Project For The Exposure Of Hidden Institutions

Moderators: DrVolin, Wombaticus Rex, Jeff

Project For The Exposure Of Hidden Institutions

Postby cortez » Tue Feb 07, 2006 3:17 pm

I came across this site recently, and was impressed by the amount of work put into the research.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://home.planet.nl/~reijd050/introduction.htm">home.planet.nl/~reijd050/...uction.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>The people with the endless bios<br>An introduction to the world we live in - Part one<br></strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>Turns out it's quite a challenge to write a decent introduction to the information available on this website. The issue at hand is enormously complex and a lot of work still needs to be done. We'll give it a try anyway and discuss the history of the globalist movement, including 19th century Britain, the US, Canada, Israel, the European Union, and the opening up of both Russia and China. In the process we'll determine the absolute core of this globalist network and provide an extensive biography with each name. Then we'll put forth a theory that might explain why ordinary politics and the hidden globalist group go hand-in-hand without the latter being exposed by anyone on "the inside," whatever that means. At the end we'll take a look at who's behind the sustainable development movement and the United Nations while discussing the rather disturbing information that was brought to light by George Hunt in the late 1980s and early 1990s. I suggest you pay attention to the fine print in this article and read the biographies provided, otherwise it will be much more difficult to see how this relatively small group of people are all closely knit together.<br><br>The basic premise of this article is that an old boys network of low-profile, privately-funded, and intelligence-ridden institutes exercise a huge amount of influence over local governments, the media, universities (science), and the policies of the multinational corporations (who fund these networks). The names of about 150 of these institutes have been listed in appendix A and about 1400 names plus biographies, ranging from the most complete available to very basic, are available in the different membership lists. A smaller list of globalist institutes are chronologically ordered in Appendix B, together with the persons who founded them and some of the connections they had. Appendix C contains the genealogies of the Rothschild, Warburg, Rockefeller, and Morgan families, which might come in handy at times. A partial Cecil bloodline is also listed there, although, as you'll see, that one has been compiled for a different reason.<br><br>Below you can see a simplified sketch of the network that will be discussed. At this point I consider The Pilgrims, Le Cercle, and the 1001 the umbrella organizations, because together they encompass all aspects of the globalist movement: the leadership of all the other private globalist institutes, Anglo-American business and banking, multinationals worldwide (1001), old blue blood family lines, Western and Middle-Eastern intelligence, the illegal arms trade (1), and the environmental movement. If there is a group that keeps these three organizations in line it will exercise a huge amount of direct and indirect influence over many parts of the world. The question is, is there such a group? <br><br>In any case, it's abundantly clear that all roads lead to London. All three organizations, the Pilgrims, the 1001, and Le Cercle, have been set up and are managed by a combination of Anglophiles and zionists (2). The Pilgrims were primarily set up by the elite Privy Council and Garter families. In fact, the person who came up with the name 'Pilgrims' was a great grandfather of the late Princess Diana (3). The British monarch became the official head of the Pilgrims Society and members of the royal family have always attended the London meetings. The 1001 Club was mainly created by Prince Philip and the South-African billionaire Anton Rupert. Officially the 1001 only coordinates the WWF, but many members, who represent a huge chunk of the conventional environmental movement, seem more occupied with Anglo-America's need for natural resources. And Le Cercle, a shady international intelligence group, is run by Privy Councilors and Rothschild associates. The latest head of the Cecil family, a Privy Councilor, is also a participant in today's meetings.<br><br>Just to clarify a bit: the Privy Council, the most senior advisory body to the queen and the highest organ within the Commonwealth itself, largely serves a ceremonial role these days, at least in Britain itself. On the other hand, it's obvious that only the most trusted aides of the Financial Empire ever receive such an appointment. Members represent high level politics, official and private intelligence, and the senior military positions. Bank of England officials are also quite common in the Privy Council ranks. The Commonwealth consists of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, large chunks of southern Africa, and a few other countries in the rest of the world.<br><br>The Order of the Garter is another elitist body about which some confusion exists. It is the highest and oldest order of chivalry (Templar) in England and, as with the Privy Council, only some of the most trusted aides of the Financial Empire are given life membership. I wouldn't put it above or below the earlier mentioned societies. It's just different. And we'll leave it at that.<br><br>Where the globalist movement started<br>Zionism and the interests of the British Empire were informally merged no later than 1891, the year that the Rhodes secret society was created (4). Robert Cecil, the 3rd Marquess of Salisbury (Order of the Garter; Privy Council; chancellor of Oxford University; member of what is quite possibly the most influential blue blood family in British history with many Knights of the Garter, Privy Councilors, and members connected to the occult; earlier (female) members of the Cecils intermarried with the de Vere family, but created no offspring. De Vere family members seemingly consider themselves part of the Archdruid-Elven-Fairy-Dragon race and have an obsession with specific genes (5)) represented the British Empire and was the primary coordinator of the later Round Table, the group the Rhodes secret society evolved into. The zionists were represented by Baron Nathan de Rothschild, who's French cousin, Baron Edmond, started to buy up land in Palestine in 1882 (6). The birth of political zionism was only a few years away, which cannot be entirely ascribed to the Rothschilds, but they certainly became its most powerful backers. The person that seems to have brought these different interests closer together was the British politician Benjamin Disraeli, who later in his life became the first Jewish Prime Minister of England. He was a very close friend to Queen Victoria (7), the Cecil family (<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START 8) --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/glasses.gif ALT="8)"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> , and Lionel de Rothschild (father of Nathan) (9). Over time he managed to water down the distrust the Queen and the Cecils had against the Jews. In part due to his support, Lionel de Rothschild was able to become the first Jewish member of Parliament. Nathan Mayer Rothschild (close friend of Edward VII well before this person became king) subsequently became a baron in 1884 and started to finance Cecil Rhodes' adventures in South-Africa (10). In 1891 Rhodes created De Beers mining company together with his secret society. Everything was financed by the Rothschilds and looked over by Lord Robert Cecil. After Rhodes died in 1902, Alfred Milner (Order of the Garter; Privy Council; director and later chairman Rio Tinto, which was owned for 1/3 by the Rothschilds in 1905 (11)) took over from him. Milner is known to have visited Edward Cecil (son of the 3rd Marquess of Salisbury and an aide-de-camp to Pilgrims Society member, Privy Councilor, and Knight of the Garter Lord Kitchener) and Lord Rothschild (12). When in 1917 the Balfour Declaration was sent from foreign secretary Arthur J. Balfour (Privy Council; Knight of the Garter; nephew of the 3rd Marquess of Salisbury; occultist) to Lord Lionel de<br><br>1907, The Pilgrims & the<br>American Commonwealth. Click to enlarge. Rothschild (son of Nathan; head family bank), we know for sure that zionism became an official British policy next to the maintenance of the British Empire. In 1924, after the Cecil-drafted League of Nations (13) put Palestine under a British Mandate, Edmond de Rothschild set up his Palestine Jewish Colonization Association (PICA). Edmond's importance in the creation of Israel has been acknowledged by his good friend David Ben-Gurion (14 & 15), the first Prime Minister of the newly established state. Through the Pilgrims Society members, the British Empire and the later Commonwealth unofficially included the United States.<br><br>Quigley has described how the Round Table, with their main US ally J.P. Morgan, set up the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Institute for Pacific Relations in the 1918-1925 period, although he seems to have missed the Pilgrims Society, established in 1902 in London and in 1903 in New York. This same Round Table, or wider Pilgrims Society group, also established the Federal Reserve and the Rockefeller Foundation, both in 1913 (all these people can be found in the Pilgrims Society membership list). The Carnegie network, which was (and is) especially influential on the Western educational system, was also set up during this time period, starting with the Carnegie Institution of Washington in 1902, an organization for scientific discovery; the Carnegie Endowment in 1910, which became an intelligence and big business ridden geopolitical think tank for global peace; and the Carnegie Corporation of New York in 1911, which is the grant making part of the Carnegie network. Today this institute donates dozens of millions a year to all the major universities in the United States and southern Africa (16). Grants are also made to organizations like the CFR, the RIIA, the American Assembly, the UN, the American Red Cross, the Museum of Jewish Heritage, and the American Museum of Natural History (Darwinism). Our little Hegelian Social Darwinist, once born in a poor family of handloom weavers, had a very different background than most of his later associates. Around 1870 he already was a wealthy self-made man, but only after some crucial help from the London banker Junius S. Morgan (father J.P. Morgan; worked for George Peabody, who supposedly was a Rothschild agent; after Carnegie's joint venture in the<br>steel industry went awry due to financial problems of his partners, Peabody finally sold his bonds to "London investors") in 1874, he rose to became the most powerful industrialist of the US, next to J.P. Morgan. His primary associates, who inspired and guided him in the founding of the different Carnegie Institutions, were Daniel Coit Gilman (incorporated Skull & Bones into the Russell Trust 50 years earlier), Nicholas Murray Butler (head of Columbia University; major totalitarian Hegelian US educator; President of the Pilgrims Society; Bohemian Grove; associate of J.P. Morgan and Robert Cecil - 1st Viscount of Chelwood; co-founder League of Nations), and Elihu Root (Pilgrims Society; official founder CFR; close friend of Butler).<br><br><!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://home.planet.nl/~reijd050/organisations/introduction/Carnegie_Network.gif" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--><br>Three of the men are confirmed members of the Pilgrims Society. The fourth, Gilman, will undoubtedly turn out to be another one. Especially Butler was a very close associate of the Morgans and Cecils.<br><br>much more here<br>http://home.planet.nl/~reijd050/introduction.htm <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=cortez@rigorousintuition>cortez</A> at: 2/9/06 2:18 am<br></i>
cortez
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 11:58 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Project for The Exposure of Hidden Institutions

