BREAKING NEWS

Putin-Lenin

COMMENTARY: Russia Manifesto Outlining Plans Is Coming True

Anthony Sutton clearly documents the link between the Jewish International Bankers and the Bolshevik Revolutionaries in his book titled “Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution” published in 1974. He also documents in his three-volume book titled: “Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development, 1917 to 1930” how western capitalistic nations financed most of the economic growth of the Soviet Union. So this ‘western’ Communist infiltration should come as no surprise to us, instead, the level of ignorance that Americans have of their own history, as well as their passiveness towards these facts, is what is hard to believe.

Putin-Lenin

“Russia manifesto outlining plans is coming true,” Source: news.com.au

EVER wondered what Vladimir Putin is up to infiltrating the US elections? Surprisingly, there is an answer to that.
In 1997, a Russian political scientist named Aleksandr Dugin and a serving Russian General named Nikolai Klokotov sat down and wrote a text that would become the foundation of Russian geopolitical strategy over the next 20 years. It was called “Foundations of Geopolitics” and it was all about how Russia could reassert itself in the world.
Chillingly, the book now reads like a to-do list for Putin’s behavior on the world stage.

Perhaps surprisingly, the document is not a secret. It has long been known to observers of Russian foreign policy and has served as a textbook among a generation of military strategists. But with the scandal over Russian influence in the US elections, growing by the day, it’s surprising how little coverage this important text has been given.

The book starts out by saying that the shrewd thing for Russia to do is to steer clear of direct military confrontation. Instead, the book counsels Russian leaders to favor political stealth. It emphasizes the need for the infiltration of Western institutions, and the use of soft power to shape the world in Russia’s favor. Sound familiar yet? We haven’t even got to the good stuff.

The text then goes into a very specific list of to-dos, about Russia’s posture towards almost every nation on earth.

Let’s start close to Russia. The book argues that Ukraine should – surprise, surprise – be annexed by Russia. “Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics.” It goes on to argue that the only use for an independent Ukraine would be to provide a barrier to Europe, but that it’s not necessary.

Next, it turns to Britain. The book’s authors say Russia should encourage Britain to leave the European Union, and thus weaken it. That’s right. Russian strategists were openly arguing in favor of Brexit in 1997 when it was still just a glimmer in Nigel Farage’s eyes.

Score so far, Putin: 2, Rest of World: 0.

How about the rest of the world? It identifies Iran as a key ally for Russia and recommends that Turkey should receive a series of “geopolitics shocks” using Kurds and Armenians to keep it off-balance. I’d give that Putin: 4, Rest of World: 0.

The document even mentions Australia, if only in its relation to China. It says that China should be encouraged to have its geopolitical posture aligned to its south – Indo-China (except Vietnam), the Philippines, Indonesia, Australia – so that Russia can remain predominant on the “Eurasian” mainland. It also talks about making Germany and France the predominant powers in the European Union, in order to unbalance that alliance, and encourage an anti-Atlantic sentiment on the continent. Score so far is Putin: 6, Rest of World: 0.

But perhaps most amazing part of the book is when it calls for Russia to “introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilising internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics.” If that reads like an accurate description of Trump’s inner-circle, again remember that this text was written twenty years ago.

Like Putin, Dugin and Klokotov saw the collapse of the Soviet state as humiliating. They believed that the West had hacked infiltrated their institutions in the late-1980s, and weakened the Soviet state from within. They, therefore, sought revenge in kind – influencing the institutions of other countries, to return Russia to what they considered its rightful place as a superpower.

It’s now clear to everyone but Sean Spicer that Trump’s campaign was in communication with the Kremlin for a year leading up to his election victory. The revelation on Thursday about Jeff Sessions means that this is the story that will dominate Trump’s first term. Putin: 7, Rest of World: 0.

Of course, every nation has influential strategic thinkers who help leaders shape their thinking, but the Foundations of Geopolitics has had an outsized influence since it’s publication 20 years ago. By some accounts, the book has been used to teach a generation of military officers in Russia, while Dugin himself continues to be considered a member of Putin’s inner circle.

There are many factors that go into geopolitics — and it can be easy to overstate Putin’s influence on what are tendencies that may have arisen anyway. But reading through the document, it is hard to escape the conclusion that much of Russia’s foreign policy has been shaped by Dugin and Klokotov’s thinking – and that that is in turn, shaping the way the world is heading.

And that should be a concern to us all. Their thinking breaks with many of the central tenets that underpin our politics. It rejects democracy and places nationalism at the heart of how geopolitics should operate. It is essentially a wholesale rejection of the globalization that Western economies have engaged in during the past four decades.

The question for the US intelligence community, and the Congress leaders who are looking into Russian influence in the US election, now becomes, what will Putin do next? Was his mission in assisting Trump’s election simply to pay back the USA for the collapse of the Soviet Union? Or is it to simply weaken the US, so that his own Eurasian Union — a hierarchical, anti-democratic alliance of countries with Russia at its head — can become a superpower? Who knows, but in the same way that the USA felt they had a friend in the Kremlin when President Gorbachev was in power, Putin clearly has a friend in the White House. If I were Putin, I’d be playing that card for as long as it lasts.

 

Challenge Your Knowledge - Zionist Report

VIDEO: Zionist Report Published It’s FIRST Book Titled – “Challenge Your Knowledge”

If you have not yet read our recently published book, we strongly recommend you do. Even if you think you are already aware of all the historical lies we have been taught for centuries, you are still in for a surprise! Please spread the word, we must give people a chance to learn the truth! 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37vBzYGrv3Q

New World Pope

VIDEO: Francis The Destroyer

Francis is a false prophet clearly serving Satan while deceiving the world. He was ‘chosen’ for that mission. Many have prophecized this throughout the years and we are SEEING IT TAKE PLACE TODAY. How much proof do we need?! The Third Secret of Fatima CLEARLY states this. Have you ever asked yourself why it was never completely released to the public? The Third Secret has two parts. The rulers of our Catholic Church are the head of the snake. 

Pope John XXIII

COMMENTARY: Vatican II – The Beginning Of The End Of Catholic Anti-Semitism

Anti-Semitism? Or Anti-Communism? The Washington Post seems to have ignored the real reasons that led to WWII. The truth is that Europe had a solid and documented history of what the Jews had brought to their lands. Usury, adoration of false gods, corruption, degeneration, massive communist infiltration, in one word the DESTRUCTION OF CHRISTIANITY. Everything that has been corroding our society ever since. But the Catholic Church, that was supposed to withstand the evil infiltration, succumbed to demonic persuasion. It stopped being the House of God and turned into the House of Lucifer. Wasn’t that the idea all along?

Pope John XXIII played a key role in this ‘transition’. He was a false prophet and his role is explained in this linked article. 

John XXIII “was the inspiration behind the “historical compromise” between Catholics and Communists, especially in Italy. For the Communists, Pope John was “the Good Pope” and Vatican II “the Council of Peace”; the Kremlin launched the doctrine of the “Pacific coexistence”, “dialogue” and “peace”, whereas the Soviet Premier Khrushchev described it in a discourse given on January 1, 1961, as a time of intense struggle of ideologies and politics.”

