Sunday, December 4, 2016

YOU HAVE BEEN BANNED! Another Shill Site Discovered

I signed up to this site just the other day. I was doing some research on the Columbine shooting and saw that it had many active forums, so I was hoping to discuss with people. I don't get a lot of chances to do that with serious researchers, and this place claimed to be a site where researchers are welcome. 

After I signed on I started reading posts and responding to a few. Nothing much... Just asking a few questions about details of the Columbine shooting and giving a bit of information where I could. 

I saw that they also had forums for other shootings, including Sandy Hook. So I went into the Sandy Hook forum and started reading posts there. The thread I was reading was titled "Sandy Hook - No Proof". It was the only one that appeared to be conspiracy-related. The person who started the thread was asking for proof that Sandy Hook was a real shooting, and pretty much everybody else was attacking him, and not being very nice at all. So I decided to respond to a few of them, not being nasty or anything, but just questioning their own posts and their motives for attacking this person. They had also said something about conspiracy theorists all being stupid, so I let it be known that I was a conspiracy theorist, and I said a few things like I typically do to defend my position. Again, I said nothing rude or out of hand. 

Then I got into a discussion in that same thread with one of the other members about something else. One of the mods (Jenn) had apparently had a hand in discovering some online posts by Adam Lanza a while back (the Smiggles posts), and these were supposed to conclusively prove (according to the discoverers) that Lanza was a real person. 

So I started asking some questions about them because I don't just take someone's word about something like that any more. I wanted to investigate further to assure myself that there wasn't any possibility that these posts weren't planted there on purpose by someone else, or created after the shooting, or whatever else. I was simply asking questions, but I seem to have gotten someone pissed off, because now I'm banned and can't even view the site.

What would be the reason to not only ban me, but also block me from the site altogether? That's overkill, unless they have something to hide from me. Being unable to view the site, I can't easily research the people that run it or see what they're really up to on there. 

My suspicions were already being raised when I was first reading posts on the site. The nasty attitudes of the most active members towards anything conspiracy related were one thing, but then I got a subtle warning from the person I was corresponding with in the form of an accusation that I was calling the mod a liar. I pointed out that I wasn't calling anyone anything and was just trying to assure myself that there was no way that these posts could have been planted or created on purpose. 

Throughout my discussion, I had been explaining what I knew about psychological operations, what I knew about how these staged events are orchestrated, how agents and informants are planted online to act in various capacities in these orchestrated events, the discovery of Homeland Security's HSEEP program and how these emergency drills are incorporated into the event as a cover, how crisis actors are used and the companies that contract them for these drills , etc. 

Basically, I let it be known to any government agents that might be on that site that I was very aware of how they operate. 

And now here I am, banned and blocked.

I believe that  is a government site, like so many others out there these days. I'll add it to the list of sites I've been banned from for no apparent reason other than I talked about government conspiracy theories. 

Tuesday, November 8, 2016

Kaczynski, SSRIs, and the System

Ted Kaczynski allegedly stated in his manifesto:

"[O]ur society tends to regard as 'sickness' any mode of thought or behavior that is inconvenient for the system, and this is plausible because when an individual doesn't fit into the system it causes pain to the individual as well as problems for the system. Thus the manipulation of an individual to adjust him to the system is seen as a 'cure' for a 'sickness' and therefore as good."

And isn't this EXACTLY what is going on today? The correction of 'abherent' thoughts through the diagnosis and treatment of something so general and hard to define but nonetheless given a blanket name like 'schizophrenia' to make it seem like it's something substantively defineable, and therefore diagnoseable.

How many SSRI drugs are out there today that can cause abherent thoughts and actions in the patient? Look at the long lists of side effects that these drugs have, which just get longer with each new drug that comes out. Why do you think they advertise them on TV, and then list these many dangerous side effects? The most logical reason is because no doctor wants to be sued for prescribing them, and neither do the pharmaceutical companies who make them, so it must fall on the patient to take responsibility for how the drugs might affect them. This is undoubtedly why many of them are also now over-the-counter drugs, rather than prescription only. But they're nonetheless very DANGEROUS! They create psychotic monsters! The world is more full of people taking these questionable drugs than ever before, and that means that the likelihood of someone going off the deep end is only increasing because of them. THIS IS WHAT THEY WANT! This is why there are so many instances these days of lone-nut shooters going into schools and churches and malls and shooting everyone up! Just do a search online for mass shootings and SSRIs, and you'll find not just a few cases where these drugs were involved, but many 100s, and increasing steadily with each passing year!

Drugs are a form of technology, so Kaczynski was as right in this instance about how technology is overtaking society as he was about any other technology he might have been referring to. And aren't we being encouraged - very often even forced - to turn to drugs as 'cures' for every perceived ailment, more and more? Are they not attempting to classify every perceived 'sickness' of the mind and correlate them with brain activity so that they can just plug you up to a machine that will spit out a diagnosis, and that diagnosis must stand as fact because their machines don't make mistakes? Do you think they would ever be willing to explain how such a machine works? Do you think they will even know after a while? Who comes to be in charge of THAT knowledge? A pimply-faced computer programmer? Compartmentalization of knowledge and secrecy based on proprietary information will only add to the problems we'll face more and more in the future. And that's the way we're giong. But they don't really care. They just want to be able to label people in order to justify what they do to them after that.

The system that the manifesto talks about is likened to a machine. It has no brain, no heart, no senses. It does not acknowledge the human condition beyond what it's programmed to understand. It works towards one end, and that is to enslave humankind to itself. That is how it's programmed. The laws we live by are part of the programming, and we must adhere to those laws in order that the machine will work effectively in its task to keep us enslaved. The fact that we keep having more rights and freedoms taken away from us is based on how the machine must operate, not on how humans operate. We are being forced to become something other than what God made us. That is a requirement of the system, if the system is going to move forward with its intended purpose. The system comes first, and individuals come last. That's how it's programmed.

The fact is, Kaczynski was labelled as mentally ill based on the manifesto, which his State-appointed DEFENSE team (who were screwing him over) claimed was a sign that he was paranoid, as though very well-reasoned fear or aprehension are somehow equated with mental illness. If that's the case, then this write-up and most of my other blog articles qualify me as mentally ill, as are many other people who post their thoughts online. And that's exactly how they want it to be. We become easy targets ourselves if we accept this blatant labelling of people with very generalized mental illnesses like schizophrenia.

The evidence of sickness they used with Ted is the same sort of evidence they will use on others. He had vocalized his well-reasoned thoughts in a paper that many first said was pure genius for its deep insight, but then they were overrun with louder and more 'authoritative' claims that he was paranoid, and therefore schizophrenic, and therefore a madman. Case closed.

So I must be a madman too. And so are you if you happen to agree with any of this. At least we'll have each other for company in that rubber room.

