
11-04-2009, 11:09 AM
MOGUL DISTORTS ROTHSCHILD DEATH; POLICE SAY AMSCHEL WAS MURDERED (http://www.beyondweird.com/conspiracy/cn08-68.html)

This shows if true that their either is great instabily in the rothshild family or that he was silenced by higher power. If you believe its not true and he indeed suiciced then there is nothing really wrong even billionaires can suicide. But if it true its either one of those two scenario's come to mind.

It wouldn't be the first time in history that some powerful person had his brother, father or cousin murdered to gain more power by himself.

Beside is Mi6 loyal to the Rotscilds? I rather believe the monarchy.

There's no difference, since the monarchy is subservient to Rothschild interests. The real power of the queen of England is minimal.

Like I said a rothschild assasinated who cares nobody as we have seen from the supposed suicided but if a royal dies... well look at Diana and the immense impact that had.

The Rothschilds learnt from experience to stay out of the spotlights and their control of the mainstream media allows them to do.

Besides if the Rotshilds run the game then why are they involved in organisations which are headed and controlled by the royals (pilgrim society, le cercle by brittish aristocracy, freemasonry).

Because they are the ones telling the royals what to do and say. Officially they have an advisory role, much like David Axelrod (Obama's main puppet master)

And besides this the marriage between jewish banking and european protestant royalty took place long before the rothshilds appeared on the scene when the venenation jewish mercintile moved their riches to amsterdam and eventually to london.

Obviously, the Rothschilds weren't the first Jews who attempted to dominated gentile society according to Jewish prophecy. There're just more succesful than anyone else before them.

Even elizabeth I (where intelilgence agencies started) first tried to get them to come to london but it failed. To imply that the rotshilds have taken over would mean that the powefull hesse, brunsick, hanoverian and orange dynasties simply stopped fighting for power.

They have, haven't they? Are there still any European dynasties or governments at war with one another?!?

This is strange since in my opinion the entire protestant reformation was largly politcal to get away from the powers of the vatican and habsurg (Grand design, rosicrucian enlightment by francis yates) and now they simply surrender to (no disrespect) a couple of rich jewboys?

I guess the rich Jewboys were better tricksters or simply learnt from the mistakes made by the Knights Templar (who thought they were powerful enough to defy the king and clergy and were eradicated as a consequence) ;)

Notice that before the arrival of the rothshilds the hessian family (which launched the rothshilds) went to great efforts to emancipate jews in masonic lodged with the Asiatic Brethern. The oranges (of hessian descend) gave jews a save haven in amsterdam and then moved them to London.

[...]

So from this perspective and the overall trends it seems to me strange to suggest that the rotshilds dominate period over everyone.

There has been a powerful Jewish elite before the Rothschilds. The Rothschilds simply surpassed their predecessors and became the spearheads of what is now known as the "New World Order" or "Illuminati". While it is not impossible there's some secrete ancient Jewish cabal who elected the Rothschild family to spearhead this movement, I found no evidence whatsoever that the Rothschilds are not the very top of the pyramid.

Besides this I also put some questionmarks to the story that the rotshilds gained their riches by fraudulant markt speculation. As researcher and former Mi6 agent John Colemen claims the wealth of the rothhilds had nothing to do with their great financial instinct it was merely 'theft by conversion' meaning that the hessian prince gave them his money to avoid accusations of fraudulant behavior with his money. Simple as that. The other stories are merely specualation and are simply not proven, in my opionion to hide the fact that the rothsilds money is simply royal money.[/quote]

First, the Rothschilds were just bankers for royals and the Vatican. In time, they became their masters.

as anthony sutton showed in his book about the skull and bones the rockerfellers where put their by the families of the skull & bones and not the other way around.

That makes sense, considering the Rockefeller dynasty is one of the few dynasties with such an amount of power that is not Jewish.

The warburgs have worked together with morgan affiliated bussinues elements to finance hitler.

Just like the oligarchy would later finance Saddam Hussain. This doesn't make either of them a pawn of the oligarchy.

And Hitler himselve was trained in england as is sister in law (I believe) talks about in her diary (you can find a tread about this on this board).

The evidence for such a claim is pretty weak. Hitler did enter the NSDAP party as a spy for the German army (he mentions this in Mein Kampf), but the way Nazi literature exposed and fought the oligarchy afterwards it makes no sense to believe Hitler was a pawn of the oligarchy.

The entire hitlertarion philosphy came from mystic sects which go beyond rotshilds in the pasts.

Hitlerian philosophy was based on a Romanticist view on ancient Germanic culture (including Germanic paganism) and a strong desire to overthrow the capitalist oligarchy and replace it by a folkish nation. Unlike commonly claimed, there are no connections to the Thule Society or Freemasonry and such organisations were all banned in Hitler Germany.

The royals worked hard to put him there in combination witht he bankers this shows that they are on the same page first and second it shows and wanted to bring the philosphy out in the world. This philosphy came from royalty and it goes back to ancient mystery religions its even becoming mainstream information as you can find detailed scientific studies about it all over the internet how renaicaince, templaris, freemasonry etc take knowledge from egypt.

Actually, Knights Templar, Rosicrucians and Freemasons oposed the arristocracy and clergy. It is only since the late 18th century that the ones you call "Illuminati" graduately gained control over Western society. The arristocracy and clergy represent the old order and the "Illuminati" replaced them.

If the rothshilds wanted they could have started a communist revolution in brittain and usher in the NWO right then and their but its not their call as it would remove the most important players: the royals.

There was no need for a communist revolution in Britain because the Rothschilds already dominated Britain before Marx was even born. Communism was just a tool to replace the arristocracy and clergy by "Illuminati" pawns where this hadn't succeeded before (eg. Tsarist Russia).

makaveli
11-04-2009, 03:20 PM
It wouldn't be the first time in history that some powerful person had his brother, father or cousin murdered to gain more power by himself.

Of course not but that would show instability within the family. If you murder your relative either everyone is on board or there is going to be tension when there is tension there is oppertunity for others to defeat you. Simply stating that the murder was done by a fellow rotshild doesn't make any sense as there is no evidence for that at all. There is no evidence that royals killed him either but that leaves the options open for speculation but you simply brush it of as a clasical family dispute. You can state that thats your opinion but unless you show some facts about the murdercase that seem to support it you can't really persuade anyone.


There's no difference, since the monarchy is subservient to Rothschild interests. The real power of the queen of England is minimal.

There is a huge difference. If they have a complete spionage system at their disposal they can easily take over everything the Rothshilds ever thouched. Its naive to say that a physicaly stronger person would take orders from another if that person has more goldpieces in his pocket. With his physical power he could take his gold and kill hem. Same goes for this situation. If the royal family has Mi6 at their disposal that its game over right there. All they have to do is lauch an spionage project against the rothshilds, figure out their strategies, locations of money supplies and intamiate family secrets and its checkmate. But somehow you find it easier to just completly ignore this and say that royals are stupid people who can't think straight and can't take over a rich banking family. I'm not neccecarily saying I know everything in full detail about Mi6 but enough to say that if their is any loyalty its towards the monarchy (in my opinion).


The Rothschilds learnt from experience to stay out of the spotlights and their control of the mainstream media allows them to do.

This doesn't make sense. When you are out of the spotlight you are assasinated and no one cares. I've mentioned this before. They can't kill a royal member that would draw to much attention as with diana. Royals are from this perspective ALWAYS in a position of adventage because they can't be blamed for anything and politicians and secret bankers can be blamed for everything and secret bankers can be killed if they draw to much attention.


Because they are the ones telling the royals what to do and say. Officially they have an advisory role, much like David Axelrod (Obama's main puppet master)

You can't prove this when it comes to the Pilgrim society and Freemasonry. Not being on the inside you can't tell and can only go by the official story unless there is indication to believe that that isn't true and I haven't found any evidence to suggest Rothshilds run freemasonry.

Obviously, the Rothschilds weren't the first Jews who attempted to dominated gentile society according to Jewish prophecy. There're just more succesful than anyone else before them.

