Photo evidence of George Herbert Walker Bush's Illuminati roots

Originally posted by Jn
Masonic Light, now you have returned back posting, can i ask you what you where talking about a few pages back on page 5 of this thread?.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

Hmmm, I'm not sure, I had several posts on that page. Which one are you referring to?

Originally posted by MissMarple


Don't halloo till you're out of the woods. Recently, I've seen a good movie made by Jüri Lina. It's called "the Lightbringers". In it the original writings of the Bavarian Illuminati are shown which are kept in the local museum's archive of Ingolstadt. It happens that in one of these documents the "All-seeing eye" (their seal) appeared.

The Illuminati adopted the three degrees of Blue Lodge Masonry (Rite of Strict Observance), and conferred them on their candidates. This conferral was of course irregular, and those who received Masonic degrees in Illuminati Lodges were not recognized as Masons by regular Masonic Lodges.

The All Seeing Eye is a symbol introduced in the Third Degree of Masonry, so it was used by the Illuminati in that context. However, it was the Illuminati who borrowed the symbol from Masonry, not vice versa.

Slowely but surely I'm getting the impression that each level of degree has its own corresponding manner of interpreting symbols. The higher you're climbing the degree ladder the deeper you're penetrating the meaning of the symbol...

It also depends upon context. For example, in the Third Degree, the All Seeing Eye is the symbol for God's omnipresence. In some degrees in the Scottish Rite, especially the 4° and 28°, it also is used as a symbol for the sun.

Originally posted by Masonic Light
Hmmm, I'm not sure, I had several posts on that page. Which one are you referring to?

Masonic Light, your discussion about the St. Louis Arc on page 5 of this thread.

[edit on 16-8-2006 by Jn]

Originally posted by MissMarple


Okay, you might be right that an EXACT PERFORMANCE of the rituals and ceremonies is achieved. No problem. But I was rather referring to corruption within the masonic system. I can imagine that some masons are progressing faster than others with regard to obtaining degrees. Not due to their intellectual brilliance but due to their "right connections".

A Mason may progress in the manner outlined by his Grand Lodge, according to its Constitution and Code. It has nothing to do with "right connections", although "intellectual brilliance" can affect the situation because the Entered Apprentice cannot advance to the degree of Fellow Craft until he has learned the Catechism of his Degree: this is also the case with the Fellow Craft who seeks the degree of Master Mason.

Obviously, one who is a genius can probably learn his material pretty quickly, but it takes work and dedication for those like myself, who are somewhat less than brilliant.

Regardless, my Grand Lodge regulations require a minimum waiting period of 4 weeks between degrees. This is enough time for the Average Joe to learn his material. There is no maximum time, so if it takes longer, the candidate can learn at his own speed.

After one becomes a Master Mason, he may be advanced through the Scottish and/or York Rites at his own request, upon application and election. This is entirely up to the individual member, and there is no waiting period between degrees in the higher Rites.

Originally posted by MissMarple
In the first place the majority joins masonry in order to make important contacts developing to business relationships.

Where did you get this information? I've personally never met a single Mason who joined for any business contacts, so this has peaked my curiousity.

It's all about networking.

Interesting. I thought it was about Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.

In the second place many become masons because their father, grandfather, ect were masons, too.

That, my dear, is true. Although I don't know anybody who would ever think of joining a Lodge for business deals in the profane world, I know many who joined because of family members they admire who were Masons.

Do you notice that in masonry women don't occupy leading positions?

That's because there aren't any women in Masonry. Masonry is a fraternity.

Okay, at best they have the opportunity to advance in their career in the "Job's daughters" or the "International Order of the Rainbow" or the "Order of the Eastern Star

How exactly does one advance in their career if they're a member of Job's Daughters or Rainbow? Both of these are clubs for girls, like the Girl Scouts. Their only career is their math homework.

