HOME PAGEIlluminati -- myths? 

My take.

I think the Cathy O'Brien & Brice Taylor story is a "cartoonish" adventure story about a very serious issue of the CIA and MK Ultra/Monarch, human experimentation by the United States government/secret government/National Security State. I could be wrong, I don't mean to mock any abuse done to Ms. O'Brien if that was real.  Some of these CIA people are working on "security", some have ties to Nazis, and some believe or apparently truly believe that the destiny for America should be a fascist military state, not a liberal democracy where everyone has rights.   MK Ultra experiments in mind control -- sheesh, there's been government hearings and partial exposés on the History Channel -- were designed as a counter-insurgency, counter-revolutionary, control freak military tool, to manage societies.

It's a simple historical fact that the CIA was formed out of OSS and Nazi SS, and the Nazi State was supported (and directed?) in large measure from Wall Street. Wall Street investors and industrialists in the Fortune 500 or Fortune 100 (in general, may be individual exceptions) have long wanted to operate in an atmosphere of monopoly of wealth and power, control freaks who wanted power over national decisions and the world, and eliminating "inefficient" competition.

Naturally, people who hold wealth and power TEND to (not all!!) want to maintain a world run by wealth and power, whereas people who are not wealthy and powerful want to see a world run by more democratic means, like voting that counts and other forms of public input, which are levelling influences, which do not depend on financial success or robber-barony.

For those who believe in American liberal and democratic principles, in a republic of laws, it's considered cheating when the wealthy buy their way into the system, by buying politicians and positions, by trading favors to achieve public office (like Cabinet positions occupied by CFR members), since we have accepted this MYTH (fact) that all men were created EQUAL, and we want our government to live up to these principles. (Redundant to say it, but the Constitution meant to support these principles to an extent, and sought to eliminate or mitigate the powers of hereditary aristocracy, but also intended to maintain an alternate hierarchy of wealth and inheritance only partially parallel to the older hierarchies based on blood and family ties.)

In other words, ultra rich people CAN, in theory, lose their wealth ... and many have. And poor people CAN, in theory, become very rich. John D. Rockefeller did, but with good connections to others with links to the government. But since the American aristocracy of wealth has crystallized, there has been an effort to close the channels by which many of the poor can become rich or middle class, esp if it means reducing the power and wealth of the super rich.

Look at what happened in the 60's and 70's when "insolent" middle class youth with college educations on the GI Bill decided they were smarter than the authorities, and could decide for themselves whether the war in Vietnam was right or wrong, and could decide for themselves whether it was justified for America to be murdering millions of Vietnamese and others, simply because THEY democratically decided to have their own government with a controlled economy and to share prosperity by law. There were marches, riots, speeches, and general rebellion, (including by "Negroes") countered by COINTELPRO, an attack by the FBI and CIA on civil society. They are SERIOUS control freaks, and paranoid about losing control.

Alex Carey wrote a book on conservatism called Democracy without Risk (i think) links here to audio and book:

My problem with Illuminati theories -- besides the fact that normal people roll their eyes -- is there's no antidote for that eye-rolling or the fact that whereas the Tri-Lateral Commission, the CFR, the Heritage Foundation, and the CIA have names, street addresses, phone numbers, fax numbers, websites, publications and email --- on the other hand, the "Illuminati" has none of those.

The 'proof' that the Illuminati exists is a chain of connections allegedly going back to shadowy history, Adam Weishaupt, and his history of
a) his rebellion against the Church and the Vatican
b) his creation of an alternate society kept secret from the police state of the Church and the Vatican
c) the Church and the Vatican labelling him evil
d) Weishaupt's alleged escape to Moscow
e) a supposed direct link from Weishaupt to Karl Marx and Lenin
f) Weishaupt's ideas about covert attempts at running the world, or was that to have an alternate democratic system run the world? Alternate from the Church and the Vatican?

and a bunch of other stuff by crackpot Fritz Springmeier and some of his theories around prophesy.

What I'm apologizing for here is this: OF COURSE that was a SECRET SOCIETY!! You could not expect Weishaupt to have had OPEN rebellion against the Church and the Vatican. Look what they tried to do to Gallileo and others. Look at the Inquisition. OPEN rebellion would be suicide, so naturally they had underground cells. From what little I have gleaned, these underground cells engaged in philosophizing and writing, as well as expanding links to others and other powerful people, a run-around behind the backs of the Church and the Vatican.

NOW, I guess it's true that Weishaupt also tried to write an alternate religion too. So friggin what! The mock Church of Subgenious did too, with their idol "Bob" who is a computer clipart representing "Man". I think the evilness of the original Illuminati is way overstated, BY the powers that be, BY the Church and the Vatican.

Compare alleged evil that to Skull and Bones, below. Skull and Bones is tied to the power of consolidated capitalism and wealth. The philosophy of Weishaupt included levelling their wealth, something the Church also labelled "evil". Well of course, if you've got all the wealth and power and positions locked up, then you call names at anyone who tries to challenge you, and you try to destroy them, and since it was a religious and superstitious era, and the Church was threatened, naturally the SLUR they used was "evil". As in "Axis of Evil". In short, I think the most "evil" aspect of the old Illuminati is that they were a force for democracy and self-rule. (All fascists incl Nazis considered self-rule to be destructive to society, actually destructive to the human race, and considered the only sensible path to be rule by powerful bullies. They had a deep contempt for liberal democracy.)

I have not seen a verifiable connection between the Russell Trust, Yale, Skull and Bones, and Weishaupt's group.

So maybe it does exist, but it's sketchy. These other groups are not sketchy.

In addition, the Church and the Vatican also demonized the Masons and Knights Templar, as they were an alternate source of spirituality and community, outside of reach of the Church and the Vatican. Power struggle.

I'm not so sure I'd appreciate a world run by the Church and the Vatican.

The history of the Masons includes the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, however limited those are. The Monarch/MK Ultra video I mentioned on YouTube discusses the Masons (and their ostensibly weird rituals) in Chapter 5, but mentions the caveat that they may have been infiltrated from within as a closed society by other powerful forces.

A young friend of mine was in DeMolay, and the story of Jacques DeMolay is how he was tortured by the Vatican to reveal the names of his Mason cohorts, but he did not break. The Masonry my friend was taught was an advanced expression of morality and Judeo-Christian ethic (actually, any monotheistic religion accepted, which would also piss off the more exclusive Church). He said the only weird ritual he saw at a upper levels was an oath to loyalty to the brotherhood, a bonding ritual, I think involving blood, but nothing truly Satanic or evil (except to more extreme views on that). Nothing more extreme than many secrecy agreements people sign to go work for the government or some corporations. But the MAIN focus was to go out into the world and DO GOOD, to LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF, and other good Biblical teaching of which hardly anyone disagrees.

Compare that to the Masons' apparent successor, Skull and Bones. Compare America under the Masons to America under Skull and Bones. Masons openly accepts members of good character from the general society. Skull and Bones is a more secretive society than Masons, far more exclusive, and designed to give an upper hand to wealthy Yalies who want to run the world, and who appoint each other to positions of power, and whose motto seems to be "Everything for us, fuck everyone else."

THat was my friends' argument about and defense of the Masons, and at this point I think it's valid.