The point of my post is taking out of context. What I was trying to say is there has been a marriage between jewish mercantiles of venice and royal nobility before the rothshilds. This only happened because the royals allowed jews to come to their places. Integration happened only because the royals heavily supported it with their secret societies.

They have, haven't they? Are there still any European dynasties or governments at war with one another?!?

I'm sorry to point it out to you but the Brusnwick/Hesse/Orange dynasty where almost always allies and pratically constantly interbreeding. What I was trying to say is that they are together in a coalition fighting for power not seperatly fighting eachother. You obviously didn't understand this cause you haven't had a clue about this now have you?! If you knew this very basic history you would know I meant this. lol :rolleyes:
You reaction know probably will be that still other royal families aren't fighting today, but thats because they pratically all descend from these germanic families if you do some genealogical research you'll see this. Germanic families have taken over all trowns of europe.

I guess the rich Jewboys were better tricksters or simply learnt from the mistakes made by the Knights Templar (who thought they were powerful enough to defy the king and clergy and were eradicated as a consequence) ;)

As you state yourselve this is just merely a guess not supported by any further information. I don't really understand also where you get your information regarding the knights templar. For your information many kings disagreed with the abolition of the templars including the kings own brother who took the trown after he died. Afterwards the order of Guarde de Ecosse was created consisting out of sons of templar families to protect the fresh kings. Sorry but what your saying isn't close to the information I have gathered on the templars.

There has been a powerful Jewish elite before the Rothschilds. The Rothschilds simply surpassed their predecessors and became the spearheads of what is now known as the "New World Order" or "Illuminati".
While it is not impossible there's some secrete ancient Jewish cabal who elected the Rothschild family to spearhead this movement, I found no evidence whatsoever that the Rothschilds are not the very top of the pyramid.

I have no insight in your research so I can't comment.

Besides this I also put some questionmarks to the story that the rotshilds gained their riches by fraudulant markt speculation. As researcher and former Mi6 agent John Colemen claims the wealth of the rothhilds had nothing to do with their great financial instinct it was merely 'theft by conversion' meaning that the hessian prince gave them his money to avoid accusations of fraudulant behavior with his money. Simple as that. The other stories are merely specualation and are simply not proven, in my opionion to hide the fact that the rothsilds money is simply royal money.

First, the Rothschilds were just bankers for royals and the Vatican. In time, they became their masters.

Lol thats quite a weak comment on my statement. I made the claim (wheter valid or not is irrelevant right now) that the rotshilds didn't had the supergreat financial skills and the origin of their money simply came from the hessian king who 'gave' it to them. This must draw atleast some suspucion to those investigating the rothschilds but you make know comment on this. I agree (with little evidence I might say) that the external elements have taken over the vatican but please provide some evidence that the royals have been taken over by the rotshilds cause you really haven't.

That makes sense, considering the Rockefeller dynasty is one of the few dynasties with such an amount of power that is not Jewish.

This doesn't make sense at all as the families I am refering to are not jewish. Its even known that morgan made antisemetic comments (perhaps as a disinformation propoganda who knows).

Just like the oligarchy would later finance Saddam Hussain. This doesn't make either of them a pawn of the oligarchy.

If they never had any chance of getting there in the first place and where completely financed isn't it reasonable to say that they where atleast meant as a pawn?????? You are not suggestiong they just hopeless investigate in everything that talks right.

The evidence for such a claim is pretty weak. Hitler did enter the NSDAP party as a spy for the German army (he mentions this in Mein Kampf), but the way Nazi literature exposed and fought the oligarchy afterwards it makes no sense to believe Hitler was a pawn of the oligarchy.

How exactly is this evidence weak? Here you cite hitlers propoganda book Mein Kampf but its apperantly not allright to make mention of hitlers pressense in england and involvement in the tavistock program (written by his sister in law) isn't allright. You have to explain why this is weak if you just say its weak how could I possibly accept such a statement? Show me why his sister was lying show me why research on this subject is disinformation and then I might be persuaded. Besides you suggest that hitler wasn't meant to be put up there as a pawn even though he was financed by warburgs, morgan and made peace with oppenheimers (giving them honary aryan status) and Henry Ford. Warburgs, morgans and oppenheimers are the once you cited as being the financial olicharcy that runs the game but you ignore these facts that hitler closely worked with them and give them special titles. Besides if you believe the financial olichargy runs everything what is your opinion on the Bank of International Settlements and Youngs and greecelyes (hitler financial man) involvement in it. Greecely (probably spelled wrong sorry) even gave young half of his ideas as writtin in his diaries.
Please show me some me the antiolicharcy propoganda hitler was spreading amongst his people if you can.

Hitlerian philosophy was based on a Romanticist view on ancient Germanic culture (including Germanic paganism) and a strong desire to overthrow the capitalist oligarchy and replace it by a folkish nation. Unlike commonly claimed, there are no connections to the Thule Society or Freemasonry and such organisations were all banned in Hitler Germany.

Huh? It's commonly claimed hitlers philosphy was based on ancient germanic culture. I've heard many contradictionary stories about masonry and nazism so I'm not going to mention it because of my lack of research. But if you are going to suggest hitler didn't draw his occult philosphy from mystic rites I straight laugh in your face. The swatstika, the expedition in tibet to find the origins of an aryan race, the believe that aryans came from atlantis, the search for the holy grail etc etc all vital elelments of his philosphy most of which can be found in the books of madam blavasky and her racial/spiritual profiling thoughts. Plus the hand sign of hitler was used in brittish circles (where he most likely go it from anyway).

Actually, Knights Templar, Rosicrucians and Freemasons oposed the arristocracy and clergy. It is only since the late 18th century that the ones you call "Illuminati" graduately gained control over Western society. The arristocracy and clergy represent the old order and the "Illuminati" replaced them.

Complety nonsense. John Dee, Maurice of Hesse, Tycho Brahe all patronised by royalty all involved in rosicrucinism (maurica himselve was royalty). Ramon Lull (medival cabbalist forerunner of rosicrucian cult) and Francesco Georgi where members of the Franciscian Order and there are many more examples. Try reading some books of Frances Yates. Freemasonry is full of aristocracy especcialy templar strict observance (which didn't start late ub the 18th centuary). I got the feeling that you honestly really have some bacis information gathered and you try to win an argument with this. Forgive me for 'reading' you but some of the things you just said are simply wrong. Again don't just make a statement please show examples etc so I can research your argumentation.

There was no need for a communist revolution in Britain because the Rothschilds already dominated Britain before Marx was even born. Communism was just a tool to replace the arristocracy and clergy by "Illuminati" pawns where this hadn't succeeded before (eg. Tsarist Russia).[/quote]

Just as there is no need to get rid of Brittains monarchy there is also no need of keeping a potentional enemy alive if you can destroy it. In their plan royalty is not going to have a place in the world right? How could it be when royalty claims they are devinely chosen and today are there merely for the sake of tradition they have some sort of a function in the NWO? So why don't get rid of them when you had the chance to do it smootly? Now its going to be a bloody mess with everybody focusing on it. If they financed not just a russion revolution but an world revolution they would be living the life of gods right now, but it didn't happen. The plan is bigger. The state of Irsrael had to be created for a certain purpose before the usering in the NWO. THe people had to be exposed to all sorts of philosophical gnostic elements before it could take place. Dynastic marriages had to be made and the technology wasn't there yet to make the big spectacle which they want.

makaveli
11-04-2009, 03:21 PM
BTW within the quote I also make comments

Out of the Box
11-04-2009, 05:56 PM
Of course not but that would show instability within the family. If you murder your relative either everyone is on board or there is going to be tension when there is tension there is oppertunity for others to defeat you. Simply stating that the murder was done by a fellow rotshild doesn't make any sense as there is no evidence for that at all. There is no evidence that royals killed him either but that leaves the options open for speculation but you simply brush it of as a clasical family dispute. You can state that thats your opinion but unless you show some facts about the murdercase that seem to support it you can't really persuade anyone.

