Ted Turner, Rupert Murdoch and the illuminati

Seeing that the illuminati influence much of what we see on television, wouldn't it benefit them if they had one of their own overseeing a network?

I would love to hear what you guys know/think as to if there was a connection between network heads and the illuminati/freemasonry/any other secret society/group. Thanks.

Here are a few secret societies that are actually tied together. Not only only do they have similar policies but their members are picked from the same groups of elite.

Cecil Rhodes' Round Table Group eventually became the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House today). They also have an American branch called the Council of Foreign Relations. The Bilderberg Group was formed to insure the Seven Sisters' oil companies remains as the only oil cartel. The Trilateral Commission was then formed to include Japanese power players.

These are the groups you should focus on. The Freemason and the Illuminati are IMO, red herrings.


[edit on 21/3/08 by ConspiracyNut23]

Thanks...I was already aware of these groups...I was just wondering if you had any info on the connection between the powerful network heads, and the powerful families that run the planet.

IMO, they are the elite's PR department. That is they have to make sure that somethings are rarely talked about. For instance, it is rarely mentioned that all the wars of the past century have been fought over control of natural resources. (making sure the Seven Sisters keep their monopoly on oil) not over political beliefs.

Control of the media in a democracy is essential because that is where people are supposedly "informed".


[edit on 21/3/08 by ConspiracyNut23]

Brilliant and concise as usual ConspiracyNut23, all I wish to add is the qualification that there is no such thing as politics ONLY economics. So to qualify, all wars since the beginning of the 20th century have been fought with and for economics. Though natural resources are a major factor it is more a matter of how trade is governed than the resources themselves.

As far as the media is concerned, it is fairly easy to ascertain where loyalties lie, the BBC for example represents the interests, in part, of the City of London Corporation (and therefore those integral to Chatham House). Fox, Turner et al have their own monopolistic interests as well as being toadies to the interests of the trade monopolists. The joke is that when for decades the enemy was supposed to be communism, these corporations seek to install what is essentially a communist economic structure - and one that they seek to spread throughout the globe.

In their vision of an elite there will be no social or economic mobility, the elite are the feudal lords and the rest of us the serfs. The bigger joke is that those in control pay for the installation of these systems by selling shares and services to us serfs, we therefore pay them to control us

And let's not forget Rockefeller's now infamous quote:

We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost 40 years........It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supernational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries.

reply to post by KilgoreTrout

---

Thanks for the addition KT. BTW, I'm currently reading William Engdahl's A Century of War. An excellent book with brilliant insights into the oil cartel. He details out what Robert Newman briefly covers in his History of Oil stand-up routine. (GoogleVid)

PS: I usually look for your posts, but it has become extremely difficult. I can't wait for the return of the "posts" feature.

[edit on 21/3/08 by ConspiracyNut23]

Sounds like a book that I should read, I'm not at all well informed on the oil situation, certainly not as well informed as I should be. I have had a brief peak at the Rob Newman link (I had a crush on him in my teens - still not unpleasing to the eye either), a very astute mind, I'll hopefully get to watch it through over the weekend. Once again you have an impeccable eye for pertinent information.

In a desperate bid to stay on topic - I think that the main thing that you have captured so well (and the post you made a little while back about the nature of compartmentalised secrecy in corporations supports this - www.abovetopsecret.com...) is that structures or conduits of secrecy have evolved. While it is possible that the Freemasons, for example, may have been deal brokers (and before anyone jumps on me, I use this only as an example), it is quite clear that as the organisation grew, its own success would have nullified that ability. But, private and public corporations, (and professional and advisory bodies) do, operate on a pyramidical power structure which does mean that the left hand doesn't actually know what the right hand is doing. John D Rockefeller senior was a firm advocate of this practice, so many of his employees and acquisitions didn't even know that Standard Oil was the boss/buyer. A little like the leadership principle in reverse.

I think that the notion of an Illuminati exists, but it is not at all what we expect it to be and I agree wholeheartedly that the Freemasons represent a red herring. Lots of mud gets thrown about, but look closely and none of it is sticking. The media are proven liars, omitters and distorters. The more savvy we as an audience become, the more obvious their tactics and allegiances are - the only people who trust the media are those that stay glued to the box...we're waking up...but they know it as well as we do...and I kind of think that that means we're heading for war, I hope I am wrong.



I'm missing you too,

Don't think that you have missed much from me though, haven't had a great deal to say for myself of late - kind of swishing things around. Would love to get into a discussion with you at some point on these and many more things, I covet the contents of your mind quite shamelessly as you know

ConspiracyNut, I have already finished A Century of War and found it to be a very informative and illuminaitng text. It is good to see that there are others who are actively pursuing the true rationale behind certain global motives and are willing to dismiss outright sensationalism to discern the truth.

