It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

George Washington was a member of the Order of the Garter?

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 07:28 PM
link   
I found this picture on the internet.





911:Order of the Garter.

Third row ; Lord Indg, The Duke of Abercorn, Lord Ashburton, The Register The Dean of Windsor, Sir Edmund Hillary, The prelate The Bishop of Winchester, Sir Timothy Coleman, The Secretary Hubert Chessyre, Sir William Gladstone and Sir Anthony Acland.

Second row ; Page of Honour The Honourable John Bowes-Lyon, Black Rod Sir Michael Willcocks, Sir Edward Heath, The Duke of Devonshire, Lord Sainsbury of Preston Candover, The Duke of Wellington, The Chancellor Lord Carrington, Lord Richardson of Duntisbourne, Lord Kingsdown, Lady Thatcher, Garter Peter Gwynn-Jones, Page of Honour Lord Carnegie.

Front row ; from left to right : The Duke of Grafton, The King of Spain, The Queen of Denmark, The Duke of Gloucester, The Princess Royal, The Duke of Edinburgh, Queen Elizabeth II of the UK, The Prince of Wales, The Duke of Kent, Grand Duke Jean of Luxembourg, The Queen of the Netherlands, The King of Norway

wikicompany.org...:Knights_of_Malta

Notice that George Washington is portrayed in the middle painting.

Queen Elizabeth is the head of this secrative society.



There has always been a strong connection between the Royal Family and St George's Chapel. Over the centuries members of the Royal Family have been baptised, married and buried there. HM The Queen is closely involved with the life of the College and attends matins at the chapel on Easter Day, there are also many other times when The Queen and the Royal Family attend the Chapel, especially every June when they can all be seen attending the annual ceremony of the Most Noble Order of the Garter.

www.heraldicsculptor.com...



Remember that the House of Windsor is actually coming from as German family tree: Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (Deutschland equals to 666). In the United Kingdom, King George V changed the name from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha to the House of Windsor in 1917.

The British Crown is even telling they are sitting on the Throne of King David. They even claim they are descendants of Jesus Christ himself. THIS IS COMPLETELY FALSE! They are actually really referring to the Satanic House of David. The royalty of the Tribe of Dan (and descendants of Cain) have descended down through history as a powerful Satanic bloodline. The 13th or final blood line was copied after God’s royal lineage of Jesus.

specialfarm.net...




he two-headed eagle emblem of the Byzantine Empire (Roman Empire) on a Red Shield was adopted in 1743 by the infamous goldsmith Amschel Moses Bauer. He opened a coin shop in Frankfurt, Germany and hung above his door this Roman eagle on a red shield. The shop became known as the “Red Shield firm”. The German word for ‘red shield’ is Rothschild. After this point, the Rothschilds became the bankers to kings and pontiffs alike, among the richest families in the world. Ever since, they have financed both sides of every major war and revolution using the Hegelian Dialectic to engineer society toward their New World Order.

aftermathnews.wordpress.com...

Notice the rider in the middle of the shield. Now look at this picture.






The moment Brown depicts is that of Evacuation Day, November 25, 1783, when Washington reclaimed the city from the British. With outstretched hand, he signals to the troops in a gesture of benediction, a sculptural motif indebted to precedents from antiquity, most notably the Marcus Aurelius statue on Rome’s Capitaline Hill.

www.flickr.com...

Is there any question as to whom Washington's loyalty belonged to?

Is there any question as to whom the Freemason are loyal.

I'll tell you.






educate-yourself.org...


politicalhumor.about.com...




posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Manasseh
Notice that George Washington is portrayed in the middle painting.


So...because (what you claim is) George Washington's painting appears in a painting of a society, and something like a George Washington monument appears on a shield, it must mean he is a member of that society? This really makes no sense. Its like your trying to make a connection where none exists.

Not to mention most of the other things you quote are from conspiracy websites and conspiracy wikis, and I see very little here in the form of actual evidence for any of this. Just seems to be the normal "OMG ANYONE WITH POWER IS A SECRET WORSHIPER OF SATAN" hysteria, to me.

Also, Order of the Garter is not a secret society, its a honor society that the royalty gives out. Also, that shield you posted? It was made when George Washington was 11. I doubt he was in any evil satanic world domination plots at that age. I'd also point out the obvious, that in art generic male figures always look the same during that time period (just like every male during the height of Greek art looks like an Adonis).