* * *

Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber

Saturday, November 5, 2016

Staged Terror: Research Notes

This document is under constant construction. These notes are not fully organized and a lot (99.9%) of pertinent information on individual cases I would like to include is still missing. Additions will be made continuously as I work on this project.

[T]he utilization of barbaric acts of mass-terror-murder by governments in order to manipulate political objectives is hardly new. Deliberately manipulated outrage-incidents such as the sinking of the Lusitania, the burning of the Reischtag, and the attack on Pearl Harbor, as precursors to elite-planned military campaigns has historically held several functions: it triggers the built-in nationalistic war spirit, channels the resulting righteous wrath toward the nominated enemy, and concentrates power in the executive branch, where elite control is unhampered by popular influence. – David Hoffman, The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Politics of Terror

[E]very year or two, some major monster is constructed that we have to defend ourselves against. There used to be one that was always available: the Russians. But they're losing their attractiveness as an enemy, and it's getting harder and harder to use that one, so some new ones have to be conjured up… They've got to keep coming up, one after another. You frighten the population, terrorize them, intimidate them.… That's one of the ways in which you can keep the bewildered herd from paying attention to what's really going on around them, keep them diverted and controlled. – Noam Chomsky

Some terror events that are discussed in this document:

- OKC bombing (1995)
- Columbine shooting (1999)
- 9/11 (2001)
- Aurora shooting (2012)
- Sandy Hook shooting (2012)
- Boston bombing (2013)
- Orlando shooting (2016)

A comparison of these events shows us:

- some of the weaknesses of earlier events
- how later changes have made these events more resilient to discovery of a staging
- how later changes have made these events less violent and criminal
- how Hollywood theatrics and scripted media presentations are used to do this

More particularly:

- events that involve real violence (i.e. OKC, Columbine. 9/11) pose more risks and leave many loose ends that must be dealt with, sometimes for a long time afterwards
- small events in controlled environments (i.e. Aurora, Sandy Hook, Orlando) require less planning and preparation and allow for greater control of the evidence and the people involved
- theatrics and scripted media bites allow for better control of the narrative and assure that what will be seen and heard by the public is convincing
- virtually all aspects of an event can be prepared in advance and staged at the most opportune place and time for the best results

Stage 1: Planning and Preparation


Every event has a primary objective. It can be:

- To promote a certain agenda
- To eliminate a perceived enemy
- To justify a war
- To distract from other issues or events taking place
- To create discord and division among the population

The primary objective is typically one of three types:

- False Flag
- Sting
- Assassination

The type of operation determines what sort of scenario will be used to fulfill the objective. Each type serves a different purpose and is successively more complex and riskier.


False flag events will have a predetermined storyline that explains the who, what, when, where, why, and how of it all. The storyline will typically involve a perpetrator who engages in an act of violence against a group of people at a given location. Further details will be built into the story in a way that gives it more plausibility. These details will include the place of the attack, the history and character of the perpetrator, the weapon(s) used, the number who will ‘die’ or be ‘wounded’, who the victims and witnesses will be who will give statements and what statements they will make, how the perpetrator will be stopped, etc. Some of these details will be real while others will be purely fictional. It’s quite possible for a false flag event to be a completely fictional story with no actual event or people involved, where just news reports are used to coerce an audience to respond in a certain way and achieve the objective sought, but since the whole purpose of acting out the event is to add enough realism to make the story more powerfully convincing, there will almost always be a staged event to go with the story, with real people who play the roles of perpetrators, victims, and witnesses.

The storyline will describe:

- Location of attack
- Type of attack
- People attacked
- Motive for attack
- Damage inflicted

A script will be developed around these five basic elements of the story. The script will include further details of the storyline as the scenes are written and roles are established. Whatever props will be used will also be determined during this phase.

The specific time and date of the event will usually only need to be known during the script-writing phase if there’s another event that it will coincide with. Otherwise, a script can be written that isn’t dependent on the event occurring at a particular time and date, although it should be noted that the date might be chosen for its symbolic nature, as is often the case (i.e. OKC, Columbine, 9/11). Timing will be dependent on how effective it will be on achieving the desired objective, more than anything else. Events might be staged late at night in order to delay public knowledge and avoid large crowds of onlookers (i.e. Orlando), or they might be staged during the day in a heavily populated area in order to maximize public attention to the event (i.e. Boston).


The location for the event will depend on the storyline. The type of attack, the people targeted, and the motive for targeting them will all have some bearing on the selection of a location as well. A general location (i.e. school, shopping mall, nightclub, etc.) can be determined for the storyline while a more specific location might be not be decided until much later on.

The selected site has to be able to be easily secured from non-participants during the event. Closed off/private areas might involve the cooperation of the owner/leaser, while open/public areas require a means of setting the stage and getting actors and props in place without arousing attention, so how these preparations will be disguised as normal activity must be planned out.

- The Sandy Hook and Orlando events took place in buildings where there would be no non-participants to witness anything.

- The Boston event took place in a public area that was strategically blocked from view by the fencing and scaffolding, and easy to secure from non-participants.


Emergency Medical Services
Government agencies
Casting companies

The event is typically treated as an exercise drill, wherein most of the police, emergency medical services, hospital staff, etc. who will be involved will only be involved after the fact. These parties can be expected to follow whatever protocols are already in place for emergency drills, so that only a few people at the supervisory levels need to be involved in any planning and preparations for an event.

Various federal- and/or state-level government agencies will normally be involved in overseeing the planning and execution of the various aspects of the event. For instance, it’s not unusual for the FBI, ATF, FEMA, DHS, DOJ, DOD, etc. to be involved.

Casting companies are typically used to supply trained crisis actors to act as perpetrators, victims, and witnesses. These companies won’t necessarily require any prior knowledge of the event beyond the fact that it will be a crisis simulation, and will merely supply people who are trained in crisis simulation and who have the necessary security clearances in place.

The media’s full cooperation will be required to assure that news of the event is quickly spread far and wide and to the right audiences. For this reason it’s likely that certain people working within various media outlets will have foreknowledge of the event.

Fundraising companies will be used to raise donations for victims and victim’s families immediately after the event. Very often, fundraising campaigns are started before the dust has even settled, suggesting that these companies are more deeply involved.


Traditionally, false flag events have involved real violence against real people to achieve the necessary objective, but this has proven to be extremely risky, since the chances of being found out could lead to justified retaliation when it’s against another country, or to serious criminal charges if it’s conducted on home soil.

More recently, theatrics have begun to be incorporated into these operations in order to avoid these risks. The logic of this is quite simple: the intended audience only needs to think that an attack occurred in order to get them to respond in the desired way. The actual violence can be staged, and actors can be used instead of real people.

Actors might be used as:

- Victims
- Witnesses
- Perpetrator(s)

Of course, there are variations on how an event might be staged, and sometimes non-actors might be involved, and real violence might be used, depending on the situation. If they can be avoided they probably will be, but sometimes there’s a reason to incorporate them.

