Timothy Spearman, like the Earl of Oxford before him, shakes his spear at the twin serpents of ignorance and vice. The lies and distortions of academia and media are slowly being exposed and the Spearman is at the cutting edge. Many disquieted spirits are finding peace now that grievous errors of history are being set to rights. The Earl of Oxford finally found some peace with the release of the film "Anonymous" on October 28, 2011, a date many believe is the end of the Mayan Calendar for the current cycle. The time was out of joint but is now being set to rights. Catch his radio show at Orion Talk Radio Network 11:00 am to 1:00 pm Saturdays.
Freemason and Rosicrucian Lord Oxford Is Shakespeare
Timothy Spearman has made some astonishing discoveries about history. The true identity of Shakespeare is just one of his amazing discoveries. This short film by Robert Badali is based on Timothy Spearman's portrait painting comparison of the Earl of Oxford and William Shakepeare. The featured paintings include one of Lord Oxford at the age of 36 and another under his pen name William Shakespeare, which he sat for just before his official death at age 54, when his death was faked and he was sent into exile on the Isle of Mersey near Colchester. He was exiled following the death of his mother Queen Elizabeth in 1603 as he was considered a threat to the throne by King James I. In Romeo and Juliet, he reveals his identity as the Tudor prince in the balcony scene speech given by Juliet, "What's in a rose?" The rose refers to thee Tudor rose. Though he could not bear the name of the rose, he still smells as sweet because he retains the bloodline of the Tudor family. Timothy Speaman is a revisionist historian. Check out his website www.shakesaspear.com and his new radio show Writing on the Wall at Orion Radio at www.micro1650am.com. Visit Timothy Spearman's publisher www.xoxopublishing.com to see his new book releases "Must I Remember" and "The History of the Peace Train".
MIFAN FILM CO PRESENTS Tim Spearman and Ram Deenoo and Ken Kendai's film SECRET DESTINY
Secret Destiny Mission Statement
Secret Destiny is a project I couldn’t pass up. I took it on because it presented me with a quest to find a truth. I am now presented with the honour of sharing my research findings concerning modern terrorism with the world. People deserve to know what is happening in their world. They cannot be left in the dark. I teach security for the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services because I am a specialist in the area. I know how to keep my corner of the world safe and secure. That is why I am sharing my expertise with the world. I would like the other corners of the world to be as safe and secure as my corner of the world.
The title Secret Destiny is something of a paradox since the destiny of this film is no secret. It is a title that will soon be on everyone’s lips as news of this film spreads. Soon everyone will have heard of it. Time tells the truth. This film will set the record straight and explain why over 300 lives were taken from this world on one of the most tragic days in Canadian history.
Time tells the truth. The truth about history is told in this film. Despite its fictional content, it leaves the M.O. of the conspirators exposed. Their days are done. Humanity’s ascension coincides with their descent into the abyss. A cultural renaissance unrivalled in the annals of history is about to dawn. We are at the cusp of a new season, Cosmic Autumn, a time when the fruit of humanity is destined to achieve harvest. The dawning renaissance is the fruit of heaven and earth and it is ripe.
Here lies our true mission. We wish to help liberate the oppressed Canadian artist and intellectual and to grant them the creative outlet they need to get their message out there.
Secret Destiny is the first step. Assist us in bringing the truth to light so that no lie can hold a candle to our truth. A contact on the Canadian Human Rights Commission has offered to put us in touch with the 324 families affected by the Air India Disaster. We plan to hold a candle light vigil with over a thousand participants marching in downtown Toronto in honour of those killed in the terrorist attack. The film will open with this candle light vigil. Time tells the truth and it is high time it came out. We think the Evangel expressed it best when he proclaimed, “Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set ye free.”
Secret Destiny was inspired by the stories of the heroic families that endured this tragedy. What happened in 1985 is now an integral part of Canadian history. We can never forget. We must never be allowed to forget. What this film will help us do is forgive. Once the truth is told, healing can begin. Once the deception and the veil of lies are removed we can begin to move forward and take pride again in what we have achieved in Canada, the most peaceful and peace-loving country in the world. Help us to heal the victims of this tragedy. Help them to overcome their grief.
Must I Remember?
Timothy Spearman's groundbreaking novel sets the record straight on the Afghan War
Must I Remember Timothy Spearman bestselling book is now available on line: http://www.xoxopublishing.com/shop-online in the following formats: ebook CD and in paperback.
"Must I Remember?" is a line from Hamlet. My favourite play. It's most apropos as a title because it refers to the prince's memory of his mother and father in the throes of love, only to have his father die on him and she marry with unseemly haste. In reference to my book, it's an ironic reversal because the mother is a pillar of virtue who not only mourns her husband's passing, but never remarries and devouts herself to raising and being the self-sacrificing and vigilant guardian of their children. She is the epitome of virtue in contrast with Queen Gertrude who is "Frailty, thy name is woman" to Prince Hamlet.
That he might not beteem the winds of heaven
Visit her face too roughly.—Heaven and earth,
Must I Remember? Why, she would hang on him
As if increase of appetite had grown
By what it fed on, and yet, within a month—
Let me not think on ’t. Frailty, thy name is woman!—
A little month, or ere those shoes were old
With which she followed my poor father’s body,
Like Niobe, all tears. Why she, even she—
O God, a beast that wants discourse of reason
Would have mourned longer!—married with my uncle,
My father’s brother, but no more like my father
Than I to Hercules. Within a month,
Ere yet the salt of most unrighteous tears
Had left the flushing in her gallèd eyes,
She married. O most wicked speed, to post
With such dexterity to incestuous sheets!
It is not nor it cannot come to good,
But break, my heart, for I must hold my tongue.
Act I, ii, ll.140-159
"Straw boats to borrow arrows" is a proverb based on a legend about a Chinese military strategist, an adviser to a general. The narrative style of this novel is influenced by the legend. According to the fable, the general asked his adviser to produce one hundred thousand arrows for his army in advance of a military offensive across the Yangtze River. Rather than decline what the general considered a mission impossible, the adviser agreed to the challenge. Not only did he promise to deliver the arrows, but insisted it could be done in only three days. He vowed to deliver one hundred thousand arrows within seventy-two hours or face certain death if he failed. He launched his boats just outside the enemy's naval yards. The enemy, unable to see clearly through the fog, resorted to firing volleys of arrows to prevent an attack. With theeventual break of dawn approaching, the adviser called in the boats bristling with one hundred thousand plus arrows, all donations of a badly outwitted enemy.
In this novel about an Afghani refugee family, there are several straw men dispatched in several narrative boats. The story is told by a central protagonist, who breaks off her narrative to allow her mother and brother to tell their sides of the story. And each narrator tells stories about the patriarch of the family, Mr. Rostami, who died at the hands of the Taliban. What makes this story of terror unique is the telling of it. With so many straw men telling their sides of the story, it is impossible to establish a definitive narrator of the novel. Fire might be drawn, but by whom? It seems like there would be a lot of wasted arrows. Must I Remember is based on the Rostami family's epic journey to find a new home.
The History of the Peace Train is a book for our End Times.
Do you want peace? Gregg Braden says it only take the square root
of one percent of a population to engage in positive wilful intention
through meditation or spiritual practice to lower the incidence of
violence and accidents in a target community. So let's hold a
Peace Train in your community and see what it does to affect
While social engineering has long sought to derail the peace process by making the Peace Train seem like some quaint anachronism of a bygone age, the Peace Train is back on track. The world will never know peace argue the cynics when really they just don’t care because they are living on the right side of the tracks and don’t have to concern themselves with the peace process. To them, it is no consequence if the peace process gets derailed. The juggernaut of greed, land acquisition and the theft of resources will never affect them. They are the pirates, after all. What we need is to get the Peace Train back on track to entrain the children so that they can build the world of peace we have failed to secure for them. With Timothy Spearman’s The History of the Peace Train, the Peace Train Cat Stevens made so famous rides the rails once more. Long considered dinosaurs of a defunct evolutionary period, the steam engine had suffered roughly the same fate as the gargantuan beasts that roamed the marshes and flatlands of the Cretaceous Period. Like the dinosaurs, they were replaced by something higher on the evolutionary scale, something more advanced that could adapt to the changing times and the demands of a competitive world in which only the fittest could survive. But while the steely hand of progress is often ruthless in the stranglehold grip it maintains over development, there is a counterforce of a more compassionate and caring nature that harkens back to former times with a nostalgic longing that somehow manages to slow down the speeding juggernaut of progress, granting us a brief respite and a chance to take a breath. This desire to pay homage to the past and acknowledge the debt owed to our forebears is precisely what makes historical and pioneer villages so attractive, and why Colonial Williamsburg is one of the most popular tourist destinations in North America, or why the old world city of Quebec exudes a charm that attracts tourists from all over the world. It is this longing for the past that raises the spectre of a technological Jurassic Park, where some of the primitive beasts of our industrial past are brought back, resurrected in necromancy ceremonies all over the world, raised from the dead, repaired and restored to full vigour by the deft hand of craftsmen, metalworkers and restorers of every stripe. It is precisely this nostalgia, this longing for our ancestral past, this veneration of the artisanship and craftsmanship of former times that has re-rigged tall ships, refitted steamships, restored old cars and resurrected the steam-driven trains, the dinosaurs and extinct beasts of former times dug up from antique fossil beds, their technological DNA extracted and their lifeblood renewed. While it may only be a book, the words on a page sometimes speak louder than those issuing from the mouth of a statesman. They say the pen is mightier than the sword. To stay the hand of violence requires greater strength than to raise the cry of war.
Tim Sails the Seven C's with Confidence, Courage, Calculated Chance, as a Champion, Conqueror and one day a Caesar
The Hourglass: A Film Short
This short film by Robert Badali is based on Timothy Spearman's song lyrics set to Lance Reegan-Diehl's music. It is enormously gratifying to have a friend like Robert, who is one of the few people to come along to show appreciating for my work. I am an artist and it takes one to know one. Thanks to James Newhouse and Lance Reegan-Diehl for also recognizing promise and talent in my work.
as the killingMasonic brotherhoodas the killing of the king also arranged for the killing of the princess.
Lighted by flame surrounded by pentacle marked by
torch symbolizing illumination of the Sirius star.
Dealey Plaza and Pont de L’Alma mark sites
representing king and virgin queen worship
Virginia-Simiramis-Diana had to die at
the site of traditional Diana cult
worship known as Pont de L’Alma.
They need a lighted torch to mark the
site with real meaning to the Diana cult.
but knowing agenda of ritual murder activity
assassination,murder rite,
story of JFKon Masonic
the officialofficial line
is notis not
couphit
AA
Timothy Spearman: Radio Show Host of Writing on the Wall Timothy Spearman's show Writing on the Wall airs Saturdays from 11:00 am to 1:00 pm - Timothy Spearman is a masked marauder - Catch him if you can!
Tim shakes his spear at the twin serpents of ignorance and vice as did the venerable god Apollo before him with consort Pallas Athena at his side. The Spearman reveals Shakespeare's Codex to all the world, the M.O. of the front man employed for generations by the Illuminati-controlled intelligence services. Just as Will Shakspere from Stratford was the front man used by the Illuminized Freemasons working for H.M.S.S. to hide the identity of the courtier scholar, Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford, so the modern day intelligence services employ an array of front men, including Lee Harvey Oswald, Timothy McVeigh, Manuel Noriega, Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, etc. to conceal their covert operations orchestrated to advance the New World Order of Lucifer and the All-Seeing Eye Cult of the Brotherhood of the Snake and the Serpent Cult, Freemasonry. Edward de Vere worked for Francis Bacon's secret writing ministry, The Honourable Order of the Knights of the Helmet, the secret writing ministry named in honour of Pallas's helmet of invisibility, which they did kiss and place upon their heads, while writing anonymously and under pen names. Meanwhile, Will Shaksper of Stratford, cousin of de Vere through the Arden family, would take the credit for the play so the true author could remain hidden behind the stagecraft.
So now in our age, we see the same M.O. played out in the drama known as the Killing of the King ritual, which took place in Dealey Plaza, Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963, when Lee Harvey Oswald took the fall for the covert operation orchestrated by the All-Seeing Eye Cult's CIA. Osama bin Laden of the Freemason/MI6 creation known as the Muslim Brotherhood would later work for the CIA under the code name Tim Osmond, where he would be scapegoated for 9/11 while Dick Cheney was running his decoy wargame exercise known as Vigilant Guardian and Northern Guardian that same day. Shakespeare's Codex is alive and well passed on like a torch from the old world the the new, Francis Bacon's New Atlantis, the U.S.A.
Gandhi leads ambulance team for British during bloody suppression of South African Natives
Embarking on a historical analysis of Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948) - the most revered politician/saint of the 20th century - is a daring enough adventure in itself. Any author attempting to remove the halo from this glorified character risks his own reputation in today’s politically correct intellectual world. Books on Gandhi number in the thousands, yet none of them can escape the fact that it is in South Africa where Gandhi nourished his purported ideals following a series of public disgraces encountered at the beginning of his career there. History books teach that Gandhi’s life changed drastically when, as a young lawyer traveling by train from Durban to Pretoria in pre-South Africa, he faced a series of racial humiliations in 1893. These humiliations galvanized him to fight against apartheid and later against British colonialism. These far-reaching consequences have been attributed to what transpired at the Pietermaritzburg train station where he was evicted from a first class train compartment. Free informational bookmark included with each book ordered. In this provocative text, retired U.S. Army Col. G.B. Singh and Dr. Tim Watson subject the 20th century’s most revered figure to a rigorous cross-examination on the witness stand. Who would have dreamed Gandhi would ever be questioned, let alone be cross-examined in court? The courtroom lessons learned through the historical scrutiny of Gandhi’s racial encounters must spark a re-evaluation of our perceived “historical truths.” The authors recognize a modern culture of deception and propaganda, and simply wish to set the record straight on this issue. They request that their supporters and detractors alike view the book as a search for honesty in the historical account. This book is sure to provoke lively debates inside and outside the halls of learning. The authors hope all will benefit from the revelations within this book - however shocking - and that the verdict will help free the world from the yoke of “propa-gandhi.” Col. G. B. Singh (Ret.) served in the U.S. Army. He is a professional student of Indian politics, world religions and their true historical values and political impacts, and the life and teachings of Gandhi. He lives in Tennessee, USA. Dr. Tim Watson gained his higher education in Europe and taught for several years in East Asia. He currently works in TV and film in Toronto, Canada, and hosts a weekly radio show at Orion Radio micro1650am.com
Reply to Zarathustra By Timothy Spearman
Are we prisoners of the moment or can we use faith, imagination and hope to set ourselves free? This gloriously panoramic musical allegory, The Symphony of Time, offers an optimistic answer. Here is a sophisticated postmodern synthesis of spirit and materialism, consciousness and music, text and hypertext that will captivate and liberate the modern philosopher and educated reader.
The mysterious narrator who writes with his feet, and is so ordinary as to be extraordinary, writes with his ffet because he is too ordinary to hold a pen in his hand. In this unconventional and breathtakingly original novel, the reader is lead through a series of episodes that incorporate elements from the life of every man. This is a book that moves from the tragic to the comic effortlessly, as we are taken on a journey that operates on many levels of consciousness at once.
Portrait Painting Comparison of Edward de Vere and William Shakespeare
Good Friend, Sweet Friend, Lend Me Your Name By Timothy Burns Watson
A man calling himself Lord Ampthill, who if memory serves, was the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of England in the early 20th century, wrote the foreword for Rev. J.J. Doke's biography of Gandhi. What is amazing about this is that Lord Ampthill actually presided over the laying of a foundation stone for a new Shakespeare Theatre in Stratford in honour of the supposed birthplace of the bard. In other words, this prominent Freemason was so duplicitous that he was not only instrumental in promoting the 400-year-old myth of Will Shakspere, but was in the process of cultivating the new myth of the 20th century concerning Freemason Mahatma Gandhi. Gandhi's actual name was Mohandus, but became Mahatma because Theosophists who happened to also be initiated Freemasons were referred to as Mahatmas, meaning Great Souls. To understand the Freemason-Rosicrucian-H.M.S.S. operation known as the Shakespeare plays, one needs to read Ignatius Donnelly’s book "The Great Cryptogram: Francis Bacon’s Secret Cipher Code in the So-Called Shakespeare Plays". Donnelly was an interesting man. He was a U.S. Congressman, who was actually running for the presidency at one juncture. What is incredible is that he cracked the code that reveals a secret biography of Will Shakspere, the frontman Manchurian candidate, who took credit for the plays and details about the gentleman of the court that concealed his authorship as an agent of the crown. At any rate, "A Comedy of Errors" was the first play to be performed and it was staged at Gray's Inn, one of the Inns of Court in the City of London, where both Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford, and Francis Bacon attended law school. The reason this play was chosen as the first to be performed is because it contains the theme of the entire H.M.S.S. Manchurian Candidate operation, which would employ Will Shakspere as the replacement front man, who would take credit for the plays so the British agent could hide behind the stage curtain. The theme of the play thus revolved around two identical twins, who were constantly mistaken for one another, which was in fact the case for the bard and Will Shakspere, whose names were so alike that they were often mistaken for one another. Shocking though it may be, Bacon and Oxford it happens were half brothers and concealed princes of the realm, Bacon through the secret marriage of Robert Dudley, the Earl of Leicester, to Queen Elizabeth I and Oxford, the product of a rape then Princess Elizabeth endured at the hands of her stepfather, Thomas Seymour. There is something deeply suspicious about the conduct of court officials in the wake of this rape. In his biography of Francis Bacon, Alfred Dodd records that the queen was secreted away to the country to give birth to this bastard child under the auspices of Lord Burghley, her trusted confidante and friend. The reason this is odd is that it happens to be consistent with the behavious of high-ranking Illuminati families, whose virgin children are raped by a high wiccan priest, in order to seed a Luciferian offspring. Some may find the circumstances of the rape and aftermath suspicious in this regard as there are aspects of the scenario that complement Satanic ritual rape. It is interesting to note that, in the ancient world, it was believed that a wise magus was very often the product of an unnatural birth such as incest. The Earl of Oxford was a prodigy and a wise Magus of the kind only seen once in a millennium.Why the concealment of the queen's secret issue? It is now believed that she had at least three concealed princes of the realm: Francis Bacon, Edward de Vere and Robert Devereaux, the Earl of Essex. Were the queen and her close officials involved in Illuminati sorcery and Satanic ritual sex magic or were they rather aware of some prophecy pertaining to the fate of her children that required her to take pains on their behalfs and conceal their existence from the world so that the Luciferian faction would not hunt them down and kill them. The latter seems the most likely given the beauty and majesty of Francis Bacon's and Edward de Vere's work and the legacy they have spawned, the most miraculous and edifying of its kind. Together, these concealed princes would start Fra Rosy Cross and the Honourable Order of the Knights of the Helmet, named in honour of Pallas Athena, the Spear-Shaker who wore the helmet of invisibility. The bard is in fact wearing her helmet as one of Francis Bacon's team of invisibles, who are writing under pen names or anonymously as members of the secret propaganda ministry. Meanwhile, Will Shakspere, who is made great light of in the comedies through such characters as Sir John Flastaff (False-Spear) was a cousin of Edward de Vere through the Arden family. He becomes a figure of fun in the prologue to "Taming of the Shrew," where a drunken beggar is conveyed to a Lord's house, placed in his bed, dressed in fine clothes, lordly rings placed on his fingers. When he comes to, he is addressed as My Lord, told repeatedly he is Lord of the manner, addressed by the Lady of the manor as My Lord, until he begins to believe he has in fact been in some distemper that has caused him to forget his true stature. Within no time he begins to fall for the ruse and believe that he actually is the Lord. The whole play is based on mind control. Katerina is mind-controlled by Petruchio, who tells her it's the moon in the sky when it's actually the sun at midday and confuses day for night so utterly that her senses are so out of whack she doesn't know day from night. He then subjects her to food deprivation and sleep deprivation, all three strategies from the author's intelligence programming manual. Who else would be familiar with such psychological programming techniques but a member of British intelligence and Her Majesty's government? The Illuminati Bacon cabal had made the Manchurian Candidate into an art form only to employ it as recyclable M.O. for the next 400 years.
The All Seeing Eye Cult-controlled intelligence services would then recycle the tried and tested M.O., one that they had refined into an art form for covert operations spanning some 400 years or so. The patsy front man would be used to conceal their covert operations, so that a lone front man would take the credit or the blame for the operation so the true operatives could remain behind the curtain with the puppet masters. Thus, a look alike of Rothschild agent and 33 Degree Freemason, John Wilkes Boothe would die in the barn allowing the assassin to escape unscathed. Lee Harvey Oswald's look alike would implicate him in a variety of settings, setting him up as the patsy front man for the Kennedy coup d’état. Timothy McVeigh would have a look alike on the ATF Bureau, who would implicate him by association with the Oklahoma Bombing. Osama bin Laden meanwhile has obviously had doubles doing the CIA videos for him. And more recently, Saddam's look alike would not only go to the dock for him, but would even stand in for him on the gallows. Very generous of him if it were actually a volunteer, but far more likely to be a mind-controlled Manchurian canadidate duped into believing he is the martyred Iraqi leader, just one more low born figure of fun in Illuminati stagecraft masquerading as statecraft.
SHAKESPEARE'S CODEX Timothy Spearman of www.Thatradio.com is the Spear Shaker par excellence. Catch Tim's program Shaking a Spear at www.Thatradio.com Thursdays from 10:00 to 11:00 p.m.
Timothy Spearman is masqued marauder Timothy Burns Watson - Catch Me If You Can!
"Shakespeare's Codex" is an article on the use of a common M.O. by the world's Illuminati controlled intelligence services to conceal the real nature of their clandestine operations through the use of a front man. The M.O. was developed and perfected in Elizabethan England under the control of H.M.S.S. head Sir Francis Bacon, who employed the Shakespeare authorship deception by using Will Shakspere, the commoner, as the front man in order to conceal the identity of the true propagandist for National Security Reasons. The DISPLAY to the right shows the bard seated on the right receiving back his hair in a series of thumbsize Powerpoint images so that he more closely resembles the man he was on the left at age 36 when he sat for a portrait under his own name, Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford. Will Shakspere, cousin of Edward de Vere through the Arden family, would be the illiterate front man Manchurian Candidate of the H.M.S.S. covert operation, who would take credit for the plays. The M.O. of the front man patsy has been been employed more latterly by the intelligence services with the likes of John Wilkes Boothe, assassin of President Lincoln, Jack the Ripper, Lee Harvey Oswald, patsy of JFK assassination, Timothy McVeigh, Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Bureau front man, Osama bin Laden, boggy man terrorist blamed for 9-11 inside job, Moussaoui, mind-controlled fall guy for 9-11, etc.
Shakespeare's Codex By Timothy Burns Watson
The Shakespeare authorship has deeply puzzled thinking people for over 400 years. How could a commoner study works in foreign tongues and retell the story in a new language in the process of development? It doesn't make any sense unless he was part of an avante garde movement of the British intelligensia. How could he possibly know the words and spellings of a vocabulary only recently introduced to English by Bacon's Fra Rosy Cross literary society as loan words from Latin and Italian? His caste position alone would deny him entry into this club of peerage and privilege. What if he was a mere front man, so that the real author could hide behind the scenes rather like the beggar dressed up like a lord in the opening scene of "Taming of the Shrew"? "Shakspere" is a far cry from "Shakespeare", a totally different spelling for a totally different man, but a spelling close enough to "Shakespeare" to allow the intelligence operation to succeed in duping successive generations of bard lovers for over 400 years. The truth is that when the author's name appeared on the first folio of plays it was hyphenated "Shake-speare", proving that it was a pen name employed by some invisible personage. Why the deception? Because the bard was a British agent employed by H.M.S.S. who required a code name to conceal his true identity. Were his identity to be revealed, he would be in danger and many of the personages of the court he was lampooning in his plays would be exposed to the general public's gaze, which would have been a serious threat to national security. So the secret had to be kept and for national security reasons has been kept for 400 years. The code name of British agent Edward de Vere was actually derived from Pallas Athena, the patron goddess of the secret writing society he worked for called The Honourable Order of the Knights of the Helmet also named in honor of Pallas, the Spear-shaker, who always shook her spear at the twin serpents of ignorance and vice and who wore the helmet of invisibility, which rendered her invisible every time she drew the visor down over her face. Initiates of Sir Francis Bacon's secret propaganda ministry would kiss the helmet of Pallas when they joined and subsequently wrote under pen names or anonymously. Bacon would refer to these propagandists as his "team of good pens". The Earl of Oxford was one such very "good pen". Paul Streitz's book "Oxford: Son of Queen Elizabeth I" recently created quite a stir in the international press for suggesting the author was actually the Queen's son. The Virgin Queen as she was known was not called so for her virtue, but for her occult witchcraft status as the incarnation of the moon goddess Diana otherwise known as Virginia, the virgin huntress and goddess of the moon. She had purportedly carried the child of her stepfather, Thomas Seymour, who impregnated her at the age of 16, forcing her to farm the child out for adoption to the home of the 16th Earl of Oxford to be raised as a changeling child. The secret prince would remain a state secret. A second liaison would occur with Robert Dudley, the Earl of Leicester, when Elizabeth and he were both confined to the Tower by Queen Mary. The product of that liaison would be a second child, whose identity was also concealed as a changeling child of the home of Lord and Lady Bacon. That prodigy would grow up to own one of the most illustrious names and careers in European history as Sir Francis Bacon. The relationship forged between the half brothers allowed them to work closely on the secret writing fraternities they formed. Bacon and his brother Anthony Bacon would also work closely together, spawning H.M.S.S. through their joint efforts as well as Fra Rosy Cross and The Honourable Order of the Knights of the Helmet. Bacon and his brother Anthony would go on to found most of the intelligence services of the European continent and would set up Masonic and Rosicrucian Lodges throughout Europe. This explains why high-ranking officers in the British and American military and intelligence units tend to belong to secret societies like the Freemasons and Rosicrucians to this day. Promotion within military-intelligence makes Masonic or Rosicrucian affiliation a practical prerequisite. The most prestigious Shakespeare academic journal known as The Shakespeare Quarterly is located in Washington D.C. and is run by the Folger Gallery, which Paul Streitz exposes as a fraud in his book. The Folger Gallery actually committed a crime against history and scholarship by painting over a portrait purported to be of Edward de Vere that was also said to be a painting of the real Shakespeare. The museum's motivation for perpetrating this crime was to make the bard's cranium conform to the classical notion of what "the bald guy" is actually supposed to have looked like. It is amazing indeed to think that Shakespeare scholarship is actually entrusted to custodians of this kind. Why English departments around the world are not up in arms about this only attests to the fact that something stinks in Denmark. Some people have asked me how I could seriously believe that Bacon or Oxford wrote the plays when 99% of academia have believed otherwise for 400 years? How could such a deception be orchestrated people ask and why? The answer is really very simple. The Freemasons created and control the university degree system based on the first three degrees of Freemasonry: Entered Apprentice corresponding with Bachelor's Degree, Fellow Craft corresponding with Master's Degree and Master Mason commensurate with Ph.D. Thus, rank within the academic establishment is defined not by the pursuit of truth, but with one's adherence to the fascist and duplicitous aims of the most powerful crime syndicate in the world - Freemasonry. Intellectual prostitutes are of higher degree and gain all the privilege, while genuine philosophers are relegated to the bottom of the social pyramid and denied tenure. Here I am languishing at the bottom of the academic world for espousing truths, but I'm the better man for it I console myself. Revealing the truth about the authorship of the Shakespeare plays has grave implications for both British and American national security because it exposes the modus operandi of the front man used in so many of their clandestine operations A.K.A. John Wilkes Boothe, front man for the Lincoln assassination, Lee Harvey Oswald patsy for JFK assassination, Timothy McVeigh, front man for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms operation to sabotage the Murrah Building in order to destroy the files on the highly reactive vaccinations given to the Gulf War Vets now suffering and dying from Gulf War Syndrome, Osama bin Laden, boggy man for 9/11 inside job for planned second Pearl Harbor, pretext for invasion in oil rich countries of the Middle East, etc. That is why the Shakespeare Quarterly and Folger Gallery are located in Washington, D.C. The hawks in Washington want to keep a very close eye on Shakespeare criticism to ensure that the front man, Will Shakspere, gets all the press, while articles about the Oxford/Bacon connection continue to be suppressed. I leave you with one final question: Why are discoveries and insights like this not seen in popular bestsellers and mainstream news media publications? You may now be able to answer such questions for yourself.
Was the Bard Murdered? By The Spearman
Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford, was a changeling child of Queen Elizabeth and one of the rightful heirs to the throne as a concealed prince. In a ritual undertaken with a Native American shaman in 2005, we contacted our ancestors with the aid of a Native American divination plant called salvia divinorum. After making contact with my inductee’s ancestors, I contacted mine, Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford. He appeared to me in a vision. He was being pursued by some adversary along a fortress wall. I then saw two black stallions silhouetted against the night sky, one in hot pursuit of the other. Upon reaching a meadow, Edward dismounted from his stallion and took flight on foot. I saw him take an arrow in the back and fall face first into the pasture. Two enemies approached from the rear, grabbing him under the armpits. He was dragged to an animal’s water trough, where his head was forced under. I recall feeling his pain as the life was snuffed out of him. Following this vision, I performed automatic writing in order to corroborate the true circumstances of his death with my own suspicions. I wrote four questions down on a sheet of paper and left space on the right for the spirit’s replies. Replies to these questions appear below to the right of each question as they did on the night when the ritual was held. The reply to the first questions was a definitive “yes” written in a stylized Elizabethan hand. The other replies appear below in sequence: 1. Are you Edward de Vere? yes 2. Did the Masons kill you? masons 3. Why? play 4. How can I avenge the death of Hamlet’s father’s ghost? by writing My shaman guide noticed that none of the responses were capitalized. He suggested that I combine the words into a single sentence and see what I came up with. He had a sharp eye. As a full sentence, the response read, “Yes, Mason play by writing.” This seemed to answer the most urgent questions: 1) Why had the Masons killed him? And 2) How can I avenge the death of Hamlet’s father’s ghost? It appears that the bard’s last play, “The Tempest,” was the reason for his death. His answer to Question Three verifies that he was killed over a play. “The Tempest” is rich in Freemasonic references, including the attack on Prospero by three ruffians, a symbolic reference to the murder of Hiram Abif, the alleged architect of King Solomon’s Temple. The murder of Hiram is recorded in the Third Degree ritual of Freemasonry and contains and “The Tempest” contains a pointed allusion to this. The sentence “yes, mason play by writing” also answers Question Four pertaining to how I might avenge his death as a writer and researcher. By writing a screenplay, which I may soon be commissioned to write, I may be able to avenge the death of the bard by conveying the truth to the multitudes and by attributing merit where merit is due by granting full credit to Edward Tudor better known as Edward de Vere, Lord of Oxford. The "mason play by writing" appears to have been the motive for the killing. My suspicion is that he got the truth out about the plot to kill Prospero, i.e. himself (Pro-spear-Oxford or prosper-Oxford) by the Three Unworthy Craftsmen featured in “The Tempest” who attack Prospero with blows to the head (corresponding with the Third Degree of Freemasonry), making off with his manuscripts. It therefore seems that at some point in time, the bard’s more recently penned manuscripts were stolen. This may have been a reconnaissance operation to ascertain the nature of the bard’s work on the Isle of Man, where he was exiled by King James to live out the remaining eleven years of his life, following his official death in 1603. In short, the bard’s work was stolen! At the beginning of “Troilus and Cressida”, we have a prologue, which relates how the author's manuscripts were in the safekeeping of the Grand Possessors. These I take to be a guild of Freemasons under the control of whom? Was it one of brother Francis's organizations: Fra Rosi Cross perhaps? The author appears to have been blowing the whistle on Luciferian Masons through the plays. I strongly suspect that King James was at the head of the Luciferian Masons. On the occasion of his mock death in 1604, Edward was paid the honour of a state funeral, in which some of his plays were performed as a tribute to him as Lord Chamberlain. Keep in mind that on the occasion of King James' ascension to the throne, Oxford and his concealed son, the Earl of Southampton, were both arrested and confined to the Tower of London. This is no doubt due to the fact that they were perceived as threats to the throne as they had a legitimate claim overriding that of James. I believe James struck a deal with Oxford around this time. The deal was that he would be allowed to live and continue to exercise his talent as poet laureate from exile on the Isle of Man. This legend is recorded in a book by Oxfordian Peter Sammartino. He would then stage his death and the death certificate would identify the "plague" as the cause. His official death was in 1604, which would make him 53 years of age. According to legend, he would live for an additional 11 years on the Isle of Man, continuing to write his plays for all posterity, which would put his actual death at 1615. There is some dispute over his burial site, some alleging he is buried in Hackney Churchyard, while others maintain he is interred in Westminster Abbey. This dispute results from the fact that he was not buried. In the Henry plays, the author makes repeated allusions to Prince Hal's fear of not being given a proper Christian burial. This is because the Luciferian Masons reserved this punishment as one of their most severe, reserved for those who betray their dark lords. Following the "contacting ancestors" ritual, I awakened in the middle of the night to a vision some nights later, where I saw Edward's casket on the sea bottom with seaweed dancing in the tide in front of it. The casket lid opened and bright white light came flooding out. This matches the First Degree of Freemasonry in terms of ritual punishment: All this I most solemnly, sincerely promise and swear, with a firm and steadfast resolution to perform the same, without any mental reservation or secret evasion of mind whatever, binding myself under no less penalty than that of having my throat cut across, my tongue torn out by its roots, and my body buried in the rough sands of the sea, at low-water mark, where the tide ebbs and flows twice in twenty-four hours, should I ever knowingly violate this my Entered Apprentice obligation. So help me God, and keep me steadfast in the due performance of the same. I am firmly convinced based on mystical and metaphysical evidence presented to the sixth sense superseding my other five that Edward Tudor/Vere was murdered on the Isle of Man by Luciferian Masons under the control of the Luciferian King James I and that his body was sunk in the sea at the mouth of a river of the coast of the Isle of Man. I strongly recommend a sea expedition of said coast in search of Edward's remains so that he can be given a proper Christian burial on the occasion of the 400 year anniversary of his death in 2015, when he was assassinated at age 64 by Luciferian Masons for revealing certain untimely secrets in the play “The Tempest”.
Pallas Athena Shakes Her Spear at the Twin Serpents of Ignorance and Vice
Shaking a Spear at Ignorance:
A Resolution to the Shakespeare Authorship Problem
By Timothy Burns Watson
This paper was originally inspired by a discovery the author had made concerning a similarity in the likenesses of the subject featured in the portrait of William Shakespeare by John Taylor and that of Edward de Vere by Marcus Gheeraedts. The conjecture of the author of this paper is that the subject featured in the Taylor portrait of Shakespeare is the same man shown in the Gheeraedts portrait only advanced in age by some fifteen years and therefore with a receding hairline resulting from middle age. The hypothesis is that, having lost caste in the Elizabethan Court for writing subversive plays that failed to meet their sole objective of serving the propaganda aims of the Court in addition to causing other scandals, including an affair with the Queen’s handmaiden, Anne Vavasor, Edward de Vere, the seventeenth Earl of Oxford became increasingly defiant of the establishment, adopting a bohemian lifestyle and dress, growing what was left of his hair long, allowing his courtier goatee and mustache to grow into a full but scruffy beard, while sporting an earring and commoner’s dress. Further study resulted in the discovery that the author was a Freemason initiated into the Higher Degrees of Freemasonry and a British intelligence operative under the cover of a diplomat, who visited the courts of Europe on several occasions. The life of privilege led by Edward de Vere, seventeenth Earl of Oxford, so dwarfed the life of the mediocrity from Stratford-upon-Avon as to eliminate him altogether from the authorship candidacy. Why, thought the author of this paper, would the Stratford man so clearly support the ideology of caste and privilege, as evidenced by his early plays in particular, when such an ideology disqualified him from upward social mobility? In addition, it did not make any sense whatsoever that he had such a breadth of knowledge gleaned from having participated in aristocratic sports, while studying jurisprudence, medicine, and several languages, in addition to traveling widely, when none of these privileges would be open to the commoner from Stratford. The author of this paper therefore thought to shake his spear at the ignorance of a naïve world blinded by four hundred years of incalculable oversight. The author hopes the findings here presented will sufficiently shake a spear at the serpent of ignorance that he might seek safe haven in the same hole he crawled out of. We also hope, but by no means hold our breath, that the academic world that has been so spitefully unkind to our person will offer a warmer reception to this our “spear-shaking” than it has in the past. It is also hoped that those who gaze upon the countenance of Edward de Vere will have the vision to see the resemblance in the two portraits this study has herein brought to the world’s attention. What’s in a name? In the name “William Shakespeare”, there is a great deal. One would assume then that, as a name of great import, the author would at least endeavor to adopt a uniform spelling of his name and a uniform signature to go with it. Yet, of the six signatures found attached to documents ascribed to the man from Stratford, each displays a different spelling and style of handwriting. Why would this be when literate men of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries developed personalized signatures just as people do today? As evidenced by the signatures extant, the man from Stratford whose name was most commonly spelled Shakspere seems not to have developed a consistent signature.1 Baptized Gulielmus Shakespere, he would go on to be known in other documents by William Shaxpere, William Shackespere, Willelmus Shackspere, William Shackspere, William Shakespeare of orthodox spelling, William Shackspeare, Willelmus Shakespeare, Willelmum Shakespeare, Willielmi Shakespeare, Willelmus Shackspere, Willelmus Shakspeare, Wyllyam Shaxpere, Mr. Shakespere, etc. These names appear on records ascribed to the man known by the name most commonly spelled William Shakspere from Stratford-Upon-Avon. It makes no sense whatsoever that a man of such importance would not endeavor to standardize the spelling of his name as well as his own signature for simple purposes of identification if nothing else. Indeed, the fact that there seems to have been no effort on the part of the Stratford man to do so is where a good part of the confusion rests and has contributed in no small degree to the authorship problem itself. Some of the scholars who examined these records initially decided that some of these documents belong in the biography of some other man of that name. Scholar Sydney Lee, for example, concluded Anne Whately became engaged to another of the numerous “Shakespeares” who then abounded in the diocese of Worcester. Then, in two articles entitled “Other William Shakespeares,” Charles William Wallace established that one of the documents pertaining to malt sales should be reassigned to a man other than the Stratford man.2 So the already scant record on the Stratford man, a record showing no evidence of any literary life, may be reduced still further by the fact that many of the “Shakespeares” referred to under different spellings in diverse documents may in fact be different men. The question that immediately springs to mind is why is the record so blank on William Shakspere of Stratford? Why is there such abject poverty in terms of documentation, including written records, letters, manuscript materials, etc.? Bear in mind that the question is asked of the man deemed to be the greatest author of English letters. How can this be, when significantly more documentation has been found on contemporaries of lesser note such as Ben Jonson and Michael Drayton? Michael Drayton, a much less revered contemporary and fellow poet from the same town, has exactly the kind of documentation associated with him one would expect to find in the great bard’s record, including letters, direct references to works, a brief description of his physical appearance, evidence of revision and polishing of his works, evidence of attending educational institutions, etc. Why the comparative destitution in the Stratford man’s record? And why is there no surviving evidence that these two famous poets from the same town had known each other or even met?3 We might just as well ask: What’s in a face? The sheer abundance of disparate visages appearing in engravings and paintings of the bard indicate that hardly anyone seems to have had a clear impression of what the man actually looked like. In the opinion of the author of this paper, there is only one true likeness of the author of the plays and sonnets, and that is the portrait of Shakespeare painted by John Taylor circa 1610. While the painting by Taylor has been given the date 1610, this date must be erroneous since the subject of the painting, Edward de Vere, died in 1604. While many will be surprised by this claim, since the Stratford man is known to have died in 1616, I contend that it is not the Stratford man who is the subject of the Taylor portrait. The subject is indeed the man posterity knows as William Shakespeare, but that man is not from Stratford-Upon-Avon, nor was his real name William Shakespeare. The portrait is in fact a likeness of Edward de Vere, the seventeenth Earl of Oxford, who wrote the plays under the pen name, William Shakespeare. The man shown in the Taylor portrait bears a striking resemblance to a well-known portrait of Edward de Vere painted by the Dutch painter Marcus Gheeraedts. An approximate date for the Gheeraedts’ portrait is given as 1586. The marked difference of course is the fact that the man appearing in the Taylor portrait is bald, while the portrait of de Vere shows a man with a full head of hair. The reason for this is that the subject in the Taylor portrait is some fifteen years older and has gone bald with advancing years, while the de Vere portrait depicts the same man in his prime and with a full head of hair. The subject featured in the Taylor portrait is in fact the same man shown in the de Vere portrait only fourteen to fifteen years older, since the de Vere portrait shows the same man at approximately 36 years of age, since an approximate date of 1586 has been given to the painting. The author of this paper believes the Taylor portrait depicts de Vere at approximately fifty years of age, four years before his death in 1604. The dating of the Taylor portrait would, therefore, have to be reassigned to circa 1600, ten years earlier than that assigned by orthodoxy. Included in this paper is a composite photo comparison of the subjects featured in the two paintings. Both the aging process and unkempt appearance is eliminated in the painting of the bard with the aid of Photoshop, restoring his full head of hair, while eliminating his earring and long hair. Before and after photo analysis reveals that the middle-aged bard bears a striking resemblance to Edward de Vere featured at the age of 36, suggesting that Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford, is the bard writing under the pen name William Shakespeare. (See the accompanying composite portrait comparisons of before and after likenesses). The authorship controversy has not been helped by the fact that irresponsible researchers have deliberately misled lay people and scholars alike by making grossly erroneous claims. Perhaps the best example of this is Gareth and Barbara Lloyd Evans’s grievously errant contention in their Companion to Shakespeare: We no more about the life of Shakespeare, both in terms of facts and of rational conclusions that they suggest, than of any other Elizabethan dramatist… Documents relating to Shakespeare’s activities, including letters to him and material relating to his family, are extant in quantity in the Shakespeare Centre records office at Stratford upon Avon.4 Note that the Evans’s tell us that there are many “letters” extant to Shakespeare, that is “letters” in the plural, misleadingly implying that there are many such letters extant. The truth is, however, that there is only one letter on record addressed to William Shakspere, the man from Stratford, and it was never delivered.5 How can so-called scholars mislead the public so irresponsibly? No wonder the authorship question has never been adequately resolved. With such gross distortions of the actual facts, many of the misinformed are discouraged from even embarking on the quest for the true author due to the erroneous weight of evidence tilting the balancing scales in favor of orthodoxy. The surname “Shakespeare,” it should be noted, appears as the hyphenated name, “Shake-speare,” in the dedications to Venus and Adonis and Lucrece. Of the thirty editions of the Shakespeare plays published before the First Folio of 1623, in which authorial attribution was given, the name appeared hyphenated in fifteen of these cases. This suggests that the name is of the order of a sobriquet or nom de plume. The only legitimate case for hyphenating an Anglo-Saxon name would be in the case of two noble families brought together through the bonds of marriage and who wished to retain their family peerage mutually by preserving both names in a hyphenated surname, but in such cases, the family name appearing after the hyphen would be capitalized. The “speare” in “Shake-speare” is most definitely not capitalized, leaving little doubt that it is pseudonymous.6 What’s in such a name? If a dramatist were to assign himself a pen name, would it not be apropos to take on a name that canonized him as a dramatist in some kind of homage to his art form? True, he would be under no obligation or compunction to do so. Still, it would be no less fitting. This being the case, it will constitute no shock to learn that the name “Shake-speare” or “Shakespeare” is derived from Pallas Athena, patron goddess of the Greek theater in Athens, who was nicknamed “Hasti-Vibrans” in Latin, meaning the “Spear-shaker”. The reason assigned to the sobriquet for both the goddess and the bard is that Pallas was known for shaking her spear at the serpent of ignorance and vice.7 In Greek mythology, Pallas Athena was the goddess of wisdom, philosophy, poetry, and the fine arts. Her original name was Pallas…from palein, meaning ‘shake’. Athens, the home of Greek drama, was under the guardianship of Pallas, the spear-shaker. The phrase, “The spear of Pallas shake,” can be read in a line of verse from a collection of Shakespeare’s poems of 1640.8 Pallas always shook her spear at ignorance, which is what the poet himself is doing, shaking his spear at the ignorant mass of humanity for believing the ridiculous ruse that an ignorant rustic from the country could be a claimant to the throne of the immortal bard, this a mere stand-in, substitute, or understudy brought in to play the part of the bard so that the true author could remain behind the scenes hidden from view. Pallas Athena also wore the “helmet of invisibility,” which rendered her invisible each time she drew the visor down over her face. The bard is, therefore, wearing Pallas’s helmet of invisibility, as his true identity is concealed behind a mask or visor. Ben Jonson recognized the true significance of the sobriquet when he wrote of Shakespeare’s “true-filled lines,” that “In each of which, he seems to shake a lance, /As brandished in the eyes of ignorance.”9 How did Jonson know about the Pallas Athena connection unless he was in on the plot? Gabriel Harvey, a fellow at Trinity College, Cambridge, in an address to the queen during one of her visits to the university, paid tribute to Oxford as a prolific poet, and one whose “countenance shakes spears.”10 Why the strange reference to the Shakespeare-Pallas Athena sobriquet once again? Why was the Bard so inspired by Pallas Athena that he chose to adopt her nickname? From whence did this influence arise? It is known that, while studying law at Gray’s Inn, the young Francis Bacon formed there a secret literary society called “The Honourable Order of the Knights of the Helmet”. The “Helmet of the Order” was of course the helmet of Pallas Athena, the helmet that occulted her and rendered her invisible. She was Francis Bacon’s patron goddess since his early experience with the French Academie on the Continent whose patron was Pallas Minerva, the same goddess under her Roman designation. The candidate for initiation within the order swore allegiance to Pallas Athena and to uphold her ideals, banishing the serpent of ignorance to the remotest corners of the civilized world in order to spawn an age of enlightenment and a literary renaissance capable of enlightening the world. The initiate would then kiss the helmet, after which it was placed on his head. Just as the Helmet of Pallas was said to make the wearer invisible, so the initiate would become an invisible of Bacon’s invisible college or mystery school and secret literary society. In his right hand simultaneously was placed the spear of Pallas, which he was sworn to shake with valor at all the serpents of ignorance and vice to be found in the world.11 The author of the Shakespeare plays, who the author of this paper believes was Edward de Vere, would have worn the helmet of one of Bacon’s ‘invisibles’ within the Order and would have been sworn to write in secrecy. Given the political import of many of the plays including, Hamlet, Othello, and Macbeth, the author would have been forced to write under a pen name and to conceal his authorship. The Shakespeare Sonnets would also have to have been written under a pseudonym since they contained the story of the author’s invisible or secret life. The visor of invisibility Pallas Athena drew down over her helmet to render herself invisible makes sense of an otherwise obscure scene from Act V, scene I of Henry the Fourth, Part Two, in which Davy speaks of one William Visor to his master Justice Shallow, a name of obvious allegorical import, “I beseech you, sir, to countenance William Visor of Woncot…” (Henry IV, Part II in Shakespeare’s Complete Works, Collins Classics, V.I, ll.38, 39) To this entreaty, Shallow replies, “There is many complaints, Davy, against that Visor. That Visor is an arrant knave, on my knowledge.”(V.I.ll.40-42) “Woncot” is a probable allusion to Wincot. Wincot is where Will Shakspere’s uncle and aunt lived and is clearly a name of Warwickshire designation. The gratuitous exchange has no relevance to the play and makes no sense at all unless it is to point to Will Shakspere of Stratford as the “visor” of Pallas Athena’s helmet behind which the true author of the plays may remain obscured.12 In other words, Will Shakspere from Stratford is the front man behind which the true author, Edward de Vere, can conceal his identity as the bard out of political and social necessity. To substantiate the point, the Earl of Oxford’s wife died in 1612. In her will, she stipulated that a certain sum be laid aside as a provision “to my dombe man.” Was this the continuance of an allowance to be paid to the Stratford man, Will Shakesper, to continue in his capacity as the front man?13 He certainly was mute in terms of composition and functioned as a kind of “dummy” of the real bard, a mere stand-in or double. Alfred Dodd believes that Bacon wrote under many masks including, Thomas Nashe, Thomas Watson, Robert Greene, and John Lyly. In fact, amazingly, if it can be believed, Dodd claims that even Edmund Spenser was a mask employed by Bacon to conceal his authorship. According to Dodd, it was in July 1580 that a clerk, who worked for the Earl of Leicester, named Edmund Spenser, left to take up a job in Ireland. Before he left, Francis paid him for the use of his name in the publication of certain writings.14 According to Dodd, John Lyly is just one of the masks under which Francis Bacon wrote secretly. Using the initials I.L., since the author of John Lyly’s work often signed himself Ihon Lillie, the author wrote a commemorative poem about Edward de Vere. It must be remembered that it was common practice in the age of Elizabeth for authors to suppress their names and substitute initials or a pen name.15 This probably resulted from the fact that Elizabeth had enforced such strict censorship laws and mete out such severe penalties on violators. The author of the poem here in question attributes the valor Edward de Vere exhibited in the naval battle against the Spanish Armada to the inspiration provided by his patron goddess, Pallas, whom he refers to by name: De Vere, whose fame and loyalty hath pierced The Tuscan clime, and through the Belgike lands By winged Fame for valour is rehearsed, Like warlike Mars upon the hatches stands, His tusked Boar ’gan foam for inward ire, While Pallas filled his breast with warlike fire.16 It seems rather odd that Pallas Athena, patron goddess of the Greek theater in Athens and goddess of wisdom sprung from the brow of Zeus, should be placed on board Edward de Vere’s ship at the time of battle. One could imagine the goddess of war or some other goddess being at his beck. Why of all goddesses it should be the goddess of the Greek theater inspiring him in time of battle is extremely odd, unless of course Lyly, or Bacon, if indeed Lyly was a Baconian mask, knew Pallas was de Vere’s patron goddess. If de Vere’s patron goddess was Pallas Athena, then it would not be surprising for him to borrow her attributes, since it was custom for noblemen to employ pen names to conceal their authorship at this time anyway. It must be remembered that the nobility seldom attached their names to works of poetry and especially dramatic works, as it was considered beneath their dignity to publish lines of verse or plays. Why would Edward de Vere employ a pen name? Recourse to pen names and anonymous authorship by men of noble rank is not unique to Elizabethan England. Precisely the same practice was employed by the nobility in diverse cultural milieu. In Korea, for example, two classical operatic works were composed anonymously by persons of the noble class, Shimjong Jeon and Chung-hyang Jeon, and for precisely the same reasons. Gentleman of rank in the Choson Dynasty were forbidden to attach their names to dramatic works and works of poetry. It will come as no surprise then that the same practice was adhered to in another feudal society halfway around the world at the time of Queen Elizabeth. Any nobleman writing poetry for publication or dramatic works for the theater would have lost caste immediately. The threat of losing caste was so real for the author of the Shakespeare plays that it is even alluded to in a poem by John Davies, a contemporary, appearing in the Stationer’s register of 1610. What becomes abundantly clear is that the entire poem is written in the past tense, which suggests that its import is addressed to a poet already dead. Edward de Vere was of course already dead in 1610. He is known to have died in 1604 in fact. Will Shakspere of Stratford, however, would not be referred to in the past tense in 1610, as he still had six more years of life to live. The other thing to notice about the Davies’ poem is the fact that the Will. Shakespeare referred to is most definitely of the noble class, which the Stratford man was most definitely not, and has lost his noble rank as a consequence of his having performed in his own plays, a definite no-no for a nobleman:
To our English Terence, Master Will. Shake-speare. Some say (good Will) which I, in sport, do sing, Hadst thou not played some Kingly parts in sport, Thou hadst been a companion for a King; And been a King among the meaner sort. Some others rail; but, rail as they think fit, Thou hast no railing, but, a reigning Wit: And honestly thou sowst, which they do reap; So, to increase their stock which they do keep.17 The import of the poem is that “Shake-speare”, the name once again appearing hyphenated, indicating it is pseudonymous, is a nobleman who lost rank by performing on the stage. So addicted was he to the stage that he would take to the stage secretly under his pen name, but was probably recognized by the Queen’s omniscient ‘Gestapo’ or secret service and reported. “Thou would have been a companion for a King,” is an allusion to his status as an earl. The title “count”, being equivalent to “earl” in the English caste system, is in fact designated as a “companion to the King” in terms of peerage. “And been a King among the meaner sort” refers to the fact that de Vere had played kingly parts for the theater, which would in fact be seen as “a meaner sort of King”, since the theater was considered low and common. There is in fact a well-known portrait of Edward de Vere extant showing him in costume as King Henry. The last two lines of the poem indicate that the bard labors without gain, since others profit from his work. The implication seems to be that certain individuals reap the benefits of his work and keep the profits for themselves. At the same time that a nobleman who has lost caste is implied, so an allusion is also made to the man from Stratford known as Will Shakspere. The clue for this occurs in the allusion to “our English Terence”. The English Terence refers to the Roman poet Terence, a slave who became a free man and a well-known poet. The man summoned from Stratford to act as the front man and to double as the bard, in order that the true author could conceal his authorship of the plays is here implied.18 To corroborate the above account, where a tribute is given to an author already dead, when the man from Stratford is still living, we have the first edition of the sonnets published in 1609 under the title, Shake-speares Sonnets. Once more the name appears hyphenated implying a pen name, but there is something else this time. This kind of locution is usually reserved for one who is already dead. The byline should read, “By William Shake-speare” for a living author. Then, there is the text of the dedication, which refers to “our ever-living poet.” Implying once again that the author is no longer living. “Ever-living” is used in memorials to signal the fact that someone dead lives on in the memory of the living.19 Is the Elizabethan social ethos and the question of caste the only issue? Are there other reasons for adopting a pen name? The author of this paper would like to suggest that there is. Edward de Vere would have a rather good reason for adopting a code name were he a spy or agent of the British Crown. And the evidence strongly supports the fact that he was. The most convincing piece of evidence for his status as a secret agent can be found in a Privy Seal Warrant issued by the Queen on June 26, 1586. The warrant calls for a grant to be issued to the Earl to the tune of 1,000 pounds a year, a sizeable sum equivalent in today’s terms to three times the Prime Minister’s salary. The reason for the grant is not given, but what is abundantly clear is that the Queen issues instructions at the end of the letter that no accounting for the expenditure is required by the Exchequer, standard practice in the case of secret service money: Elizabeth, etc., to the Treasurer and Chamberlains of our Exchequer, Greeting. We will and command you of Our treasure being and remaining from time to time within the receipt of Our exchequer, to deliver and pay, or cause to be delivered and paid, unto Our right trusty and well beloved Cousin the Earl of Oxford or to his assigns sufficiently Authorized by him, the sum of One Thousand Pounds good and lawful money of England. The same to be yearly delivered and paid unto Our said Cousin at four times of the year by even portions: and so to be continued unto him during Our pleasure, or until such time as he shall be by Us otherwise provided for to be in some manner relieved; at what time Our pleasure is that this payment of One Thousand Pounds yearly to our said Cousin in manner above specified shall cease. And for the same or any part thereof, Our further will and commandment is that neither the said Earl nor his assigns nor his or their executors nor any of them shall by way of account, imprest, or any other way whatsoever be charged towards Us, our heirs or successors. And these shall be your sufficient warrant and discharge in that behalf.20
What the last two sentences mean is that no accounting of expenditures implied by the grant are to be required by the Exchequer, which is tantamount to saying that the transaction is secret and classified. The scholar B.M. Ward claims that this is the usual formula followed in the case of secret service money. The Earl had no known office other than his place on the Privy Council, so there is no good reason for the payment in terms of official function or capacity. There is no evidence of any official assignment calling for such an annuity. The Earl never left the country following the issuing of the grant which he received beginning in 1586 when he was 36 until the time of his death in 1604 at the age of 54.21 For so large an amount to be paid out of the secret service fund, it had to have been used for purposes of state, Dorothy and Charlton Ogburn arguing that it was used for England’s first Ministry of Propaganda. The purpose of the propaganda ministry would be to educate the English people, most of whom could not read, through a medium of education analogous to today’s Hollywood, opening their eyes to the world around them, while acquainting them with a revisionist history that would have them bursting with pride. And while the state was busily taking charge of the theater for purposes of state propaganda, it was simultaneously clamping down on the printing presses, the Queen authorizing Archbishop Whitgit and the Privy Council to draft legislation to strictly regulate them. A Star Chamber decree was duly authorized on June 23, 1586 calling for stricter governance over the printing press, with a list of pains and penalties for violations of the censorship laws. No publication could be released without first receiving approval from the Archbishop of London. The success of the Queen’s Propaganda Ministry cannot be underestimated for its power to instruct the uneducated masses on their history, enlightening them on their place, and furnishing them with so thorough a knowledge of rewards and punishments they would have known what would invite praise and censure. A more vivid description of the state propaganda apparatus the theater guilds served could not be found than Thomas Heywood’s aptly named Apology for Actors, which is none other than an apology for the theater arts being held subordinate to the state to which the performers themselves had been held ransom: Plays have made the ignorant more apprehensive, taught the unlearned the knowledge of many famous histories, instructed such as cannot read in the discovery of all our English chronicles; and what men have you now of that weak capacity that cannot discourse of any notable thing recorded even from William the Conqueror, nay from the landing of Brute, until this day? Being possessed of their use, for or because plays are writ with this aim, and carried with this method, to teach their subjects obedience to their king, to show people the untimely ends of such as have moved tumults, commotions, and insurrections, to present them with the flourishing estate of such as live in obedience, exhorting them to allegiance, dehorting them from all traitorous and felonious stratagems.22 Is it mere coincidence that history plays remained in vogue from 1586 until the conclusion of the Anglo-Spanish war? Chronicle plays were very popular, the pseudonymous author Shakespeare, Marlowe, and others writing several, many of which were original, but some of which Oxford apparently permitted his apprentices to revise and reshape. At the cessation of the war, the demand for such plays from the state and the appetite for them from a people weary of war dried up. Considering how scarce money was at the time, and how careful the Queen had to be with funds in providing for the war effort, it is clear that, if not the Queen, the state apparatus, had to be sufficiently pleased with the propaganda produced for the Elizabethan stage to maintain Lord Oxford’s annuity until the time of his death. Why would the Earl receive such an annuity? If he is not being paid for his official duties, what is the reason for so exorbitant a salary? Is he being paid for covert operations of some kind? Once again, the evidence would support such a hypothesis. Christopher Marlowe and Ben Jonson both faced prosecution for libelous and blasphemous allusions made in their plays, great risks for commoners to take without protection from higher personages, institutions or organizations. In May 1593, the Star Chamber prosecuted Christopher Marlowe for “lewd libels” and “blasphemes”. Certain papers of Thomas Kyd were found keeping company with Marlowe’s manuscripts. Testifying under duress on the rack, Kyd protested that, “My first acquaintance with this Marlowe rose upon his bearing name to serve my Lord, although his Lordship never knew his service, but in writing for his players.” It is one of the most tantalizing mysteries in the Marlovian biography question that Kyd omits to identify the mysterious lord of whose household he had been a member for nearly six years. Six years places Kyd in the services of the mysterious lord back to the end of 1587, from his time of arrest in 1593. The Spanish Tragedy attributed to Kyd on the strength of a single reference is assigned by scholar Edmund Gosse to the period 1584 to 1586. Researcher E. T. Clark believes that the mysterious lord under whose supervision Kyd worked for six years, and for whose players Marlowe wrote, was none other than Lord Oxford. It is more likely to have been Sir Francis Bacon, since the author of this paper believes that both Kyd and Oxford were working under Bacon as ‘invisibles’ in his secret literary societies, which in essence were employed as compartments within the state propaganda apparatus. The period of Kyd’s employment nevertheless coincides with the period in which Oxford’s annuity of 1,000 pounds commences.23 It also happens to coincide with King Philip II of Spain’s rage over the manner in which he was portrayed on the Elizabethan stage. The Venetian ambassador of Spain even reported on King Philip’s complaints concerning the Elizabethan stage to the Signory:
