Sunday, September 25, 2011

Troy Maxi Conversation About EJP Controlled Opposition

From: TS
Date: 25 September 2011

Dear Maxi

Thanks for your thoughts:

> By my investigations i still believe the Jesuit/Templar Order IS the most powerful satanist force in world. Although some good questions arises, like: what about the rosicrucianism? and, who really was Bernardo de Claraval? I believe we must invetigate the ptolemaic/seleucid dinasties and the origin of the cistercian and templar order. As i said, i still believe the jesuits are the "pinnacle of the NWO structure". I believe that is very probable that mister Phelps could functions like a "damage control" for the work of Taupper Saussy and others in order to monopolize the historical "Anti Jesuit Movement" to create a controlled demolition of the same. This was always a possibility, you know that. Also... i am very impressed how California seems to be the nest of the "conspiracy movement". Remember that i pointed out some time ago that the Church of the Scientology wanted a part of California by using the secession to do it... and this is the same strategy proposed for mister Phelps: Church => Political Pression => Secession = (?).

They brought to mind a few matters which I will outline below:

Admittedly Saussy wasn't perfect in his conclusions - although his historical perception was acutely accurate - but I can't help thinking that he was the William (Bill) Cooper to Eric Phelps' Alex Jones, i.e. that Jones & Phelps were put out there around 2001 to be controlled opposition - one as the selected public face spokesman for the general conspiracy investigation movement, the other to do the same role for the Jesuit/Roman agenda investigation arena - this effectively sidelining Cooper (who was taken out of the picture completely not long after via government forces in what was IMHO an assassinate set up to look like an "anti-government fringe/whacko" who brought on his own demise.

When Saussy was lambasted a few months back at the Unhived Mind for having his book published by Harper Collins I wrote the following reply:

"Let it be known that Tupper Saussy's book "Rulers of Evil" was [in fact] originally published in 1999 by Ospray Bookmakers. It had been in the public sphere for two years when Harper Collins picked it up. Note that they never published a paperback edition of it - which would have made it much more popular - & they have never republished the book, despite the fact that it commands reasonably high prices in the used market via online retailers such as Amazon."

The works of Saussy ("Rulers of Evil"), John Daniel ("Grand Design Exposed") & PD Stuart ("Codeword Barbelon"), while not perfect, are far more credible presentations of the Jesuit NWO conspiracy than Phelps' work & show how King James VI/I & George Washington were shills for Rome, rather than the great heroes that Phelps eulogises & would have his audience do likewise.

Phelps' presentation of his own work took a major nosedive in 2008 when he got his own radio show in which he radically departed from the cool, calm, albeit passionate presenter of mostly sound information (King James & George Washington worship aside) that we had come to know primarily via his many interviews by Greg Szymanski on the Investigative Journal from 2006 to 2008 & embarked on putting histrionics & hysteria before history. For those unfamiliar with the term "histrionics" I will provide the following dictionary definitions, which the reader will surely associate with Phelps' shows of the past three years:

: adjectivea histrionic account of her divorce: melodramatic, theatrical,dramatic, exaggerated, stagy, showy, affected, artificial,overacted, overdone; informal hammy, ham, campy.

Such an approach is of course based on the (I would contend deliberate) use of the Logical Fallacy of Appeal to Emotion, which puts us on alert that the accompanying information flawed. This repeated methodology is one of Phelps' key tools to discrediting the valid parts of his information to those who have not researched these matters independently - & to discredit that of others that associate with him & to discredit the area of research that he has been put out to be the public face of.

As for the subject of the Templars that Maxi brings up, it is worth noting that it was the Spanish branch of the Templars who carried on into the Jesuits (via the likes of the Order of Montessa - giving thanks to Maxi for his researches into this area in the past), while those elements of the French branch who escaped to Scotland, as well as the Scottish branch themselves preserved their traditions via Freemasonry. Now the Jesuits eventually founded that particular advanced degree system that became the Scottish Rite (after the Stewarts were exiled from the British Isles to the continent) & had been involved in attempting to wrest control of Freemasonry from the Sinclairs since the days of Jesuit-directed Freemason King James VI/I.

The Templars (& Freemasonry) clearly derive from the High Priests of the Temple of Jerusalem, as a number of rare studies & sources show - not to mention the Masonic rituals which clearly illustrate this:

Also worth noting some of my preliminary research on this below where I posted Wikipedia links to help other researchers get some basic grounding in some of the key groups that ultimately led to the foundation of the Templars.

To these I should have added (had I been fully aware of the links at the time):

Peace be with you -



Amish said...

There is zero proof KJ was knighted of any sort. There is ample proof he refused or was never offered the vestments of the Order of the Garter, along with Queen Elizabeth I, which is why the Jesuits tried to assassinate both of them. People often attack KJ to support their new version Bibles used to support some false doctrine. The 1611 KJV is an old english and that includes the Apocrypha so the newer editions would be preferred. Perhaps visit Bible Protector on Youtube as to which KJB is the better edition.

Amish said...

Looks like King James did accept the Templar founded Order of the Garter at some early stage of his life. However, sometimes these knighted kings converted to Christian. This was certainly the case with King James and at least a few others in Prussia.

King James, Meditation on Revelation

“The Pope is Antichrist, and Popery the loosing of Satan, from whom proceedeth false doctrine and cruelty to subvert the kingdom of Christ: Now whether the Pope beareth these marks or not, let any indifferent man judge; I think surely it expounds itself: Doeth he not usurp Christ his office, calling himself universal Bishop and head of the Church? Playeth he not the part of Apollyon, and Abbadon the king of the Locusts and destroyer, or son of perdition, in chopping and changing of souls betwixt heaven, hell, and his fantastic or imagined purgatory at his pleasure? Blasphemeth he not, in denying us to be saved by the imputation of Christ his righteousness? Moreover, hath he not sent forth and abused the world with innumerable orders of locust and shavelings? Hath he not so fully ruled over the world these many hundredth years, as to the fire went he, whosoever he was, that durst deny any part of his usurped supremacy?”....“But I am sure none will condemn me for an heretic, save such as make the Pope their God...” (King James I, A Meditation on Revelation; Premonition).

"locust and shavelings"

Locust, an apparent reference to Rev 9 possibly denoting Islam; and shavelings refers to priests.

Whether King James was Knighted or even a Christian has no bearing on the accuracy of the KJB translation, and to imply KJ was "Jesuit controlled" as they attempted assassination of the entire govt thru Guy Fawks is dogmatic.

It was Queen Elizabeth I and King James who founded the Protestant British Colonies in the New World. These were Protestant founded and governed. Only after King James was Maryland founded for the Catholics, then the masonic American Revolution and subsequent founding of their Capital in Maryland, Washington.