Brexit 2016: Illuminati - Freemason Struggles
Published on Jun 27, 2016
FREEMASONS over United Kingdom choosing the fate of the BRITISH people.
The New World Order plan to impose bankster-driven global tyranny took a huge hit Friday morning as news of the Brexit victory stunned markets, political leaders and pundits.
BREXIT victory shocks NWO – were “conspiracy theories” responsible?
By Kevin Barrett
June 24, 2016
The New World Order plan to impose bankster-driven global tyranny took a huge hit Friday morning as news of the Brexit victory stunned markets, political leaders and pundits.
They obviously hadn’t planned on this. Polls before the vote showed “leave” down 52%-48%. Given the likelihood of pro-“remain” election fraud – the skids for which had been greased by the elimination of exit polls – a pro-Brexit result seemed mathematically impossible. So…what happened?
That is undoubtedly what the Rothschilds and their minions are asking themselves as they take a much-needed break from cackling and rubbing their hands together in glee at the cascading successes of their planetary hostile takeover operation, and instead get to experience a tiny fraction of the anxiety that their victims everywhere have been living with for centuries.
A poll-forecasted four point Brexit defeat somehow turned into a four-point victory. That’s an eight-point swing overnight. How did it happen?
Normally such discrepancies suggest election fraud. But the people with the tools to steal elections were generally anti-Brexit, so I think we can eliminate that possibility.
The second leading reason for poll vs. result discrepancies is what might be called a “tell the pollster what the establishment wants to hear” bias. Polls that ask whether you would refuse to vote for Obama because he is black, for example, typically find very few if any people saying “yes, of course I would never vote for a black president.” But actual secret-ballot votes show that this kind of racism exists in much greater numbers than polls reveal. (Conversely, of course, even more people voted for Obama BECAUSE he was black; but they probably wouldn’t easily admit that to a pollster either.)
Voting for Brexit, like racism, is politically-incorrect according to establishment ideology. Therefore a certain percentage of people probably misstated their actual intentions to pollsters. This had the happy result of lulling the New World Order elites into a sense of complacency. They probably had a contingency plan to steal the election if it was close. They probably decided they wouldn’t have to to so because the polls showed they would win anyway. Or, conversely, they may have figured they would only have to shave off a couple of points from the pro-Brexit side, not realizing that the polls were massively understating pro-Brexit sentiment. So they may have committed election fraud, but not to the degree that would have permitted them to win.
The NWO elites may also have had another reason for complacency: The seeming success of the apparent Jo Cox murder false flag.
Prior to the emotion-stirring killing of “heroic anti-Brexit icon” Jo Cox by an apparent Brexit supporter, the polls showed the pro-Brexit side was significantly ahead. In the wake of the Cox murder, a huge swing occurred, putting anti-Brexit forces ahead 52-48% in polls taken on the eve of the vote. The elites who had arranged the false flag were presumably cackling and rubbing their hands in glee. What could possibly go wrong now?
What went wrong was “conspiracy theories.”
On Thursday, countless posts were circulating on Twitter and Facebook suggesting Cox was sacrificed by pro-EU forces.
The New Statesman:
But focusing on the EU referendum ignores a wider divide: between parliamentary democracy and a majoritarian fury. Between respectful disagreement on immigration and dog whistle claims. Between reporting on facts and the kind of paranoid internet conspiracy that labels Cox’s death a “false flag”. The kind of divide that has echoes in US politics and European populism.
Virtually all British voters who use the internet heard about these “conspiracy theories.” A significant number believed them, while an even more significant number – likely a majority – gave them at least some credence. Today, more and more people understand that the elites manipulate the population through public relation stunts that appeal to emotions and shut down rational thought. The BBC documentary Century of the Self exposed the legacy of Edward Bernays, father of mass mind control, to the British and global public.
Believing in “conspiracy theories,” indeed giving them any credence at all, is wildly politically-incorrect, if not downright heretical, according to establishment ideology. So the very large number of voters who found the timing and style of the Cox murder suspicious would never admit that in a formal setting; on the contrary, when contacted by a pollster, they would be even more likely than before to misstate their intentions in the direction of pretending to be anti-Brexit.
But in the privacy of the voting booth, people often go with their real thoughts and emotions. Enough of them, anyway, to occasionally sway elections.
If the above analysis is correct, the wildly-popular “false flag” meme that I have been tirelessly promoting for more than a decade may have been a key factor precipitating this historic first step in the eventual break-up of the European Union and the destruction of the New World Order.
It’s all the fault of “conspiracy theories.”
No wonder the whole establishment, led by suchsupposed intellectual heavyweights as Obama’s former information czar Cass Sunstein, is dedicated to eradicating “conspiracy theories” even if they have to “disable the purveyors” (harass them? cripple them? kill them?) or, worse, burn the Constitution, make conspiracy theories illegal, police the internet, and send people like me to prison for thoughtcrime.
But it may be too late. The breakup of the EU, then NATO and finally the whole New World Order project has already been set in motion.
Congratulations are in order to all who have contributed to propagating the false flag meme, exposing the New World Order, taking down the DIPS (Dominant Inbred Psychopaths) and clearing the way for a better world.
Why Rupert Murdoch Decided to Back Donald Trump
By Gabriel Sherman
May 17, 2016
I think I fancy Donald. Photo: Drew Angerer-Pool/Getty ImagesCall it the media equivalent of Bobby Riggs vs. Billie Jean King: Tonight, Donald Trump finally sits down with his Fox News nemesis Megyn Kelly. The battle between Trump and Fox’s biggest star has been one of the most compelling story lines of the 2016 election, and the subject of much discussion in the run-up to Kelly’s prime-time broadcast special with the GOP frontrunner. But in all the coverage of the Trump-Kelly détente, a more important development has been overlooked: Trump has made peace with Kelly’s boss’s boss, Rupert Murdoch.
According to a half dozen sources familiar with Murdoch’s thinking, the media mogul has signaled he plans to fully back Trump in the general election against Hillary Clinton. Murdoch’s embrace of Trump is a sharp reversal from the hostile view he held over much of the past year. In fact, according to one high-level Fox source, it was Murdoch himself who directed Kelly to hammer Trump during the debut GOP debate, in Cleveland, that sparked the feud in the first place. “Rupert told her to do that,” the source said.
The Murdoch-Trump alliance is the result of at least two private meetings between the billionaires this spring as well as phone calls from Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Murdoch’s view, according to those who’ve spoken with him, is that Trump is a winner whom the “elites” failed to take seriously. “He doesn’t like people to be snobs and treat Trump like a clown,” one person explained. Murdoch’s outlook is also informed by his take on the winnowed GOP field. When it came down to the final three candidates, Murdoch simply saw Trump as the best option. “He never liked Cruz,” the source explained. Kasich made a personal pitch to Murdoch that he could win on a second ballot at the convention, but failed to persuade. In March, Murdoch tweeted that the GOP would "be mad not to unify" behind Trump.
Spokespersons for Murdoch and Trump did not respond to requests for comment.
That Murdoch flip-flopped on Trump shouldn’t be all that surprising. Yes, Trump’s stances on immigration and trade clash with Murdoch’s more moderate views (he's for comprehensive reform and trade deals). But throughout Murdoch’s career, he’s sacrificed core principles to forge political alliances that advance his media empire’s interests (after all, he backed both Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair in the U.K.).
And it’s clear Trump is good for business. According to one Fox News producer, the channel's ratings dip whenever an anti-Trump segment airs. A Fox anchor told me that the message from Roger Ailes's executives is they need to go easy on Trump. “It’s, ‘Make sure we don't go after Trump,’” the anchor said. “We’ve thrown in the towel.” Similarly, the New York Post has staked out a pro-Trump position in the marketplace while its rival the Daily News remains one of Trump’s loudest critics. The Post endorsed Trump last month and dubbed him “King Don!” after he won the New York primary. (The outlier among Murdoch’s properties is The Wall Street Journal. “They’re stupid people,” Trump told me back in March).
Murdoch's strategy seems to be a win-win. If Trump gets into the White House, Murdoch will likely have an open line to the new administration (at least as open as anyone can have with Trump). And, if Trump loses to Hillary Clinton, then Murdoch's right-wing outlets have a ready-made enemy to beat up on for the next four years. That's a deal Trump can surely respect.
Police face questions over the influence of the Freemasons after it emerged match commander and his boss were both members
Match commander David Duckenfield and former boss Brian Mole members of same lodge
Duckenfield was promoted despite not being 'best man for job'
South Yorkshire Police colleagues said to have been furious over decision
Year after disaster Duckenfield became a 'worshipful master' of local lodge
By Martin Robinson, Uk Chief Reporter For Mailonline
Updated: 27 April 2016
Powerful force: Hillsborough match commander David Duckenfield, pictured a month after the disaster, was a Freemason and promoted into a job he couldn't do properly, much to the anger of colleagues
South Yorkshire Police today face questions over whether powerful 'secret society' the Freemasons held sway over the force at the time of Hillsborough.
Families of victims say that officers who were Masons were promoted into powerful positions despite being ill-equipped, including match commander David Duckenfield.
Duckenfield told the fresh inquests he had been a Freemason since 1975 and became head of his local lodge - a worshipful master - the year after the 1989 disaster.
The match commander, 46 in 1989, was handed control of F Division, which included policing games at Hillsborough, just three weeks before the tragedy.
He was forced to admit at the inquests that he had no experience of policing football, did not know Hillsborough and 'wasn't the best man for the job'.
At the time there was fury among colleagues who believed it was his freemasons membership that was behind his promotion.
When asked during the inquest of was influenced by his membership of the so-called 'secret society', but added: 'I would hope not.'
His predecessor Brian Mole, now dead, had also been a member of the same lodge, jurors were told.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), as part of its overall investigation into alleged criminality and misconduct, has examined concerns from the Hillsborough families over Freemason membership.
The United Grand Lodge of England has provided information including historical attendance records of meetings.
Coroner Sir John Goldring later warned the jury that there was 'not a shred of evidence' that such a meeting ever took place or that all of those named were Freemasons. He advised them to put the 'gossip and hearsay' to one side.
Giving evidence, Mr Duckenfield said he was unaware if his boss, Chief Constable Peter Wright, was also a Freemason.
He said: 'I can't say whether he was or he wasn't. What I am saying is within my knowledge in the whole of the Sheffield/Yorkshire area, and in my lodge, he certainly wasn't a Freemason, and it wasn't customary in those days, because a situation had arisen where it was unfashionable, or some people thought unacceptable, to be a Freemason in a senior police position.'
Freemasonry is one of the world's oldest and largest non-religious, non-political, fraternal and charitable organisations, according to the United Grand Lodge of England's website.
It adds that 'it teaches self-knowledge through participation in a progression of ceremonies' and 'is a society of men concerned with moral and spiritual values'.
David Duckenfield, who is believed to be in Portugal, said Liverpool supporters had smashed through a closed gate before kick-off, causing the crush, when in fact he had ordered it to be left open to ease congestion.
It was only 26 years later, having retired on a gold-plated police pension, that he was forced to admit this was the 'direct cause' of the tragedy and that he had lied to save his own skin.
Today the inquest found that his decision had caused or contributed to their deaths - and also meant that they were all unlawfully killed.
In 2000 the families of the dead brought a private manslaughter prosecution against Duckenfield, but a jury failed to reach a verdict. The Crown Prosecution Service could again choose to prosecute him after today's verdicts.
Today, as the damning verdicts were read out, the match commander was not at the hearing and neighbours said the retired golf fan was last seen at home on the edge of the New Forest over the weekend.
A Master Freemason Speaks: "Bankers Control The World, Not Us"
Despite the tales of human sacrifice, world domination and masked sex parties, I managed to speak with two Master Freemasons from across the pond, to find out what the deal really is with their secret traditions...
Apr 12, 2014
For centuries the Freemasons have been known as a cloak and dagger society that employs the use of secret handshakes, mysterious passwords and bizarre blindfolded entry rituals. Their fondness for secrecy has led to outlandish speculation and has even made their practises outlawed in certain countries.
Some accuse them of being members of a hidden worldwide shadow government, worshiping the devil and even performing human sacrifices at the foot of a gigantic effigy of Magog. With a slight trepidation of having my throat slit with a double-edged letter opener for discovering "too much", I managed to speak with two third degree Master Freemasons from America to find out what the deal really is with their ominous rituals and so-called world domination plans.
Jake Hanrahan: Morning guys, first of all could you tell us where you're both from and what level you're currently at in the world of Freemasonry?
SJ: I'm Stephen Jennings, from Ohio, USA. That's where I was "raised" in the Masonic sense to the third degree. It's also where I attained the level of 32nd degree from the Scottish Rite. Currently I reside in Washington State. 32nd degree is the highest degree I have attained.
MB: Hello, my name’s Mike Braun, I am from North Carolina and I am a third degree Master Mason and a 32nd degree Scottish Rite mason also.
So what's the difference between a Scottish Rite mason and a regular one?
MB: Masonry has side orders. Actually, there are a bunch of them, but the popular ones are Scottish Rite and York Rite. If you think about Freemasonry as High School, then the side orders are like taking college classes. In the US, Scottish Rite is not the same as it is in the UK. In the southern Jurisdiction of the US, you go through the degrees of four to 32 in a weekend. It’s not as prestigious as it in the UK. Over there it takes time, and those are the same guys who get the 33rd degree and are accused of ruling the world [laughs].
Scary. How did you first get involved in Freemasonry?
SJ: I majored in History while at college and always enjoyed reading about Masonry just from a historical point of view. You could be reading articles or manuscripts and sometimes Freemasonry was inserted without explanation. There was a lot of mystique surrounding the Craft, especially in British, Irish and French histories. So when I was 19 and still in school, I went to the biggest lodge I could find, which was the most impressive building in the city, and I asked to join. About six months later I was raised to the third degree.
MB: I have several friends whom I look up to who all happened to be Freemasons. After seeing that they all had this in common, I was curious. Then, after reading how evil they apparently were on a conspiracy forum, I had to find out the truth for myself. I didn't believe my friends could be part of anything other than a respectable organisation.
In the UK it takes time, and those are the same guys who get the 33rd degree and are accused of ruling the world.
Why do you think that a lot of people perceive the Freemasons as this ominous society that rule the world from behind the scenes?
SJ: That's a very complicated question. Ultimately I believe it has its roots in history and ignorance. Freemasonry was a secret organisation from the start. It may not be now, but at the beginning and into the 20th century, we were a very secretive organisation… that much is fact. We were secret because we did some very audacious things [laughs]; such as allowing Irishmen to drink with Englishmen and do business, discuss personal freedoms, rail against the monarchies, push away from social injustices caused by religion. In the 1600's and into the 1800's these were some very serious crimes. The secrecy was more or less to hide those who were members in case the authorities discovered, as well as hide the actual society itself from those that would do it harm. Freemasonry has been persecuted in every major country in Europe, and the Catholic Church ensured that no one was mistaken about the evil deeds we performed, spreading rumours and lies to taint the reputation of the Craft.
In modern times there is still the stigma lasting from the centuries of persecution. Hitler rounded up Masons and placed them in the same camps as Jews. Jews had a gold star; Freemasons wore a blue forget-me-not. Mao and Stalin also persecuted Masons, and Freemasonry is illegal in China and most Middle Eastern countries to this day. In Britain, public officials have to detail their membership to the Craft and so on. In the United States the largest ever third party in our political system was the "Anti Masonry Party".
MB: And people fear what they don't understand. In the past the stance of Freemasonry was to ignore all the rumours, rather than try to explain things to the public, so some of the rumours got out of control.
SJ: Yes, and then we have ourselves to blame. We are a weird organization… we talk funny, hold funny rituals and antique ways of acting: oaths and obligations, initiations and bizarre customs. By today's standards we are downright weird. Many people look at us and have no idea what to think… often the overly religious write it off as Satanism or other such nonsense.
What about the strange antics of things like Bohemian Grove though? Do you not think that has a detrimental effect on the Freemasons? After all, when a load of rich fellas meet in a secret forest to worship a gigantic stone owl and make mock human sacrifices, the wrong impression can be given, especially when it’s performed so secretly...
SJ: The Bohemian Grove is not Masonic in any way shape or form… it gets thrown into Masonry because it's a group of well-connected rich guys getting together and doing bizarre rituals in the woods like you said. But not every bizarre ritual is Masonic. The Grove was first established by very successful actors and journalists, and soon encompassed powerful people from business and politics as well – not Masonic though.
Okay, but what about Leo Zagami? He reckons he’s the kin of some mysterious Illuminati bloodline, and that the Pope is in fact a Freemason, and less surprisingly has a boyfriend…
MB: [Laughs] I think Leo has a fantastic imagination. He’s quite young to be the head of Masonry and the Illuminati. As with most things in life, if it sounds too fantastic to be true…
I guess… How does a member move up in the ranks, and what do the degrees represent?
SJ: A member moves up by first being initiated after passing a vote, which must be a unanimous acceptance. Then the candidate learns the degrees obligation, and in many cases the entire actual ritual by heart, and then recites it to the lodge at a meeting. These rituals continue until you are “raised” to Master Mason. There are then three total degrees, Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, and Master Mason; each with its own degree.
MB: The first three degrees are the most important and hardest to attain though. You have to recite a catechism that describes everything you went through.
When you say everything you went through, do you mean in life or in the ritual process?
MB: I was referring to the ritual, but life lessons are the key to understanding why you ended up in a lodge. It’s one of those things that really cannot be fully explained, it must be experienced.
Discussing the secrets doesn't reveal anything about our actions or plans. Some people would never step foot in a lodge if they knew what the ritual was.
What happens in the ritual?
MB: Initiates go through a ritual. They usually have no idea what is going on, but when he learns about it in the study later, he understands the reason for everything, and hopefully learns the lessons that were meant to be taught.
So to gain clout in the world of Freemasonry, you have to take part in a secret ritual where you have no idea what’s going to happen to you?
SJ: No Mason is higher than any other Mason regardless of what you've done. The only real power of any sense is the Most Worshipful Master of the Grand Lodge, who oversees states and countries… They’re sort of the government, and they’re elected by the officers of all lodges in an open election. Masonry is a direct democracy in most countries. Some countries, like England and Wales, are governed in a more traditional manor. Prince Edward, the Duke of Kent, is the head of the United Grand Lodge of England and thus head of all Masonry in England and Wales since 1967.
I can't tell you what the degrees individually represent, but that they are allegorical and signify the basic tenants of Freemasonry. The Scottish Rite, where you go from four to 33 as an honorary, is done in a play like setting, where candidates watch the performance and discuss the lessons learned.
Going back to Leo Zagami again – he talks of degrees up to 37, is there any credence in this at all?
SJ: Not in the Scottish Rite… The Scottish Rite stops at 33.
What sort of benefits does a higher degree Freemason have from a lower?
MB: A full Master Mason can go to any meetings, where as a first or second degree Mason may only go to a meeting opened in his degree respectively. There are no differences though really, except more dues to pay.
But if there's no real difference for someone who has effectively worked harder than a lower level Mason, other than having to cough up more membership money, why are people so eager to raise their degrees? If there is no hierarchy or benefits to this I mean...
SJ: The difference between a Master Mason and a one or two degree Mason is that only a Master Mason may fully partake in Lodge affairs; that is, voting, committees, officer positions, ritual work. You are not a fully-fledged Mason until you are a third degree Mason. If you go on to be a 33rd degree or a Grand Commander of the York Rite, or Potentate of the Shrine – it doesn't matter. In a lodge or elsewhere, you hold absolutely, positively no special bearing over any other Mason. Even the Most Worshipful Master, head of all Blue Lodges cannot do anything rash. Everything is the result of a direct democracy in Freemasonry, except in England and Wales.
Sounds a bit like Socialism to me.
SJ: It's more like an extreme form of Republican Democracy. The closest political definition I could possibly place on Masonry is Libertarianism. Power is decentralised. Each state makes its own laws. Each Grand Lodge can only enforce the laws as outlined in the Charter. Each Lodge is self-determined and has its own constitution. All officers are voted for by the members, all Grand Lodge officers voted by the officers of all Lodges, and no collective oversight over all Worldly lodges. And the ritualistic teachings of Masonry place a very heavy emphasis on personal responsibility. Any form of collective "socialist" practices would take place on a collective personal level… personal choice, personal action. We never rely on another institution, not even our own Grand Lodge, to care for us in any form.
Think the original United States Government under the Articles of Confederation. Very decentralised, almost no "head" government to speak of, no outlining of government responsibility to individuals. It’s the polar opposite of Socialism.
Okay... Have you ever been privy to information that has perhaps led even you to believe that there's a more sinister side to the Freemasons like everyone else thinks?
SJ: On the contrary, everything I've learned about the Masonic political system has shown that it is very open, direct, and void of corruption. I'm certainly not saying it's impossible that there is corruption, abuse, and so on, but from my interactions with multiple Grand Lodges I have never seen anything that would make me doubt my membership.
It's an odd mix of guys: young and old, professional to unemployed, guys in $2,000 suits sitting next to a guy covered in tattoos with gauged earrings.
So what exactly do you do at Freemason meetings?
MB: A meeting is a business meeting. We have certain rituals that we do.
SJ: First we open the lodge, read some petitions if there are any, maybe vote on a new candidate, and discuss different committee reports.
MB: We vote to pay peoples bills.
SJ: Yes. We deliberate upcoming events, plan new ones, maybe prove up a member or perform a degree, then close the meeting. Usually there is a dinner before or after, and my personal lodge goes to a local bar for a few beers afterwards.
The Freemasons will actually financially support its members in times of need?
MB: Yep. That is one of the things we are famous for amongst ourselves. We don’t advertise what we do since that would be like tooting your own horn, but we do lots of things for people who need help. Most people just don’t hear about it.
Suddenly I feel the need to get involved. How does Joe Public become a Freemason, or is it only for a certain group of society?
SJ: No you don't have to be anything special. To be one, ask one.
MB: That's all you have to do. And be a good person with no criminal record.
SJ: You'll see if you ever join, it's an odd mix of guys: young and old, professional to unemployed, guys in $2,000 suits sitting next to a guy covered in tattoos with gauged earrings.
But why all the secrecy?
SJ: Secrecy today is more of a tradition, there are very few things we actually cannot talk about and the only reason we cannot is out of respect for the tradition, think of it a taboo if you will. Discussing the secrets doesn't reveal anything about our actions or plans. Ultimately it's a perfect recruiting tool, some people would never step foot in a lodge if they knew what the ritual was, and some who otherwise wouldn't join, would. This way we keep only those willing to entirely trust strangers in, without them knowing what will happen if they join.
MB: The secrets that we keep are simply a test of character. The passwords and handshakes are our only secrets and they can be found out by a junior detective.
Can you teach me the handshake?
MB: It's only for Masons.
Maybe I am one though...
MB: Are you?
What if you want to leave the Freemasons?
SJ: You stop paying your dues, and stop coming to meetings.
MB: Or you can demit, which requires you fill out a form. Nobody will come after you.
Thanks for speaking to me, it's been an education. For some reason though, I still find it all a bit ominous, but I think it's just a part of me wanting to if that makes sense? The idea of the cloak and dagger world control element is alluring…
SJ: Hmm… maybe I can help. There is a control element in this world but it doesn't happen in a Lodge room, no, it happens in the Board Room. Bankers control the world, money controls the world, the globalists control the world. Progressive elites control the world. These are the people desperately trying to integrate world governments, who are trying to use the Euro Crisis to turn it into a federalist system with the destruction of individual sovereignty. There are people in this world trying to consolidate power globally, who transcend nation, boundaries, culture and history. They do it for the power, the wealth, and the control.
Freemasonry has always been desperately opposed to such ideologies, our core beliefs of self-sufficient individual sovereignty and freewill have led to our being hunted by such people and organisations. There is a reason why the most powerful regimes in the world hate us, why history always shows the most powerful governments persecuting us. We are usurpers of consolidated power, because where power is consolidated there is corruption, abuse and neglect.
If you want to take aim at the New World Order -the globalist elites that are trying their hardest to tear down this world and build a new one without national identity - look at the Council of Foreign Relations, the IMF, Reserve Banking, ECB, politicians supporting the Euro, Club of 500, World Trade Organisation, and most importantly, the Bilderberg Group. Masons are easy to be a scapegoat for the powerful and corrupt, we have been for centuries, because we rarely ever defend ourselves from public ridicule. The biggest problem for Masons is not that we are attacked, but that those who attack us are the real culprits doing harm in our name, they go unseen and are not held accountable.