Appendix: The 'Counter-Conspiracy'/Fragments

This thread is a direct continuation of all my other accounts. Naturally, familiarity with all those will be presupposed. This thread will contain disconnected fragments that supplement the previous explanations.

++

>The ‚masonic‘ ‚counter-conspiracy‘
The rosicrucian and new ‚freemasonic‘ environments of the Renaissance shifted the focal point of ‚craft‘ and ‚contemplation‘ towards the order of individual human virtue, giving rise to the classical formula „Liberté, Fraternité, Egalité“. As the social order was concerned, the ‚democratic‘ and ‚libertarian‘ ideas of Montesquieu, Rousseau, Locke and Paine stood in contradistinction to the ‚hierarchic‘ thought that argued from a ‚misanthropic‘ standpoint: the ennobling of ‚human reason‘ could only occur on the account of his ‚individual‘ subordination to a ‚latomistic‘ contract, in which better men rule over him and educate his character to the better; ‚enlightenment‘ was the seperation of the ‚wheat from the chaff‘ along the lines of rational intellect, financial talent and ‚hermetic initiation‘ in accordance with the ‚Valentinian‘ threefold distinction of men; the latter lineage was cultivated by the likes of Thomas Hobbes, Edmund Burke, Joseph deMaistre, who continued the aristocratic lineage of the Anglo-Dutch ‚financial guilds‘, yet also recognized the creative power of hidden governance that ‚liberalism‘ and ‚democracy‘ might harbor, which was incorporated by the ‚french‘ ‚intellectual‘ circles of the Grande Oriente de France, and the later congregation of ‚Continental Masonry‘. The French Revolution and the reign of Napoleon Bonaparte, who had been initiated into the ‚Philadelphes de Narbonne‘ Rite, akin to the A.A.S.R. in the 1790s, constituted the first real ‚continental schism‘, which was brought to an end in 1815 with the Battle of Waterloo and the Restauration Congress of Vienna.

++

The 19th century then saw a ‚dialectical play‘ between the ‚reactionary‘ financial aristocratic families on the one hand, see the ramified branches of the Rothschild Family, and certain actors of the masonic liberalist, nationalist and early marxist environments, which resumed the continuity of the french revolution in 1830 through the Juli Revolution, and in 1848 through the uprisings in Germany, Hungary and Italy (‚Risorgimento‘) until 1861. The higher-profile financial guilds also had an interest in the abolishment of the Restauration Order, which had been put forth by reactionary forces and support by ‚reactionary‘ masonic circles such as within the Kotzebue and Metternich families, ‚enclosing germany at the rhine and the baltikum‘; these guilds sought to abolish the ‚royal paradigm‘ and replace it with the ‚Central Banking‘ paradigm completely. The Rothschild Family was particularly interested in the cultivation of zionist thought under the guise of marxism and progressivism, as can be seen with Moses Hess, the first racial zionist, who in his work ‚Rome and Jerusalem‘ (1862) first proposed that the unsteady jewish spirit be enclosed in national flesh, for the racial question must inescapably precede the question of social liberation. He was among the first figures that developed a ‚Race Theory‘ alongside Arthur de Gobineau. He writes:

++

„Wie die Natur keine allgemeinen Blumen und Früchte, keine allgemeinen Thiere und Pflanzen, sondern nur Pflanzen- und Thiertypen produzirt, so der Schöpfer in der Geschichte nur Volkstypen. In der Menschheit soll allerdings der Plan des Pflanzen- und Thierreichs zum Abschluss gelangen. Aber die Menschheit ist als selbstständige Lebenssphäre, als die Sphäre des socialen Lebens, noch in der Entwicklung begriffen. Wir finden hier eine ursprüngliche Verschiedenheit von Volkstypen, die zuerst, wie im Pflanzenreich, nur neben einander existirten, die sich sodann, nach dem Plane der Thierwelt, gegenseitig bekämpften und absorbirten, um erst schliesslich wieder frei zu werden, friedlich neben einander und solidarisch für einander zu leben, ohne deshalb ihre typischen Unterschiede aufzugeben.“