Pope John XXIII

“Vatican II: The beginning of the end of Catholic anti-Semitism,” Source: washingtonpost.com

On Oct. 28, 1958, Cardinal Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli, a rotund jolly Italian was elected to succeed the recently deceased Pope Pius XII.
At age 77, most of the world believed that the new Pope John XXIII would be a caretaker pope, an interim leader who would maintain the status quo and permit the entrenched bureaucracy to preserve things as they were during the long reign of his predecessor. Elected on the 12th ballot, some even called Roncalli an “accidental pope.”How wrong they were.

Just three months after his election, John XXIII called for the world’s Catholic bishops to gather for a second Vatican Council to chart the church’s future in the post-World War II era.

Because people underestimated John XXIII, his plans initially received little attention, but things changed when he used a vivid image to describe his plans: the council would serve, he said, to “throw open the windows of the church and let the fresh air of the Spirit blow through.”

Clearly, he was serious about confronting the scientific and intellectual revolutions of the 20th century, the legacy of two world wars, communism, fascism, and Nazism, and especially the horrific Holocaust. John XXIII wanted Catholics to face up to that dismal history — and Christians’ role in it — and make positive changes vis-a-vis Jews and Judaism.

Exactly 50 years ago this month, more than 2,000 bishops arrived in Rome and began complex deliberations that eclipsed John XXIII’s own death in 1963 and concluded in 1965. During that time, many ecclesiastical reforms were debated, none more important than the Catholic Church’s frequently negative and turbulent relations with Jews and Judaism.

Indeed, Catholic-Jewish relations became a central topic of what became known as Vatican II. In the midst of the Holocaust, Roncalli had written: “We are dealing with one of the great mysteries in the history of humanity. Poor children of Israel. Daily I hear their groans around me. They are relatives and fellow countrymen of Jesus.”

Before and during the war, Roncalli was the Vatican’s top diplomat in Turkey and Greece; in 1944, he was transferred to Paris as the Vatican ambassador to France. The future John XXIII used his Vatican credentials to save thousands of Jews in Europe.

The pope wanted his church to officially change its teaching, preaching, liturgy and beliefs about Jews and Judaism. He and other Catholic leaders, including many American Catholics, desired a new relationship with “the relatives” of Jesus — one built upon mutual respect and understanding, not bigotry and hatred.

It all sounded good when things got started in October 1962, but it was no small thing for a global church to eradicate the long-standing pathologies of anti-Judaism and anti-Semitism that were embedded in the hearts and minds of many Catholics throughout history. Although deicide was never an official doctrine of Catholicism, the obscene and lethal charge of “Christ killers” had been hurled against Jews for nearly 2,000 years.

It was an enormous task to transform the church’s encounter with the Jewish people and Judaism. But John XXIII’s leadership — followed by that of his successor, Paul VI — inspired a host of Catholic clergy and laity to work together to achieve purposeful change throughout the church.

After many drafts and sometimes bitter debates, the now historic declaration Nostra Aetate, (Latin for “In Our Time”) was adopted by the bishops in October 1965 by a vote of 2,221 to 88. The declaration, less than 1,600 words in length, specifically denounced anti-Semitism, urged “mutual respect and understanding” and the establishment of “biblical and theological studies” as well as “fraternal dialogues” between Catholics and Jews.

While the term deicide does not appear in the final text, Nostra Aetate effectively served as a formal rejection of the charge of Jewish culpability for Jesus’ death.

In the 50 years since Vatican II, much has been accomplished in building a new relationship between Catholics and Jews, even as more work is required. However, what John XXIII began in October 1962 represented the beginning of the end of anti-Judaism and anti-Semitism within the Catholic Church.

 

Freemasonry

COMMENTARY: The God Of Freemasonry Exposed – Worship Of The Fake Light

It is crucial to understand the level of brainwashing being done to society through Cultural Marxism. They only way to raise awareness is by first learning the hidden intentions of the ‘way of life’ being constantly imposed on us through subliminal and distorted messages on morals, freedom, religion, tolerance, etc.

This article mentions Gnosticism as one of the branches of Luciferianism. In our recently published ebook titled “Challenge Your Knowledge” we explain what Gnosticism is:

“The Gnostics were heretics within Christianity, they believed that the real god is the prince of this earth, and his name is Lucifer ‘Angel of Light’ also called Satan, Baphomet, Baal, or Remphan, etc. Gnostics are against Jesus and need to destroy His teachings. Gnosticism (basically a Luciferian doctrine) infiltrated different secret societies for centuries by acting behind the scenes.

When the fourth Gospel of John was written, it talked about a heretic thought of the time, and called it Gnosticism. This is the basic doctrine, which later derived into multiple other doctrines. It states that matter is essentially bad and sprit is essentially good.

Gnostics thought that God was too divine to touch matter hence God could have not created the world, because the world is tangible. They believe that God sent emanations and each one of these emanations moved farther and farther apart from God. The farthest emanation, the last one, was the one that touched matter and the one who created the world. The idea is bad enough, but they made it worse by adding the following to it, Gnostics believed that as these emanations moved farther from God, they knew less and less of God Itself. They are so far away from God, that they get to a point where they not only ignore God but, are hostile towards Him. That is how they reached the conclusion that god the creator was not only different from the true god, but that their creator ignored God and was actively hostile to Him.

Cerinthus one of the leaders of Gnosticism, claimed that the world was created not by God, but by a power totally separate from God, and that this force is located above the universe. He claimed that this force ignores that God is over everything material. For them, Satan, the Angel of Light is the Illuminated. This is where the name ‘Illuminati’ comes from “the illuminated one” the creator of the earth of the tangible. Satan is the prince of this earth.

That is why the disciple John begins the Gospel by saying: “All things were made by him, and without him was not anything made that was made” (John 1:3) that is why he insists that ‘that is how God loved the world” (John 3:26)

You must keep in mind that this corrupt elite believes in Satan as their god. What you think doesn’t matter to them the only thing that matters for them, is carrying out their centuries old agenda.”

Freemasonry Many have wondered who or what the God of Freemasonry is. We have enough clues & evidence to connect the dots … and no surprise: more Satanic inversion.

“The God of Freemasonry Exposed – Worship of the Fake Light,” Source: freedomarticles-toolsforfreedom.com

The God of Freemasonry is an important thing to know if you are interested in zooming in on the source of evil in this world. Centuries of leaked documents, former insider accounts and scholarly research has shown that Freemasonry has become the most pervasive, influential and powerful of all the Secret Societies on Earth. Many US Founding Fathers were masons. Many leading figures of the French Revolution were masons. Many US presidents have been masons. Freemasonry inspired Mormonism and was a central theme behind the occult assassination of JFK. People in high positions of power place their oath to Freemasonry above their oath to serve the people who elected them; some such policemen and judges make decisions not based on truth and justice but rather based on protecting the masonic network, the Lodge and their masonic brethren. Many lower level masons are deliberately kept in the dark, not told what they are getting into, but what are the higher levels initiates really worshipping? Who or what is the god of Freemasonry?

The Great Architect of the Universe

In trying to decipher the god of Freemasonry, there are many clues that point towards a dark force that is the engineer or creator of this world, especially the dystopian aspects of this world which some people have dubbed The Establishment, The System or The Matrix. It is no coincidence that in The Matrix movie series themselves, Neo finally meets his maker, i.e. the being who created the entire system. He is called “the architect” and is represented by a bearded old man. Saturn, god of time, harvest, law and death, is also represented this way. Masons typically refer to their god as the “Great Architect of the Universe” while Gnostics also used the same term in reference to the tyrant they claimed had created a fake, inferior copy of the original perfect world (they also called this force “Demiurge” and “Yaldabaoth”). The primary masonic logo of the letter G is enclosed inside a square and compass, which are tools of an engineer, draftsman or architect who designs and draws with them to create things.

It’s easy to get lost in names here, but the point is to see the connections. There are many names but one underlying force beneath all the names. The Architect/Demiurge is the cruel god who is basically the same force as Satan or the Devil, and goes by many other names, as we shall see.

god of freemasonry masonic lodge

Ceiling of masonic lodge in Philadelphia.

The Mysterious Masonic Letter “G”

Speaking of the masonic G, what does it stand for? Official masonic lore claims that it stands both for “God” and “Geometry”. Is G a clue for the God of Freemasonry?:

““By letters four and science five, this “G” aright doth stand, in due Art and Proportion; you have your answer, friend.”

What are the “letters four”?  It is believed that they stand for “YHWH”, the name of the Great Architect of the Universe (pronounced “Yahway”. (sometimes pronounced Jehovah) in the ancient Hebrew language, from which the Bible was translated: Which is the 5th science? Geometry. The Letter G stands for “Geometry”, which is the mathematical science upon which Architecture and Masonry were founded.”

However there are others who quote famous grand masons Eliphas Levi and Albert Pike to claim that the masonic G really stand for gnosis and generation. Gnosis is the Greek word for knowledge, and this fits in precisely with the masonic ideology of worshiping the light (more on this below) to become enlightened or illuminated (think Illuminati). This is from the website GnosticWarrior.com:

“In the Mysteries of Magic by Eliphas Levi and interpreted by Arthur Edward Waite, it is written; “All these magical theorems, based on the unique dogma of Hermes, and on the analogical inductions of science, have been invariably confirmed by the visions of ecstatics and by the convulsions of cataleptics under the supposed possession of spirits. The G which Freemasons place in the centre of the Burning Star signifies Gnosis and Generation, the two sacred words of the ancient Kabbalah. It also signifies Grand Architect, for the Pentagram, from whatever side it may be looked at, always represents an A. (Also See Eliphas Levi, Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie, vol. II, p. 97.)

Albert Pike had reconfirmed this fact by quoting Levi in his book, Liturgy of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry: IV to XIV; “In the centre of this Blazing Star Freemasons place the letter G. It signifies Gnosis and Generation, the two sacred words of the ancient Kabala; and also the Grand Architect; for the Pentagram, whichever way we view it, presents the letter A.”

god of freemasonry masonic G

The masonic G.

Jahbulon, Baal and Nimrod

Is the God of Freemasonry Jahbulon? Historian Jasper Ridley claims in his book The Freemasons that before joining a lodge all Masons must accept that the God of Freemasonry is Jahbulon and that they learn this once they get to the Royal Arch Degree. Interestingly, Jahbulon is a composite word made up of 3 parts: Jah is the Hebrew name for God (Jahovah is very similar to Jehovah) and is also used by certain Rastafarian religions to mean God; Bul refers to the Babylonian deity Baal; and On refers to the Egytpian deity Osiris.

Baal is mentioned in the Bible as a god who demanded and required human sacrifice. Baal is another name for the Babylonian god Nimrod. The ancient Mystery Schools which spawned the world’s current Secret Societies, of which Freemasonry became the dominant strain, trace their roots back to Egypt and Babylon. Hence Nimrod may be yet another name for the God of Freemasonry. This article on MediaMonarchy.com states:

“Masonic writings … dwell heavily on a descendant of Ham as one of the founders of Masonry—Nimrod. In the
Encyclopedia of Freemasonry (Mackey-McClenachan), under the heading “Nimrod,” we find:

“The legend of the Craft in the Old Constitutions refers to Nimrod as one of the founders of Masonry. Thus in the York MS., No. 1, we read: “At ye making of ye toure of Babell there was a Masonrie first much esteemed of, and the King of Babilon yt called Nimrod was a Mason himself and loved well Masons”.”

As Nimrod had so many things attributed to him, it was only reasonable for peoples, now in segregation, to adopt the portion of belief best interpreted by each group. Thus, diverse religious attributes and beliefs, yet peoples remaining reverent to their god. We find such names for this revered god (Nimrod) in scripture as Chemosh, Molock, Merodach, Remphan, Tamuz, and Baal, to mention only a few of the some thirty-eight Biblical titles plus numerous representatives of these “gods”.”

Did you catch that Moloch (aka Moloch, Molech) was among the other names of the God of Freemasonry? The same Molech is featured at Bohemian Grove where Secret Society initiates perform black magic, mock (or otherwise) sacrifices and sexual rituals under a giant 40 foot owl.

god of freemasonry baphomet washington

Statue of George Washington, 1st US President and high-level Freemason, in a Baphomet pose.

Baphomet, Mendes, Horny Goats, Pan, Capricorn and Saturn

Baphomet is another god associated with Freemasonry, even though some Freemasons officially deny it. You can see master mason George Washington doing his baphomet pose above. Baphomet was a hermaphroditic god (having both male and female genitalia) which will begin to take on more significance in the future, as we head into a transhumanistic world where the NWO transgender agenda (part of the synthetic agenda) is to make all humans more robotic – non-binary, genderless and sexless. Baphomet’s head is an inverted 5-pointed star/pentagram (more Satanic inversion), and being a goat he is linked to Mendes, Pan (god of the wild, often linked to horniness and sexual excess), Capricorn (the zodiac sign symbolized by goat horns) and of course Saturn (housed in Capricorn in the night sky).

god of freemasonry seething energies of Lucifer

Blatant: Manly Hall writes of the “seething energies of Lucifer”, the God of Freemasonry.

The Seething Energies of Lucifer

Albert Pike and Manly Hall are former masons whose work is widely quoted by those seeking to understand what exactly Freemasonry is. Both of these men referred explicitly to Lucifer as the God of Freemasonry. Pike spoke of the pure doctrine of Lucifer while Hall wrote about the seething energies of Lucifer which can be awakened by master masons:

“Lucifer, the Light-bearer ! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! It is he who bears the Light, and with its splendors intolerable, blinds feeble, sensual or selfish souls? Doubt it not!”

– Albert Pike (33º Freemason), Morals and Dogma of the ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, pg. 321

“When the Mason learns that the key to the warrior on the block is the proper application of the dynamo of living power, he has learned the mystery of his craft. The seething energies of Lucifer are in his hands and before he may step onwards and upwards he must prove his ability to properly apply (this) energy.”

Manly Hall (33º Freemason), Lost Keys of Freemasonry, pg. 48

Freemasonry, like other strands of Satanism, inverts everything and takes the opposite as the truth. Grand Commander and sovereign pontiff of universal freemasonry Albert Pike was quoted as giving instructions to the 23 supreme councils of the world:

“That which we must say to the crowd is, we worship a god, but it is the god one adores without superstition. To you sovereign grand inspector general, we say this and you may repeat it to the brethren of the 32nd, 31st and 30th degrees – the Masonic religion should be by all of us initiates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the luciferian doctrine. 

If lucifer were not god, would Adonay (the God of the Christians) whose deeds prove cruelty, perfidy and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion for science, would Adonay and His priests, calumniate Him? 

Yes, lucifer is god, and unfortunately Adonay is also God, for the eternal law is that there is no light without shade, no beauty without ugliness, no white without black, for the absolute can only exist as two gods. darkness being necessary for light to serve as its foil, as the pedestal is necessary to the statue, and the brake to the locomotive. 

Thus, the doctrine of Satanism is heresy, and the true and pure philosophical religion is the belief in lucifer, the equal of Adonay, but lucifer, god of light and god of good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the god of darkness and evil.”

Recorded by A.C. De La Rive, La Femme et L’enfant dans La Franc-Maconnerie Universelle, pg. 588. Cited from ‘The question of freemasonry” (2nd edition 1986 by Edward Decker pp12-14)

This is the very same Albert Pike whom I have quote elsewhere as predicting a World War 3 scenario, where the NWO controllers pit Zionism against Islam (same source as above):

“We shall unleash the nihilists and the atheists and we shall provoke a great social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to all nations the effect of absolute atheism; the origins of savagery and of most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the people will be forced to defend themselves against the world minority of the world revolutionaries and will exterminate those destroyers of civilization and the multitudes disillusioned with Christianity whose spirits will be from that moment without direction and leadership and anxious for an ideal, but without knowledge where to send its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer brought finally out into public view. A manifestation which will result from a general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and Atheism; both conquered and exterminated at the same time.”

god of freemasonry fake light

The God of Freemasonry: responsible for the fake light that initiated the Simulation/System/Matrix we inhabit.

Worship of the “Light” … But What Light?

“Masonry, like all the Religions, all the Mysteries, Hermeticism and Alchemy, conceals its secrets from all except the Adepts and Sages, or the Elect, and uses false explanations and misinterpretations of its symbols to mislead those who deserve only to be misled; to conceal the Truth, which it calls Light from them and to draw them away from it.”

― Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonryp.104-5

Which it calls “light” – indeed. The open admission by esteemed masons that the God of Freemasonry is Lucifer (and concomitantly that the ideology of Freemasonry is Luciferian, that the goal of Freemasonry is to become enlightened) is itself another inversion. The light is not what you think it is. In this context, light is not synonymous with good, pure, moral or love. Remember, Freemasonry extolls the virtue of intellect and knowledge represented by the light. They worship Prometheus, the mythological figure who stole fire from the gods and gave it to mankind (a statue of Prometheus can be found outside the Rockefeller building in New York). Not coincidentally, in another of his myths, Prometheus establishes a form of animal sacrifice that was practiced in ancient Greece.

The evidence that Freemasonry is a negative force is overwhelming. The Illuminati are a group of cold-hearted psychopaths, eager for power and control at any cost, and are the furthest thing from enlightened or illuminated in the normal and common sense of the world. To be truly enlightened or illuminated would be to realize that we are all one, we are all connected, that whatever you do to another you do to yourself, and that therefore empathy for others is a natural extension of love for yourself. The attitude of high-level manipulative Secret Society initiates is just the opposite of this.

The light of Freemasonry is a fake light, which has given birth to a fake reality. The light is the start of the Matrix. “Let there be light …” can be interpreted as the story of creation of the inverted, dystopian world in which we live, designed and created by the same negative force with many names that I am exposing throughout this article. The light has been weaponized.

This is, of course, intimately connected to the widespread idea that we live on a prison planet, trapped through karma (ruled by Saturn, god of time), where (unless we elevate our consciousness) we may not be able to escape a soul net or reincarnation cycle – which works by introducing a fake light at the point of death to entice our souls to rinse and repeat ad infinitum. Read Soul-Catching Net: Are We “Recycled” at Death to Remain in the Matrix? for a deeper explanation.

And the God of Freemasonry Is …

What is most important is to see the deeper unity of reality, to connect the dots among seemingly disparate names, terms, ideas and cultures. Whether you call this dark force the Great Architect of the Universe, the Demiurge, Yaldabaoth, Satan, Devil, Yahweh, Jehovah, Saturn, Jahbulon, Baal, Nimrod or Lucifer, it’s the same basic force. Rich and powerful people are worshipping something – and they’re not just doing it for fun. They’re getting something out of it. They are literally selling their souls – handing them over for possession – in exchange for (what they perceive as) power, but which in reality is a diminishment of their power.

With consciousness rising, more of this horrible truth will be brought to light – the true light, not the fake light that fuels the synthetic Matrix – and hopefully sooner rather than later.

*****

Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative media / independent news site The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com, writing on many aspects of truth and freedom, from exposing aspects of the worldwide conspiracy to suggesting solutions for how humanity can create a new system of peace and abundance.

Sources:

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/kennedy-assassination-who-how-why-part-3/

*http://www.masonic-lodge-of-education.com/letter-g.html

*https://gnosticwarrior.com/g.html

*http://mediamonarchy.com/2015/02/masonic-roots-christ-solomon-or-baa/

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/satanic-black-magic-rules-the-world/

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/synthetic-agenda-heart-new-world-order/

*https://www.christian-restoration.com/fmasonry/lucquotes.htm

*http://www.manlyphall.org/text/the-lost-keys-of-freemasonry/chapter-iv-the-fellow-craft/

*https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/69103.Albert_Pike

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/russia-already-china-to-come-syria-ww3/

*http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/soul-net-deep-down-rabbit-hole

Ben Gurion

COMMENTARY: ‘We Look At Them Like Donkeys’ – What Israel’s First Ruling Party Thought About Palestinian Citizens

There is an ‘apparent’ clear divide among Jews today, but one finds it hard to believe that there are Jews who do not think or feel different than non-Jews, especially when they have been raised believing that they are the ‘chosen people of God’. The truth of the matter is, that Jews have ALWAYS been a problem, because they DO NOT INTEGRATE, but rather INFILTRATE and CORRODE society. 

So what is this ‘divide’ all about then? Could it be that there is a plan to destroy those who are not ‘that Jewish’?

Ben Gurion‘We look at them like donkeys’: What Israel’s first ruling party thought about Palestinian citizens,” Source: haaretz.com

“The Arab question in Israel” was the term used in the top ranks of Mapai, the ruling party in the young State of Israel – and forerunner of Labor – to encapsulate the complex issue that arose after the War of Independence of 1948-49. In the wake of the fighting, and the armistice agreements that concluded the war, about 156,000 Arabs remained within Israel (out of an estimated 700,000 before the war), accounting for 14 percent of the nascent state’s population. So it was with some justification that Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett stated in a meeting of Mapai Knesset members and the party’s senior leadership, on June 18, 1950, that “this is one of the fundamental questions of our policy and of the future of our country.” He added that the issue was one “that will determine the direction of the country’s morality,” for “our entire moral stature depends on this test – on whether we pass it or not.”

Almost 70 years later, the “Arab question in Israel” continues to pose a conundrum for politicians when they address the issue of the status of Palestinian citizens of Israel (or, as they are often imprecisely called, “Israeli Arabs”).

The minutes of the meetings held by Mapai, which are stored in the Labor Party Archive in Beit Berl, outside Kfar Sava, attest to the deep dispute in the party over two conflicting approaches concerning the Arabs in Israel. Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion and his associates – Moshe Dayan (Israel Defense Forces chief of staff 1953-1958) and Shimon Peres, at the time a senior official in the Defense Ministry – urged a policy of segregation and a hard hand against what he argued was a communal threat to national security; while Sharett and other Mapai leaders – Pinhas Lavon, Zalman Aran, David Hacohen and others – promoted a policy of integration.

The disagreement between Ben-Gurion and Sharett mirrored the respective approaches held by the two regarding the Arab world in general. Sharett was critical of Ben-Gurion’s policy, which he said, held that “the only language the Arabs understand is force,” and called for an approach that preferred the “matter of peace.” Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, then a Knesset member, and later Israel’s second president (1952-1963), summed up succinctly the alternatives in a meeting of the Mapai MKs several weeks later, on July 9, 1950: “The question is the attitude the state takes toward the minorities. Do we want them to remain in the country, to be integrated in the country, or to get out of the country We declared civic equality irrespective of race difference. Does this refer to a time when there will be no Arabs in the country? If so, it’s fraud.”

‘Transfer’ option

The discussions within the party were quite freewheeling, even if speakers frequently expressed concern of leaks to the press, which could have lead to international pressure on Israel to improve the treatment of its Arab citizens. Indeed, the future of the relations between the peoples who inhabited the country demanded weighty political decisions. Among the issues in question: the right to vote, the Absentees’ Property Law, the status of the Arab education system, membership of Arab workers in the Mapai-affiliated Histadrut federation of labor, and more.

One proposition that arose frequently in the discussions was that of a transfer – the expulsion of the Arabs who continued to reside in Israel – a term that some found grating already then. In the June 1950 meeting, Sharett took issue with the allegation, voiced by Ben-Gurion and his supporters, that the Arabs in Israel were a “fifth column.” That was a simplistic assumption, Sharett said, “which needs to be examined.” As he saw it, the fate of the relations between the two peoples depended overwhelmingly on the Jews. “Will we continue to fan the flames?” Sharett asked, or try to douse them? Even though a high-school education was not yet mandatory under law (and the state was not obligated to offer one), a large number of the Jewish youth in the country attended high school, and Sharett thought that the state should establish high schools for the Arabs as well. Israel needs “to guarantee them their cultural minimum,” he added.

For political reasons, the segregationists tended to ignore the difference between the Arabs living in Israel and those who were left on the other side of the border following the war, many of whom made attempts to “infiltrate” and return to their homes. Sharett took the opposite view: “A distinction must be made between vigorous action against Arab infiltration” and “discrimination against Arabs within the country.”

Ben Gurion David Ben-Gurion. Fritz Cohen / GPO

Ranking figures such as Sharett and Lavon, who was defense minister in 1954-55, viewed positively a further exodus of Arabs from the country, but only “by peaceful means.” Sharett vehemently objected to the position taken by Dayan, who not only wanted to bring about a situation in which there would be fewer Arabs in Israel, but sought to achieve this through active expulsion. In Sharett’s view, “We must not strive to do this by a wholesale policy of persecution and discrimination.” Sharett spoke of “distinctly unnecessary forms of cruelty, which are tantamount to an indescribable desecration of God’s name.”

Dayan, notwithstanding the fact that he was serving in the army at the time – as head of Southern Command – participated in Mapai’s political meetings and helped set public policy. He was one of the leaders of the aggressive stance against the country’s Arabs and was against a proposal that they should serve in the army (an idea that came up but was shelved). He opposed granting the Arabs “permanent-citizenship certificates,” opposed compensating those who had been dispossessed of their land, and in fact opposed every constructive action that could contribute to bridge-building between the peoples. “Let’s say that we help them live in the situation they are in today” and no more, he proposed.

Dayan’s approach remained consistent over the years, and conflicted with the view taken by Sharett and the stream in Mapai that he represented. Speaking in the same June 1950 meeting, Dayan asserted, “I want to say that in my opinion, the policy of this party should be geared to see this public, of 170,000 Arabs, as though their fate has not yet been sealed. I hope that in the years to come there will perhaps be another possibility to implement a transfer of these Arabs from the Land of Israel, and as long as a possibility of this sort is feasible, we should not do anything that conflicts with this.”

Dayan also objected to Sharett’s proposals to improve the level of education among the country’s Arabs. “It is not in our interest to do that,” he said. “This is not the only question on which the time for a final solution has not yet arrived.”

Zalman Aran, a future education minister, objected to the military government that had been imposed on Israel’s Arabs at the time of statehood and remained in effect until 1966. Under its terms, Arabs had to be equipped with permits both to work and to travel outside their hometowns, which were also under curfew at night. “As long as we keep them in ghettos,” Aran said, no constructive activity will help. Lavon, too, urged the dismantlement of the military government. In 1955, a few months after resigning as defense minister, he savaged the concept at a meeting in Beit Berl. “The State of Israel cannot solve the question of the Arabs who are in the country by Nazi means,” he stated, adding, “Nazism is Nazism, even if carried out by Jews.”

Even earlier, Lavon was a sharp critic of the line taken by Dayan and other advocates of transfer. At a meeting of another Mapai leadership forum, on May 21, 1949, he said acidly, “It’s well known that we socialists are the best in the world even when we rob Arabs.” A few months later, on January 1, 1950, in another meeting, he warned, “It is impossible to take action among the Arabs when the policy is one of transfer. It is impossible to work among them if the policy is to oppress Arabs – that prevents concrete action. What is being carried out is a dramatic and brutal suppression of the Arabs in Israel… Transfer is not on the cards. If there is not a war, they will not go. Two-hundred thousand Arabs will be citizens in terms of voting… As the state party, we must set for ourselves a constructive policy in the Arab realm.”

Back in December 1948, during the discussions on granting the right to vote for the Constituent Assembly – Israel’s first parliamentary institution, which was elected in January 1949, and a month later became the “Israel Knesset” – Ben-Gurion agreed to grant the right to vote to the Arabs who had been in the country when a census was taken, a month earlier. About 37,000 Arabs were registered in the census. The decision to enfranchise them apparently stemmed from party-political considerations. The thinking was that most of them would vote for Mapai.

This assessment was voiced in the discussions on the Citizenship Law in early 1951, when Ben-Gurion expressed the most assertive opinion. He refused to grant the right to vote to the Arabs who were living in the country lawfully (as Sharett demanded) but who had been elsewhere during the census (because they had fled or had been expelled in the wake of the war); or to those Arabs who resided in the “Triangle” (an area of Arab towns and villages on the Sharon plain), which was annexed to Israel only in April 1949, under the armistice agreement with Jordan. “Is there no country in the world that has two types of citizens in elections [meaning voting and non-voting],” Ben-Gurion asked rhetorically in a meeting of Mapai MKs on February 20, 1951.

Moshe Dayan. Fritz Cohen / GPO

In the view of Sharett, who submitted a conflicting draft resolution, it would not be possible to defend “this situation in regard to ourselves and in regard to these Arabs, and in regard to the Arabs in Israel as a whole and in terms of world public opinion. Accordingly, I suggest granting them the right to vote… Discriminate only against the Arabs who entered Israel without permission.”

Sharett maintained that Ben-Gurion had not given consideration to the root of the problem. “Terrible things” were being done against Arabs in the country, he warned. “Until a Jew is hanged for murdering an Arab for no reason, in cold blood, the Jews will not understand that Arabs are not dogs but human beings.” Sharett’s view carried the day in the vote, and the Arabs in the Triangle voted in the elections.

In the July 9, 1950, meeting, MK David Hacohen disputed the argument that discrimination against the Arabs and the institution of the military government were essential for the country’s security. Assailing the Absentees’ Property Law – a series of measures that allowed the state to expropriate land and homes abandoned by Palestinians who were displaced during the war, even if they subsequently returned to the country – he said, “I don’t know whether it was clear to us all, when we voted, how grave it is.” He noted that, “According to the law, when an Arab dies, his property does not go to his wife but to the Custodian of Absentees’ Property It is inconceivable for us to declare equality of all citizens and at the same time have a law like this on the books.”

Apparently, no one took issue with the next comparison Hacohen drew: “These laws that we are coming up with in regard to Israel’s Arab residents cannot even be likened to the laws that were promulgated against the Jews in the Middle Ages, when they were deprived of all rights. After all, this is a total contrast between our declarations and our deeds.”

A similar approach was voiced during the same meeting by Zalman Aran, who viewed Mapai’s handling of the Arabs as a “process of despair” that must be rejected instead of finding excuses for it.

“Morally, if we are a movement that does not lie, and we do not want to lie, we are here living a total lie,” he said. “All the books and articles that have been written, and the speeches made internally and for external consumption, are groundless when it comes to implementation. I am not talking about the attitude of individuals in the country toward the Arabs. I am talking about a [policy] line. I reject this line, which has emerged within society and has a thousand-and-one manifestations. I do not accept all the excuses that have been put forward.”

Taking issue with Dayan’s approach, Aran compared the situation of the Arabs in Israel with the situation of Jews in other countries. “On the basis of what we are doing here to the Arabs, there is no justification for demanding a different attitude toward Jewish minorities in other countries I would be contemptuous of Arabs who would want to form ties with us on the basis of this policy. We would be lying in the [Socialist] Internationale, we are lying to ourselves and we are lying to the nations of the world.”

Dayan – still an officer in uniform, it must be remembered – objected to the opinions voiced by Hacohen and Aran, and saw no reason to draw a distinction between the Arab public in Israel and Arabs in enemy countries. “I am far more pessimistic about the prospect of viewing these Arabs as loyal,” he countered.

Moshe Sharett. Frank Scherschel

Flawed democracy

During the same period of a decade-plus when Ben-Gurion was premier, a political battle raged in Mapai over the continued existence of the military government. Ben-Gurion persistently defended the military government, which he saw as a “deterrent force” against the Arabs in Israel. In a meeting of the Mapai Secretariat on January 1, 1962, he railed against the “dominant naivete” of those, such as Sharett and Aran, who do not understand the Arabs, and warned of the possible consequences: “There are people living under the illusion that we are like all the nations, that the Arabs are loyal to Israel and that what happened in Algeria cannot happen here.”

He added, “We view them like donkeys. They don’t care. They accept it with love…” To loosen the reins on the Arabs would be a great danger, he added: “You and your ilk” – those who support the abolition of the military government or making it less stringent – “will be responsible for the perdition of Israel.” A decade earlier, on January 15, 1951, Shmuel Dayan, Moshe Dayan’s father, a Mapai leader and longtime Knesset member, had voiced similar sentiments in a meeting of Mapai MKs. The Arabs, he said, “could be good citizens, but it’s clear that at the moment they become an obstacle, they will constitute a terrible danger.”

A decade later, Aran offered an opposite assessment of the situation. Speaking at a meeting of the Mapai Secretariat in January 1962, he maintained that it was the military government that “is exacerbating the situation.” He also rejected the Algeria analogy. On the contrary, he thought, the existence of the military government would not delay an Arab uprising but would only spur it. He reiterated his critique of the early 1950s a decade later. He was against a situation in which the Arabs are “second-class” citizens who lack rights like the Jews, and he was critical of both himself and his colleagues: “We accepted this thing, we became accustomed to it… We took it in stride… It’s hard to swallow… No Arab in the State of Israel is able, needs to, is capable of – whatever you give him economically, educationally – accepting that he is a second-class citizen in this country. I think that the world does not know the true situation. If it did, it would not let us keep going on this way.”

Already then, Finance Minister Levi Eshkol, under whose term as prime minister the military government would be abolished, foresaw the dire consequences: “It would not surprise me if something new suddenly emerges, that people will not want to rent a stable – or a room – to an Arab in some locale, which is the [logical] continuation of this situation. Will we be able to bear that?”

One person who was not impressed by such arguments was the deputy defense minister, Shimon Peres. In a Mapai Secretariat meeting on January 5, 1962, he maintained that in practice, the military government “is not a strain on the Arabs.” The military government, he added, was [effectively] created by the Arabs, “who endanger Israel and as long as that danger exists, we must meet it with understanding.” In contrast, Isser Harel, head of the Shin Bet security service (1948-1952) and the Mossad (1952-1963), stated in 1966, days after resigning as Eshkol’s adviser for intelligence and security, that “the military government is not a security necessity, and therefore there is no need for its existence. The army should not be dealing with the Arab citizens. That is a flaw in terms of our democracy” (quoted in the daily Maariv, July 10, 1966). That had been the view of the security hawks, including Yigal Allon, since the early 1950s.

Over the years, it was claimed that the military government had served as a tool in Mapai’s hands for reinforcing its rule, both by giving out jobs and by distributing benefits, and also by intervening in election campaigns through the creation of Arab factions within existing parties that were convenient for the ruling party (and suppressing opponents on the other side). This is not the venue to discuss that allegation – for which evidence exists – but it’s worth noting one of the motifs of the hard-hand policy, which preserved the segregation between Arabs and Jews, as expressed candidly by Ben-Gurion in the meeting of the Mapai Secretariat on January 5, 1962: “The moment that the difference between Jews and Arabs is eliminated, and they are at the same level If on that day there does not exist a regime in a world where there are no more wars, I do not have the shadow of a doubt that Israel will be eradicated and no trace will remain of the Jewish people.”

Patton quote

VIDEO: Patton Assassination

Guess who did it? The tribe. And why? Because he knew that The United States was fighting the wrong war. Instead of allying with those who were fighting for freedom, they allied themselves with the enemy. Patton spoke the truth, therefore, he was killed. In his diary he tells his wife, he knew that they were out to kill him. So, what is America then? The land of the free? Or the land of the hostages of the Devil?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDw4N8mwg1o

Marlene Dietrich

COMMENTARY: Did Marlene Dietrich Plot To Murder Hitler? She Seduced John Wayne, James Stewart And JFK But The German Siren Had Grander Designs On History

Google never forgets to add their daily share of ‘brainwashing’! On Wednesday’s Google Doodle it celebrates Marlene Dietrich’s 116th birthday. Why do you think that is? She was also mentioned in tribal owned Time Magazine,The Telegraph, El Pais, etc. etc. etc. Because Dietrich is one of Berlin’s 20’s and 30’s icon of corruption. Those that Hitler wanted OUT of Germany. She was bisexual and much despised by the National Socialists for her lack of morals. 

Dietrich was a Jewess who worked as a stage and film actress in the famous decadent Twenties in Berlin. This is the type of trash that Hitler fought to rid his beloved Deutschland and the rest of Europe from. But, this poisonous filth continued to corrupt the world through Hollywood and today we clearly see how it has destroyed and continues to destroy our society. 

Marlene Dietrich

“Did Marlene Dietrich plot to murder Hitler? She seduced John Wayne, James Stewart and JFK but the German siren had grander designs on history,” Source: dailymail.co.uk

As the long black limousine pulled up unannounced outside the gates of Buckingham Palace, the guardsmen were surprised to see one of the most famous and beautiful women of the day reclining elegantly in the back seat.

Marlene Dietrich Seductress: Marlene Dietrich planned to use her wiles to entrap Hitler and bring an end to the war 

Marlene Dietrich, then the world’s highest-paid film star, was the epitome of husky-voiced sexual allure.

At the height of her fame, she seduced many of Hollywood’s best-known actors, including John Wayne and James Stewart. But on that summer’s evening in 1936 she had a very different conquest in mind.

Dietrich was in England to make a film called Knight Without Armour at Denham Studios in Buckinghamshire.

Her boyfriend, Douglas Fairbanks Jr, was friendly with the Royal Family and through him she had learned of King Edward VIII’s plans to abdicate so he could marry American divorcee Wallis Simpson.

Shocked at the idea he might renounce everything for what she described as ‘that homely, flat-chested woman,’ the 35-year-old screen goddess had decided to intervene.

‘She was prepared to seduce him and show him that Wallis wasn’t the only woman in the world,‘ Fairbanks said.

Dietrich’s audacious plan was concocted in her suite at Claridge’s, he claimed. ‘She told me: “I’ll make him forget her. I must have a bath and the right perfume.”

‘She began taking her clothes off as she went.’

Since they were in the midst of their own affair, Fairbanks — not surprisingly — expressed his reservations about the scheme.

‘Oh darling, don’t be so old-fashioned,’ she replied.

‘We’re doing it for England, which we both love. Some sacrifices must be made.’

King Edward VIII

Doing it for England: Dietrich wanted to prevent King Edward VIII from abdicating to be with Wallis Simpson, pictured here together on a 1936 Adriatic cruise

Fairbanks said: ‘She went off in her limousine but she’d dallied a bit too long enhancing her charms, which hadn’t needed any enhancing, and the King was out when she arrived — or so she was told.’

According to a colourful new biography, it was not the last time Dietrich would consider using her charms to change the course of history.

Her prolific love life would involve the seduction of both President John F. Kennedy and his father Joe — not to mention a bizarre plot to assassinate Hitler.

Underlying all this was a free and frank enjoyment of sex — startling for a woman of her generation.

‘Darling, the legs aren’t so beautiful,’ she once said of her most celebrated attributes.

‘It’s just that I know what to do with them.’

Marlene Dietrich

Ahead of her time: Dietrich was open about enjoyment of sex, which was rare for a woman in her day and age

Born in Berlin in 1901, she was the daughter of Louis Dietrich, a lieutenant in the Royal Prussian Police, and his wife Josephine, whose family ran one of the city’s best-known department stores.

Among the first people to fall for Dietrich’s allure was an older girl at her school.

‘I was allowed to overnight with her and she was the initiator,’ she remembered.

‘She didn’t seem to know much about what she was doing, but she seemed to enjoy her fumbling.’

Working as a stage and film actress in decadent Twenties Berlin, she went on to conduct affairs with both sexes. But her strangest and most enduring relationship was with a man, a handsome assistant director named Rudi Sieber.

She would later describe him as ‘the love of my life, my soul mate’.

Yet after they married in May 1923, and she gave birth to their daughter Maria the following year, they agreed to enjoy an open relationship and Dietrich gave her stamp of approval to Sieber’s affair with Russian actress Tamara Matul.

In part, this was a practical arrangement. In 1930, her success in the film The Blue Angel took the new international sex symbol to Hollywood and she left her daughter in the care of her husband and Tamara — an agreement that was repeated throughout her career.

Although they continued to live apart in the coming years, Dietrich wrote to Rudi whenever she had an affair and told him the details.

‘I never loved anyone else the way I loved Rudi, so Rudi didn’t need to be jealous,’ she explained.

There must have been many such letters. Her Hollywood romances included affairs with two of Greta Garbo’s former lovers.

One was a dalliance with Mercedes de Acosta, a society lesbian renowned for her habit of wearing mannish trousers, along with a naval-style tricorn hat and cape. The other was with actor John Gilbert, known as ‘the great lover’ of the silent screen.

Her two-year relationship with Gilbert ended when he died of a heart attack in January 1936, but she quickly moved on, meeting Douglas Fairbanks Jr at a party in London, shortly before her abortive role in the abdication crisis.

That night, she asked him to give her a lift back to Claridge’s and invited him in for a nightcap.

Douglas Fairbanks, Jr. Confidant: Douglas Fairbanks, Jr said Dietrich told him of her plan to assassinate Hitler and asked him for helpHitler

‘It’s very nice of you to have me up for a drink,’ he said as he settled on the sofa in her suite.

‘That wasn’t what I had in mind,’ she replied.

Dietrich was eight years older than Fairbanks, but he recalled: ‘She was unconventional in her lovemaking as she was unconventional in everything.

‘She was totally uninhibited about her nudity which was easy to understand when you gazed upon that body.’

Their relationship coincided with Dietrich’s growing concerns about the rise of Nazism in her homeland. She was deemed a traitor for refusing to return to Germany and make films at the state-run UFA studios, which would have been great propaganda for the Third Reich.

One day, according to Fairbanks, she asked for his help in an extraordinary plan. She would agree to make one film in Germany, on condition that she could be alone with the Fuhrer.

This would give her an opportunity to kill him.

Jimmy Stewart

Not so gentleman Jim: Dietrich enjoyed a dalliance with her co-star James Stewart, and found his private persona quite different to his public one

She told Fairbanks: ‘I would gush over how I feel about him, intimating that I am desperately in love with him. I’ve heard Hitler likes me and I’m certain he would agree.’

Realising she would be searched, she was prepared to go into Hitler’s bedroom naked if necessary, but the only detail she could not resolve was how to smuggle in a murder weapon.

She considered a poisoned hairpin, but asked for Fairbanks’ suggestions, too.

‘I never thought of anything,’ he said.

‘Fortunately, her idea didn’t go any further because she didn’t figure out how to complete the assassination, but she was a very brave girl and I know she would have gambled her life if she thought she had a chance of success.’

When Dietrich ended her affair with Fairbanks in 1938, he suspected she had simply tired of him.

The following year she began an affair with James Stewart, her co-star in the Western film Destry Rides Again. She revealed a very different side to ‘Gentleman Jimmy’, as he was known to fans.

‘He never said “I love you” or anything like that,’ she recalled.

‘One rather expects that kind of thing, those words, even if delivered in perfect insincerity.

‘Then I discovered I was pregnant. It was his baby too, so I told him. He looked shocked.

‘He said: “Jeez, what are you gonna do about it?” I noticed he said “you”, not “we”.’

Some accounts suggest Dietrich had an abortion with Stewart’s endorsement, while others say she claimed it turned out to be a phantom pregnancy.

Whatever the truth, their relationship did not survive the end of filming, and Dietrich was soon in pursuit of Joseph Kennedy, father of the famous brothers John, Robert and Edward.

Kennedy was then the U.S. ambassador to Britain and he and Dietrich met in the summer of 1939 when both were holidaying at Cap d’Antibes in the South of France.

JFK

Family friend: John F Kennedy and his father Joseph, were both wooed by Dietrich years apart – and both kept their watches on

She was there with Rudi, Tamara and Maria, while Kennedy was accompanied by his wife and children, but this did not deter them from a dalliance which proved disappointing in several respects.

‘He was a very rich man but he never gave me even a simple token, like a scarf,’ said Dietrich.

‘I think he wanted to be sure you really liked him, just for himself alone. He wasn’t very comfortable when it came to women.’

Their fling ended that summer, but it appeared she had made a lasting impression on the young John F. Kennedy, then only 21.

In later years her popularity as a film star began to wane and she turned to a career as a cabaret artist.

Touring the country with such memorable songs as Falling In Love Again and Lili Marleen, she arrived in Washington in the early Sixties and invited President John F. Kennedy to her show.

Marlene Dietrich

Lifestyle: The love of Dietrich’s life was an assistant director named Rudi Sieber who she married but then enjoyed an open marriage with

Word came back the president could not accept but would like her to visit him at the White House.

She was escorted to his private quarters where they were left alone together.

‘He clearly remembered those days in the South of France,’ she said.

‘Most of him was relaxed, but not all of him and he didn’t leave any doubt as to what he had in mind.

‘I can’t say I was caught completely by surprise. He was, after all, his father’s son and I wanted to see if he made love like his father.

‘I don’t remember most of what happened because it was all so quick. Afterwards I remembered saying: “Please don’t muss my hair.” I kept my professional focus and I knew I had a show to do later  that night.

‘I think he was even faster than his father. He had an even busier schedule I suppose. They both kept their watches on.’

Before she left, Kennedy asked if she had really gone to bed with his father. She said: ‘I hesitated a moment and thought about what he wanted to hear. “No, your father tried but I didn’t agree,” I told him.

‘The president smiled, so I suppose what I said was right for him. “The old fox,” he said. “I knew he was lying”.’

Dietrich was then in her early 60s and admitted to feeling relieved that Kennedy, some 16 years her junior, had found her attractive.

‘I felt too old for the young president,’ she said.

‘I wished I could have been younger and more beautiful for the occasion.’

Ageing came hard for a woman whose sex appeal had once enabled her to pick and choose which of her leading men she would invite into her bed, and choosy she could be.

She had been enamoured of John Wayne, her co-star in The Spoilers, filmed in 1942. When she first saw him, she was struck by his ‘broad shoulders and flat behind’, but what most appealed to her was that he wasn’t vain or arrogant.

‘Far from it, he was insecure as an actor,’ she said.

John Wayne

The Duke: This shot from ‘The Spoilers’ in 1952 shows Dietrich, left, with John Wayne, who she wanted to ‘mother’ because he was vulnerable

‘I don’t think it’s what a man his size would like to have said about him but he brought out the maternal side in me.’

Aware she could not depend on her looks for ever, she had long had a pact with her husband Rudi that they would spend their old age together.

In this, there was never any question in Dietrich’s mind that he would ultimately choose her over long-term mistress Tamara.

‘She could never be the love of his life because that place had been taken by me,’ she said. Dietrich believed this realisation may have contributed to Tamara’s increasingly fragile mental health.

In 1965, she was committed to a lunatic asylum, where she was later stabbed to death by another inmate.

The path was clear for her and Rudi to enter their twilight years together — but the great tragedy of her life was that he died in 1976, leaving her to live out her last years on her own in a Paris apartment.

When she died in May 1992, it was as a virtual recluse.

There was a simple reason for her refusal to leave her flat. The woman who had once entranced millions was terrified photographers might take snaps of her, revealing the beauty which could have changed the course of world events was itself now part of history.

• Extracted from MARLENE: A PERSONAL BIOGRAPHY by Charlotte Chandler, to be published by JR Books on May 25 at £18.99. © 2011 Charlotte Chandler. To order a copy for £15.99 (including p&p)  call 0845 155 0720.

Chosen Ones

VIDEO: The Not So Chosen People

Why do Christians know so little about the Bible?Because the Church was infiltrated from its early days and the truth has been kept from us. So who are the ‘chosen ones’? The answer is those who believe in the Father and His Son Jesus. That is what the Bible says. Then why do Jews insist on making the world believe that they are the chosen people and that is how the justify all their crimes? Because their long waited Messiah who has been their god all along is Satan. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWzkC1NnMIo

Christmas

EXPOSED: How Satan Infiltrated Christianity With Christamas

Are we really celebrating the birth of Christ year after year? Or, a camouflaged Satanic ritual called ‘Christmas’? Most of us have been doing it for years, practically all our lives, without even knowing it! Time to see the truth! Here is Christmas exposed for what it really is! 

This video is produced by Yosef, please subscribe to his channel if you like.

https://youtu.be/dLoUf2UhRI4