Is there any question as to whom Washington's loyalty belonged to?


Nope. He was loyal to the United States. His appearance in a painting of a royal honor society suggests nothing but that your really reaching here.



Is there any question as to whom the Freemason are loyal. I'll tell you.


Freemasons as a group aren't really loyal to anyone. A Freemason is an individual, and their loyalties depend on where they live and their ideology.

But of course!! Out of no where and for no reason, all this means that FREEMASONS ARE LOYAL TO BAPHOMET (even though that was a hoax, but hey were just ignoring the facts here) and ARE SATAN WORSHIPERS...ignoring the fact that neither Cheney, Bush, or his daughter are masons/eastern star members..and that the "devil horns" sign has nothing to do with freemasonry.

[edit on 20-9-2008 by LowLevelMason]



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by LowLevelMason
 


What do you know?

You are just a lowlevelmason.

Do you think for one moment you would be privy to such info.

Did you notice how Washington is wearing the garter in the painting.

But you already knew that, didn't you.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 10:09 PM
link   
A New World Order....of the Garter.




posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Manasseh
I found this picture on the internet.

Notice that George Washington is portrayed in the middle painting.



I am not sure if you are whooshing us or playing around or just jumping to wild conclusions. Whatever – the middle portrait is Geroge the III Painted by Sir Thomas Lawrence c.1792 and commissioned by George IV

Going across on your screen the one on the far left is George III as painted by Allan Ramsay c.1792 and commissioned by himself


The one on the right is George IV again painted by Thomas Lawrence circa.1820.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 10:18 PM
link   
Haven't you been banned yet? I mean again...for the 3rd time. We all know about the other times you were banned...


Originally posted by Manasseh
Notice that George Washington is portrayed in the middle painting.
Can you find any sources that claim that's a portrait of George Washington? All I see is a guy in a powdered wig. The face is a full 10 pixels tall. Not really something one could make a declarative identification from.

One of your sources says that picture was taken in the Waterloo Chamber of Windsor Castle. I can't find any references to any portraits of George Washington in Windsor Castle. Or are you the first person in 200 years to ever write about such an odd occurrence?

Who's to say it isn't King George III?


Queen Elizabeth is the head of this secrative society.


The Order of the Garder is not a secret society. In fact, here's a list of all of its members! George Washington is conspicuous in his absence.


[edit on 9/20/2008 by JoshNorton]



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 10:21 PM
link   
Apparently I have to be more careful around the OP. I just assumed that he would be kind enough not to make up the facts about the circumstances in the painting. I couldn't tell myself (as JoshNorton noted the "George Washington" painting is rather small) and I assumed he was correct - shame on me! It appears as though its even MORE questionable than I originally assumed.


Originally posted by Manasseh
What do you know?
You are just a lowlevelmason.


So instead of addressing the substance of my posts and the inaccuracies you have posted as truth, your just going to tell me that I'm a low level mason (read my signature). Please do tell - if this conspiracy is something that only the non-existent high level masons would know about, how exactly is it you know about it - not even being a mason?


Originally posted by Manasseh
Do you think for one moment you would be privy to such info.


And yet somehow you are? I'd LOVE to see any proof you have..so far you haven't offered any. Oh, except that because someone who you think is George Washington's painting (appears to not be him) is in a painting of the Order of Garter, that must mean hes a member. You know, I've had my picture taken with lots of people who were not masons. Even in the lodge. How could it be?!


Originally posted by Manasseh
Did you notice how Washington is wearing the garter in the painting.


ASSUMING it is George Washington - which it doesn't seem like it is: As a garter for men is "a small strap used as a device to attach pieces of armor" it does not seem unusual at all that such things would be worn for ceremonial paintings, or just painted on. Has it occurred to you that throughout the time not everyone who wore a garter is a member of a order? If I took a picture of you in a men's garter and then held up that picture in front of a painting of Queen Elizabeth, would that make you a member?

[edit on 20-9-2008 by LowLevelMason]



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 10:30 PM
link   
And the gang of thugs, I mean, masons, emerge.

Have I angered you?



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Manasseh
 


By flat out lieing? I'm going to say that'd be a yes.
As for thugs, you called them out first.

