Is that the Illuminati sign on the back of a dollar bill?
If you mean anything other than the eye in the pyramid, no. If you mean the eye in the pyramid, no, BUT there's a story involved to explain why.
I'll tell it further down.
Most the time it is spoken of as more of a Masonic thing than Illuminati thing. Of course the division between those two groups isn't always clear
either which makes them innerchangable on some occasions anyway.
It is generally attributed to Masons by the ignorant, yes. The Masons and the Illuminati are not interchangeable. They were not historically the same,
and they are not now the same.
That image is cute, by the way. I wonder how many hours it took the guy who made it to think of that. The guy who made that image. Not the guy who
made the Great Seal.
A new order of the ages might have something to do with rearranging history to cover up something. Funny how it's printed on a bill of money.
It might also have something to do with "the beginning of the new American Era, which commences from that date (1776, the numeral on the bottom of
the pyramid)", to quote Charles Thomson, the designer of the image, and Secretary of the United States in Congress assembled on June 20, 1782, when
the design was ratified. The symbolism of various elements of the Great Seal are a matter of public record, if you'd bother to search for Thomson's
explanations. But don't let me stop you from making wild and ridiculous guesses. Please, continue.
Which is not to imply that the official symbolism is complete, although it is accurate.
The year 2000 will be a turning point for the New World Order.
You know, despite the fact that everyone claims Bush said this in a speech to the UN in 1990, he didn't. I have the full transcript of that speech.
Do you want me to paste it here? I'll just paste the relevant paragraphs. You can read the whole thing at
The United Nations can help bring about a new day, a day when these kinds of terrible weapons and the terrible despots who would use them are both a
thing of the past. It is in our hands to leave these dark machines behind, in the Dark Ages where they belong, and to press forward to cap a historic
movement towards a new world order and a long era of peace.
And he DID also mention a "turning point" in that same speech:
And as we look to the future, the calendar offers up a convenient milestone, a signpost, by which to measure our progress as a community of nations.
The year 2000 marks a turning point, beginning not only the turn of the decade, not only the turn of the century, but also the turn of the millennium.
And 10 years from now, as the 55th session of the General Assembly begins, you will again find many of us in this hall, hair a bit more gray perhaps,
maybe a little less spring in our walk; but you will not find us with any less hope or idealism or any less confidence in the ultimate triumph of
So your quote is actually a confabulation of two totally different parts of the same speech. Yeah.
the illuminati are said to consist of a strict bloodline, and all hold positions of power
That's ridiculous. Anyone can be in the Illuminati.
Or to further the mystery, lets lay this symbol from Ordo Templi Orientis (Templars) on top and match the circimference of it [...etc..etc]
The OTO and the Templars are two completely seperate entities. They always have been. Both groups still exist. They don't associate. They never
The Knights Templar (formally known as "The Poor Knights of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon") were founded by Hugues de Payens in 1118. The
"last" Grand Master of the Knights Templar was Jacques de Molay, executed in 1314 by Philip IV of France. Philip quite frankly needed the money. The
Templars were filthy stinking rich. Philip was also taking the opportunity to weaken the Papacy by killing an order dedicated to it. If Philip hadn't
executed de Molay when he did, all the religious fighting orders in existence at the time would have been concatenated into one order called the
Knights of Jerusalem. This would have represented a major threat to Philip's ambitions because the supreme rank of that proposed Order was
specifically denied by the Pope to Philip. But this is turning into a history of Philip IV. The Templars prefer to keep a low profile today, and
membership may or may not have devolved into a status symbol among wealthy French businessmen. I should now give a brief introduction to the OTO.
The Ordo Templi Orientis, or OTO, was founded in Austria by a man named Carl Kellner in either 1895, or 1902, depending on what you mean by
"founded". The OTO is not so much an offshoot of the Freemasons as it is a way to unite at the highest level the three Masonic factions (Craft
Masons, Royal Arch Masons, and Scottish Rite Masons). Membership in the OTO was never granted to a Mason below the 33rd degree. Then, when John Yarker
died, everything fell apart. The OTO ceased to exist for a time, until none other than Aleister Crowley refounded it. Under Crowley, it was more or
less a completely different order. Being a Mason was no longer a requirement to join, and Crowley preferred to refer to the order as the "Mysteria
Mystica Maxima". Crowley continued to award members Masonic degrees, despite the fact that the Masons refused to recognize his authority. After
Crowley died, the order once again fell in decline, and ended up being maintained only in German speaking countries. It died out in France, Spain and
Italy. Today, though the OTO and the Freemasons have common members, one's rank in one does not carry over into the other. Frater Superior Hymenaeus
Beta is the current head of the OTO.
