The Occult Matrix
Recently Updated as of 2017 - This Website is Completely AD FREE - Please Support Me Via Paypal, Promoted Products and Bitcoin or Etherium

Welcome Page About Me Announcements Personal Writings Knowledge Base News Articles
Video Links Digital Downloads Shop Store Suggested Reading Links Page Contact Me

Alex Jones &
The War For & Against Freemasonry

 War Between French & English Freemasonry : Jones/Birchers V. LaRouchers

When one reads this line from Eustace Mullins, one would have to wonder if it's true or not, right? Well, it may seem absurd, however, if you read the following below, IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE.
This thread started it, here, thanks to the persistence of stupidity and ignorance among a few posters here.
Is the Birch Society a Zionist Front? -

    Eustice Mullins notes:
    The Rockefellers were also active on the "right-wing" front through their sponsorship of the John Birch Society . To enable Robert Welch, a 32nd degree Mason, to devote all of his time to the John Birch Society, Nelson Rockefeller purchased his family firm, the Welch Candy Company, from him at a handsome price. Welch chose the principal officers of the John Birch Society from his acquaintances at the Council On Foreign Relations . For years afterwards, American patriots were puzzled by the consistent inability of the John Birch Society to move forward on any of its well-advertised "anti-Communist" goals . The fact that the society had been setup at the behest of the backers of the world Communist revolution may have played some role in this development ."

From Scarlet and the Beast, a History of the War between English and French Freemasonry.

"While most such distributers are anti-semitic, the largest of these, the John Birch Society, is not and normally eschews anti-semitic literature, but apparently makes a special acception in the case of Nesta Websters writings. In fact, Nesta Webster's conspiriological studies are especially esteemed by the John Birch Society's founder Robert Welch. As recently as 1976, Mr. Welch reiterated his faith in their soundness by characterizing Mrs. Websters books as "splendid sources".
   This attitude appears to be largely shared by  leading John Birch society reserchers, including Gary Allen and William H. McIlhany II in which the latter gave a spiritted defense of Mrs Webster's scholarship.
   There are three accusations made by Richard Gilman to discredit Mrs. Webster's credibility:
1. Her role as the scion of one of Britain's leading international banking families makes her part of the oligarchy conspiracy. .
2. Her penchant for the occult, particularly her theory that she was the reincarnation of the Comptess de Sabran, an 18th century French aristocrat.
3. Her close association with the Britons Publishing Society which was, for nearly half a century, one of the major publishers and distributors of the "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" in the English-Speaking world.

A Scion of one of Britain's Leading Banking Families

The editor of Conspiracy Digest (Summer 1980) concurs with Richard Gilman, stating the following concerning Nesta Webster's connection to a leading international banking family.  :

"The point to keep in mind is that  as a supporter of the British empire, Nesta Webster was at least a defacto supporter of the Round Table conspiracy since British Imperialism was and is it's goal. The interesting question is whether Webster was a knowing or manipulated disinformation agent for the Round Table......[A]s a Director of Barclay's her father was doubtelessly deeply involved [in the oligarchy conspiracy] and very well could have recruited her.
  A hypothesis that deserves investigation is that Webster's function was to divert blame for "World Revolution" from British Intelligence "black operations" to the mythical Learned Elder's of Zion and once real Illuminati.

 The Conspiracy Digest suggests that Mrs. Webster is a spokesperson for the English Masonic conspiracy, because her books expose the Grand Orient Masonic conspiracy against world governments. Her books do not condemn English Freemasonry but rather praise it, even warning the British that the French Grand Orient atheistic ideals have the potential of penetrating British society through English Freemasonry -- if the brotherhod does nto guard against it.

Furthermore, Mrs. Webster is praised by English Masons, one of whom is 33rd Degree Mason H.G. Wells, a member of the Round Table, who commented on her work in his own writings as follows : "In the "Fate of Homo Sapien" I drew attention to the influence of Mrs. Nesta Webster's "Secret Societies and Subversive Movements" It is a book that all serious people interested in the British situation ought to read and think about, and very few of them do......I believe her influence has spread beyond the circle of the actual readers."

   The British Masonic Record also praises "Secret Societies and Subversive Movements" : "This book will give thinking persons much scope for reflection.....[I]t will bring home to many...what the underground subversive movements of today have become."

Now drawing a comparison to LaRouche.....and the Grand Orient...let's see what "Scarlet and the Beast" has to say about Grand Orient Freemasonry.

Lyndon LaRouche

    Lyndon LaRouche writes on the Oligarchy conspiracy, which we identified previously with English Freemasonry. I researched Lyndon LaRouche for 4 years, and to my knowledge LaRouche has never mentioned the illuminati or the French Freemasonry conspiracy, which makes me suspect that he is a closet communist. Books published by the New Benjamin Franklin House are from the LaRouche network. His periodicals are Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), Investigative Leads, and New Solidarity.
LaRouche will appeal to Christians because he writes against the high orders of Freemasonry and their occult teachings; against the CFR Trilateralist control of government; against communism and the KGB as tramplers of human rights; against liberation theology in Latin America; aganist genocide; against abortion; against drugs; and for a balanced economy, including a possible return to the gold standard.
   But LaRouche is a deciever. He has no understanding of Christianity (Ed Note : The author is a Christian, unbiased in everything I have read from him), especially fundamentals and evengelicals. His publication takes a humanist viewpoint -- almost leaning toward the new age movement.

     ......"As LaRouche's political base grew, (Ed. Note : Read Media Empire/Infowars, Prison Planet, Prison Planet TV, Info Warroars Network, etc...), he became a dangerous rival to the "power elite". Biding their time, the "power elite" waited until enough evidence was gathered that proved LaRouche was financing his political rise illegally. The time was right during the spring of 1987, when federal agents, acting under orders from federal bankruptcy judge, siezed the headquarters of LaRouche and took control of three of his companies."......

LaRouche's Platform

The Readeer's Digest in 1986 called LaRouche "far right". (Page 91) Newsweek, May 26, 1986, calls him a "right wing activist" Page 63). The Atlanta Journal, May 21, 1986, refers to him as an anti-semitic extremist (page 22a) The New York Times, June 2 1986, informs us that he was a "one time communist" (page 16-y), which makes him "far left".
   Who is Lyndon LaRouche? Is he right wing or left wing? To find the answers to these questions, and more, I wrote the Conservative Heritige Foundation. Following is the Summary of the foundation's analysis :

........."After leaving the serviceLaRouche surfaced in 1948 as a member of the Socialist Worker's Party (SWP), a Trotskyite communist group. Although he left the SWP in 1957, he continued to be active in communist circles, and supported himself by working as a management consultant and systems analyst. During the late 1960's, LaRouche, using the name ("Lynn Marcus"),  was listed as a faculty member at several of the Marxist "alternative" schools which sprang up at the time. In June, 1968, LaRouche became active with the radical Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) , an arm of Grand Orient Freemasonry, teaching a course at their "Summer Liberation School" organized at Columbia University. From this, he was able to assume a leadership role in the SDS Labor Committee which eventually evolved into the National Caucus of Labor Committee. (NCLC).
    During a dispute over support of striking teachers in New York City, LaRouche split with the SDS leadership by taking a position on behalf of the strikers, and broke off the NCLC from the SDS. The NCLC, which remains in existence today, formed the core of what would eventually become the LaRouche network."
    LaRouche has managed to attract a small, but fanatical following to his conspiratorial view of the world. (Ed Note : Read: Jones) Despite their small numbers (estimated at from one to three thousand), he has managed to fashion them into a surprisingly broad network of organizations that not only extend to many many major cities in the U.S., but to Europe and Latin America as well.
   All of the groups adhere to LaRouches ideology, which holds that a "super elite", which he calls the "Oligarchy", controls world events. Included in the oligarchy are such disparate elements as the Rockefeller family, the British Royal family, the Jewish Anti-Defamation League, the Soviet KGB, National Review, and the Heritage Foundation.
    The use of various fronts has been among the LaRouche network's most successful tactics (Ed Note : Read "We are change, 911 Truth, etc."), enabling it to atttract unwitting, well-intentioned citizens to it's cause. Obviously laRouche learned well from his Masonic research, for he uses identical tactics.

    What puzzles most casual observers of the LaRouche operation is just what it is that the organization really stands for, and what it is that it wants. Depending on the moment and the issue, LaRouche can appear to be ultra right wing, ultra left wing, or somewhere in between. There are, however, certain themes that run consistently through the ideology of his network. Among them, so say his accusers, is virulent anti-semitism.
    However, many in the LaRouche network are Jewish, such as Anton Chaitkin, author of Treason in America; Richard Dreyfuss; author of Hostage to Khomeini; and David Goldman and Jeffrey Steinberg, co authors of "Dope Inc."
   Dr. John Coleman, an anti-Masonic conspiracy researcher and former British Intelligence officer, says, in a letter dated Sept. / Oct, 1986, that LaRouche's publication New Solidarity, is funded by the KGB. So also believes the Heritige Foudation. Coleman adds that New Solidarity "is run by Jews and should be called Jew Solidarity".
   In an attempt to make some sense of these allegations, zI spent many telephone hours with the LaRouche network from 1982 ot 1986. In conversation with a particular LaRouche solicitor, who, incidently, was Jewish, I asked, "Why is LaRouche slandered by the Anti-Defamation League as anti-semetic, when so many of you are Jews?" the female solicitor answered, "There are different kinds of Jews." I then asked, "Is LaRouche anti-semetic or not?" She answered, "No, we are anti-Zionist." My final question was, "Is LaRouche Jewish?" She answered, "No".
   In another conversation with a LaRouche solicitor from Washington, D.C., headquarters, I asked Do you realize there are two Freemasonries? LaRouche only condemns the British form." The solicitor answered, "There are bad Masons and good Masons." I asked, "Who are the good Masons?" The solicitor answered, "People like Ben Franklin and George Washington".
   Realizing that both Franklin and Washington were backed by French Freemasonry, I suspected LaRouche was as well. My final question was, "Is LaRouche a Grand Orient Freemason?", and the solicitor answered, "Yes".
   My conclusion is that LaRouche is backed, not by the KGB, but by the Communistic French Grand Orient Lodge. When he made his extended trip to Europe, he must have joined the Grand Orient. His Jewish contingency are Reform Jews, who from their inception have been teied to Grand Orient Masons. Apparanetly, LaRouche's assignment is to bring down America with a Communist Revolution.
     Why then, do I use some of hi spublications and documentation for my book?
   The answer is simply that LaRouche is a voice from one side of the conspiracy. His battle is with the English Freemasonic oligarchy. His intelligence network is broad, spanning North America, South America, and Europe. (Ed. Note : Read : We are Change U.K.). He has agents that have penetrated the inner shrines of English FreemasonryHis people have done extensive research into the British control of the world's illegal drug traffic. His research sources are reliable, although his political and religious theories are not.
   The question may fairly be asked, "How can LaRouche's (Ed. Note : Read Alex Jones) research information be credible, if he is a deciever?"
   The answer is simple "through verification". Relying on our investigative background, we use information from laRouche publications that can be verified by one or more unrelated sources. LaRouche is usually ahead of all other researchers by two years. For example, his network exposed the Masonic assassination of Pope John Paul I two full years before other books were written on the subject in 1984. I use his material only after the latecomers confirm. Historical accuracy is determined by how closein time to the event the author is writing. the closer, the more accurate. LaRouche was the first exposer of current events, and more detailed than the latecomers."