For any Masonic member who is a businessman, the business world ends at the door of the Lodge. The same thing goes for the Mason who is a cop, a carpenter, a janitor, or a king. The profane world may judge a man by his bank account, but such a thing is alien to Freemasonry which notes that All Seeing Eye is concerned not with what is in the wallet, but what is in the heart.

Originally posted by Jn


Masonic Light, your discussion about the St. Louis Arc on page 5 of this thread.

Only that it's not a Masonic symbol. Architects and builders have been erecting arches long before Freemasonry.

The Royal Arch Degree of Masonry has no connection to the St. Loius Arc. That degree is based around the quasi-legendary history of the building of the second Temple in Jerusalem during the reign of Zerubbabel, after the Babylonian captivity ended.

Originally posted by Masonic Light
The Illuminati adopted the three degrees of Blue Lodge Masonry (Rite of Strict Observance), and conferred them on their candidates.

Do you have any ideas where I could find the ritual, or something like the rituals that the Strict Observance might have used? I have a very complete book on the Bavarian Illuminati, however, the symbolic degrees are not described. Although the author has written another book specifically on masonry, has anyone heard of Illumines de baviere et la franc-maçonnerie allemande by Le Rene Forestier? (is it ever referred to in Masonic literature?)

ML you are positive that the Illuminati would’ve used the All Seeing Eye in its symbols? What about the eye inside a pyramid? (I have to go to Germany soon!)

I checked out Lithography to make sure.

Lithography was invented by Alois Senefelder in Germany in 1798 and, within twenty years, appeared in England and the United States. Almost immediately, attempts were made to print pictures in color. Multiple stones were used, one for each color, and the print went through the press as many times as there were stones. The problem for the printers was keeping the image in register, making sure that the print would be lined up exactly each time it went through the press so that each color would be in the correct position and the overlaying colors would merge correctly.

Source: www.lib.udel.edu...

The image posted on the proceeding page couldn’t have been printed in 1785. (or before)


[edit on 16/8/06 by ConspiracyNut23]

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23
Here's the pic you’re referring to...

... It’s in color Isn’t that a little bit fishy? How could the Bavarian Illuminati have created that? And doesn’t the design of the eye appear a little more modern than late 18th century? the typeset? the layout?

It looks just like a modern newspaper. Color printing on newsprint only really kicked off in the mid to late 1980s, and the typeface and style is consistent with a European newspaper from the last 10 years.

Are there any linguists around who could read and translate the larger text?

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23

Do you have any ideas where I could find the ritual, or something like the rituals that the Strict Observance might have used?

The Grand College of Rites now has jurisdiction over the Rite of Strict Observance, and published those rituals for its membership 8 or 9 years ago. Unfortunately, I have them packed up some where in my storage building and don't have quick access to them.

I have a very complete book on the Bavarian Illuminati, however, the symbolic degrees are not described. Although the author has written another book specifically on masonry, has anyone heard of Illumines de baviere et la franc-maçonnerie allemande by Le Rene Forestier? (is it ever referred to in Masonic literature?)

Personally, I am not familiar with it.

ML you are positive that the Illuminati would’ve used the All Seeing Eye in its symbols?

Not absolutely. It's possible that they could have edited the ceremony. I'm only assuming that the Eye was used by them because they worked a version of the Master Mason degree.

What about the eye inside a pyramid? (I have to go to Germany soon!)

No, the Eye in the Pyramid is not an Illuminati symbol. It appears to have been invented by the Congressional Seal Committee, perhaps borrowing on Masonic and Oddfellow symbolism.

Any Master Mason holding membership and in good standing in a regular symbolic Lodge recognized by a majority of the Grand Lodges of Freemasonry in the United State may petition for membership in the Grand College of Rites.

Source: www.grandcollegeofrites.org...

Of course

Keeping things secret that should rightly be public domain is wrong.

However…

Many Freemasons, and even many of the Grand College's members, disagree with the College's leadership over whether this is a desirable state of affairs.

source: en.wikipedia.org...