Acting Participants

There might be any number of acting participants involved in an event, filling the roles of victims and witnesses. There might also be participants who are unwittingly involved and perceive the staging as real, but it’s far more likely that every person involved in an event is an actor playing a role. An exception here might be where the perpetrator is being set up in a sting, in which case he is likely to be the only unwitting participant. All of this depends largely on the level of sophistication of the staging, where a more sophisticated staging will typically incorporate fewer actors and more unwitting participants in order to capture the realism of the event.

Acting participants will obviously know that the event is staged, so they’ll be handled differently than unwitting participants. All actors will be made to sign a non-disclosure agreement prior to receiving any information about what they will be involved in, in order to assure that security will be maintained and the true nature of the event isn’t discovered. For this reason, some actors might be drawn from the military or government agencies where they already have security clearances.

Actors will be selected to fill the scripted roles once those roles have been determined during storyline development. It’s likely that back-up actors will also be selected in case of problems, and these back-ups can otherwise be used as extras to fill the scene.

Actors who can cry on demand or maintain the appearance of emotional distress will be particularly useful in post-event news clips and interviews.

Amputees might be specifically used as victims where extreme violence is to be portrayed (i.e. Boston). These actors can be provided with special prosthetics that look like freshly lost limbs, which will have maximum shock effect.

Lookalikes are often used in these operations for any number of reasons. One reason might be to create false witness evidence that places a target at a certain location at a certain time. In other cases, they might be used to confuse witness reports, or to act as temporary stand-ins for a non-existent person.


Each actor is assigned a role and given a script to follow. The script details their part in the event -- what they witnessed, how and where they were hurt, etc. Scripts will typically be kept very simple in order to avoid mistakes. Actors who are to receive extensive media attention during the post-event stage will need to be more carefully selected and prepared.

Personal Histories

Each actor will need to have an identity, whether their own or a made up one, as well as some semblance of a personal history to give plausibility to the claim that they are who they say they are. For this purpose, accounts are sometimes created on popular social media websites at some point before the event, and other biographical information might be scattered around on a few other sites as well, but this will usually be very limited in informative content in order to protect the actor and reduce traceability. The drawback of creating online accounts is that they have to be maintained for as long as the deception is to continue. It’s therefore safer and easier if actors don’t have an active online presence at all, even if it looks suspicious.

Unwitting Participants

In some cases, unwitting participants will be involved in the event to some degree. Apart from those organizations mentioned previously that might become aware that the event is staged only after they’re called into action, other participants might become involved because they just happen to be present, but they don’t know that the event is staged. These people will primarily be used as witnesses in order that their stories reflect a realism that actors may not be able to pull off so convincingly. For this reason, they will need to be carefully controlled during the event, so that they only see or hear what they’re intended to, and nothing else. These people will unwittingly help by adding a sense of realism to the narrative through interviews and statements. It’s obviously quite risky to use unwitting participants since they could do something unexpected, so their use will likely be limited to that of witnesses.

Sometimes unwitting participants might be used as real victims, in order to affect even greater realism. This of course requires that real violence occurs, which increases the risks involved.

Nonexistent Participants

Nonexistent participants primarily include the dead and wounded that don’t really exist beyond the personal histories that have been created for them. Sometimes these nonexistent participants will require actors to pose as family members. These actors can be handled similarly to other acting participants.

Nonexistent participants can also be witnesses, anonymous police sources, etc. Anywhere where it’s necessary to introduce some information while maintaining plausible deniability, a nonexistent participant can be created to fill the role.

The Perpetrator(s)

The perpetrator(s) may or may not be an actor, and this is an important point to consider when trying to determine the true nature of an event. Often, a real person is being targeted for arrest or elimination, such as in a sting operation where the FBI sets up a potential terrorist and allows him to go so far as to act out his plans, but in a carefully controlled environment. It’s not known for certain if any perpetrators in past false flag events were actors or not, since they’re immediately isolated from the public after the event (if they survive) and there’s no way to check the official story that’s given about them. In many past false flag events, the perpetrators may have been completely fictitious people.

In cases where the perpetrator is a real person who isn’t an actor, he might actually be wittingly involved in the event, or he might be present but not wittingly involved (directed there for some other fictitious reason), or he might not even be present at all.

In some cases, it’s possible that the perpetrator is under some form of mind-control, or isn’t acting entirely under his own free will. In these cases he might be placed at the scene but not actually take part in the event, or he might appear to take part but not really understand what’s going on. These cases are usually either sting operations, or more likely, the perpetrator is being used as a patsy and someone else is the real perpetrator (where there’s any real violence involved).

Whether or not the perpetrator actually exists, a history will need to be pre-established for him that will be used to explain his activities leading up to the event, in order to establish a motive and character profile. Planted evidence might also be used in this capacity, as well as look-alikes.

Often, the perpetrator will have spent some time in the military, usually having received an early discharge, or they come from a military family. A history of mental illness is also common.


The timing of the event might be chosen for any number of reasons. Usually it will be selected for the event to have maximum effect in achieving the objective. It will often be chosen to occur around the same time as another event, based on its primary objective.

Some other possibilities are:

- late night/early morning to avoid non-participants
- early morning to dominate the day’s headlines
- to distract from another breaking news event
- to maximize the shock value
- to get the attention of a particular audience
- to target a particular group or person
- symbolic date

The time and date of the event might be selected long before the event takes place, or it might be selected at the very last minute. The more serious the consequences of the event are expected to be, the more planning will likely be involved, and the more likely a planned time and date will be significant to its success (i.e. OKC, Columbine, 9/11, Boston). On the other hand, some events are planned out so that there’s a great deal of flexibility in when they might be executed (i.e. Aurora, Sandy Hook, Orlando), in which case the time and date of execution are far less important.

Stage 2: The Event

Once everything has been planned and prepared, and the date and time have arrived, the event begins.


Training drills often run in parallel to false flag events in order to provide cover by confusing the events. The exact time and place of the drill varies, but it will usually be very close to that of the staged event, sometimes taking place throughout the days or weeks that the staged event occurs, and at a nearby location.

Very often, the drill will follow the exact same storyline as the staged event (i.e. OKC, 9/11, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Boston), which helps to confuse things further.

Some reasons for using a drill as cover:

- In the case that someone sees something they shouldn’t have, it can be made to appear to be part of the drill.
- In the case that something goes wrong and the staged event needs to be aborted, it can appear to be part of the drill.
- To confuse the two events so that responding police, EMS, hospital employees, etc. who aren’t in on the false flag event will think that they’re responding to an ongoing drill and don’t know that the parallel event wasn’t real either.
- To slow down, distract, or remove key personnel from the scene of the staged event who aren’t in on it.