But what has enraged him much more than all else, and has caused him to show a resentment such as he has never displayed in all his life, is the account of the masquerades an comedies which the Queen of England orders to be acted at his expense.24
What King Philip’s complaint, as related by the Spanish ambassador, makes explicit is the fact that the plays had some effect in rousing a reaction from the foreign courts. It is at this time that we begin to hear about the so-called “university wits”. Researcher E. T. Clark believes that Oxford’s apprentices turned out dozens of plays under his supervision, including chronicle plays, revenge plays, Senecan plays, most of them conceived to sustain the people’s morale during wartime. Since his early twenties, Oxford had served as a patron for other writers, so it was easy for him to slip into his new role as the master of young propaganda initiates.25 Clark maintains that Oxford turned to recent graduates of Cambridge and Oxford, and even to those at the point of graduating, who showed promise as writers, to assist in the task of writing state propaganda for the stage. Clark also contends that it was Oxford who discovered Marlowe’s dramatic gifts, encouraging him to write Tamburlaine to portray as a ruthless conqueror the personage of King Philip.27 According to the great Baconian scholar, Alfred Dodd, in 1579 and by 1580, Sir Francis Bacon had founded the secret literary societies Fra Rosi Cross and The Honourable Knights of the Helmet, the latter named in honor of his patron goddess Pallas Athena who always whore the ‘helmet of invisibility’. This was all part of Bacon’s effort to achieve “The Universal Reformation” or English Renaissance in literature. Fra Rosi Cross and The Honourable Knights of the Helmet were invisible colleges or mystery schools, whose initiates wore Pallas Athena’s helmet of invisibility and were known as ‘invisibles’. The founding of these societies began at Gray’s Inn law school, the Grand Patriarchs of the orders being Bacon’s personal friends such as Gabriel Harvey, his old literary professor, and Fulke Greville, a well-known poet. Bacon’s cousin, Sir Philip Sydney, and Sydney’s sister, Lady Mary, Countess of Pembroke, would also be on the planning committee. And according to Alfred Dodd, “He would have the warm support of Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford, also a poet.”28 Was Oxford a poet or a concealed poet, one of the invisibles? Dodd has provided strong evidence that Oxford and Bacon were associates and that he was even in on the planning of these invisible literary societies? Was he also a member? It is very likely. He was referred to as a poet and playwright and yet he stopped writing poetry at least under his own name at a very young age, while strangely none of his plays survive under his own name. Kid, Jonson, Marlowe, Lord Oxford as Shakespeare and others were working together as a syndicate of writers under the patronage of Sir Francis Bacon, whose source of funding came from the Queen, which is one explanation for the great flowering that occurred in Elizabethan drama and the unity of style found among the major playwrights of the time. Similarities found between the Shakespearean and Marlovian works, which have hitherto been explained away by charges of plagiarism and even the speculation that Marlowe was covertly writing the Shakespeare plays following a staged death in a tavern brawl, can now find a more logical explanation. What is more likely is that the similarities in styles found among the playwrights resulted from them working closely together as part of the same secret literary society and propaganda ministry, writing and sometimes sharing plays to meet deadlines assigned to them either by Bacon’s propaganda ministry or the Court. Similarities found between Shakespeare’s early historical dramas and Marlowe’s Edward the Second, published in 1594 as Marlowe’s, which orthodoxy acknowledges as proof of the greater author’s debt to the lesser, can instead be explained by the reverse scenario, in which Marlowe, as a initiated member of Fra Rosi Cross, is apprenticing under de Vere, the author known to posterity as William Shakespeare. What is more likely than Shakespeare being the plagiarist of the inferior dramatist’s work is that de Vere turned one of his own early plays over in draft form to his apprentice Marlowe to complete, perhaps in order to meet some pressing deadline assigned by their patron Sir Francis Bacon or the court.29 Othello would have been one of the plays that caused King Philip such strong offense. “Moor” was a racial slur for Spaniard at this time, and as the murderer of Brabanto’s daughter, Othello would have seen himself reflected in the Moor, since he was rumored to have arranged the murders of his third wife, Elizabeth of Valois and the Princess of Eboli, claimed to have been his mistress. With the production of Marlowe’s Tamburlaine probably launched a year later in 1587, Philip probably would have been further slighted. Envisioning himself as the master of land and sea, Tamburlaine boasts:
Even from Persepolis to Mexico And thence unto the Straits of Jubalter, Where they shall meet and join their force in one, Keeping in awe the Bay of Portingale, And all the ocean by the British shore; And by this means I’ll win the world at last.30 Small wonder that the Spanish King would be so put out by the way he was represented on the Elizabethan stage. Why it should come as any surprise to anyone that the plays should be used for state propaganda is truly amazing. We have to remember that a feudal system existed at this time in which each lord served an overlord. No man was free. To exhibit the kind of genius shown by Edward de Vere would have been more of a curse than a blessing. His talents would have been most certainly seized upon and used on behalf of the Queen, the Court and the state. Why should it be any surprise that Jonson, Marlowe, and the man posterity knows as Shakespeare were writing state propaganda on behalf of the crown? Is not the same the case today with Hollywood writers turning out state propaganda on behalf of the American government? Just as the English nobility are depicted as the bastion of heroism in the Shakespeare plays, so is the American hero a star shining with unrivalled brilliance in the firmament, witness AirForce One or Impact, both of which feature hero presidents. Examine any of the films starring Clint Eastwood, Sylvester Stalone, Harrison Ford, and innumerable others in which the American maverick is the model hero. Just as the author of the Shakespeare plays shows the English aristocracy as a caste that will set the nation to rights even when “the times are out of joint,” so now is the American elite seen as the bastion of righteousness which will set to rights even the most corrupt and untoward of governments, witness Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, JFK, All the President’s Men, and Amistad to name but a few. How would Lord Oxford have been selected for such an assignment? We have established that he worked for the British secret service. But can we establish under whose command he was assigned? We do know that Sir Francis Bacon and his brother Anthony were the founders of the British secret service. We know that both Francis Bacon and Edward de Vere studied law at Gray’s Inn, one of the Inns of Court. We also know that Love’s Labor’s Lost and A Comedy of Errors were performed there for the first time at the Hall of Gray’s, the dining hall of the Inn of Court in 1594.31 What is certain beyond doubt is that Will Shakspere of Stratford-Upon-Avon did not and could not have studied at Gray’s Inn even if he wanted to because he was not of the noble class. It is even claimed that Bacon delighted in the theater and even performed masks himself, which he staged at Gray’s Inn. Could this have been under the inspiration of the Earl of Oxford? Could it be that having witnessed the poetic gifts of the dramatist for himself, Bacon later thought to put them to good use for the sake of nation building? While Freemason scholars and other researchers have long promoted Bacon as the author of the Shakespeare plays, surviving titles of plays known to be Baconian resemble the titles of none of the Shakespeare plays: The Birth of Merlin, 1589, The Misfortunes of Arthur, 1587, The Lord Mayor’s Pagaent, 29th of October, 1591, A Conference of Pleasure, 1592, The Order of the Helmet or the Prince of Purpool, 1594-5, The Device of the Indian Prince, 159532 These titles dated within the same time frame in which the Shakespeare plays were being performed, often under the same titles in which they appear in the Folio, lack the sophistication and playfulness of the Shakespeare titles. And in the Device of the IndianPrince, a sonnet of Bacon’s preserved from the play shows that his verse falls fall short of the grace of the Bard: Seated between the Old World and the New, A land there is no other Land may touch, Where reigns a Queen in Peace and Honour true, Stories or Fables do describe no such. Never did Atlas such a Burden bear, As she in holding up the World Oppressed; Supplying with her virtue everywhere Weakness of Friends, Errors of Servants best. No Nation breeds a warmer Blood for War, And yet she calms them by Her Majesty; No Age hath ever Wits refined so far, And yet she calms them by her Policy; To Her THY SON must make his SACRIFICE If he will have the morning of his Eyes.33
Anyone who thinks that this is up to Shakespearean standard is either tone deaf, blind or lacking in aesthetic taste because this is simply bad verse and could not possibly be written by the same hand that penned the immortal lines written by the Bard. A great deal of similarity, however, has been found between Oxford’s early verse, penned under his own name, and Shakespeare’s. The Benezet test devised by Professor Louis P. Benezet is a good example of how many of the stylistic devices and language used by de Vere is identical to that of Shakespeare. The Benezet test, which juxtaposes de Vere’s early lines of verse with Shakespeare’s, has defied the efforts of numerous scholars to identify which lines are Oxford’s and which Shakespeare’s.34 Other clandestine operations were going on at this time. Why is a propaganda ministry run by the secret service outside the realm of possibility? Not only was the English language canonized at this time, but the greatest literary works in the language were also being undertaken. Not only that, but the knowledge and wisdom of the classical writers, the histories of great nations, and practically everything else worth knowing from foreign countries was imported into the English language at this time. Books were printed and published on every art and science imaginable. In addition, the names on the title pages of these works are totally unknown. It is bewildering that so many men could be put to work on one arcane subject for the task of translating one book and one book only and to then disappear into the same obscure cloud from which they sprang.35 This suggests that they were under hire of the intelligence service just as readers and researchers are called in by the CIA today. It suggests a large clandestine operation designed to plunder the coveted secrets of the Continent as part of an orchestrated effort to import the Renaissance from the Continent. Revealingly, many of the books published during the period 1576 to 1598 are dedicated to the Queen, the Earl of Leicester, and Lord Burghley. Leicester was the Queen’s lover and Burghley, the Queen’s Chancellor. Together they constituted the most powerful triumvirate in the country. Bacon’s intelligence service would naturally depend on funding from these personages in return for which the commissioned volumes would be dedicated to the benefactors.36 What is even more revealing from the intelligence service end of things is that Bacon oversaw the writing of many books in this period. He even supervised the printing process using his own wooden blocks, many of his own design, and each book under his direction was marked with such blocks, suggesting that he himself was acting as the national censor, ensuring on behalf of the Crown that every book published was politically correct.37 What is certain is that de Vere had the intelligence-gathering skills required for the job. He had visited the foreign courts, where he had been dispatched as a diplomat. What is said of Bertram in All’s Well That Ends Well, where he is told, “You have sold your own lands to see other lands,” could equally be said of the Earl, who did appeal to Lord Burghley in a letter to do the very same by agreeing to pay for his expenses abroad. Oxford traveled widely on the Continent.38 He is known to have visited France and Italy with certainty. The fact that he was granted official permission to travel in 1575 implies that he was both eminent and trusted, since it was difficult at this time for anyone to get permission to travel. The fact that his visit to the Continent was given the official seal of approval and that he was permitted to travel widely to Paris, Strasburg, Padua, Venice, Florence, and Sicily suggests that he was on official business probably on behalf of the Crown and that it constituted a diplomatic mission. The fact that he was recalled in 1576 pushes the case for a diplomat on official business, since his itinerary was being monitored and his person was valued enough to be dispatched and recalled.39 He was even known as the Italianate Englishman due to his tendency to wear the fashion of Renaissance Italy in the Court. He was also strongly influenced by Ovid, Particularly Ovid’s Metamorphosis, and was even referred to as the English Ovid. Oxford did travel in Italy extensively. He traveled with a retinue, according to Lord Burghley of eight people, including two gentlemen, two grooms, one payend (a dispursor of funds), a harbinger (someone who goes ahead to make arrangements), a housekeeper, and a trencherman (a cook). The author of the Shakespeare plays was clearly well acquainted with Italy and its cities. Professor Ernesto Grillo notes that Italy herself is mentioned some 800 times in the plays, while her cities are mentioned severally, Rome 400 times, Venice 52, Naples 34, Milan 25, Florence 23, Padua 22, And Veronas 20. Genoa, Mantua, Pisa, Ferrera and other cities are also mentioned frequently.40 In addition, it is evident that the avant-garde Italianate theatrical form, commedia dell’arte is particularly in evidence in plays like Love’s Labour’s Lost. It was a form of comedy in which the plot was written out, but the dialogue improvised on the stage. George Lyman Kittredge holds the opinion that Shakespeare’s precise descriptions of scenes, laws, and customs spring from firsthand experience.41 In addition, there is the massive influence Italian and Roman authors exerted on the bard. Measure for Measure is influenced by the sixteenth century writer Giovambattista Cinzio; The Merchant of Venice is inspired by Il Pecorone of Florentino, 1588; A Midsummer Night’s Dream must credit Ovid’s Metamorphosis as its muse. (And let us not forget that Oxford worked on the translation of Ovid’s Metamorphosis personally with his uncle Arthur Golding when still a boy); Much Ado About Nothing owes a debt to Matteo Bandello, a fifteen century writer of novellas or tales; TheTaming of the Shrew is based on Arioto’s I Suppositi; and the basic plot of All’s WellThat Ends Well is drawn from the ninth novella of the third day of Boccaccio’s Decameron.42 Then there is the fact that Shakespeare has borrowed so many loan words from the Latin. Alfred Hart credits Shakespeare with employing a vocabulary of 17,677 words, twice that of Milton and two and a half times that of Marlowe. So dexterous was he with words that he was able to employ 7,200 words, more than occur in the King James’ version of the Bible. Lewis Theobold credits him with the massive suffusion of Latin words into English. So immense was the rhetoric of the Italian Renaissance that it amazes even modern researchers, and so great a master was Shakespeare of this rhetoric that he introduced the vocabulary and syntax of the Italian Renaissance to England. Even the sonnets are modeled on the Petrarchan form. In fact, Shakespeare can be credited with single-handedly bringing the Italian Renaissance to England.43 How could the Stratford man have gained so much firsthand knowledge about the Continent, particularly Italy? It was difficult even for nobles to travel at this time. A nobleman required special permission from the Queen to travel at a time when Protestant England was under siege by the Continent. The Throckmorton Plot to unseat the Queen and the northern uprising prove that England was under great peril and in constant danger of plots hatched by France and Spain. Under siege as she was, Elizabethan England had a moratorium on travel as strict as that of Soviet era Russia or North Korea today. It is unlikely Shakespeare would have ever been granted such permission to travel, and there is certainly no evidence from any of the documented record that he ever was. It seems likely then that the author of the Shakespeare plays, which the author of this paper believes to be Edward de Vere, was dispatched to the Continent on an intelligence-gathering mission to the foreign courts and returned to England to dramatize what he had learned abroad. As part of the propaganda network operating under Sir Francis Bacon, founder and head of British intelligence, Oxford would have acted as a patron to the other writers employed by the propaganda syndicate, turning out plays with his apprentices that would have inspired great revelry at the revels. No Elizabethan scholar has ever pointed out the formulaic nature of the Elizabethan theater with its tendency toward histories, comedies and tragedies among the various dramatists. It is as if they were all part of the same dramatic school. Even the titles of the plays among the various Elizabethan authors resemble each other, the Jonson play titled, Every Man Out of His Humor, resembling vintage Shakespeare. As propaganda, the history plays seem conceived to bring into relief the heroic exploits of the English nobility to cultivate a feeling of national identity and pride in the patriotic playhouse. The comedies, on the other hand, were designed to lampoon and satirize the foreign courts, particularly that of France and to paint then in a disparaging light, highlighting their decadence and dissolute ways. Tragedies like Othello, Marlowe’s Tamburlaine, and Titus Andronicus, as already revealed, are designed to make foreign monarchs like Philip II of Spain look like homicidal maniacs. Then, there are the tragedies closer to home like Hamlet, which seem not to have the foreign court as its target, but the Elizabethan Court itself. This accounts for why a pen name was required. Had Philip and other foreign monarchs been able to identify Oxford with the authorship of the very plays that so maligned them, the playwright would have made himself all too vulnerable to political assassination. Closer to home, the identification of the author as a man of Court would have exposed to public ridicule the high-ranking officials around him that are the targets of his plays, rendering him too vulnerable to political dangers including assassination. But even more serious is the issue of the plays and the sonnets, if read as Oxford’s, exposing the true nature of his relationship with the Queen, a problem which the establishment sought to remedy through damage control. Suppression of the author’s true identity was the means.44 Another motive for a British intelligence agent operating as a propagandist adopting a pen name is that he would make himself immune to both prosecution and persecution precisely because, if he were publicly censured, reprimanded and punished for any of his literary works, it would expose the very figures who wished themselves not to be identified with the brutes and monsters of his plays. What is evident beyond doubt is that the author of the Shakespeare plays is not only of the noble class, but subscribes to an ideology embracing peerage, caste, privilege and the entire edifice of feudal England. It makes no sense whatsoever that a commoner from the country seeking a higher status and class position would subscribe to an ideology that would conspire to keep him in the mud. This safely eliminates the Stratford man from the authorship candidacy, since he would have no good reason to promote an ideology that would disqualify him from obtaining either respect or rank within his society. In Troilus and Cressida, there is an unmistakable appeal on the part of the dramatist to the need to maintain a caste system and its hierarchies of privileges, ranks and degrees. There are repeated references to the occult beliefs of Freemasonry. Allusions to ‘degree’ and its importance are repeated several times. What must be stated here is that Freemasonry, which was based on the Egyptian mystery school tradition, was designed specifically to reinforce, safeguard and protect the aristocratic bloodlines in Europe just as the Egyptian mystery schools had formerly done in Egypt. Only aristocrats could belong to Freemasonry and they would be initiated into its higher degrees in order to protect the aristocratic bloodlines as part of an orchestrated effort to maintain their hegemony, privilege and purity. To the author of the Shakespeare plays, obedience to rank and degree was so natural that it made appeal to the order of nature itself. Freemasonry, to which the Earl of Oxford belonged, as most nobles of rank would, had a vested interest in promoting its ideology as a higher initiate, which he does through the personage of Ulysses: The heavens themselves, the planets, and this center Observe degree, priority, and place, Insisture, course, proportion, season, form, Office, and custom, in all line of order: And therefore is the glorious planet Sol In noble eminence enthron’d and spher’d Amidst the other. Troilus and Cressida, Act I.iii.ll.85-91 To understand these lines and their significance requires some rudimentary knowledge of Freemasonry. Sol is Latin for ‘sun’. The Sol Invictus religion was the religion of classical Rome and was a sun-worshipping cult. The Freemasonry secret society fraternity is pagan and is a sun-worshipping cult, exalting the sun as its highest principle. The Sun is the king of the planets, so it may be said the King as the sovereign of the nation is the Sun or the sun god, and as such is no less than God in glory. High aristocratic caste is indistinguishable from high degree in Freemasonry, since only those initiates with the most royal blood and highest noble peerage would be able to rise to the highest degrees. A higher-degree Freemason would certainly have the bloodline of kings. The ideology embraced by the fraternity was that caste had to be maintained, that bloodline could not be compromised or like metal it would suffer debasement. Shakespeare writes that degree and rank must be adhered to lest, as Ulysses maintains, disease and disorder reign: “O! when degree is shak’d,/ Which is the ladder to all high designs,/ The enterprise is sick….” I.ii.ll.101-103 In a poem from his youth called, Labour and Its Reward, Oxford, crediting himself as the author, writes, “The Mason poor that builds the lordly halls/ Dwells not in them: they are for high degree….”45 Oxford is referring to the system of initiation in Freemasonry based on degree, which assigns privilege to those of higher degree, those of more noble blood, who are initiated into the higher initiatory levels of the fraternity. What is clear throughout the poem is that Oxford is lamenting the fact that there are many initiates of higher degree who outrank him. As a Mason, not only is he honor bound to maintain the secrets of the order, having taken a pledge to do so, but must also comply with what higher initiates within the order demand of him. I think it not at all far-fetched to suppose that Oxford has been required by his membership within Fra Rosi Cross, Freemasonry, and the British Secret Service, all founded by Sir Francis Bacon, to write secretly as an ‘invisible’ for purposes of personal safety as well as national security. The fact that Oxford as an author regrets the anonymity he must maintain is clear in two lines appearing near the end of the poem: “So he that takes the pain to pen the book/ Reaps not the gifts of goodly golden muse….”46 While being a higher degree initiate of Freemasonry, Oxford would have been surpassed in rank and degree by Bacon, who would have been a 33rd Degree Freemason and Master of the Order, and would have required the lower degree initiate to write anonymously as an agent of British intelligence, initiate of Freemasonry, Fra Rosi Cross, and courtier. While Bacon was over ten years younger than Oxford, he surpassed him in rank because his royal blood granted him higher peerage. Amazingly, according to Alfred Dodd, Bacon was not a commoner, but the secret son of Queen Elizabeth I and prince of the realm.47 Far from being the Virgin Queen known to posterity, Dodd and other researchers believe her to have had at least two children, including the Earl of Essex. His patriotic duty would have required him to be a spiritual martyr in the cause of nation building. He would not be entitled to enjoying the fruits of his labor. He would be writing clandestinely as an intelligence man, dispatched on espionage missions to the Continent under the protection of diplomatic immunity, while covertly gathering intelligence on the royal courts of other lands, and then returning to England to dramatize what he had learned abroad as part of a state propaganda operation. He would also appropriate what had become institutions in Italy, including the Petrarchan Sonnet, the masterpieces of Ovid, Plutarch and others, superceding them in mastery and genius, exacting a cultural coup on the Continent that would leave England sitting prettiest, while holding the coveted prize of the greatest writer in European history, and what would be even worse medicine for the Europeans to bear, that this peerless writer was a commoner from the country. The strongest evidence that the author’s works were not under his control and had been suppressed by a secret fraternity can be found in the preface to the first edition of Troilus and Cressida in 1609, appearing five years after the official date of Oxford’s death. The First Folio of Shakespeare’s works did not appear until 1623, some nineteen years after the Earl of Oxford’s death and seven years after the Stratford man’s death, suggesting that the bard did not exercise control over his own work. Having escaped the covetous hands of those who suppressed the other plays, Troilus and Cressida was somehow printed and distributed. The dedication is provocative because it gestures to the fact that the author and his works are intended for the highborn. It begins with the heading, “From a never writer to an ever reader. Newes.” This is highly suggestive, since it points to the fact that the author may never be acknowledged, since he is “a never writer, but that his work is addressed to “an ever reader,” an E. Ver reader perhaps hinted at by cryptic heading. The author of the dedication then writes, “Eternal reader, you have here a new play, never staled with the stage, never clap-clawed with the palms of the vulgar.” Does this sound like a dedication to a commoner from Stratford? If anything, it sounds like a nobleman praising the work of another nobleman, whose newly published work has managed to escape the hands of the vulgar commoners who have failed to exhibit it at the theater. It goes on to praise the author, while never referring once to Shakespeare, the author credited with the play by posterity. The dedication further alleges that, were the names of the comedies changed to commodities,
…you should see all those grand censors that now style them such vanities flock to them for the main grace of their gravities: especially the author’s comedies, that are so framed to the life, that they serve for the most common commentaries of all the actions of our lives, showing such a dexterity of wit, that those most displeased with plays are pleased with his comedies. (Troilus and Cressida, Preface)
The dedication then ends with a reference to the “grand possessors,” which Stratfordians, those who believe the bard to be Will Shakspere from Stratford-Upon-Avon, naively believe refers to an acting company that has seized control of his plays. The reason this claim is naive is because “grand possessors” implies a body of individuals of noble rank and of considerable authority. Since we are on the subject of commodities, the author of this paper has put his money on it being the Freemasons, the Fra Rosi Cross fraternity, or some body within British intelligence service itself here referred to: And believe this, that when he is gone, and his comedies out of sale, you will scramble for them, and set up a new English Inquisition. Take this for a warning, and at the pleasure of your peril’s loss, for not being sullied with the smoky breath of the multitude; but thank fortune for the ’scape it hath made amongst you. Since by the grand possessors’ wills I believe you should have prayed for them rather than been prayed. (Troilus and Cressida, Preface)
It is clear that the plays are in the clutches of unrevealed hands, “grand possessors” as they are called. By “grand possessors,” Stratfordians somehow have arrived at the amazing conclusion that an acting company is involved. Why the word “grand” then? “Grand” would hardly be a fitting word to apply to an acting company composed of common players. What is far more likely is that Sir Francis Bacon’s intelligence service, Fra Rosi Cross secret literary society, or Freemasonry are implied. In his seminal biography on Sir Francis Bacon, Alfred Dodd, addressing the issue of the Shakespeare manuscripts, claims that the manuscripts were filed away for safekeeping with the “grand possessors,” who, according to the Preface of Troilus andCressida of 1609 kept them in safe custody for the author.48The Preface to Troilus and Cressida makes it abundantly clear that the plays are in the protective custody of the grand possessors. The author of the Preface even suggests that Troilus andCressida has been wrested away from the grand possessors against their wills, bidding the reader to, ‘…thank fortune for the ’scape it hath made amongst you. Since by the grand possessors’ wills I believe you should have prayed for them rather than been prayed.’ This suggests that the grand possessors exercise control over the plays and that their fate is subject to their wills. Granted, this could be with the author’s approval, but the opening lines suggest that the preface is partly written to the author himself in the form of a eulogy as in the words, “…for it is a birth of your brain that never undertook anything comical vainly.” (Troilus and Cressida, Preface)Note that the past form ‘undertook’ is used, implying that the products that are the birth of the author’s brain are in the past. Why not ‘undertake’, if in 1609, the author is still active and writing? The reasonable explanation for this is that the author was dead by this time and his work was now in the custody of a group of individuals functioning as executors and guardians of the deceased’s manuscripts. Since Edward de Vere is believed to have officially died in 1604, this could account for why the manuscripts are no longer in the author’s possession of under his control. It was probably considered expedient by the Freemason fraternity to hold off on the release of the plays until after all the figures in the Elizabethan Court and English establishment alluded to or lampooned in the plays were dead. It is also probable that even an influential organization like Freemasonry could only suppress the true authorship through a generational delay, in which the release of the plays would be delayed by a span of some twenty years, by such time that the true bard, along with his political opponents, would have been forgotten. Since the hierarchy of the intelligence services is based on the initiatory degrees of Freemasonry, it is reasonable to suppose that those most highly placed in both command structures would be in many instances the same men. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to surmise that the Masons and the Elizabethan intelligence service were connected, since both Speculative Freemasonry and the British intelligence service were founded by Sir Francis Bacon and his brother Anthony, so that many of the same vanguard could be found in both fraternities. According to a contact in U.S. Naval Intelligence, higher ranking officers in the military and intelligence command structure of the United States are often either Freemasons or Rosicrucians. The same is the case for the British intelligence services. Since Bacon is responsible for founding Fra Rosi Cross, Speculative Freemasonry in its modern form, and the British intelligence service, it is not difficult to give credit where credit is due. As a fraternity wielding great influence, Freemasonry would have been able to disseminate misinformation through the education system, easy enough to orchestrate since the university degree system is based on the first three degrees of Freemasonry, Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master Mason, and could therefore control which theses on the bard would obtain Ph.D.s and which would not. This means that the organization controls who gains privilege within the university establishment. The release of disinformation and the control over information are then exercised by a steering committee that functions like the Invisible College Bacon refers to in The New Atlantis, dictating what the official view on the bard is going to be. What the preface to Troilus and Cressida appears to be saying is that the dramatist’s plays are held by members of a secret fraternity of noble peerage, such as Fra Rosi Cross or the Masons and that this play was somehow rescued from their control. This eliminates Bacon as the author. Why? Because if he were the founder and director of the secret societies in addition to the British intelligence service, how could the plays be wrested from his control? It is self-evident that Bacon’s secret societies Fra Rosi Cross, later the Rosicrucians, and Freemasonry are behind the Stratford authorship ruse. They needed a front man to conceal the authorship of the ‘invisible’ who wrote the Shakespeare works. The Stratford man was selected as the commoner front man who would take credit for the works. This, in part, served to empower the lower classes by granting enormous dignity to a man from the lower ranks of society. This mission was part of Bacon’s secret enterprise. There is no way that Bacon could be the author of the plays. The Preface to Troilus and Cressida disqualifies him as the author. The power he wielded as the founder of Speculative Freemasonry and Fra Rosi Cross meant that he would exercise absolute control over his own plays. Yet the Preface to Troilus and Cressida makes it explicit that the grand possessors have wrested the plays out of the dramatist’s control and that they are subjected to their will not the author’s. The plays cannot be Bacon’s, since Bacon was the head of all the fraternities implied by the “grand possessors” including, The Honourable Order of the Knights of the Helmet, Fra Rosi Cross, Speculative Freemasonry and British intelligence. How could the plays possibly be prized from his hands? Not only is Bacon the founder of the British Secret Service, he is the founder of the Freemason and Rosicrucian societies in their modern form. He is even responsible for the Thirty-three Degree system of initiation employed by the Freemason Craft today around the world.49 How could the plays be exercised from the control of a man who headed all the organizations who could have qualified for the designation “grand possessors”? Obviously, Bacon and one of his secret fraternities exercised control over the plays and not the author. The author is clearly someone other than Bacon, an ‘invisible’ who worked under his authority and did not exercise control over his own plays. Edward de Vere is the only man other than Bacon whose life, peerage, education and craftsmanship could have qualified him for the role of Shakespeare. It is probably Oxford who had the plays wrested from his control. What is clear from the record is that Ben Jonson has had a hand in the publication of the First Folio of plays. This we know because of his dedication, which appears in the Folio itself. Documented proof also exists that Sir Francis Bacon has had a hand in the Shakespeare plays at least at the planning level, since the Northumberland manuscript displays his name, along with the name William Shakespeare as well as the titles of several of the plays. What the author of this paper suspects is that the Shakespeare manuscripts were in the hands of a body referred to in the dedication to Troilus and Cressida as the “grand possessors” to which Jonson and Bacon belonged. It is Charlton and Dorothy Ogburn who have helped enlighten us on the identify of the “grand possessors” in their classic This Star of England. In 1615, the Earl of Pembroke became the Lord Chamberlain. It would therefore be with his approval that Ben Jonson would be nominated for the office of Master of the Revels. And it was at the Lord Chamberlain’s behest that Jonson was awarded a pension of 100 marks a year. It the year 1621, Pembroke increased Jonson’s salary temporarily to 200 pounds a year. It will be remembered that the First Folio of the Shakespeare plays came out in 1623. We know that Jonson had a hand in the editing of the plays because we have all read his dedication to the Shakespeare works. Is it such wild speculation to suppose that he might be receiving a stipend from the Lord Chamberlain for his work on the Shakespeare manuscripts? Not only was Ben Jonson on close terms with Lord Pembroke, he was on intimate terms with Lady Mary Pembroke as well. The “Incomparable Paire of Brethren” to whom the First Folio was dedicated, were the Countess of Pembroke’s two sons, William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke, and Philip Herbert, Earl of Montgommery. Philip Herbert had married Edward de Vere’s daughter, Susan. A confederacy or fraternity involving all these people had already formed when Oxford was still alive. The Ogburn’s research has determined that the Countess of Pembroke, her two sons, the Earls of Pembroke and Montgommery, the Earl of Southampton, who some affirm to be Oxford’s illegitimate son, Sackville, Neville and others, all intimately connected with the Earl of Oxford, constituted the Virginia Company.50 Considering that the Virginia Company was under Charter of King James to develop the lands and resources of the colony of Virginia and whatever other territory in the New World it could lay its hands on, we can assume it was directly connected with Sir Francis Bacon’s ambitions in the American colonies as outlined in The New Atlantis. There is ample evidence that Bacon had a hand in the plays. Baconian ciphers found in the plays and the Northumberland manuscript certainly link him to their production. It is probable that, as head of British intelligence and founder of Speculative Freemasonry and at least two secret literary societies, he would have advised Oxford on what themes, coded messages and other devices to include in the plays. Bacon was in fact a cousin of the Cecil’s and thus a family relation of Lord Oxford. It is probable that they met when Oxford was but a child. Their intimacy would have only grown during their attendance at Gray’s Inn law school, where they both purportedly wrote and produced revels for the stage. While approximately a decade younger than Oxford, Bacon wielded great influence at Gray’s Inn, where many of the revels were performed, and was even installed there as dean for several years. Jonson was also closely connected with Bacon. There is ample evidence within the Jonson and Shakespeare canons to prove that Jonson and the author of the Shakespeare plays were both initiated Masons. This will be explored later in the paper. Jonson paid Bacon the highest tribute in 1619, giving him the title “Dominus Verulamis” for his persuasive power, eloquence, and graces in delivering fine speeches. According to a noted source at the time identified as Judge Webb, Bacon was closely associated with Jonson long before he was created Lord St. Albans. He even engaged Jonson to compose a masque for the Christmas celebrations in 1617. Jonson would even go on to write a panegyric on Bacon on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday in 1621. What is revealing is that, though Bacon would have been intimately familiar with his family relation, Lord Oxford, he never mentions him throughout the seven volumes of the Letters and Life of Francis Bacon, except once, and that in the formal list of peers who sat as Commissioners in the trial of Essex and Southampton. The author of this paper fully agrees with the Ogburns that Bacon and Jonson and the Freemason fraternity are responsible for orchestrating the hoax that has concealed the true authorship of the Shakespeare plays.51 Implicating Bacon and Jonson in the greatest literary hoax in history without implicating the Freemasons would be absurd, since the two men could not have acted alone and required the mobilization of a clandestine organization fully supportive of their scheme, and to which they both belonged, to successfully pull off one of the greatest orchestrated deceptions in world history. In commemoration of the Freemason-led deception, a Freemasonic ceremony was held in July 1929 to lay the Foundation Stone of the Shakespeare Memorial Theatre at Stratford-upon-Avon, a fully laid on Masonic ritual conducted by Lord Amptill, pro-Grand Master of the United Lodge of England, in which he employed an old Egyptian stone maul used at Sakkhara four thousand years ago. Six hundred Masons were in attendance in full Masonic costume.52 The author of this paper believes that the Earl of Oxford, the pseudonymous author of the Shakespeare plays, was martyred by the Masons as part of a Masonic ritual murder known as “The Killing of the King”. The sacrifice of authorship in art can be conceived as a reenactment of Jesus martyrdom as a kind of “passion play”, since it is the mystery and passion of the author’s sheer obscurity that peeks our curiosity and whets our appetite for discovery. It is a god-like enterprise retold in the Shakespearean Sonnets over and over again, the sacrifice that is to be answered at another time, the glory that is to spring from the silence at some future time. That the world will all at once see it, and wonder why they did not see it before is an event only a breath away.53 This explains the significance of the Freemasons using the stone maul from Sakkhara to lay the Foundation Stone of the Shakespeare Memorial Theatre. A stone maul was used in the murder of Hiram Abif, who Freemason lore tells us was the architect of King Solomon’s Temple, the Master Mason and guardian of the secrets of the Third Degree of Freemasonry. The author of the Shakespeare plays actually foretells his own end in The Tempest. The scene in which the three ruffians, Caliban, Stephano and Trinculo plan to set upon Prospero and steal his books is in fact a reenactment of the murder of Hiram Abif from Freemasonic lore. The modus operandi Caliban outlines is drawn directly from the legend: Why, as I told thee, ’tis a custom with him I’ th’ afternoon to sleep: there thou mayst brain him Having first seized his books; or with a log Batter his skull, or paunch him with a stake, Or cut his wezand with thy knife. Remember First to possess his books; for without them He’s but a sot, as I am, nor hath not One spirit to command: they all do hate him As rootedly as I. Burn but his books. The Tempest, III.ii.ll.87-95