++

The dichotomy congregated into the first transnational ‚Ur‘ lodge environments ‚Thomas Paine‘ and ‚Edmund Burke‘ at the end of the 19th century [the ‚germanic triumvirate‘ was limited to the german environment in the first decades]; the former reflects the ‚progressive/republican‘ tendencies of american rosicrucian scholars, but was also frequented by european revolutionary activists and ‚occultists‘ such as Giuseppe Garibaldi, Giuseppe Mazzini and later Helena Blavatsky. ‚Edmund Burke‘ was established not just as a ‚financial-aristocratic‘ answer to the french-american republicans, but also intended as a hidden framework for worldwide Anglo-Saxon dominance over the ‚subhuman‘ races; this idea had been put forward by Cecil Rhodes.
„There came a sudden conjunction of two Meteors, perhaps in the little hut that Gordon had been allocated under the shadow of the northern mountains of what, much later, was to become Lesotho. Or, to give a romantic Interpretation of this encounter: Rhodes and Gordon, lonely men of mysoginist impulse, both being „absorbed in [their] gigantic dreams,“ were delighted to find each other…Rhodes and Gordon went on long walks together during what must have been a period of no more than a week … In 1881, Gordon wrote a letter to a young member of parliament proposing a kind of secret community of men for the betterment of society … a group of ombudsmen in Britain modeled on the so-called College of Censors in China.“ - Robert I. Rotberg in ‚The Founder: Cecil Rhodes and the Pursuit of Power“ - Robert I. Rotberg in ‚The Founder: Cecil Rhodes and the Pursuit of Power‘

++

„On the 19th September 1877, this youth of 24 wrote his Last Will and Testament To and For the Establishment, Promotion and Development of a Secret Society, the true aim and object thereof shall be the extension of British rule throughout the world. Much later in life Rhodes remarked to me that he had never deviated from the Policy he then laid down in that shanty on the Diamond Fields“ – Sir Lewis Mitchell in ‚The Life and Times of the Right Honourable Cecil John Rhodes 1853-1902, Vol I.
As already described, the end of the 19th century saw the proliferation of various new occultic modalities, which might or might not be derived from a syncretic mixture of martinist, frankist schemes within the ‚asiatic brethren‘ of the 18th century, russian and ‚classical‘ rosicrucian-masonic lineages; the ‚Rite of Memphis-Misraim‘ was composed by Giuseppe Garibaldi, which included Rudolf Steiner, Rudolf von Sebottendorff, and many other figures that would later orchestrate the ‚proto-fascist‘ schism from the ‚progressive‘ theosophic environment, the ‚Hermetic Brotherhood of Luxor‘, the Gnostic Church of France, the O.T.O. of Theodor Reuß and later Aleister Crowley, and many other orders of sexual magical, magical, animist or naturalist-paganist delineation, which operated adjacent to, or with a more-or-less distant maintenance from the US-american and european ‚economic nobility‘ and masonic ‚cosmopolitan‘ society congregated within ‚Edmund Burke‘, later the ‚germanic triumvirate‘, ‚Thomas Paine‘, ‚Ghedullah‘ [a ‚progressive‘ environment, particularly dedicated towards ‚rosicrucian‘ studies] and certain ecclesiastical circles, which were inhabited by Franz von Papen.