Sometimes a drill will go ‘live’, in which case a real perpetrator allegedly opens fire during an otherwise safe drill. In these cases, it appears that a sting operation is in progress, since it would otherwise make no sense that a real perpetrator with real weapons would be involved in the drill.

Sometimes a real drill with an identical scenario will take place days or weeks before the staged event, and this might serve as a rehearsal or preliminary staging, where photographs and film footage, witness/victim interviews, etc. can be created for use as part of the later event. This offers some obvious advantages, in that much of the material that will be used to convince the public of a real event can be more carefully prepared prior to its staging, reducing the chances of mistakes. Close analysis of photos and other evidence sometimes reveals that they couldn’t have come from the event they’re attributed to, revealing that deception is taking place.

In some cases, the staged event will be preceded by announcements that a drill is about to take place. These announcements are usually directed at the police and emergency services that will be responding to the drill, but they also act as a signal to witting parties that the staged event is about to go down.

(Interestingly, these training drills appear to be increasing in frequency in response to the fear raised by these false flag events, effectively making the staged events easier to cover up.)


The staging begins with the location first being secured from non-participants and the actors taking their places. The perpetrator then enters the scene and acts out the attack and the actors respond with their scripted actions.

Victim actors who will be observed with wounds will either have moulage applied prior to the staging, during the event, or immediately after.

If the perpetrator is an unwitting patsy, his elimination or capture will usually occur during the event or soon after, even though he isn’t necessarily involved in the actual event at all. A look-alike might be used, or his actual participation might just be a fabrication, even though he’s a real person.


Immediately after the perpetrator has acted out the attack, the police are signaled to respond. If the first-responders aren’t aware that it’s a staged event or think it’s a drill, their lack of foreknowledge could lead to innocent people being harmed. Therefore the first-responders will likely already be aware that it’s a staged event, or they will be notified of this as soon as they arrive. First-responders are very likely in on the deception, and arrive first in order to manage the situation and make sure that unwitting responders don’t realize it’s a staged event.

Only after the police have arrived and taken control of the scene will any other emergency services be called in, and from then on routine procedures will be followed, whether it’s treated as a real event or as a training drill.


Media activity will usually begin soon after the police and other emergency services begin to respond. In order to control how the narrative unfolds, local media might be kept far away from the scene of the event and forced to rely on police reports and witness interviews as they become available. National news outlets will pick up the story immediately and spread it far and wide. These national news outlets will be used to carry the main narrative, so there will likely be some collusion between the orchestrators and key media personnel.

Stage 3: Post-Event Activity

The FBI will usually take over the case immediately after the event. They will usually be responsible for identifying/capturing the perpetrator and solving the case. The capture will almost always be swift, occurring within days of the event. The FBI’s case will at first appear to be founded on irrefutable evidence, but closer scrutiny will usually reveal that there are many problems with it. This is the point at which ‘facts’ must be established that will support the official story, while anything that doesn’t fit with the official story and puts it into question must be made to appear irrelevant or nonsensical.


As soon as the event begins to unfold and the police are on the scene, the media is brought into play. They will typically respond when the first calls to 911 are made, making the initial news announcements to alert the public. National news agencies will quickly pick up the story and keep it alive with constant updates as new pieces of information come in.

News stories will serve a number of purposes:

- To drive the desired narrative
- To set the desired attitudes and opinions
- To deal with undesirable attitudes and opinions
- To add inconsistencies
- To explain away inconsistencies
- To demonize the perpetrator
- To promote the desired objective

The narrative will usually change as time goes on and inconsistencies begin to emerge. This is the point at which the orchestrators will begin to micromanage the situation, introducing new information to direct the focus of attention, adjusting scripts to make them consistent, eliminating problem information by providing plausible explanations, etc.

Misinformation will often be purposely injected into the narrative in order to confuse and mislead anyone who might suspect that it’s a staged event. Usually, this misinformation will be introduced by witnesses and victims to allow for plausible deniability, or if it comes from an authoritative body, the identity of the person(s) giving it will remain anonymous. News writers might also introduce various opinions and ideas as facts through deceptive wording.

In order to control information, the active participants in the event who will be known to the public will need to be handled carefully to make sure that they stick to their scripts and don’t say or do anything unexpected. Normally, this won’t be a problem, since they will have signed NDAs and will be fully aware of the consequences of breaking those agreements. Unwitting participants pose more of a threat because they won’t have signed an NDA and might see or hear something that they aren’t supposed to, so they will need to be monitored very carefully as well, although from a greater distance so as not to arouse their suspicion. If they do make a statement to the press or anyone else that throws the official story into serious question, then efforts at damage control will be initiated to re-establish the ‘facts’. In severe cases, these people might even be eliminated by staging an accident, murder, or suicide.


A body of evidence that supports the official story will need to be presented in order to make the staging appear to be legitimate. This evidence will primarily consist of words and images presented by the media and little else, so it’s quite easy to present whatever story the orchestrators choose, and create the evidence to support it.

Evidence handling includes:

- Creation of evidence
- Suppression of evidence
- Tampering with evidence
- Dealing with inconsistencies
- Early destruction/disposal of evidence

Much of the preliminary evidence will come from victim and witness statements, which are less reliable than official police reports, so these will offer a means to introduce confusing information or to change the narrative over time to suit the need.

Most or all physical evidence of the event will be suppressed from the public, aside from a few staged images presented by the media, and some footage of police activity at the scene of the crime. There will be just enough to make it appear that the event occurred.

Evidence that the victims and witnesses are real people will mostly only be available through online searches, so online personal histories will usually be created for actor’s roles and nonexistent victims sometime before the event, but these tend to have minimal content and aren’t usually kept very active. However, this isn’t always the case, and some key participants in these events maintain their roles for years afterwards (i.e. Jeff Bauman of Boston).

In cases where there is no real violence (i.e. Aurora, Sandy Hook, Boston, Orlando), any descriptions of the carnage will usually be missing from police and witness reports, while the alleged severity of it will be used as an excuse to withhold the evidence of it. Where real violence occurs (i.e. OKC, Columbine, 9/11), the carnage is usually described in greater detail by the real victims and witnesses, and the emotional response to it is much more realistic.

Obituary notices will usually be posted and mock funerals or memorials will sometimes be staged for nonexistent victims who allegedly died in the event.

Because these staged events are sanctioned by the government, there is no need to really investigate them. Therefore the case will be wrapped up almost immediately and there will be little further evidence to deal with. The physical site of the event will often be quickly destroyed in order to remove any evidence that nothing actually occurred there.


The immediate aftermath of the event is a crucial moment when the real objective of the event first becomes apparent.

Political Pressure

The seriousness of the situation will demand an immediate response, which will be political in nature. New legislation is typically introduced soon after an event, stripping away more rights from the people and giving government more control.


The greater the emotional impact of the event, the greater the public response. The final payoff for the acting participants includes the accumulation of publicly donated money raised through private fundraising organizations. This money often reaches into the millions of dollars in very short time, propelled by government-led campaigns against gun-ownership, etc., in which several of the alleged victims or their family members are used as spokespeople, reiterating their scripted stories over and over for their audiences.


If the perpetrator dies during the event, then there will only be a short investigation in order to quickly confirm the official story.

If the perpetrator survives the event, his quick capture and isolation from the public will be followed by a quick trial and conviction, or the trial will be held off long enough to lose the public’s interest.

Investigators and prosecutors will focus only on witnesses who are favorable to the official storyline, and ignore leads and witnesses that conflict with it.

Signs of Deceit

Some things to look for in a possible false flag event:

- The event is immediately high-profile in the media
- The official narrative is arrived at immediately
- Lack of real tears or emotional distress
- No evidence of blood and carnage
- Lack of urgency in first-responders
- Staged camera shots at scene
- News reports on the event are posted before event
- News discussions do not waver from official narrative
- Conflicting testimonies of witnesses and victims
- Witness and victim statements sound scripted
- Witness and victim statements use police vernacular
- Witness and victim statements change over time
- Non-existent or unrealistic motive
- Unrealistic marksmanship of perpetrator
- Suppression/destruction of key evidence
- Police determine deaths instead of qualified MEs
- Other important events are being distracted from
- Standard protocols aren’t followed
- Drills conducted just prior to or in parallel with event
- Perpetrator is immediately identified and demonized
- Investigation is quickly ended
- Loose ends and inconsistencies in official story
- Fast-tracked legislation
- Conspiracy theorists are demonized in the media
- Online discussions are infiltrated by hoax-deniers
- Prior ties between perpetrator and government agencies
- Unrealistic-looking/fast-healing wounds
- Participants are involved in multiple events
- Participants have acting backgrounds
- Participants have ties to government or big business
- Perpetrator/victims have little to no online history
- Large monetary payoffs are accumulated for victims
- Fundraising websites for victim’s go online too early
- Key participants become spokespeople for political causes

A Look at Some Past Events 

By comparing some examples of false flag events, we can more easily see what caused them to be recognized as staged events, and how they’ve become more refined over time as weaknesses have been identified and methods to deal with them have been implemented in later operations. This will allow future staged events to be more easily identified, as well as allow logical predictions to be made as to what to expect in the future.

OKC Bombing

Official story – A couple of extremists that were involved in militia groups blew up a government building with a simple fertilizer bomb, killing 169 people and injuring several hundred more. The motive was anger over the massacre at Waco.

The deaths and injuries were very real, but evidence revealed that something other than a fertilizer bomb had to have been used, and that others had been involved in the plot. There were strong indications that it was orchestrated by the government and the two perpetrators had been set up. Covering this evidence up involved a great deal of work, including destroying evidence, tampering with evidence, ignoring evidence, misreporting facts, silencing witnesses, etc., all of which was very risky and required more and more people to be aware of a cover-up as things progressed in the post-event stage.

Columbine Shooting

Official story – Two teenagers decided to shoot up their school. The motive was anger and frustration at the world. The shooters had killed 13 and wounded 24 before they finally turned the guns on themselves.

Although this event resulted in real deaths and injuries, including those of the perpetrators, the evidence revealed that there were many questionable inconsistencies regarding the number of shooters when comparing early witness reports to later police reports, as well as many other aspects of the event that weren’t able to be explained by the official story. In order to cover these up, victims and witnesses were threatened and intimidated into changing their stories and were watched for months afterwards, evidence was tampered with, destroyed, or suppressed, and official investigative reports were classified for years afterwards.

9/11 Attack

Official story – Middle-Eastern terrorists hijacked planes and flew them into the WTC towers and Pentagon, causing the towers to collapse. The motive was retaliation for American aggression in the Middle-East. 1,000s of people were killed and many more injured in the event.

The death and destruction of were real enough, but evidence revealed that the official story was full of holes, which resulted in the destruction of evidence, planting of evidence, tampering with evidence, suppression of evidence, threats and intimidation of witnesses, false statements, false reports, etc. Efforts were started to disrupt online discussions about the event, and the label of ‘conspiracy theorist’ began to be routinely used by the government and mainstream media to demonize anyone who questioned the official story.

Aurora Shooting

Official story – A lone gunman decided to booby-trap his apartment with high-tech explosive devices and then go on a shooting rampage in a local theatre, where he killed 12 people and injured 58 more. He had no apparent motive.

The evidence revealed that the event didn’t take place as reported, that there were others involved, that the perpetrator had likely been set up or was an actor, and that some or all of the alleged victims were actors. The response to this by the authorities was to ridicule those who questioned the official story and label them as ‘conspiracy theorists’.

Sandy Hook Shooting

Official story – A lone gunman woke up one morning and decided to kill his mother while she slept, and then drove to an elementary school to massacre a classroom full of children before killing himself. In the end, 28 people were dead and 2 wounded. The motive was unknown.

There was immediate suspicion that nobody died in this event. In this case, it was the lack of any physical evidence, as well as the odd activity of police and victim’s families in the immediate aftermath that raised suspicions. It was suspected that many of the participants were actors, and some were eventually recognized as participants in other staged events (Aurora, Boston). In addition to the methods of cover-up used in previous events, in this case they also included public threats to anyone who questioned the official story, as well as isolating the alleged victim’s families from reporters and private investigators, disrupting online discussions, demonizing ‘conspiracy theorists’, etc.

Boston Bombing

Official story – Two brothers who were mixed up with Islamic terrorists planted and detonated two homemade bombs at the Boston marathon before escaping on foot. This led to a city-wide lockdown while they were hunted down, leading to one being killed before the other was captured. The bombs killed 3 people and wounded 268.

Photo evidence quickly proved beyond any doubt that this event was staged and the perpetrators appeared to have been set up as patsies. It is doubtful that anyone was hurt, other than the perpetrators. All participants in the bombing except the perpetrators appear to have been actors. In spite of the photo evidence that proved this was a staged event, and the fact that many of the alleged victims recovered far more quickly than normal, and that some participants had been recognized from earlier staged events, no one in authority or in the mainstream media would acknowledge any of these facts, and instead used the ‘conspiracy theorist’ label to discredit anyone who questioned the official story.

Orlando Shooting

Official story – A lone gunman walked into a nightclub and opened fire on the crowd before barricading himself in a bathroom with a number of patrons. After a three hour stand-off, a SWAT team knocked a hole in the wall to free the hostages before killing the gunman in a shoot-out. The gunman’s motive was to show his allegiance to the Islamic State.