The name Prospero stands for the author and is probably to be taken as a play on the word ‘prosper’. Thus we have “Pro-Spear-O”, denoting ‘hope’ or ‘affirmation’, denoting the ‘spear’ of Shakespeare and the ‘spear’ Pallas Athena shakes at ignorance. At the same time, Prospero represents the Master Mason, Hiram Abif, while Caliban, Stephano and Trinculo represent the “Three Juwes” of Masonic legend, Jubila, Jubilum and Jubilo who conspired to steal the secrets of the Master Mason, Hiram Abif, at the Temple. The account of the fate that met Hiram Abif at the Temple is given in the Masonic Rite of the Third Degree:
His devotions being ended, he prepared to retire by the south gate, where he was accosted by the first of these ruffians, who, for want of a better weapon, had armed himself with a plumb rule, and in a threatening manner demanded of our Master…the genuine secrets of Osiris, warning him that death would be the consequence of his refusal; but true to his obligation he replied that those secrets were known to but three in the world and that without the consent of the other two, he neither could, nor would divulge them… This answer not proving satisfactory, the Ruffian aimed a violent blow at out Master’s forehead, but startled by the firmness of his demeanour, it only glanced down the right temple. Yet with sufficient force to cause him to reel and sink to the ground on his left knee. Recovering himself from this situation, he rushed to the west gate where he stood opposed by the second ruffian, to whom he replied as before, yet with undiminished firmness when the ruffian, who was armed with a level struck a violent blow on the left temple which brought him to the ground on his right knee. Finding all chances of escape in both these quarters cut off, our Master staggered, faint and bleeding, to the east gate where the third ruffian was posted and who, on receiving a similar reply to his insolent demand…struck him a violent blow full in the center of the forehead with a heavy stone maul, which laid him lifeless at his feet.54 The intended murder of Prospero is planned by three ruffians, representing the Three Juwes of Masonic lore, who intended to kill him with blows to the head with a wooden instrument, representing the maul of Masonic legend. The mischief they intend is to follow the stealing of Prospero’s books, which are symbolic of the secrets of the Master Mason. The murder was to take place at noon at the entrance to Prospero’s cell, the cell representing the Masonic Temple. The time of noonday is significant as it is the highpoint of the sun, which is of great ritual significance in the “Killing of the King” rites, since Osiris, the king, is the sun, and Horus, his son, is the son of Osiris, the sun god.55 If the man posterity knows as Shakespeare was subject to a political assassination, would it not account for the disparate accounts concerning the cause of death, the absence of a will, a grave and other anomalies related to so great a personage? Would it not also provide an additional motive for concealing the true authorship of the greatest literary personality in history? Would not such a revelation be shaking a spear at the serpent of vice known as the British establishment, including the British Royal Family, government, intelligence service, educational establishment and Freemason network? Further evidence from The Tempest confirms its status as a Masonic play. The strange appearance of the Widow Dido in The Tempest offers yet another reference to Hiram Abif, this time as the son of a widow: Hiram, the widow’s son, Sent to King Solomon, The Great Keystone; On it appears the name, Which raises high the fame Of all, to whom the same Is truly known.56 In certain Masonic ceremonies, i.e. the Third Degree, there is a substitution of Hiram Abif for the initiated candidate. The passage quoted from The Tempest refers to Hiram as the “widow’s son”. Masons even refer to themselves as “son’s of the widow” or “the widow’s sons”. The reason for this is that the expression has an intimate connection with the building of Solomon’s Temple and its architect. In the First Book of Kings, vii. 13 the following words appear: “And King Solomon sent and fetched Hiram of Tyre, a widow’s son of the tribe of Naphtali.” Hiram is therefore referred to as a widow’s son. The Masons are referring back to this “widow’s son” of Biblical import in their rituals and ceremonies.57 There is ample evidence that the plays contain Hermetic and Ancient Mystery sources of Rosicrucian and Masonic origin. The Sonnets are pregnant with fertility god imagery of rebirth and revelation.58 References to Freemasonry abound in the Shakespeare plays. This is no surprise since the author is an initiate of Bacon’s Speculative Freemason fraternity and Bacon is responsible for founding all thirty-three degrees of Freemasonry, which are mini-dramas in themselves, the Third Degree on which the plot of The Tempest is based being but one. Just to prove the case that the plays were written by a high initiate of Freemasonry, a list of references is here made that the reader may judge for himself. There is a reference to Masonic apparel, accessories and symbols in The Merry Wives of Windsor consisting of the garter, and the compass in a ring. The garter is worn by Masons, while a square and compass are featured in a Masonic ring worn on the finger. There is a reference to a young Masonic initiate in Much Ado About Nothing: “Is there no young squarer that will make a voyage with him to the devil?” (I.i.ll.69, 70) A reference to a candidate being initiated into the rites of the Third Degree in The Tempest with the following expressions employed by Caliban over the course of Act IV: “Be patient…I’ll bring thee…Hoodwink this…speak softly…This is the Mouth of THE CELL…No more…ENTER.” (IV) There is an allusion to the Worshipful Master in The Taming of the Shrew: “What! My old Worshipful Master.” (V.i.l.55) Then there is the Masonic ritual letter code referred to in Richard III: “And from the Cross Row plucks the letter G.” The Cross Row refers to the Rosy Cross of the Rosicrucians also known to Masons, and the letter ‘G’ so sacred to Masons refers to the Grand Geometrician or God, who is responsible for all sacred geometry, Temple design and architecture.59 From the evidence provided in the dedication to Troilus and Cressida, we already know that “grand possessors” have dispossessed the author of his books. Are these the ruffians he refers to in The Tempest? We should note that the author’s primary concern in The Tempest is the issue of dispossession. Many scholars are in agreement that TheTempest is the last of the author’s plays. Not only does the author break his wand at the end of the play, but he sets the nature spirit that has been his muse, Ariel, free.60 Does this not signify that the master Prospero has hung up his hat? There is no question that he sees his artistic days as being at an end, Prospero’s epilogue seeming more like his final curtain call and last farewell: Now my charms are all o’erthrown, And what strength I have’s mine own, Which is most faint: now, ’tis true, I must be here confined by you, Or sent to Naples. Let me not, Since I have my dukedom got, And pardon’d the deceiver, dwell In this bare island by your spell… (The Tempest, Epilogue) First, the author addresses his waning artistic powers, which are nearly at an end. Then Prospero says, in what appears to be the author’s final address to the King, only fitting since the play is probably being staged for King James, “now, ’t is true,/I must be here confined by you,/ Or sent to Naples.” The choice has probably already been given to Oxford by King James either to be imprisoned in the Tower or sent into exile perhaps to Italy, where he is known to have cottaged in his younger days. He then entreats the King not to exile him, since he has got back his dukedom. This corresponds to Oxford receiving back some of the landholdings the Queen had earlier confiscated and awarded to Leicester and others as patronage favors. He then indicates that it is under the king’s curse or “spell” that he is able to continue living on this bare island, that island possibly being the Isle of Man, where Oxford is rumored to have been sent into exile, an island that would of course have been barren. He then goes on to appeal to the King for clemency or mercy: But release me from your bands With the help of your good hands: Gentle breath of yours my sails Must fill, or else my project fails, Which was to please. (The Tempest, Epilogue)
In the above lines, Oxford seems to be appealing to the King for forgiveness, hoping that, if his play pleases, the King might see fit to release him from confinement on the island and fill his sails with his command that he might return to England, since the entire play was conceived to please the King and win his approval. He then complains of the despair from which he suffers that only prayer can deliver him from. He then appeals to the King to act according to the Golden Rule, forgiving him his trespasses, as he would have others forgive his:
And my ending is despair, Unless I be relieved by prayer, Which pierces so, that it assaults Mercy itself, and frees all faults. As you from crimes would pardon’d be, Let your indulgence set me free. (The Tempest, Epilogue) Oxford concludes by appealing to the King to free him at his pleasure. Now compare Prospero’s epilogue with a story pertaining to Oxford related by Peter Sammartino in The Man Who Was William Shakespeare. The story goes that King James I was suspicious of Oxford because of the loyalty he had demonstrated to a protestant queen. James I knew of Oxford’s opposition to the former Scottish king being on the throne. He was reluctant to assassinate Oxford however, as he feared rebellion. He resolved instead on confining Oxford to the Tower of London. It was at this time that Oxford’s sin-in-law, the Earl of Derby, suggested a compromise to King James. Since Oxford was the principle writer in all England, he should be permitted to live. Derby proposed that he be removed from the public arena so that he no longer posed a threat to the King. The King then gave Oxford a choice: oblivion or death. Oxford naturally would have chosen oblivion. This would have eliminated him as a political threat, for without the Earl in Court wielding his pen, no one could have discerned the message he imparted through the lines of his plays. It was at this time that he was pronounced officially death. This is said to have occurred at the official date of his death in 1604. Oxford was then allegedly sent to the Isle of Man, which interestingly belonged to the Derby family. There he is said to have spent the rest of his life in isolation attended to by only one servant who brought him logs for the fire as well as food and water, another striking parallel to The Tempest, as Caliban is employed in the same daily tasks as the servant of Prospero. Oxford is said to have continued writing and revising his plays until his actual death in 1611.61 What is interesting about this story is that it seems to corroborate Prospero’s accounting of events in TheTempest’s epilogue and is therefore worth including in the body of this paper as a footnote. What happened at the hour of Oxford’s official death in 1604 is highly suspicious. The events have been recorded in G.P.V. Akrigg’s Shakespeare and the Earl ofSouthampton. The events are of so extraordinary a nature that it raises suspicions about the allegation that Southampton, the “Fair Youth” referred to on the Sonnets, was in fact the illegitimate child of Oxford and a claimant to the throne. In fact, Oxfordian scholar Paul Streitz has proposed that Edward de Vere was actually Edward-Tudor-Seymour, the illegitimate son of Queen Elizabeth I, conceived through an elicit affair between a sixteen-year-old Princess Elizabeth and her stepfather Thomas Seymour.62The reason events of that day seem to confirm this is that Southampton was arrested on June 24, 1604, the day of Oxford’s death, when a seeming panic erupted in King James’s Court. What this suggests is that the Earl of Southampton may have been perceived as a threat due to the fact that he himself may have been a claimant to the throne. The king may have been concerned that, with Southampton’s father, Oxford, removed from the political landscape, Southampton may have developed an appetite for the throne. The king immediately ordered his heir to the throne to confine himself to chambers and called upon the protection of his loyal Scots guards. Southampton and other associates of the Earl of Oxford were arrested and taken to the Tower for questioning. Their personal papers and documents were also seized and examined, presumably for evidence of treasonous plotting. The very next day they were set free. Despite the uproar over the incident, the authorities loyal to the king kept silent, no official explanation ever being offered, while details pertaining to the incident were suppressed. This finding was reported by Oxfordian Randall Barron to the Shakespeare Oxford Society Newsletter in the Fall, 1993 edition. Barron’s conclusion is that, among the papers and documents that were probably seized on the occasion would be Oxford’s own, since they were probably perceived as a national security threat.63 The register of Church of St. Augustine in Hackney tells us that Oxford died of the plague: “Edward de Vere, Erle of Oxenford, was buried the 6th day of July, anno 1604.” In the margin of the same page in the church register is the annotation “The plague.” He is supposed to have been interred here, yet no grave marker has ever been found. The Tudor church was destroyed in 1798, and the ancient gravestones, defaced by time, have been stacked against the church wall.64 The chances of ever finding evidence of his interment at Hackney parish church are exceedingly low. Regarding the Earl’s interment, Lady Oxford’s will attests to the fact that her husband was buried in the churchyard of Hackney parish church, as she stipulated in the passage from her will below that she wished to be laid there with her husband: …in the Church of Hackney, within the county Middlesex, as near unto the body of my late dear and noble lord and husband as may be; only I will that there be in the said Church erected for us a tomb fitting our degree.65 Yet directly contradicting this is the testimony of Oxford’s first cousin, Arthur Golding’s son, who wrote of Oxford’s interment: “I will only speak what all men’s voices confirm: he was a man in mind and body absolutely accomplished with honorable endowments; he died at his house in Hackney in the month of June Anno 1604 and leith buried at Westminster.”65 Some researchers have accounted for this with the explanation that the Earl’s body was at some point exhumed for reburial at Westminster Abbey. When he allegedly died of the plague in 1604, and was purportedly buried in the churchyard at Hackney parish church, there was no memorial and he left no will.67 Is it not strange that one of the most legendary nobles in English history should receive no tribute and leave no will? This suggests that he died in disgrace or that his death deliberately received as little attention as possible. Can one conclude otherwise than that the circumstances of his life and death being deliberately suppressed? Even the stories related to his death are inconsistent. There is even a rumor that he survived beyond his official death in 1604 to live for an additional seven years in exile on the Isle of Man. True, this story might be of the same category of stories that attend the lives of larger-than-life figures such as Marlowe, Jim Morrison, and Elvis, all of whom have had mysterious circumstances attached to their deaths, but could it just be that the very mystery surrounding their deaths is due to something macabre and untoward? Could the riddle of de Vere’s death point to a yet unsolved homicide? There are haunting examples of foreshadowing in the Shakespeare plays, in which the author seems to prophecy his own death and interment. While such references abound, this paper will examine two in which the characters in question are clearly identified with our Lord and author of the plays, they being King Henry V and Romeo. In Henry V, for instance, the king is haunted by the fear that he will be left without a tomb or grave, in which he sees it as his curse to be punished by not receiving a proper Christian burial should he fail in his campaigns in France: Or there we’ll sit, Ruling, in large and ample empery, O’er France, and all her almost kingly dukedoms, Or lay these bones in an unworthy urn, Tombless, with no remembrance over them: Either our history shall, with full mouth, Speak freely of out acts; or else our grave, Like Turkish mute, shall have a tongueless mouth, Not worshipped with a waxen epitaph. (Henry V, I.ii.ll.233-241.) Square the above passage with the problem attending the mystery over Oxford’s interment. Where exactly is one of the greatest nobleman in England’s history buried or is he buried at all? Was it perhaps a Masonic punishment for those who betrayed the Order not to receive a proper burial and was that the fate he was threatened with, a prophecy that was eventually fulfilled? As for the speculation that the Earl may have been murdered by the Masons or indeed by King James’ henchmen, a fate he seems to fear and point to in play after play, we have the bone-chilling presentiment of Romeo preceding the mask, in which in an aside to the audience, he prophesies his own death.
I fear, too early; for my mind misgives Some consequence yet hanging in the stars Shall bitterly begin his fearful date With this night’s revels and expire the term Of a despised life, closed in my breast, By some vile forfeit of untimely death. (Romeo and Juliet, I.iv.ll.104-111) The fact that the prophecy is uttered as an aside to the audience indicates that its relevancy is not so much related to Romeo’s imminent appearance at the ball, but is in fact meant to be taken in a context outside the play, as an aside. As is so often the case in Shakespeare, there is a double import to the character’s speech. While Romeo prophecies that some dark fate will begin to work its poison that night at the masked ball, which will end in his untimely death, so the author also had a predilection about his own death, the reference to “this night’s revels” as much applying to the author’s opening night at the theater as to the ball Romeo plans to attend, in which his highly charged ‘political’ play The TragedyofRomeoand Juliet will be staged for the first time. The implication is that the dark fate of untimely death and political assassination will begin its slow advance that night at the theater. The play Romeo and Juliet was most assuredly political. For those unversed in the background to the play, Oxford was imprisoned for a brief period for his affair with Anne Vavasor, one of the Queen’s handmaidens. Anne’s uncle challenged Oxford to a duel, which left them both wounded. Street battles between the Vavasor clan and Oxford and his acting troupe from Blackfriar’s Theatre took place over several months, providing the inspiration for the Montagues and the Capulets.68 Oxford took revenge in the balcony scene of Romeo and Juliet by having at the Queen: But soft! What light from yonder window breaks? It is the East and Juliet is the sun! Arise, fair sun, and kill the envious moon, Who is already sick with grief That thou her maid art far more fair than she, Be not her maid, since she is envious. Her vestal livery is but sick and green, And none but fools do wear it. Cast it off. (Romeo and Juliet, II.ii.ll.1-9)
The references here are unmistakable. The Queen was often referred to by the appellations Diana or Cynthia meaning ‘the moon’. The Tudor livery worn by all servants to the Queen was green and white’.69 There is no mistaking the fact that Juliet is here being referred to as the Queen’s maidservant. It is clear in Romeo’s speech that both the Queen and his lover Anne Vavasor, the Queen’s maidservant, are implied. The speech is undeniably to be taken as a snub at the Queen’s vanity in probable revenge on Romeo-Oxford’s part for the wounds of love caused him by the fair Rosaline, a character in which the Queen is also implied. This provides one more reason for the necessity of a pen name. Having been made to look foolish to her Court by Oxford’s portrayal of her in his play, she can hardly turn around and punish him for such an offense, since she would only make more of a spectacle of herself in the eyes of her courtiers. She is therefore compelled to pocket the insult. As a consequence of his shift from continental targets to targets closer to home, Oxford would of course have placed himself in far graver political danger. This latter fact accounts for the forlornness of Romeo’s prophecy. On the occasion of Oxford’s ‘official’ death in 1604, the bard appears to have left no will. It is impossible to fathom why a man of his importance would have no concern for what became of his personal property and effects following his death.70 It is claimed that Oxford, probably in weakened health, succumbed to the plague. This claim is highly suspect. Breakouts of the plague usually occurred in London in the summer as the result of drinking water being contaminated by human and animal waste. The poet lived well north of the city in Hackney, where vulnerability to the plague would have been exceptional. Deaths resulting from the plague among the aristocracy were extremely rare.71 Motives for murder or exile of a potential heir to the throne would be strong. And there is ample evidence that Oxford was the Queen’s son, the strongest of which is the signature Oxford used to sign all his personal letters up to the time of King James’s succession. The signature consisted of an overarching crown above his name and seven slash marks beneath his name. Had he succeeded Elizabeth on the throne of England, he would have been Edward VII. This practice of adorning his signature with a crown and seven slashes ceased following the Queen’s death and burial. Oxford’s Tudor signature appears in a letter to Robert Cecil dated April 25, 1603. Queen Elizabeth was interred at Westminster on April 28, 1603. In a letter to Robert Cecil following her burial, Oxford suddenly drops the practice. No other signatures extant following that date contain the marks denoting his divine right to Tudor succession because he would not be King.72 There is considerable circumstantial evidence that Oxford may have been murdered or exiled. It is interesting to note that his ‘official’ death or disappearance occurred only a year after the Queen’s death. Without the protection of the Tudor Queen, he may have found himself in an increasingly vulnerable position politically and socially. In addition, the Shakespeare canon provides strong evidence the author is the Queen’s son. As discovered by Alfred Dodd, the author’s sonnet-diary appears to contain an appeal to the Queen to acknowledge the author as her son and his right to succeed her.73 The appeal could not be more pointed in sonnet thirteen: “You had a father; let your son say so.” (13.14) Or the warning given in sonnet fourteen more explicit: “Or else of thee this I prognosticate,-/Thy end is truth’s and beauty’s doom and date.” (14.13-14) Given that Elizabeth was famed for her beauty and given that Oxford was officially of the line of de Vere or the House of Vere, the words ‘truth’ and ‘beauty’ appear to refer to their respective lines of heredity as Queen and son, since the name Vere is implied by the word ‘truth’. Further evidence for the author’s link to the Tudor line can be found in the oft quoted line by Juliet: What’s in a name? That which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet. So Romeo would, were he not Romeo called, Retain the dear perfection which he owes Without that title. (II.ii.ll. 43-47)
The reference to the ‘rose’ is a veiled reference to the Tudor rose. Thus, the bard’s lineage would have the same pedigree whether or not he bore the name associated with the Tudor line. His pedigree would therefore remain sweet scented no matter what name he bore. The prince is of the sweet Tudor rose lineage whatever name he goes by. The prince will thus retain the peerage and perfection of his birth even without the title associated with the Tudor royal bloodline, the Rosy Cross. As the author of this paper, I hesitated before releasing my findings to the world. I even contacted some Baconian scholars to test my findings out on them, including the composite portrait analysis. While I met with a courteous reception, the Baconian scholars dismissed my findings. I believe that our vision is always attenuated by a certain amount of bias. I have endeavored to overcome my bias by being as objective as possible about the authorship problem. I respect the Baconian position a great deal, but given the weight of evidence supporting my view of the authorship, I have come down on the side of the Oxfordians. This was a painful and tortured position to arrive at. My investigation into the authorship question will continue. I have no wish to mislead the world. Great circumspection and vigilance are required in order to give Shakespeare and the authorship problem a proper burial. 2004 will be the fourth centenary of the Earl of Oxford’s ‘official’ death. The author of this paper intends to celebrate the occasion in style, commemorating his death by deifying him among the pantheon of literary gods as the author of the greatest works in the world canon and holding a celebration to mark the occasion on the 6th of June.
Notes
1 Diana Price, Shakespeare’s Unorthodox Biography: New Evidence of an Authorship
Problem. London: Greenwood Press, 2001, 125.
2 Diana Price, 19.
3 Rolland DeVere, A Student’s Guide to the Shakespeare Mystery. Hunting Valley, OH:
The U of School P, 1993, 12, 13.
4 Diana Price, 11.
5 Diana Price, 11.
6 Charlton Ogburn Jr. The Mysterious William Shakespeare: The Myth and the Reality.
McCeal, VA: EPM Publications, Inc., 98.
7 Charlton Ogburn Jr., 26.
8 Charlton Ogburn Jr., 97.
9 Charlton Ogburn Jr., 234.
10 Peter Sammartino, The Man Who Was William Shakespeare. New York: Cornwall
Books, 1990, 52.
11 Alfred Dodd, Francis Bacon’s Personal Life-Story: The Age of Elizabeth (Vol. 1).
Rider & Co., 1949, 131.
12 Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Mysterious Wm. S., 747.
13 Peter Sammartino, The Man Who Was William Shakespeare, 60.
14 Alfred Dodd, Francis Bacon’s Personal Life-Story: The Age of Elizabeth (Vol. 1), 137.
15 William T. Smedley, The Mystery of Sir Francis Bacon, Mila, MT: Kessinger
Publishing, Reprint, Originally Published in 1910, 102.
16 Anonymous poem attributed to John Lyly quoted in Charlton Ogburn Jr.’s The
Mysterious Wm. S., 705.
17 John Davies’s poem quoted in Charlton Ogburn Jr.’s The Mysterious Wm. S., 104.
18 John Davies’s poem quoted in Charlton Ogburn Jr.’s The Mysterious Wm. S., 104.
19 Richard F. Whalen, Shakespeare: Who Was He? The Oxford Challenge to the Bard of
20 The Queen’s Privy Seal Warrant quoted in Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Mysterious
Wm. S., 688.
21 Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Mysterious Wm. S., 688, 689.
22 Thomas Heywood’s Apology for Actors quoted in Dorothy and Charlton Ogburn Sr.,
This Star of England. New York: Coward McCann, Inc., 1852, 710.
23 Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Mysterious William Shakespeare, 694.
24 Venetian Ambassador of Spain’s Report to Philip II quoted in Charlton Ogburn Jr.’s
The Mysterious Wm. S., 692.
25 Dorothy and Charlton Ogburn Sr., This Star of England, 711.
27 Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Mysterious Wm. S., p.694.
28 Alfred Dodd, Francis Bacon’s Personal Life-Story: The Age of Elizabeth (Vol. 1), 130.
29 Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Mysterious Wm. S., 694, 695.
30 Marlowe’s Tamburlaine quoted in The Mysterious Wm. S., 693.
31 Charlton Ogburn Jr. The Mysterious Wm. S., 453.
32 Alfred Dodd, Francis Bacon’s Personal Life-Story: The Age of Elizabeth (Vol. 1), 154.
33 Francis Bacon sonnet from The Device of the Indian Prince quoted from Alfred
Dodd’s Francis Bacon’s Personal Life-Story: The Age of Elizabeth (Vol. 1), 158.
34 Richard F. Whalen, 143-145.
35 William T. Smedley, 98.
36 William T. Smedley, 98.
37 William T. Smedley, 109.
38 Peter Sammartino, The Man Who Was William Shakespeare, 88, 89.
39 John Mitchel. Who Wrote Shakespeare? London: Thames and Hudson, 1996, 161.
40 Peter Sammartino, 90.
41 Peter Sammartino, 88.
42 Peter Sammartino, 89.
43 Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Mysterious Wm. S., 291, 292.
44 Charlton Ogburn Jr., The Man Who Was William Shakespeare: A Summary of the Case
Unfolded in the Mysterious William Shakespeare, Delaphane, VA: EPM Publications, Inc.,
1995, 41.
45 Edward de Vere, “Labour and Its Reward” in The Poems of Edward de Vere,
http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/poemslny.htm
46 Edward de Vere, “Labour and Its Reward”.
47 Alfred Dodd, Francis Bacon’s Personal Life-Story: The Age of Elizabeth (Vol.1), 80, 81.
48 Alfred Dodd, 161.
49 Alfred Dodd, 62.
50 Dorothy and Charlton Ogburn Sr., 1208, 1209.
51 Dorothy and Charlton Ogburn Sr.. 1210, 1211.
52 Peter Dawkins, Shakespeare and Freemasonry, 1997, from
http://sirbacon.org/Dawkinsfrmsnry.htm.
53 W.F.C. Wigston, Bacon, Shakespeare and the Rosicrucians. London: Redway, 1888,
Preface, xviii.
54 Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas, The Hiram Key. London: Arrow Books, Ltd.,
1997, 175.
55 Peter Dawkins, Shakespeare and Freemasonry.
56 Lines from “The Tempest” quoted in W.F.C. Wigston’s Bacon, Shakespeare and the
Rosicrucians, 134.
57 W.F.C. Wigston, 134, 135.
58 W.F. C. Wigston, 134, 135.
59 Peter Dawkins, Shakespeare and Freemasonry.
60 W.F.C. Wigston, 174.
61 Peter Sammartino, 11, 12.
62 Paul Streitz, Oxford: Son of Queen Elizabeth I. Darien, CT: Oxford Institute Press,
]2001, 98.
63 John Mitchel, 174, 175.
64 Charlton Ogburn Jr. The Mysterious Wm. S., 765.
65 Dorothy and Charlton Ogburn Sr., 1198.
66 Charlton Ogburn Jr. The Mysterious Wm. S., 43.
67 John Mitchel, 162.
68 Charlton Ogburn Jr. The Mysterious Wm. S., 656, 657.
69 Charlton Ogburn Jr., 656.
70 Paul Streitz, 138.
71 Paul Streitz, 158.
72 Paul Streitz, 157. 73 Alfred Dodd, 120. References
Altrocchi, Paul Hemenway. Most Greatly Lived: A Biographical Novel of Edward de Vere, Seventeenth Earl of Oxford, Whose Pen Name Was William Shakespeare. Xlibris Corporation, 2000.
Dawkins, Peter. Shakespeare and Freemasonry at http://sirbacon.org/Dawkinsfrmsnry.htm.
DeVere, Rollin. A Hawk from a Handsaw: A Student’s Guide to the Shakespeare Mystery. Hunting Valley, Ohio: The University School Press, 1993.
Dodd, Alfred. Francis Bacon’s Personal Life Story (Vol. 1 & 2). London: Rider & Co., 1949.
Knight, Christopher & Robert Lomas. The Hiram Key. London: Arrow Books Ltd., 1997.
Mitchell, John. Who Wrote Shakespeare? London: Thames and Hudson, 1996.
Obgurn, Charlton. The Man Who Was Shakespeare: A Summary of the Case Unfolded inThe Mysterious William Shakespeare. Delaplane, VA: EPM Publications, Ltd., 1995.
Ogburn, Charlton. The Mysterious William Shakespeare: The Myth and the Reality. Mclean, VA: EPM Publications, ltd., 1995.
Ogburn, Dorothy and Charlton. This Star is England. New York: Coward-McCann, Inc., 1952.
Orville, W. Owen. Sir Francis Bacon’s Cipher Story. Montana: Kessinger Publishing, Reprint.
Price, Diana. Shakespeare’s Unauthorized Biography: New Evidence of an AuthorshipProblem. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2001.
Rogers, L.W. Rogers. Occultism in the Shakespeare Plays. Montana: Kessinger Publishing, Reprint.
Sammartino, Peter. The Man Who Was William Shakespeare. London: Cornwall Books, 1990.
Smedley, William T. The Mystery of Sir Francis Bacon. Montana: Kessinger Publishing, Reprint: First Published in 1910.
Streitz, Paul. Oxford Son of Elizabeth I. Darien, CT: Oxford Institute Press, 2001.
Shakespeare, William. The Complete Works with particular attention to Henry IV Part I& 2, Henry V, Romeo and Juliet, and The Tempest.
Whalen, Richard F., Shakespeare: Who Was He? The Oxford Challenge to the Bard ofAvon. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1994.
Wigston, W.F.C., Bacon, Shakespeare and the Rosicrucians. London: Geaorde Redway, 1888.
Ship of Fools The 12th Ill-Feb55 fated1912did ship o’shenot foolswentgo doomdownwith crewmuchher to the chagrin of all who believed in invincibility of passenger ship and who never dreamed she’d go55 down on her maiden voyage by striking an iceberg.were the number of cancellations made before she set sail, including Jesuit Order elite banker J.P. Morgan, who waved cordial goodbye to World Government faction who sought to found League of Nations for a world order that would preserve global order as opposed to slaughterhouse known as New World Order inaugurated by the Morgan-Rothschild-Rockefeller faction, founding the U.N. headquarters on land formerly occupied by slaughterhouse for cattle, making explicit how they see us whom they call the goyim or cattle. Jesuit owned White Star Line ensured Titanic’s two sister ships the Olympic and the York went to the same watery grave. Robert Ballard’s photos show Titanic’s hulk does not match her blueprints, but rather those of sister ship Olympic. There was an explosion in boiler room below waterline before she set sail from port in Southampton to New World Order capital New York.