++

In 1870 and 1877, the drift between the continental ‚french‘ and british ‚masonry’ was consummated in regular terms in the ‚Louisiana‘ and ‚theism‘ dispute; a new branch of masonry was created as the Grand Lodge of England discredited the labour of the new ‚Ur‘ lodge ‚Montesqieu‘ within the GOdF, which incorporated a more extreme liberalism (‚laicism‘, ‚anti-racism‘, etc.). This ‚schism‘ illustrates on the one hand the volatilization of ‚ordinary‘ and ‚regular‘ masonry in the wake of the growing scope of ‚Ur masonry‘ in the late 19th century, as well as the ‚softening‘ process, of which the countless new ‚occultic‘ groups would be the crest, using the new laws within ‚ordinary‘ masonry for infiltration.‚Montesquieu‘ in particular, and some other ‚Ur‘ lodge congregations within the french environment, especially the ‚Ferdinand Lassalle‘ group, would perpetuate the ‚liberalist‘ masonic lineage; ‚Montesquieu‘ claimed intellectual descent from the Templar Tradition. In 1902, the Pilgrim’s Society was established, a transatlantic environment that would gather financial aristocrats, masons and non-masons alike, of all political lineages in a group of masonically inspired character, which would later become the breeding ground for the ‚Ur‘ lodge ‚Leviathan‘; a joint project of reconciliation between ‚progressive‘ and ‚aristocratic‘ influences around ‚Jekyll Island‘ that would later form the ‚Council On Foreign Relations‘ and the RIIA.

++

The ‚liberal masonic‘ continuity was later carried forth by figures as Franklin Roosevelt, ‚Mahatma‘ Gandhi [who created the ‚Ur‘ lodge ‚Arjuna-Phoenix‘ in 1904,which is inhabited by ‚Thomas Paine‘ related figures from India and Africa mostly], H.G. Wells, Eric Blair, Arthur Schlesinger Jr., Martin Luther King, and John F. Kennedy, Robert and Ted Kennedy, John Kenneth Galbraith, Yitzak Rabin, against the growing environment around ‚Leviathan‘ [which had become fully oligopolist/aristocratic], ‚Geburah’, ‚Compass Star-Rose‘ and ‚Joseph De Maistre‘ [which, founded by Vladimir Lenin and some high-profile ‚germanic‘ masons in 1916/17 in Switzerland, was the environment in which the soviet state apparatus was internationally coordinated; the chosing of name not only expresses ‚anti-democratic‘, but also an ‚anti-catholic‘ sentiment]. Kennedy in particular, who was instantiated by a joint effort of ‚progressive masons and catholics‘, despised these circles and exhausted every degree of freedom to maneuvre and labor against them; he hints at this conglomeration in his ‚infamous‘ speech ‚The President and the Press‘ in New York, 1961, in which he hinted at a conspiracy in deployment of vast scientific, military and political resources on both sides of the ‚iron curtain‘.

++

With the ascent of ‚Three Eyes‘, the ‚liberal masonic‘ lineage was weakened politically, but maintained an undercurrent for many ‚libertarian‘ and ‚social liberal‘ ideas that were popularized in universitarian environments and the entertainment industry of the second half of the 20th century. Its strongholds lied in Western Europe, France, Italy and Scandinavia. After the Manhattan Incident and especially after the ‚World Economic Crisis‘ of 2008, the particular french-masonic lineage began to thrive again with France and Italy as its cultural hotbeds; see >>33356536. In the U.S., this environment supports ‚anti-conspiratory‘ and ‚libertarian‘ figures, and were invested to a certain degree in the presidency of Donald Trump. In 2018, after I had left all the major congregations of the ‚western oligarchical‘ type [except for ‚Der Ring‘, which I still inhabited nominally], I gathered a small circle of associates in Germany, Scandinavia and Saudi Arabia, which at first seemed to be not much else than an ‚apolitical‘ platform, but later reached out to the ‚Ferdinand Lassalle‘ group, which is the ‚initiatic‘ environment of ‚democratic civil socialism‘ in countless modalities next to ‚Golden Eurasia‘ worldwide [they are even partly responsible for the japanese ‚Sonderweg‘, which was supposed to mold a ‚prussian‘ type social state, but led to a militaristic and authoritarian ‚hardening‘ during the Meiji period] but it is particularly active in Germany, Scandinavia and France. The 1970’s and 1980’s were a notable period, as the members Olof Palme, Francois Mitterand and Helmut Schmidt became heads of state.

++

In 2019, then, I provided ‚progressive‘ groups in France with ‚classified‘ information and strategies concerning the ‚initiatic‘ structures of the western oligarchies, who now operate to a notable degree through their relations to the Communist Party of China [the ‚chinese model‘ is the blueprint for a ‚new society‘ that can be exported around the world], and proposed to establish an Intelligence network connected to various research groups [called the ‚pentahedron‘; not only a quantifier, but also a symbolic ‚inversion‘ of the american MIC]; it was in late 2019, then, when the first ‚ecumenic‘ lodge ‚Phoenix ex filis Arabiae‘ was established and I disclosed the pending reality of the ‚coronatic‘ paradigm to all circles involved. Around the same time ‚Mario Draghi‘ and ‚Christine Lagarde‘ reached out towards the ‚democratic‘ ‚liberal‘ fraction and their neo-keynesian economic theories [see ‚Modern Money Theory‘], which they now considered more sustainable and ‚humane‘. In the last two years, then, we have congregated disillusioned ‚Ur‘ masons [mainly from ‚Der Ring‘, ‚Three Eyes‘, and ‚Compass Star-Rose‘], regular masons, politicians and economists of all types into the new environment ‚Atlas Adlerbund‘, which was officially founded in 2022 in Bavaria, and ‚the rest is history‘, as they say.

++

>Imminent threats
In the last few weeks, we have received information through various independent channels, and observed an unusual shift in certain global parameters, which indicates that a new internationally coordinated ‚crisis paradigm‘ might come into effect soon, involving ‚cyber security‘ in the western countries in the broadest sense. If this is true, then this means that the ‚Agenda2030‘/‘SmartCity‘ paradigm that I have verbosely accounted in the past has been significantly changed.

++

>‘political gnosticism‘
While certain ‚chaotic genius‘ characters prevailed in anti-globalitarian research of the past, the confusion of this worldview with ‚psychic‘ or ‚New Age‘ doctrines into the mindset which is termed by some ‚conspirituality‘, certainly accords at some order to the ‚elitarian‘ pursuit of creating a new ‚folk religion‘. If one is to subvert a movement or idea, one must first discern the most uncultivated and unintelligent characters of this environment and put loudspeakers in their hands. Overthrowing the mental autonomy of the common folk while at the same time involving them in superstitious rants against the elitarian castes has become a trademark of the distal MIC circles in particular. This new ‚folk religion‘ would play out in levels of abhorrent brutish passivity, which reduces all efforts to discern hidden environments onto an entertainment ‚viewing screen‘ that just accompanies man in his increasingly depraved ordinary life.

++

>‘Ur‘ lodges
Perhaps a further clarification is due as to the nature of these particular congregation. It is a transnational ‚workshop‘ inhabited by economists, politicians, ‚scientists‘, ‚artists‘, journalists who can be trusted with higher ‚intellectual‘ affairs. It is usually of most discrete character, and structured ‚masonically'; a threefold grade system, a ‚master of chair‘, a senior and junior warden, a secretary, a ‚master of treasury‘ and in some cases a blazon. As the circle is transnational in nature, it does not revolve around a ‚lodge architecture‘ and is comprised of ‚masons‘ with various ‚exoteric‘ religious origins; it is thus referenced to ‚Ur‘, the intersection and ‚esoteric‘ origin of the ‚abrahamite‘ religions. It is a volatile environment that does not necessarily follow a particular rigorous rite, but is merged under a general ‚symbol‘ or ‚idea‘, and dedicated to geopolitical strategy. It provides ‚protective financial umbrellas‘ for esoteric, occultic or otherwise ‚fringe‘ circles that then serve as an ‚adjacent laboratory‘; its members also create public or semi-discrete environments outside the ‚ritual dynamic‘, through which members can communicate with other ‚initiatic‘ or ‚non-initiatic‘ circles. These are called ‚para-masonic viewing screens‘, ‚lounges‘ or ‚front offices‘; they are frequented by a broader spectrum of people, who need not be trusted with higher affairs and are expected to enact policies or regulations at a more local level. I have already named such organizations.

++

>Literature
Cecil Rhodes: ‚Confession Of Faith‘ (1877)
https://pages.uoregon.edu/kimball/Rhodes-Confession.htm

Adam Weishaupt: ‚Pythagoras, oder Betrachtungen über die geheime Welt- und Regierungskunst‘ (1790)
https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_T-FLAAAAcAAJ/page/n5/mode/2up

Lyndon LaRouche: ‚The Secrets Known To The Inner Elites‘ (1978)*
https://archive.org/details/the-secrets-known-to-the-inner-elites-lyndon-la-rouche/page/5/mode/2up

++

*Although it contains many 'modern' ‚promethean‘ confusions and distortions, there are several hints that deserve a due mention: the disposition between the Ionian architectural guilds and the ‚aristotelian‘ misanthropic ‚feudal‘ ‚zero-growth‘ oligarchies; the threefold constitution of man and the difference between ‚pure knowledge‘ expressed through ‚favorable mythologies‘, and the ‚deistic‘ ‚static‘ approach of mythology that places ‚divinity‘ in unfavorable reach of the adept, yet in close reach to the ones that reap the profits of ‚syncretic theatre‘; a custom that is severely related to the ‚theosophist’s‘ strategy since the middle of the 19th century. LaRouche is capable of distinguishing ‚scientific reason‘ from the ‚empiricist‘ approach of Hume, and the ‚deistic‘ mindset from the ‚human microcosm‘ (expressed as ‚continued creation through man‘), yet confuses the idea of ‚man’s becoming‘ as an inward growth of the soul and Geist through initiation and contemplation, with ‚evolutionary‘ and ‚enlightened‘ entrepeneurship, which he maintains to be the pinnacle of the unfoldment of man’s platonic reason and human civilization as such. These notions come from the hegelian perspective of ‚unfoldment of history from chaotic indifference towards differentiation/individuation through dialectic self-comparison‘ and rely precisely on the inversion of the true cyclic ‚devolutive‘ doctrine of history. The lineage itself sprang forth from the ‚natural theologist‘ lens of late ‚scholastics‘; it stands in exact opposite to the platonic and pythagorean teachings, perhaps the most exact ‚philosophic‘ ‚exoteric‘ approximations of the perennial metaphysical disciplines; these figures, as opposed to Leibniz and other theorists of the ‚clockmaster‘, are truly the last ‚universal minds‘ of a ‚golden age‘.

++

LaRouche was a sophisticated but confused character; his research activity was closely observed and ‚distantly‘ cultivated by certain circles at the fringes of the MIC, who hoped that his intelligence network could be used as a ‚sleeping pivot‘ to dissipate incriminating information of variable degrees about the ‚Three Eyes‘, ‚White Eagle‘ and ‚Edmund Burke‘ environments onto a broader viewing screen if needed [the ‚neo-malthusian‘ scheme lamented by LaRouche is a reference to the ‚ecological market society‘, which stems directly from the crucibles of ‚Three Eyes‘ via the ‚Club Of Rome‘ and the ‚Trilateral Commission‘]. His analysis concerning the ‚misanthropic‘ Frankfurt School is correct, thus in its basic outline it sees man, instead of being inherently ‚good‘ and ‚creative‘, as a malevolent character that must be ‚reared‘ or ‚corrected‘ by an omnipresent institutional ‚social paradigm‘. This mode of thought has been the driving force of various figures in ‚psychoanalysis‘ and ‚evolutionary psychology‘ (see Freud, Russell, Huxley, etc). Because of his impenetrable, disagreeable character, LaRouche quickly lost many of his friends; after his imprisonment, he found a new interest in the orbit of the ‚Golden Eurasia‘ environment in Germany and later Russia, but he was never invited.