As a side note I am too disapointed at the 'posts' feature being disabled as I always find yours to be very insightful and thought provoking.

reply to post by ConspiracyNut23

---

Wow....everyone is in love with these conspiracies.....I would like to see someone actually prove them. Have you ever been to a Masonic lodge? Have you seen the guys who are members? I am a mason in oregon and I get a good laugh when you type of theorists try to blame all that is wrong in the world on my fellow lodge brothers...I am 32...I am a fairly young member..and when I think of one of my elderly brothers cracking the whip and ruling the banking system or some such thing I get a huge laugh...... Those who live in ignorance are eventually the great butt of the joke to those who live in reality. Next you talking about the mind control agents that girl scouts put in the cookies they sell. HAHAHAHAAHAHAHa...thanks for the laughs ..I love these threads..Oh yeah and by the way ...one thing you can thank freemasonry for is the founding of this country (which does not include the fairly recent.last 100 years or so. downward spiral of the government)

reply to post by Stumpy1

---

Greetings Stumpy, I think you are missing the thesis of ConspiracyNut's posts, he is not linking Freemasons with any of the groups mentioned and is instead postulating that they are not related to the Bilderbergers, Tri-Lateral Commission or Council on Foreign Relation groups. The insights provided are more in depth then the usual 'Masons are taking over the world' nonesense that occasionally prevails. I think you will find him to be a staunch supporter of Masonic endeavors and very unbiased in opinion.

[edit on 21-3-2008 by AugustusMasonicus]

reply to post by Stumpy1

---

Perhaps you should reread my posts. What I mention is more conspiracy fact than conspiracy theory. If you disagree with any points I have actually made, let me know. And please remember, this is a conspiracy forum.

PS, thanks AM.

I am reading a book that sounds very familiar to A Century of War, it is called World Conflicts. It is a heavy read at 600 pages but it is really concise listed by countries and there respective conflicts with a final chapter on Terrorism. I highly recommend it as it discusses the intentions and diplomacies leading up to and during these conflicts.

This thread has been completely sidetracked. I thought it was an interesting notion that since the ruling elite of the world control and own our media, the most powerful people in the media could be illuminati members.

Stumpy, reading your post proves to me that you are (no offense) a low-level mason privy to NO juicy information. Even the high-level masons aren't privy to all secret information.

I WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU GUYS COULD MAYBE ELABORATE MORE ON THE POSSIBLE LINK BETWEEN POWERFUL MEDIA MEMBERS AND THE ILLUMINATI. THANKS.

This is 100% correct. The Freemasons and the T of I have nothing to do with the corruption and evil going on in the world today. Both groups abhor these evils. Both groups teach and strive for the highest morality.

reply to post by Societalgnorance

---

I thought the Illuminati in its conspiratorial sense usually described the collective rulers of the world? ie the ruling class (hence, my comments. I was assuming you weren't referring to the Bavarian Illuminati)

What exactly do you have in mind when referring to the Illuminati?



lol. And you thought your thread got sidetracked. Watch what happens now...

[edit on 22/3/08 by ConspiracyNut23]

The Rothschilds own Reuters AND The Associated Press. By the Rothschilds I mean the illuminati aka they own half the world's money and the banks and just about everyone and everything else. There are other families, but they come to mind first.

Seeing that they own the media, wouldn't they put "one of their own" in charge of networks, conglomerates, etc?

reply to post by Societalgnorance

---

Owning a media outlet takes a lot of money. Expansion needs to be financed. Since the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds are shareholders in leading merchant banks (who in turn have shares in the Federal Reserve) it is quite natural to assume that they would most likely finance individuals who are sympathetic to their goals. (whether them being aware of it or not)

Both families are/were heavily involved in the groups I mentioned in my first post.

Many prominent members of the media are part of the Bilderberg Group mentioned above. The Rockefeller quote I posted here was spoken at a Bilderberg meeting.


[edit on 22/3/08 by ConspiracyNut23]

Makes sense......I am aware of the groups you mentioned and their power is obvious. I wonder if anyone out there can actually link a network head like Rupert Murdoch or Ted Turner to one of these groups (Bilderberg, CFR, even a Masonic lodge)

If there was any link between a network head and a secret society which wields considerable power, it would further prove to me that we are brainwashed on a daily basis.

Carla Anderson Hills sits on the board of Time-Warner and she is also a member of the CFR. You can establish many links for yourself by going here and typing Ted Turner in the directors field. Unfortunately there is no entry for Murdoch and his News Corp.

Can you enlighten us as to what, in your estimation, is a 'high level' Mason?