Postby cortez » Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:03 am

More on the Pilgrims Society (of which I know little, but intend to find out more)<br><br>from asia times (Bilderberg links)<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/GE10Aa02.html">www.atimes.com/atimes/Fro...0Aa02.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>...Bilderberg's membership is heavily crossed with the Council on Foreign Relations, <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>the Pilgrims Society</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->, the Trilateral Commission and the famous "Round Table" - a British, Oxford-Cambridge elite group crystallized in the homonymous journal of empire founded in 1910. The Round Table - which also denied its existence as a formal group - called for a more efficient form of global empire so that Anglo-American hegemony could be extended throughout the 20th century.<br><br>Bilderberg regulars include Henry Kissinger, David Rockefeller (of JP Morgan's International Council), Nelson Rockefeller, Prince Philip of Great Britain, Robert McNamara (J F Kennedy's secretary of defense and former president of the World Bank), Margaret Thatcher, former French president (and main redactor of the EU constitution) Valery Giscard D'Estaing, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski and the chairman of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan. The Rothschild family has hosted many Bilderbergs. In 1962 and 1973, on the island resort of Saltsjobaden, Sweden, the hosts were the Wallenberg banking family.<br><br>Some of these masters control more of the universe than others. They are the members of the steering committee, which includes Josef Ackermann (Deutsche Bank), Jorma Ollila (Nokia), Jeurgen Schrempp (DaimlerChrysler), Peter Sutherland (former North Atlantic Treaty Organization - NATO - general and now with Goldman Sachs), James Wolfensohn (the outgoing World Bank president) and the "Prince of Darkness" Richard Perle. Iraq war conceptualist and incoming World Bank president Paul Wolfowitz is a also a Bilderberg permanent member. George W Bush happened to be in the neighborhood - the Netherlands, for the World War II commemorations - during Bilderberg 2005. He may have dropped in. Bush did meet Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, who must be present at every Bilderberg....<br><br>-----------<br><br><br><br>from the Project for The Exposure of Hidden Institutions<br><br><br>In the <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://home.planet.nl/~reijd050/organisations/Pilgrims_Society_members_list.htm">Pilgrims Society</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> list the names have been added of, or work has been done on:<br><br>Charles F. Adams IV         John Pierpont Morgan, Jr.<br>Winthrop W. Aldrich         Henry Morgenthau, Jr.<br>Walter H. Annenberg         Prince Philip Mountbatten<br>Anne Legendre Armstrong         Richard A. Peabody<br>Kingman Brewster, Jr.         Elliot L. Richardson<br>George Ball         Lord Gordon Richardson<br>David K.E. Bruce         Sir Malcolm Rifkind<br>Nicholas Murray Butler         David Rockefeller<br>Andrew Carnegie         Nelson Rockefeller<br>Lord Carrington         Elihu Root<br>Donald W. Douglas         Edmund de Rothschild<br>Christopher Forbes         George P. Shultz<br>Lord Guthrie         Paul Volcker<br>Lord Peter Inge         Sir John Weston<br>Henry Kissinger         John Hay Whitney<br>John Pierpont Morgan         <br><br>The information in the biographies will be summarized in an article that will appear soon, together with more names and information.<br><br>In the 1001 Club list similar additions to the names or the biographies have been made:<br>Giovanni "Gianni" Agnelli         Chief Shafi Lawal Edu<br>Prince Sadruddin Aga Khan         Godrej family<br>Heidi Andersson         Alexander King<br>Hersh Chadha         Sukum Navapan<br>George R. Cooley         Maurice F. Strong <p></p><i></i>
cortez
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 11:58 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Project for The Exposure of Hidden Institutions

