Log in
| 1 | ||
| 1 | ||
| 1 | ||
| 1 | ||
| 1 |
I was researching John Dee and stumbled upon https://johndee.org. Yesterday morning it provided an original study of the man which was the only one at the time to draw from all his texts. I'm not sure if anything like it has been produced since. The same afternoon, it became the homepage of some service provider that only lists their domains. The content's gone. Archive.org has a a copy from last Tuesday but the deeplinks provide a 503. Luckily archive.ph still has the actual content. But anyone who encounters a direct link isn't going to bother digging into the archive, and it disappears from search engines. This is how the Internet shrinks.
John Dee?
I'm impressed. You're on the right track if you're researching this character.
IIRC the queen (Victoria I?) eventually distanced herself from him, as he was getting to much attention for his spiritual influencing.
He was a legit OG Rosecrutian elite. I'm pretty sure he was part of the original concepts of "free trade" and "must favored nation status" as a mechanism of creating a global economic empire with the collision of the City of London and the British Crown.
Kudos to you.
^
Thanks. I was actually researching Francis Bacon. Check out https://sirbacon.org. It's about Baconian authorship of the Shakespeare plays primarily but also provides general information. I was linked to johndee.org from there.
According to Alan Green, Rosicrucianism was setup by John Dee, Francis Bacon, and Edward de Vere. They all worked together. John Dee was the cryptographer behind the various encoded messages found in the Shakespeare plays, the King James Bible, the Shakespeare monument, etc. Probably the other figures did some cryptography of their own as well. Also, Prospero in The Tempest is based on John Dee, who is believed to have been responsible for the storm that was pivotal in England's victory over Spain in their attempted invasion of 1588.
On the subject of globalism: Francis Bacon is identified as the secret founder of the USA, which was meant to bring the whole world into the next stage. Could have sprang forth from a collaboration with John Dee.
It's mind blowing when you start to connect the dots.
Most people can't handle that level of truth. You're right over the target. 100%. Keep going bro! ;-)
I doubt Francis Bacon the "author" was a single person.
It's a nom de plume; The crest (plume) of a greater organization.
They often use acronyms and reverse or combine sections in ways that can only be recognized by insiders.
Ab = "accepted brother" is a title used by all masons.
And "con" is old English for "son" and "sun".
Reverse Ab + con = BaCon
Accepted brother of the sun.
Franciscan monks were also called "grey friars" but franc also means red.
So it's my understanding that this cryptograph name is something similar to accepted brother of the red sun.
"Bacon" wrote too many books containing exceedingly dense information to have been written by a single person; particularly in an era where most were illiterate. And no internet. And the idea of writing all of that with a feather quill and bottle of ink... And advising the court...? And serving as a judge?
He was a front man for the brotherhood.
IMO Elon Musk is a modern version, and his "genius" is a media manufactured persona. He wears waaaay too many hats.
He was allowed to create an internet banking system with a handful of others, which would obviously compete with the banking Monopoly on some level, and they'd never allow that if they didn't have complete control over whomever was controlling Paypal, and he followed orders so they have him more assets to attach his name to. Space X, Twitter, tunnel boring business, neurolink, Tesla... ? It's absurd.
I doubt Elon Musk actually owns any significant portion of all of that. It's almost certain that he's just controlling it as a front man; Exactly like J P Morgan, as when he died it was made public that he has a small minority share in "his" banking businesses. The Rothschild's needed a front man in America, and Morgan wore their hat.
Warren Buffett is probably the same. I'm sure you can think of others who fit this pseudo"genius" business mogul template.
The circumstances have changed since Morgan's time. They didn't have NGO foundations operating internationally like today, and buffet and musk and bill Gates, etc. have have pledged their bazillions in assets to various foundations, and this allows for the appearance of benevolent philanthropy; when the reality is these front men are simply cedeing control of their financial assets back to the hidden hands of their masters.
One of the links
https://web.archive.org/web/20251117191615/http://www.johndee.org/reviews/
the Monas Hieroglyphica
John Dee did intentionally combine:
…into one master glyph representing the unity of all Hermetic, alchemical, astrological, and cabalistic principles.
https://web.archive.org/web/20170808210426im_/http://www.johndee.org/reviews/images/monad1.gif
John Dee is a historical grey man. The man in the middle between ruling elite and the deep seated ancient powers that be.
The white being the visible portions of history, and the black being the hidden forces shaping the past and the future.
The grey man is public the go between between these worlds.
Henry Kissinger was probably a grey man.
Zbigniew Brzeziński is another likely candidate IMO.
These characters typically receive marching orders from "Talmudic scholars" who remain unnamed throughout history.
Dee is certainly quotable.
I never got deep enough to know more. And so far back it's hard to know what's fluff that has been glossed over. Many old power player figures aren't what they seem through centuries of revisions. Was Cromwell really that bad like John Bolton or just bad like Steve Bannon? Captain Bligh was demonized, sainted, demonized, then practicalized.
Kissenger and Brz are evil baddies.
Follow the links @LarrySwinger posted, and decide for yourself.
The alchemical sciences still have influence in many circles.
Cromwell was 95% bad.
And percentages on Bolton, Bannon, Trump, Kissenger, Brzeziński?
Assigning an arbitrary % doesn't have any meaning.
They're all agents of dynastic power, and they wage war on the foolish and unsuspecting humanity.
My point exactly.
So then, what is the good 5% of Cromwell.
My 5% uncertainty rounding error for my 95% 1-sided confidence interval.