Well at least it’s not all masons.

Really, this so-called Grand College is guarding rituals that are not in use!!!

I bet it’s full of eye-in-the-pyramids in there. Maybe be even the plans to the gateway arch... (sorely walks away…)

edit: added source


[edit on 16/8/06 by ConspiracyNut23]

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23

Keeping things secret that should rightly be public domain is wrong.

I'm not sure they should be in the public domain. After all, it is the ritualistic process that makes a man a Mason, and captures the unique Masonic experience. It's fine to discuss aspects of ritual openly, but I firmly believe that the actual ceremony in toto belongs to the Mason, as one who has earned it through the traditional and ancient procedures.

However, women and atheists will forever be left speculating because they can never become masons and can never have access to those books.

We have to take your word that they are no all-seeing eye in the pyramid in those ritual. That sucks, although I have come to trust you and I don't think you would lie, I can't verify your sources and check for myself. (heresay)


[edit on 16/8/06 by ConspiracyNut23]

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23
However, women and atheists will forever be left speculating because they can never become masons and can never have access to those books.

We have to take your word that they are no all-seeing eye in the pyramid in those ritual. That sucks, although I have come to trust you and I don't think you would lie, I can't verify your sources and check for myself. (heresay)

That's true. I myself would be in the same situation if I wanted to investigate a fraternity that I'm not a member of, whether it be a Greek Letter Society or Knights of Columbus, etc. However, I also recognize the right of those organizations to have their own ceremonies and privacy, just like we do.

Originally posted by Masonic Light
However, I also recognize the right of those organizations to have their own ceremonies and privacy, just like we do.

But I’m not sure that the information is rightly for masons to own. Legally the copyrights are long expired.

And exactly by whose authority does the Grand College claim rights to those works?

Among the many rituals over which the Grand College claims jurisdiction in the U.S. are those belonging to systems of Freemasonry that at one time co-existed with the Ancient & Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry. Chief among these was the Antient & Primitive Rite, or the Rite of Memphis.

Source: en.wikipedia.org...

Why is the Miziam Rite left out? (which I think I could qualify for membership.)

It seems to me claims by the college to these works are dubious at best. IMHO, they belong to history.

Until then, I’ll personally take your word that they are no “eye in pyramid” in the strict observance rituals. However for the purpose of this thread, I think it can be freely discussed that the pyramid sitting on Bush’s lap in the OP could indeed be Masonic or Bavarian Illuminati in origin.

the info is there, but we can't access it

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23

But I’m not sure that the information is rightly for masons to own. Legally the copyrights are long expired.

That depends. The timelimit on copyrights start when they are first published. If the rituals were never publicly published (By the holders of the copyright) the copyright time limit has not started.

For example if one of Shakespeare's descendants published a play of his that was handed down in the family today, today would be the day the copyright timelimit starts.

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23

But I’m not sure that the information is rightly for masons to own. Legally the copyrights are long expired.

From a legal perspective, I'm not sure, as I don't know copyright laws in regard to fraternal rituals. It's my understanding that there was some controversy on ATS not long ago concerning copyrights to the rituals of a Greek Letter Society, but I didn't follow it very closely, and am not sure how it turned out.

Regardless, what I meant earlier is that the ritual morally and spiritually belongs only to Masons, of ancient right and custom.

And exactly by whose authority does the Grand College claim rights to those works?

The Grand College was instituted by several Brethren who held due authority over the degrees in question. For example, the first Grand Chancellor of the College was the well-known Masonic scholar and author Harold Van Buren Voorhis. Brother Voorhis was the Grand Hierophant of the 97° of the Oriental Rite of Memphis for the United States, and was Exalted Grand Magus of the 90° of the Egyptian Rite of Mitzraim for the United States. The other co-founders of the College were also members of the Sovereign Sanctuary of the 96° of Memphis. By unanimous vote, the various Rites were consolidated into the Grand College.

Why is the Miziam Rite left out? (which I think I could qualify for membership.)

Mitzraim was also placed under jurisdiction of the College. As for you qualifying for membership, the Rite of Mitzraim (or at least the regular one) had the same requirements as all other regular Masonic bodies. Why would you not qualify?

It seems to me claims by the college to these works are dubious at best. IMHO, they belong to history.

As an active member of the College, I assure you that the claims are not dubious. It was founded by the elected authorities of those degrees for the sole purpose of preserving them. Otherwise, many may have been lost, as these Rites were inactive in all practical senses.

hen, I’ll personally take your word that they are no “eye in pyramid” in the strict observance rituals.

Actually, I'd said that there is no eye in the pyramid in the Illuminati degrees. The Eye is used in the Rite of Strict Observance, as is in all Masonic Rites. The addition of the pyramid, however, is not Masonic nor Illuminated.

Perhaps it should also be mentioned that several versions of the Rite of Strict Observance are still active. In the United States, it is known as the Chevaliers Bienfaisants de la Cité Sainte, or Knights Beneficent of the Holy City, and is Martinist in symbolism.

HI CN

Allow me to attempt to smooth your troubled breast...

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23
However, women and atheists will forever be left speculating because they can never become masons and can never have access to those books.

Atheists can join an irregular lodge, women can join womens freemasonry (not OES). In England, at least the Order of Women Freemasons follow EXACTLY the same ritual as many of the regular male lodges, and consequently would have access to the same information.

We have to take your word that they are no all-seeing eye in the pyramid in those ritual. That sucks, although I have come to trust you and I don't think you would lie, I can't verify your sources and check for myself. (heresay)

There is no guarantee that the same knowledge is imparted within regular freemasonry as is without, but clearly no self respecting conspiracy theorist would be closed to the possibility the even joining full-blown regular freemasonry will give him all the answers.

The eye in the pyramid could be in an appendent order; then it will be in the one appendent order you didn't join; and finally it will be a symbol of the higher-order freemasons who do not allow the lower orders to see it (and 'you' will never get access to it). There will be no 'proof'.

Alternatively, you can (as you are doing) go with the 'probabilities' approach, and in that spirit I can confirm the complete lack of a pyramid in any masonic symbolism that I am familiar with. However the Eye, and the Eye within a Triangle, are commonplace.

@MasonicLight:

Welcome back

Originally posted by Masonic Light
Dwight D. Eisenhower was not a Mason. There have been fifteen US Presidents who were Masons, but Mr. Eisenhower was not one of them.

Also, Freemasonry is a fraternity, which means that it only admits men. No queens have been Masons (except for Oscar Wilde).

As I said before: The fact that Eisenhower is not on the OFFICIAL list of masonic presidents does not convince me that he's not a mason. it's quite interesting that Eisenhower was a Jehova witness (an organisation founded by a mason) and that he joined the Gettysburg Presbyterian Church which is said to be cozying up to freemasonry. For instance, a mason named Evans was once a head of that church.

Here you are! A fraternity only admitting men. And what about co-freemasonry practised by the "Grand Orient of France"? By the way: queens prefer joining chivalric orders.

The Rite Care Foundation is the official charity of the Scottish Rite of Masonry (similar to childrens orthapedics hospitals from the Shriners). Therefore it's not surprising that it is administered by Scottish Rite Masons.

Of course, I was aiming at the conclusion that William Gates might be a mason because he has given so much money to that organisation headed by a 33rd mason (Scottish rite). Nobody could tell me that a billionaire like Gates donates without other than just noble & humane motives. He's done it either because of his masonic affiliation or because of the chance of wielding influence.
Or because of both.

I'm the Secretary in my Lodge, which means that, along with the Treasurer, I'm the primary business officer. Lodges are required by the Constitution and By-Laws of the Grand Lodge to record everything. There's no if's, and's, or but's, and no exceptions. It's simply a matter of Masonic law.

Oh, do you think masonic laws can't be broken? Um, yes, of course, there are those rigide oaths sworn and taken very seriously by the masons. Otherwise...they will regret it. But I can figure out that many 33rd masons ON THE TOP consider themselves standing ABOVE THE LAW. Even above masonic law. There's no equality in freemasonry: Those on the lower levels have to obey (one brethren watches over the other, in case of need he's under the obligation to denunciate his fellow brother), those on the upper levels have privileges.

When a man joins, his initiation fees are paid to the Lodge, and the Secretary forwards a percentage to Grand Lodge for per capita dues. After a man receives the Third Degree, he is officially enrolled as a full member, and must pay annual dues. If I didn't record everybody who joined, I wouldn't know who to bill every year for dues. Secondly, we're also required to pay Grand Lodge a set sum for each member every year, and at year end they'll be wanting their money.

Please, don't dupe me. It's quite natural that you are obliged to record everybody who'd joined and control if he'd paid his dues. The new member is on your INTERNAL list. But he decides wether he wishes to appear on the OFFICIAL membership list frequently presented on the masonic organisation's public webside. That' s the salient point. And for several reasons not all members welcome their "outing".

In this context I would like to make the point that, contrary to the advertising slogan that "everybody is welcomed to join", not every John Doe has the opportunity to enter freemasonry actually. Neither an unemployed nor welfare (if there is one) recipient can afford the dues. Let alone the costs for the "costumes" (regalia, equipment, books, jewels) and other conceivable expenditures. Of course, this exclusion is intented since the solvent members want to be among themselves. It's like an elitist coterie comparable to an expensive golf club . No "social losers" (disadvantaged, poor, old, disabled) are desired.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23

But I’m not sure that the information is rightly for masons to own. Legally the copyrights are long expired.

From a legal perspective, I'm not sure, as I don't know copyright laws in regard to fraternal rituals. It's my understanding that there was some controversy on ATS not long ago concerning copyrights to the rituals of a Greek Letter Society, but I didn't follow it very closely, and am not sure how it turned out.

In England its quite simple. There are several rituals in use in England, and the copyright is held by the lodge in question (if there is just one lodge using the ritual), the Ritual Association (the governing body for the usage and procedures within the ritual) or Lewis Masonic (a masonic publishing company who publishes ritual). Therefore somebody owns the copyright and somebody could theoretically 'sue your ass' if they wanted to.

There is a difference, however, between 'owning' and 'making available'. All the ritual owned by Lewis Masonic is available for purchase from their website.

@MasonicLight:

Originally posted by Masonic Light
There's nothing secret or clandestine about joining a Lodge. Famous Msons are proud of their membership in the Lodge, and they display that membership proudly.

Nobody's trying to hide any Masonic membership, especially the Duke of Kent, who is the Grand Master of England. The queen of course is not a Mason, nor is Prince Charles, although Charles is eligible to join if he ever wants to.

Well, yes, for instance Benjamin Franklin was a famous high-level mason sold to the public as a "multitalented genius" and "benefactor/philanthropist". The blemishes of his biography (like that of having been a member of the satanic "Hellfire Club") were avidly removed before presenting him to the public. That's the intention: to present a famous mason in a positive light only. This leads to associating the term "mason" with positive characteristics & qualities. It's all about applying self-marketing and public relations techniques...

Everybody working for the NWO is trying to hide his masonic connections. Even CURRENT high-level members in politics, military, economics, show business are missed on the official membership lists. Merely many famous DECEASED members are listed. Because dead men tell no tales.

Oh yes that's right, the Duke of Kent (and his son) are VIPS within the NWO scenery. As well as all the European dynasties (including the Duke Otto of Habsburg) . The Duke of Kent is one of the heads of the "United Grand Lodge of England". Among his titles are KG, GCMG, GCVO, ADC
Grand Master. Probably he is too arrogant to conceal his membership.