So basically, this was a pointless issue to begin with.

There is a huge difference. If they have a complete spionage system at their disposal they can easily take over everything the Rothshilds ever thouched.

The Rothschilds already had their own system of messengers and spies long before MI6 was founded. In fact, this is the very reason their 1815 scam actually worked.

This doesn't make sense. When you are out of the spotlight you are assasinated and no one cares.

That's precisely the point. When no one cares, they can do pretty much everything they want behind the scenes. When the whole world is watching you, that's quite a bit more difficult.

You can't prove this when it comes to the Pilgrim society and Freemasonry.

Can you prove that the Rothschilds AREN'T in control of these particular organisations? I agree there may not be sufficient evidence for these particular organisations, but it's pretty obvious the run Western society as a whole.

What I was trying to say is there has been a marriage between jewish mercantiles of venice and royal nobility before the rothshilds. This only happened because the royals allowed jews to come to their places. Integration happened only because the royals heavily supported it with their secret societies.

Integration happened because powerful Jews wanted an arristocratic title and the arristocracy was in a desperate need for money. Jewish bankers could provide the money and the arristocracy could provide the title. This could happen only because the arristocracy had become decadent and didn't realise the Jewish bankers were stealing their power and fortune right from underneath them.

I'm sorry to point it out to you but the Brusnwick/Hesse/Orange dynasty where almost always allies and pratically constantly interbreeding. What I was trying to say is that they are together in a coalition fighting for power not seperatly fighting eachother.

I know. I just don't see where you're getting at.

You reaction know probably will be that still other royal families aren't fighting today, but thats because they pratically all descend from these germanic families if you do some genealogical research you'll see this. Germanic families have taken over all trowns of europe.

Some suggest the Brusnwick/Hesse/Orange dynasty is actually Jewish of origin, however I'm not sure about the evidence for that. Still, I don't see how that makes a difference since royals today have little power both legally and behind the scenes.

As you state yourselve this is just merely a guess not supported by any further information. I don't really understand also where you get your information regarding the knights templar. For your information many kings disagreed with the abolition of the templars including the kings own brother who took the trown after he died. Afterwards the order of Guarde de Ecosse was created consisting out of sons of templar families to protect the fresh kings. Sorry but what your saying isn't close to the information I have gathered on the templars.

The mainstream view is that Templars were eradicated because they had become too powerful and thereby were a threat to both the French king and the Vatican. According to masonic history, some of the remaining Knights Templar fled to Scotland and infiltrated in movements that would develop into Freemasonry. Freemasons have been behind for the French Revolution and the American Revolution which together lead to the collapse of monarchism as a political power.

As researcher and former Mi6 agent John Colemen claims the wealth of the rothhilds had nothing to do with their great financial instinct it was merely 'theft by conversion' meaning that the hessian prince gave them his money to avoid accusations of fraudulant behavior with his money. Simple as that.

Mayer Amschel Rothschild started the infamous dynasty by becoming the banker of Crown Prince Wilhelm of Hesse during the late 18th century, but it wasn't until the 1815 scam (that is definitely not a fabrication) that the British branch of the Rothschild gained the kind of power it has today.

First, the Rothschilds were just bankers for royals and the Vatican. In time, they became their masters.

I agree (with little evidence I might say) that the external elements have taken over the vatican but please provide some evidence that the royals have been taken over by the rotshilds cause you really haven't.

So what is the relationship between the Rothschild and the royals in your opinion and on what do you base this?

If they never had any chance of getting there in the first place and where completely financed isn't it reasonable to say that they where atleast meant as a pawn??????

???

How exactly is this evidence weak? Here you cite hitlers propoganda book Mein Kampf but its apperantly not allright to make mention of hitlers pressense in england and involvement in the tavistock program (written by his sister in law) isn't allright.

Where's the evidence of Hitler's presence in England and his involvement in the Tavistock program? I've looked for it in the past but could never find any.

Also, why would Nazi authors make such an effort to expose the "Illuminati" and their agenda if they were really a part of it? Even Alex Jones doesn't go nearly as far as Nazi authors like Giselher Wirsing or Anton Zischka.

Show me why his sister was lying show me why research on this subject is disinformation and then I might be persuaded.

As I said, I've looked for evidence in the past but could never find any. Feel free to provide me some sources I might have missed.

Besides you suggest that hitler wasn't meant to be put up there as a pawn even though he was financed by warburgs, morgan and made peace with oppenheimers (giving them honary aryan status) and Henry Ford.

Henry Ford was a supporter of Hitler who oposed the "Illuminati" just as much. Just because he happened to be rich, that doesn't make him part of the "Illuminati".

you ignore these facts that hitler closely worked with them and give them special titles.

He needed them for the time being, until he had the chance to do without them.

Besides if you believe the financial olichargy runs everything what is your opinion on the Bank of International Settlements and Youngs and greecelyes (hitler financial man) involvement in it. Greecely (probably spelled wrong sorry) even gave young half of his ideas as writtin in his diaries.

I'm not familiar with the Bank of International Settlements and Youngs and greecelyes (?). Source?

Please show me some me the antiolicharcy propoganda hitler was spreading amongst his people if you can.

My favorite Nazi authors on this topic are Giselher Wirsing and Anton Zischka. I own some of their publications, but I don't know if they were ever published in English.

Huh? It's commonly claimed hitlers philosphy was based on ancient germanic culture.

As I said, Hitlerian philosophy was based on a Romanticist view on ancient Germanic culture (including Germanic paganism).

But if you are going to suggest hitler didn't draw his occult philosphy from mystic rites I straight laugh in your face.

Himmler and his SS were quite a bit into Germanic occuly rituals, but Hitler was not interested in that sort of thing. In Mein Kampf, he supported the separation of state and church and showed no interest in the occult whatsoever.

The swatstika, the expedition in tibet to find the origins of an aryan race, the believe that aryans came from atlantis, the search for the holy grail etc etc

That was just the SS, most specificly the SS Ahnenerbe.

all vital elelments of his philosphy most of which can be found in the books of madam blavasky and her racial/spiritual profiling thoughts.

Blavatsky's views have little in common with Hitler's. Blavatsky did write on race but her views are very different from Hitler's.

Plus the hand sign of hitler was used in brittish circles (where he most likely go it from anyway).

The "Hitler greeting" arm sign was copied from Italian fascists who in turn copied it from the Romans.

Complety nonsense. John Dee, Maurice of Hesse, Tycho Brahe all patronised by royalty all involved in rosicrucinism (maurica himselve was royalty). Ramon Lull (medival cabbalist forerunner of rosicrucian cult) and Francesco Georgi where members of the Franciscian Order and there are many more examples. Try reading some books of Frances Yates. Freemasonry is full of aristocracy especcialy templar strict observance (which didn't start late ub the 18th centuary).

It is true that some Arristocrats joined their enemy to be able to keep or increase their status. This includes the British monarchy.

I got the feeling that you honestly really have some bacis information gathered and you try to win an argument with this. Forgive me for 'reading' you but some of the things you just said are simply wrong. Again don't just make a statement please show examples etc so I can research your argumentation.

I try to be as complete as possible, but I can't provide a source refence for every statement I make. That would be just too time-consuming.

Just as there is no need to get rid of Brittains monarchy there is also no need of keeping a potentional enemy alive if you can destroy it.

What potential enemy? Why would the British monarchy risk giving up everything they have in an attempt to overthrow a far more powerful adversary?

How could it be when royalty claims they are devinely chosen and today are there merely for the sake of tradition they have some sort of a function in the NWO?

The removed the monarchy in some countries (like France or Germany) while they kept it in others. It really depends on the local culture and the obedience of these monarchs.

If they financed not just a russion revolution but an world revolution they would be living the life of gods right now, but it didn't happen.

They ARE living the life of gods.

The state of Irsrael had to be created for a certain purpose before the usering in the NWO. THe people had to be exposed to all sorts of philosophical gnostic elements before it could take place. Dynastic marriages had to be made and the technology wasn't there yet to make the big spectacle which they want.