++

>Epilogue
The accounts have been a broad outline of the abberations of European Civilization after the ‚Renaissance‘, and especially a dissection of the shipwreck that was the last century, isolatedly hinting at a meagre subset of initiatic truths. I myself, an ‚Architect of Globalization‘ as I have called myself at the beginning of this testimony, have helped shape this modern world; even though I am certainly resentful at the role that I have played on the geopolitical scope, I realize the grand importance of the world as it is today; even in the present there are occasions where I sit in the skyscraper apartment, looking down on the endless scape of steel and iron stretching out beneath, bathed in the glassy reflections of the sunset gleam and the artificial lights, and there is a promethean spark in me that ignites again, that makes me think about the stars and bathe in joy for our unruly human power that has conquered every law of the square, crushed the wheel of nature, ‚brought the world to a standstill‘ as has been professed so often by the ambitious geniuses of science and technology. But then, during my ‚chaotic dance of Shiva‘ I halt disillusioned, I collect myself and fall again into reactionary brooding; I discern the four cardinal directions; truly the signs of our times.

____

>> How many Ur lodges are there?

++ The most influential ones I have already mentioned. Smaller circles of this type often appear at the boundary of the ‚Western Nations‘. Naturally, I will avoid listing names and unnecessarily endangering such individuals that labour within a hostile environment.
- ‚Ecclesia‘; it was founded in the late 19th century in the Vatican; it is now the chief congregation for ‚progressive catholics‘ who are engaged in ‚officious‘ clerical work worldwide.
- ‚Ibn Arabi‘; it was founded in the very early 19th century as a small circle of Sufis; amidst the upheavals of the 20th century, it has occupied a small piece of the chessboard of Middle Eastern politics. It is frequented by ‚libertarian‘ and ‚progressive‘ dissidents mostly in Saudi Arabia, Iran and North Africa.
- ‚Lux Ad Orientem‘; it was founded within a small circle of anti-communistic, and ‚borderline‘ Trotskyite agitators and scientists at the ‚Columbia University‘ around Zbigniew Brzezinski; shortly after, all the Trotskyite elements would migrate towards ‚Golden Eurasia‘. Boris Jelzin was a member, and Sergej Nawalny is presently initiated. The name is a reference to one of the alternative designations of ‚Golden Eurasia‘: ‚Speculum Orientalis Occidentalisque‘.
- ‚Ioannes‘; it was created in the late 19th century around the ‚Knights Of Malta‘; Franz von Papen was a prominent member.
- ‚Benjamin Franklin‘; it was created ‚officially‘ at the end of the 19th century as far as the specific initiatic modality is concerned, but it stands in continuity to freemasonic circles from the time of the ‚Founding Fathers‘ . The group is highly fortified and has been operating mostly unnoticed of most agencies related to the ‚oligo-authoritarian‘ supraenvironment.

++

‚Hiram Rhodes Revels‘; it was created in 1963 by Martin Luther King as a ‚bridge‘ between the europid and negro peoples, and one of the carriers of the ‚Civil Rights Movement‘.
- ‚Daath‘; a ‚progressive‘ and mostly non-religious jewish environment in the US and Israel; non-jews are permitted entry as well. Yitzhak Rabin, Golda Meir and Robert Zimmerman are members.
- ‚Tao Lodge‘; a subsidiary of ‚Three Eyes‘ in China of a similar type as ‚Amun‘ in the Middle East.
- ‚Simón Bolivár‘; an organization of South Americans of many political lineages; it consists mostly of ‚progressives‘ and ‚social democrats‘. As ‚Operation Condor‘ was being countermanded in the 1980’s in the wake of the ‚Globalization Treaty‘ including almost all transnational environments, many members became influential figures in the state departments of south america.
- ‚Atlantis Aletheia‘; founded by two opposing groups of scientists and politicians in the early 20th century. Now it operates within the scope of NATO.
- ‚Carrol Of Carrolton‘; it was founded by the ‚progressive‘ environment around John F. Kennedy after his assassination, notably Lyndon B. Johnson, Robert McNamara [who was also a member of ‚Janus‘] and Arthur Schlesinger Jr, in 1964. Schlesinger later knocked on the doors of ‚Three Eyes‘ as well for reasons of curiousity and strategy.