Arcadia Discussion Zone

Roscoe wrote:



Tim wrote:



Hi Tim,

I'm a little confused by this. Are you saying that 'Gaylord Freeman' wasn't a name incorporated into the Sion narrative by Plantard et al, or are you saying that that name was not used specifically on the 'Prieure de Sion document of Dec. 16, 1983'? Or do you mean something else?

Regards,

Spartacus

Sorry to confuse, allow me to clarify:

Yes, "Gaylord Freeman" was indeed a name incorporated into the Sion narrative by Plantard et al. Purposely, it would appear, due to the similarity between this name and that of the actual individual Plantard is referring to. The same with John Drick, who, as I've mentioned before, was in reality Col. John Driscoll. That's why I labeled the coincidence "serendipitous", one couldn't have asked for a better fit.

I've also mentioned before that "Gaylord's" actual given name was Henry (with a Y, thus "Chyren" and not "Chiren") so if you find the right guy you'll understand why "Gaylord" fits (and no, not because he was gay).

TCP

Surely not the lifeboat hero

Or is it this guy:



Or is it the Pin Fund guy?

Um, no.



Sadly, no, although this guy would have made a most intriguing candidate when it comes to enigmas. The Henry Freeman to which I am referring died in 1987.

You'll find him, I have every confidence in your skill.

TCP

I'll certainly do my best, but I definitely do like the 'Gaylord Freeman' we already know and love

That's because he's the only "Gaylord Freeman" you've ever heard about. And, of course, powerful bankers make for a more exciting narrative than...well, I'll leave that to you to find.

TCP

The Freeman family
are definitely interesting
part of the Goldman Sachs influence and part of the Banksters

The American side would not want anything to do with Plantard
they lean toward the British (London) group....verses France

A French Monarchy return was not in their vision
but a European Union was and they got what they wanted

of which when anybody watches the movie
http://youtu.be/FzrBurlJUNk

The Inside Job will understand the control these families have on the world

MWDP MONS se specialisant dans les progres de l'aviation.
Pas dans les renseignements, et meme pas sur le pas de la porte de ces agences

If you mean the Aerospatiale (SNCASO) I believe we've spoken about it.

Non, la MDWP

You mean this, I guess.

Sean O'Driscoll came to live in Ireland in 1962 and restored Castle Matrix. The castle now has a library containing a collection of original documents relating to the "Wild Geese", who left these shores during the 17th and 18th centuries to serve in the armies of Europe. Castle Matrix's name may be derived from Caisleán Bhun Traísce but Sean O'Driscoll attributed the name to an association with the Matres or Matrone. The Matres were triple mother-goddesses of the Pagan Celts, a type of pre-Christian Trinity.

Sean O'Driscoll served in the U.S. Air Forces during WWII. In 1945 he engineered the first defection from behind the Iron Curtain, the escape of Theodore Wilhelm Schmidt. He served for a short time as aide to Brigadier-General Charles Lindbergh. O'Driscoll also worked with John Wheeler, who was the first to discover black holes and was the co-discoverer of Uranium 235 with Niels Bohr.

TCP

Here's a nice shot of Driscoll's library at Castle Matrix:



Notice anything large, green and pointy above the fireplace?

TCP

Yes I see it TCP
I know it well

You're making this up.

Robert Addoud says it was Freeman who recruited him
and his connection with the CIA was he was the commanding officer of the CIA's chief's son
He had a military background

If they were part of the American contingent of Priory of Sion
their influence on the politics of America and Europe and Asia is nothing to sneeze about

Hi Tim,

I'm still a bit confused by all this...

Roscoe wrote:



Tim wrote:



Roscoe wrote:



Tim wrote:



It would seem from this exchange that you are claiming that the specific name "Gaylord" was not used by Plantard et al...'the signature on the document didn't read "Gaylord"'! Can you explain what you meant because this seems to make no sense?


The original impression I took from your posts was that you felt you had deduced that the references to a 'Freeman' and a 'Drick' refer to two specific people (who you know!), and were never meant to refer to a Gaylord Freeman and a John Drick, and that this IYO 'erroneous' association was a mix up on the part of later researchers. AFAIR some of your other posts intimated the same thing. Can you explain?

Regards,

Spartacus

It probably makes no sense to you because you're trying to make new details fit old parameters that have never been questioned.