Edit: For that matter, this is the first I've seen of Landru, unless my memory's off again.

[edit on 20-9-2008 by RuneSpider]



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Manasseh
And the gang of thugs, I mean, masons, emerge.


Gosh darn those evil masons (me and Josh) and those who are not masons (everyone else) but you wish they were to make your conspiracy more real! Clearly, your on the trail of our massive..garter conspiracy?...and we're just terrified. Even the non-masons. For some reason.


Originally posted by Manasseh
Have I angered you?


I wouldn't say angered. However, your wanton disregard for the truth and desire to make up facts to suit a non-existent conspiracy narrative does sadden me a bit.



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Manasseh
 


Oh my god, I'm never going to raise my arm or wave again,let alone sit in the sun with my shirt off, for fear that I may be mistaken as one of the evil Order of the Garter, dirty satan worshippers that they all are....there's an evil and malicious conspiracy to rule the world by people wearing garters....help me!

*searches for a facepalm image*

More reason to dislike religion and god, if you ask me...look at the kooks it produces



...but Landru, it sure LOOKS like George Washington (oh my god, another GW! )
...surely because it looks like him it must be him? /sarcasm

Nice research there Landru...good work (oh no, another GW!)

[edit on 20/9/08 by ChChKiwi]


I'm sure Sir Ed was evil, I could tell from the look in his eye and the fact that he climbed tall mountains!

[edit on 20/9/08 by ChChKiwi]



posted on Sep, 20 2008 @ 11:51 PM
link   
The depiction of a toga clad George Washington is a homage to Cincinatus, the famed General of the Roman Republic who, after defeating the enemies of Rome, relinquished his command and returned to his life as a private citizen. Hence the reason Washington has the hilt end of the sword extended and is why he was refered to by his contemporaries as a 'Modern Day Cincinatus' for declining the Kingship of the United States. To quote Brother Washington, "I did not fight George III to become George I."

As others have correctly indicated, it is indeed George III, King of England in the portait above the assembled congregation. You would of course have remembered that from your previous incarnations here on this forum when you misrepresented this very image, but you continue to post the same nonesense that caused you to be banned several times already.

By the way, how is the weather in Colorado, stomperino?

[edit on 21-9-2008 by AugustusMasonicus]



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 12:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
By the way, how is the weather in Colorado, stomperino?
Actually, looks rather nice. You got a guest bedroom, Steve? I've got some friends who still don't have any power after Hurricane Ike... I know you've taken in the homeless before. And you are the warm feather quilt Comforter, after all...



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 08:22 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 09:00 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 10:37 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 02:35 PM
link   
Combo breaker!!!


So we have determined that it was a British Monarch in the middle painting. I guess that the fashions of the time gave many people a superficially similar appearance.
I'm still proud of our good old Ed, he did well throughout his life, just a tough old nut from the Colonies who managed to mix it with the common folk as well as the hob-nobs!



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 07:46 AM
link   
How exactly does the first picture tie Freemasons in with satan and Queen Elizabeth? I see the nice pictures, but I didn't catch the connection. The flag with the two headed eagle holding the holy hand grenade is pretty cool though. Is this really the best you could come up with? I kind of expected more from you. Being the Parakeet and all.



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by network dude
How exactly does the first picture tie Freemasons in with satan and Queen Elizabeth? I see the nice pictures, but I didn't catch the connection. The flag with the two headed eagle holding the holy hand grenade is pretty cool though. Is this really the best you could come up with? I kind of expected more from you. Being the Parakeet and all.


Are you implying that someone is singing? LOL Why do people look to that past to make predictions of the future. Are their secrets within? My crystal ball tells me.. people behave and do the things they do for a reason. Where do the words: duty, honor, tradition come from? History is his-story.



posted on Oct, 26 2008 @ 09:02 PM
link   
I do not know the exact connection, but as I understand it, Queen Elizabeth II is related to George Washington through her maternal great grandmother, Cecilia Cavendish, who was descended from a member of the Bulter family from which Washington was also descended. Washington's gggg gm was Margaret Butler (b. 1568 Sussex, Eng. -d. Northamptonshire, Eng 1622) . Washington's father's first wife was also a Butler, Jane Butler.



new topics




 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join