33 DEGREES By Timothy Burns Watson
IS
ANYONE
AWARE THAT
IT’S BEEN MUCH
WARMER THESE DAYS
IN THE NORTHERN CLIMES
AT THE NORTHERLY LATITUDES
AT ABOUT SAY 33 DEGREES OR SO?
IT’S ABOUT 33 DEGREES ALL YEAR LONG
EVEN THE PENTAGON ANGLES ARE AT 33o
THE GRAPH’S EVEN STEEPER DURING WARTIME
HAVE YOU TAKEN THE PRESIDENT’S TEMPERATURE?
33 DEGREES IS USUALLY CONSIDERED NORMAL FOR THEM
33 IS A PRETTY IMPORTANT NUMBER TO THOSE ILLUMINATI
POPE JOHN PAUL I ASCENDED TO HEAVEN AFTER ONLY 33 DAYS
JESUS DIED AT 33 AND MASONS WROTE ABOUT IT 33 YEARS LATER
PHOENIX ARIZONA IS PERCHED AT 33 DEGREES ON THE LATITUDE LINE
THE FOLKS AT 33 DEGREES TAKE A LOT OF LATITUDES WITH THE PEOPLE
THE QUEEN MOTHER DIED AT 3:15, WHICH SHOWS THE HANDS POINTING AT 33o
Cleopatra’s Needle
Timothy Spearman
A
long
needle
and thread
has been used
to weave the web of Illuminati control.
It may not be that easy
for a rich man to enter
the kingdom of heaven,
but they’re not worried.
They weave their webs
And extend their Net &
Worldwide Web globally,
extending their influence
peddling around the map
from the poppy fields of
Afghanistan and Burma
to those killing fields of
Cambodia and Rwanda.
Cleopatra threads her
needle, while children
in the poorer countries
try to darn their socks.
As for the camels that
may have some trouble
passing through the eye
of the needle, no worries;
the rich man has no wish
to go to heaven, with a
place staked out in hell.
DOUBLE CROSSED
(By Timothy Spearman)
JESUS’ BIRTH BENEATH A STAR
WAS SAID OF OSIRIS AND HORUS.
THE STORY CONCERNED SIRIUS,
THE HEAVENS’ BRIGHTEST STAR.
THE RISING OF 3 STARS MARKED
THE OCCASION FOR 3 WISE MEN;
THE STARS FORM ORION’S BELT.
SUN-WORSHIPPING MAGI VISITED
MITHRAS LONG BEFORE JESUS MET THE 3 WISE MEN WHO CAME BEARING GIFTS
FOR THE SON OF THE SUN GOD; GOLD, FRANKINSENSE, AND MYRRH BEING THEN
THE TRADITIONAL OFFERINGS OF THE MAGI TO THE SUN OF THE SUN GOD MITHRAS, WHO WAS ALSO BORN IN A DARK PLACE BECAUSE THAT’S WHERE THE CELLESTIAL
ORB GOES WHEN IT DIES ON THE WINTER SOLSTICE, ONLY TO RISE AGAIN AFTER THREE DAYS ON DECEMBER 24TH, THE HOLYDAY THEY CALLED CHRISTMAS EVE.
A CROSS SYMBOLIZES SPRING,
THE SPRING EQUINOX PERIOD,
WHEN DAY AND NIGHT ARE OF
EQUAL DURATION AND A TIME
WHEN LIGHT WINS A VICTORY
OVER DARKNESS AND WINTER.
JESUS DIED IN THE DARKNESS
JUST AS THE SUN HAD DONE,
SINCE JESUS LIKE THE SUN’S
SON, HORUS, IS ANOTHER SUN.
THE REBIRTH OF THE SUN ON
THE THIRD DAY IS THE STORY
OF OSIRIS’S COMING VICTORY
OVER DARKNESS AND WINTER,
THE DAYS GROWING LONGER
IN THE JOURNEY TO SUMMER
AND THE JUNE 21ST SOLSTICE.
THE CROSS IS NORTH-SOUTH
AND EAST-WEST, SYMBOLIC
OF THE SEASONS OF A YEAR.
Fair and Square
By Timothy Spearman
Just to be on the level with those Squares in the Oval Office,
no one has yet managed to put Square blocks in round holes.
Would that they measuring by degree were made to measure
so that installed masonry would square measure for measure.
Worshipful masters unfit for Solemn Temples in them reside.
Hiram Abif knows great headaches do confound the temples.
There are more sore temples among students of Temple Bar;
watch them holding their heads after completing a Bar Exam.
No wonder the twin pillars of the Temple folded in New York;
the masonry of the Temple didn’t square at the right angles;
As a matter of degree, the 33rd Degree was too hot to handle.
Each president knows very well why he gets his fingers burnt.
Being the Grand Master of the Order is just too high an order
to show strength and foundation for the benefit of the nation.
Jack the Ripper
(By Timothy Spearman)
To div-ide
dis-sect
andopen
thatcase
onemore
timemay
The squareshedsunas planner.
as a rule islightonhe let on
not on theIDmore than
level ofMajesty
A totallyknown hiS
Ohonest &may haveN
upstandingphysician &
governmentas personal
either in theRoyal Majesty
U.K. or U.S.A.he served Her
Jack should know since
Osiris’ Penis
Now
Osiris has fallen
The WTC’s gone limp
Before Mammon’s altar
Won’t the economy falter?
Before Isis loses her virginity
Won’t it begin to lose its rigidity?
Will the monument appear smaller?
Will good old Osiris become flaccid?
What if the dollar starts losing value?
Won’t we start experiencing deflation?
What if Top Gun starts shooting blanks?
What will happen at the end of the war?
Do they need more oil for their parties?
Are the wars over there really about oil?
What’s their ambition in the Middle East?
Why are they intent on aiming so high?
What’s the big brass’s hard-on for war?
Why is the President getting so excited?
And have you noticed prices shooting up?
Have you been keeping an eye on inflation?
Are they trying to make us feel inadequate?
What’s an Egyptian god’s phallus doing here?
What about the bill of rights for us less virile?
Is it really a must to erect something so high?
Why all the planning way up there at the top?
Made to measure’s a matter of small measure
I’ve heard that some are more than satisfied.
Myself, I really don’t care if it measures up.
It matters to some - perhaps the higher ups?
Why build things so tall if size doesn’t matter?
Who says size doesn’t matter and how come?
The Egyptian fertility god Osiris is impressive.
When you consider it once belonged to a god,
Small wonder it’s called Washington Monument.
ROYAL ARCH DEGREE
THEAND
SERIOUSLYPRIMARILY
OVERARCHINGHOLD MEANING WORRY MOST HAVEFOR THOSE ELITE IS THE ARC OF CONTROLWHO KNOW THE SECRET
THE BLUEBLOOD FAMILIESLANGUAGE OF THE MASONS
EXERCISE IN GLOBAL AFFAIRSAND THE GOLDEN HANDSHAKES
AS EVIDENCED BY THE CRYPTICTHAT ERECT THE GOLDEN ARCHES
LOGOS THAT ARE THEIR LOGOS,OF OVERARCHING GLOBAL CONTROL
THE MODUS OPERANDI FORMULATHAT EXTEND FROM THE CHAEBOLS
THAT GOVERNS ALL THEY FRONTOF SEOUL TO THE N.Y. BOARDROOMS
THROUGH THE MANIFOLD FRONTSOF THE FREEMASONIC ELITE FAMILIES
FROM FRONT COMPANIES TO THEWHO CONTROL THE MAJOR CONSORTIUMS
BY SUCH DUMMIES AS GEORGE W.BEING ONLY ONE EXAMPLE OF TOP DOWN
AND OTHER LUMINARIES SUCH ASMANAGEMENT UNDER THE GOLDEN ARCH
SAM NUNN AND WARREN BUFFET.OF HIGHER DEGREES IN THE FRATERNITY.
DODGE RAM HAS A GOAT’S HEAD,TEXACO HAS T-SQUARE AND PENTACLE,
SYMOLIZING BAPHOMET, HORNEDCHEVROLET, A MALTESE CROSS, ACURA
GOD OF ANCIENT PAGAN RITUAL.HAS THE MASONIC COMPASS AS A LOGO,
CHRYSTLER LOGO IS WINGS OF RAAND GM HAS THE 7TH AND 13TH LETTERS
WHILE MERCURY IS A PAGAN GOD.SIGNIFYING THE ‘GRAND GEOMETRICIAN’
LOGOS ARE THE MASONIC LOGOSTHEY BELIEVE CONTROLS THE UNIVERSE.
Skull and Bones
For most of us who read the label on the products we buy the skull and bones logo means poison but the origin of the pirate logo Theis very oldSuch crossedindeed.advice bonesis given meanto 3rd death toDegree Masons who thenwho do confrontnot heed death.warnings.
As for the stern maraudersof the high seas who would haveus bow down to them, don’t believe a word about what the history books say. These pirate ships were the armada of the Knights Templar, whose organization was driven out of port in La Rochelle by Philip the Fair of France. Whether or not it was fair has not been established, but for the followers of Templar Jacques de Molay, King’s edict of Friday, October 13th, 1307 was far from above board, that Black Friday considered a day of ill-omen ever since. The Templar fleet fled port of La Rochelle before the axe came down and made their way to Portugal and Scotland to found the respective orders Knights of Malta and the York Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, which have ruled land and sea ever since.
Aswhothetheitasus for thosehoistedflag upmastheadwas notthey hadbelieve. It was not the pirate flag as popular lore would have it, but the Knight Templar battle flag. As for the crime syndicate masquerading under the black flag of pirate cutthroats, the Templar-Freemason pirates would exact their revenge against the monarch of Europe by attacking ships under royal charter. They would then expand their empire by allowing their bank and corporate syndicates to branch out under a host of other brand names.
THECHECKERBOARD
By Timothy Spearman
ANY GOOD AT CHESS AND CHECKERS? WHY IS IT ALL IN BLACK AND WHITE?
BLACK AND WHITE SQUARES CAN BEFOUND ON THE FLOORS OF MASONIC
TEMPLES OF THE ILLUMINATI CULTAND SYMBOLIZE THE FACT THAT THE
BROTHERHOOD EXERCISED CONTROLOVER THE LIGHT AND DARK FORCES SINCE THE ANNANAKI, ILLUMINATI,NEPHILIM OR WATCHERS FIRST CAME TO EARTH IN THAT TIME LONG AGOWHEN THEY SET UP COLONIES ON MU
AND ATLANTIS DEDICATED TO THEMYSTERIES OF TEMPLE INITIATIONS
IN WHICH RITES OF HIGHER DEGREEARE RESERVED FOR THOSE CHOSEN
DEEMED WORTHY BY THE ELECTEDBLOODLINES WHO REACHED THE TOP
DUE TO FAMILY CONNECTIONS ANDTHE BLUE BLOODLINES OF THE PAST,
THE ANCIENT EMPIRES OF LEMURIA& ATLANTIS IN THE ANTIDELUVIAN
PERIOD BEFORE THE FALL OF MAN.THE FALL WAS PRECIPITATED BY A
WATCHER NAMED AZUZEL WHO ISTHE GREEKS PROMETHEAN HERO OF
ANTIQUITY WHO BESTOWED UPONTHE ELECT FEW THE ILLUMINATION
OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD ANDEVIL, WHICH USHERED IN THE FALL
OF MAN AND AN ENTIRE CYCLE OFGRACELESS EXILE FROM THE GARDEN
OF PARADISIACAL DELIGHTS THATTHE WORLD IS SUPPOSED TO BE AND
WILL SOON BE AGAIN WHEN THIRDDIMENSION MEETS FOURTH IN REALM
BORDER CROSSING THAT IS SOONTO OCCUR WITH THE RETURN OF THE
WATCHERS WHO DESIRE TO RULEOVER US IN THE FOURTH DIMENSION.
The Clock Is Ticking
By Timothy Spearman
12
All
the watches
clocks and time zones
are set to the same solar time clock
that set alarm bells off all around the world
from the Greenwich zero degrees longitude timeline
to the international dateline, which is yesterday and today. Since Constantine first established the solar time cult on Earth
9 time has involved constant mind-control by the Illuminati which aims3
at synchronizing our minds and our watches to conform to the
same timetable and agenda laid down by those ancients
to set our alarm bells ringing at the End of the Age
that we now know is the Great Work of Ages
or the New World Order to others
which basically just happens
to be right on time right
this very moment
now.
6
THE LIGHTED TORCH By Timothy Burns Watson
A SUN
CULT
BASED
ON PAGANA
SYMBOLISMMAN
REPRESENTS MUST BE
AITS AGENDAINITIATED
FLAMEWITH THE ‘G’BEFORE HE
AND LIGHTEDOF THE GRANDCAN RECEIVE
TORCH SYMOLIZEGEOMETRICIANILLUMINATION
AND REPRESENTWHOSE ETERNALFROM THE ELECT
THE KNOWLEDGEINFLUENCE ISWHO DESCEND FROM
THE WATCHERSTHEIR SACREDTHE WATCHERS
SHEMYAZAPRESERVEWHO GAVE A
& AZAZELAS THEYCHOSEN
GAVE T0CONTROLFEW
MANIT ALLfire
NOW
The Millennium Dome By Timothy Burns Watson
To
cap it all,
the Millennium Dome
has been built next to zero degrees,
Greenwich meantime is waking up to the fact
that alarm bells are going off everywhere to announce the end
of the timetable laid down long ago by the Illuminati family bloodlines;
The storm that precedes the calm when humanity will finally be freed from the bonds
that have kept us imprisoned here in the Intellectual Globe of World Order ideology.
“Dome” from the Greek means the place of the gods, one such place being London,
a place where the sons of gods and the daughters of men settled down together;
this explains why there are many domes in Capitoline Hill in St. Peter’s Square,
and why St. Peter’s Square is not always fair and square and on the level;
and why the Capitol Dome on Capitol Hill was given the same name.
The dome houses the energy of the dark goddess and harnesses it;
sacred geometry is not always so, because it is much abused by us.
The Missing Capstone
By Timothy Burns Watson
D
DIS
DISIST
DISEStab
DISestablish
DISestablishment
DISestablishmentarian
DISestablishmentarianism
We the People, in Order to build and establish a more PERFECT UNION
wish to do away with all antiestablishment thinking by disestablishing the disestablished
Rumsfeld, Bush, George W., Cheney, Frank Garlucci, who rule by the same divine rite of kings that raised those
who got a RAISE in hire to the highest degrees in the fraternity,
which is rank to those of us without a degree unlike the university gentrified, who have been through the Third Degree known as the Ph.D.
It’s ironic one of longest words in English is DISESTABLISHMENTARIANISM
and even more so that French has an equally long word: Anticonstitutionalment! The Other Missing Capstone
By Timothy Burns Watson
NEAR OSIRIS’ BODY
ATOP THE 12 STONES
AN ETERNAL FLAME BURNS
THE LIGHTED TORCH SHOWS
WHEN THEY BUILT THE OBELISK
THE MASONS DID NOT WEAR GLOVES
AT THE CRIME SCENE MAINLY BECAUSE
THE ILLUMINATI LEFT THEIR FINGERPRINTS
THE GOD SET GAVE HORUS A SHOT TO THE EYE
THE SUN OF THE SUN GOD DIED THAT FATEFUL DAY
WHEN WE’RE READING TOP TO BOTTOM AND BOTTOMS UP
WHERE SHOULD WE PUT THE PUNCTUATION IN THIS OUR POEM
EVEN THOUGH WE’RE LOOKING AT THINGS FROM THE BOTTOM UP
IT WAS A COUP ORGANIZED FROM THE TOP DOWN AT HIGHER DEGREES
NOVEMBER 22, 1963 WAS A RITUAL MURDER CALLED ‘KILLING OF THE KING’
DEALEY PLAZA, DALLAS IS A TRUNCATED PYRAMID WITH A MISSING CAPSTONE
The Pentacle By Timothy Burns Watson
A
star having
A5 pointsA
plotrepresentsplot knownthe star Siriusknown
to insidersto the Illuminizedto Masons
as the killingMasonic brotherhoodas the killing
of the king also arranged for the killing of the princess.
Lighted by flame surrounded by pentacle marked by
torch symbolizing illumination of the Sirius star.
Dealey Plaza and Pont de L’Alma mark sites
representing king and virgin queen worship
Virginia-Simiramis-Diana had to die at
the site of traditional Diana cult
worship known as Pont de L’Alma.
They need a lighted torch to mark the
site with real meaning to the Diana cult.
but knowing agenda of ritual murder assassination,murder rite,
story of JFKon Masonic
the officialofficial line
is notis not
couphit
AA
The Twin Towers By Timothy Burns Watson
On one side, George W. BushOn the other, Osama bin Laden,
two twins divided by a Gulfwe know as the Twin Towers.
Changeling twins from samefamily and Illuminized fraternity.
Skull and Bonesman’s sonand the CIA operative bin Laden.
Two royals of one big familyworking for the same societies,
whether on this side or that;whether here or way over there.
Falling for the ruse, America,of the faulty towers is our fault.
We’re being double-crossedagain by French House of Guise.
Just look at the coat-of-armsthey’re wearing on their sleeves
and you will see the EXXONlogo is the very same as theirs,
Proving that the twins workfor the same mafia brotherhood.
As for the Holy War over oil, they’re using the same script
St. Augustine used long ago,and Muslim clerics consulted
to launch the Holy Crusadesand the Jihad against infidels
that would bring two armiesto the Holy Land to spill blood:
“Ye are the evil heathens!”“Nay, ye are the devil’s infidels!”
“In God We Trust” to win.“God is on our side indubitably.”
“We are the self-righteous.”“We are Allah’s holy warriors.”
We are a tower of strength.The tower is our foundation.
The Strength and Foundationare those WTC Twin Towers
known as Jachin and Boaz,the twin pillars of the Temple
destroyed by fire and waterin Atlantis back in 11,000 B.C.,
Newly erected in the USA,Francis Bacon’s New Atlantis
destroyed by fire and water.They will rise again phoenixes.
The New Atlantis has fallen,only to rise up again from ash
in the final stage of creatingthe UN’s Great Work of Ages.
The Pentagon By Timothy Burns Watson
The truth is not 5-sided.
To those who want to see truth,
sacred is to reveal the profane mask.
For sacred geometry to be a sacred preserve
its lines and angles would have to conform to peace.
Note that there is nothing sacred or holy about HOLY WARS
either for the Church Fathers or their Sons or for the Son of the Father.
As for Thomas Jefferson’s street plan for Washington, D.C., why all the pentacles?
I'm sure there are a few hexes in those hexagrams drawn by that Grand Geometrician. Let us not be deluded into thinking that the Pentagon Building conforms to the norm
of what is held sacred according to the letter of the word G, the Great Artificer.
There is nothing sacred about the Pentagon Building’s sacred geometry;
it is a travesty of everything called holy to regard it as a holy site.
It is actually Lucifer’s disguised pentacle from the inside out.
So don’t be deceived by the deceiver’s appearances.
The world is not called Samsrara for nothing.
This unholy site is a mechanized Mecca
for robots like Gen. Richard Myers,
the chief organizer of 9-11.
Know it is on his head He wears the mark
of the Beast:
6 6
6
THREE STARS
By Timothy Burns Watson
A
TRI-
LATERAL
3-POINTED
TRIANGULAR
STAR FORMATION
FORMED IN 4000 B.C.
A GIANT STAR EXPLODED
WITHIN A STELLAR TRIANGLE
MARKED BY STARS ZETA PUPPIS,
GAMMA VELORUM, LAMBDA VELORUM,
FORMING BASIS OF FREEMASON CALENDAR
WHICH BEGINS FROM A.L., IN THE YEAR OF LIGHT,
FOUND BY ADDING 4000 TO MODERN CALANDAR YEAR.
THIS ACCOUNTS FOR THE NAMES TRILATERAL COMMISSION,
TRISTAR PICTURES, SAMSUNG, NISSAN AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS
WHICH ARE KNOWN TO BE UNDER THE THUMB OF MASONIC HANDSHAKES.
THE T-SQUARE
By Timothy Burns Watson
THERE IS AN ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN BUILT INTO EVERYTHING BY
THE GRAND GEOMETRICIAN AND THE MASONS HAVE DONE THEIR BEST
TO EMULATE HIM IN THE WORLDWIDE WEB WOVEN BY THOSE SPIDERS
AT THE TOP WHO SPIN THE WEB ON BEHALF OF SIMIRAMIS-ISIS-DIANA
CYNTHIA-VIRGINIA-DURGA-KALI-THE BLACK MADONNA WHOSE MANY
NAMES SHOW HOW FAR HER NET OF INFLUENCE ACTUALLY EXTENDS.
THE TEXACO LOGO FORMS
THE MASONIC T-SQUARE
INSIDE A PENTACLE STAR
FORMED WITHIN A CIRCLE.
THE ARCO LOGO DISPLAYS
A PYRAMID WITH MISSING
CAPSTONE OF ILLUMINATI AMOCO’S LIGHTED TORCH
LIGHTS THE WAY FOR THE
LIGHT-BEARING MASONS
WHO DIRECT LUCIFERIAN
INSURANCE HIGH STAKES
SUCH AS SUN ALLIANCE,
SUN LIFE, & EAGLE STAR.
SEAGOING VESSELS AND
SPACE SHIPS I.E. NIMROD,
HERMES, ATLANTIS AND
COLUMBIA SHOW WHO’S
HEADING UP THE SPACE
PROGRAM AND THE U.S.
MILITARY OPERATIONS.
SOLOMON’S TEMPLE
The Riddle of the Sphinx is asked and answered in all the temple architecture ranging from the Temple in Jerusalem
to the face on Mars
with its pentagonalHoly of Holies
pyramid in Cydonia
where man settled
before the issue of his origins was ever even raised or settled.
That followed the realization man had a place in the scheme of
things as a being capable of reason and intellect in that center
knowncalled the Holy of Holieswhere
as ajnawhere the High PriestsTemple
whereconvened to raise theiradepts
elusiveminds to sublime levelsresolve
bits ofof cosmic enlightenmentto solve
wisdombefore the End of Dayscosmic
enteredwhen 12th processionalHall riddles
the mindcycle of the zodiac endsofat the
througha 309,000 year epoch of Worshipbehest
apertureenslavement by Annunakiof that
of browlizard beings from the 4thlioness
beatenDimension who enslavedSphinx
chakra.us millennia ago while weof yore.
have been trying to learn
Priestto walkto stayPriest Cells
Cells on twoon our
legs in2 feet
bipedalwith a
periodsolid
JachinbeforepillarBoaz
walkingfirmly
into 4Dlaid on
realityMason
in 2012.floors.
THE HOURGLASS
By Timothy Spearman
HAVE YOU NOT NOTICED IT’S GETTING LATE IN THE HOUR?
TIME AND NUMEROLOGY ARE INEXTRICABLY LINKED.
AN HOURGLASS IS AN OCCULT SYMBOL INDEED,
CONNOTING AS IT IS ABOVE SO IT IS BELOW,
TEMPORAL IN SINK WITH THE ETERNAL,
BUT TIME IS RUNNING OUT ABOVE
THE HOUR IS ALMOST UP BELOW.
THERE IS NOWHERE TO HIDE
AT THE END OF THE AGE
THE TIME OF THE END
ALREADY UPON US
THIS MOMENT
NOW
8:15 A.M. EST
ON AUGUST 6 1945
B-29 BIRD ENOLA GAY
GAVE BIRTH TO LITTLE BOY
ON 33RD DEGREE LATITUDE LINE
A PLACE THAT WILL LIVE IN INFAMY.
GREAT SEAL OF THE U.S. HAS 13 COURSES
ON THE PYRAMID FOR 13 PERIODS OF 13 YEARS
THE BOTTOM COURSE DISPLAYS 1776 OF COURSE.
FROM JULY 4 1776 TO JULY 4 1945 TOTALS 169 YEARS,
FROM JULY 4 1945 TO AUGUST 6 1945 ARRIVES AT 33 DAYS.
13 TIME PERIODS OF 13 YEARS DOES COME OUT TO QUITE A SUM.
JFK Assassination: Masonic Passion Play
By Timothy Burns Watson
Last night, Timothy Spearman, host of Shaking a Spear www.thatradio.com, held a round table discussion with three Toronto-based researchers. The topic of Masonry came up in relation to the JFK assassination. Discussion centred on whether or not the Masons actually had anything to do with JFK assassination plot. The Killing of John F. Kennedy was a Masonic passion play from start to finish. Bear with me as I present the evidence and a case so watertight that no one will be able to resort to the usual obfuscation, evasiveness, equivocation and apologetics.
First, there is the Secret Service agent who walked away from the presidential limousine motorcade moments before the fateful shots were fired, raising his hands three times from his side in an upward motion. This is the Masonic distress sign, “Who’s afraid of the Widow’s son?” It alludes to the assassination of the Masonic hero Hiram Abif, the alleged architect of King Solomon’s Temple, who was assassinated by the Three Unworthy Craftsman in the Temple of Solomon. He was treated as a treasonous brother for failing to reveal the secrets of the Master Mason Degree to the three ruffians referred to in Masonic lore as the three Juwes: Jubelo, Jubela and Jubelum by name.
Next, the assassins, hidden somewhere behind the now infamous Grassy Knoll, fired the fatal shots that would end the president’s illustrious life. These assassins have been named by some astute researchers as E. Howard Hunt, whose deathbed confession we now have, Frank Sturgess, and one other. The now famous photo featuring the mock arrest of these three agents, who have been dubbed the “Three Railway Hoboes,” reveals a great deal. The hoboes, purportedly arrested in a railway boxcar of a freight train just pulling out of the station, were incarcerated and lead away in an unorthodox fashion by three officers. For suspects of a capital crime involving the president, they were taken into custody in an absurdly lax fashion. The photo reveals that the so-called railway hoboes were neither cuffed nor placed in leg irons, despite the enormity of the crime for which they were arrested as suspects. The arresting officers casually lead the men away with their rifles held casually like hunters on an outing rather than at port arms. The hoboes featured in the photo do not appear to be hoboes at all, but clean-cut men, whose shoes are hardly threadbare and whose clothes are far from careworn.
In the Masonic passion play, the three railway hoboes represented the “Three Unworthy Craftsmen” of Masonic lore as James Shelby Downward so perceptibly pointed out. These Three Unworthy Craftsmen would pop up in another Masonic ritual murder staged on a more recent calendar date, when Princess Di(e)’s ritual assassination was preceded by a chase lead by three paparazzi motorcyclists. The three men were taking part in another passion play involving the ritual killing of Diana, who represented the moon goddess to the occult nutcases who bumped her off.She died exactly 33 years, 9 months and 9 days after the killing of the sun-god, represented by then president of the United States, John F. Kennedy. Diana died in a tunnel beneath Pont de L’Alma hill, the traditional site of Diana worship for generations of pagan worshippers, mere coincidence of course. On a much earlier calendar date, the Jack the Ripper slayings would feature another incarnation of the Three Unworthy Craftsmen. A message written in chalk on a wall near one of the slayings reading, “The Juwes are not the men who will be blamed for nothing.”
To reiterate, JFK was killed Masonic ritual style. The forensic evidence, despite denials, shows that the fatal shot came from the front. It targeted his temple and exited through the cranium, where it blew out the back of his skull. Abraham Lincoln would also die from a head wound a century earlier. The shot to the head is Masonic ritual writ large in their occult script. It was a ritual re-enactment of the murder of Hiram Abif, who was struck once with architectural devices in the right and left temples and taken down with a final fatal deathblow to the forehead with a stone maul. The anatomical name “temple” is derived from the Temple of Solomon, where the murder involving an attack on the two temporal lobes of victim Hiram Abif took place. The JFK Masonic Passion Play takes on even more ominous overtones when one realizes it also references the Royal Arch Degree of Freemasonry. The Royal Arch Degree is when the candidate is symbolically granted the secret of the Royal Arch Degree, enabling him to assist in the reconstruction of the Temple. The reconstruction of the Temple in Jerusalem commemorating the inauguration of Lucifer's wordwide throne. Kennedy was a fierce opponent of Israeli ambitions and was pro-Paestinian. He was a starch opponent of their effort to obtain nuclear technology and get a hold of the bomb. That is why he was in part given the ritual punishment of the 13 Degree in the Scottish Rite and the 7th Degree in the York Rite of Freemasonry known as the Royal Arch Degree Oath. The candidate freely submits to ritual death shoud he ever divulge secrets of the Craft or work against the Craft in any way. The ritual death oath he takes consists of agreeing to "have his skull struck off and his brains exposed to the scorching rays of the median sun." Meditate on that pronouncement for a moment. Then think back to the Zapruder Film and recall what transpired following the final fatal shot to the head. Was the president's skull not struck off? Were his brains not exposed to the noonday sun? I put it to you that Kennedy quite by design landed and made his way from Dallas airport to the parade route at Dealey Plaza at 12:00 noon or high noon. In other words, JFK was given the ritual death corresponding with the Royal Arch Degree because he interfered in a symbolic sense with the agenda to rebuid the Temple in Jerusalem.
The Royal Arch Degree is a Satanic rite from start to finish. In the rite, 3 Master Masons appear to the candidate purportedy from Babylon. This is a Satanic inversion and perversion of the appearance of the Three Wise Magi from the East who appeared at Jesus' birthplace. In this Degree, the candidate learns the hidden name if his 'god', who he is informed is "Jahbuhlun" composed of the triune gods of Jahwey, Baal and Osiris or On. On is aso a city in Egypt where the worship of Osiris or On is thought to originate. This demon god is a perversion of the Christian Holy Trinity. W.L. Wilmhurst explains in "The Meaning of Masonry" why this degree is so important to the candidate's life. He explains that it is when the candidate "exhibits the attainment of a new order of life." This is reminiscent of the anguage used by the New World Order, who have repeated time and again that "it is a big idea" this New World Order "struggling to be born" and "coming into view". It is a language that speaks of a dawning sun rising over the horizon, heralding the appearance of a new day , a "new dawn", a "new age", " a golden dawn", etc. This "new order of life" as with the New World Order" implies a new order of Lucifer to replace the od order of God. It is a Satanic inversion and perversion of the rites of Baptism, in which one is "born again" into the spiritual life of the Christian church fellowship. Without realizing it, the candidate is very often initiated into demonic possession through this degree rite. He is even expected to drink blood from a human skull, as Jane Mansfield was photographed doing before her death in an automobile "accident".
Another sordid aspect of the ritual is the Sign of the Hidden Hand, where the initiate is sworn to secrecy regarding the ritual oath he has taken as symbolized by the hand he is obliged to hide beneath his jacket or shirt upon his bosom. The sign is executed by thrusting the hand into the bosom and drawing it out again. It is drawn from the 4th Chapter of Exodus, where Moses is addressed by God: "And the Lord said unto Moses, put now thy hand into thy bosom; and he put his hand into his bosom; and when he took it out, behod his hand was leprous as snow." This explains the countless portraits of America's Founding Fathers and illustrious Eurpeans like Victor Hugo, Napoleon, Marx, Lenin, etc. with their hands hidden away in their breast. It also explains the name of The Order of the Black Hand, the Masonic secret society that orchestrated the death of the Archduke Ferdinand that kicked off WWI.