The evidence suggested early on that this was a staged event, due to the sloppiness of the operation. It was noticed within hours of the event that the victims and witnesses were acting, that there were no ambulances or other emergency medical services on the scene, that there were no signs of any real carnage, etc. It was also very suspicious that the alleged victims recovered so quickly and were smiling for the cameras as they eagerly related their scripted stories and asked the public to send donations.

References and Further Reading

Terrorist Plots, Hatched by the FBI

The Oklahoma City Bombing and the Politics of Terror

Why I Changed My Opinion on the Sandy Hook Shooting Psyop

46 Tips for Recognizing a False Flag or Other Psyop

False Flag Terror: A Historical and Analytical Overview

Understanding False Flag Operations in Our Time

The False Flag Formula – 15 Ways to Detect a False Flag Operation

Manipulated Shootings: The Profile

Monday, October 17, 2016

The Legal Fiction - How They Control Us



Throughout the ages mankind’s ingenuity has allowed one group of people to control others. The creation of the ‘legal fiction’ is a superb example – it is the very foundation of how we are controlled today and yet the knowledge of its existence eludes all but a tiny few of us.

Judges know how the ‘legal fiction’ applies to each of us, but barristers, solicitors, Magistrates and politicians mostly do not – it is a closely guarded secret. Our courts impose their will on us using the ‘legal fiction’ and it is through this imposition that governments are able to control every facet of our lives. Without the ‘legal fiction’ governments and an array of authorities have no power over us whatsoever and with this in mind it is perfectly clear that understanding the ‘legal fiction’ is a prerequisite to understanding how the world around us really works as distinct from how we think it does. Knowledge and understanding of the legal fiction is the first step on the road of freedom.

So What Is The Legal Fiction & How Does It Impact On Our Lives?

If you tried to explain the concept of the ‘legal fiction’ to the average individual in the context of how it applies to them, there is a high degree of probability that they would stare back at you as though you were quite mad... explanation rarely attracts a demand to know more, which it should, generally people find comprehension beyond their scope of understanding and they prefer therefore to dismiss it as an absurdity. The creators of the legal fiction knew this and have used our own ignorance to further their aims to control and dominate us, their ultimate weapon being ‘plausible deniability.’ But suddenly we are waking up to what is really going on and as we do the shackles of control are starting to loosen.

Imagine having a conversation in the 10th century in which you were describing a mobile telephone to an audience... they would to a man and woman think you were a complete lunatic... despite being able to explain the science behind it, and so it is with trying to explain the ‘legal fiction’ today. Fortunately, thanks to people like John Harris, Winston Shrout, Robert Arthur Menard and others, the secret of the ‘legal fiction’ also known as the ‘strawman’ has been laid bare and as a consequence those of us who are prepared to learn are now able to take advantage of this very important knowledge.

But bear in mind this... the ‘powers-that-be’ have a vested interest in us not knowing how they effect their control over us... and this translates into them being adamant that you must not know of the existence of the legal fiction, never mind understand it. So if you are thinking about writing to the government and asking them to confirm the existence of the legal fiction, may I suggest that your time would be better spent writing to the mafia and asking them to confirm in writing that they are indeed engaged in organised crime. Please let us know if you get a reply.

The legal fiction is described briefly as ‘a means by which something can be done in law, which, without the legal fiction, would not be possible.’ Look it up in a law dictionary. There are many applications of the legal fiction concept and only through study will you get to grips with the extent of its functions. It is not complicated, just confusing and understanding it requires that you resist the urge to dismiss it as a nonsense. Because we have limited understanding of the origins of the universe, that does not mean that it does not exist - and so it is with the legal fiction.

A Company Is A Legal Fiction

If we assume that your name is Roger Hayes... you could create a legal fiction called ‘ROGER HAYES LIMITED’ which you could own lock, stock and barrel. You could lend the company money and it in turn could buy and own plant, machinery and stock and build up an array of assets and wealth through trade - all of which would then belong to the company... but not you. Yes you would own the company, but the company would own the assets. If on behalf of the company you sold some stock, you would be required to put the proceeds into the company’s bank account and not your own private account. The company would be obliged to pay back the money that you lent it, but apart from that the only way that you could take any benefit from the company would be if it paid you a wage as a manager or a dividend as a shareholder and if the company went bust with net liabilities, you would not be liable for its debts.

It is easy to see then how despite you being the only owner and thus the controller of the legal fiction ‘ROGER HAYES LIMITED’ that it remains an entirely separate entity to you. You could sell the company and somebody else would then control it, despite it keeping your name. Now to deliberately confuse you... this entity was also given the generic name ’person’ and yes, it is meant to confuse you. In legalese (the language of law) the word ‘person’ means company or corporation; it does not mean man or woman. In an ordinary dictionary ‘person’ is described as an individual human being. In a law dictionary ‘human being’ is described as a monster. Do you think they were trying to bring clarity to the meaning of words or do you think they were trying to create confusion? Obviously it was the latter and it was both deliberate and calculated.

When you were born (still assuming that your name is Roger Hayes) and your parents registered your birth, the government set up a company which they called ROGER HAYES. If you look at all your official documents you will see that they are all represented with capital letters as a means of distinction. It is important to remember, that as it was the government that created this company, it is they that own and control it – despite it having your name. The deceit was in the fact that they did not tell you, nor did they want you to know, that they would use this company (person) as a tool to attach liabilities to the real you.

Thus, ROGER HAYES the company was created and existed alongside Roger Hayes the flesh and blood boy created and named by your parents. But in the absence of the knowledge of the existence of the former everybody was led to believe that everything applied to the latter – as devious a plan surely as selling land on the sun to the unsuspecting.

When officialdom then asks the question ‘Are you Roger Hayes?’ What they are really asking is ‘Do you accept the liabilities for ROGER HAYES the company (i.e. the person)?’ and when you say YES – you are unwittingly accepting the liabilities placed upon the ‘person’ (company) that they own and through which they establish their authority over you . How very clever and devious is that?

Roger Hayes is a flesh and blood man. ROGER HAYES is a person (company) – and they are separate entities. You control you, they control the person, if you accept the liability of the person – then they control you.

All Acts of Parliament are applied to the ‘person’ (the company), and not the man or the woman. This is self-evident in that the words man or women are never used in Acts of Parliament. So Acts do not therefore apply to the flesh and blood man or woman, if they did, they would say so. Acts of Parliament extend to you the man or woman only if and when (through your ignorance) you accept the responsibility and liability of the ‘person.’ When a policeman or a judge asks you for your name – they are tricking you into accepting their authority over you, because you have unwittingly assumed responsibility for the legal fiction (despite them also being ignorant of this fact) and the fact is that they must get you to acknowledge ‘the name’ i.e. ‘the person’ i.e. the ‘legal fiction’ ‘ROGER HAYES’ before they can assume their authority over you. When you say YES my name is ROGER HAYES, you are submitting/consenting to their authority, and conversely if you deny the liability of the corporate entity then you deny them the control that they need to enforce their penalty charge notices upon you. Denial of consent is denial of authority which means no penalties. It is as simple as that.

So now you know - government secures its authority over you by simply asking your name, or by getting you to fill in one of their forms. If you understand this then you can start to adjust the way in which you respond to their demands. Learn how to respond to this deceitful tyranny and your life will change; you will become freer in mind, in spirit and in reality. And the more of us pushing them back the faster we will take back control of our nation.

By denying the control that the legal fiction creates, you will be making an enormous stride in securing your freedom.

The fact remains that the Government and its institutions, i.e. the police, the courts, the taxman have authority over you by virtue of you unwittingly giving them your consent. But, whilst statutes (Acts of Parliament) apply only to the legal fiction – common law most definitely applies to YOU - the flesh and blood man or women. Be very careful to understand the difference. Common law which the police monitor as peace officers (constables) protects our natural rights, common law are the rules that govern how we behave towards our fellow men in order that we can all to live in peace and harmony with others without the threat of harm or loss.

So speeding, parking, council tax, VAT, PAYE etc all apply to the ‘legal fiction’ which you have an absolute right to reject if you so choose, but if standing up for your rights is too much trouble, you can chose to continue to remain compliant and obedient. Take your choice.

I have no objection to paying my fair share towards running a system of which we are all beneficiaries, but I will not be dictated to. If refusing to pay my council tax, speeding and parking fines is the way to bring about change that will benefit us all, then that is what I am going to do. Hopefully many more people will start thinking and acting like free men and women, the sooner we do then the sooner we will close down the tyranny and the sooner our lives will start to improve.

BUT... and there’s always a but, the ‘legal fiction’ has benefits as well as liabilities. The NHS, schooling, child benefits, land and home ownership, bank accounts etc, all come to you courtesy of the ‘legal fiction.’ If you want to dump the liabilities, you are potentially going to have to dump all the benefits as well. So you have to have a clear understanding on what it is you are letting yourself in for before you start messing with the system.

Dear reader, our controllers are not stupid... they have been working their scheme for a long time. They have devised a system that gives as well as it takes and it has been a careful balance of both of these that has allowed them to maintain their control. So if there are benefits as well as liabilities and we do not want to throw the baby out with the bath water, where do we go from here?

The answer to that dilemma is simple. The system can be used for our overall benefit. The bad guys have taken control of it and they are quite deliberately using it for their benefit at our expense. They are using it to fine us excessively and needlessly to feed their greed, to tax and persecute us; keeping us on a tread mill of servitude and making our lives a misery in the process. We have a right to take the benefits and reject the liabilities when the balance has been distorted to our detriment – which clearly it is.

The writer has been in court (on numerous occasions) denying the liabilities of the legal fiction – to date 100% successfully. There have been some feisty moments - it has been an interesting journey during which compliant servants of the system have watched in bewilderment (and ignorance) as we (many friends and activists) have turned up at court and said NO... we do not accept your authority. The shock to authority is palpable; they respond by shouting, barking orders for us to obey, they use threats, intimidation and occasionally they call their security guards and the police to try and force us into submission – all to no avail. We have stood our ground and witnessed the weakening of their resolve and have watched as they have instead slowly started to submit to our authority. In court now, we ask the questions and they do the responding. They become particularly more compliant when we remind them that the courts belong to the people... not them. 

The flesh and blood man is considerably more powerful than their legal fiction controls; it is just a matter of discovering how it is that we can demonstrate our authority over them. It has been and will continue to be a bumpy ride, made smoother with the support of those who attend courts as witnesses. The British Constitution Group is pushing the tide of tyranny back slowly but surely, we do it with the knowledge that we are right and they are wrong as evidenced by their gradual submission to our demands. But we still have a long way to go. The more of us that join the fight, the faster we will take back control. We do not need elections or referendums or any other controlled mechanism to free ourselves from corrupt government be it in the UK or in Brussels [or the USA or Canada], we just need the spirit, determination and courage to stand up and say NO.

We, the British people [and the rest of the world] have right to govern ourselves, we have a natural instinct to want to preserve our sovereignty and our independence... but we have been lulled into thinking that we need the permission of a powerful elite to secure it... we do not.

We have become confused about our identity and our nationhood - we no longer understand the purpose of our constitution and the rule-of-law. Some of us have been fooled into thinking of ourselves as European [or American or Canadian], a universal description with as much meaning as calling ourselves earthlings. We are British – English, Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish [and other nationalities]. We have amongst us people from every country on earth, here to share in what is unique to these islands and the British people – a nation of tolerance, compassion, fortitude, fair play and justice. We have taken these values to the world – and it seems that the time has come to do so again.

Our future will not be determined by a political party, it will not be determined by puppets like Clegg, Cameron or Brown (remember him?)... our future will be forged by those amongst us who find the courage to stand up for our rights and declare them to the world.

The tyranny that has been build up around us will crumble when we stand up and defend ourselves. This is a game of numbers... when there are more of us than there are of them... the job will be done.

Tuesday, September 27, 2016

Freemasonry (Luciferianism): Basic Structure and Binding Oaths

The following provides a basic outline of how Freemasonry is structured and how members are committed by their oaths, as well as how members are introduced to Luciferianism in the higher degrees. It also lists other secret societies that are directly connected to Masonry through overlapping memberships, and explains a little bit about how they are connected and the differences between them. A list of references and suggested reading is also provided.

* * *

The entry level of Masonry is the Blue Lodge, which consists of the first three degrees:

  1) Entered Apprentice
  2) Fellowcraft
  3) Master Mason

During initiation into the 3rd degree, the following oath is made:

"Further, I will keep a worthy brother Master Mason's secrets inviolable, when communicated to and received by me as such, murder and treason excepted. Further, I will not cheat, wrong or defraud a Master Mason's Lodge, nor a brother of this Degree, knowingly, nor supplant him in any of his laudable undertakings, but will give him due and timely notice, that he may ward off all danger."

After this degree has been attained, if a Master Mason wants to continue advancing, he can choose either the York Rite or the Scottish Rite.

The York Rite has ten additional degrees (4th to 13th), and is more oriented to Christians.

The Scottish Rite has twenty-nine additional degrees (4th to 32rd), and is more oriented to deism (a belief in the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator who does not intervene in the universe). 

A 33rd degree is offered in the Scottish Rite as an honorary degree to selected candidates. They must be invited to join.

As a Mason advances by degrees through either the York or Scottish Rites, they are slowly indoctrinated further into deism, and ultimately into Luciferianism.

In both the York and Scottish Rites, the Royal Arch degree is where the Mason makes the following oath:

"I will aid and assist a companion Royal Arch Mason when engaged in any difficulty, and espouse his cause so far as to extricate him from the same, if within my power, whether he be right or wrong."

This includes any criminal act, including murder or treason.

Masons who reach the Royal Arch degree also swear to promote and vote for any fellow Mason of that degree "before any other of equal qualifications."

Members of the Royal Arch degree can be found throughout the justice system, serving as judges, lawyers, and police officers. This means that a Royal Arch Mason can expect favourable treatment by the courts should he ever find himself in trouble. 

In some Lodges, a Mason who enters the Scottish Rite is given a copy of Morals and Dogma, which they are expected to read. This book was written by Albert Pike, who served as the Sovereign Grand Commander of the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry in the USA from 1850 to 1891 and is still considered to be a leading authority on Masonry. The book provides the moral teachings of Freemasonry, which the reader will soon discover from reading it that Masonry is Luciferianism.

Albert Pike has indicated elsewhere in his writings that the 30th, 31st, and 32nd degrees are to be taught the Luciferian doctrine. In speaking to the 33rd degree, he says:

"You may repeat it to the 32nd, 31st and 30th degrees — The Masonic religion should be, by all of us initiates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian doctrine."

Another 33rd degree Mason and leading authority on Freemasonry was Manly P. Hall. In his book, The Lost Keys of Freemasonry, he wrote:

"When the Mason learns the key to the warrior on the block is the proper application of the dynamo of the living power, he has learned the mystery of his Craft. The seething energies of Lucifer are in his hands and before he may step onward and upward, he must prove his ability to properly apply energy."

These are just a few examples to show that Freemasonry is Luciferian at the highest levels. Many other examples exist besides these.

* * *

At the highest levels, Masonry is intimately tied to a number of other secret societies through overlapping memberships. These other secret societies include but are not limited to:

Order of the Illuminati
Order of the Garter    
Knights of Malta
Opus Dei
Council on Foreign Relations
Trilateral Commission
Knights of Columbus
Skull & Bones
Golden Dawn
Ordo Templi Orientis
Church of Satan
Temple of Set

These secret societies each have their own internal structures, doctrines, and areas of influence, with some being more politically-oriented while others are more mystical/theological, but they all serve the same Luciferian New World Order agenda.

The Order of the Illuminati
“The great strength of our Order lies in its concealment, let it never appear, in any place in its own name, but always covered by another name, and another occupation. None is fitter than the three lower degrees of Freemasonry; the public is accustomed to it, expects little from it, and therefore takes little notice of it.” -- Adam Weishaupt
This Order was founded by Adam Weishaupt in 1776, under the direction of the House of Rothschild. By 1782, an alliance was formed at the Congress of Wilhelmsbad in Germany between Illuminati, Freemasonry, and a number of other leading secret societies (Rosicrucians and Theosophists), uniting no less than three million members worldwide.

The Order of the Illuminati has always been made up (in part) of the highest-ranking Masons. It is a very elite group made up of the world's richest and most powerful movers and shakers, who operate on a global level and only from the shadows. Like with the honorary 33rd degree of Freemasonry, candidates can only be invited to join. New members can be invited in from the upper ranks of some of these other secret societies as well. All new members of the Illuminati must take an oath to put their loyalty to that secret society above that of any other oath they might have taken or will ever take.

John Robison, another authority on Freemasonry of the 33rd degree who was invited to join the Illuminati, reveals their oath of initiation in his book, Proofs of a Conspiracy (pg. 71), part of which reads:

"I bind myself to perpetual silence and unshaken loyalty and submission to the Order..."

Rosicrucians and Theosophists are also Luciferian, as many of their published doctrines will show. Their highest ranking members can also be selected for membership in the Illuminati.

Albert Pike was a high ranking Rosicrucian (and probably also an Illiminatus) prior to ever joining the Freemasons. Similarly, most or all other 33rd degree Masons are also high-ranking members in one or more of these other secret societies. In this way, these groups are all intimately linked together and controlled by a relatively small group of people.

The ultimate goal of these secret societies is to create a single world government and force the world's population to adopt a single religion that's based on their Luciferian doctrines.

With the aid of Freemasons, the Illuminati have been responsible for starting the French Revolution of 1789, the Russian Revolution of 1917, World War I, and World War II. They intend for there to be a third world war, after which they will enact the final stage of their plan to create a single world government. The Duke De'Orleans, Karl Marx, Nikolai Lenin, and Adolph Hitler were all heavily involved with secret societies and were ultimately under the control of the Illuminati.

The Origins of Freemasonry

The English Grand Lodge of Freemasonry was founded by members of the English Order of the Rose Croix (Rosicrucians). It works only the first three degrees – Apprentice, Fellow-Craft, and Master Mason – and constitutes the nursery for the selection of initiates for the higher degrees worked by other Lodges, such as the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rites and the Grand Orient. The Grand Lodge therefore only teaches the exoteric doctrines (known as Blue Masonry), reserving the esoteric teachings for other Lodges. In 1813 it added a fourth degree, that of Holy Royal Arch. After the English Lodge’s founding, men of religious persuasions other than Christianity began to be accepted into Masonry. On initiation, each member is given an alias that they will be known by within the Lodge. The secret oath taken by initiates supercedes all other oaths that they have or might ever take, thereby making their first allegiance to the Order and their fellow Masons. This oath continues even if they decide to leave Freemasonry, in order to assure that whatever secrets they might hold regarding the inner workings of Masonry are never divulged. All Masonry is founded on the principle of helping fellow members over helping non-members. Because of this, after the English Grand Lodge was established, it became almost necessary for any person in London to become a Mason in order to succeed in business.

To secure the inner workings of Freemasonry against the higher morals of its members, once in the higher degrees, a member who is found to be intractable can continue to the highest visible point of initiation along the track prepared by those who mean him to know nothing. All is beautiful, all is noble, he sees only the best, and forever advertises the goodness of Freemasonry. Though in this capacity he may do nothing else, he becomes an important factor in recruiting.

Under the guise of philanthropy, humanitarianism, democratic ideals, and the promise of material advancement, this Order attracts untold numbers of unsuspecting men. The sifting takes place from the time of their initiation. For those who are deemed useless to the further secret aims of Masonry and therefore unworthy of climbing from the Master's chair in Grand Lodge to The Royal Arch degree, English Masonry will always remain what it was represented to be when they became candidates for initiation. They will be useful carriers of the legend that English Masonry believes in God and philanthropy. But, like Charity, English Grand Lodge covers a multitude of sins.... Above all, it covers Gnosticism under all its aspects; it is in fact its screen.
(See Occult Theocracy, by Lady Queenborough Edith Starr Miller) 

* * *


Morals and Dogmas - Albert Pike
The Secret Teachings of All Ages - Manly P. Hall
The Lost Keys of Freemasonry - Manly P. Hall
Proofs of a Conspiracy - John Robison

Suggested Reading:

New World Order: The Ancient Plan of Secret Societies - William T. Still

Further Resources: