Oh what a tangled web they weave
“The wisdom of the ancients devised a way of inducing men to study truth by means of pious
frauds, the delicate Minerva secretly lurking beneath the mask of pleasure.”
-Richard de Bury, High Chancellor of England, A Vindication of Poetry.
“I have seen the FNORD” is a phrase that was once written on bridges in Portland
Oregon and Earlsdon near Coventry England. To see the FNORD means to be
unaffected by the supposed hypnotic power of the word. What follows in this
chapter may at first seem distant from the mystery at Rennes le Chateau however
the understanding of the activities surrounding the Abbé Saunière at the turn of
the twentieth century may go some way to getting to the bottom of what he was
up to.
A person with prior prejudice and a mind conditioned from birth can find many
reasons not to believe any of this, completely overlooking of course that we are
not asking anyone to believe anything other than to come to terms with what
others may have believed throughout the ages. We are dealing with a secret that
to many people has occupied their every waking hour and driven them to
annihilate whole communities in order to stamp out, a heresy that has not been
sanctioned by them. The promise of an afterlife is more precious than gold, to be
told one doesn’t exist will cause these believers to fight and kill in order to bury
any notion or even evidence that this maybe true. The detractors of anything that
has the label mystery have never asked themselves the question as to why a
particular heresy began in the first place which caused a large number of people to
defy the authority of Rome and face certain death in order to practice their faith.
People whom we have seen have chosen death rather than submit to the Catholic
Faith; the default position has been that these people are simply misguided.
Remember the Crusade against the Albigensians (Cathars) was not called to gain
territory or wealth but to stamp out a free spiritual movement not under Catholic
control that undermined their supreme authority.
People who say ‘I see no evidence’ are very adept at simply ignoring large swathes
of it that does not fit their hypothesis for the very reason that it does not fit into
their belief system. They arbitrarily declare the evidence void because of their
adherence bordering on their own religious reverence to the academic canon that
cannot ever be questioned without incurring ridicule. But that which is
unchallenged and exercised as habit rapidly becomes mere ritual. When this occurs
any dissent of the dictates of the academic priesthood becomes an object of
surprise and even resentment. Those with careers to protect will defend old ideas
with vigour and resort to obfuscation and ridicule and the introduction of straw
men and pedantry where their reasoned argument fails. The eventual imposition of
authority on these matters is to be interpreted as their argument failing to find the
truth.
The freethinker however does not ever fear the truth and will bow to it gracefully
should he or she find himself or herself in conflict with it. But here we are dealing
with something beyond the mere protection of misguided theses written years ago
with inadequate data and careers built upon old evidence that has been
superseded by the accumulation of new evidence and data. This subject has
religious overtones that overflow into an established political and authoritarian
dogma, something people will (and do) defend their position with violence if
necessary. Centrally controlled church of whatever persuasion has risen to global
proportions; it carries influence in all matters of state and has a presence in the
political makeup of every country on the planet. It is little wonder that the great
church authorities would employ people full time to watch for signs that their
established position is being challenged or questioned.
An inordinate amount of time has been spent trying to play down this mystery, so
much so that some of us have noticed a tendency on the detractor’s part that ‘The
Lady Doth Protest Too Much Methinks’ (Hamlet Act III scene ii). Whole web sites
and TV programmes are dedicated to finding anything that is perceived (by them)
to be a chink in the evidence. If something is presented that does not have an
establishment body of research behind it then any perceived violation of the
academic canon is expanded beyond proportion and sometimes the pedantry
moves into the blatantly absurd. For example one person took a great deal of
trouble to document every single position of the Aude valley churches using GPS
and declared that he had shown that any landscape geometry is nonsense because
some of the churches are as much as 50 metres out (50 metres over several miles).
Somehow he considered a 0.001 percent error proof that landscape geometry is all
nonsense and they wheeled out the old chestnut that any pattern can be made
with anything and a bit of imagination. It was then pointed out to this person that
GPS is only accurate to 100 metres in mountainous terrain, which is a clear feature
of this area and anyone driving around the area using a car SATNAV will notice that
on many occasions one is being asked to make a turn where none exists. It was also
pointed out to this person that some of the Christian churches may have been
placed randomly over the original pagan site and could have been placed there in
slight error by the uninitiated and ignorant modern church authorities. But perhaps
the real killer was when I informed this particular person that, with respect to an
area of this latitude, the zero meridian for the Global satellite system is 102.5
metres east of the meridian marked at Greenwich, the one used on all of the older
maps of this area. So his errors found with GPS of less than 100 metres are
completely irrelevant when compared to a map drawn using the old theodolite
method of triangulation and drawn using Lambert Conformal Conic Projection. He
was then challenged to reproduce patterns that he had been boasting of like those
we shall be describing later using a similar number of other non-religious random
but linked land features in a similar area. I have to confess that at the time of
writing I have not heard from him since I challenged him to put up or shut up and a
website he had set up has been removed. Presumably he decided to take the latter
option.
His hard earned data, which obviously he firmly believed in, has been shown to be
absolutely useless and he has no counter. Why would people dedicate most their
time in trying to play down something if they didn’t have some kind of agenda;
Why bother? Surely it would be more believable if they simply presented the
rebuttal evidence and then quietly defended it and if it proved flawed then bow
gracefully and retire. The problem they have is that the rebuttal evidence they
gave simply didn’t stand up to close scrutiny and were even surprised to find
themselves having to defend their own position that appears to have been driven
by a pseudo-religious belief in the authoritarian academic canon (devoted fidelity
without evidence). This is simply a belief masquerading as science and to
challenge it was seen by them as some kind of religious blasphemy, clearly a
mindset they had acquired at birth and carried through their lives. They were
surprised to the point of indignation that I dared challenge them and it was
obvious that these people had never found themselves in a position where they
themselves have come under such sustained and logical attack.
A German pastor Viktor Knirsch once wrote;
“If those whose contentions are questioned had truth on their side, they would
patiently answer all the questions. Certainly they would not continue to conceal
evidence and documents that pertain to the controversy. If those who demand
belief are lying, however, they will call for a judge. By this ye shall know them.
He who tells the truth is calm and composed, but he who lies demands worldly
justice.”
I have presented my hypothesis to academic web discussion groups only to be met
with curious non-sequiturs accompanied with a kind of supercilious intimidating
manner insinuating that I should accept what they say without any question. When
this manner of theirs doesn’t work and after my persistent requests for them to
use facts rather than threats, they have simply banned me having completely run
out of argument very rapidly and they were unable to continue to argue their case,
as they’ve never really had to do it before. This course of action of continually
running away from me only emboldens me.
Why for instance do the detractors insist that there is no hint that there is a
bloodline in the Bible involved with Jesus? Haven’t they read the first seventeen
verses of the New Testament? It’s all about a bloodline from David through to
Joseph, the surrogate father of Jesus. Haven’t they looked at the very first line of
the New Testament? Why, for what reason are these verses included to point to a
person who isn’t important to the story anyway beyond identifying him as a person
for whom the mother of Jesus is married to, for Mary is deemed here to be no
more important the merely the wife of Joseph? Why do people insist that there is
no record of Jesus and Mary Magdalene attending a marriage ceremony when the
wedding at Cana, where Jesus turned water into wine and which never says
precisely whose wedding it is? A wedding that not only includes Jesus and the
disciples as guests but Jesus’ mother is also in attendance. Whose marriage can
possibly have such distinguished list of guests and yet fail to warrant a mention as
to their identity, even after Jesus had openly intervened with their catering
arrangements?
Jesus was the King of the Jews, the Magi called him by this name at his birth;
wouldn’t you suppose that a reason for him not continuing the Royal dynasty be
included in the Biblical narratives? As a Rabbi he would have been required under
Jewish law to have been married and he is called by this title on no less than five
occasions. These detractors rely on ignorance and intimidation, one needs to do a
large degree of study to feel confident in questioning the onslaught that seems to
typify the official story being put out in the wake of Dan Brown’s blockbuster.
All documents described here in this book are out in the open for scrutiny of the
wider public, as indeed am I. I will publicly defend ALL of the claims I have made
and as I have the truth on my side I will do it in a calm manner and will have little
need for ridicule, or obfuscation, or resort to pedantry against anyone who would
choose to question the contents of this book. Should someone give a genuine
instance where I have made an error then I will gladly concede. My ego is not
sacred, only the truth can be exalted in this manner. Indeed some detractors have
presented good rebuttal evidence that has shown that some of the original
assumptions have been made mistakenly, however this is to be expected in
something that has some aspects of a speculative nature such as this.
For forty years anthropologists studied the Piltdown man, only to find out later
that the whole thing had been a hoax, one is allowed to change ones views and
opinions in the light of new evidence. What one shouldn’t do is to ignore new
evidence completely because it doesn’t fit the rigorously applied paradigm or
because it is too risky to even discuss it as whole doctorates with long established
academic prestige may be at stake. This is what happened with the Piltdown man
fiasco, for forty years nobody dared question data that everyone had wanted to
hear because it fitted in with their perceptions and the hoaxer recognised this
tendency in the scientific academia to be reluctant to leave their preconceptions
and be moved out of their comfort zone. The Piltdown man fiasco shows if nothing
else that all one needs to do if one want to create a hoax is tell people precisely
what they want to hear and it will be accepted and the premises for the religious
belief in this particular scientific doctrine not re-examined for years.
In cases like this it is good to sometimes return to first principles and it is
important to realise that the original documents held in the Dossiers Secret have
not been disproved and at best opponents of their validity have merely said that
there is no evidence from other sources to back up the claims. Some may say here
that Pierre Plantard admitted to the hoax, when in fact he has done nothing of the
sort. That these criteria of no corroborative evidence should only apply to this
story is nit picking in its most basic and banal form. One could easily apply these
criteria to other sciences from the accepted academic canon. If something doesn’t
have independent evidence to back it up then should it be completely ignored and
not even taught? Who could agree with this without it bothering their conscience
should they actually have one? There is no independent evidence apart from the
obviously biased New Testament and the Gnostic gospels that Jesus ever existed.
There is independent evidence that a Christ existed and this comes from 1 st
century writer Josephus, however Christ merely means ‘The Anointed One’ and
there were many who had been anointed at this time. Are we to apply the same
rule of non-compliance unless backed up by corroborative evidence here? Is belief
in the gospels not to be taught or even discussed in anything but a ridiculing
manner through this lack of corroborative evidence from other independent
sources? The writings of the first century chronicler Josephus are generally
accepted in mainstream history; perhaps if someone had deposited Josephus’
writings in the Bibliotheque Nationale in the 1960s then his writing, clearly a
personal view also, wouldn’t have been accepted either, it seems it is the date of
writing only that implies credibility.
A TV programme was shown on Channel 4 on UK television called ‘The Real Da
Vinci Code’ which was based on the assumptions of Dan Brown’s book. Important
aspects of the book were investigated and the results were screened in February
2005. The programme produced by Simon Raikes and presented by Tony Robinson
looked into Dan Brown’s claims. Skilfully using Tony Robinson’s show business
persona as the bumbling Baldrick, who has to be stupid in the first place for even
being willing to give the question of Brown’s claims airtime. In some kind of
inquisitive childlike dalliance and not automatically accepting what the academic
high priests who have ordained that you accept their word without question,
Robinson starts out as the common man who is simply curious. Then we get the
“Experts” with their “sit down, shut up and listen” persona. They know best seems
to be the way we should respond to this, why are we daring to even question their
view. At first the producers tried to portray to the public that the programme was
being objective and fair and balanced however it gets gradually eased into ‘type’.
One point came out of the programme that really bothered me and was a direct
indication that the programme had been biased from inception. They had shown
some of the findings of researcher Graham Phillips who has done some excellent
work investigating the work of Thomas Wright around Hodnet Church in Shropshire
England and the programme had shown a rather meagre looking chalice that would
convince nobody. What is wrong about this is “investigation” at Hodnet was that
they completely ignored the very principle theme they had been supposedly
investigating, although they clearly must have known about it. The programme’s
premise had nothing to do with a cup but the female companion of Jesus. In the
church at Hodnet there are three stained glass windows of Matthew, Mark, Luke
and John. In the window the figure of John is clearly female (even breasts can be
detected) AND she is carrying a chalice. John the Apostle simply doesn’t normally
carry a chalice in the bible but when one puts this to people they say that he’s
always depicted in this way in art as if that is some kind of acceptable answer. One
detractor I spoke to even forgot himself and in an effort to play this down tried to
make out that the object was spikenard jar not the Holy Grail, it was quickly
pointed out that John definitely doesn’t carry a spikenard jar either but Mary of
Bethany does. This is now written into legend as John, the effete disciple, and now
everyone only sees what they are told to see and not what is actually there. One
commentator said that experts know that the figure of John in Florentine friese of
The Last Supper is a man as if they had received a personal interview with
Leonardo Da Vinci himself and knew his intentions and that the entire population
of the world lacks the necessary expertise to tell a woman from a man, if this is
true then I do not hold out much confidence for mankind’s future. But the name
John, now exclusively a male name actually means ‘God Given’ in Hebrew which
can of course equally apply to a female and they gloss over the fact that all of the
characters in the Gospels are in fact only known by their title and not their name.
The stained glass windows in Hodnet Church would have reinforced the theme
depicted by Leonardo Da Vinci’s painting of the Last Supper in Florence that
figures in Brown’s Da Vinci Code of a female looking John the Apostle to the right
of Jesus. The producers must have figured that this would give too much credence
to the proposition of Jesus’ companion and wife being the chalice bearing Mary
Magdalene. One of the authors of Holy Blood and the Holy Grail was put on the
spot to prove the assumption that Jesus had fathered children; this was demanded
from people who have yet to even offer independent proof that Jesus himself
existed let alone his children, sometimes the hypocrisy of these people is
laughable.
Here is strong evidence here that there is an agenda in operation to play this
down. But whilst we are discussing the trivial matter as to whether Jesus was
married or not we are overlooking a greater controversy and also we are
inadvertently endorsing the Judeo/Christian/Muslim belief system. It actually
shouldn’t matter to an individual’s faith whether Jesus was married or not one can
still find salvation through his teachings, but such beliefs of Jesus’ being mortal
with normal non-godlike instincts and urges will undermine the established
church’s authority that has been continually altering the true sense of Jesus’
divinity for seventeen hundred years. By vigorously opposing the proposition of his
marriage the church is at the same time lending it publicity. The gospels never
mention his marriage or even his non-marriage and this is significant, however this
in fact not surprising as the New Testament was ever meant for the consumption of
the laity. It would indeed be unusual that a Rabbi, or a teacher with some
authority as indeed Jesus appeared to have, is not married and would have
warranted some comment especially since he was also called ‘King of the Jews’ by
the Magi and the words INRI were pinned to the cross, for as a descendent of King
David he would be expected to produce an heir. If Jesus was an Essene, as some
have suggested who were supposedly celibate then this too should also have
produced a comment. Indeed the much quoted Josephus writing from the first
century mentions the Essenes so why no mention of this sect in the Gospels? Why Because it was written by Christians for Christians of the first and second
centuries. Comments of such nature in the Gospels are conspicuous by their
absence. Indeed in the subsequent letters to Paul one would have expected the
question from someone as to why Jesus wasn’t married. This whole question of his
marriage is conspicuous by its absence in Saunière’s church too; several stained
glass windows seem to be hinting at an intimate relationship between Jesus and
Mary of Bethany (recognised as the Magdalene by the Catholic Church).
It is important to state here that Pope Gregory I (the Great) gave a sermon
between 1238 and 1246 called Patrologia Latina which included the curious
phrase:
“…..the woman Luke called the sinner and John called Mary was the Mary out of
whom Mark declared seven demons were cast”.
This of course is The Magdalene.
In Brown’s work of fiction he uses the Priory of Sion in the plot that he expands
into a world organisation that has been running the political makeup of Europe and
America for millennia. This is unlikely to be the case for the Priory of Sion is a
small organisation started in 1956 but may have been a small public front from a
small lodge of a greater organisation instructed to push a concept into the public
eye and once one studies secret societies one immediately becomes aware of the
intricate network of groups with members who cross over lines to other groups in a
seamless transition. The Priory of Sion is not the only society with secrets that one
is able to join if one had the right credentials. More secret organisations or a
network of organisations with similar belief may indeed have been behind a
release of information into the public domain. It is the belief of a few that
Plantard and de Chérisey were simply the hired actors, perhaps unwittingly, for
the public front and most probably had been recruited early in the 1960s after
they had been showing an interest in investigating the mystery themselves and had
attracted attention as suitable fall guys. Plantard in particular had demonstrated
his talent for showmanship in such matters with his publication Alpha Galates
during World War II, which was a right wing organisation that was in some ways
sympathetic to the Nazi doctrine or perhaps a united Europe under a non-Christian
totalitarian authority be it based upon either Communist or Capitalist ideologies,
the nature of final structure will not matter to the elite driving the change so long
as they govern from outside the ideology. Plantard in particular was given just
enough information to get the public attention of authors like Lincoln, Baigent and
Leigh who picked up his ‘specially formed’ history and ran with it, probably a little
too far for the liking of the alumni and it seems they may have ran far too close to
the truth for their liking. Plantard’s surprised reaction to the question posed by
Henry Lincoln in an interview made for the BBC in 1970s is legendary. Henry
Lincoln asked: “The geometry’s pentagonal isn’t it?” Plantard, making a futile
effort to stop himself, nevertheless smiled a knowing smile. The question clearly
took Plantard by surprise and he muttered that he couldn’t comment looking
straight back at Lincoln when he said it, a moment when Lincoln had suddenly
acquired this normally aloof Frenchman’s undivided attention. One thing of note
is that hardly any direct information of pentagonal geometry has ever come from
either Plantard or de Chérisey.
It appears that Plantard and de Sede had met over writing a book that talked
about an apparent find of Templar treasure at Gisors. They were introduced to a
man named Joseph Courtaly, a priest of Villarzel du Razès close to Rennes le
Chateau who had been an acquaintance of Beringer Saunière and who had
apparently given Plantard and de Sède the information regarding Rennes le
Chateau for a book that was to be written by Gerard de Sede, indeed de Sede’s
book was dedicated to Joseph Courtaly in its foreword. This book by de Sede had
in turn triggered Lincoln’s interest. In other words the prime mover of everything
regarding the Dossiers Secrets and all the subsequent books we’re told appears to
have been the priest and aristocrat Courtaly through Plantard, however Courtaly
died in 1964 and sources say he may have been suffering from dementia prior to
his death. Despite this it is alleged that Courtaly wrote a note that accompanied
the pamphlet deposited in the Dossiers Secret that was allegedly written by a
researcher and archaeologist called Eugene Stublein entitled Pierre Gravees du
Languedoc (carved stones of the Languedoc). Although the relevant drawings from
this book were deposited in the Bibliotheque Nationale in June 1966, Courtaly’s
note is dated four years earlier in April 1962. It says:
“The book by Eugene STUBLEIN, edition Limoux 1884, having become very rare,
and being perhaps one of the rare owners to have it in his library, I owe it to
myself to satisfy the numerous requests of researchers to make reproduction of
the plates of the book, no XVI to XXIII on the countryside of RENNES LES BAINS,
RENNES LE CHATEAU and ALET”
So the pictures of the headstone and tombstone that we have become familiar
with came from Courtaly’s copy of”Carved stones of the Languedoc”. It has been
said that Courtaly helped Saunière to add the final touches to the painting of Mary
Magdalene on the front of the altar depicting her in the cave with the triangular
mountain with the tower and the arch. Courtaly had been the priest at Brenac
from where the view is likely to occur.
Evidence for the existence of the Priory of Sion is sound and documented and
centred on St Julien in Geneva. This hard evidence for the existence of Prieure de
Sion is when the organisation was registered with the French Government in 26 th
June 1956 in this same district of Geneva. Its constitution states:
"Declaration to the Sub-Prefecture of Saint-Julien en Genevois.
Prieure de Sion.
Objectives:
Studies and mutual aid to members.
Head Office
Sous-Cassan, Annemasse, Haute Savoie.
Priory of Sion - A study Group apparently started by the artist and film maker Jean
Cocteau. In an interview with one of Lincoln's researchers a member of this group
said that the Priory of Sion was created as a public persona of an older group
called the Order of Sion, later to become the Abbey of Sion and then finally the
Priory of Sion. The Priory of Sion at this time boasted three Grand Masters but this
story has since changed, the original document of registry is signed by Pierre
Plantard, who describes himself as Le secrétaire Général (not Grand Master) and
under his name in quotes is “Sous-Cassan” the street on which Plantard’s home
was situated in Saint Julien en Genevois. Later we shall see that the choice of the
headquarters is right in the centre of the esoteric activities within central Europe.
The Order of Sion from the 11th century is directly mentioned in the ‘Lobineau
Document’. As I’ve already said the document is so called because it has been
deposited under the name of Henri Lobineau; a pseudonym that is most certainly a
false name. The name was probably taken from the street Rue Lobineau in Paris
which runs between St Sulpice and the church of St Germain du Pres and both of
these churches are built on the former site of a Merovingian Abbey. The document
heading mentions the well known real historian called Rene Grousset who has been
mentioned earlier. Grousset’s esteemed work consists of some 2400 pages and the
writer of the Lobineau document has done some serious research here, here there
is no idle use of his name. Curiously the document describes how Baudouin I of
Jerusalem was forced by Sion to divorce his wife Adelaide and constitute the Order
of the Temple. It says that of the nine initial knights that formed the Knights
Templar only five were members of the Order of Sion and this did not include Hugh
de Payn, the first Grand Master of the Knights Templar. The document then talks
about the curious ‘cutting of the Elm’ ceremony at Gisors (Eure) which marked the
separation of the Order of the Temple and that from here certain members
founded the Ormus under the protection of Saint Samson d’Orleans.
What is usually overlooked is that the Priory of Sion is also called the Order of the
Rose Croix Veritas (the True Rose Cross) and in a lesser known document we
appear to have the founding of a group called the Golden and Rosy Cross also by
what is described as an Alexandrian Sage called Ormus. This was in the year 46CE
and according to the document he and his six followers were converted by one of
the disciples of Jesus and from this conversion Rosicrucianism was born as a fusion
between Christianity and Egyptian mysteries. According to 19th century writer
Émile Dantine the origins of the Rosicrucians may well have had Islamic
connections.
The documents deposited by this Henri Lobineau therefore suggest that the Order
of the Temple, Ormus and the Order of Sion were one and the same organisation
for the period 1188 until 1306, over a hundred years and several generations, one
is reminded that the Knights Templar were dissolved a year later in 1307. The first
Grand Master of the Priory of Sion is listed in the Dossiers Secrets as Jean de
Gisors. According to the documents after the fall of Jerusalem to Saladin in 1187
these monks that had previously founded the Abbey of Notre Dame du Mont Sion
were forced to move to Orleans under the protection of the already established
Priory of Saint Samson. A list of the Abbots of the Priory of Mount Sion between
1152 and 1281 then follows. The Lobineau Document then goes on describe the
structure of the Priory of Sion and we are informed initially that the organisation
started in 1481 (this was later amended to 1681). The constitution disputed
Cocteau’s statutes and talked about twenty-seven commanderies one of which was
called Beth-Ania (house of Anne) at Rennes le Chateau. One is tempted to believe
the assertions made in the Lobineau Document, it doesn’t seem to have a purpose
and doesn’t seem to be pushing any particular agenda and what is significant about
this cutting of the Elm ceremony at Gisors? After this single mention of Ormus the
name isn’t mentioned again. One is tempted to keep these assertions in mind and
not dismiss them too readily unless evidence can be found that it is false. This is
not to say that this has been in any way been proven.
So far what we have with the Priory documents has been similar to a historical
novel; some genuine histories coupled with some seemingly inside information
thrown in or deliberate tampering with historical facts - nothing new there. There
is still no confirmation of the validity of this inside information but what are we to
expect? Can we confirm any of this information? Well documents held in France
proving the existence of the Order of Sion from 1099CE (around the time of the
first crusade) can be found in a Papal bull from that date, a document that is part
of a private collection. In 1833 Charles Nodier (a listed Grand Master of the Priory
of Sion) had a disciple at the Arsenal Library called Jean Baptiste Pitois who was an
official in the Ministry of Public Education. In that same year this Ministry
undertook a project to publish all hitherto suppressed documents concerning
French History. Two committees were formed to preside over this ambitious
enterprise. These included Victor Hugo (listed as the POS Grand Master who
immediately followed Charles Nodier), Jules Michelet (a man associated within
esoteric groups that will be mentioned later) and lastly a known prominent
authority on the crusades Baron Emmanuel Rey. Amongst the works subsequently
published under the auspices of the Ministry of Public Education was Michelet’s
‘Les Proces des Templiers which dealt with the Inquisition records dealing with the
trials of the Knights Templar and largely as a result of the same release of
information Baron Rey published a number of works dealing with the Crusades and
the Frankish Kingdom of Jerusalem. At certain points Rey quotes almost verbatim
with passages in the Prieure documents (or vice versa). Rey co-founded the Society
of the Latin Middle East based in Geneva. This society dedicated itself to
archaeological projects and also produced its own magazine, which is a primary
source for modern historians. What triggered this sudden release of new
information and study?
Therefore in this particular list of Prieure de Sion Grand Masters all had a link to
each other and seemingly had knowledge regarding the Knights Templar that had
not been previously published. In their epoch defining book the Holy Blood and the
Holy Grail the authors have found links between all of the Grand Masters and one
thing is clear all these Grand Masters were involved in either hermetic thinking or
were politically controversial or both. Even if their membership of the organisation
is false there is a pattern here, these names are not random. This is far too
detailed to be a hoax, it doesn’t need to be this detailed, for this list is well
researched and too elaborate and such a large array of facts would make any scam
vulnerable to mistakes. To set this up without any error would have taken years of
study and meticulous recording and cross referencing of data. The smart money
would be on this not being a total fabrication.
Another mention of Sion from the political world which has proved to be
controversial to say the least are the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion which
are also largely thought again to be a hoax made by the Russian Secret Police on
the Russian Tsar in the early twentieth century. My but the hoaxers have been
busy; everything controversial has to be a hoax it seems, this has to be a new law
of nature – controversial therefore = hoax. Without doubt the Protocols provided
Adolph Hitler with a blueprint to total power through secret societies which he and
others followed until he gained Absolute Power over the Third Reich. The fact that
the dictates of each Protocol (24 in all) seems to have been played out in the
political arena (and are still being played out) gives the works absolute imperative
that they should never be ignored and yet they are.
In the book Holy Blood and the Holy Grail it is explained in great detail how the
Romanov Dynasty came to be influenced by esoteric enclaves who journeyed from
France and it was here that the Protocols first burst into the public eye. These
esoteric enclaves had direct contact with groups mentioned in the Prieure de Sion
Documents and had influence on the Romanovs at the same time the Protocols
appeared.
Everyone is aware of Rasputin’s influence on the Tsarina but the Romanovs had
also been principally influenced by a man they called Monsieur Philippe who was
very likely the mysterious magician and healer known as "le Maitre Philippe" real
name Philippe Nizier Anthelme. He was born in 1849 in Loisieux, Savoy between
Lyon and Geneva and died 1905 in L’Arbresle, Rhône. He was also known as Maître
Philippe de Lyon. Tsar Nicolas had given two greyhounds to him and Monsieur
Philippe then boasted that he could talk to these animals. He also apparently
stopped a hurricane for the Tsar.
Monsieur Philippe himself had a mentor who operated under the pseudonym Papus
a person who also had direct influence on the opera singer Emma Calve through
her Martinist associations. Throughout his life Papus had been a member of the
Theosophical Society, the Hermetic Brotherhood of Luxor, the Golden Dawn’s
Athahoor Temple in Paris, and the Ordre Kabbalistique de la Rose+Croix - L’OKR+C
[Cabalistic Order of the Rosy Cross] founded by the Marquis Stanislas de
Guaita. Papus also founded the Groupe Indépendant d’Études Ésotériques
[Independent Group for Esoteric Studies] and reconstituted the Martinist Order, an
influential Gnostic Christian society and in many if not all of these groups he
attained leadership. He was a physician and a hypnotist and is primarily
remembered as an author of books on magic, Qabalah and the Tarot.
We know for certain that Papus (real name Gérard-Anaclet-Vincent Encausse)
himself visited the Romanovs on three occasions, in 1901, 1905 and 1906, serving
Tsar Nicholas II and Tsarina Alexandra both as physician and occult consultant. In
October 1905, he allegedly conjured up the spirit of Tsar Nicholas's father,
Alexander III, who delivered a prophesy through Papus that the Tsar would meet
his downfall at the hands of revolutionaries. Papus allegedly told the Tsar that he
would be able to magically avert Alexander's prophesy so long as he remained
alive. His claim proved uncannily accurate, Nicholas kept his hold on the throne of
Russia until 141 days after Papus's death. Papus seems to have served the Tsar and
Tsarina in what was essentially a shamanic capacity, however he was later
curiously concerned about their heavy reliance on occultism to assist them in
deciding questions of government. During their later correspondence, he warned
them a number of times against the influence of Rasputin.
The leading speculation regarding the Protocols is that the Russian Secret Police –
The Ochrana, forged the Protocols in their entirety in order to impress Tzar
Nicholas into agreeing to a persecution of the Jews in Russia and influence him
into retaining Nilus as an advisor to Tzar Nicolas. This ‘theory’ fails to take into
account the fact that at least part if not all of the text originated in France. The
text even specifically criticises French journalism, why would the Russian Ochrana
wish to criticise French journalism and not include Russian journalism as well? The
most likely scenario is that a French lawyer called Maurice Joly wrote the
groundwork for the Protocols of Zion. The title of Joly’s masterpiece from which
the Protocols originated was called Dialogue aux anfers entre Machiaval et
Montesquieu, ou la politique de Machiavel au XIX siècle – Dialogue in Hell between
Machiavelli and Montesquieu, or the politics of Machiavelli in the nineteenth
Century. Joly was a subversive who was eventually thrown into jail for his
activities; however the text he first published in Belgium in 1864 continued to be
printed in secret presses. Joly had an intense hated of Napoleon III and probably
had some instrumental effect in the Emperor’s eventual downfall. Nesta Webster
makes a strong case for Joly as the source of the Protocols, in ‘Secret Societies and
Subversive Movements’, she states: "The Protocols were largely copied from the
book Dialogues aux anfers entre Machiaval et Montesquieu published in 1864. Let it
be said at once that the resemblance between the two works could not be
accidental. Not only are whole paragraphs almost identical, but the various points
in the programme following each other in precisely the same order." Joly was tied
to the Alliance Israelite Universelle through his association with French Rosicrucian
Freemason in the French government Cremieux, Joly himself being a member of
the ‘Antient(sic) Order of the Rosicrucians’ and had resurrected the ideals of
Machiavelli in a warning forecast as to how the masses could be dominated.
Interestingly the Protocols differ from Joly’s work inasmuch as Joly refers to ’We
the Beast always says ‘We’ for he is Legion’. However General Rachkovsky, chief of
the Ochrana did consider the Protocols as “excellent work” and had hoped that the
Tsar would be impressed - he wasn’t.
This esoteric enclave of Papus and Monsieur Philippe was actively opposed by the
Grand Duchess Elizabeth who was intent on installing her own favourites in
proximity to the imperial throne. One of the grand duchess’s favourites was known
under the pseudonym of Sergei Nilus who was a rather contemptible anti-Semitic.
Around 1903 Nilus presented the highly controversial document to the Tsar – The
Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion - a document that supposedly bore witness
to a dangerous worldwide conspiracy. But if Nilus expected the Tsar’s gratitude for
his disclosure, he must have been grievously disappointed. The Tsar declared the
document to be an outrageous fabrication, and ordered all copies of it to be
destroyed and Nilus was banished from the court in disgrace.
Standing completely in antithesis of Jewish ideals the Protocols of Zion referred to
king, a pope, an international church, and to Sion and was signed by the
‘representatives of the Sion of the 33rd Degree’ (a direct reference to the Scottish
Rite Freemasonry of Albert Pike whose Southern US headquarters he help found on
the 33 degree parallel in Charleston, SC). The Protocols speaks openly of
infiltrating freemasonry and using its members for its own purposes as did the
Compagne de Saint-Sacrement.
Post WWII seekers of the truth have a serious problem. At the mere mention of the
previously described document given the name Protocols of the Learned Elders of
Zion one is instantly labelled Anti-Semitic for even daring to mention the name.
The fact is that this document was regarded in the twisted, bitter mind of Hitler
and his followers as some kind proof of a Jewish conspiracy and so anyone daring
to do no more than read and discuss this document must be clearly in league with
the Nazis using the corrupted logic of other twisted and bitter souls that the mere
mention of something automatically implies complicity with it. So one is never
allowed to study what could well be a pointer to the grave dangers we are facing
in the early 21st century, a trend which in itself should ring alarm bells. It’s the
same as observing a large asteroid heading for earth but because the first
observation was reported in a disenfranchised journal then one should never be
allowed to discuss it until it blows the earth apart. In fact the protocols
themselves say in its 24 chapters that one is encouraged to foster the illusion of an
Anti-Semitic attitude amongst anyone trying to investigate the activities of these
“Elders of Zion”. To call the Protocols a fake or a hoax is an oversimplification; for
one thing patterns of events that have happened and are happening now are
written down in this document, but to declare them as wholly the truth is also an
oversimplification. Let us look at their history in order to explain this apparent
dichotomy.
In 1797 the French Jesuit Abbé Barruel who wrote a five volume Memoire pou
server á l’histore du Jacobinisme received a copy of a letter in 1806 from J.B.
Simonini, an army officer in Florence. In this letter was the statement that the
Jews ‘promised themselves that in less than a century, they would be masters of
the world’. This letter was circulated widely in France however it was later
revealed that it had been fabricated by the French Police in order to turn
Napoleon against the Jews. Later in 1848 Hermann Goedsche, a German Postal
official forged papers indicating a conspiracy to assassinate the King of Prussia.
After being found out he was removed from his job but he began writing under the
name of Sir John Retcliffe and in one of his novels called Biarritz there was a
chapter called ‘In the Jewish cemetery in Prague’ in which the twelve tribes of
Israel met with Satan to tell him the plans to control the world. In this book of
fiction the proceedings were witnessed by two men who then dedicated their lives
to fighting this so-called ‘Jewish Plot’. In 1872, Russian anti-Semites picked up this
chapter and printed this chapter in a pamphlet as “fiction based on fact”. It was
reprinted in 1876 and 1880 and in 1881 the story was published in the French paper
Le Contemporain as fact and all of the individual speeches made by each tribe
were consolidated into a single speech, supposedly made by a chief Rabbi in a
secret meeting of influential Jews. The claim was made to have come from a
forthcoming book by English diplomat, Sir John Readcliffe (clearly taken off
Goedsche’s pen-name) in order to give the story some substance. In 1891 the story
reappeared in a Russian newspaper Novorosssiysky Telegraf which said that the
speech was made by a rabbi to a secret Sanhedrin (possibly referring to the First
Congress of Reformed Judaism held in Leipzig). The article was again attributed to
this Sir John Readcliffe. Later in 1920 another French newspaper La Vielle France
said that The Protocols of Zion bore a striking resemblance to something that a
Rabbi Reichhorn had said in Prague in 1869 over the tomb of Grand Rabbi Simoenben-Ihuda. This apparently fictional speech was used in 1900 to instigate a pogrom
against the Jews and became universally known as ‘The Rabbi’s Speech’. A known
anti-Semite called P.A. Khrushevan used the speech to provoke this pogrom at
Kishinev in the Ukraine in 1903 in which 45 Jews were killed and 400 injured and
1300 Jewish homes and shops were destroyed. The speech, which we know was
originally a work of fiction, was now being used to prove the authenticity of the
Protocols. Nilus showed these to the Czar in 1903, who being a freemason himself,
believed them to be fraudulent, and ordered that all copies were to be destroyed.
After this Nilus was banned from the Court, it is believed that he may have altered
the text to be more intense than they originally were. However, as far as the
mysterious references to the “representatives of Sion, of the 33rd degree,” he
would not have any idea what this meant, and probably would not have altered
this and any other in-kind references.
The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion as we know it in it’s final draft first
appeared, in August, 1903 edition of the Kishinev newspaper, in the Ukraine and
then again in 1905, in the appendix of the third edition of a book by Nilus called
The Great in the Small, which was a treatise about the coming of the Antichrist.
Nilus said that the Protocols were translated from the French text of a speech
made to 300 influential Jews. According to the story a prostitute had allegedly
stole the document from a leading Jew.
A copy was received by the British Museum in London, in August, 1906, where it
was translated by English journalist Victor Marsden, who published it in 1921.
Marsden said that he couldn’t work on the translation for more than an hour at a
time, because of the evil he felt while reading it. In 1917, Nilus revised and
expanded his book, which he called; He is Near, At the Door: Here Comes the
Antichrist and the Reign of the Devil on Earth. Nilus wrote:
“These Protocols are nothing else than a strategic plan for the conquest of the
world ... presented to the Council of the Elders by ... Theodor Herzl, at the time
of the first Zionist Congress (held by the World Zionist Organization in 1897, at
Basel, Switzerland).”
However, in his 1905 edition, he said that the Protocols had been given in 1902-03.
In fact, with each subsequent edition that appeared in different countries, the
origin of the document was different.
On August 16, 17, and 18, 1921, the New York Times ran editorials by Phillip
Graves, a London Times correspondent, who said that the Protocols had been
copied from a rare 1864 French political satire called Dialogues in Hell Between
Machiavelli and Montesquieu (also referred to as the Dialogues of Geneva by the
London Times because Geneva had been identified as a centre of revolutionary
activities) by lawyer Maurice Joly (1831-1878). It was a pamphlet containing a
conversation between Montesquieu (presenting a case for liberalism) and
Machiavelli (who represented autocracy) which criticized the government of
Napoleon III (who was deposed in 1871). Being illegal to criticize the Monarchy, he
fictionalised it, making Napoleon the character of Machiavelli, to explain the
Emperor’s underlying motives. Joly had it printed in Belgium, then attempted to
have it smuggled over the French border. It was seized by the police, who
confiscated as many copies as they could, then banned the book. The police traced
the book to Joly, who was then tried on April 25, 1865, and sentenced to fifteen
months in prison. At the Berne trials, a witness for the prosecution tried to prove
that Joly was a Jew, and that his book was a coded version of the Jewish plan for
world domination. Victor Hugo (1802-1885), listed as a Grand Master of the Prieuré
de Sion(1844-1885) as previously reported who in 1849 made a reference to the
‘United States of Europe,’ wrote satirical poetry against Napoleon III. It is likely
that Joly knew Victor Hugo.
As it turns out, over 160 passages from the Protocols are almost a word for word
copy of Joly’s book, which is about half the text of Joly’s original and the only
major change is that it was altered from the past, to the future.
Some researchers believe that either, Joly was given the minutes to a Masonic
meeting by Adolphe Cremieux (a Mason and Rosicrucian), who urged Joly to write
the book, which he did under the pseudonym of “Mr. X”; or that the minutes were
from a Marxist meeting which took place in a Masonic lodge in Geneva, and had
been stored in the archives of the Mizraim Masonic Lodge in Paris, where
Cremieux, who sat on the Supreme Council, discovered them.
Who could have forged the Protocols isn’t known, if in fact it is a forgery. Some
researchers claim it was done in Russia, in 1904, by agents of the Czar. However,
the general consensus is that it was probably done by Elie de Cyon (Ilya Tsion), a
Russian journalist living in Paris, who was an opponent of Sergey Witte, the Russian
Minister of Finance.
When Witte took office in 1892, he began to modernize Russia by doubling steel,
iron, and coal production; and constructing railroads. He was disliked by those who
had their money tied up in agriculture. He caused inflation by abandoning the gold
standard in 1898 because of an economic slump. The Protocols say that such
economic depressions are caused by the Elders to gain control of the money; and
that the gold standard has ruined every country that has adopted it. Researchers
say that the economic and financial data could have been extracted from Joly’s
book, and applied to Witte, in order to present him as a tool of the Elders of Zion.
So it was Elie de Cyon who allegedly forged and translated the Protocols,
expanding them as an apparent satire on Witte. His writings resembled the style
used in the Protocols; and he was known to have used another French satire on a
dead statesman, by changing the names.
In 1897, Gen. Pyotr Ivanovich Rachkovsky, head of the Russian Secret Police in
Paris, on instructions from Witte, broke into Cyon’s villa at Territet, Switzerland,
to look for additional written attacks on Witte. It is believed that Rachkovsky
discovered the Protocols there, and used it for a dual purpose. He could use it
against the Jews, claiming it was part of a Jewish conspiracy; and he could reveal
that it was written by a Jew, which Cyon was, thus destroying Cyon. It was kind of
ironic, that the Russian translation for Cyon’s name, ‘Tsion’, also means ‘Zion.’ So
his name was Elie of Sion.
In 1921, Count Alexandru du Chayla said that Nilus revealed to him in 1909 that the
Protocols were fraudulent, and had been sent to him by Gen. Rachkovsky.
During the 1934 trial of two Swiss Nazis in Berne, brought by a group of Jews who
accused them of distributing the Protocols, the historian Vladimir Burtsev and a
professor, Sergey Svatikov, testified that Rachkovsky and other Czarist officials had
a hand in the fabrication of the Protocols. In 1891, Rachkovsky sent a letter to the
Police, and announced his intentions to oppose the Jews. This was followed up by
a book that stated his views about the Jews, and how, as a result of the French
Revolution, they controlled Europe. It is quite possible that he added to Cyon’s
original manuscript to produce the Protocols, and then gave it to Sergei Nilus to
publish in his book. On May 14, 1935, the Court of Berne ruled regarding the
Protocols (and contrary to popular belief) “that this court did not declare the
Protocols fake but were merely not of Jewish origin.”
To complicate matters even more, a book by Jacob Venedey, called Machiavelli:
Montesquieu and Rousseau, which was published in Berlin, in 1850, also contained
passages very similar to the Protocols.
Standard Oil allegedly had the Protocols distributed in Russia to create a tense
situation between the Czarist Russian government, and the Jewish-owned Royal
Dutch Co., who had oil distribution rights in Russia. The document was also used in
the late 1800’s to instigate pogroms against the Jews so they would migrate to the
United States. Once they were in America, they were registered to vote
Democratic, and greatly contributed to Wilson’s election in 1912. During the
Russian Civil War from 1918-20, Bolsheviks distributed the Protocols, and in the
subsequent pogroms, over 100,000 Jews were killed. During World War II, the
document gave Hitler an excuse to exterminate the Jews, and there is evidence
which indicates that he was financed and controlled by the Illuminati.
Eventually the Protocols were distributed all over the world, and it gave the antiSemitic people of various countries an excuse to persecute the Jews. In 1920, U.S.
industrialist Henry Ford supported them in a series of articles in his newspaper The
Dearborn Independent and eventually in his book The International Jew, which he
published in 1921. On February 17, 1921, in New York World, Ford said: “The only
statement I care to make about the Protocols is that they fit in with what is going
on. They are sixteen years old, and they have fitted the world situation up to this
time. They fit it now.” The German translation was known as The Eternal Jew.
Ford supported Hitler, who was seen by him as fighting against the international
Jewish conspiracy. In 1927, he renounced his belief in them after his car was
sideswiped, forcing it over a steep embankment. He interpreted this as an attempt
on his life by elitist Jews.
In 1938, Father Charles E. Coughlin printed them in his weekly paper Social
Justice, and various other semi-religious organizations followed suit.
Those researchers who believe in the authenticity of the Protocols, trace them
back to 1785, when the Illuminati courier was struck by lightning on the way to
Paris, and their plans for world control was discovered. The Illuminati had drafted
a master plan that was worded in such a way, that it diverted attention away from
the Illuminati, and directed it towards the Jewish Revolutionary movement in
Russia. Their plan would appear to be a Jewish plot to achieve world control
through political Zionism, when in fact it represented the future plans of the
international bankers of the Illuminati. The fact that the document was antiSemitic would help suppress it.
One inescapable fact is that the Protocols do reflect some of the views of
Weishaupt, the founder of the quasi-Masonic Illuminati on May 1st 1776 and also
the writings of various Socialists on Bolshevism; and because of that, they were not
easily dismissed. Even though they were written so long ago, they have become an
accurate barometer of events during this century and the last, and seem to
parallel the goals of the Illuminati, as you can see in these excerpts from the
Victor Marsden translation:
“Out of the temporary evil we are now compelled to commit, will emerge the good
of an unshakable rule, which will restore the regular course of the machinery of
the national life, brought to naught by liberalism. The result justifies the means.
Let us, however, in our plans, direct our attention not to what is good and moral,
as to what is necessary and useful. Our power in the present tottering condition of
all forms of power will be more invisible than any other, because it will remain
invisible until the moment when it has gained such strength that no cunning can
any longer undermine it. Before us is a plan in which is laid down strategically the
line from which we cannot deviate without running the risk of seeing the labour of
many centuries brought to naught...”
“Only force conquers in political affairs, especially if it be concealed in the talents
essential to statesmen ... This evil is the one and only means to attain the end, the
good. Therefore we must not stop at bribery, deceit, and treachery, when they
should serve towards the attainment of our end. In politics one must know how to
seize the property of others without hesitation if by it we secure submission and
sovereignty.”
So the Protocols were (and still are) seen by the uninformed as evidence of a
Jewish conspiracy and used by anti-Semitic elements to gain their own subversive
ends. However when one reads the text themselves there is little evidence to
substantiate a specific essentially Jewish plot. Apart from the liberal use of the
word Goyim which is the Jewish name for those who aren’t Jewish, the Protocols
seem to be more Masonic than Jewish. The signature at the bottom is distinctly
odd if one is attempting to discredit the Jews and the Jews only. It says:
“Signed by the representatives of Sion of 33rd degree”.
It talks of Popes not Chief Rabbis and churches not synagogues and it also refers to
the Davidic Bloodline and the coming of the King of the Jews, a title once held by
Jesus. Since when has modern Judaism been concerned with Royalty or Popes? This
King of the Jews will be selected by the “three who hold sponsor to him” - hardly
Jewish, more Masonic and specifically a branch of freemasonry that concerns itself
with 33 degrees. If this is a fake document to discredit the Jews it is decidedly
hamfisted and written by someone who has little or no knowledge of Judaism.
But it isn’t from ordinary freemasons either: “Freemasons "have to die at the
hands of the revolution which has been brought about with their cooperation”
according to C.G. Rakovsky, a founder of the Communist International. "The real
secret of masonry is the suicide of Freemasonry as an organization, and the
physical suicide of every important mason." This disclosure is from a 1938 Stalinist
police interrogation entitled "The Red Symphony." (Transcript in Des Griffin,
Fourth Reich of the Rich, p. 254) "It is clear that I know of this not as a
Freemason, but as one who belongs to 'Them,'" [meaning the Illuminati] says
Rakovsky who had been a colleague of Leon Trotsky who was arrested for plotting
against Stalin. Rakovsky's aim was to convince Stalin, a nationalist, to cooperate
with the "the Communist-Capitalist International". Freemasonry is the world's
largest secret society with over five million members, including three million in
the US. It is instrumental in the totalitarian conspiracy. In The Protocols of the
Elders of Zion, the author writes,
"Gentile masonry blindly serves as a screen for us and our objects, but
the plan of action of our force, even its very abiding place, remains for
the whole people an unknown mystery....Who and what is in a position to
overthrow an invisible force?" (Protocol 4)
The Protocols says "We shall create and multiply free Masonic lodges...
absorb into them all who may become or who are prominent in public
activity, for in these lodges we shall find our principle intelligence
office and means of influence.... The most secret political plots will be
known to us and will fall under our guiding hands...We know the final
goal...whereas the goyim have knowledge of nothing..." (Protocol 15)
In his interrogation, Rakovsky said that millions flock to Freemasonry to gain an
advantage. "The rulers of all the Allied nations were Freemasons, with very few
exceptions. He says that the real aim is to create all the required prerequisites
for the triumph of the Communist revolution; this is the obvious aim of
Freemasonry; it is clear that all this is done under various pretexts; but they
always conceal themselves behind their well known treble slogan [Liberty,
Equality, and Fraternity]. You understand? Masons should recall the lesson of the
French Revolution. Although they played a colossal revolutionary role; it
consumed the majority of masons..."Since the revolution requires the
extermination of the bourgeoisie as a class, [so all wealth will be held by the
Illuminati in the guise of the State] it follows that Freemasons must be
liquidated. The true meaning of Communism is Illuminati tyranny. When this
secret is revealed, the expression of stupidity on the face of some Freemason
when he realises that he must die at the hands of the revolutionaries. How he
screams and wants that one should value his services to the revolution! It is a
sight at which one can die...but of laughter!" Rakovsky refers to Freemasonry as a
hoax: "a madhouse at liberty." When the interrogator pressed Rakovsky for
Illuminati notables to approach with an initiative, Rakovsky was only sure of two
who were deceased: Walter Rathenau, the Weimar foreign minister, and Lionel
Rothschild. He says that Leon Trotsky was his source of this information.
Others he insists are speculation:
"As an institution, the bank of Kuhn Loeb & Company of Wall Street: [and] the
families of Schiff, Warburg, Loeb and Kuhn; I say families in order to point out
several names since they are all connected ... by marriages; then Baruch,
Frankfurter, Altschul, Cohen, Benjamin, Strauss, Steinhardt, Blom, Rosenman,
Lippmann, Lehman, Dreifus, Lamont, Rothschild, Lord, Mandel, Morganthau,
Ezekiel, Lasky....any one of the names I have enumerated, even of those not
belonging to "Them" could always lead to "Them" with any proposition of an
important type. "Rakovsky referred to the 1929 Crash and Great Depression as an
"American revolution." It was deliberately precipitated by the Illuminati for profit,
to break the "classical American," and to take political power.
"The man through whom they made use of such power was
Franklin Roosevelt. Have you understood? ...In that year 1929,
the first year of the American Revolution, in February Trotsky
leaves Russia; the crash takes place in October...The financing
of Hitler is agreed in July, 1929. You think that all this was by
chance? The four years of the rule of Hoover were used for the
preparation for the seizure of power in the United States and
the USSR: there by means of a financial revolution and here
[Russia] with the help of war [Hitler, WWII] and the defeat
which was to follow. Could some novel with great imagination
be more obvious to you?" said Rakovsky. Rakovsky proposes
that Stalin cooperate with the Illuminati, which
he subsequently did. The first condition is that he stops
executing Trotskyites. Then "several zones of influence" will
be established dividing "the formal Communism from the real
one." There will be "mutual concessions for mutual help for a
time while the plan lasts...There will appear influential
persons at all levels of society, even very high ones, who will
help the Stalinist formal Communism..."