Postby cortez » Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:24 am

The Pilgrims Society<br><br>Even today it's members consist of the wealthiest businessman and the most influential politicians. It was erected over a century ago and meets at least 2 or 3 times a year. Still, 99% of the world has never heard of it. We're talking about the Pilgrims Society. An aristocratic Anglo-American dining club who's members keep themselves informed by inviting politicians to make a speech. The primary purpose of this club is to keep the ties between the United States and Britain as strong as possible. The official reason was, and is, that the forefathers of most Americans from the Virginia and New York area emigrated from the British Isles, therefore they share a common heritage. They are blood brothers so to speak. Of course, the obvious reason was to form an unofficial alliance with the United States to improve the strained relations and to vastly increase the powers of the dwindling British empire. The heart of the British empire and the later British Commonwealth became the Pilgrims Society, it's philosophies dominated by the executives of the upcoming mega corporations, largely located in the City of London and the city of New York.<br>The London chapter of the Pilgrims Society was established on July 11, 1902, followed by<br>                <br><br>a New York chapter on January 13, 1903. It's patron is the British monarch, who has plenty of representatives attending the meetings. A member of the Royal family usually attends the London diners.<br><br>As you'll find out by looking at the membership list, the Pilgrims Society has clearly fused together the business centers of New York and London, together with a large portion of the political centers of both nations. Ninety percent of the American members are top-level bankers and businessmen from New York city.<br><br>Only a couple of Pilgrims own or chair companies with headquarters in Boston or Philadelphia. Businesses that have their headquarters in any other location than this small part of the north-east corner of the United States don't seem to be represented at all (do keep in mind that recent data is sketchy). Relatively few government officials from Washington are recruited into the Pilgrims Society. Officials from outside the UK or US visit the club occasionally. In the past they usually came from countries incorporated within the British Empire or the Commonwealth, most notably Canada and Australia.<br><br>A mistake usually made when people refer to this society, is when they call it the 'Pilgrim Society', because this name hasn't been used that often. The most often used name is the 'Pilgrims Society', sometimes spelled as 'Pilgrim's Society'. You might think this isn't such a big deal, but when you search the internet or some archives for the 'Pilgrim Society', you will hardly find any official sources, simply because they all refer to the 'Pilgrims Society'. The name 'Pilgrims Society' is also unique, so you won't confuse it with this one. Also try searching on 'The Pilgrims' or more specifically, the 'Pilgrims of the United States' and the 'Pilgrims of the United Kingdom'/'Pilgrims of Great Britain'.<br><br>The club is secret. It might be one of those 'open-secrets', but it's secret nonetheless. If it wasn't, we would have read about it in the history books, we would know all the details of the meetings, and we would have membership lists in the public domain. It is possible to find quite a bit of information in regular newspaper archives, but you really have to look for it. It takes forever to piece the story together. For example, The Scotsman made numerous references to it in the first half of the century (archives are only available up to 1950 atm). Time Magazine made them much less, but still referred to the club once every few years. After 1958, Time only mentioned the club 2 or 3 times, even though meetings continued as usual. Other newspapers in the U.S., like the New York Times and the Washington Post have referred the Pilgrims at times. The Wall Street Journal on the other hand never mentioned a whole lot about this dining club at any time in the past century. The Times of London mentioned the society a couple of times in the past 10 years, even though, as all the other papers, it didn't give many details about who's attending. Most other newspapers, including the Scotsman, New York Post, Washington Times, or even the Guardian, seem to have been (almost) completely silent about the Pilgrims in the last 5 to 7 years (that's how far the digital archives go back). In other countries it's virtually impossible to get any information on the Pilgrims. Not one large Dutch newspaper has mentioned the name in the past 20 years. References in German or French newspapers are just as uncommon. One thing you actually càn find, is different speeches on official websites; One at NATO, another one at the State Department, and yet another one from 1999 on the MoD website. They all deal with one little speech and when you ask for some background information you won't get any replies. And that's strange. Maybe it's done to give people the impression there's nothing unusual about the club. Indeed, looking at the speeches there certainly isn't. All they do is talk about regular pro-NATO politics and kiss up to their "brothers" on the other side of the ocean. Two recent examples:<br>[1]         January 2002, Lord Robertson, 'NATO after September 11'<br>[2]         November 2002, Richard Boucher on Foreign policy, the EU, and NATO<br><br>You can find other speeches in the references at the bottom of this article. Of course, it's probably not because of the speeches that the Pilgrims Society keeps itself out of the public eye. More likely it's because of who's being informed and for what purpose. Also, it's obvious that members discuss a lot of other business among themselves.<br><br>More in depth<br>As already stated, those who own or run the major banking houses, law firms, and insurance companies in the London and New York area will be invited to join, together with a few very specific government officials. This always includes the president of the United States, the U.S. Secretary of State and the U.S. ambassador to Great Britain. On the right you can see which other delegates traditionally are recruited into Pilgrims. Chancellors, Chief Justices, and Attorney Generals seem to be frequent members also. Occasional exceptions have been made to allow writers, composers and art collectors into the society. An example of that was Mark Twain. The patron of the                 <br>Scanned by Charles Savoie of Silver Investor.<br>Pilgrims Society is the king or queen of England and a member from the royal family usually attends the Pilgrim dinners in Great Britain.<br><br><br>much more here<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://home.planet.nl/~reijd050/organisations/Pilgrims_Society.htm">home.planet.nl/~reijd050/...ociety.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
cortez
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 11:58 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Project for The Exposure of Hidden Institutions

Postby FourthBase » Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:54 am

Holy f***ing shit, that's the most fascinating site I've been to in months, espeically the sections on Bohemian Grove, JASON, and USAPs. A MUST READ SITE FOR EVERYONE HERE.<br><br>Jeff, please take note!<br><br>NB: Luis Alvarez!<br><br>BTW, Mark Twain was a friend of Tesla's. WTF. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=fourthbase>FourthBase</A> at: 2/9/06 3:50 am<br></i>
User avatar
FourthBase
 
Posts: 6669
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 4:41 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Surprised ? Not me.

Postby slimmouse » Thu Feb 09, 2006 11:26 am

<br><br> Why does absolutely none of this surprise me ?<br><br> "No one is in charge ?" <br><br> Sure lol.<br><br> Saw a lovely little snippet the other day btw. Gorbachev and Reagan 'Shaking hands' - cough.<br><br> Ive always had Dr Kissinger right up there at the pinnacle. Kinda like the overt General. Even in my "West are the good guys" days, ( I was gonna say whiter than white, which is probably more appropriate ) I couldnt stand the sight of that man. I just knew he was some kind of hideous excuse for a human being.<br><br> Thanks for the link Cortez. A data dump in itself. <p></p><i></i>
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Project's LaRouche influence

Postby hmm » Thu Feb 09, 2006 2:24 pm

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I came across this site recently, and was impressed by the amount of work put into the research.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>alot of work does seem to have gone into the site, and it is interesting, but i would note that he is quite open about his admiration of LaRouche and his contacts with them go further than passive reading (from dutch language posting's of his).<br>He also says his research is internet based and recent(post 2004) and the only thing i can find that distinguishes him from "just another conspiracy theorist" with a homepage is that he claims to have contacted EIR and some organisations mentioned in or around conspiracy theory.<br>what i find odd is he "speaks" with great authority for someone who is so new to this field.<br>Not that i think this suggests a sinister motive,just another (partially) misguided soul..<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://home.planet.nl/~reijd050/links.htm">home.planet.nl/~reijd050/links.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br>Executive Intelligence Review         Some of their authors, including LaRouche himself, have a very radical way of writing and speaking, which tends to put people off. Personally, I usually try to double check what they have written down, but as far as I can see, the things they report are very accurate. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>In fact, I think their stuff is awesome.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>here he speaks of his contacts with EIR <br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://forum.fok.nl/topic/808924">forum.fok.nl/topic/808924</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Anyway OpenYourMind, die 2 films die je me stuurde van George Hunt bleken erg nuttig te zijn A) omdat het artikel zo klokkie rond was en B) omdat de info, indien waar, hoogst interessant is. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Pierre Beaudry en waarschijnlijk ook Jeff Steinberg van EIR</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> gaan nu proberen om George Hunt te vinden en documenten plus audio te verifiëren.<br><br>Hoewel ik EIR, de politieke groep van Larouche, over het algemeen wat te christelijk en te radicaal vind (waardoor hun boodschap meestal totaal niet aankomt) weten ze in ieder geval wel heel goed waar ze over praten. Ze zijn nu bezig met wat prime time reclamespotjes en ik gaf als tip dat wanneer ze dat spul van George Hunt kunnen verifieren, ze daar een hele mooie reclamespot van kunnen maken. Mocht dat ooit gebeuren of zie je dat er in de toekomst meer over Hunt's werk geschreven wordt, dan weet je iig dat je daar jezelf aan hebt te danken. So, thx.<br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>his claim to contacts with Navy Intelligence<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://forum.fok.nl/topic/769643">forum.fok.nl/topic/769643</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Ik heb de laatste tijd met mensen gesproken over de telefoon of via mail uit Navy intelligence</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->, een New York bank, een advocaat die onderzoek heeft gedaan naar een groep achter het WWF, een redacteur van een Engels inlichtingenblad, een universiteits professor geschiedenis, en de groep achter een presidents kandidaat (je kunt iedereen tegenwoordig bereiken). Nu ben ik bezig met een groep uit Luxemburg ivm de Dutroux affaire.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <p></p><i></i>
hmm
 
Posts: 521
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 7:22 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

I guess without.

Postby slimmouse » Thu Feb 09, 2006 2:47 pm

I guess without checking on his facts, it is difficult to establish the facts.<br><br> Time to cross reference with primary sources ?<br><br> Oh damn, they all seem to be dissapearing . <p></p><i></i>
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

"Part of the Archdruid-Elven-Fairy-Dragon race"?

Postby starroute » Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:34 pm

Kind of lost me a bit there -- also with the suggestion that the American Museum of Natural History was a sinister plot to promote Darwinism.<br><br>But those two things aside, if you're going to look for conspiracies, that particular timeframe and group of individuals and interests is as likely as any.<br><br>One thing I've noticed but have never seen discussed anywhere is that in the period following the Civil War, there was something close to a coup in the United States, whereby the descendents of the old New England colonial families largely took over the direction of the government and of society as a whole. This had not been true before the war, when political power in the US was both more widely dispersed and more anti-establishment and anti-British.<br><br>I don't know if the Civil War was deliberately aimed at concentrating power tightly in a specific set of northern hands, of if that was merely a fortuitous outcome. But starting in the 1870's, the majority of US presidents were descended from a common set of New England families, which had not been true previously. (At present, the imbalance isn't quite as severe, though Nixon, Ford, and the Bushes are all of that group.) The great industrialists also took pains to trace their colonial bloodlines (or even, like the Morgans, to commission fake genealogies to carry things back to British aristocracy.)<br><br>By the early 20th century, this kind of snobbery had passed down to the middle classes, reaching a peak around World War I, with anti-immigrant feelings running high and Colonial Revival (or even fake Tudor) houses displacing the arts-and-crafts bungalows of a decade earlier. <br><br>Along with all this went a move to establish a solid US-British alliance. We tend to forget that for most of the 19th century, the United States and England were not on good terms. Even during the Civil War, despite widespread anti-slavery sentiments, Britain favored the South, on which it depended for cotton imports. But the would-be American aristocrats of the late 1800's started marrying their daughters off to pedigreed Brits (as in the case of Winston Churchill's mother.) And by about 1900 -- when Britain was mired down in the Boer War and the US in the Philippines -- the two countries finally got together, largely on the basis of being reviled by everybody else for their brutal and repressive behavior.<br><br>Since, then global politics have been more or less dominated by the single theme of the US and Britain working together to dominate the world and screw everybody else. (The main secondary theme, of course, is control of the Middle East -- first because Britain dependended on the Suez Canal as its lifeline to India, but then increasingly because of the oil.)<br><br>So on that basis, the idea of an ongoing US-British-aristocratic conspiracy makes a fair amount of sense. It would be only the covert side of the known, visible political events of the last century -- which I regard as a test of plausibility for any conspiracy theory.<br><br>I do still sort of wonder about the de Vere's and those elf-dragon bloodlines, though. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=starroute>starroute</A> at: 2/9/06 2:41 pm<br></i>
starroute
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 12:01 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Disraeli and Bulwer-Lytton

Postby starroute » Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:47 pm

I'm not sure why, but the original post got me thinking about Disraeli. So I started googling a little, and immediately ran into his connection with Bulwer-Lytton, of which I'd either been unaware or had forgotten. For example:<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2003/06/08/bomit08.xml">www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/...omit08.xml</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr> A High Victorian shocker<br><br>John Gross reviews Bulwer Lytton: The Rise and Fall of a Victorian Man of Letters by Leslie Mitchell<br><br>You can't get very far reading about the Victorians without coming across Edward Bulwer Lytton. He knew everyone; he crops up everywhere. And he was a great name in his own right - a hugely popular novelist, but also a social commentator, a public figure, a politician who achieved cabinet office. When he died, in 1873, he was buried in Westminster Abbey. . . .<br><br>Lytton's wife Rosina was clever and spirited. At first their marriage seemed to be idyllic, though laced with a suspicious amount of baby-talk. Within a few years, however, it was falling apart, amid accusations of ill-treatment and infidelity. Since Lytton enjoyed the legal and social advantages of a Victorian husband, one is inclined to side with Rosina. But by no means entirely. Both partners were notably selfish: their children in particular suffered cruel emotional neglect.<br><br>After the couple had separated, their feuding grew even more bitter. Part Strindberg, part Punch and Judy show, it afforded all but their most tender-hearted contemporaries a good deal of entertainment. Lytton set spies on Rosina, she made scenes and lampooned him in novels. The climax came in 1858 - over 20 years after their separation - when she mounted the hustings just after he had won a parliamentary election and accused him of having killed their daughter.<br><br>He responded by having her committed to a private hospital, where she repeated the accusation and added that he had only been offered a post in the Cabinet (which he had) in return for committing sodomy with Disraeli. She was distraught rather than mad, however. There was a public outcry on her behalf, she was released, and he reluctantly agreed to settle her debts and increase her allowance.<br><br>You wonder why he didn't try to get a divorce. But as Leslie Mitchell explains, if he had, his conduct would have come under courtroom scrutiny which would have put paid to his hopes of high office. He had had affairs before he and Rosina separated (as had she), and many affairs since. Provisions in his will suggest that he left behind a small swarm of illegitimate children.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br> <p></p><i></i>
starroute
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 12:01 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Disraeli and Bulwer-Lytton

Postby smithtalk » Fri Feb 10, 2006 1:16 am

and talking of disraeli here's a gem of a cryptic quote from his dad writing about charles the first<br><br>There were peculiar reasons which might have justified the supposition, that England would be the spot in which the important struggle would commence. The establishment of the reformed faith had habituated the English to a greater freedom of inquiry than their neighbours, a freedom of inquiry unknown in preceding times, when authority was the sole test of opinion ; and a long and luxuriant peace had raised up among the Commons of England a new class of men ;—new, by possessing a weight and influence in society which they had never before held. There were other causes, which, though not so evident, were scarcely less influential, but which must be developed as we proceed. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>It was fated that England should be the theatre of the first of a series of Revolutions which is not yet finished.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>wonder what he knew that everyone else didnt <p></p><i></i>
smithtalk
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 10:53 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Disraeli and Bulwer-Lytton

Postby cortez » Mon Feb 13, 2006 12:05 am

Since I have not read anything, or close to nothing on some of these societies (Pilgrims,1001 club..etc) I find his research very interesting and worth much more study. Some of the connections made are really interesting.<br><br>Here's one more<br><br><br>(Lord) Carrington was another ultra-connected early director of Kissinger Associates (26). That means we have two heads of Bilderberg, covering the period from 1989 until today, that sat on the board of Kissinger's shadowy company. And whatta ya know? Lord Roll, Bilderberg chairman from 1985 to 1989 was another board member of Kissinger Associates since 1984 (27). You almost get the impression that Kissinger and his closest associates (Rockefeller and Rothschild) pick the leadership of Bilderberg. The short version of Carrington's bio, a president of the Pilgrims Society since 1983, reads: Director Rio Tinto (used to be a Rothschild company. Don't know today), Barclays Bank, Hollinger (Owned by Canadian Privy Councilor Conrad Black; Evelyn de Rothschild sat on the same board, as did Kissinger and many other very important globalists), a few metal companies, and Hambros Bank; Privy Councilor; Order of the Garter; insider of Brian Crozier's (Le Cercle; disinfo specialist and MI6 agent) Shield Committee that got Margaret Thatcher elected; governor Ditchley; governor Atlantic Institute for International Affairs; member RIIA; member CFR; member Trilateral Commission; and secretary-general NATO.<br><br><br><br>----------<br><br><br>...Today's Israeli-Iranian conflict might be a good example. Netanyahu of the Likud party is very supportive of a pre-emptive bombing campaign to Iran's nuclear reactors, while Sharon, now out of the picture because of a stroke, was much more interested in diplomacy. The latter probably includes attempts to internally destabilize Iran. Both Sharon and Netanyahu are closely connected to some of the most influential globalist insiders like George Shultz and Henry Kissinger, whom they both meet frequently. Does this mean they are ordered to play a game of good cop, bad cop while at the same time they are meeting in some secret masonic lodge on the Moon to do secret handshakes, play poker, and get drunk? No, it doesn't. We really don't have to go there to explain why "everybody is in on it." It only means they had the desired basic mindset to be supported by a large enough portion of the international money group to make it to the top tiers of the elected government. Once there, once they have been carefully screened to make sure they are a reliable 'investment', these people can agree and disagree with other politicians as if this unofficial third party doesn't exist.<br><br>Even though the vast majority of these people haven't got the motivation, the means, or the knowledge to expose this network, they do have to abide to certain rules. One of these rules is that they always have to consider the overall opinion of the globalist group, because the lone politician will find that money starts flowing in his opponent's (or other nation's) pockets as soon as he starts making decisions a lot of people in this network don't like. Not to mention the pressure that will be put on this individual from all sides. Hugo Chavez of Venezuela is an example in which even the full range of the internal corporate media censored him, manipulated (rather shocking) news events, and ultimately played a major role in the failed April 2002 coup (6<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START 8) --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/glasses.gif ALT="8)"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> . The earlier mentioned Rockefeller associate Gustavo Cisneros played a major role in that event.<br>Another rule these overt leaders seem to abide by is that they do not allow any kind of attention to be focused on this organized international establishment, directly or indirectly.<br><br>The direct exposure is obvious. The indirect ways this network might be exposed are numerous. Too many accusations of conflicts of interest or corruption will lead to continuous (potentially very costly and unhealthy) retaliations, but more importantly, to an increasingly skeptical and investigative public that might even start to accept the existence of certain conspiracies. In turn this will lead to a gradual exposure of the ruling elite, like it already has to some degree. No one in the this group is going to benefit now and even the world order might dramatically shift in the end because it loses its power to covertly defend its mineral interests around the world. Therefore it is obvious that unwritten rules exist to settle things among each other while as little as possible is shared with the public. This will not always be possible though and after certain exposures a policy of damage control is enacted. Especially since the present Bush administration it seems that damage control has become more or less a continuous thing even though the internet also has a whole lot to do with that. I myself would probably not be writing this article if 9/11 never<br>happened or the internet wasn't available. So as you can see, one thing leads to the other. Conspiracy talk cannot be allowed, because it undermines the whole structure. Especially since the introduction of the internet....<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://home.planet.nl/~reijd050/introduction.htm">home.planet.nl/~reijd050/...uction.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>
cortez
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 11:58 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Project's LaRouche influence

Postby cortez » Mon Feb 13, 2006 12:54 am

hmm,<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>what i find odd is he "speaks" with great authority for someone who is so new to this field.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>That is worth noting, and probably due to my sloppy research habits (erratic) don't find it that troubling, as I find there seems to be allot of info that can be mulled over and verified to be true or false. The way his introduction article is compiled looks to me as an ongoing effort on his part to make sense of allot of detail picked up in a very short time. I'm not sure if he is part of the LaRocian cult or just finds their research good. He has some UFO research mixed in with it, blue bloods who may think they have inherited dragon blood(?) ...<br><br><br>I came across his site by doing somewhat of a vanity search to see if anyone had picked up on the video of UNCED World Conservation Conference I had been posting around different places. It's start date took place on Sept 11/1987 (I thought that tidbit was interesting in and of itself), he seems to have followed the video and found some of the information as interesting as I did, and dug deeper into it.<br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.nw0.info/index.php?dir=Media.Clips/&file=UNCED.Summit_Rothschilds.wmv&AutoIndex=124238cfc71464fc6f4296f338afa6ff">link to the video</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br>----<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>The dark side of the sustainable development movement</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>George Hunt, a business consultant, was present at the earlier mentioned 1987 Fourth World Wilderness Congress as a member of the staff. He initially wanted to buy a ticket, but this proved to be much too expensive ($650). At the conference he noticed it had very little to do with the conventional environment movement and was surprised to see people like Maurice Strong, Edmund de Rothschild (Pilgrims Society), David Rockefeller (Pilgrims Society), and James A. Baker (Pilgrims Society; Cap & Gown; trustee American Institute for Contemporary German Studies; Atlantic Council of the United States; National Security Planning Group; Bohemian Grove; CFR; Carlyle; advisor George W. Bush in his 2000 election). In his two videos,<br>produced in 1989 and 1992, he plays audio recordings of several of the 1987 speakers, including Maurice Strong and Edmund de Rothschild (71). There's not really a reason to label these recordings a hoax (to use UFO community language) and subsequently denounce George Hunt as a fraud. In fact, Hunt could hardly have done a better job at presenting his evidence. However, some of the evidence this person has uncovered is so amazing, that most people will remain skeptical (like me), no matter how much evidence is presented. If what Hunt is claiming is true, then it confirms the overall picture that has been sketched in this article. First take a look at the following Fourth World Wilderness Conference (1987) statement from David Lang (spelling unknown; a Montreal banker, according to Hunt):<br><br>"I suggest therefore that this be sold not through a democratic process - that would take too long and devour far too much of the funds - to educate the cannon fodder, unfortunately, that populates the earth. We have to take almost an elitist program, [so] that we can see beyond our swollen bellies, and look to the future in timeframes and in results which are not easily understood, or which can be, with intellectual honesty, be reduced down to some kind of simplistic definition." [snobby emphasis on 'simplistic'] - mp3<br>There's more. In his 1992 video Hunt shows a document (72), obtained by a friend, which has been taken from a UN-affiliated public hearing held at Iowa State Capitol in Des<br><br>Moines on September 22, 1991. The last paragraph of this document reads:<br><br>"Therefore the following policy must be implemented... all nations [should] have quotas for reduction on a yearly basis... by military force, when required... Security Council has complete legal, military, and economic jurisdiction in any region in the world... take possession of all natural resources, including the watersheds and great forests, to be used and preserved for the good of the Major nations of the Security Council... the UN will explain that not all races and peoples are equal, nor should they be. Those races proven superior by superior<br>                <br>Hunt's document. It has a lot of similarities with the preferred methods of Prince Philip, who's mentioned in the document, to solve overpopulation. (79)<br>achievements ought to rule the lesser races, caring for them on sufferance that they cooperate with the Security Council."<br><br>This worldview is the same as some British imperialists used to daydream about, like Cecil Rhodes and his gang. Coincidentally, the paper contains references to both leaders of the Round Table and their respective wills and credos:<br><br>"We are the living sponsors of the great Cecil Rhodes will of 1877, in which Rhodes devoted his fortune to: ’the extension of British rule throughout the world... the colonization by British subjects of the entire Continent of Africa, the Holy Land, the Valley of the Euphrates, the islands of Cyprus and Candia, the whole of South America, the islands of the pacific not heretofore possessed by Great Britain the whole of the Malay archipelago, the seaboard of China and Japan, the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire...’<br><br>We stand with Lord Milner’s Credo. We too are ’British Race patriots’ and our patriotism is ’the speech, the tradition, the principles, the aspirations of the British Race.’ Do you fear to take this stand at the very last moment when this purpose can be realized? Do you not see that failure now is to be pulled down by the billions of Lilliputians of lesser race who care little or nothing for the Anglo-Saxon system?"<br><br>"This is the time to save the Anglo-Saxon race and it most glorious production: the Anglo-Saxon system of banking, insurance and trade."<br><br>So, as you can see, if this 1991 document is real, it means we have come full circle in this article. And you may not believe me, but this wasn't planned beforehand. Just as I didn't select the most important globalists by first looking into their Rockefeller-Rothschild connections. I selected them over time when filling in the biographies of the names that appeared in the different membership lists (the ones that were still alive, that is). A small minority stood out above the rest, but only when I expanded their bios to be included in this article, it turned out that not a few, but almost every single one traced his history back to the Rockefeller family. That only reinforced a theory that has been going round for decades, of course.<br><br>But before we call it quits, let's make a few additional observations about the 1991 document. First of all, Hunt, unfortunately, doesn't provide any details about this meeting, like who sponsored it or who was attending. There's only one quickly accessible source that confirms this meeting ever took place. Dr. Burns H. Weston, Law professor (emeritus) at the University of Iowa, lists the following reference among his 'Invited Lectures, Papers and Other Public Appearances' (73):<br><br>"Proposals for International Legal Environmental Reforms (UNA Midwest Public Hearing on Environment and Development, State Capitol, Des Moines, Iowa, September 22, 1991)"<br><br>That's the exact same meeting Hunt is talking about, because the date, location, and title all match. The UNA prefix isn't included in Hunt's document though, but my initial thought was that it stood for 'United Nations Association'. Coincidentally, the United Nations Association, amid numerous references to New World Orders and Iraq (like in the Hunt document), is mentioned several times on dr. Weston's website. In one case it reads (74):<br><br>"Proposals for International Legal and Institutional Environmental Policy Reforms, in Midwest Public Hearing on Environment and Development (United Nations Association-Iowa Division, October 1991)"<br><br>The United Nations Association, which is part of the World Federation of United Nations Associations, is a worldwide body that promotes the work of the regular United Nations by setting up education centers and study programs at the most important universities. The top echelons, as always, tie into the Anglo-American establishment. It was founded in 1944 under the name American Association for the United Nations (AAUN) which was merely a name change of the League of Nations Non-partisan Association (LNA). George W. Wickersham (director CFR 1921-1933; president CFR 1933-1936; Pilgrims Society; Law Partner of William Howard Taft) was one of the two official founders of the LNA, erected to push the United States into the League of Nations. In 1945, Nelson Rockefeller (Pilgrims Society; original patron Henry Kissinger; big intelligence insider) and John D. Rockefeller, Jr. (Pilgrims Society) played important roles in the creation of the actual United Nations, the location of its headquarters, and even how these headquarters were designed (75). Chase Manhattan Bank would manage [at least many of] the different accounts of the UN programs and in 1969 John D. Rockefeller III chaired a United Nations Association-USA panel that was instrumental in creating the United Nations Population Fund (76). According to the archives of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the AAUN and the UNA-USA received grants from 1945 to 1961 and from 1963 to 1983, including additional funding for several specialized projects in the Americas and Japan. In 1999, the Business Council for the United Nations, originally founded in 1958, was incorporated within UNA-USA. <br><br>http://home.planet.nl/~reijd050/introduction.htm <p></p><i></i>
cortez
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 11:58 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

An answer to the "Mark Twain" question.

Postby slimmouse » Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:09 am

<br> Interestingly enough, a side thread kinda started, mentioning Mark Twain, and what the hell, he was doing associating with Grovers.<br><br> A logical and articulate answer is provided within that particular section of the site also. Namely that originally, the grove was a place for Artists, writers etc - until of course Big Money got their inevitable stranglehold on the place.<br><br> I would post the link, but its too long and would screw up the thread . It is contained within the first hyperlink on the BG section ( within the words 'take a look here') <p></p><i></i>
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: An answer to the "Mark Twain" question.

Postby FourthBase » Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:50 am

I'm aware that the original theme of the BG was more artistic, and that Twain became a member before it started to become what it is today. But he <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>remained</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> a member during the transition in the 1890's.<br><br>Is this the passage?<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Under normal circumstances one might not contemplate the alternative meaning of the word 'grove', especially not when newspapers referred to a 'redwood grove' ever since the day the Bohemians bought their initial 160 acres in 1899. Still, the decision to hire a piece of land in the redwood grove was made in the early 1890s under the Bohemian Club presidency of Joseph D. Redding. At the same time he created the original Cremation of Care ceremony and acted as its High Priest. Redding had a completely different background than the average Bohemian Club artist. His father was a land agent for the Southern Pacific Railroad Company, which was owned by the elite Anglo-American Pilgrims Society families, Harriman (chair of Southern and Union Pacific was Edward Henry Harriman, who was financed by Jacob Schiff) & Harkness (major shareholders of Rockefeller's Standard Oil; intermarried with the Stillmans, who also intermarried with the Rockefellers; partners of J.P. Morgan; co-founders of the Commonwealth Fund and the Pilgrim Trust). Redding went to Harvard Law School and became a wealthy lawyer for Southern Pacific. Southern Pacific is a great example of the reported schism that happened within the Bohemian Club between the original middle class artists and the wealthy businessmen. In May 1898 Southern Pacific created Sunset Magazine, which dealt with the outdoors, artistic writings, and things about everyday life. In 1911 Charles K. Field, a member of the Bohemian Club, became its editor. Bohemian Club writers like Ina Coolbrith, Jack London, Bret Harte, and John Muir contributed to the magazine, but as time progressed all these writers became increasingly critical of the business ways of the robber barons. Because of this development Southern Pacific had to do away with the magazine in 1914. And by this time the Cremation of Care founder was living in New York, surrounded by members of the Pilgrims Society. <br><br>The term 'Bohemian', by the way, has very little to do with the East-European region of Bohemia. The original Bohemians were a group of pennyless rebellious young artists living in 19th century France. Among them were Victor Hugo (wrote 'Hunchback of the Notre Dame' and is today an inspiration for the elite European Institute), Arthur Rimbaud, Alfred De Musset, and Paul Verlaine. Those who referred to these people as 'Bohemians' meant that they thought of them as Gypsies (low life). The first accusation we know of was made in 1834 by Felix Pyat in a Parisian publication called 'Nouveau Tableau de Paris au XIX Siecle'. It read: "alien and bizarre... outside the law, beyond the reaches of society... they are the Bohemians of today." The Frenchman Henry Murger was the first to popularize the term in his 1849 novel 'Scenes de la Boheme', which was turned into a play 2 years later. In this book the main character, together with a few newly found friends, is involved in creating a small unofficial Bohemian club at a local Parisian tavern. Murger's description of a Bohemian is someone who purely lives of the art he creates. Bohemia, according to him, was located in Paris. So, I guess it's pretty obvious to see where the San Francisco artists got their inspiration from when they established the Bohemian Club in 1872. And they might have been totally different persons then those who inspired the creation of the Cremation of Care.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <br><br>OK, but take a look at the timeline:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>1872 The Bohemian Club is organized in San Francisco as a gathering place for men who like the arts and literature. The clubhouse is located in the Astor Hotel on Sacramento Street and the owl is chosen as the club's symbol. <br>1874 The Club has 182 members. <br>1875 The Bohemian Club's motto, "Weaving spiders, come not here", first appears on a Club announcement. It was taken from Shakespeare's "A midsummer Night's Dream". <br>1877 The Club has outgrown the Astor Hotel and moves to 430 Pine Street in San Francisco. <br>1878 In 1878, several dozen Bohemians hold a Jinks in the forest in Sonoma County near what is now known as Camp Taylor (California Historical Society, Bohemian Club 1947). This was the start of a long Bohemian tradition of trekking to the Sonoma County redwoods during July and August of each year for camping and self entertainment. <br>1882 The Club's patron saint becomes John of Nepomuk. The legend says that St. John was killed in 1393 at the orders of Wenceslaus IV, King of the Bohemians & King of the Holy Roman Empire, because he didn't want to disclose the confessional secrets of Queen Johanna of Bohemia. Today, St. John symbolizes the right to privacy of the Bohemians. An interesting, but seemingly unconnected detail is that Wenceslaus IV struggled with his half-brother Sigismund I (same father) for the title of Holy Roman Emperor. King Sigismund was the one who reinstituted the ancient Dragon Court, which still exists today. The British Queen and the Lord Mayor of London are involved with it. <br>1885 The extremely successful <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Joseph D. Redding is elected president of the Bohemian Club</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> and in 8 years he will devise [his version of?] the Cremation of Care. Redding is a very successful attorney for the Southern Pacific Railroad Company, which is owned by the Rockefeller-connected Pilgrims Society families of Harriman & Harkness. Redding is considered a musical genius. [Reference 2 on this page; more details in the article on the BG symbolism and in the membership list] <br>1887 The Club has 561 members, which are a combination of literary figures and San Francisco businessmen. Among them are 4 members of the Crocker banking family, 3 Spreckles, William Randolph Hearst, Bay Area shipbuilder Arthur W. Moore, columnist and writer Ambrose Bierce, writer Henry George, and 14 officers from the Army and Navy. Other Bohemian Club writers are Charles K. Field, Ina Coolbrith, Bret Harte, Daniel O'Connell, and Mark Twain. <br>1892 The 70 ft. high Buddha statue is built within the Sequoia Valley, now known as the Bohemian Grove. It is modeled after the Daibutsu of Kamakura, the Great Buddha from Japan. The statue used to be part of the Cremation of Care. <br>1893 Joseph D. Redding creates the Cremation of Care and serves as High Priest of Bohemia during this ceremony. Within a couple of years he will move his business to New York where he again becomes part of 'high society'. The Bohemian Club starts renting a piece of land in the Sequoia Valley from the Sonoma Lumber Company. They will do this until 1899 when they make their first land purchase. <br>1899 The Bohemian Club buys a 160 acre piece of land in the Sequoia Valley, today known as the Bohemian Grove. The Club will make twenty-eight purchases of land over a 67 year period. Today it owns 2,712 acres. The New York Times writes two articles about the Cremation of Care and how impressive it is. <br>1905 The Washington Post reads: "The Taft party to-day visited the Bohemian grove of redwoods...", which is the first reference I have seen to presidents visiting the Bohemian Grove. <br>1913 The Cremation of Care ceremony is moved to the first weekend of the encampment. <br>1914 The Bohemian Club has 1259 members, of which 787 resident members, 241 non-resident members, 19 Navy officers, 49 Army officers, 29 faculty members, 114 associate members, and 20 honorary members.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <p></p><i></i>
User avatar
FourthBase
 
Posts: 6669
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 4:41 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: An answer to the "Mark Twain" question.

Postby starroute » Mon Feb 13, 2006 12:29 pm

It looks like Twain only actually lived in California from 1864 to 1866, with some briefer travel there in 1868 -- all before the founding of the Bohemian Club. After his marriage in 1870, he lived entirely in in New York, Connecticut, and Europe.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.geocities.com/swaisman/">www.geocities.com/swaisman/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>So it looks as though his membership in the Bohemian Club would have been no more than a courtesy ever at the start, and there is no reason to think he was ever an attending member.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
starroute
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 12:01 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to Deep Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests