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.

 

Bloodline:part 1

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Anyone who has seen the film knows the tomb was fake. It was obvious and Burgess himself more or less admitted it twice.




posted on May, 24 2012 @ 05:44 PM
link   
I'm trying to figure out the motive behind this film.

Was it just to make money?

Was it to expand upon "The DaVinci Code" and Holy Blood Holy Grail?

Was it to antagonize the Vatican?

Exactly what did this film accomplish?



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Help me out here. WHO was the hoaxer? Were the guys who filmed this the hoaxers? How about the various people they interviewed?

This was incredibly elaborate.

I noticed that many of the pieces of paper with clues were incredibly clear--not what you would expect after 100 years or more in the ground.



posted on May, 24 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 


I don't think anyone knows for certain who the hoaxers were except for the guy who claimed to find the tomb.

It WAS a very elaborate story, wasn't it? It would be nice to know what is fact and what is fiction.

I think the bottles that were found were also baloney.

Roberto Calvi really was murdered. He had bricks in his pockets.

The rest of it could be hooey for all we know.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 08:14 PM
link   
I haven't seen the videos posted by the op, and don't know if I want to if its all a hoax... But, hmmm... I might have to put the time into this. If its as elaborate as you all say, then isn't there a chance that it could be truth but they were convinced to say it was a hoax to protect their lives? I hate to put all the time into this, but none of you explained it enough for the benefit of those who haven't seen these videos, so I guess I will have to see for myself what the claims are and decide if I believe them to be hoax... Yeah, i know, its best to do your own a research and all that I just a waste my time if it's all fake...



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 06:32 AM
link   
reply to post by 3n19m470
 


Some of it is fact. That's what makes it interesting.

Sauniere renovated his church in a peculiar way. He was suddenly very rich for no reason. The Vatican told him to zip it after this.

The video is worth the time. You can decide for yourself if the tomb and bottles are fake.

Burgess made an interesting film. The question remains though. What is at the heart of this mystery? No one is talking.

Did Sauniere find a treasure? Did HE find a tomb?



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   
I went through the vid twice and also the podcast where Ben Hammott (His real name is Wilkins, I think) admitted his hoax. Hammott/Wilkins says he built the tomb in a London warehouse, pre-recorded it, and pretended to go into the woods to film it.

OK. I accept that.

But this does not explain Gino Sandri's comments, nor those of Nicolas Hayward, both supposed to be at least "close" to the Priory of Sion and who confirm the basic story as depicted in "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" and "The DaVinci Code." These two guys are completely unconnected to Hammott and appear to be leading the Bloodline team along.

Hammott did an awfully good job faking the tomb, which he said he did for a few hundred pounds with stuff he "found on the Internet." He of course insists he was not paid to make this stuff up, but given that he says his cave was a hoax, why should one suddenly believe his confession? That part of the story kind of stinks, and it has the net effect of discrediting what was

Sandri (the guy with the wild hair who spoke only French) seemed genuinely frightened. Hayward seemed much more direct and precise, but still evasive. I would like to see a follow-up featuring these two guys.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 


I agree with you. Sandri and Haywood are interesting, particularly the latter.

Remember, he said the attitude about the subject was crucial to the P of S.

As for Sandri, he did look shaken.

Given what we know about the clandestine services it's no surprise. I think the Vatican operates the same way.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by disgustingfatbody

Some of it is fact. That's what makes it interesting.

Sauniere renovated his church in a peculiar way. He was suddenly very rich for no reason. The Vatican told him to zip it after this.

The video is worth the time. You can decide for yourself if the tomb and bottles are fake.

Burgess made an interesting film. The question remains though. What is at the heart of this mystery? No one is talking.

Did Sauniere find a treasure? Did HE find a tomb?


No, And people ARE talking. In fact the Rennes-le-Chateau mystery has been largely solved by the ground-breaking research of Patrice Chaplin, daughter-in-law of Charlie Chaplin. She is an internationally known writer and playwright with a Hollywood film "Siesta" to her credit. She has written two fine books - "City of Secrets" and "The Portal" in which she provides documentary proof gained by her early life in Girona that Berenger Sauniere modelled his Tour Magdala on the tower behind the cathedral. She became involved with a Spaniard who was the custodian of a Spanish Kabbalistic society that was behind all that Sauniere did with his church. She reveals how he became very rich (he was paid by the Royal House of Hapsburg to encrypt the secrets he stumbled across in his church - his Paris bank account has been discovered showing huge payments from the Hapsburgs. I won't reveal the truly amazing secret at the heart of the mystery. You must read her books. Google her name and you will find her Facebook page with lots of information, plus various videos of interviews she has given concerning her discoveries. If you want to understand what drove Sauniere, find out what this painting by Salvador Dali really depicts:
www.friendsofart.net...
edit on 26-5-2012 by micpsi because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by micpsi
 


Dali was born in 1904. That makes him 13 at the time of Sauniere's death.

What does this painting from 1965 have to do with a man 48 years dead?

EDIT: I'm on an SP so I can't get a decent look at the picture. What is that top center?
edit on 5/26/2012 by disgustingfatbody because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join