In his interrogation Rakovsky outlined the Illuminati plan to blend Communism and
Capitalism. In each case, the Illuminati will control all wealth and power. It
matters not to the rulers whether one lives under a Communist state or a Capitalist
state. In fact greater control through fear can be gained if one establishes an
illusion of these two seemingly opposite ideas - Hegel’s philosophy.
"In Moscow there is Communism: in New York capitalism. It is all the same as thesis
and antithesis. Analyse both. Moscow is subjective Communism but [objectively]
State capitalism. New York: Capitalism subjective, but Communism objective. A
personal synthesis, truth: the Financial International, the Capitalist Communist
one. - 'They' “Said Rakovsky.
Professor Anthony Sutton in his comprehensive study of the finance of the
Bolshevik revolution virtually confirmed to the world that there is no specific
“Jewish” conspiracy at all but that there is most certainly is a conspiracy from
somewhere to take over individual governments and control the world under one
umbrella and when one thinks about it clearly, why wouldn’t power hungry
criminal dynasties concoct a plan to at least want to try to do precisely that?
Since the Protocols are associated with Russia at the turn of the twentieth century
we will take the curious circumstances surrounding the rise of the Bolshevik
Revolution of 1917 as a case study here as an indicator that there are indeed
elements that are driving world events. President Woodrow Wilson’s government
knew well in advance about the impending Bolshevik revolution and the British
government ordered British residents to leave Russia six weeks before the
Bolsheviks revolt. Despite the fact that Russia had been one the initial protagonists
in the war against Kaiser Wilhelm, Wilson ordered no interference with revolution
that would at the very least mean that the Germans no longer had any concerns on
their Eastern front and could concentrate their troops and war effort in other
theatres for example on the Western front. This curious instruction has been down
put by historians as merely due to a request by US Ambassador for Russia, Francis
for an impending allied conference, to which Britain had already agreed. This
seems rather a lame excuse that they should ignore interfering in the revolution
that, if successful would result in increased pressure against the Western European
Nations. However the none-interference of the US government with the rise of the
Russian Socialist state continued long after any conference, why was the US
apparently standing back from this? Some say that this was based purely on
rumours that Germans had been financing the Russian revolution and that this
money was recognised as “larger than expected”. How could Germany, who was
subjected to a naval blockade, even think about financing something that may fail
when they had a stalemate against Britain, France and their allies on their Western
Front.
The fear was that US and Britain did not wish for the new Soviet state to come on
the side of the Germans in the war against the Allies, but this of course never
materialised and would have been token gesture from the newly formed state
anyway and why wasn’t there a concerted effort to nip this in the bud? Indeed
Wilson gave his approval for the export of US goods to this new socialist Soviet
state that they would later conduct a 45 year ‘Cold War’ against and even
approved the appointment of representatives in Russia to offset this apparent, yet
unconfirmed, German financial influence. However this unexplained friendly
approach to the new Socialist state by the US was consistently aided by financiers
Raymond Robins and William Boyce Thompson and one report says the direct aid
amounted to two million dollars worth which was directly against the Russian
monarchy and the democratically elected government. On January 22 1918 Robert
L Owen chairman of the US Senate Committee on Banking and Currency, a person
who has been directly linked to Wall Street interests, sent a letter to Woodrow
Wilson recommending the recognition of Russia.
One can see that this is unlikely to be a Jewish conspiracy and this can be
concluded from a detailed (and open minded) study of the Protocols themselves,
however the fact remains that in the US state department Decimal file No 861
00/5339 which is entitled “Bolshevism and Judaism” dated November 13th 1918 the
text reports that the revolution in Russia was “engineered” in February 1916. It
found the following persons and firms were engaged in “destructive work” and
specifically name them as:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
Jacob Schiff
Kuhn, Loeb & Company (under the management of Jacob Schiff)
Felix Warburg
Otto H Kahn
Mortimer L Schiff
Jerome J Hanauer
Guggenheim
Max Breitung
Isaac Seligman
And it is true that all of these people just happen to be Jewish and the US state
department states that there can be “no doubt” that the Russian Revolution was
“engineered” by this group. The report says that in April 1917 Jacob Schiff in fact
made a public announcement and it was due to his financial influence in that
Russian Revolution was successfully accomplished and that in the spring of 1917
Schiff started to finance Trotsky who was also from a Jewish background. The US
report contains miscellaneous information about Max Warburg also financing
Trotsky and the role of the Rheinish-Westphalian syndicate and Olof Aschberg of
the Nya Banken (Stockholm) together with Jivotovsky. The report lists a large
number of Bolsheviks who were also described as Jewish and records the actions of
Paul Warburg, Judas Magnes the Kuhn, Loeb & Company and Speyer & Company All
these, it has to be said, are outwardly Jewish and so therefore can one describe
the US state department as Anti-Semitic for including them in a list that is
subversive? No, one could also describe Mussolini as a Christian but one wouldn’t
condemn all Christians because of members outwardly appearing to be Christian
having been found in the past to be tyrants and murderers. Blaming a whole group
of disparate persons for the actions of a few in their midst is over simplistic in the
extreme.
However the US state department Decimal file does indeed end with an attack on
“International Jewry” and places the argument into the context of an ongoing
Christian-Jewish conflict and is backed up by quotations from the infamous
Protocols of Zion mentioned earlier. It includes a series of ‘cables’ between the US
State Department and the American Embassy in London:
“October 16th 1919 In Confidential File
Secret for Winslow from Wright Financial Aid to Bolshevism & Bolshevik Revolution
from prominent “Am. Jews”. Jacob Schiff, Felix Warburg, Otto Kahn, Mendell
Schiff, Jerome Hanauer, Max Breitung and ‘one of the Guggenheims’. Document
re- in possession of Brit. Police authorities from French sources. Asks for facts re“
“October 17th 1919 In Confidential File
Very Secret; Wright from Winslow. Financial aid to Bolshevik revolution in Russia
by prominent American Jews. No proof re- but investigating. Reports – Asks to urge
Brit. Authorities to suspend publication at least until receipt of document by
Dept.”
“November 28 Great Britain
For Wright: Document re financial aid to Bolsheviki by prominent American Jews.
Reports – identified as French translation of a statement originally prepared in
English by Russian citizen in Am. Etc Seem most unwise – the distinction of
publicity.”
It was mutually agreed on both sides of the Atlantic to suppress this material and
the files conclude “I think we must have the whole thing in cold storage”
There is another document marked “Most Secret” which is included with this batch
of material at the US state department, the provenance of this document is
unknown, and it reviews a translation of the ‘Protocols of the meetings of the Wise
Men of Zion’ and concludes:
“In this connection a letter was sent to Mr W enclosing a memorandum from us
with regard to certain information from the American Military Attaché to the
effect that the British authorities had letters intercepted from various groups of
‘International Jews’ setting out a scheme for world domination. Copies of this
material will be very useful to us.”
This information was apparently developed by British Intelligence and issued in a
report which makes the flat accusation:
“SUMMARY: There is now definite evidence that Bolshevism is an
international movement controlled by Jews, communications are passing
between the leaders in America, France, Russia and England with a view
to concerted action”
There is overwhelming evidence that events throughout history (certainly recent
history) are being orchestrated to a quite definite scripted plan, let us use the
Bolshevik Revolution which of course occurred in the same year as the death of
Beringer Saunière, 1917, for only one example of odd events that seem to be
occurring, as an indication of what is going on and how governments have and still
are being manipulated by an invisible cabal.
As we know one of the principle players in the Bolshevik revolution was a man
we’ve already mentioned called Leon Trotsky and it appears that his early career
did not fit the profile of a pro-worker Communist eking out an existence by writing
in leftist journals. It is also clear that his philosophy stemmed from his
involvement in elitist movements and their doctrine. For example he wrote the
following statement in his autobiography called Leon Trotsky: My Life: The Rise
and fall of a Dictator (pages 124-127):
“It was during that period that I became interested in freemasonry… In the eighteenth century
freemasonry became expressive of a militant policy of enlightenment, as is the case of the
Illuminati, who were the forerunners of the revolution; on its left it culminated in the Carbonari.
Freemasons counted among their members both Louis XVI and the Dr. Guillotin who invented the
guillotine. In southern Germany freemasonry assumed an openly revolutionary character, whereas
at the court of Catherine the Great it was a masquerade reflecting the aristocratic and
bureaucratic hierarchy. A freemason Novikov was exiled to Siberia by a freemason Empress.
I discontinued my work on freemasonry to take up the study of Marxian economics… The work on
freemasonry acted as a sort of test for these hypotheses…. I think this influenced the whole course
of my intellectual development.”
Trotsky was no doubt a child prodigy born to a Jewish family and given the name
Lev (Lieb) Davidovich Bronstein in Yanovka in the Ukraine and his birth date is
usually given as 1879 but this is most certainly a mistake. The fog surrounding
Trotsky’s earlier years is not surprising because by the 1920s Trotsky had been
labelled by Stalin as an enemy of the Soviet state and all memory of his earlier
career has been eliminated turning him into what has been subsequently called
“the annihilated shadow” and the most famous phantom in Russian history. Trotsky
was in Paris in 1914 but had also travelled to London and Vienna before this. He
was expelled from Paris in 1916 because of his anti-war activities and moved to
the United States.
Trotsky was staying in New York immediately prior to the Bolshevik Revolution but
the question is how did Trotsky survive in capitalist America? He said that whilst
there he had only written for Novy Mir, the New York Russian socialist paper, yet
we know that Trotsky’s family apartment in 1916 had a refrigerator and a
telephone and in Trotsky’s own words he occasionally travelled in a chauffer
driven limousine. This style of living is at odds with his reported income that he
had said had been $310 in the whole of 1916 and he also said himself that he had
given this away. When in Europe, Trotsky had paid for a first class cell in Spain and
he and his family had travelled extensively across Europe to the United States and
had somehow acquired a first class apartment in New York paying three months
rent in advance. In April 1917 the Canadian authorities had taken $10000 from him
in Halifax, Nova Scotia whilst under arrest, from where did this money for this
lifestyle come? One report says that he worked as an electrician at Fox Film
studios but there is no evidence of any other income or that he was a competent
electrician and any employment other than writing for Socialist publications.
Trotsky’s unexplained affluence was the subject of an investigation by the
Overman Committee and his income was ‘officially’ reported by them to have
come from “German sources”.
However Woodrow Wilson gave this soon to be Socialist revolutionary who had
been apparently “working under a German payroll” an American passport to return
to Russia as well as Russian entry permit whilst at the same time the US State
Department bureaucrats, concerned about revolutionaries entering Russia, were
unilaterally attempting to tighten up passport procedures. But when the SS
Kristianiafjord left New York on March 26 1917 Trotsky was onboard holding an
American passport and accompanying him were other Trotskyite revolutionaries,
some Wall Street financiers and American communists - Strange bedfellows.
Onboard was Lincoln Steffens at the special invitation of Charles Richard Crane, a
banker and a former chairman of the US Democrat Party who had left Russia
immediately prior to the Bolshevik revolution. Crane was vice president of the
Crane Company that had organised the installation on Westinghouse in Russia. This
company and its subsidiaries were to provide most of the Soviet Union’s arms
during the Cold War.
Trotsky’s brief stay in custody in Canada is now declassified and is available for
study. According to these archives Trotsky was removed by Canadian and British
Naval personnel from the SS Kristianiafjord at Halifax, Nova Scotia on April 3 rd 1917
and listed as a German prisoner of war and interned at Amherst, Nova Scotia. Mrs
Trotsky and the two sons and five other men described as Russian Socialists were
also taken off and also interned. A cablegram described the men as being interned
on suspicion of being German, however another telegram states that they were
suspected of propaganda against the present Russian government and are
“supposed agents of Germany” The eventual order for Trotsky’s release came from
London and it had been the British Prime Minister Lloyd George who ordered it.
This is odd as Trotsky was on his way to take Russia out of the war and thus release
more German troops from the war with Russia to attack British and Canadian
troops on the western front.
What was going on here? In 1918 Lieutenant Colonel John Bayne MacLean a former
member of Canadian Intelligence wrote an article in his own publication called
“Why Did We Let Trotsky Go? How Canada lost an opportunity to shorten the war”
The article contained detailed and unusual information about Trotsky. According to
MacLean Trotsky spoke better German than Russian yet Trotsky was supposed to
have been born Lev Davidovich Bronstein in the Ukraine.
On the establishment of the new Bolshevik state Wilson was offered several states
of Russia in exchange for a free hand and recognition. Wilson refused, had he
accepted the Soviet Union would never have become a Super Power under Stalin
who later forced Trotsky into exile and carried out his own persecution of the
Jews.
In his novel ‘1984’ George Orwell featured Emmanuel Goldstein who in the book
was a former top member of the ruling party who had broken away and started an
organisation known as “The Brotherhood” dedicated to the downfall of the party.
Orwell’s Goldstein is thought by many to be modelled directly on Leon Trotsky and
even the character of Snowball from Orwell’s Animal Farm was thought also to be
Trotsky.
Professor Anthony Sutton wholly rejects the idea that the US state department is
correct in its assertions that the move to world domination is a Jewish plan but
does recognise that most, but by no means all, of the names that appear in
discussions surrounding this do seem to have come from Jewish backgrounds. If the
plan for this world domination is laid out in the Protocols of the Learned Elders of
Zion signed by the representatives of Sion of the 33rd degree then one only needs
to study the title and the signature in order to give the correct name for this
group:
Zionists
And it is Zionism that I have been describing in this book and the word Zion is
mentioned 17 times in the New Testament; - A little more than a simple Jewish
plan methinks. Indeed the true Torah Jews openly reject Zionism and Zionism was
deemed as a political racist organisation in 1979 by the United Nations under
resolution 3379. However this UN resolution was repealed after a personal
campaign by George Herbert Walker Bush, former president and known freemason
and who is the father of the current (as of 2008) president. A man who has
effectively had three terms of office having been Vice President during Ronald
Reagan’s recovery from attempted assassination as well as his own two terms as
president. But it is not Zionism for the sake of a Jewish homeland it is for a
homeland for the establishment of a Luciferian world state. Rakovsky refers to this
group as the Illuminati; however this obsolete word merely refers to the followers
of the Light or the followers of Lucifer.
This concept of a Zionist/Luciferian state is echoed by Saunière and his church
dedicated to the Daughter of Zion; the Watchtower of the Flock for this involves a
schism that goes back to the children of Israel and the Exodus. Remember Saunière
had been a staunch royalist and had taken an interest in the area surrounding
Perillos and had built a tower called Magdala.
So what is behind this unnatural obsession with Jerusalem that the Jews and
Christians call Zion? What is so special about this place that has been fought over
by the three principle Middle Eastern religions - Judaism, Christianity and Islam for
millennia?
Why should calling themselves ‘The Priory of Sion’ mean anything at all? Why were
the Templars prepared to fight over this land and name their holy places after
“Our Lady” and after Zion or Sion?
What precisely is Zion? Why is it worth
fighting over?
In Hebrew Zion means fortress and according
to Strong's Exhaustive Concordance #6726
and it is pronounced Tsiyown, tsee-yone;
Tsijon (as a permanent capital), a mountain
of Jerusalem --- Zion. The word Zion is
found 152 times in the Old Testament.
Sion is Strong's #7865 SIYON, see-ohn; or
peak; and Sion is the summit of Mount
Hermon. However, Sion (Deuteronomy 4:48 for Mount Hermon) can also be used to
define a district in Jerusalem (Psalms 65:1, KJV). Remember, too, that Sion is the
Greek spelling for Zion and the seventeen times it is used in the New Testament of
the King James Bible. All modern translations use Zion instead of Sion. The word
Shenir, Strong's #8149 and Sirion, Strong's #8304 are words also closely related to
the word Sion.
However the Greek word Zoion from which the word Zoidion and thus the word
Zodiac comprises is from the base words ‘Zoe’ which means ‘life’ and the word
‘ion’ which means ‘placed at the root of something’. So Zoion was ‘the’ place for
life or as some have put it the ‘seat of the soul’. Plato said in Epinomis ‘the
Athenian stranger defines for us that a Zoion results “whenever a single copulative
union of soul and body should give birth to a single shape”. A little further on he
says that the stars are either gods themselves, or else images [zoia] of the gods
created by the gods themselves.
The most fervent of Zionists are the church of Jesus Christ and the Latter-Day
Saints better known as Mormons. They believe that during the ‘Second Coming’ the
city of God Zion will descend from heaven and take all the righteous people from
the earth. To them Zion means ‘Pure in Heart’ and is the City of Enoch. Enoch was
of the Melchizedek priesthood and was the seventh in the bloodline from Adam. If
you wish to follow the genealogy of your family tree one consults the Mormon
records, why did they undertake such a mammoth task at great expense to record
everyone’s ancestors? Were they looking for any remnants of the bloodline of Jesus
Christ perhaps? If so from what source could they check their findings?
Above right are the statues on the north façade of Chartres Cathedral. The priest
Melchizedek is on the extreme left with Abraham with the young Isaac on his
immediate left seemingly both looking up to him. Melchizedek translates as ‘Zedek
is my King’ and was thought to be the King of Salem which is now Jerusalem.
Melchizedek instructed Abraham in the Torah and Rabbi Eleazer said that the
school of Melchizedek is one of three places where the Holy Spirit has manifested
itself.
If according to Plato Zoion (Sion) is the union of the Soul with the body then the
Priory of Sion would be the portal through which this can be attained. This can be
attained in the heavens at the root of life Zo-ion when the images of the Gods in
heaven align with the Zodiac.
One person mentioned with Papus who, according to the Holy Blood & the Holy
Grail was also associated with the Protocols of Zion and who is also from
Carcasonne and who may well have known Saunière is a man called Jules-Benoit
Stanislas Doinel du Val-Michel.
Jules Doinel had been the founder of the neo-Cathar church in the Languedoc and
in 1890 had become the Librarian in Carcassonne. Doinel too had been a close
friend of Emma Calve the opera singer who was a Superior Inconnu of the Martinist
movement who has also been linked with Beringer Saunière. Doinel wrote
prolifically on Cathar thought and by 1896 had become the secretary of the Society
of Arts and Sciences of Carcasonne. The membership of this group included the
Abbé of the church at Rennes les Bains Henri Boudet and although there’s no direct
evidence for it, very likely Saunière as well.
Doinel had previously had previously displayed the Martinist tendencies. The
Martinist Movement, started by Papus, is based on the teachings of the French
mystic and philosopher Louis Claude de Saint Martin (1743 – 1803) who took his
lead from his mentor Martines de Pasqually who had in turn took his philosophy
from Jacob Boehme, whom Louis Claude Saint-Martin called his ‘second’ master.
Doinel had been fascinated with the Cathars and began a detailed study of their
doctrine and those of the Bogomils, the Paulicians, the Manichaeans and the
Gnostics. He eventually came to believe that the Gnostics were the true religion of
the freemasons. In 1888 Doinel had a vision which he describes as the ‘Aeon Jesus’
appearing to him who charged him to begin a new church. The vision anointed him
as Bishop of Montségur and Primate of the Albigenses. After this vision Doinel
attempted to contact Cathar and Gnostic spirits in séances in the salon of Maria de
Mariategui, Lady Caithness, Duchess de Medina Pomar.
The Duchess of Caithness had long been associated with Doinel as she was a
prominent figure in French Spiritualist circles of the time. She had been a disciple
of Anna Kingsford who was the leader of the French Branch of the Theosophical
Society. Anna Kingsford considered herself a reincarnation of Mary Stuart who had
also a vision that told her of a ‘New Age of Our Lady of the Holy Spirit’. Doinel’s
Gnostic séances were attended by other notable occultists from other sects, these
included Abbé Roca an ex Catholic Priest and a close friend of Stanislas de Guaita
and Oswald Wirth. Communication with the spirits was usually achieved by
suspending a pendulum over a board of letters.
One such séance allegedly received the following response from the spirit world:
“I address myself to you because you are my friend, my servant and the prelate of
my Albigensian Church. I am exiled from the Pleroma, and it is I whom Valentinus
named Sophia-Achamôth. It is I whom Simon Magus called Helene-Ennoia; for I am
the Eternal Androgyne [sic]. Jesus is the Word of God; I am the thought of God.
One day I shall remount to my Father, but I require aid in this; it requires the
supplication of my Brother Jesus to intercede for me. Only the Infinite is able to
redeem the Infinite, and only God able to redeem God. Listen well: The One has
brought forth One, then One. And the Three are but One: the Father, the Word
and the Thought. Establish my Gnostic Church. The Demiurge will be powerless
against it. Receive the Paraclete.”
It is perhaps worth noting that this time at the end of the 19 th century was the
heyday of spiritualism and many people particularly from the aristocracy were
drawn into sects and were generally exploited by them.
Jules Doinel founded the Gnostic church on September 21st 1890 about a year
before Saunière wrote his enigmatic messages in his diary. Doinel had apparently
discovered a Charter dated 1022 in the library of Orleans written by a forerunner
of the Cathars, a Canon Stephan d’Orleans who apparently had been a
schoolmaster who taught Gnostic doctrines, he was eventually burned for heresy.
Another apparent spiritual manifestation had been Guihabert de Castres a Cathar
bishop who had been martyred at Montségur. At another séance in September of
1889 the “Very high synod of Bishops of the Paraclete” consisting of 40 Bishops
manifested themselves and gave their names and they checked against names in
the National Library. These also told Doinel to form the Gnostic Church and that he
was to take the fourth Gospel, the Gospel of St John, as their Holy book and Doinel
proclaimed 1890 as the “Era of Gnosis Restored”. Doinel took the mystic name
Valentin II in homage to Valentinus, the 5th century founder of the Valentinian
school of Gnosticism (he is the saint to which Saint Valentine’s Day is dedicated).
He consecrated a number of bishops, all of whom chose a mystic name which was
prefaced with the Greek letter Tau representing the Tau Cross or the Egyptian
Ankh. Doinel regarded himself as a direct descendent of John the Apostle. As such
he was influenced greatly by the Johannine doctrine. Perhaps most significantly for
our story, Doinel also proclaimed that the head of the Gnostic Church (initially
himself) would always be chosen from direct descendents of John the Beloved, the
person always depicted as having a feminine appearance in many paintings notably
Leonardo Da Vinci’s Last Supper. The Gnostic Eucharist was called the Fraction du
Pain or breaking of Bread. Doinel’s Gnostic church could be described as being
essentially Roman Catholic in its practices and rituals but with the added
dimension of mystical freemasonry. The Holy Gnostic Synod decreed:
Article One
The re-establishment of the hierarchy permits the Restoration of Gnostic Symbolism.
Article Two
The Consolamentum, the Breaking of the Bread and the Appareillamentum of the Albigensian Assembly are reestablished.
Article Three
Bishops and their coadjutors can confer the Consolamentum.
Article Four
Every pneumatic, Parfait or Superior Inconnu can perform the Breaking of Bread.
Article Five
The Appareillamentum is the exclusive privilege of the Patriarchal seat.
Article Six
L’Initiation will repeatedly publish the three rituals.
Article Seven
The Martinist Order is declared to be of Gnostic Essence. Every Superior Inconnu takes their place at the level
of the Parfaits.
Article Eight
The Gospel of John is the Gnostic Gospel.
Given at Paris under the seal of the Very high Gnostic Synod the 28th day of the seventh month in the year IV
of the restoration of the Gnosis.
Signed
T Valentin
Gnostic Patriarch
Primate of the Albigensians
Bishop of Montségur, 1893
Amongst Doinel’s Gnostic bishops called “Sacred Synod of the Gnostic Ecclesia”
consisted of the Gnostic coadjutor of Toulouse Paul Sédir (Tau Paul), Lucien
Chamuel (Tau Bardesane), Gnostic Bishop of La Rochelle and Saintes. In 1892
Doinel also recruited “celebrities” from Parisian Society such as Louis-Sophrone
Fugairon (Tau Sophronius) Gnostic Bishop of Béziers, Albert Jounet (Tau
Théodotus) Gnostic Bishop of Avignon; Marie Chauval de Chauvignie (Sophia of
Varsovie), the first Sophia to be consecrated who was also known as Escharmonde
(after the bearer of the Grail in the Cathar legends) and Eugène Joseph Fabre de
Essarts (Tau Synésius) Gnostic Bishop of Bordeaux.
In 1895 Doinel curiously left the church he had created and resigned from his
Masonic lodge and wrote a book called ‘Lucifer Unmasked’ under the pseudonym
of Jean Kostka, remember that this was four years after Saunière’s discovery 40
km south of Carcassonne. Doinel had been a freemason attached to the Grand
Orient de France Order Council and Doinel too had been a member of the Martinist
Order of Papus. Doinel returned to the Roman Catholic Church in 1894 having
previously displayed a remarkable earlier reverence to Albert Pike the well known
Scottish Rite 33 degree freemason and author of the freemason’s bible ‘Morals and
Dogmas’, a man known as the Black Pope and despite the fact that he is also said
to be a founder of the Ku Klux Klan, his statue stands today in Washington DC.
Doinel had collaborated briefly with Leo Taxil (G.A Jogand-Pages), a man
renowned also for his attack on freemasonry. Taxil, a former mason himself (who
had been expelled from the order) said himself that these orders were satanic in
nature and were controlled by the “Order of the Palladium” (Sovereign Council of
Wisdom), which had been founded in Paris in 1737. Palladism had been brought to
Greece from Egypt by Pythagoras in the fifth century, and it was this alleged cult
of Lucifer that was introduced to the inner circle of the Masonic lodges consisting
of the higher degrees, which was allegedly headed by Albert Pike.
Doinel seems to endorse Taxil’s notion for in his book Lucifer Unmasked written
after he re-embraced the Catholic faith again Doinel said in it:
“The shiny star, Lucifer itself. Centre of Star is detached the letter G, the science
of the good and the evil, the symbol of Gnose, the letter G, monogram of pride
spiritual that we spell: Satan God.”
Doinel attacked freemasonry in his book whom he regarded the senior degrees as
worshippers of Lucifer.
It is known for certain that Doinel had many dealings with the Bishop of
Carcasonne Mgr. Félix Arsène Billard who had protected Saunière during his
activities that eventually came to the attention of the Catholic Church. This is
confirmed in a letter of correspondence between the French Novelist J.K.
Huysmans and Doinel which is preserved in the Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal and filed
under “Letters de Jules Doinel”. In his book Doinel revealed a ritual which
belonged to the “Chevaliers Bienfaisants de la Cité Sainte” and this is from the
inner order of the rectified Scottish Rite of Freemasonry. In the churchyard at
Rennes les Bains a tombstone exists giving reference to this Order and this is also
alluded to in Le Serpent Rouge.
Amongst the first of the Gnostic bishops to be consecrated by Doinel was the man
whom we have already mentioned the man known as Papus, a name that had been
given to him by Doinel’s Gnostic Church and the name of the genius associated
with physicians in The Nuctemeron, a work attributed to the legendary magus
Appolonius of Tyana. His mystic name in the Gnostic church was Tau Vincent and
he was designated the Gnostic Bishop of Toulouse. This is the same man who had
some influence in the court of Tzar Nicholas II.
Dr. Gérard Encausse (Papus), as well being a Gnostic bishop, had himself organised
the original Martinist movement in 1891. The modern movement was reconstituted on August 13, 1960, by the fusion of two branches the Martinist Order
“of Papus”, which was in full force and effect in 1952 and the Martinist Movement
of Lyon which was under the Grand Mastership of Henry DuPont whose first
Sovereign Grand Master had been in 1916, this same year Papus died whilst
working as a doctor on the French lines. Philippe Encausee, the son of Papus had
re-established his father’s Martinist movement in 1951. Tsar Nicolas II of Russia too
became a Martinist after he invited Papus to Tsarskoïe Selo in 1900 to ask for his
advice with regard to the revolutionaries.
Papus too had been heavily involved in esoteric circles and this is confirmed
through his books on magic. He was recruited to the Martinist movement around
1888 by a man called Joséphin Péladan, who claimed that a Babylonian King had
left the title of Sâr to his family and who gave himself the name Sâr Mérodack
Péladan or Marduk the Chaldean God associated with Jupiter. The name was
chosen for its similarity to the Babylonian King Merodachbaladan son of Baladan,
the king of Babylon mentioned in Isaiah 39:1. Their task was to recreate the
Rosicrucian Brotherhood then known as “l‘Ordre Kabbalistique de la Rose Croix”.
Péladan had written poetry that had also attracted the Marquis Stanislas de
Guaita, who was a descendent of the Lombard family and he too became involved
in the recreation of the Rosicrucian brotherhood. Péladan and de Guaita had
reformed the Rosicrucian Brotherhood. Stanilas de Guaita was famously involved in
a Black Magic duel with Joseph Antoine Boullan, a defrocked priest, who was a
member of a rival lodge called the Church of Carmel which de Guaita and Wirth
had tried to infiltrate. The Church of Carmel, which was formerly condemned by
the Catholic Church in 1848, had also attracted the Countess of Caithness.
Joséphin Péladan was a decidedly odd character and it is said that Saunière visited
him and may well have been one of Saunière’s benefactors. Remember that
Péladan had persistently boasted to have known the whereabouts of the tomb of
Jesus, whether this was before or after Saunière’s ‘descouverte d’un tombeau’ it
is not clear. It is quite difficult to believe that Saunière would associate with such
a character but there may have been some mutual interest that caused them to
meet. However it is more likely that it was through Péladan that Saunière had
been first introduced to the opera singer Emma Calve. Péladan was a striking
looking figure with a dark beard large mop of hair and protruding staring eyes but
was a well known colourful figure in the cafés of Monmartre, where he apparently
paraded in a variety of costumes. Sometimes he wore a monk’s clothes, sometimes
a doublet with velvet breeches fringed with lace. But he was no shallow poseur,
he had a very creative mind and showed great versatility. He was a novelist; he
wrote La Décadence Latine based on occult themes and it was the first volume of
this novel that had attracted de Guaita. He is considered a very important literal
figure in France having also written several romances but is little known outside
France.
The Qabalistic Order of the Rosy Cross (K.R.C) was headed by the Marquis Stanislas
de Guaita around the time of Saunière he headed a supreme council of twelve but
only six were given so the order could be resurrected in case of decay; their names
were:
Péladan
Papus
Marc Haven (Dr Emmanuel Lalande)
Abbé Alta (Abbé Melinge)
Paul Adam (writer)
François Charles Barlet (Alfred Faucheux, astrologer and alchemist)
Other names linked to the K.R.C were:
Charles Detre (Teder)
Joanny Bricaud
Lucien Mauchel (Chamuel)
Constant Chevillon (killed by the Vichy resistance in 1944)
Victor Blanchard
Charles Henry Dupont
F. Jollivet-Castelot
August Reichel
Sedir (Yvon de Loup)
Pierre Augustin Chaboseau (he made Dr Ralph M. Lewis a member of Supreme
council of the K.R.C)
And
Dr Harvey Spencer Lewis who began the AMORC in the US.
Of these Péladan, Papus, Stanislas de Guaita and Paul Adam were also prominent
Martinists in addition to being members of the Qabalistic Order of the Rosy Cross.
The Martinist movement generally consisted of three degrees but have also
boasted a fourth degree which deals in Theurgy, the ‘divine working’, a philosophy
based on Neoplatonisism and especially on the works of Iamblichus of Chalcis, who
is said to have been the ancestor of the priest-kings of Emesa (Kadesh in the bible)
which was known as ‘The Temple of the Sun’. The Theurgist philosophy works ‘like
with like’ at the material level and with symbols and ‘magic’ at the higher level.
Iamblichus, 250CE – 325CE who took his philosophy from the ‘Mysteries of Egypt’
had at the head of his philosophy the Monad whose first principle was the intellect
– NOUS which is visually represented by a circle with a point in the centre. It is
also worth mentioning that when members of an 18th century group known as the
Illuminati, whom we shall be discussing later, wrote to each other they would also
designate themselves by the same circle with a point in the centre. After the
absolute ‘One’ Iamblichus introduced the DYAD or soul or psyche and this is again
visually represented by the Vesica Pisces with a line dividing the centrally created
‘fish bladder’ equally across the widest part from the central point of one circle to
the central point of the other. The first and highest ‘One’ - NOUS was represented
by Plotinus (of whom Iamblichus was a student) under three stages of (objective)
being, (subjective) life and (realised) intellect was distinguished by Iamblichus into
spheres of intelligible and intellective and a third sphere being the domain of
thought and this leads visually to a third Vesica Pisces that joins the two ends of
DYAD to the intersection of the two circles forming a equilateral triangle inside the
nut-shaped ‘fish bladder’ called the TRIAD. This was the basis Iamblichus’
cosmology, Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa, whom we shall be referring to in more
detail later, refers frequently to Iamblichus in his work Occulta Philosophia. A
principle member of the Theosophical Society Helena Blavatsky regards NOUS as
the equivalent to the Egyptian MAAT, the universal intelligence, the rational divine
ego. In the Kabala this is called ΝΟΥΣ which can also be read from the Greek as
NOIS, NOIS literally ‘In a Nutshell’ and of course ‘NOIS’ is Old French for nutshell.
However there is another meaning which will prove more significant.
Remember that Papus had also been a member of Blavatsky’s Theosophical
Society. Papus never became a regular (Grand Orient) Freemason. He opposed
Masonry as being atheistic, in contrast to the Esoteric Christianity of the Gnostic
Church, the K.O.R.C. and the Martinist Order. Despite this, he organized what was
announced as an "International Masonic Conference" in Paris on June 24, 1908, and
at this conference, he received a patent from Theodor Reuss to establish a
"Supreme Grand Council General of the Unified Rites of Antient (sic) and Primitive
Masonry for the Grand Orient of France and its Dependencies at Paris." It was
probably on this same occasion that Reuss conferred upon Papus the X° of O.T.O.
for France, and Papus in turn assisted Reuss in the formation of the O.T.O. Gnostic
Catholic Church as a child of l’église Gnostique de France. When English freemason
and occultist John Yarker died in 1913, Papus was elected as his successor to the
office of Grand Hierophant (international head) of the Antient (sic) and Primitive
Rites of Memphis and Mizraim. This was a high position for a previous Grand Master
of this Rite had been no less a person than Giuseppe Garibaldi. Papus’ influence
spanned across many esoteric groups; however when World War I broke out he
joined the French army medical corps and while working in a military hospital on
the French front lines, he contracted tuberculosis and died on October 25, 1916, at
the age of 51.
World War II was as disastrous for the Martinist movement as everyone else, the
Nazis suppressed any movement of this kind and many European Martinists died in
concentration camps. The Traditional Martinist Order still exists in America but is
reserved exclusively for members of the Rosicrucian Order AMORC; it is however
experiencing a revival particularly in America. All of these esoteric groups
mentioned intertwine with their beliefs and many are members of all of the
groups.
One such close acquaintance of Martinist patriarchs, Louis-Claude de Saint Martin
and Martines de Pasqually was Jean-Baptiste Willermoz. In 1773 and the following
year he wrote a book called ‘Of the errors and the truth’ and it was published in
1775 by a member of the Elected Official Coëns a system of high ranks organised
around specific doctrines concerned with Theurgy or Divine Magic. On the deaths
of Louis-Claude de St Martin and Martines de Pasqually in Haiti, Willermoz enters a
new phase in his life. He comes into contact with a man called Baron Karl von
Hund who began an Order known as Strict Templar Observance (SOT). This order
dominated German freemasonry and cultivates a spirit of chivalry. Willermoz
became a knight in this group and took the name Eques (Latin for knight). In the
late 18th century he took over a group called the ‘Lyon Martinists’ even though a
Martinist group would not be formed until much later when Papus formed the
Martinist movement in 1889. Willermoz ran the ‘Lyon Martinists’ under SOT rules.
In 1782 there was a general assembly of Freemasons of the Strict Templar
Observance at Wilhelmsbad where they declared themselves an ‘affiliation of
spirit’ and changed their name in France to the Chevaliers Bienfaisants de la Cité
Sainte elsewhere they were called the Rectified Scottish Rite of Freemasons. With
this we are drawn back to Rennes les Bains and Le Serpent Rouge for as I have
already mentioned there is a grave in Rennes les Bains which alludes to this Order
but also in the verse called Scorpio in Le Serpent Rouge which has a piece which is
translated from French as “HE HAS PASSED, in doing GOOD as he of the flowery
tomb” However this is actually rendered in French as:
“IL EST PASSE, mais lui aussi en faisant LE BIEN, ainsi que xxxxxxxx CELUI la tomb
fleurie.”
It is not known for what reason the author included the x’s but the phrase written
in capitals for some reason ‘IL EST PASSE’ can translate as ‘IT IS THE MASTER KEY’
and faisant LE BIEN is clearly an allusion to the Chevaliers Bienfaisants de la Cité
Sainte. But it also speaks of CELUI la tombe fleurie and in the graveyard we have
the tomb of Paul-Urbain de Fleury. Paul-François Vincent de Fleurie who married
Gabrielle who was the daughter of Marie de Negri d’Ables d’Hautpoul Countess of
Blanchefort, whose tomb has the anagram of the shepherdess message, and
inherited the land that included Rennes le Chateau and Rennes les Bains through
her dowry, their son was Paul Urbain de Fleury who is buried at Rennes les Bains.
Curiously this man once had two graves although one has now disappeared. The
stone called the “Fauteuil du Diable” (Devils armchair) was carved for the Comte
de Fleury in the 18th century.
According to Pierre Plantard one of
the founders of the Priory of Sion in
1681 is the Abbé André-Hercule de
Fleury. He appears after JeanTimoleon Negri d’Ables and Blaise
d’Hautpoul (died 1694) and who
died in 1743. On the right is the
frieze over the confessional in
Saunière’s church where Jesus
stands on a Fleury (flowery)
landscape.
The Abbé de Fleury was born in Lodève in the Languedoc in 1653 and was the
bishop of Fréjus in 1698 and became the preceptor for the young King Louis XV in
1715. He was a member of the Academy of Sciences and was a Cardinal and Prime
Minister by 1726 at the age of 73. He extended the library for the King but
interestingly he sent many of the members of the Academy of Sciences to the
North and to Peru to measure the meridian. He also sent scholars to Egypt and
Greece to search for precious manuscripts.
In this impressive frieze from Saunière’s church can be found on your left as you
enter Saunière’s church, just above the devil, the font and the angels and also
above the confession box, below is the SAC A BLES inscription. It shows Jesus on
top of a hillock and on it are scattered flowers and a money bag full of gold to the
point of bursting. You could say it is a Flowery (Fleury) hill, there is a similar
shaped hill called Roc Fuarbe that was once owned by the Fleury family.
Perhaps at this stage I should give a little more of the background of one one the
main players in this mystery The Marquis Philippe de Chérisey and finally lay to
rest the current suggestion that he was the originator of this entire mystery.
Philippe de Chérisey is from the district of Lorraine in eastern France, far from the
Languedoc. In 1967 he deposited his book CIRCUIT with the Library of Versailles
and in the foreword to this book de Cheriséy makes the following statements:
“A history seen through two stained glasses, the Tarot in the order and the song
(of good king Dagobert) in the disorder, if one refers to the version given by
Grande ‘Universal Larousse’ of the 19th century…….The reader who would like to
discover a second CIRCUIT (NdA Cromleck) under circuit can restore the chapters
in the order of the verses. Other structures were considered that we leave to the
reader the joy of discovering himself……..As you will see, friendly reader, if you
will be also intelligent (malignant) qu’ Amédée.
In the book de Cheriséy hints that the place of his initial discovery is Rennes les
Bains and he advises us to “Look at the side of what is shown”.
He says: “The doctors prescribed me a cure in Rennes les Bains; obsolete thermal
spa located on the meridian line zero. I was going to discover over there that if I
had a cast, it was to avoid the look of the others whilst at the same time deal
with the evasion of that secretly”
Then de Cheriséy says something very significant. He says:
“Two contrary desires share my heart, glory to publish all that at the great day,
and to jealously keep this treasure without ever saying anything. My whole life
needs to hesitate and I awake in the same moment that I die….. By the celibacy
which is imposed on them the priests are the best guards of treasures than one
can conceive…..A priest, because it is concerned [with] Sky and Earth, must
meditate on the relationships of astronomy with the geography…..With the
difference in the phenomena which should be seen to believe, Cromleck of RLB
[Rennes les Bains] is seen only when one believes in it, nothing is really proven
there, not even the roulers or hones it posed which will appear readily to the
whims of nature.”
In other words Philippe de Cheriséy discovered the landscape geometry and its
association with astronomy as early as 1967 but chose to say nothing about it,
saying also that it was not proven. He hints that he has left codes within the text
that the reader can follow. Subsequent authors coming after de Cheriséy have
confirmed that the landscape geometry is indeed real. The phrase “My whole life
needs to hesitate and I awake in the same moment that I die” clearly means that
he was born again in some kind of initiation ceremony or he became enlightened.
Another interesting piece of evidence from Philippe de Cheriséy is an interesting
letter he wrote to Pierre Plantard on 6th July 1965.
He firstly complains that Plantard has not answered his letter of 17th January (this
date appears significant to these people). But the thrust of the letter is to inform
Plantard that Gérard de Sède is in possession of the case files of the Priory of Sion
that were stolen from 37 Saint Lazare, Paris and that de Sede is writing a book on
the strength of these papers. He mentions that de Sede is in possession of the files
of George Monti.
Plantard had regarded George Monti as his mentor to whom he had been
introduced in 1934 (Plantard would have been only fourteen) by his family doctor
Camille Savoire. However it is on record that Plantard did indeed speak about this
in 1942, but the problem is that Monti died in October 1936 so Plantard did not
know him long. Monti died quite young at the age of 56 and he is believed to have
been poisoned and this is just a few days after a bulletin in the journal of the
Grand Lodge of France denounced him as an impostor and a Jesuit spy (he was in
fact raised by the Jesuits). There has been a campaign to discredit Monti but what
is true is that he became secretary to Josephin Péladan, whom we’ve already
mentioned and who had created a Catholic Order of the Rose and the Cross after
having been a Martinist, and he was also closely associated with Gerard Encausse,
better known as Papus, the founder of the Martinist movement. Indeed Papus had
dispatched Monti to Egypt in 1908 for some unspecified reason and Monti also
became involved in the OTO (Ordo Templi Orientis) and through this had met
Aleister Crowley, the self styled beast (666). Indeed Monti was described by one
person as Crowley’s French representative who himself had spent an awful lot of
time in the French Pyrenees in 1908. Monti called himself ‘Count Israel’ and
formed a group called ‘Groupe Occidental d’Etudes Ésotériques’ – Western Esoteric
Study Group and you will remember that Papus had also founded a Group called
the Independent Esoteric Study Group. These groups, and according to some also
the Priory of Sion, was linked to an ultra right wing group called the Hiéron du Val
d’Or. Jean Luc Chaumeil states in his book Le tresor du Triangle d’Or that the
Hiéron du Val d’Or practiced a version of the Scottish Rite Freemasonry and that
the upper degrees of this order constituted the lower degrees of the Priory of Sion.
The Hiéron du Val d’Or was vehemently pro-Monarchist and sought the reestablishment of the Holy Roman Empire. This new empire would have a reflection
of heaven on earth that was specifically a Hermetic Arcadian Ideal. Chaumeil
described the Hiéron du Val d’Or ideals as:
“…a theocracy wherein nations would be no more than provinces, their leaders
nothing but proconsuls in the service of a world occult government ruled by an
elite. For Europe, this regime of the Great King implied a double hegemony of the
Papacy and the Empire, of the Vatican and of the Habsburgs, who would have
been the Vatican’s right arm.”
The similarity of these
ideals to that written in
the
Protocols
of
Learned Elders of Zion
is striking. Although
why Jean Luc Chaumeil
should say these things
when, he later says, he
was in the possession of
de Chérisey’s writings
all the time and that it is all a hoax is rather strange. The Hiéron du Val d’Or
apparently started in 1873 and had a place near the Catholic Shrine of Paray-leMonial in Burgundy where in the 17th century the mystic St Margaret-MarieAlacoque saw visions of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Paray-le-Monial, a former
Roman settlement became a Benedictine priory in 973CE which was built over an
ancient temple dedicated to the ”Mother of God”. I will talk about the Hiéron du
Val d’Or in more detail in the last chapter. You are reminded that the Villa
Bethania built by Saunière has the statue of Jesus and the Sacred Heart adorning
its front façade and also we have some stained glass windows inside the Villa
Bethania also showing two slightly different depictions of the Sacred Heart and
these are shown on the left:
The left hand window shows a sacred heart bound by thorns wounded and bleeding
with a crucifix coming out of the fire at the top. The right hand window shows the
heart now bound by flowers with typical Languedoc wild flowers emerging from
the top. This heart is run through with a sword.
The sacred heart on the left is the sacred heart of St Vincent de Paul.
If we return to de Cheriséy’s letter we perhaps may have a deeper insight into his
thoughts, for example he mentions that Plantard had made some kind of deal for
book rights with the prolific Rennes researcher Rene Descadeillas and that Plantard
had 65% of the rights to a book called ‘Rennes and its last Lords’. But he seemed to
be more worried that de Sède was now in possession of an original manuscript of
Circuit before it had been published and that Circuit wasn’t his (Philippe de
Cheriséy’s) work.
The letter mentions Philippe Tuscan a film producer and cinema critic who was
later to be arrested for possession of drugs in 1967, making headlines in some Paris
newspapers. He had apparently been in possession of some research papers into
the Priory of Sion having once been a member but was expelled in February of that
year because of his drug taking. De Chérisey goes on to describe these papers as
the truth ‘according to the Order that had been held by de Chérisey’s great-uncle
Monsieur de Saint Hillier in the Chateau de Lys on September 19 th 1736’. Plantard
later said in an interview in 1989 that it was Philippe Tuscan who had written the
Dossier Secrets and to be fair there is no reason to believe this is incorrect. He
also said in this same interview that the Priory of Sion does not go back to the
crusades or to a Sous-Prefecture of Saint Julien en Genevoise in 1956 but was
founded in 19th September 1738. (Note the discrepancy of two years with the date
from de Chérisey’s letter.) Plantard says in this same interview that “Parchments
held in London are completely authentic” and that all the official Hautpoul family
documents up until 1337 were copied by Charles Rene d’Hozier de Serigny, Juge
d’Armes on the orders of King Louis XIV and that the documents are notarised in
30th April 1781. They were reproduced in Montpellier between 1911 and 1913.
Plantard says in this interview that with regard to the “famous” parchments (he
doesn’t specify which ones) published by “a person” who claims authority on this
matter (undoubtedly he means Gérard de Sède here) that it is a fabrication by
Philippe de Cheriséy for a film on Rennes similar to that Jean Louis Fournier, based
on a novel by J.M. Thimbaux called L’Or du Diable (The Devil’s Gold). He said that
the original text is in the Bibliotheque Nationale in a book of Christian Antiquities.
This was in 1989 and to date no such publication has been found in the
Bibliotheque Nationale. Is this a reaction to Gerard de Sede’s books? Is this an
attempt to discredit his work having obtained the Priory of Sion documents
illegally? At the end of the interview Plantard says:
“Would you mind telling me exactly who would believe the tall stories of Gerard
de Sede? I intend publishing some letters by this individual on the subject of the
Saint Clair family”.
Throughout all of the writings and publications of Philippe de Cheriséy he talks
little about the Church of St Sulpice until he describes in Circuit the painting of
Eugene Delacroix in the chapel of Angels. Even the most fervent opponents of the
mystical aspects of this story have failed to come up with a positive identity of the
authors of the document known as Le Serpent Rouge and there is a general view
that whoever wrote this it was NOT Philippe de Cheriséy, it simply is not his style.
The registered authors Pierre Feugere, Louis Saint-Maxent, Gaston de Koker are
names of persons who were all found hanged on 6th & 7th March 1967 and were
taken from newspaper articles that informed of their deaths. This is probably a
correct assumption but this in no way invalidates the text and to find three such
hangings available for use within a day of each other is a lucky coincidence that is
hard to believe. The document itself contains a floor plan of St Sulpice that is
signed by Louis Saint-Maxent, the plan of the Abbey of St Germain des Pres is
signed by Gaston de Koker and the text is signed by Pierre Feugere.
1967 was a very significant year in this saga for in addition to the publication of de
Chérisey’s book and the deaths of the supposed writers of Le Serpent Rouge we
have another suspicious death reported in a Paris daily on Tuesday February 21 st. of
that year. A Pakistani by the name of Fakhar-Ul-Islam was found lying at the side
of the railway line near to Melun and is presumed to have fallen from the Paris to
Geneva train at around 11pm on the 20th February (his watch had stopped at
11:27). His body was found by the station master of Melun at 4 am. Ul-Islam was 21
years old and according to the police carried dozens of visas of various European
countries however he also carried a decree of expulsion from West Germany. This
document carried photographs of other persons some in turbans and some
Europeans. A curious thing is that Ul-Islam was clothed very elegantly and yet
when the police searched on the train for his baggage none was found. Who travels
across Europe from the French capital to Geneva with only the contents of his
pockets?
What this has to do with Rennes le Chateau mystery is found attached to the
Lobineau document deposited in the Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris entitled
“Secret files of Henri Lobineau: Monsignor count de Rhédae, duke de Razes, the
legitimate heir descended from Clovis 1st king of the Franks”. It contains the
following sentence:
“The business of Rennes le Chateau touches all the Languedoc, it even causes a
small war between secret services. A case amongst others, the disappearance of
the leather case of Leo Schidlof transported by a certain Fakhar-Ul-Islam. This
leather case contained the acts as well as the secret files of Rennes between 1600
and 1900 and was to be given February 17th 1967 to an agent delegated by Geneva
in West Germany. However Fakhar was expelled and was found in Orly February
16th. In Paris he awaited orders. He met on the 18th a certain Herbert Regis,
engineer;”
Again was someone using newspaper articles to include them or was there
something to this? Nevertheless both the curious death of the three supposed
authors of Le Serpent Rouge and the curious death of Fakhar-Ul-Islam falling from
a train and travelling across France without any luggage is, to say the least a
remarkable coincidence. The fact that his destination was Geneva is highly
significant as we shall see.