I never said I knew Freeman or Driscoll (though I exchanged a few e-mails with Freeman's son several years ago), I've said I've known others who knew Driscoll and Barber from the Augustan Society. And no, I never said this "erroneous association" was due to "a mix up on the part of later researchers."

Assuming the document in question exists at all, there are three possibilities with regard to the signatures:

1. They are the genuine signatures of Gaylord Freeman, John Drick, and Robert Abboud.
2. Someone else intentionally signed their names to the document.
3. The signatures on the document belong to other people, which Plantard presented to "later researchers" as belonging to Gaylord Freeman, John Drick and Robert Abboud.

IMHO, option #1 is the least plausible, considering who these men were. Option #2 is possible, but as Roscoe pointed out, these men were still alive and could easily debunk the document if it ever became an embarrassment so it would have been rather risky. Option #3 offers an automatic out should the ruse backfire - similar names, but on close inspection clearly not those of the men in question. And while this last option could be attributed to a "mix-up" if needed, I believe that all parties concerned knew exactly what the truth was.

TCP

Edited to add: John Drick had been dead for two years before the date on the letter. When confronted with this, Plantard said that all three signatures were actually rubber stamps.

Hi Tim,

Thanks for the reply...

Tim wrote:



Ok, but what you wrote was 'the signature on the document didn't read "Gaylord" Freeman at all'!

Spartacus Paraclete wrote:



Tim wrote:



My apologies, I'm confusing you now. What I meant when I wrote 'who you know!' was that you feel you know who the 'real' Freeman and Drick are. I wasn't suggesting that you had claimed to know these people personally.

Tim wrote:



Ok. Again, I take you back to what you wrote - 'the signature on the document didn't read "Gaylord" Freeman at all'!

Tim wrote:



There is no question that 'the document' exists! However there are, in fact, two documents that are relevant to the discussion. Perhaps that is were you are becoming confused?

Tim wrote:



IMHO option 1 is extremely implausible.

IMHO option 2 is extremely likely because...

IMHO option 3 is extremely implausible

IMHO option 3 is extremely implausible because the signatures used read 'John E. Drick', 'Gaylord Freeman', and 'A. Robert Abboud'. There is very little doubt that this sequence of exact name composition and combination is a specific reference to the Chicago bankers, and would not, in fact, offer an 'automatic out' at all.

AFAIK Gaylord Freeman assumed leadership of the bank in 1969 and was then replaced by A. Robert Abboud in 1975. During this period John E. Drick was Chairman of the Executive Committee.

IMHO this combination of specific names was used specifically to suggest that the leadership of the Priory of Sion, or part thereof, was based within 'Chicago banking'. This was IMHO to associate the Priory of Sion with the supposed headquarters of the B’nai B’rith, deliberately to fool people like Roscoe into believing in the 'Jewish bankers conspiracy' nonsense (that spurious notion being based on the claim made in Freemasonry and Judaism: The Secret Powers Behind Revolution by Leon de Poncins)...

IMHO Pierre Plantard et al simply took those names from a publication associated with the bank, or perhaps more likely from p.11 of Gaylord Freeman's book [i]Gaylord Freeman of First Chicago[/i], which is a compilation of his speeches and letters. The added advantage of this particular page was the presence of Thomas G. Ayers, father of Bill Ayers, who co-founded the Weather Underground. The use of this combination of names would have set off massive 'alarm bells' for the Roscoe People of the 1980s. I find it inconceivable that this was not the purpuse for the use of these particular names, when placed within the context of the over-all Sion narrative.

Btw, the name 'Gaylord Freeman' first appeared, not in a document that might or might not exist, but in the doctored text of the Bonne Soiree article attributed to Jania MacGillivray dated August 14th 1980. AFAIK the name 'Gaylord Freeman' had no prior appearance in the Sion mythos (however, as always, I stand to be corrected if any one is aware of something that I may have missed. I also stand to be corrected on my exact understanding of this sequence, because BLL claim the article could have been doctored as late as 1981?!)

The next use of the name 'Gaylord Freeman' was in association with the so-called 'Mise en Garde' dated to January 17th 1984. The 'Mise en Garde' was signed 'John E. Drick', 'Gaylord Freeman', 'A. Robert Abboud' and Pierre Plantard.

Regards,

Spartacus

Have you seen the document?



OK, thanks for clearing that up.



You keep lopping off the words "very likely" from the beginning of my statement.