Jackie, the grieving widow, completes the passion play. She represents the Widow in the Masonic passion play. The Widow grieved for her son Hiram Abif, who died at the hands of the Three Unworthy Craftsmen. Whether or not Jackie was aware of her role in the ritual re-enactment of the Third Degree of Freemasonry, she played her part in the mini drama, as the keystone or capstone who would cap the action of the passion play. The grieving Widow brought the play to its dramatic climax and conclusion, embedded archetypically in our psyches to remain indelibly stamped for all eternity as the Masonic passion play it was always intended to be. Sick I know, but whoever said the world was run by sane people. Rather ironic and sickeningly hypocritical that we the people should fall subject to psychological evaluations based on our questioning of a sick and demented cabal of Luciferian politicians who have the audacity to call themselves leaders. And where do these leaders intend to lead their flock? It should be obvious by now. Who’s afraid of the Widow’s son? Nobody now it seems. He’s dead.
Royal Bloody Murder by Timothy Burns Watson •Tuesday, May. 30, 2006 at 11:53 AM apollospear@yahoo.com The British Royals are at the top of the Masonic establishment that orchestrates events around the world that we call history, including Royal bloody murder.
Jack the Ripper
To
div-ide
dis-sect
andopen
thatcase
onemore
timemay
The squareshedsunas planner.
as a rule islighton he let on
not on theIDmore than
level ofMajesty
A totallyknown hiS
Ohonest &may haveN
upstandingphysician &
governmentas personal
either in theRoyal Majesty
U.K. or U.S.A.he served Her
Jack should know since
It is said that the British intelligence services have the sworn duty of protecting the British Royal Family at all costs. At what cost? How far would they be willing to go in carrying out their duty of protecting the royals and why? The logo for MI5 features a pyramid with a missing capstone, not unlike the Masonic pyramid, missing capstone and All-Seeing-Eye featured on the hind side of the American dollar bill. Why? Are the same controllers in charge on both sides of the Atlantic? What is Masonic symbolism doing on the American one dollar bill and the logo for MI5? Is it not suggestive of overriding control of both these groups by the Masonic fraternity? It is known that a member of the Royal Family of Great Britain has presided as the Worshipful Master over the Grand Lodge of England – currently the Duke of Kent – for generations. The Grand Lodge is the central or premier Masonic Lodge in the world, to which all other Lodges owe their loyalty and their charters. What precisely is the extent of the British Royal Family’s control over Freemasonry and how far is their influence likely to extend? People often ask me to define Freemasonry. What is Freemasonry? I have researched their role in world history enough to know that the Masons and their parent organization, the Knights Templar, have controlled international banking since its foundation in the 13th century. They were also behind the slave trade and the opium trade. If that is not a scandalous enough connection to confirm they are a crime syndicate that has committed grave crimes against humanity, perhaps the fact that their occult symbolism is found on most of the military uniforms of the world, including the Maltese cross, skull and bones insignia, and double-headed phoenix found on the Nazi officer’s uniform will make the case clearer. Would it not be even more shocking to learn of their connection with royal bloody murder, in particular the Jack the Ripper slayings and the murder of Princess Diana? It sounds incredible, but there is evidence to suggest that in the case of Jack the Ripper and the assassination of Princess Diana, there is both a royal and Masonic connection. In observance of the timeline, let’s go back to the Victorian Period to revisit the first of these cases. It is known that all the victims had their throats cut, in most cases from ear to ear. One of the victim’s tongues had been removed. One of the murdered prostitutes had her breast torn open and her heart and vitals removed. Four of the victims had their abdomens cut open and their bowels removed, and in one case burned to ashes. Despite the denials of Masonic apologists, the M.O. here described corresponds with the punishment befalling anyone who fails to uphold the blood oath of the First Degree of Freemasonry. To make the case clear, let us examine these words taken directly from the First Degree oath of Freemasonry: “To all of which I do solemnly and sincerely promise and swear, without any hesitation, mental reservation, or secret evasion of mind in my whatsoever; binding myself under no less a penalty than that of having my throat cut across, my tongue torn out, and with my body buried in the sands of the sea at low-water mark, where the tide ebbs and flows twice in twenty-four hours, should I ever knowingly or willfully violate this, my solemn Obligation of an Entered Apprentice. So help me God and make me steadfast to keep and perform the same.” Some have claimed that there is no evidence of Masonic involvement in the killings. True, the evidence is only circumstantial, and in the absence of hard evidence, it would be difficult to obtain a post-mortem conviction. Still, to say there is no evidence, when there is actually a mountain of circumstantial evidence is misleading and highly inaccurate. The murder of the final victim, for instance, was committed on the final evening of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge #2076, the premier lodge of research in Speculative Freemasonry. The Grand Master of that Lodge was the head of Scotland Yard, who resigned as chief of police immediately following the last Ripper slaying. There may have been a good reason for him doing so, since researchers have identified him as the man who tampered with evidence at the last crime scene. The evidence in question was actually a message scrawled on the wall near the victim’s body, which read, “The Juwes are not the men who will be blamed for nothing.” Masonic apologists have denied that the reference to “the Juwes” has anything to do with Masonic tradition. That claim is shamefully false however. The scrawled message referring to the Three Juwes – Jubila, Jubilo, and Jubulum by name – is a direct reference to the Third Degree of Freemasonry – from which we get the expression “They gave him the Third Degree – and specifically relates to the three assassins of Hiram Abif, the said architect of King Solomon’s Temple. The three ruffians are said to have cordoned off the exits of the temple, demanding that the master mason reveal to them the secrets of the Third Degree. When he refused, each of the ruffians in turn leveled a violent blow to the architect’s head, the first two to the “temples” and a final fatal blow to the forehead. It is highly probable that there are in fact three Jacks involved rather than just one and that these are the three ruffians referred to in the scrawled message found at the last crime scene. Having examined the case report from the British Archives, the letters ostensibly sent by “Jack” to Scotland Yard, show three very distinct hands at work, certainly three different writing hands and indisputably three different voices. One “Jack” uses high English and is probably university educated. The second employs middling English and is probably a commoner of the middle class. The third “Jack” is indisputably working class, employing the Cockney East End London vernacular throughout the letter. Stephen Knight’s investigation of the Jack the Ripper case led him to the conclusion that it was the Queen’s physician, high degree Freemason William Gull, who organized the murder conspiracy in accordance with Masonic ritual. The ostensible motive for the killings was to protect the royal family. ‘What from?’ One might ask. Given the royal family’s penchant for scandal, one might ask why one might ask. According to Knight’s hypothesis, the murders were carried out to protect Prince Albert, the grandson of the Queen, and second in line to the throne, from scandal. The scandal involved his secret marriage to a young Catholic woman, who had given birth to his child. The royal scandal probably had less to do with her being Catholic and more to do with the child being conceived out of wedlock, followed by a secret marriage between the woman and the prince. Such actions would not have carried the stamp of royal respectability, and were unwelcome given the political climate of the time. As for Princess Diana, there may have been a motive for the murder never before considered. The Mason-controlled intelligence service MI5 may have been called upon to protect the British Royal Family for very similar reasons. The former Princess of Wales was allegedly pregnant with the child of Dodi Fayed. The scandalous nature of this revelation seems lost on the general public, but should be clear. It would further humiliate the already much cuckolded Prince of Wales, and cause further embarrassment to an already disaster ridden P.R. department at Buckingham Palace. The irony is that when the truth comes out, the erupting scandal will be the worst in British history and is certain to consign the scandal-ridden Royals to the dustbin of history. The first thing to note about the assassination of the princess is that it took place in a tunnel with a very similar M.O. to that used in another failed MI6 assassination attempt. The fact that Henri Paul has been linked to French intelligence, and that questions have been raised about the blood tests that confirmed high alcohol readings in the driver’s bloodstream raises still further questions. There is evidence emerging that certain intelligence services may have been involved. In another recent revelation, Diana entertained concerns about her safety, believing that “her husband” was planning a murder he hoped would appear like a car accident. Of all the miles of open road in Paris, a car accident in a tunnel away from the prying eyes of the general public does seem rather convenient. The fact that the surveillance cameras were down for the first time in their history and conveniently failed to film the final moments of the crash is also rather telling. It is also highly irregular that the police channel would fail to broadcast for a whole hour leading up to the fatal crash until just after the accident, when it suddenly burst into frenetic life. Were the Masons involved? Is there any evidence that Mason-controlled elements within the intelligence services of Britain and France might have been involved in the murder of the princess? First, let us examine the presence of the three motorcycle paparazzi that were present at the accident scene and later blamed for the fatality. From a Masonic ritual standpoint, they represent “the three Juwes”. It would not be the first time this Masonic M.O. would be used in a political assassination of a major figure. At the time of the JFK assassination, for instance, three railway hoboes would be apprehended and carted away by police. Yet none of these suspected felons would be cuffed and the officers in charge merely carted them away with their guns at port arms. This is highly irregular protocol for a major arrest to say the least. The M.O. would pop up again with the murder of William Morgan, a figure apparently murdered for revealing the secrets of Freemasonry he was assigned to keep. Morgan was actually abducted from jail by three Masons prior to his murder. This is Masonic M.O. related to the Third Degree of Freemasonry specifically targeting victims who have revealed secrets in some way threatening to the Freemason establishment. Morgan, JFK and Princess Diana were all whistle-blowers. Each of them posed a threat to the Mason-controlled establishment and each of them planned to reveal damaging secrets before their deaths. It was natural and calculated that the M.O. employed in their specific murders was directly related to their crimes of indiscretion. It should also be noted that the murder of JFK is said to have conformed to the Masonic “Killing of the King” ritual, a fertility rite honoring the sun god of ancient Egypt, Osiris. At the site of the killing, Dealey Plaza, Dallas, stands a stone obelisk comprised of twelve stone blocks with a lighted torch at the top. This commemorates the killing of the sun god Osiris by the Egyptian god Set, who armed with sword, cut the sun god down, scattering his thirteen body parts to the winds. Isis, the consort of Osiris, would reclaim his body parts and hold a necromancy ceremony to raise him from the dead. But the missing thirteenth body part, Osiris’ phallus would never be recovered and is represented by the Egyptian stone obelisk, one of which is found at Dealey Plaza. The killing of the moon goddess Diana would occur exactly thirty-three years, nine months and nine days after the killing of the king in Dallas, who died at the 33-Degree parallel line of latitude on November 22, 1963. She would die inside a tunnel beneath Pont de l’Alma hill, the traditional site of Diana worship for generations of pagans. At the site marking her death lies a lighted torch within a pentacle star, another Masonic calling card. The fact that a member of the Royal Family presides as Grand Master over the central and premier Lodge of world Freemasonry does create disturbing implications in light of the fact that the Masons have left their fingerprints had so many of the world’s great crime scenes.
The Pentacle
By Timothy Burns Watson A star having A5 pointsA plotrepresentsplot knownthe star Siriusknown to insidersto the Illuminizedto Masons as the killingMasonic brotherhoodas the killing of the king also arranged for the killing of the princess. Lighted by flame surrounded by pentacle marked by torch symbolizing illumination of the Sirius star. Dealey Plaza and Pont de L’Alma mark sites representing king and virgin queen worship Virginia-Simiramis-Diana had to die at the site of traditional Diana cult worship known as Pont de L’Alma. They need a lighted torch to mark the site with real meaning to the Diana cult. but knowing agenda of ritual murder activity assassination, murder rite, story of JFKon Masonic the officialofficial line is notis not coup hit A A
They Gave Us the Third Degree By Timothy Watson
“They gave them the Third Degree” is just one of the Masonic expressions with which our language is steeped. But to what arcane reference does it owe its origin? To anyone familiar with Freemason lore, it will be clear that it refers to one of Freemasonry’s most venerated figures – Hiram Abif. The biblical reference to Hiram Abif tells us that he was the architect dispatched by the King of Tyre as the architect-builder of King Solomon’s Temple. Legend holds that he was approached at the Temple by three ruffians in search of the secrets of the Third Degree of Masonry – secrets presumably related to the art of stone building – but Hiram, as stolid as stone, refused to budge. The “Three Unworthy Craftsmen” as they are known cordoned off the exits of the Temple and lay in wait for their quarry to attempt an escape. Hiram’s first escape attempt was met with a blow to one temple with an architectural device, causing him to drop on one knee. As he staggered to the next exit, he was met with a second blow to the other temple, which took him down on the other knee. After regaining his senses a third time, he staggered to the third and final exit of the Temple, where he met with the final fatal deathblow administered by a stone maul to the forehead.
The Third Degree ritual is often referred to in literature as in Shakespeare’s “Tempest”, where Prospero is confronted by three ruffians who steal his manuscripts or in “Macbeth,” where Banquo is confronted and killed by three agents. The Shakespeare plays were a collective effort of Francis Bacon and Edward de Vere, co-founders of Fra Rosi Cross and the Honourable Order of the Knights of the Helmet, secret writing societies and state propaganda ministries attached to Her Majesty’s Secret Service. The Bacon-Oxford team were steeped in the 33 Degrees of Freemasonry, which were basically mini-dramas created by Bacon and Oxford based on the Elysian mysteries of the ancient world dedicated to Pallas Athena, their patron goddess, the Spear-Shaker, who wore the helmet of invisibility.
The Third Degree ritual is also commemorated in murders and assassinations where Luciferian Masons have left their calling card and other clues. Jack the Ripper, for instance left a message scrawled on a wall near one of the killings that read. “The Juwes are not the men who will be blamed for nothing.” This was a reference to the three unworthy craftsmen who murdered Hiram Abif, who by name were known as the three Juwes, Jubelo, Jubela and Jubelum. It just gets nuttier, I know, but then these people are criminally insane. The murder of William Morgan by the Masons employed the same M.O. with three ruffians pulling him out of jail the night of his murder. The JFK assassination would see a repeat of this M.O. with the “three railway hobos” arrested in Dallas on the day of the shooting. These so-called hobos were well turned out in brush cuts and well heeled shoes and clean clothes. It was later revealed that two of these men were CIA assets Sturgess and Hunt, who had been recycled from the Bay of Pigs and would be used again in Watergate. Then there is the Diana assassination involving three paparazzi motorcyclist at the accident scene.
For those who suffer from the delusion that Freemasonry is a quaint gentleman’s club that undertakes arcane rituals like the Third Degree initiatory rite just for kicks, let me set you straight on that point immediately. I met a former Mason in Seoul, South Korea, who had obtained a higher degree within the fraternity, who had himself been put through the ritual torture known as the Third Degree and even had the scars to prove it. He told me that he had been a rich and influential corporate magnate in Pakistan under the tenure of Benazir Bhutto. He told me that the former president of Pakistan had been a member of his Masonic Lodge. I was taken aback by this news as I had always believed that highly placed women had always joined a sister’s Lodge known as the Order of the Eastern Star. He corrected me on that point by informing me that influential women were often initiated into male Lodges if they were considered fit to serve the New World Order.
It turns out that Bhutto had asked him for a campaign contribution for re-election, which he had politely rebuffed. This was considered a betrayal of a fellow lodge member, a slight to a ‘brother’ or ‘sister’ in this case. It was then decided that because he had refused to serve the New World Order in common cause with one of his brethren, he had betrayed the order and was ripe for the Third Degree. He told me that his face had been so badly mangled by ritual torture that he had to get plastic surgery to repair the damage. He displayed the scars on his temples and in the middle of the forehead to prove the veracity of his claim. Following his ordeal, he and his family fled to Vancouver, Canada, where God willing they remain to this day.
Our culture is steeped in the Third Degree ritual. In a sense, we have all been through it. We have all been put through the Third Degree in one kind or another. Take the university degree system, for example, based on the first three degrees of Freemasonry: Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft and Master Mason. Take the degrees you confront in the military command structure, featuring the so-called “stripes” on the shoulder of the uniform, which actually represent ashlars of the Great Pyramid in Egypt, the arcane reference point for so much Freemason symbolism or for that matter the ranking system in the police, security and law enforcement agencies. I have talked to several former military brass and military intelligence personnel who have informed me that most of the higher ranking officers in the Anglo-American military establishment are either Freemasons or Rosicrucians. This is no surprise to me whatsoever given that Francis Bacon and his brother Antony set up all of the intelligence services of Europe and laid the foundation for the future Unites States. Indeed, the degree system permeates the executive branch of government, the managerial class of the corporate world and the degree ranking system of our class based society. Even the traditional peerage system of dukes, earls, princes and kings is referred to as a degree system. The truth is it gets a little hot at the higher degrees, which explains why a lot of us are feeling a little hot under the collar.
Remember the song by the rock band The Who called "Who Are You?" Pay close attention to the lyrics the next time you listen. The lyrics are really quite revolutionary and subversive. Maybe that's why I like it so much. Who has authoritative knowledge? Do you? Do I? Socrates, one of the very greatest minds, insisted that he knew nothing. Contrast this with today’s know-it-all intellectuals who assume they know everything. It is our observation that scholarship itself should come under the microscope, since the scholarly community has found itself in error on a host of subjects over the centuries. Just to offer some early examples: Columbus had to discover the New World to promote his new paradigm. Meanwhile, Copernicus withheld his discoveries for thirty years before daring to propose his heretical heliocentric solar system to the monastic pedants of his day. Luckily, he managed to escape the purifying rituals of the Inquisition’s torturers by dying. Copernicus was then forced to recant for reiterating the theory; Bruno was burnt to a cinder for reiterating the already reiterated; Galileo was martyred for being the patron saint of an already accepted truth; Descartes was mercilessly persecuted by the monastic scholars of Holland only to narrowly escape trial by fire; As for Shakespeare, the scholarly community has embarrassingly overlooked the obvious, that the plays could not have been written by the commoner who purportedly wrote them. The real writer was in fact an intelligence operative who needed a front man to hide behind. The real author was a nobleman, a courtier connected with HMSS and closely associated with Francis Bacon. William Shakespeare was a pen name. The man who sat for the famous portrait of William Shakespeare by John Taylor is not from Stratford. That man is Edward de Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford. A comparison of this portrait and the portrait of Edward de Vere by Marcus Gheeraedts shows this to be the case. In the last century Percey Bysshe Shelley was expelled from Oxford for merely suggesting that there might not be a Creator in a paper called "The Necessity of Atheism". And just to catalogue some of the things the scholarly community has gotten wrong in the 20th century, they found themselves in gross error over the psychoanalytic theories first proposed by Freud. Geographers and geophysicists could not have been more in error concerning continental shift and Earth plate tectonics, a discovery they attempted to suppress for over fifty years through their notoriously criminal conduct. Indeed, I have something of an axe to grind with the corrupt academic establishment that is notoriously in cahoots with the corrupt political and legal establishments, each of which vaccinates the others to enhance each other’s legal immunity. Later in the century, social scientists found themselves committing a litany of errors in the realm of geopolitics, misjudging the situation in Vietnam, East Timor, Central and South America, the Balkans, and a host of other places that came under the gun of Uncle Sam, NATO or the UN’s so-called security forces. In addition, they were largely in error about Cuba, the Bay of Pigs, the JFK coup d’etat, the Nixon coup, the Panama Invasion, the Gulf War, the Balkan conflict, the rigged election of 2000 and 2004 and of course 9/11 and the war on terrorism. Noam Chomsky, one of the world’s most revered scholars, still believes Oswald did it. But then Noam insists there is no evidence 9/11 was an inside job. Where have you been Noam? And how can anyone forget AIDS, Ebola, SARS, and Anthrax? Professor Jacob Segal alleges that HIV was manufactured at Fort Detrick, a biological weapons research facility in Maryland. Segal states that the P4 High Security laboratory at Fort Detrick created a deadly hybrid biological agent by splicing the Visna virus – a deadly disease that kills sheep and HLTV-1 – and the Human T-Cell Leukemia Virus together. He goes on to state that the virus was tested on inmates of the prison system who volunteered for experimentation in exchange for early parole. Because symptoms did not show up within six months, the prisoners were released. Many of them were homosexual, so the virus quickly spread within the gay communities of New York and San Francisco. What is worth noting here is that BBC and other journalists traced the Anthrax that was sent to several prominent people in the United States to, you guessed it, Fort Detrick. Clearly Fort Detrick is the common denominator in the ugly deception perpetrated by the U.S. intelligence services. Did I say intelligence services? What an oxymoron that is. How about the Third Reich’s Gestapo? George Orwell said it best in 1984.
In the vast laboratories of the Ministry of Peace and in the experimental stations hidden in the Brazilian forests, or in the Australian desert, or on lost islands of Antarctic, the teams are indefatigably at work. Some are concerned simply with planning the logistics of future wars; others devise larger and larger rocket bombs…others search for new and deadlier gases, or for soluble poisons capable of being produced in such quantities as to destroy the vegetation of whole continents, or for breeds of disease germs immunized against all possible antibodies...
Could you repeat that last bit again, George? Did you say, "disease germs immunized against all possible antibodies?" Thanks George. It appears they’ve done it. By Jove you were right George, right about everything except the 1984 bit. AIDS hit the headlines before 1984. But pretty good job on the whole George. You and Edgar Cayce would have made a good team. Given the appalling record of oversight and the skill they exhibit at missing the obvious, it amazes me that anyone should be amazed by the attenuated vision, myopia and ignorance of the tunnel-vision pedants that stake their claim over the archives only to collect more dust from neglect and redundancy than the books they pour over in their corner of the archives. How is all this possible? What if there was an overarching organization that controlled the dissemination of knowledge, information and just about everything else? Well there is. What is the university degree system based on? The first three degrees of Freemasonry: Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master Mason corresponding with Bachelor’s Degree, Master’s and Ph.D. This means that a secret establishment controls the whole show. Subversive anti-establishment thinkers get weeded out before they reach the top of the pyramid. What about banking? Who created banking? The Knights Templar. Who are they? The Masons under an older name. How did they do it? By lending gold. How much gold? More than they had. What’s that called? A con game. Today they call it fractional reserve lending. Ever notice how a bank looks like a Masonic Temple? Ever notice the Cathedral arches in the WTC Twin Towers? The Templar Masons designed the Gothic cathedrals too you know. And how about the WTC Twin Towers? Why twins? Because they represent the pillars of a Masonic Temple: Jachin and Boaz, meaning Strength and Foundation. You mean to tell me that the New York Financial District is a Masonic Temple? Yep! How about the check? Comes from the coded number system invented by the Templar Knights. Gold is heavy. You don’t want to carry that all the way to the Holy Land. Here, take this check. It’s good for 3,000 ducats of gold. Where is London’s legal district located? Temple Bar. Ah, so that’s where the term “Bar Exam” comes from. You guessed it. What about the Temple part? Well, how about the Knights of the Temple or the Knights Templar? And how about the Masonic Temple? You’ve got to be kidding me. Nope. Check out the police uniforms. Ever notice those black and white squares on the police caps? Well those black and white squares are on the floor of every Masonic Temple. Know what it means? Nope. It means we control the light and the dark forces. We control both sides. We control both sides in wars and cold wars. We control the Capitalists and the Commies, this ideology and that. We control the North and the South, this army and that. We control both sides. We control all sides. That way we control the outcome we call the New World Order. Who controls the World Government? Who controls the UN? You guessed it. Look at the logo for the UN. 33 rectangular squares representing the longitude and latitude degree lines of the Earth and also the 33 Degrees of Freemasonry. And the laurels of Pallas Athena surrounding the globe? Well, Pallas always presented her heroes with laurels. So what? Well, she’s the patron goddess of Freemasonry. And how about all those pagan gods and goddesses all over the Ivy League university campuses. Well, the Freemasons secretly worship the pantheon of pagan gods and goddesses of the ancient world. How about the world religions? How about the oil companies? How about the multinational corporations? Well, yes I’m afraid they created and control those too. Still have your doubts?
They Cap-It-All
By Timothy Watson
An examination of the American one dollar bill is really quite revealing. The first thing to notice is the spider web woven around the outside of the bill. What could this possibly represent? Could it be that a cabal of black magicians akin to black widow spiders has actually woven a web of control around us in the form of the money system and international finance? The evidence is suggestive. Take the dollar sign for example “$”. Would you have guessed that this is actually the sign for the moon goddess Isis? We even trade in paper “mooney” based on silver, the “moon element”, which is actually the color of the moon. Where did the distinctions First, Second and Third World come from? Do you ever hear any references to the Second World in any mainstream discourse? We hear of the First World, supposedly designating First World developed countries. But what is the actual meaning of First World? The First World is the Illuminati. They control the gold supply and trade in gold. Why is that? Because they are the capitalists or “cap-it-all-ists” and they “cap it all”. They cap the entire social pyramid of our world whose hierarchy is based on the Great Pyramid of Giza, Egypt, a truncated version of which is featured on the hind side of the American one dollar bill. They are the missing keystone or capstone of the Great Pyramid featured in the Great Seal of the United States seen on the one dollar bill. Here we see the All-Seeing Eye of the sun god peering out of the missing capstone surrounded by the thousand points of light referred to in so many of George Bush Sr.’s speeches. The Illuminati trade in gold, the sun element, which is the color of the sun. They cap-it-all from the national cap-it-alls using financial cap-it-all because it is their cap-it-all gain. If you look at the first letter of the alphabet “A”, you will see that it is the keystone of capstone of the alphabet. It even resembles the pyramid and missing capstone of the Great Pyramid. We can see who is in control. The evidence is all around us if we can read the signs, the “logos”, which are the Illuminati LOGOS, Greek for the word, sign or logic through which they communicate with their initiated members. So who is the Third World? The world’s poor of course. They trade in the Earth element which is bronze. They get paid pennies a day so that the product brand makers in the Illuminati cap-it-alls can get rich off their poor backs through a hierarchical pyramid-based money system designed to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Those being paid in the earth element at 17 cents an hour make the rich richer so that they can afford to purchase and trade in the sun element on the international money markets, ensuring that they remain the “invisibles” at the top of the pyramid, the “missing” capstone, where they cap-it-all through financial cap-it-all. The pyramid of control is also seen in the Illuminati Games also known as the Olympic Games, where we see those who demonstrate the heroism of the gods – for ‘gods’ read Illuminati – being awarded the sun element associated with the sun god Osiris in the form of the gold medal. Those of us who demonstrate the heroism of the gods, while not being equal to the gods, will receive the moon element associated with the moon goddess Isis and will be recipients of the silver medal. Those poor earthlings among us who are unequal to the gods or their heroes will not receive the victory laurel of Pallas Athena’s heroes, but will have to settle for the Earth element associated with GAIA, the Earth mother and will receive the bronze. Of course we can go further and see that the illuminati have established their control over our education system as well through the university matriculation system based on the first three degrees of Freemasonry: Entered Apprentice corresponding to Bachelor’s Degree, Fellow Craft corresponding with Master’s, and Master Mason corresponding to Ph.D. To ascend the ladder of these higher degrees is no challenge so long as one conforms to the establishment that established the degrees in the first place. At the B.A. level, being a novice or entered apprentice, you are free to explore the world and read anything, say anything or write anything you like. This will instill in the novice the firm conviction that he lives in a free society that grants him freedom of thought and speech. But by the time the novice rises to become a Fellow of the Craft, he must learn what all Masters of Arts and Sciences must learn. He must learn to conform. He must learn to submit to submit to convention and tailor his thesis to the views and opinions of his predecessors, referring to them in his academic papers as his authorities, because he must bend and submit not stand straight on his own two legs. By the time he aspired to be a Master Mason, he will have to submit to the rigors of a Ph.D. supervisor and a team of reviewers who will insist that he has become an expert in the small area or box to which they have seen him consigned and that he will show no originality or vision what so ever, but will conform to the establishment ‘norm’ he has been ordered to uphold. This perfect mind control operation mistakenly referred to by the global elite as higher education is based simply and solely on programming of the world’s population by those who cap-it-all. They tried to keep us out and had succeeded until the 20th century, but finally decided to allow the citizens of the Second World to participate in the university education system as long as they continued to mind their place. This became apparent to them when they saw those soldiers who had participated in the First World War coming home and calling for a greater voice and a greater place in society as a reward for serving their countries and the sacrifices they had made. The Illuminati had no choice but to concede and grant them the illusion of greater participation and freedom of speech. Instead however, the citizenry were merely being programmed by a hierarchical degree system that ensured that they would uphold the ideology and ‘invented’ history the Illuminati had decided to feed to a naïve and unassuming population of the uninitiated. And it worked and has continued to work up till the present day with a curriculum in force to ensure the “educated” population believes such nonsense as the Shakespeare from Stratford nonsense, the Oswald Kennedy assassination, the 9/11 Osama operation, AIDS of the African green monkey, and the coming Avian Flu H5N1 scourge. If our education system is not about mind control than how can you explain why supposed trained medical experts are diagnosing AIDS through bogus HIV blood tests, based on the detection of HIV-related antibodies in the blood stream. These so-called medical experts are diagnosing patient as being HIV positive with not a shred of empirical evidence. Proper scientific evidence calls for empirical proof of something. The detection of HIV-related antibodies in the bloodstream of a patient is not empirical evidence of HIV infection. The antibodies could be related to other blood borne pathogens. Scientists have already admitted that HIV is a virus subject to extreme mutation, so how do the medical practitioners identifying the HIV-related antibodies know that they are really HIV related? In addition, how can they go on to prescribe highly reactive and poisonous AZT drug cocktail treatments for patients diagnosed as HIV positive when there is no clinical proof they are sick? In fact, some experts feel that many of the deaths listed as AIDS-related are in fact drug induced. Is medical school really about schooling or is about mind control and submission to authority and unquestioning subordination to convention and the prevailing view? It should be clear to anyone with a brainwave that the military is no different. The so-called stripes on the uniform are not stripes but ashlars or cubes of the pyramid designating the first three degrees of Freemasonry, Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft and Master Mason. There is a reason George Washington (33rd Degree Freemason), General MacArthur (33rd Degree Freemason) and so many other high-ranking military men had a comparable high rank within Freemasonry. It was their ticket to success, which is why most of the men of high rank within the intelligence units of the Anglo-American empire are high degree Freemasons or Rosicrucians. It is their ticket. So if you really want to succeed be like George W. Bush and go to an Ivy League university (the poison “Ivy” representing the vine or the branches of the Illuminati bloodlines) and join a secret society fraternity like the Skull and Bones and have a daddy who is the former head of the CIA because he was a fellow bonesman and a 33rd Degree Freemason, and invest in gold because it’s the sun element and the only element to never lose its value in the changing times, and become a president for heaven’s sake because your bloodline en-“titles” you to it because you have a royal pedigree and bloodline as one of the Eastern Establishment families, and join an elite military unit even if you fail drug tests, go AWOL and deserve a dishonorable discharge. That’s my prescription for success. Now doesn’t that just cap it all?
The New World Order of God has been replaced by the New World Order of Lucifer. Have you noticed your place in the scheme of things has been shrinking a bit? Do you feel a little cramped and closed in? Do you feel a little like Luke Skywalker and Han Solo, and the princess in the garbage compactor?
Welcome to the Hotel California by Timothy Watson
It’s nice to know that we don’t have to die anymore to go to hell. I mean why not save yourself the trip, right? You don’t have to contact a travel agent, in this case the angel of death. You don’t have to book any airline tickets. You don’t have to worry about collecting air miles or getting discounts on your flight. You don’t have to make a reservation at any hotels. You don’t even have to pack your bags. The New World Order of Lucifer has made things very convenient for you. Life itself has become a living hell. It’s like the Hotel California: “You can book in anytime you like, but you can never leave.” The world has now officially gone to hell in a hand basket. I know, I know, you don’t believe in Lucifer. You don’t have to. And furthermore, they don’t want you to. How else would he come as a thief in the night? Through a slow incremental process, he has entered your life through stealth and taken over. You have a social insurance number. Can you work without it? Have you been asked to go for a medical checkup with blood work by your employer? Have you tested positive in a bogus HIV test? Have you been pressured to go on poisonous antiretroviral AIDS drug cocktails formerly prescribed for cancer patients but later banned because of dangerous side effects? Have you been perfectly healthy before the drug regime, but now find yourself experiencing pain, discomfort, headaches and more recently complications including immune dysfunction and organ failure? Do you feel that the drugs made you a full-blown AIDS patient rather than the virus? But none of the medical professionals are listening, right? Welcome to the Hotel California. What would you like the medical records to show as the cause of death? Drug-induced AIDS? Not very likely, I’m afraid. Like it or not you will probably be another AIDS statistic. Welcome to the New World Order of Lucifer. Still looking for the exit? So is Sartre. Can your child go to school without up-to-date vaccine records? Can your child go to school without submitting to a highly toxic schedule of vaccines containing the sterilizer thimerosal with the active ingredients mercury, aluminum and formaldehyde? Can your child be suspended from school until the vaccine schedule is brought up to date? Can you be considered an unfit parent and have your children taken away from you by child services if you don’t get them vaccinated or worse attempt to home school them? Do you think life without your child is a living hell? If you think having your child taken away and raised by strangers in an orphanage is not your worst nightmare, consider this. Your child is raised as an orphan by Kindercare, an Illuminati front organization, whose logo consists of a schoolhouse resembling the pyramid and All-seeing Eye. Your orphaned child is subjected to Satanic ritual abuse and mind programming as part of the CIA’s MK-ULTRA program. Your child grows up with DID (dissociative identity disorder). He or she is now a mind-controlled sex slave of the Illuminati and may even grow up to become an entertainer or celebrity for the global elite like Jane Mansfield, Marilyn Monroe, Loretta Lynn, or Madonna. More and more services are on-line and require a credit card. Can you order the service without one? Don’t worry about not believing in Lucifer. The Illuminati don’t really believe in him either even though they worship him in all his guises, Osiris, Aton, Apollo, Prometheus, Malech, Baphomet, Baal, etc. What they are really doing is venerating a principle of evil. Why else would they meet to hold their childish rituals at Bohemian Grove? Dressing up in robes before the statue of a great horned owl named Molech? Offering mock human sacrifices to a stone god? You must be kidding, our leaders? Reagan, Nixon, Ford, Clinton, Bush, the bin Ladens, the House of Saud, you can’t be serious? You can’t believe the Grovers take any of this to heart, do you? You don’t really think they believe in this stuff surely? Would it be any less scary if they did? Either way they are off the chain. Placing the destiny of the world in the hands of individuals who would sooner get their rocks off in a California redwood forest than address the international emergencies of war, climate change, endemic food and water shortages and famine should be incentive enough for riots, rebellion and uprising. Personally, I’m glad I don’t have to go to hell. Why are people always telling me that? Can’t they see that I don’t have to go anywhere? The Old World Order of God has been replaced by the New World Order of Lucifer. Don’t believe me? Pick up the phone and try paying your utility bill or your cell phone bill. Phone any government agency and try to get information. You don’t hear a human voice at the other end, do you? You hear an automated voice recording instructing you to choose from various options. But none of the options apply to you, do they? But you can’t explain this to the automated service agent, can you? Despite your appeals, protests, invectives and expletives, none of your questions are answered, none of your concerns addressed and none of your problems solved, right? Ever see the Sartre play, No Exit? I feel like that sometimes too. I am a professor who has taught twelve different university-level courses in South Korea. I have published in several academic fields. I have experience as a newspaper journalist and radio show host. I have been active in every field of the arts. You would think that with this wealth of experience living and working abroad, I would be a shoe-in for a faculty position in a North American university. Think again. The New World Order of Lucifer has its gatekeepers in place. I applied for a university position at two universities in Florida. I went through a three-month recruitment process. I was even asked to have my grades from my matriculation in Canada and the UK translated to the American system at a cost of $300. At the end, I was told that I would have to obtain a work permit before I could be hired when the institution knew full well that they had to sponsor me for such a permit. When I closed my bank account and returned to Canada, my Canadian bank froze my assets for two months and left me without rent and food money till the branch manager finally freed up enough funds to allow me to make minor transactions. Two checks bounced in the interim because they neglected to inform me that my newly opened account had been frozen. All this because the bank draft from my closed account at the American bank in Melbourne, Florida was considered a risk. This put my money in the freezer for two whole months. I am still thawing out the bills. Sir Wilfred Laurier is still wearing a snow white beard and moustache. I booked myself in at the hotel naturally. I was told it was a five star and had state of the art security and I would be safe. The concierge was pleasant enough. At first, it seemed like a first rate hotel. There were plenty of towels, washcloths, complimentary soap, toothbrush, toothpaste, and razors. There was a TV, VCR, a wide selection of channels. There was a sauna, swimming pool, whirlpool, games room and free access to the Internet. I almost thought I’d died and gone to heaven. It was only after this fake terrorist attack in New York that I saw the truth. Only later did I realize my phone was being bugged while my internet communications were being monitored. My cell phone in turns out had a tracking device. I also had a curfew to maintain. I had to be back in my room like Cinderella by midnight. Even if I left my glass slippers in the dining room, I had no way of retrieving them. Hotel access was severely restricted. The sauna, pool and games rooms were off limits in the evening. Then it hit me. Despite the opulent décor and the fancy plates and linen, my hotel room may as well have had bars. And then I remembered the odd comment made by the concierge when I first arrived: “Welcome to the Hotel California. You can book in any time you like, but you can never leave.”
Ever read "The Merchant of Venice"? Well, imagine Uncle Sam is Shylock and Iran is Antonio. And imagine Portia is the World Court.
A Pound of Flesh by Timothy Watson
There is much wisdom to be found in books. Take "The Merchant of Venice" for example. In this play, Antonio has taken a loan of 3,000 ducats from Shylock, the moneylender. The loan has been taken out on merchant cargo ships laden with minerals extracted abroad. Let us for our purposes imagine the commodity to be oil. The ships are then lost at sea and Antonio defaults on his loan. As collateral, Shylock has extracted a loan on exactly one pound of Antonio’s flesh. By analogy, Saddam Hussein also received many usurious gifts from the former U.S. president, George Bush Sr., when he was head of the CIA, including oil kickbacks, which they split to the tune of $250 billion a year each, through the Pennzoil Oil Company, this revealed in the book by former CIA agent, Russell S. Bowen, The Immaculate Deception: Bush Crime Family Revealed. This prefaced the sale on credit of chemical, biological and nuclear agents that could be used in weapons of mass destruction. For this, Shylock has demanded his pound of flesh in bond. In the play, Shylock does not want his loan to be paid in interest even when reparation is offered at three times its value. He prefers to have his pound of flesh. To him, it is justice to have Antonio suffer for the many insults he has received at his hands, but this is justice based on revenge. Analogously, Bush does not want the sale of arms to be repaid. Iraq may present its inventory of weapons three times over and still Shylock will not be discouraged from his course. Iraq may open its borders to UN inspectors and turn every missile, warhead, and chemical weapon over and still Shylock will insist upon his pound of flesh. Now the bond has come to court, Portia presiding not as a young doctor of law, but as the United Nations. She has come to hear the case. At first, she consents to the bond and agrees that Antonio’s chest should be laid bare that Shylock might lay hold of his pound of flesh. But Shylock is in for a surprise as the most learned judge has stipulated that while he is entitled to his bond of one pound of flesh, if even so much as a single drop of blood is allowed to spill, he will be compelled to forfeit all his property. Let the UN invoke the same wisdom with the United States, consenting to the bond of invasion –since America insists upon having its pound of flesh, so long as not a single drop of blood is spilled in Iran or North Korea—both slated to be the next targets in the war on terrorism—the terms being that the United States be forced to forfeit all its political and diplomatic power by the International Court should it fail to meet these terms. Next, Portia stipulates that Shylock is to extract the exact sum of one pound of Antonio’s flesh and not a single ounce more or once again his lands and properties will be held forfeit. Shylock has even brought his balancing scales along to weigh the morbid article that is to be cut away. Observe how the weapon’s inspectors are now weighing the cache of weapons in their scales to determine whether or not there is cause to go to war. So let Portia, in the guise of the UN, insist that the invading allied force strike only such installations as weapons silos and weapons caches. Should so much as a single tomahawk missile stray from its course and hit a civilian residence, water treatment plant, sewage treatment plant, or telecommunications installation as occurred in the first Gulf War, the UN must insist that the United States be forced to forfeit its diplomatic and military power through the jurisdiction of the International Court. Having been forced to capitulate on his bond, Shylock then requests that the debt of 3,000 ducats be paid with interest. Portia refuses to grant his request on the grounds that he had previously refused such an offer, having insisted instead on a pound of flesh without compromise. Instead, he is told that he will receive no collateral whatsoever on his bond. So let it be said to the American president that his unprovoked preemptive strike on Iraq is unlawful and hypocritical since his father had already employed weapons of mass destruction on Iraq in the form of tomahawk missiles and bombs laced with depleted uranium, 87,000 tons of bombs, equivalent to seven and one half Hiroshimas, according to Ramsay C. Clark, Former Attorney-General of the United States. In addition, 100,000 cluster bombs have been scattered all over the Iraqi and Kuwaiti deserts, undetonated and waiting to go off. Then Portia invokes Venetian legal precedent in order to exact a penalty on Shylock for deliberately threatening the life of a fellow citizen, for which all his lands are held forfeit, and at the mercy of the plaintiff to dispose of as he sees fit. So let the International Court insist that the offended party, Iraq, be compensated by being permitted to refuse trading relations with the United States, while the International Court be empowered at the same time to force the U.S. government to forfeit all its political and military power, to be disposed of as the offending party Iraq sees fit. Portia’s justice is not based on revenge or “might is right”, but upon appeal to higher wisdom. Let us be reminded of her words and address them to the U.S. president in the hope that he will heed her words:
The quality of mercy is not strain’d; It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven Upon the place beneath: it is twice blest; It blesseth him that gives, and him that takes: ’Tis mightiest in the mightiest: it becomes The throned monarch better than his crown; His scepter shows the force of temporal power, The attribute of awe and majesty, Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings; But mercy is above the sceptred sway; It is enthroned in the hearts of kings, It is an attribute to God himself; And earthly power doth show likest God’s When mercy seasons justice.
America’s Secret Government
By Timothy Watson
Europeans often have the impression that America has no tradition. It is hard to imagine a more narrow or misguided view. The United States of America is steeped in traditions that span vast vistas of time, extending all the way back to the ancient world and beyond. All you have to do is look at the Great Seal of the United States to see that its symbolism is very old, depicting the Great Pyramid with the missing capstone and all-seeing eye of Horus. Rays of illumination are seen radiating from the capstone, representing the control of the Illuminati, a secret society with roots in the mystery schools of Ancient Egypt. The Bavarian branch of the Illuminati was founded in 1776 by Adam Weishaupt, the same year the United States gained its independence. The Great Seal of the United States displays a truncated pyramid consisting of thirteen steps, representing the thirteen Degrees of initiation in the Illuminati organization. Thirteen is a very significant number to the Illuminati, Freemasons, Rosicrucians and other connected secret societies because Friday the 13th of October, 1306 is the date the Knights Templar was officially dissolved as a religious order in Europe. The Templar Grand Master, Jacques de Molay, and several of his knights were arrested, persecuted, and tortured on that date, which is why Friday the 13th remains an inauspicious date on the calendar to the present day. Around the Great Seal of the United States can be seen the words Annuit Ceoptus Novus Ordo Seclorum, a Latin phrase meaning, “Announcing the birth of the New Order of Ages”. In other words, announcing the birth of the New World Order. George Bush was full of New World Order rhetoric during his period of administration. This New World Order refers to an ancient plan by the secret society known today as the Freemasons and earlier as the Knights Templar. The plan is known as the “Great Work of Ages” or the “New World Order” and consists of a scheme to take control of the entire planet through the implementation of a world government and world army, in conjunction with a global currency and financial system. People who think this far-fetched should remember that the organization that spawned Freemasonry, the Knights Templars, invented the banking system as early as the 13th century and have been manipulating the world financial markets since the rise of capitalism. In fact, a prominent Templar family known as the House of Guise and Lorraine made enormous profits off the sale of arms to both sides in wars, a common practice of these secret societies. The coat of arms of the House of Guise and Lorraine consists of a “double cross”, the English word “double-cross” coming from the Templar family’s practice of betraying or double-crossing both sides in wars. The symbol of the “double cross” is clearly visible in the logo of the Exxon oil company, revealing that the same families are in control today that were in control in the ancient world. The Templars were in the habit of lending gold to both sides by issuing promissory notes or checks with coded numbers, which could be cashed for gold as far away as the Holy Land. The Templars also controlled the armories that manufactured the arms, thereby doubling their profits. Is it surprising that the military-industrial complex that manufactures arms in the United States today continues to be bankrolled by banks controlled by the very organization the Templars spawned, namely the Freemasons? Or that the financial district in the City of London is beside the legal district known as Temple Bar, named after the Knights Templar? Recognizing this double-cross effect it is not difficult to perceive how it was that the Rothschild family in London funded the North in the American Civil War, while the other branch of the family in Paris funded the South. The Rothschilds have always been prominent in both the Illuminati and the Freemason organizations. Knowing this, it is no surprise that other conflicts should spring up around the world with the same north-south civil war formula: Northern Ireland-southern Ireland, North Vietnam-South Vietnam, and let us not forget, North Korea-South Korea. How did the Templar-Freemason connection come to wield such enormous power? One need only look at how the Freemason-controlled banks launched a banking coup on the United States to see how it was done. They wanted two things: a new central bank with control over the nation’s borrowing and a federal income tax to give them control of the government’s income. The plan for a central bank that would wield control over the nation’s economy was put into effect when American Senator, Nelson Aldrich, and a handful of elite bankers met at a place called JekylIsland in Georgia. Educators and historians have often downplayed this meeting as a relatively minor affair. In truth, it was the moment the Elite took control of the American economy, government and people through an organization called the Federal Reserve System. The Federal Reserve System is actually a cartel of private banks, of which the Bank of New York is the most powerful. The Federal Reserve is nominally controlled by the government-appointed chairman of the Federal Reserve System, who at the moment is Alan Greenspan, a 33rd Degree Freemason. The banking elite manipulated the Federal Reserve into place by deceiving the American people. They had to think of a way of persuading the public to accept a banking coup on the American economy, while believing that the power of the banks was actually being curtailed. So when the bill the bankers had written was presented in Congress by their puppet, Senator Aldrich, as the Aldrich Bill, they publicly opposed it, in order to give the impression that it was actually damaging to the banks. In truth, the bill gave them outright control over the US economy with powers to create economic booms and busts. Just to be safe, the Federal Reserve Bill was put before Congress shortly before Christmas, 1913, when many Congressman were already at home with their families for the holiday. The US Federal Reserve lends money to the US government and charges enormous rates of interest on the debt. In this situation, it easy to see how the banking coup has resulted in a coup on the US government itself. Saddled in debt to the Federal Reserve, the government has no recourse but to implement policies favoring the banks. This includes allowing the printing of interest-accruing money by the US Federal Reserve, not interest free money as Lincoln proposed with the introduction of ‘greenbacks’, but money with high rates of interest attached. The same policy has been adopted by the Bank of England and the Bank of Canada, both of which subcontract the printing of money to private financial houses, which charge extortionate rates of interest on the money they produce. Is it any wonder that the citizens of these three countries are drowning in debt? It is this same elite control that was able to manipulate the money markets in order to force the Canadians to vote in favor of the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement. When the election was presented as a referendum on the issue, the Canadian people were given a choice between two political parties, one pro-Free Trade, the other anti-Free Trade. When the polls indicated a swing in support to the anti-Free Trade camp, something of a panic was initiated on the Tokyo and Wall Street stock exchanges as investors began pulling out their investments from Canada, a form of economic blackmail, which basically forced the Canadian public to vote in favor of Free Trade. The question is: how can such manipulation be orchestrated? The answer is that you don’t have to control everyone. You need only exercise control over the elite, the ones in charge, the ones giving the orders and the rest will march to the same drummer. With people like Alan Greenspan, a 33rd Degree Freemason in control of the Federal Reserve, there are surely men with comparable credentials on the Tokyo bourse. It is not that America has no tradition, but that it is steeped in tradition. The layout of the streets of Washington, the Pentagon Building, incorporating the golden mean, phi, and other geometric and mathematical properties, the domed buildings such as the Congressional Building, in addition to the Washington Monument, representing the phallus of the Egyptian god of the underworld Osiris, are all based on principles of sacred geometry dating all the way back to the mystery schools of Ancient Egypt. New York is named after the York Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, while Canada’s first capital, York, inherits its name from the same source. Canada’s York later changed its name to Toronto and the capital later moved to Ottawa. Red, white, and blue are prominent Freemasonry colors and are featured in the British Union Jack, the American Stars and Stripes, the Australian flag, along with Canada’s original flag, which featured the Red Maple Leaf, the white background and the two bands of blue at the side representing the land stretching from sea to sea, the Atlantic to the Pacific. The Canadian flag was later altered to its current form by Prime Minister John Diefenbaker. The Freemasons were the secret government that manipulated the United States of America into being and have been controlling the show ever since. The Boston Tea Party as it is called was an act of provocation undertaken by Paul Revere and several other members of a Freemasonic lodge known as St. Andrew’s Lodge, who dressed up as native American Indians in order to attract as much attention as possible while dumping tea chests into the harbor from the Dartmouth, a ship belonging to the Freemason-controlled British East India Company, whose cargo was heavily subsidized by the British Crown. The Americans success in the subsequent War of Independence was largely the work of Benjamin Franklin, a prominent Freemason, who used his Freemasonry connections to solicit the military support of the prominent Freemason Baron von Straub in Germany and his counterpart in France, the Marquis de Lafayette in France, whose support was instrumental in defeating the British. Ben Franklin himself a triple agent, belonged to a Masonic lodge in Philadelphia, a prominent secret society in Britain known as the Hellfire Club, and the Nine Sisters Lodge in Paris. It was through the Nine Sisters Lodge that Ben Franklin was to receive the Statue of Liberty as a personal gift. It has its exact replica on the River Seine in Paris. The Freemasons were also the hidden hand behind the charter granting America its independence. According to the Freemasonic historian Manley P. Hall, of the 56 men signatories who signed the Declaration of Independence, 49 are known Freemasons. Freemasonry, the most powerful international crime syndicate in the world, is also one of the most powerful organizations in the web of secret societies that control the secret government of the United States. It is a king-making organization that still follows the king-making rituals of the ancient Egyptian mystery schools in its secret initiation rites. The organization makes kings and then places them in high positions in the banking, media, military, and political fields in order to exert control over every sector of society. As a youth, I used to wonder why so many prominent men in society were Freemasons. ‘Did the organization recruit highly established individuals to enhance its reputation?’ I wondered. My research indicates that the situation is reversed. Freemasonry recruits members it believes hold promise, making kings of those who serve its interest, placing its high initiates in control across the checkerboard of society in order to control the whole game. From where does Freemasonry hail and how has it gained control of most of the world’s money supply? We know Freemasonry descends from the Templars, but what we don’t know is how the Templars evolved into the crime syndicate that eventually became Freemasonry. History provides the answer. After Philip IV conspired to see that the Templars were dissolved as a religious order, the monarchs of Europe immediately set about divvying up their lands, properties and gold. Receiving advanced warning, many Templars were able to escape in their armada of ships, sailing to Portugal were they resurfaced as the Knights of Malta and Knights of Columbus and to Scotland where they were reborn as the York Scottish Rite of Freemasonry. They then embarked on a campaign of revenge by raiding ships under royal charter in order to steal back the booty that had effectively been stolen from them. The pirate flag normally associated with pirate raids was actually the battle flag of the Knights Templar. Their ships would have been packed with all kinds of murderous rogues, assassins, and mercenaries, all cutthroats sharing the same appetite for the spoils of war. I speak of Freemasonry as the real ‘central intelligence agency’ of a secret government in the United States that controls a so-called democratic two-party system that is but a front for a one-party system and secret government and it occurs to me that ascendancy to the highest offices in the land usually depends on one being a Freemason or a member of some other affiliate organization like the Council of Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderbergers, etc. It does not really matter which presidential candidate is elected. The secret government to which they both belong ensures that they will be embracing the same basic policies come Election Day. What do Franklin Delano Roosevelt, George Bush, and Bill Clinton all have in common? They are all 33rd Degree Freemasons. What else do they have in common? They have all had established links with organized crime. I have often wondered why so many American presidents of the 20th century have been linked to scandals such as Watergate or Iran-Contra or Whitewater. I no longer wonder. Freemasonry is the most powerful crime syndicate in the world, and if this king-making organization is the necessary step one must take up the ladder to the highest office in the land, then it is no wonder, indeed no surprise, that these presidents should become sullied and get their hands dirty along the way. I have also wondered why Democrat presidents, despite whatever apparent ideological differences they have with their Republican rivals, embrace basically the same policies when they come to power. I have also noted how political alliances seem to cross, not only political lines, but national boundaries, such that when a Democrat is elected in Washington, there is usually a Labour prime minister in Britain and a Liberal prime minister in Canada, while a Republican administration in America will usually coincide with a Tory government in Britain and a Conservative government in Canada. I no longer wonder why. The same secret government is in operation in all three countries to ensure that the puppets most useful to the puppet show are elected. Why is it important that a Tory government come to power in Britain at the same time that a Republican government comes to power in the United States when all parties are sufficiently stocked with secret government moles to ensure that the right policies are implemented? Simply because partisan politics makes for smoother implementation of cross-border policies. Policy rebels will be less inclined to resist harmful policies when partisan politics are involved. Bombing raids in Serbia, the Middle East, and Africa are easier to stomach when they receive the lion’s share of support from one’s own political backbenchers. People I meet sometimes comment on such information by intimating it is just another conspiracy theory. Call it a theory if you like, but there is a case to be made for the phrase ‘conspiracy theory’ being a conspiracy in its own right. What better way of discrediting the claims of an astute researcher than to refer to his theory as a mere ‘theory’. What I find intriguing is that most people who dismiss conspiracy theories with a mere wave of the hand are usually involved, wittingly or unwittingly, in one of their own. Not wishing to let the cat out of the bag and leave themselves exposed, they will immediately try to discredit such notions to prevent aspersions being cast upon themselves. Who hasn’t witnessed a workplace conspiracy in which a fellow employee was sandbagged or ostracized by employers and co-workers who found him/her too eccentric or difficult to work with? And if these conspiracies are happening at the petty political level, surely to God they’re happening at the grand political level. My own experience tells me that conspiracy is not a theory. An interesting word ‘conspiracy’. Derived from the Latin, it refers to the act of ‘breathing together’. Conspirators therefore share the same bad air and breathe it together. So the next time you find yourself in a round table discussion breathing the same stale air as your cohorts, remember to ask for some air freshener.
9-11: Who Stood to Benefit and Why By Timothy Watson
A lot of conspiracy theories have been propounded since the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center twin towers and the Pentagon. A number of governments and terrorist organizations have been implicated by conspiracy theorists including those of America’s allies, namely Israel, as well as the U.S. government itself. While such conspiracy theories may appear far-fetched at first sight, we must examine the evidence for and against such conjectures before dismissing such claims. By analyzing the behavior of the U.S. government and intelligence agencies before, during and after the September 11 attacks, a number of possibilities come into relief. In the foreground is the possibility of an alien terrorist organization unconnected with any organizations operating on U.S. soil being involved in the attacks, while in the background hovers the towering monoliths of the U.S. government, CIA, Department of Defense, Bush family and their shadowy connections with the underworld activities of the bin Laden family, the Al Qaeda terrorist network, and the Taliban, all entities the U.S. government is responsible for offering funding, support and training before and during the years of Soviet occupation in Afghanistan. Is there any direct or indirect U.S. governmental involvement in what happened on September 11, 2001? The paper will examine alternatives for and against the proposed question and will attempt to bring to light evidence that will effectively eliminate certain options. By eliminating the alternatives, the strategy of this report is to attempt, through the use of hypothetical disjunction, to eliminate certain alternatives in order to bring into the foreground those possibilities that seem most plausible and likely in light of the evidence. The position being proposed is that the evidence contradicts the official government and media stories pertaining to 9-11. The paper further proposes to demonstrate that alternative viewpoints to any U.S. government involvement in 9-11 can be eliminated by the weight of evidence, such that by the end of the report, analysts will be left with one of two options: either the U.S. government was directly or indirectly involved with the attacks of 9-11. In either case, the evidence will show that the U.S. government, Pentagon and Department of Defense neglected to take the necessary action in defense of the country and seem to have simply let it happen. If it is discovered that the U.S. government, CIA and Department of Defense were involved in the tragic events of September 11, 2001, what does this suggest? Does it point to criminal negligence or High Treason? The paper will attempt to demonstrate that fake terror has a long history in justifying preemptive and or retaliatory strikes on foreign enemies and that 9-11 may be the latest in a long line of staged terrorist acts undertaken by the U.S. government with the aid, in this case, of a CIA-sponsored foreign terrorist cell. To begin the inquiry into events of September 11, 2001, let’s review the findings of Der Spiegel’s Inside 9-11: What Really Happened. Inside 9-11 documents the official media accounts pertaining to 9-11, so it is a good place to start. According to the official news media, air traffic controllers at Nashua Air Traffic Control Center attempted to make contact with Flight 11 when it banked sharply to the south, a 210-degree turn, going dramatically off course. “American 11, how do you read?” the air traffic controller allegedly inquired. Then, air traffic controllers at the same control center began to receive radio snippets at 8:29 from the cockpit. Inside 9-11 reporters inform us that someone with a strong accent could be heard issuing commands, saying, “Don’t try to make any stupid moves! Just stay quiet and you’ll be okay.” And later, a voice could allegedly be heard saying, “We have planes. We have other planes. We are returning to the airport.”1 Air traffic control continued to hear radio transmissions until 8:38. At precisely 8:29, so we are told, the Nashua Air Traffic Control Center notified the Federal Aviation Administration that American Flight 11 had gone off course and appeared to be under the control of hijackers. Remarkably, however, there is no evidence that any U.S. Air Force jets were dispatched to intercept, standard procedure under any such emergency. Normal protocol requires that, when any commercial airliner veers off course, air force jets should be dispatched to intercept. Intercept does not involve any kind of aggressive action, but simply monitoring and analysis of the situation by air force jets sent up to inspect the airliner that has veered off course. At 8:40, an official at FAA reportedly informed an official at NORAD that Flight 11 had been hijacked. Fifteen minutes after the initial detection of its change of course, at 8:45, Flight 11 would slam into the first of the World Trade Center twin towers. Based on this account, it appears that there was not sufficient time in the case of Flight 11 to issue an intercept order, and by all known accounts, none were given.2 The account repeatedly given by the media is that the government and military were caught completely off guard, as the Wall Street Journal story would attest to:
The coordinated assault on the world’s financial and political capitals caught the United States completely off guard – despite a massive intelligence and law enforcement network devoted to detecting and thwarting such attacks… 3
General Richard B. Myers in testimony at Senate hearing on his nomination to become the Joint Chiefs of Staff made the bewildering statement, “We’re pretty good if the threat’s coming from outside. We’re not so good if the threat’s coming from inside.”4 The reason this statement is extraordinary is that he is confessing to the gross incompetence both of himself and the military apparatus in defending the country from an internal terrorist threat at the very moment that his candidacy is being put forward for one of the key military positions in the country indispensable to its national security, and yet even more amazingly the remark seems to go unchallenged. The argument resonated with most Americans because it corresponded with their general state of unpreparedness and shock over the attacks. The fact remains, however, that the Federal Aviation Administration and the air defense system run by the military follow a procedure that allows them to respond to any such emergency with alertness and promptness. The lame argument that officials were taken by surprise and did not know how to respond does not hold up to any scrutinizing inquiry because the procedural protocol in such events is well known and must be strictly adhered to. The standard procedure to be followed when any private or commercial aircraft goes off course is to inform the Federal Aviation Administration, which immediately passes the information on to NORAD, which issues immediate intercept orders to the nearest American Air Force base. There is no deviation from this very strict and well-known code. It is the code to be adhered to in any such emergency. The reporters of Inside 9-11 inform us that Nashua Control Tower was in contact with Flight 175 and that Captain Victor Saracini reported that he had received a strange transmission shortly before takeoff that sounded like someone keying the mike and saying, “Everyone stay in your seats!”5 Immediately after, the transponder of United Airlines 175 became silent. The presumed hijacking of Flight 175 was reported at 8:43 a.m. Two fighter jets allegedly took off from Otis Air Force Base on Cape Cod to pursue the hijacked airplane at 8:52 to intercept Flight 175. It was later alleged that the jets that were dispatched were 24 years old, but were equipped with heat-sensitive, radar-guided rockets, Inside 9-11 adds, as though the reference to heat-sensitive, radar-guided missiles is supposed to excuse the fact that the jets are 24 years old. The first official statements made by both the government and the official news media to the attacks on September 11 was that government and military were taken by surprise and could not possibly respond to the hijacking of passenger airliners being employed like cruise missiles. The official line was: How could we have responded to an attack of so unprecedented a nature? The argument was even echoed by the news media, as in The Washington Post article of September 12th. The official line was parroted by top government and military spokespersons like General Richard B. Myers, who made the bewildering remark, “We’re pretty good if the threat’s from outside. We’re not so good if the threat’s coming from inside.” What makes this statement so bewildering is that he made it before a Senate hearing on his nomination to become Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.6 It is incredible that a senior military official should confess to the gross incompetence of both himself and the military apparatus in the face of a terrorist crisis that posed a threat to the entire nation at the very moment he was being sworn in to a position of even more senior rank that carried an even greater weight of responsibility. General Myers’ statement seems to have resonated with most Americans, since his remarks corresponded to their own state of shock in responding to 9-11, but what does not stand up in any court of law is that the Federal Aviation Administration, the military command structure, NORAD and the air defense system all have systems of routine procedure they have to follow in the event of such an emergency. These procedures are practiced in drills day after day to ensure that air safety and air defense personnel are able to take the necessary action in the event of such an emergency. The argument put forward by Jared Israel of http://emperors-clothes.com is that General Myers original statement on why the air force and military failed to respond is just too lame to bend a sympathetic ear to. “We’re not so good if the threat’s coming from inside” is an illogical statement. It’s like saying that, if an arsonist from Canada slips in undetected and plants a new incendiary device in an office tower in Buffalo, we just don’t know how to respond. People in the vicinity of the fire pull fire alarms. A neighbor calls the Fire Department and there is a Fire Station right across the street, yet not one fire truck arrives till after the schools have burned to the ground. The argument can be applied by analogy to 9-11. The first official story given by General Myers and Dick Cheney is that the military apparatus failed to respond because of the unprecedented nature of the attack. This excuse is patently absurd because the FAA, NORAD and the military apparatus have procedures to follow and know the drill.7 Yet, the next day on September 14, the new cover story, “That the planes were sent up but arrive to late” was issued. This new cover story was first put forward on September 14 on the CBS 6:00 news. Until this time top military and government officials had said that no planes were scrambled to protect Washington DC until after the Pentagon was hit. According to the new story, jets were scrambled from Otis Air Force Base on Cape Cod to intercept Flight 11, the first plane that crashed into the World Trade Center. Fighter jets were also reportedly scrambled from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia to intercept American Flight 77, the airliner that crashed into the Pentagon. Yet, despite the new cover story, Vice President Cheney was still issuing the old story as late as September 16 on the NBC TV program Meet the Press, when he maintained that George Bush had personally made the decision to send up interceptors, suggesting he had done so only after the Pentagon was hit.8 General Richard Myers, on the other hand, appearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee on September 13 testified at great length about the failure to scramble fighter jets on September 11. Despite the dissemination of the new cover story the following evening, Myers appeared to know nothing about jets being scrambled from Langley Air Force Base, where ironically, he himself had been stationed from 1987 to 1990.9 Considering for a moment that the new cover story were true, is it possible that a top military official directly responsible for the security of the nation would not know that jets had been scrambled from that location, particularly considering his years of service there and the fact that he would have known the facility and its personnel intimately? It hardly seems likely. This appears to be another alternative we can effectively eliminate. On September 12, 2001, Dan Rather asked CBS Consultant Major Mitch Mitchel a rather pressing question:
These hijacked aircraft were in the air for quite a while, they made unusual turns, to say the least. Would – why doesn’t the Pentagon have the kind of protection that they can get a fighter – interceptor aircraft up, and if someone is going to plow an aircraft into the Pentagon, that we have at least some – some line of defense?10
Then, two days later, on September 14, Dan Rather reported that U.S. Air Force jets were dispatched from OTIS and Langley Air Force Bases in response to the hijackings but arrived too late.11 Evidence that this is a mere cover story and not a particularly convincing one is the fact that Dan Rather cites no source for this new information. He simply states quite casually, “CBS News has learned….” Four days later, NORAD incorporated the CBS report into its timeline. The Langley interceptors had turned fiction into fact.12 Is it possible for fighter jets to be scrambled from Langley before the Pentagon was hit without a single top member of the military brass or Bush administration being aware of the fact even days after the attacks? It appears that this is yet another alternative we can safely eliminate. The change from the first official story that “we didn’t put planes up till after the Pentagon was hit” to the second official story that “we put planes up before the first World Trade Center attack” seems to have been carefully orchestrated during General Myers’ testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on September 13th. Under pressure from the Senators to come up with a more convincing account of events, Myers kept changing his story, putting forward a total of three different accounts of what happened on September 11th. The last story seems to be the most consistent with the cover story issued on Dan Rather’s 6:00 p.m. news report the following evening. Between the hearing and the report issued on the evening news the following day, the Senators went into a closed session.13 Senator Bill Nelson’s comments at the Armed Services Committee hearing make it clear why a cover story had to be hatched to explain away the failure of the U.S. military to offer any response on September 11th:
Perhaps we want to do this in our session, in executive session. But my question is an obvious one for not only this committee, but for the executive branch and the military establishment. If we knew there was a general threat on terrorist activity, which we did, and we suddenly have two trade towers in New York being obviously hit by terrorist activity, of commercial airliners being taken off course from Boston to Los Angeles, then what happened to the response of the defense establishment once we saw the diversion of the aircraft headed west from Dulles turning around 180 degrees and, likewise, in the aircraft taking off from Newark in flight, turning 180 degrees? That’s the question. I leave it to you as to how you would like to answer it. But we would like an answer.14
Senator Bill Nelson’s comments are revealing because he seems to be offering Myers an out, “I leave it to you as to how you would like to answer it.” The comment is a peculiar one because it seems to offer Myers the freedom to hatch any cover story he likes, providing it is a convincing one. He even prefaces his remarks by suggesting that they resolve the matter in a closed session: “Perhaps we want to do this in our session, in executive session.” Der Spiegel Inside 9-11 reporters claim that the fighter jets, which had failed to intercept the first hijacked airliner and were now too late for the second, were symptomatic of a general state of ill-preparedness.15 Otis Air Force base was two hundred miles east of Flight 11’s position at the time it allegedly received notification by NORAD. In his testimony before the Senate confirmation hearing, General Myers stated that cutbacks had caused a reduction in the number of bases from 100 to a mere 7, meaning that intercepts had to come from a greater distance.16 Despite this assertion, numerous air force bases in the vicinity of the eastern seaboard of the United States are listed on the Internet as maintaining battle-ready squadrons, Syracuse, Philadelphia, Atlantic City to name but a few.17 There are so many air force bases of much greater proximity to the hijacked airliners, whose fighter squadrons could have been dispatched to intercept at short notice. Otis and Langley seem to have been chosen as plausible locations for intercept dispatch orders to be issued since they are far enough from their respective targets to offer an explanation for why they arrived too late. Inside 9-11 reporters allege that no one expected to be attacked from the air, but that is just not so. American government officials had received repeated warnings prior to the attacks about the possibility of hijacked passenger airlines being used as guided missiles on targeted American landmarks. Andrews Air Force Base is known to have been on a high state of alert prior to the attacks because of warnings received one month previously of a possible terrorist attack from the air. It is even reported by investigative reporter Jared Israel of http://emperors-clothes.com that the web page for Andrews Air Force Base indicating that it was on high alert the day of the attacks has subsequently been altered in an apparent attempt at a whitewash. The official story is that, on that day, four commercial airliners were hijacked in a terrorist assault at the very heart of America, the United States had on standby to defend an area of nearly four million square miles exactly fourteen fighter jets.18 But again, incredible if it were true, this is just not so. The truth is that Andrews Air Force Base was on a high state of alert, and like others, certainly on standby readiness and no such claim of only 14 operational fighter jets being on standby can by made. In reality, you had at least one entire base full of jets at Andrews Air Force Base in a state of high readiness at the time of the Pentagon attacks. Andrews Air Force base is in fact only ten miles from the Pentagon building, yet no attempt was made to intercept American Airlines Flight 77 from Andrews, suggesting that the Air Force at Andrews was ordered to stand down. There are indications that Flight 77 was known to be out of control since 9:00 a.m. It had taken off from Dulles Airport at 8:20 a.m. The transponder had been switched off, as had been the case with the other three airliners. An air traffic controller allegedly tried to raise the cockpit unsuccessfully. One controller in Indianapolis radioed the cockpit and frantically demanded, “American 77, Indy, radio check, how do you read?”19Inside 9-11 tells us that, at 9:24 a.m., NORAD sent an alarm to Langley Air Force Base in Hampton, Virginia. At 9:30 a.m., two fighter jets were allegedly dispatched to intercept American Flight 77.20 The F-16s from Langley were 105 miles or twelve flight minutes away when Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. Why would Air Force Jets not be dispatched from Andrews Air Force Base instead? It is absurd to believe the official story that there were no U.S. Air Force jets at Andrews Air Force Base in a state of combat readiness. Is it possible that not one single air force jet is available in an air force base of such strategic and military importance as Andrews? If it were true, it would point to such gross governmental and military negligence as to warrant an investigation in its own right, yet no questions are being asked and no investigation is being launched by any of the major newspapers or government agencies. How is such a whitewash possible? I think we can safely eliminate the possibility that no air force jets were in a state of standby readiness at Andrews. This leaves only one alternative, that being that Andrews Air Force Base was told to stand down, and if this indeed proves to be the case, then we have High Treason involving the highest-ranking political and military figures in the country, as Jared Israel, an experienced investigator and journalist, active since the 1960s, has maintained. Even more amazing is President George W. Bush’s reaction to a national emergency of so unprecedented and unimaginable a scale. By the president’s own admission, he knew about the attack on the first tower of the World Trade Center before going into the classroom. The president made the remark before a public forum and his remarks are most revealing:
Anyway, I was sitting there, and my Chief of Staff – well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on. And you know, I thought it was pilot error and I was amazed that anybody could make such a terrible mistake. And something was wrong with the plane or -- anyway, I’m sitting there, listening to the briefing, and Andy Card came and said, America is under attack.”21
The president’s remarks are highly suggestive for a number of reasons. First of all, he could not have seen what he says he saw because the footage of the first tower being hit by Flight 11 was not shown until the following day because the footage had not yet been turned in by the pedestrian bystander who had taken video footage of the attack on the first tower. The footage of the first tower being attacked was not shown until the following day after the video footage had been made available. The president is suggesting that he saw what he could not possibly have seen. It is clear that the president is lying, either to conceal his own incompetence or criminal and treasonous negligence. I think we can safely eliminate incompetence and arrive at criminal and treasonous negligence because of the president’s own words, revealing hesitant double talk, apparent confusion over details, a broken train of reasoning and thought, all of which are the hallmarks of a liar attempting to hide something. For example, he says, “And you know, I thought it was pilot error and I was amazed that anybody could make such a mistake. And something was wrong with the plane or….” Clearly, the president is trying to hide the fact that the thought of a terrorist attack had even entered his mind. He is clearly trying to convince the public that it was the very thought furthest from his mind. He is trying to convince us that his first thought was that it was pilot error or some malfunction on board the aircraft that caused the disaster. What makes such conjecture implausible is that pilot error or mechanical malfunction could hardly account for why a passenger airliner would plough into one of America’s most important national landmarks with such pinpoint accuracy. From a navigational standpoint, it’s comparable to a mosquito flying quite by accident into a needle due to navigational incompetence or nervous system failure. The chances or odds of such a thing happening by error are so high as to be well nigh impossible. I think we can safely eliminate the possibility that the president had no idea that it was a terrorist attack. We can also safely eliminate the alternative that the president is being truthful with the audience he is addressing. This leaves us with only one option. The president is lying, but why? We have already eliminated the fact that he is trying to conceal his own incompetence. It would be absurd for him to even try since he has shown his gross incompetence shamelessly to the American public and the world everyday since he was sworn in as president. The only plausible reason for why the president lied about what he saw on the TV monitor before going into the classroom is that he already knew about the terrorist attack and was attempting to cover up his foreknowledge of the event. What is even more revealing is the school video of the president taking part in a kindergarten lesson in which he is listening to the children recounting a story about goats. Why did the president not cancel the engagement and go into an emergency session? It is absurd to believe that an accident of this magnitude would not hold significantly greater precedence over an elementary school lesson about goats. No explanation could account for the irrationality of his decision to remain in the classroom for an additional half hour. The school video, which can be viewed at a number of sites on the Internet, shows Chief of Staff, Andy Card, approaching the president from off camera, where he is seen whispering into the president’s ear.22 What is particularly shocking is that president shows no alarm or anxiety at the news that the second of the World Trade Center’s twin towers being hit. Andy Card shows even less concern. After whispering the brief news update in the president’s ear, he simply backs off and withdraws off camera. The president, showing not the least concern or emotion, then opens his book in an apparent attempt to read along with the pupils. The camera pans in for a close up and we see none of the worry lines or frown lines that should accompany news of this kind of magnitude. This extraordinary behavior cannot be accounted for by any excuse. While some apologists have attempted to argue that the president did not wish to show any alarm in front of the pupils, this is an absurd defense, since the rational course of action would have been for the president and his Chief of Staff to have risen immediately, make their polite excuses and head off for an emergency session in some high security installation without delay. This would not have come as any shock or surprise to the kindergarten teacher nor to the pupils, since it is only natural that the man holding the most important position in the country should be called away suddenly on urgent business. We can safely eliminate the alternative that the president had to stay put till further notice, which leaves us with only one possibility: The president stayed put because he was ordered to stay put because that was the order of business that had already been planned in advance. We can also eliminate the possibility that the president had no advance warning of the attack because what Andy Card’s announcement in the classroom reveals is that he is merely giving the president an update on events that came as no surprise. This accounts for the brevity of Andy Card’s announcement and the complete absence of surprise on the part of the president. What raises suspicion another notch is the business ties between the Bush family and the bin Laden family. Both families are known to have investments in the Carlyle Group, an investment firm specializing in buyouts of defense and aerospace companies. Described by the Industry Standard as “the world’s largest private equity firm,” until after September 11th practically unheard of in the public domain, perhaps because its investors wished to be discrete about their business affiliations and deals, with good reason. In recent years, George Bush Sr., ex-Secretary of State James Baker III, and ex-Secretary of Defense Frank Carlucci, Carlyle’s Chairman an Managing Director, have made the pilgrimage to the bin Laden family’s headquarters in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. George Bush Sr. even makes regular promotional speeches on behalf of the Carlyle Group. Bush Sr. is reportedly active in seeking investments for the Group from the Asian market, and is paid $80,000 to $100,000 per appearance. Partners also include George Soros, Fred Malek, and of course the bin Laden family.23 A Carlyle executive even admitted that the bin Laden family committed $2 million through a London-based branch of the company in 1995 through the Carlyle Partners Fund II, which raised $1.3 billion overall. The fund has allowed for the purchase of several aerospace companies. A former financier with ties to the bin Laden family says the family’s overall investment with Carlyle is considerably bigger. The $2 million dollars is merely an initial investment contribution. “It’s like plowing a field, the anonymous financier maintained. “You seed it once. You plough it, and then you reseed it again.”24 George Bush Sr. naturally denies having any relationship with the bin Laden family and admits to only meeting them twice. Mr. Baker visited the bin Laden family in both 1998 and 1999, according to sources close to the family. Mr. Baker declined comment when questioned by reporters, as did Mr. Carlucci, former chairman of Nortel Networks Corp., which was partnered with the Saudi BinLaden Group on telecommunications ventures.25 In fact, it has been noted, in a special report in the Wall Street Journal, that the bin Laden family could stand to profit from the war against its own son due to ties to an American investment firm known as the Carlyle Group, “If the U.S. boosts defense spending in its quest to stop Osama bin Laden’s alleged terrorist activities, there may be one unexpected beneficiary: Mr. Bin Laden’s family.”26 The bin Laden Family is said to have officially severed ties with son, Osama, on October 26, 2001, while the Carlyle Group was sold quite conveniently after 9-11, effectively eliminating the possibility that Osama himself could profit in any way from a war against himself.27 That would be one conflict of interests too many. This explains why the FBI investigation into members of the bin Laden family has been blocked by the White House. While the U.S. intelligence community has been roundly criticized for its failure to predict the terrorist attacks of September 11th, the FBI complains that their hands were tied. FBI documents shown on a BBC Newsnight program reveal that they had previously sought to investigate Abdullah bin Laden, a relative of Osama bin Laden, in Washington in connection with a Muslim organization, the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY), a suspected terrorist organization. However, the FBI investigation was closed in 1996 apparently because of constraints imposed by the Clinton administration on investigation of the Saudi family. Restrictions on FBI investigations into the bin Laden family intensified after George W. Bush became president. Intelligence agencies were told to “back off” from their investigation into other members of the bin Laden family, the Saudi royals, etc.28 Greg Palast’s feature on Newsnight revealed among other things that only days after the attacks, eleven members of the bin Laden family were suddenly whisked out of the country on a charter flight. This did not concern the White House, who places the entire bin Laden family above suspicion, doubtless because they are business partners. Instead, the Oval Office gives the appearance that, only black sheep, Osama, warrants its wrath. Even though WAMY has been linked to funding international terrorism, the U.S. Treasury Department has made no move to freeze WAMY’s assets, despite Washington’s alleged determination to freeze the assets of any suspected terrorist support group. What is their excuse for refusing to do so? They insist it is a charity. Yet, Pakistan expelled some WAMY operatives just prior to 9-11 and India linked WAMY to funding bombing attacks in Kashmir. The Philippines has even come forward to accuse WAMY of funding Muslim insurgency groups at home. For some reason, Washington pulled the plug on the FBI’s investigation into Abdullah bin Laden and WAMY. National security expert, Joe Trento, author of “The Secret History of the CIA”, managed to acquire a document linking WAMY with the bin Laden clan, and claims they fit the pattern of groups the Saudi Royals and Saudi elite fund to undertake terrorist operations. What he and other researchers have revealed is that the State Department, CIA, and the Saudis have some pretty shadowy connections. Michael Springmann, former head of the visa section of the American consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, was ordered to issue visas to Saudi citizens by a high-ranking member of the State Department.29 “My job was supplying visas to terrorists,” Springmann states quite bluntly. During his time at the consulate, the terrorists, who were being rounded up and sent to the United States for training are those whom Osama bin Laden and the CIA had recruited together.30 The plan was to have them trained in the United States by the CIA first and that brought back to Afghanistan to incite terror, in order to justify the intervention of the U.S. government’s internationally run protection racket. Joe Trento explains the need for a white House cover-up succinctly:
If a Middle Eastern terrorist finds his way to the United States to be trained by the CIA to become a terrorist, it would be very embarrassing if the FBI later turned up evidence that connected that suspect with the CIA which had trained him. This is what is called “blow back”, serious career- destroying “blow back” in the intelligence community.31
But the Bush family also has to have serious concerns about “blow back”. George Bush Jr. made his first million 20 years ago, when he was partly funded by a bin Laden family member, but Bush also received fees at that time from a subsidiary of the Carlyle Group, a little known company, which in just a few short years, has become one of the world’s largest defense contractors.32 What do Manuel Noriega, Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden all have in common? First of all, they are all former CIA operatives. Secondly, all of them have had the experience of having the countries within which they resided invaded. And thirdly, all have had direct or indirect business relationships with George Bush Sr. How interesting that the American government and CIA should keep playing Dr. Frankenstein, creating monster after monster from narco-terrorist Manuel Noriega to Osama bin Laden. However, it’s not like the Mary Shelley novel, where the monster runs amuck due to tragic circumstances. In the case of the CIA, the monster runs amuck by design. Employing problem-reaction-solution dialectics, the CIA keeps creating monsters that cause untold damage and then provide the U.S. military with pretext for providing a solution in the form of military intervention. In the case of Manuel Noriega, George Bush Sr., then Director of the CIA, placed him on the CIA payroll to the tune of $110,000 a year. In 1988, George Bush Sr. would deny ever meeting Noriega. Later, after recovering from amnesia, he would remember meeting him, but would conveniently remember none of the details of the meeting.33 The CIA has been implicated by many researchers in the death of General Torrijos in Panama. Conveniently waiting in the wings, as so often happens following CIA-led coups, is a CIA asset, Col. Manuel Noriega in this case, head of Panamanian intelligence and the CIA’s key contact in Panama. Noriega had been on the CIA payroll since the 60s. When George Bush Sr. became Director of the CIA in 1976 under President Ford, he would inherit Noriega as an asset. Despite evidence Noriega was involved in drug trafficking, Bush kept Noriega on the payroll. In fact, he increased Noriega’s salary to more than $100,000 a year and eliminated a requirement that intelligence reports in Panama include information on drug trafficking. Admiral Stanfield Turner, Director of the CIA under Carter, claims he cut Noriega off, removing him from the CIA payroll. Bush Sr. reinstated him and even gave him a raise, fostering an even closer relationship than had existed before. In fact, Bush Sr. saw to it that the man he would later refer to as “a drug-related, drug-indicted terrorist” was well looked after. Journalist Mark Hertsgaard sums up the White House’s position at the time of the Panama invasion nicely when he explains: “The story the White House was pushing was getting this so-called narco-terrorist in a net and that was the thrust of all the coverage.”34 The war against terrorism and the war on drugs have similar modi operandi in their disdain for the jurisdictional authority of foreign governments as well as the U.S. Constitution at home. The war on drugs and its fellow sibling, the war on terrorism, were united under one rubric by George Bush Sr. During this period, the FBI would undertake its largest political surveillance operation since the 60s, opening files on more than 19,500 opponents of U.S. policies in El Salvador and Nicaragua. Yet, during Bush Sr.’s term as CIA director and drug task force chief, drug smuggling into the United States would increase by 1000%.35 Once having created the monster, the U.S. government and military would later find pretext and justification for invading Panama by citing the wrongdoings of the very narco-terrorist monster they had funded, supported and placed in power in the first place: problem-reaction-solution. As for Saddam Hussein, it is well known that he was a CIA asset brought to power in a CIA-led coup against a populist government. But what is not well known is that, just as recent findings have established a business connection between the Bush and bin Laden families, so too did George Bush Sr. and Saddam Hussein share a business relationship. According to Chicago journalist Sherman Skolnick, Bush Sr. and Saddam Hussein shared profits to the tune of $250 billion a year in Persian Gulf oil kickbacks, which were funneled through the discredited Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI). These were not government-to-government transactions, but personal transactions between Bush Sr. and Saddam Hussein.36 Skolnick examined records at the Chicago branch of BCCI that showed joint business ventures between Gen. Manuel Noriega and George Bush Sr. Given that the Bush family has established business links with all three terrorist monsters is it possible to dismiss the complicity of the Bush family in the criminal activities of these three men? Given the evidence, it would be safe for us to eliminate the alternative that the Bush family had no involvement in 9-11. In fact, they are up to their red necks in involvement. Their nefarious business dealings and involvement in CIA covert operations make them directly or indirectly involved with the events of 9-11. However, the most persuasive argument for deeper culpability and involvement in 9-11 is the fact that the Bush family has been directly responsible for financing the bin Laden family, as with Noriega and Saddam Hussein. Given this history, it is impossible to dismiss the fact that they are accomplices in 9-11, guilty by association, if not more directly involved in a problem-reaction-solution scheme on behalf of the U.S. government, intelligence community and Pentagon to create pretext and justification for the Afghanistan invasion. It has been quite rightly pointed out by an array of researchers that the CIA is responsible for creating the fundamentalist Taliban regime and Al Qaeda terrorist network, offering funding, support and training to the very groups of militants, who would ultimately unleash their fury on 9-11. This is what is called “blowback” in the intelligence community and is the direct result of previous CIA operations in the region. Indeed, Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor, Zbygniew Brzezinski admitted that his policies led directly to two decades of war in Afghanistan. Brzezinski endorsed the CIA operations in Afghanistan, six months before the Soviet invasion, with the clear objective of precipitating a Soviet invasion and in Brzezinski’s own words, “give them their Vietnam.” Once war broke out, in the largest CIA operation ever, costing the CIA $3.5 billion and allies like the Saudis several billion more, the agency proceeded to fund, arm, and train the mujahaddin, whose vision for their society included the virtual enslavement of women, a fact the U.S. government knew from the outset and tacitly may even have approved of because it would have given them further moral justification for later military intervention and incursions in the region. In fact, the CIA channeled most of its aid through Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) to the sadistic madman, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who first gained infamy for inciting groups of students to throw acid into the faces of unveiled women and who went on to kill 25,000 civilians in Kabul alone through indiscriminate gunfire.37 Brzezinski hoped, that by installing a fundamentalist Islamic regime backed by a ruthless terrorist network, this would goad the Soviets into invading Afghanistan to prevent an Islamic fundamentalist pandemic infecting the region by warding off its advance to neighboring Central Asian republics. The strategy of course worked, but the blowback from the policies of the late 90s can clearly be witnessed today. “Was it a noble end to draw the Russians into an Afghan trap, in 1979, as Zbigniew Brzezinski claims he did?” Noam Chomsky quite rightly asks. While supporting the resistance against Russian invasion in December 1979 may be justifiable on the one hand, Chomsky objects to methods that incited the Russian invasion and to the funding and support of a terrorist army of Islamic fanatics.38 How can the ends justify the means, when the means are so at variance with the end, the principles of freedom and justice the so-called free world upholds as its moral justification for pursuing such ends? Brzezinski goads the Soviets into what he calls the “Afghan trap” by sending military forces to bolster and support the Islamic fundamentalist regime:
The United States, along with its allies, assembled a huge mercenary army, maybe 100,000 or more, and they drew from the most militant sectors they could find, which happened to be radical Islamists, what are called here Islamic fundamentalists, from all over, most of them not from Afghanistan.39
As Chomsky rightly points out, most of the Islamic militants come from elsewhere, not from Afghanistan. Does a manhunt for one man or indeed Islamic militants who march under his banner justify the invasion of the sovereign territory known as Afghanistan as part of infinite war against terrorism, when most of the militants come from elsewhere and indeed reside elsewhere? Is not boogeyman extraordinaire, Osama bin Laden, merely pretext and justification for U.S. military invasion and the installation of yet one more permanent peacekeeping force in the region? Indeed, one more puzzle piece in the New World Order has been secured into place. Zbigniew Brzezinski gave an interview with Le NouvelObservateur in France. With the sole exception of the Library of Congress edition, there are two versions of the January 15-21, 1998 edition of Le Nouvel Observateur. The version sent to the United States is shorter than the French version. Interestingly and tellingly, the U.S. version does not contain the Brzezinski interview. Here is why. In the interview Brzezinski makes two damning confessions. The first is that the official version of history as usual is flawed:
According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.40
By Brzezinski’s own shameless admission, the U.S. government, routinely lying to its own people, even distorts current history in Orwellian fashion to suit its own agenda. The truth remains classified until such time as it is no longer relevant at which point information gets declassified and enters the public domain. It is at this juncture that the U.S. government skeletons come tumbling out of the closet. The word ‘skeletons’ is most apropos because it is these hidden policies concealed from the public that are very often responsible for the deaths of hundreds if not thousands. When asked if he has any regrets for a policy that led to two decades of war, Brzezinski replies:
Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war.41
If the U.S. government is so duplicitous as to conceal its real objectives in Afghanistan in 1979, what is to prevent it from doing so now? What is the real motive for the invasion of Afghanistan? Is it really about the hunt for Osama bin Laden, the Taliban and al-Qaeda operatives as has been alleged? In a story the BBC published on September 18, 2001, former Pakistani Foreign Secretary Niaz Naik said that he had been told as early as July of U.S. plans to attack Afghanistan in the fall. Mr. Naik claims he was told of the plan by U.S. officials at a UN-sponsored international contact group on Afghanistan held in Berlin. The U.S. representatives told him that unless bin Laden was handed over immediately, America would take military action to kill or capture Osama bin Laden and the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar. Mr. Naik added that the invasion was planned for before the first winter snowfall in Afghanistan.42 Mr. Naik’s words were as good as prophecy. As revealed by Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie claimed that the Bush administration deliberately blocked terrorism investigations in the summer of 2001 while negotiating with the Taliban about an oil pipeline through Afghanistan. When the negotiations broke down in August 2001, Brisard and Dasquie quote a U.S. official issuing the direct threat to the Taliban, “Either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs.”43 The evidence that 9-11 and the events leading up to it were staged is only exacerbated by the fact that it looks like a frame job. Everything from the FBI allegedly finding a copy of the Koran and a flight manual on how to fly a passenger airliner in an abandoned rental car outside Logan Airport to the hijackers attracting so much attention to themselves just before the big day points to a frame job designed to specifically implicate Islamic extremists in the 9-11 terror. It is reminiscent of the tactics used to set Lee Harvey Oswald up as the patsy in the JFK assassination, where he was seen demonstrating in a pro-Castro rally and made out to be a pro-Communist sympathizer before the fated day when he would take the rap for Kennedy’s murder. Hijackers Atta and Alomari in particular were seen picking fights over bills of less than $50 in greasy bars just before the attacks. Suicide pilots Atta, al-Shehhi and a third unidentified man were known to have gone to Shuckum’s, a bar in Hollywood the night of September 7th, only days before the attacks. Here, Atta would draw attention to himself by playing a video game for hours on end and even entered the name “Abu” into the game’s record of rankings. When a bill of $48 was presented, Atta became enraged. You think we cannot pay?” he screamed. “What do you think we are? We are American Airlines pilots!” He then pulled out a wad of bills and slapped $51 on the counter. Six days earlier a similar occurrence took place at 251 Sunrise in Palm Beach. Pilot al Shehhi and an unidentified man were drinking alcohol with three girls from West Palm Beach. When a bill of $1,100 was presented, al-Shehhi yelled, “Fraud!” He then removed his glasses, seemingly preparing to fight with the bouncers and then changed his mind, his aggression suddenly dissipating. He threw a bundle of bills on the table and even sweetened it with a $25 tip. A day later, al-Shehhi would turn up at a strip bar in Daytona Beach called the Pink Pony with an unidentified companion. They would order several beers, slip some bills under the strippers’ garter belts, and would leave after about an hour.44 What is odd about all these events is that they appear staged and right on cue. Why would the hijackers draw so much attention to themselves in the days leading up to 9-11? Why would they pick a fight over a paltry sum of $48? And why would supposedly orthodox Muslim suicide pilots commit so many mortal sins, when the prospect of paradise was the expected reward for their martyrdom? Is it realistic to suppose they would trade paradise for a night or two of debauchery? We can safely eliminate this possibility, which leaves us with only one option: These men were not as religious as they purported to be. Pleasing Allah seems not to have been their motivation. Drawing as much attention to themselves as possible in an apparent bid to implicate Muslim fundamentalists in the terrorist attacks of 9-11 seems to have been their modus operandi, but why? Finally, there is the issue of fake terror, tried and tested by the U.S. government so many times in order to justify its foreign policy agenda. In 1898, Joseph Pulitzer’s New York World and William Randolf Hearst’s New York Journal were pushing for American intervention in Cuba. Hearst dispatched a reporter to Cuba to photograph the coming war with Spain. When the photojournalist asked what war, Hearst allegedly replied, “You take the photographs and I will provide the war.” Then, in 1898, the USS Maine, lying in Havana harbor would explode violently. Under the slogan, “Remember the Maine,” America went to war with Spain, making a protectorate of the Philippines and annexing Hawaii along the way. An investigation in 1975 revealed that there was no evidence of an external attack. The explosion was more likely caused by a coal dust explosion in a coalbunker unwisely placed to close to the ship’s magazines. In both cases, fake terror was used to justify war.45 Then, there is Pearl Harbor. On November 29th, Secretary of State Hull showed United Press reporter Joe Leib a message revealing the time and place of the attack, and the New York Times in the 12/8/41 Pearl Harbor Special Edition on page 13 reported that the time and place of the attack had been known in advance. The oft-repeated claim that the Japanese fleet maintained radio silence as it approached Hawaii is a false claim. The archives of the NSA still holds an intercept of an uncoded message sent by the Japanese destroyer Shirya which reads, “Proceeding to a position 30.00N, 154.20 E. Expect to arrive at that point on 3 December.”46 For four years before the attack, the Roosevelt administration had been intercepting and decoding secret Japanese messages. They knew that the Japanese planned to alert their diplomatic missions around the world of a decision to go to war through a false weather report during the daily Japanese language short-wave news broadcast. The forecast of ‘east wind rain’ indicated war with the United States, while ‘west wind clear’ would mean a decision to go to war with Britain and British and Dutch colonies in the East; north wind cloudy’ meant war with Russia. At a congressional investigation hear in 1945, messages indicating a decision to go to war with the United States and Britain were intercepted and decoded on December 3rd, 1941, just four days before Pearl Harbor. These messages later went missing from navy files. Other decoded messages gave Roosevelt more than ample prior warning of the coming attack, but no prior warning was issued. The attack was allowed to happen in an apparent bid to rally American public opinion around the decision to go to war.47 In 1962, The Joint Chiefs of Staff issued a Memorandum to the president recommending that he endorse a plan to shoot down a mockup of a passenger airliner, which was in reality a CIA asset and claim that there was an extensive passenger list on board even though the plane would be empty. The plan was to blame the missile attack on Cuba in order to justify a U.S. military invasion of Fidel Castro’s fiefdom. The plan was never carried out, but the front page of the memorandum is included in the body of this paper to show that the declassified document is available in the National Security Archives.