???

makaveli
11-15-2009, 03:45 PM
So basically, this was a pointless issue to begin with.

I don't believe it is a pointless issue to begin with. It shows that A rothschild was killed. This means it has been done by a higher person, or a person longing for his power or etc and they succeeded. There is no evidence who that could be so then it could be anyone within illuminati related circles which includes vatican and royals. It is an indication that even rotschilds aren't untouchables perhaps.


The Rothschilds already had their own system of messengers and spies long before MI6 was founded. In fact, this is the very reason their 1815 scam actually worked.

Yes I know Mi6 came in 20th centurary but the brittish inteligence itselve predates rotshilds by a full centuary ( think even two). So did the jesuits. So if they detect a rising power on their radar either you take it out before it establishes itselve (machiaveli style) or you get in on your side. Since the Rotschilds where launched by the hessian prince who descends from brittish BTW, since a Rotschild member (forgot which one) was member of a lodge of the asiatic brethern (grandmaster was Karl Von Hesse) and his librarian (if I still remember correctly) stated that the Asiatic Brethern where a spin-off of the Bavarian Illuminati and since the Bavarian Illuminati could only succeed to key member of the Brunswick/Orange/Hesse line (philip egalité, Duke Ferdinand etc) and since the Illuminati made life miserable for the Brittish, Prussian biggest enemy FRANCE, I'd say they entire financial conpsiraracy was conceived by royalty and excecuted by orders, societies and jews. They where well within the royal circles from they first day, they thing I still like evidence of is them taking over the royals.

That's precisely the point. When no one cares, they can do pretty much everything they want behind the scenes. When the whole world is watching you, that's quite a bit more difficult.

No you don't understand or don't want to understand what I'm trying to say to you for a while know. First: if you are out the spotlight then indeed you can move more easy. You are absolutly right about that. But the royal family are rarely in the spotlights. Like a commenter on the brittish royalty said: "Be honest, no one really knows what goes on beyond the palace walls". They only show their faces once in a while. But if you are completly outside the spotlight you can be assasinated better. If a rothschild gets out of line they can check him with a bullet in the head no problem. On the other hand: if they need to check a royal how are they planning on just doing that? Treatning them? If one says no kill him? And if the rest says no kill them all? Star a revolution is the only option. And the only revolutions that have happened (with significance) are those that are outside the borders of Brunswick/Orange/Hesse terretorium. You see you can't just ignore that when a aspect of an interbreeding network of protestant royals launches a jewish family and that family supposedly takes over he most notably removes the enemy royals outside the network of interbreeding protestant royals.

Can you prove that the Rothschilds AREN'T in control of these particular organisations? I agree there may not be sufficient evidence for these particular organisations, but it's pretty obvious the run Western society as a whole.

I can't prove that not being one the inside. It's indeed obvious the Pilgrim Society, The 1001club, Le Cercle, Skull & Bones, Bilgerberg Group, Trilateral, CFR, Club of Rome etc etc are all machinations set up to run the world. While in most cases rotschilds are overwelmingly present, in some they appear to be irrelevant like SKull & Bones. I know of only one official freemason I guess probably some others but this organisation is firmly int he hands of the Brittish I believe. This is because of the changes Frederick the Great made to the structure of masonry. I believe it was an brittish ambassador in France wo wrote that Frederick had thereby acuired controll of all freemasonry in Europe. This is before the Rotschilds appeared ont he scene and I don't think this controll ever shifted outside the royal lines. So while there are definitly lots of elements out their that are linked to the Rotschilds, especcialy older elements of this conspiracy are prerotschild and the only think that still can connect them are the royals.

Integration happened because powerful Jews wanted an arristocratic title and the arristocracy was in a desperate need for money. Jewish bankers could provide the money and the arristocracy could provide the title. This could happen only because the arristocracy had become decadent and didn't realise the Jewish bankers were stealing their power and fortune right from underneath them.

I agree to a certain extent but I need further information on location and tiems an persons in reference.

I know. I just don't see where you're getting at.

Well I said it was strange to suggest that this bloodline stopped fighting for power. You said "well royals aren't fighting for power amongst each other for power now rite?" But this doesn't make sense since they all are part of the same family as the german Brunswick/hesse/orange lineage took over all of Europe praticicaly. The spannish king to the duke of luxembourg to the swedig royalty. All are comming fom the same german families.

Some suggest the Brusnwick/Hesse/Orange dynasty is actually Jewish of origin, however I'm not sure about the evidence for that. Still, I don't see how that makes a difference since royals today have little power both legally and behind the scenes.

You are never going to find evidence for that first there needs to be evidence that the biblical patriachs even excist how else can this be verified? How do they don't have any controll behind the scenes?

Pilgrim Society, The 1001club, Le Cercle, Skull & Bones, Bilgerberg Group, Trilateral, CFR, Club of Rome

Out of all these groups mentioned the royals are patrons or have founded the Pilgrim Society, 1001, Cercle (habsburg in this case) Bilderberg

The club of Rome is heavily connected with the Royal Institute for International Affairs who is also responsible for the infamous tavistock. Patroned by the Queen

This means that alteast they have the potentional of influencing pratically all of the Illuminati! How can you then say they have no power at all beyond the scene? On what is this statement base if I may ask because I don't understand it.


The mainstream view is that Templars were eradicated because they had become too powerful and thereby were a threat to both the French king and the Vatican. According to masonic history, some of the remaining Knights Templar fled to Scotland and infiltrated in movements that would develop into Freemasonry. Freemasons have been behind for the French Revolution and the American Revolution which together lead to the collapse of monarchism as a political power.

Oww I see now where you are getting it. Your argument is that freemasonry must be oppisite side because they casue revolutions against kings? Well I agree with the French Revolution. But the French king was not part of the 'network of interbeeding royals' that I am talking about. If anything he was their diehard enemy. The american revolution I unfortinaly can't talk about since I still need to do some research. I know already there have been great masonic influence but I need to research particarly if this was jacobite freemasonry, infiltrated etc. It's quite important and I don't know the fact so I'm not going to discuss but what do you have to say on the frensh templars protecting the frech king after their downfall. That shows atleast they still worked with royals. Plus the acknowledged heads according to Duke Brunswick where the Stuarts but they stopped caring appearently so Frederick II moved in.

Mayer Amschel Rothschild started the infamous dynasty by becoming the banker of Crown Prince Wilhelm of Hesse during the late 18th century, but it wasn't until the 1815 scam (that is definitely not a fabrication) that the British branch of the Rothschild gained the kind of power it has today.

I understand that thiswas definitly not a fabrication bu I'm saying all the earlier talk about him being such a genius stealing money this is just to discredit the rotschilds by anti-rotschild activists since I couldn't find evidence for that. So instead up untill then they where still under royal controll for sure. Plus I once read I think on wikipedia about accusation directed at on of the hanover kings that he knew of a crisis in the making forgot about it are your familiair with this?

First, the Rothschilds were just bankers for royals and the Vatican. In time, they became their masters.

Yeay this just isn't enough for me.

So what is the relationship between the Rothschild and the royals in your opinion and on what do you base this?

Well I personally would say that always the royals are on top, then the jewish backers/descendends of royals and nobility that are today jewish anyway. BUT isntead of a tied dictorial rule, its more like an alligience like a coallition.

I can't really go out and explain it I would have to right a book on this subject lol!!

???



Where's the evidence of Hitler's presence in England and his involvement in the Tavistock program? I've looked for it in the past but could never find any.

Do'n't know are you saying it isn't there? (I gather facts alot an can only partially check the sources and I'm doing this all on top of my head so please state clear if you say that such a book by his sister in law never existed)

Also, why would Nazi authors make such an effort to expose the "Illuminati" and their agenda if they were really a part of it? Even Alex Jones doesn't go nearly as far as Nazi authors like Giselher Wirsing or Anton Zischka.

NIce find I'm going to look it up but even if this was truth then still the entire thing was financed by the west. THey might have become hostile over the course of years but they surely didn't start has enemies.

As I said, I've looked for evidence in the past but could never find any. Feel free to provide me some sources I might have missed.

Wat for the financing of hitler? That I;m not going to present thats all over the web. For hitler being in england? I need to research that for my selve so if I come along the evidences that are typically cited I tell you.

Henry Ford was a supporter of Hitler who oposed the "Illuminati" just as much. Just because he happened to be rich, that doesn't make him part of the "Illuminati".


Read this he's quite a mystery but certainly not all out against illuminati
Henry Ford is often seen to be something of an enigma among the Wall Street elite. For many years in the 20s and 30s Ford was popularly known as an enemy of the financial establishment. Ford accused Morgan and others of using war and revolution as a road to profit and their influence in social systems as a means of personal advancement. By 1938 Henry Ford, in his public statements, had divided financiers into two classes: those who profited from war and used their influence to bring about war for profit, and the "constructive" financiers. Among the latter group he now included the House of Morgan. During a 1938 New York Times interview1 (http://www.reformation.org/wall-st-ch6.html#1) Ford averred that:
Somebody once said that sixty families have directed the destinies of the nation. It might well be said that if somebody would focus the spotlight on twenty-five persons who handle the nation's finances, the world's real war makers would be brought into bold relief.
The Times reporter asked Ford how he equated this assessment with his long-standing criticism of the House of Morgan, to which Ford replied:
There is a constructive and a destructive Wall Street. The House of Morgan represents the constructive. I have known Mr. Morgan for many years. He backed and supported Thomas Edison, who was also my good friend ....

Both he, Morgan, Rockerfeller and Wharburgs where extremely important his Hitlers financing. Especcialy Morgan.




He needed them for the time being, until he had the chance to do without them.



I'm not familiar with the Bank of International Settlements and Youngs and greecelyes (?). Source?

Out of Greecelys own diary if I'm correct. Bankingrelationships continued trough the course of the war and everybody was cool with eachother.

My favorite Nazi authors on this topic are Giselher Wirsing and Anton Zischka. I own some of their publications, but I don't know if they were ever published in English.

OK I'm going to look this up. Whats your view of the Rudolph Hesse thing then? Was Hitler out of controll? Not following the plan anymore? Rudolph tried to do something?

As I said, Hitlerian philosophy was based on a Romanticist view on ancient Germanic culture (including Germanic paganism).

Himmler and his SS were quite a bit into Germanic occuly rituals, but Hitler was not interested in that sort of thing. In Mein Kampf, he supported the separation of state and church and showed no interest in the occult whatsoever.

So are you saying that hitler totaly didn't share these ideas at all? Damn long time ago my head was in the WW2 need to go back to refresh some shit.

Blavatsky's views have little in common with Hitler's. Blavatsky did write on race but her views are very different from Hitler's.

How are their vieews different? Blavasty thoutgh of the superaryan race.

The "Hitler greeting" arm sign was copied from Italian fascists who in turn copied it from the Romans.

I should write down my sources I believe I found it to be also being in use in brittain amongst certain circles.

It is true that some Arristocrats joined their enemy to be able to keep or increase their status. This includes the British monarchy.

I try to be as complete as possible, but I can't provide a source refence for every statement I make. That would be just too time-consuming.

Yeah I know

What potential enemy? Why would the British monarchy risk giving up everything they have in an attempt to overthrow a far more powerful adversary?



The removed the monarchy in some countries (like France or Germany) while they kept it in others. It really depends on the local culture and the obedience of these monarchs.



They ARE living the life of gods.

I doubt it. Running the worl is a lot of responsiblitiy. Even if you are sucking them dry its still a full time job I think with little to no rest.

???[/quote]

Out of the Box
11-16-2009, 05:15 AM
I don't believe it is a pointless issue to begin with. It shows that A rothschild was killed. This means it has been done by a higher person, or a person longing for his power or etc and they succeeded. There is no evidence who that could be so then it could be anyone within illuminati related circles which includes vatican and royals. It is an indication that even rotschilds aren't untouchables perhaps.

Unless he was killed by someone within the same family or it was suicide. That's why I'm saying this reference is pointless.

Yes I know Mi6 came in 20th centurary but the brittish inteligence itselve predates rotshilds by a full centuary ( think even two). So did the jesuits.

The Jesuits have become irrelevant during the last 2 centuries.

So if they detect a rising power on their radar either you take it out before it establishes itselve (machiaveli style) or you get in on your side.

Or you fail to respond in time and the rising power gains control over your own organisation, which is precisely what happened...

I'd say they entire financial conpsiraracy was conceived by royalty and excecuted by orders, societies and jews.

It was conceived by Talmudic Jews, using "secret societies" and other elitist organisations as tools. Kings and clerics were simply useful idiots to these people. In their arrogance, they thought they were so powerful no one could ever challenge them besides other kings and clerics, which is why the Talmudic Jews could overthrow them so easily.

I still like evidence of is them taking over the royals.

The French revolution and Russian revolution served the very purpose of eliminating the power of the arristocracy and clergy and replace them by a Jewish bourgeois elite. If the Talmudic Jews served the interests of royalty, the French and Russian revolution would never have taken place.

First: if you are out the spotlight then indeed you can move more easy. You are absolutly right about that. But the royal family are rarely in the spotlights.

Quite the contrary. Paperazzi follow every move of theirs, while they totally ignore the elite banking dynasties.

But if you are completly outside the spotlight you can be assasinated better.

To the oligarchy, it makes no difference whether you're in or out of the spotlight when you're due for assassination. Think of JFK, Bobby Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, George Lincoln Rockwell, John Lennon and other famous political figures assassinated during the '60s. Think of princess Diana and her mysterious death in a French tunnel.

Star a revolution is the only option. And the only revolutions that have happened (with significance) are those that are outside the borders of Brunswick/Orange/Hesse terretorium.

What about the French revolution and the Russian revolution? I can't say I'm sure about the French monarchs, but the Russian monarchs definitely had direct blood lines with Belgian, English and other European royal houses.

You see you can't just ignore that when a aspect of an interbreeding network of protestant royals launches a jewish family and that family supposedly takes over he most notably removes the enemy royals outside the network of interbreeding protestant royals.

The Russian-Orthodox royals in Russia, the Roman-Catholic royals in Spain and the Roman-Catholic royals in Belgium and other non-protestant royals also interbred with the protestant royals you're referring to. Royal interbreeding goes beyond religious affiliations and this is a very weak link in your hypothesis.

While in most cases rotschilds are overwelmingly present, in some they appear to be irrelevant like SKull & Bones.

That's because organisations like Skull & Bones aren't as high-level as those where Rothschilds are overwelmingly present. Skull & Bones is nothing but a breeding ground for mid-level puppets like Bush or Kerry.

I know of only one official freemason I guess probably some others but this organisation is firmly int he hands of the Brittish I believe. This is because of the changes Frederick the Great made to the structure of masonry. I believe it was an brittish ambassador in France wo wrote that Frederick had thereby acuired controll of all freemasonry in Europe. This is before the Rotschilds appeared ont he scene and I don't think this controll ever shifted outside the royal lines.

The masonic link is quite complex as there are many different lodges that operate independently from one another and that have principles that differ between one another.

older elements of this conspiracy are prerotschild and the only think that still can connect them are the royals.

Wrong. The pre-Rothschild connections are a Rosicrucian/Templar connection and a Jewish connection. Royals represent the old order that was challenged and eventually defeated by these newcomers.

You said "well royals aren't fighting for power amongst each other for power now rite?" But this doesn't make sense since they all are part of the same family as the german Brunswick/hesse/orange lineage took over all of Europe praticicaly. The spannish king to the duke of luxembourg to the swedig royalty. All are comming fom the same german families.

That's because marriages have traditionally been used among powerful families to forge alliances. The Jewish bankers do the same thing : they also intermarry with one another (eg. the Warburgs with the Rothschilds)/

Some suggest the Brusnwick/Hesse/Orange dynasty is actually Jewish of origin, however I'm not sure about the evidence for that.

I've read those claims as well, but it's irrelevant anyway since royals today have only very little real power.

You are never going to find evidence for that first there needs to be evidence that the biblical patriachs even excist how else can this be verified? How do they don't have any controll behind the scenes?

Pilgrim Society, The 1001club, Le Cercle, Skull & Bones, Bilgerberg Group, Trilateral, CFR, Club of Rome

Out of all these groups mentioned the royals are patrons or have founded the Pilgrim Society, 1001, Cercle (habsburg in this case) Bilderberg

The club of Rome is heavily connected with the Royal Institute for International Affairs who is also responsible for the infamous tavistock. Patroned by the Queen

Just because they're patrons, that doesn't mean they have a more than marginal voice in those organisations.

Oww I see now where you are getting it. Your argument is that freemasonry must be oppisite side because they casue revolutions against kings? Well I agree with the French Revolution. But the French king was not part of the 'network of interbeeding royals' that I am talking about.

What about the Russian revolution, then? The Czar's wife was even a direct descendant of the Hesse bloodline (Alix of Hesse (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Alix_of_Hesse_and_by_Rhine)).

I understand that thiswas definitly not a fabrication bu I'm saying all the earlier talk about him being such a genius stealing money this is just to discredit the rotschilds by anti-rotschild activists since I couldn't find evidence for that.

I don't think genius had anything to do with it. IMO, it was a combination of luck and a lack of scrupules.

Plus I once read I think on wikipedia about accusation directed at on of the hanover kings that he knew of a crisis in the making forgot about it are your familiair with this?

Nope.

So what is the relationship between the Rothschild and the royals in your opinion and on what do you base this?

The Rothschilds and other "court Jews" started out as bankers and advisors of the royals, but in time this gave them so much power the royals had to choose between either becoming their puppets or being eradicated by revolutionary forces (like in France and Russia).

I base this claim on the following two facts :

the decline of the arristocracy and clergy and their replacement by the bourgeois from the French revolution onwards.
the decline of traditional European values and replacement by anti-European Talmudic values from the French revolution onwards. If royals were truely in charge, you would expect a continuation of arristocratic power and you would certainly not expect a replacement of traditional European values by anti-European Talmudic values.

Where's the evidence of Hitler's presence in England and his involvement in the Tavistock program? I've looked for it in the past but could never find any.

Do'n't know are you saying it isn't there? (I gather facts alot an can only partially check the sources and I'm doing this all on top of my head so please state clear if you say that such a book by his sister in law never existed)

I don't know if there is such a book, but I've never found any traces of it nor of any other evidence that Hitler was involved with Tavistock or British intelligence in general. I do know, however, that Hitler orriginally joined the NSDAP party as a spy for the German army, but he never kept this a secret as he mentioned it in Mein Kampf.

Also, why would Nazi authors make such an effort to expose the "Illuminati" and their agenda if they were really a part of it? Even Alex Jones doesn't go nearly as far as Nazi authors like Giselher Wirsing or Anton Zischka.

NIce find I'm going to look it up but even if this was truth then still the entire thing was financed by the west. THey might have become hostile over the course of years but they surely didn't start has enemies.

Adolf Hitler may have had "Illuminati" sponsoring him in the beginning, just like the "Illuminati" sponsored Saddam Hussain for some time. That doesn't make Hitler their puppet any more than Saddam was their puppet.

Also, I'd like to point out that not all industrialists are/were "Illuminati" puppets. For example, Henry Ford was a self-made millionaire who actually supported the interests of the American people and supported Hitler out of personal ideology.

Wat for the financing of hitler? That I;m not going to present thats all over the web.

I already explained why financial support of Hitler by some powerful industrialists doesn't prove anything.

Read this he's quite a mystery but certainly not all out against illuminati
Henry Ford is often seen to be something of an enigma among the Wall Street elite. For many years in the 20s and 30s Ford was popularly known as an enemy of the financial establishment. Ford accused Morgan and others of using war and revolution as a road to profit and their influence in social systems as a means of personal advancement. By 1938 Henry Ford, in his public statements, had divided financiers into two classes: those who profited from war and used their influence to bring about war for profit, and the "constructive" financiers. Among the latter group he now included the House of Morgan. During a 1938 New York Times interview1 (http://www.reformation.org/wall-st-ch6.html#1) Ford averred that:Somebody once said that sixty families have directed the destinies of the nation. It might well be said that if somebody would focus the spotlight on twenty-five persons who handle the nation's finances, the world's real war makers would be brought into bold relief.
The Times reporter asked Ford how he equated this assessment with his long-standing criticism of the House of Morgan, to which Ford replied:There is a constructive and a destructive Wall Street. The House of Morgan represents the constructive. I have known Mr. Morgan for many years. He backed and supported Thomas Edison, who was also my good friend ....
Both he, Morgan, Rockerfeller and Wharburgs where extremely important his Hitlers financing. Especcialy Morgan.

I bet Morgan started out as what Ford calls a "constructive financeer" but ended up a "destructive financeer" as he came to realise the "destructive financeers" would destroy his empire if he didn't join them... much like the royals did.

OK I'm going to look this up. Whats your view of the Rudolph Hesse thing then? Was Hitler out of controll? Not following the plan anymore? Rudolph tried to do something?

In his naivity, Rudolf Hess believed he could arrange peace with Britain behind the backs of the British warmongers and flew to Britain only to be betrayed by his contacts and serve a life sentence in jail for his heroism.

So are you saying that hitler totaly didn't share these ideas at all? Damn long time ago my head was in the WW2 need to go back to refresh some shit.

Hitler shared with Himmler a love for traditional Germanic culture, but unlike Himmler Hitler wasn't really interested in all this esoteric occult stuff.

How are their vieews different? Blavasty thoutgh of the superaryan race.

Back in the 19th century, pretty much every educated white person believed in the superiority of white people over other people. This was considered self-evident by a comparison of Western culture with other cultures.

I should write down my sources I believe I found it to be also being in use in brittain amongst certain circles.

By fascists perhaps?!?

I doubt it. Running the worl is a lot of responsiblitiy. Even if you are sucking them dry its still a full time job I think with little to no rest.

The more power you have, the more you can delegate to others ;)

makaveli
11-16-2009, 09:28 AM
Unless he was killed by someone within the same family or it was suicide. That's why I'm saying this reference is pointless.

But this is just werid you are saying he could only be killed by his own family or committed suicide but could not be from anyone outside. This suggests you look at the murder with prejudgement. I used the murder as a way of opening a possibily that he might have been murdered from outside.

The Jesuits have become irrelevant during the last 2 centuries.

Yes but not at the time of the rise of rotschilds and they could have foreseen this and acted against.

Or you fail to respond in time and the rising power gains control over your own organisation, which is precisely what happened...

Then show me evidence of this instead of narrating a story.

It was conceived by Talmudic Jews, using "secret societies" and other elitist organisations as tools. Kings and clerics were simply useful idiots to these people. In their arrogance, they thought they were so powerful no one could ever challenge them besides other kings and clerics, which is why the Talmudic Jews could overthrow them so easily.

Useful idiots? Which king or queen in your opinion was a usefull idiot? Frederick the Great? Queen Elizabeth? WHo exactly is it you are accussing of being a puppet. You know you can't name the few mentioned cause it was Frederick the Great who reshaped the entire freemsonary making himselve head of it and used jews for dirty jobs (and if they had serverd their purpose I wouldn't be suprised he killed them). So how exactly was Frederick controlled by Jews? Tell me that. You are just saying this things but you gotta name some people and point some events that have happened that show this to be the case.

The French revolution and Russian revolution served the very purpose of eliminating the power of the arristocracy and clergy and replace them by a Jewish bourgeois elite. If the Talmudic Jews served the interests of royalty, the French and Russian revolution would never have taken place.

But you can also look the other way around: french monarch and russion monarchs where enemies to the royal bloodlines of Hesse/Brunswick. So there are two ways to look at it but you simply don't do that. The only way the Russian household as far as I am aware is connected in trough the link of Hesse wich initselve isn't a strong one.

Quite the contrary. Paperazzi follow every move of theirs, while they totally ignore the elite banking dynasties.

Paperazzi follow every move??? lol OK rite whatever......
Obviously you don't know that much about the current royal house and just go by the media.

To the oligarchy, it makes no difference whether you're in or out of the spotlight when you're due for assassination. Think of JFK, Bobby Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, George Lincoln Rockwell, John Lennon and other famous political figures assassinated during the '60s. Think of princess Diana and her mysterious death in a French tunnel.

Princess Diania never died in my opinion its just one big charade. The man you mention are just one man standing team. The royals are a whole family how to assasinate them all? Need a revolution. That hasn't happened in the the coutries where royals reign who lauchned rotschilds.

What about the French revolution and the Russian revolution? I can't say I'm sure about the French monarchs, but the Russian monarchs definitely had direct blood lines with Belgian, English and other European royal houses.

So did the french. All royals have intermarries but not on the scale of the brunshwick/hesse/orange they have praticaly become one huge family with some outside marriages to other monarchs such as the french or russian.

The Russian-Orthodox royals in Russia, the Roman-Catholic royals in Spain and the Roman-Catholic royals in Belgium and other non-protestant royals also interbred with the protestant royals you're referring to. Royal interbreeding goes beyond religious affiliations and this is a very weak link in your hypothesis.

No it isn't lol I've traced the entire geneological chart if there is interbreeding its only from time to time but never on grand scale nees to nees to uncle to sister etc like witht he brusnwick and they are all in the right places where the baviaria illuminati has been. One, two or even tree marriages doesn't matter over an course of time. Before the protestant reformation I say seven intermarriages between brunwick and hesse over 8 generations. And they where the official ones I could research on wikipedia, the others beyond it also must be numerous. Besides you don't even know what all the evidences are that support my hypotheses.

The religion itselve doesn't matter cause they aren't of christian religion its just the side they are one: the old chatholic system or the new system that will be the NWO. Sometimes people can still be married out of the sides for maintaince of peace as happened all over history but this doesm't mean anything.

That's because organisations like Skull & Bones aren't as high-level as those where Rothschilds are overwelmingly present. Skull & Bones is nothing but a breeding ground for mid-level puppets like Bush or Kerry.

But you just agreed in the other post that skull & bones are above rockerfellers you said would figgur cause rockerfellers arent jewish! So they praticaly run the USA for someone. Not Rotschilds.

Wrong. The pre-Rothschild connections are a Rosicrucian/Templar connection and a Jewish connection. Royals represent the old order that was challenged and eventually defeated by these newcomers.

Uh lol please so me your sources I this cause I don't think they excist. As I've shown Templars protected the Frensh King in de Guarde de Ecosse. What do you have to say to that. It was universially considered that Stuarts where patrons of templarism hence DukeFerdinand first mentioned the watered down input of the Stuarts in templarism as an excuse to become grand master. What do you have to say to that? James I after a meeting with Tycho Brahe and his Hessian allie prince created his order of a certain number of knights in resemblence of the kabbala and it is considered that this was the take-off of jacobite rosicrucianim. Again royals involved. John Dee as fanatic with Elizabeth. For god sake the entire house of Hesse was a manifestation of Rosicrucianism as Frances Yates points out. Where the hell do you get this information that they where enemies? The prerosicruciantemplarjewish power was never with the royals but with the pope. This was their means of getting it back.

That's because marriages have traditionally been used among powerful families to forge alliances. The Jewish bankers do the same thing : they also intermarry with one another (eg. the Warburgs with the Rothschilds)/

Lol you are not even seriously looking at the houses are you just inserting an counterargument. To look at the trend of intermarrieng you'll see that the german royals praticaly have taken over everything the last centuaries where else these so called allience marrigages would only occasianally take in a take over once in the how many years.

I've read those claims as well, but it's irrelevant anyway since royals today have only very little real power.

I start to get the feeling you don't present arguments you present dogmas

Just because they're patrons, that doesn't mean they have a more than marginal voice in those organisations.

But this is just against your own argument. You say that the rothschilds run these groups secretly and I don't know because I'm not in them this is not rite. I said this puts them in an incredible sphere of influence which could possibly be used. Not being on the inside we can't say and you can't say either. So to suggest there isn't even a chance they have big influence is aburd. Plus they even founded the very orginsations. It was a grandfather of Diana I believe who came up with the name Pilgrim. It was Bernard who lead the Bilderbergers. It has been Prince Phillip with his 1001 club.
Plus the fact that it is known they queen and the ministers meet alteast weekly and charles sends them letters constantly on how to do their bussinues and tries to influence them every time around. THis is even common fact and shown on brittish telivion on several documentaries. Afterwards they tried to get a better image with a public relation company.

What about the Russian revolution, then? The Czar's wife was even a direct descendant of the Hesse bloodline (Alix of Hesse (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Alix_of_Hesse_and_by_Rhine)).

Yeas of course I know about this but I don't consider this particilair line very influential in the Russian court.

I don't think genius had anything to do with it. IMO, it was a combination of luck and a lack of scrupules.



Nope.

Well I know its outthere cause I've read it somewhere and when I find it I'll post it here.

The Rothschilds and other "court Jews" started out as bankers and advisors of the royals, but in time this gave them so much power the royals had to choose between either becoming their puppets or being eradicated by revolutionary forces (like in France and Russia).


I base this claim on the following two facts :
the decline of the arristocracy and clergy and their replacement by the bourgeois from the French revolution onwards.
the decline of traditional European values and replacement by anti-European Talmudic values from the French revolution onwards.If royals were truely in charge, you would expect a continuation of arristocratic power and you would certainly not expect a replacement of traditional European values by anti-European Talmudic values.

I still see strong aristrocratic pressence appearantly you never read anything of Carroll Quigley or studied the Pilgrim Society. Besides this is all the reason you have for saying the royals are out of power? Besides you do know that since these royals claim jewish heritage its not suprising to see jews coming back to power and talmudic values. Besides what values are we actually talking about here?

I don't know if there is such a book, but I've never found any traces of it nor of any other evidence that Hitler was involved with Tavistock or British intelligence in general. I do know, however, that Hitler orriginally joined the NSDAP party as a spy for the German army, but he never kept this a secret as he mentioned it in Mein Kampf.
Adolf Hitler may have had "Illuminati" sponsoring him in the beginning, just like the "Illuminati" sponsored Saddam Hussain for some time. That doesn't make Hitler their puppet any more than Saddam was their puppet.

Now but if if they were put in this position by them they where atleast to be semi-puppets.

Also, I'd like to point out that not all industrialists are/were "Illuminati" puppets. For example, Henry Ford was a self-made millionaire who actually supported the interests of the American people and supported Hitler out of personal ideology.
I already explained why financial support of Hitler by some powerful industrialists doesn't prove anything.

No you didn't.

I bet Morgan started out as what Ford calls a "constructive financeer" but ended up a "destructive financeer" as he came to realise the "destructive financeers" would destroy his empire if he didn't join them... much like the royals did.

Complete nonsese you haven't read the quote right. It says first there was criticism against the house of Morgan but then Henry shifted sides and then he started calling the House of Morgan constructive.

In his naivity, Rudolf Hess believed he could arrange peace with Britain behind the backs of the British warmongers and flew to Britain only to be betrayed by his contacts and serve a life sentence in jail for his heroism.

Hitler shared with Himmler a love for traditional Germanic culture, but unlike Himmler Hitler wasn't really interested in all this esoteric occult stuff.

But even then you are still having a party with amazing amount of influence from the THule society and the occult. Perhaps not very present in Hitletarian circles but still present in his party. If he was against it it wouldn't have been there.

Back in the 19th century, pretty much every educated white person believed in the superiority of white people over other people. This was considered self-evident by a comparison of Western culture with other cultures.

Can't tell have no information on this.

By fascists perhaps?!?

Yeah maybe but it was a certain society or something can't find it anymore...

The more power you have, the more you can delegate to others ;)

Everytime I try to visualise this hierarchy with the rotschilds on top it just fall apart and doesn't hold. And I've been trying to visualise it like over 50 working hours now it only adds up with the royals on top.

Out of the Box
11-16-2009, 12:15 PM
Unless he was killed by someone within the same family or it was suicide. That's why I'm saying this reference is pointless.

But this is just werid you are saying he could only be killed by his own family or committed suicide but could not be from anyone outside.

I'm not excluding this possibility. I just seems highly unlikely.

The Jesuits have become irrelevant during the last 2 centuries.

Yes but not at the time of the rise of rotschilds and they could have foreseen this and acted against.

If that would have been the case, the last 200 years of history would have been very different.

Or you fail to respond in time and the rising power gains control over your own organisation, which is precisely what happened...

Then show me evidence of this instead of narrating a story.

The radical shift from an arristocratic pro-European agenda to a Talmudic anti-European agenda is all the evidence I need.

Useful idiots? Which king or queen in your opinion was a usefull idiot? Frederick the Great? Queen Elizabeth?

Anyone foolish enough to hire a court Jew (http://books.google.be/books?id=LCFhyCELzBoC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=&f=false) as their advisor.

WHo exactly is it you are accussing of being a puppet. You know you can't name the few mentioned cause it was Frederick the Great who reshaped the entire freemsonary making himselve head of it and used jews for dirty jobs (and if they had serverd their purpose I wouldn't be suprised he killed them). So how exactly was Frederick controlled by Jews? Tell me that.

He loved to surround himself by "Jewish advisors" aka "court Jews (http://books.google.be/books?id=LCFhyCELzBoC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=&f=false)".

But you can also look the other way around: french monarch and russion monarchs where enemies to the royal bloodlines of Hesse/Brunswick. So there are two ways to look at it but you simply don't do that. The only way the Russian household as far as I am aware is connected in trough the link of Hesse wich initselve isn't a strong one.

Czar Nicholas II was the nephew of several monarchs, including King George I of Greece, King Frederick VIII of Denmark, Alexandra, Queen consort of the United Kingdom, and The Crown Princess of Hanover.

Obviously you don't know that much about the current royal house and just go by the media.

Whatever :rolleyes:

Princess Diania never died in my opinion its just one big charade.

Evidence? Reason?

The royals are a whole family how to assasinate them all? Need a revolution.

It isn't that hard if you're a Rothschild.

So did the french. All royals have intermarries but not on the scale of the brunshwick/hesse/orange they have praticaly become one huge family with some outside marriages to other monarchs such as the french or russian.

I repeat : Czar Nicholas II was the nephew of several monarchs, including King George I of Greece, King Frederick VIII of Denmark, Alexandra, Queen consort of the United Kingdom, and The Crown Princess of Hanover.

But you just agreed in the other post that skull & bones are above rockerfellers

No I didn't.

As I've shown Templars protected the Frensh King in de Guarde de Ecosse.

So?

For god sake the entire house of Hesse was a manifestation of Rosicrucianism as Frances Yates points out.

Maybe the house of Hesse was given its power by freemasons in a first phase of their plan? That would explain why they're so obedient to the masonc agenda.

I start to get the feeling you don't present arguments you present dogmas

I just don't see any real power among royals today.

Just because they're patrons, that doesn't mean they have a more than marginal voice in those organisations.

I still see strong aristrocratic pressence appearantly you never read anything of Carroll Quigley or studied the Pilgrim Society.

Some arristocrats have joined the bourgeois. Most have lost their power entirely.
Besides you do know that since these royals claim jewish heritage its not suprising to see jews coming back to power and talmudic values. Besides what values are we actually talking about here?

I'm referring to agenda set out in the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion that has been implemented over the last century.

Now but if if they were put in this position by them they where atleast to be semi-puppets.

At no time did Hitler show any support for the "Illuminati" agenda, quite the contrary !

I already explained why financial support of Hitler by some powerful industrialists doesn't prove anything.

No you didn't.

Yes I did. Try rereading my previous post.

I bet Morgan started out as what Ford calls a "constructive financeer" but ended up a "destructive financeer" as he came to realise the "destructive financeers" would destroy his empire if he didn't join them... much like the royals did.

Complete nonsese you haven't read the quote right. It says first there was criticism against the house of Morgan but then Henry shifted sides and then he started calling the House of Morgan constructive.

The text implies that Ford first accused pretty much the entire industrialist scene of being "destructive" but as time went on he divided industrialists in "good" and "bad" people.

But even then you are still having a party with amazing amount of influence from the THule society and the occult.

Early in 1920 Karl Harrer was forced out of the DAP as Hitler moved to sever the party's link with the Thule Society, which subsequently fell into decline and was dissolved about five years later. Rudolf von Sebottendorff had withdrawn from the Thule Society in 1919, but in 1933 he returned to Germany in the hope of reviving it. In that year he published a book entitled Before Hitler Came, in which he claimed that the Thule Society had paved the way for the Führer: "Thulers were the ones to whom Hitler first came, and Thulers were the first to unite themselves with Hitler." This claim was not favourably received by the Nazi authorities: after 1933, esoteric organisations (including völkisch occultists) were suppressed, many closed down by anti-Masonic legislation in 1935. Sebottendorff's book was prohibited and he himself was arrested and imprisoned for a short period in 1934, afterwards departing into a lonely exile in Turkey.

The esotericm of the SS was largely based on the viewpoints of Karl Maria Wiligut, who was not affiliated with the Thule Society. Wiligut was the only esoterist with any real influence in the Third Reich.

Back in the 19th century, pretty much every educated white person believed in the superiority of white people over other people. This was considered self-evident by a comparison of Western culture with other cultures.

Can't tell have no information on this.

By fascists perhaps?!?

Just research 19th century culture. Back then, no educated White person would have taken the idea of racial equality seriously.

Everytime I try to visualise this hierarchy with the rotschilds on top it just fall apart and doesn't hold. And I've been trying to visualise it like over 50 working hours now it only adds up with the royals on top.

Why?

BlueAngel
11-17-2009, 12:06 AM
The Rothschild family (often referred to simply as the Rothschilds) is an international dynasty (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Dynasty) of German Jewish (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Jew) origin that established worldwide banking (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Banking) and finance (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Finance) operations and was ennobled by Austria and the United Kingdom.

Rothschild family - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschilds)

There is a thread that I authored around here somewhere titled, "Keeping it All in the Family" or something to that affect.

Excerpt:

The family's rise to international prominence began with Mayer Amschel Rothschild (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Mayer_Amschel_Rothschild) (1744–1812), the son of Amschel Moses Rothschild (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Amschel_Moses_Rothschild),[1] (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/forum/#cite_note-0) a money changer (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Money_changer). Born in the ghetto (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Ghetto) (called "Judengasse" or Jew Alley) of Frankfurt am Main (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Frankfurt_am_Main), he developed a finance house and spread his empire by installing each of his five sons in European cities to conduct business. An essential part of Mayer Rothschild's strategy for future success was to keep control of their businesses in family hands, allowing them to maintain full discretion about the size of their wealth and their business achievements. Mayer Rothschild successfully kept the fortune in the family with carefully arranged marriages (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Arranged_marriage) between closely related (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Inbreeding) family members. His sons were:

Amschel Mayer Rothschild (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Amschel_Mayer_Rothschild) (1773–1855): Frankfurt (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Frankfurt)
Salomon Mayer Rothschild (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Salomon_Mayer_von_Rothschild) (1774–1855): Vienna (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Vienna)
Nathan Mayer Rothschild (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Nathan_Mayer_Rothschild) (1777–1836): London (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/London)
Calmann Mayer Rothschild (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Carl_Mayer_von_Rothschild) (1788–1855): Naples (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Naples)
Jakob Mayer Rothschild (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/James_Mayer_de_Rothschild) (1792–1868): Paris (http://www.clubconspiracy.com/wiki/Paris)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Rothschild's built the banking houses.