There is no question that what is described as a mis en garde bearing the forged signatures of these three men, plus Plantard's (assumed legitimate) exists, but can you say that a document emanating from Plantard's "priory" bearing their authentic signatures exists? Plantard admitted they were rubber stamps; it's also been suggested that they were photocopied.



It would if the names of the real individuals were close approximations and the argument could be made that the names of the bankers were used to conceal their identities. We are talking about a forgery here, remember. Creative re-copying would take minutes and the "misunderstanding" could have been pinned on Baigent and Leigh. Convincingly? Probably as convincing as everything else Plantard made up, but it didn't stop him.



Yes, absolutely.



Or perhaps he lifted this information because the names worked out well.



Well, a forged document bearing that description exists, and neither you nor I have examined it, so...

TCP

Spartacus wrote:



Tim wrote:



No! But BLL describe it quite extensively in Messianic Legacy. Are suggesting that they misrepresented the contents of the Mise en Garde? AFAIK they interviewed, through a third party, Freeman on the basis of the claims made in the letter...

Tim wrote:



It wont happen again...

Tim wrote:



Exactly my point. I'm questioning your earlier claim that the forged signature didn't read 'Gaylord', or that the document might not even exist

Tim wrote:



I'd say it is extremely unlikely that any such document exists...

Tim wrote:



The signatures were originally printed using a type of ink that had no graphite content... Plantard claimed that they were rubber stamps to try and explain away the fact that John Drick had died two years before he supposedly signed off on the mis en garde. It is almost certain that the signatures used on the mis en garde were simply lifted from the 1974 annual report of the First National Bank of Chicago (AFAIK), which had been widely circulated on Feb 10th 1975!

Tim wrote:



Spartacus wrote:



Tim wrote:



Yet Plantard had fully acknowledged, to BLL, that the John E. Drick in question was indeed John E. Drick the Chicago banker who had died in 1982. Plantard explained that his signature had appeared on the mis en garde because the Priory of Sion had a stamp of the signature in question! Could this also be explained away as a misunderstanding?

Spartacus wrote:



Tim wrote:



Interesting. I seem to recall both yourself and Seeker strongly denying that the Sion Mythos was a deliberate attempt to develop the Jewish banker hogwash...


Spartacus Paraclete wrote:



Tim wrote:



I supposed 'or' could be replaced with an 'and'. And perhaps if you ever put your take on all this up for full scrutiny, we'll be able to judge which scenario is more likely to be the primary motivation

I'm especially looking forward to scrutinizing your 'Priory by another name' claim (the real 'mothership' with a pedigree similar to that claimed for the Priory of Sion) I hope I don't have to wait too long. And I never thought you'd go over to the dark side!

Spartacus Paraclete wrote:



Tim wrote:



Fair enough. I thought, given the way BLL present the mis en garde narrative in Messianic Legacy that it was safe to assume that they had managed to read the names 'stamped' on it correctly, or at least report what was written on it correctly

Regards,

Spartacus

Some Facts

Robert Abboud
was president of Occidental Petroleum

In 1957, Dr. Armand Hammer was elected president and CEO

Thanks to business interests around the world and his "citizen diplomacy," Hammer cultivated a wide network of friends and acquaintances. Late in life, he would brag that he had been the only man in history friendly with both Vladimir Lenin and Ronald Reagan


Haywood admits that political power broker/industrialist Armand Hammer was a member of the Priory.







Lenin

Several sources reveal that Lenin became a freemason whilst abroad in 1908. One of these sources is a thorough investigation: Nikolai Svitkov's "About Freemasonry in Russian Exile", published in Paris in 1932. According to Svitkov, the most important freemasons from Russia were Vladimir Ulyanov-Lenin, Leon Trotsky (Leiba Bronstein), Grigori Zinoviev (Gerson Radomyslsky), Leon Kamenev (actually Leiba Rosen-feld), Karl Radek (Tobiach Sobelsohn), Maxim Litvinov (Meyer Hennokh Wallakh), Yakov Sverdlov (Yankel-Aaron Solomon), L. Martov (Yuli Zederbaum), and Maxim Gorky (Alexei Peshkov), among others.

According to the Austrian political scientist Karl Steinhauser's "EG - die Super-UdSSR von morgen" / "The European Union - the Super Soviet Union (USSR) of Tomorrow" (Vienna, 1992, p. 192), Lenin belonged to the Masonic lodge Art et Travail (Art and Labour). The famous British politician Winston Churchill also confirmed that Lenin and Trotsky belonged to the circle of the Masonic and Illuminist conspirators. (Illustrated Sunday Herald, 8 February 1920.)

Lenin, Zinoviev, Radek and Sverdlov also belonged to B'nai B'rith. Researchers who are specialised in the activities of B'nai B'rith, including Schwartz-Bostunich, confirmed this information. (Viktor Ostretsov, "Freemasonry, Culture and Russian History", Moscow, 1999, pp. 582-583.)

Lenin was a freemason of the 31st degree (Grand Inspecteur Inquisiteur Commandeur) and a member of the lodge Art et Travail in Switzerland and France. (Oleg Platonov, "Russia's Crown of Thorns: The Secret History of Freemasonry", Moscow, 2000, part II, p. 417.)
http://www.zimbio.com/The+Knights+Templar/articles/lMyDl7JBgPJ/Knights+Templar+Skull+Crossbones+Freemasonry


As Pope Leo XIII pointed out in his most famous encyclical against Freemasonry, Humanum Genus, Freemasonry and communism were closely related:

"Yea, this change and overthrow is deliberately planned and put forward by many associations of Communists and Socialists; and to their undertakings the sect of Freemasons is not hostile, but greatly favors their designs, and holds in common with them their chief opinions....the sounder part of men, refusing to be enslaved to secret societies, vigorously resist them" -- Pope Leo XIII, Humanum Genus

http://www.zimbio.com/The+Knights+Templar/articles/lMyDl7JBgPJ/Knights+Templar+Skull+Crossbones+Freemasonry

Lenin
When Lenin visited the headquarters of Grand Orient on rue Cadet in Paris, he signed the visitors' book. (Viktor Kuznetsov, "The Secret of the October Coup", St. Petersburg, 2001, p. 42.)
Together with Trotsky, Lenin took part in the International Masonic Conference in Copenhagen in 1910. (Franz Weissin, "Der Weg zum Sozialismus" / "The Road to Socialism", Munich, 1930, p. 9.) The socialisation of Europe was on the agenda.
Alexander Galpern, then secretary of the Masonic Supreme Council, confirmed in 1916 that there were Bolsheviks among the freemasons. I can further mention Nikolai Sukhanov (actually Himmer) and N. Sokolov. According to Galpern's testimony, the freemasons also gave Lenin financial aid to his revolutionary activity. This was certified by a known freemason, Grigori Aronson, in his article "Freemasons in Russian Politics", published in the Novoye Russkoye Slovo (New York, 8-12 October 1959). The historian Boris Nikolayevsky also mentioned this in his book "The Russian Freemasons and the Revolution" (Moscow, 1990).

It wouldn't make much sense for BLL to expose their own lie, so accordingly, per their narrative, any misrepresentation would have been on Plantard's part. And yes, according to them Gaylord Freeman denied any knowledge of it.







Ok, then it's my bad for a poor response. I didn't choose my words very artfully. The point I was trying to make is that "Gaylord" Freeman is not "Gaylord Freeman" and the context wasn't a good one in which to make that point.



Agreed.



That makes perfect sense.



It would depend on who Plantard would have been making his case to. To BLL directly, no. To anyone else, sure. I guess it would depend on the gravity of the situation that would compel him to explain.



I did? I thought I only denied the veracity of the Jewish banker hogwash itself, not the attempt to weave it into the tale.



Oh, right, like anyone here would believe me, the king of all skeptics. No one here (with certain notable exceptions) is going to accept anything as valid that they can't corroborate for themselves. I throw out a few breadcrumbs once in a while, and if someone wants to follow where they might lead, fine. If not, that's fine too.



The dark side! Well, hey, I can leave you alone to deconstruct the enigma with Roscoe and Bill if you'd prefer.

BTW, if you haven't yet put two and two together to figure out that the "mothership" I've referred to is the Order of St. Lazarus, you're probably the only one who's missed it.



So all this means is that BLL weren't the first people to whom Plantard dropped Freeman's name.



If they came upon the discrepancy and confronted Plantard immediately, yes.

TCP

Il est triste de constater que certaines personnes ne savent pas differencier entre un tampon et une machine fort utile appelee "auto-pen". De la meme maniere ils semblent ignorer le "bleu photo".

Je ne saurais assez prevenir les lecteurs de ce forum contre les affabulations d'anciens adherents de la pretendue Societe Augustinienne.