I agree. ..a person sees what they want to see. I admit, it's strange and "freaky" how it matches up..but who knows..maybe George Washington, Ben
and the boys just had a strange sense of humor.
Neither Washington nor Franklin was involved in the design of the dollar bill. It was designed by Charles Thomson, and no other.
On the other side of the Dollar Bill, at the top right hand corner, on the top left corner of the "crest" surrounding the number one, if you look
with a magnifying glass (or you look at this graphic), you will see a teeny tiny owl. No one seems to know what this is about!
That would be because it's not an owl. Whoever claims it is has a very active imagination.
it's the illuminati sign. Does this confirm that they are indeed members??
Ridiculous. It's no such thing. That's so ill-conceived I'm not even going to explain the origin of the sign.
First off, Novus Ordo Seclorum is verbatum from Virgil the Poet
No it's not. Virgil used the word "seclorum" ONCE in Eclogue IV. He never used the phrase "novus ordo seclorum". And the word you're looking for
is "verbatim". It translates as "to the word".
The symbolism on the Dollar was made by a team that was not Masonic, and all the latin they chose is directly verbatum from Virgil the Poet.
Once again, wrong. Nothing on the dollar bill is taken "verbatim" from Virgil. Nothing. It was all adapted FROM Virgil BY Charles Thomson. And it's
a known fact that many of the founding fathers were Masons. Many of them also grew hemp. In fact, hemp was a major crop in the US all the way up to
World War 2. But I digress. I don't know if Thomson was a Mason, but it's irrelevant since the dollar bill does not contain any deliberate overt
The Dollar's symbols are on the Great Seal and they had nothing to do with Masonry or any illuminati.
The symbolism of the great seal (particularly the eye in the pyramid) and the Illuminati do have a correspondence. I'm getting to that. As I said at
the beginning of this post, I'm going to explain that.
Hamilton, that gesture predates the existence of the "Goat of Mendes" (Baphomet), and it doesn't "mean" that unless the President intended it to
mean that. Which he obviously didn't. Bush is a Methodist.
RIGHT. Now then, to explain the symbolism of the eye in the pyramid.
Aside from the US Treasury explanation, which is entirely correct, the eye in the pyramid has other symbolisms that are no less relevant to the fact
that it's on paper money and not coinage, and that the symbol is commonly used in conjunction with the Illuminati.
The apex of the pyramid corresponds to the apex of the body, which is the head, and therefore the eye is located in the mind. The eye in the pyramid
represents perception and belief. What you see and what you know. The symbol is applied to anything that exists only because people believe in it. For
instance, the concept of paper money. Nevermind that the money is actually closer to denim than paper in physical composition. The materials that go
into making a dollar bill are relatively worthless. It has no intrinsic value like coinage does. That's why the eye in the pyramid no longer appears
on coins. It did, at one point. It was judged inappropriate. This is the same reason the symbol is associated with the Illuminati. An entity which
exists solely because of belief, and not in any tangible capacity.
No evidence has been found as to who is a member because no such evidence exists. It's meaningless to say someone is "in" the Illuminati. Anyone
can claim to be a member, and work on their behalf, and that claim is valid. That is how the Illuminati survives. It survives because people like you
folks in these forums keep talking about it. That's really the only reason. It's not a fake organization. That's not what I'm trying to say. It's
real. It's just that there are no idle members. You're only "in" the Illuminati when you act in its name. Before that and after that you're not a
member. At a later time you may be a member again.
So you see, the Illuminati is not a secret because its members are good at keeping secrets. It's a secret because those members that everyone
presumes exist, in fact, don't.
The ultimate leadership of the Illuminati is another matter. It always comes back to one person. Not a committee. Not a tribunal. Not a cabinet. One
person. This person, by word or action or both, dictates the immediate future of the Illuminati. It is not nececcary for this person to know their
rank for them to perform it effectively. They don't even need to know they're in the Illuminati. They don't even need to know what the Illuminati
is. And this leader is not necessarily the same person from day to day. But it is always just one person.
Generally, the person most capable of shaping the world for the rest of humanity is the leader of the Illuminati. Not by right or privilege, but
because this person will be in a position to influence many factors, which is a prerequisite to Illuminati leadership. As to the title of the leader
of the Illuminati, it's whatever the incumbent leader chooses it to be.
Determining who this "Illumined person" is at any given time is an exercise in futility. Studying the chaos of different human interaction systems
COULD indicate who they are, if you were capable of accruing enough information to make such an extrapolation. But in the process of accruing that
information, if you actually made any progress, you would in effect become the person you're looking for. Which would necessarily void the previous
results and bring you back to square one, but ironically, you'd BE the person you're searching for, without even realizing it. Then you'd go do a
bunch of stuff, and your official tenure as the leader of the Illuminati would end and it would pass to someone else.
The ancient apparatus of government were developed specifically so that the Illumined person was never the same individual for too long. If one person
in the world accumulates too much power, and thus remains Illumined for overlong, it disrupts the stability of human civilization. Ideally a person is
supposed to fall when they've exceeded the power quota, and generally they do. But sometimes they don't. This constitutes a major problem, and a
great deal of the problems with the modern world can be traced to it. The modern apparatus of government is an attempt to circumvent the previous
trend and grant permanent status of Illumination to a single individual. This is the point of American imperialism.
However, despite what you may now be thinking, the man being positioned as the permanent Illumined one is not the President of the United States. The
President has little real power. He's a chief diplomat. Great. Yawn. So that means he can make all sorts of fluffy speeches he didn't even write.
Does he have the power to make war? No, not really. Only Congress can declare war. The War Powers Act is unconstitutional, and it will be repealed
before long if Presidents keep using it. Bush Jr's currenty foray into the Middle East is being supported by a delegation of war-making authority
from Congress to the President for the duration of the conflict. This is technically unconstitutional, too, but the nuance is lost on most people.
Anyhow, the President is in no position to directly dictate world affairs. He can't do anything without the consent of the people in his
administration, and those people are all of a single party affiliation. Aha! Now you see where this is going. Bush may be President, but he was a
Republican first. The current chairman of the Republican National Committee is a man you've probably never heard of unless you live in Montana. Marc
Racicot. He has more real power than Bush precisely by virtue of nobody knowing who he is. He doesn't have to answer to the press, largely. He isn't
under a microscope 24/7 like Bush is. Did YOU know who he was 5 seconds ago? Anyhow, American expansion, backed by the Republicans, has at its
ultimate goal the ascendancy of Marc Racicot. Why is he qualified, aside from his obscurity and the fact that he occupies the chair of the RNC? He's
not, really. He's just an ordinary guy. Meaning he'll do an ordinary job. Not great, but not terrible either. Which is adequate to the purpose of
I should point out that nobody in the US government is knowingly orchestrating this plan. It's what's known as an "emergent phenomenon". A
consequence of the complexity of the systems in question, and their interconnectedness. Despite the fact that there have been and will be many
Illumined ones, the Illuminati is ultimately directed with more continuity to ensure that stability is maintained. It is a matter of dispute as to
whether this directing entity is self-aware or not. The entity is, in fact, Jung's collective unconscious. In a sense, it is the combination of
desires and personalities of everyone in the world, meaning that whatever it does is inherently in the best interests of humanity. On the other hand,
it's more or less meaningless to say it "does" anything, if you can't assign sentience upon it.
So that is the parallel between the eye in the pyramid and the Illuminati. And the literal interpretation as "the eye of Providence" also applies,
as you can see. And you can also now see what "annuit coeptis" refers to. It means "it favors our undertakings". It, in reference to the eye in
the pyramid. The collective unconscious favors American imperialism because it will give a single person enough power to remain Illumined
indefinately. America just happens to be in the position to do it. Luck, more than anything. Britain was in such a position before the US. The torch
was passed when the colonies became independent. Before Britain, in the 1200s, it was Temujin the Genghis Khan. Before that, it was Rome. Britain
began as the Roman colony of Londonium just as the US began as a British holding. Julius Caesar and his successors all tried for the Illumination, but
the Praetorian Guard and the Senate both conspired to prevent the Caesars from achieving it. Probably just as well. Most of the Caesars were really
twisted. And before Rome it was Macedonia. That's why Alexander died so young. He was the last major candidate for indefinate Illumination. He died
of a mysterious fever 10 days after the onset, and no cause for it has ever been named. His last words, when asked who his empire was to be left to,
were "To the best". In other words, to the one next most likely to become Illumined.