The American Revolution Was A Hoax

Perpetrated By The 'Founding Fathers' And Their Parasitic Handlers

Given that we have reached the 250 year mark since the signing of the supposed Declaration Of Independence, it’s appropriate to have a look at what’s actually being celebrated.

The American Revolutionary War and the ‘Founding Fathers’ are iconic themes in the official history of the United States of America.

If they learn little else about history, students in the U.S. are repeatedly hammered with the two themes above along with the idea that America is ‘The land of the free and the home of the brave’.

Americans are also taught that their freedom and rights are guaranteed by a Constitution and Bill Of Rights created by the Founding Fathers to be used by all future generations.

Are you familiar with the famous line from William Shakespeare's pastoral comedy ‘As You Like It’, that "All the world's a stage"?

The horrific world wide staged plandemic event, with a heap of additional adlib, that we recently experienced, is a testament to Shakespeare’s claim.

Most of the American public still doesn’t realize that this Covid-19 operation was staged, although more and more people are becoming aware of that fact every day.

Many of those who figured this out early on, have already been researching prior historical narratives, finding many of them to be total fabrications, so they weren’t that surprised when the current contrived event occurred.

A wise man of American letters, Samuel Clemens, once rightly proclaimed this concerning popularly accepted interpretations of American history as mythical folklore, that “one should not believe everything one hears, and even less of what one reads.”

Well, as it turns out much of ‘official’ Department of Indoctrination…er…Education, American History is myth creating folklore.

The popularly accepted historical notion that an ill-clad, undernourished, ill-supplied, and poorly armed band of farmers and colonists untested by previous battle could field any sort of viable threat to what was, at that time during the 18th century, the most mighty and battle tested army in the history of organized warfare, much less defeat them in any sort of protracted military campaign, is patently and utterly absurd.

Do you remember being taught through movies, a particularly preferred method of indoctrination, that the American soldiers used guerilla tactics to defeat the British soldiers. Mythical hogwash.

You might already be wondering why American historical scholars haven’t been exposing the real history of the United States. Well, it’s for the same reason almost all physicians went along with the Covid operation, even to the point of injecting the bio-weapon into their patients. The great American iconoclast and man of letters, Upton Sinclair once wrote, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

Regarding the founding of America, the nation was firmly founded, in both the principles of governance and social philosophy, based upon Talmudic Judaism, which itself is a semantic trick veiling a deeper truth. Upon deeper examination, one discovers that the vaunted Hellenistic origins of democracy are but a thinly veiled concoction by Jesuit scholars. There has never been a democracy in the entirety of mankind’s history, nor does there exist now a democratic government in America, nor has one existed anywhere else, only the appearance or trappings of one.

In truth, Talmudic Judaism represents the principles of Fabian socialism, which is tied in with the philosophies held in secret by high degrees of Scottish Rite masonic orders. The philosophical nature of Fabianism can be found in the works of Frederick Nietzsche, Heinrich Hegel, Niccolo Machiavelli’s ‘The Prince’ and even Thomas Paine’s Common Sense, a pre-revolution Federalist propaganda tract written at the behest of so-called founding father and high degree mason Benjamin Franklin.

The interconnecting principles of all of these works of philosophical scholarship are unity, brotherhood and fraternity. Unknown to most Americans, and apparently to most historical scholars, is that all of those terms reference the underlying motto of the international fraternal orders of Freemasonry, the true founding fathers of the American, French, and Bolshevik revolutions.

Note- Have you noticed the black and white checkered floors in many Hollywood movies and TV shows? It’s a nod to the masonic viewers.

The international masonic brotherhood is merely an instrument; they are the worker bees carrying out the political and social bidding of the ruling elite thirteen Jesuit families. How more than coincidental then, America was founded on the basis of thirteen colonies? No, this was far from coincidental, for the unfolding of mankind’s history does not occur merely by accidental happenstance. History is the recording of fraudulent events created out of whole cloth. Mainstream and popularly accepted historical scholarship is but a thinly veiled canard designed to conceal the truth.

In the cornerstone masonic manifesto Moral’s and Dogma composed by the late masonic grand master Albert Pike, the blueprint for world revolution was put forth. A cursory glance at the text will prove to anyone beyond shadow of doubt how history is made, and who is making it on behalf of the ruling elite royal Jesuit families. Going all the way back to the 16th century, thirteen elite Jesuit families charged the high masonic ranks, then led by Francis Bacon, with staging revolution to bring about the consolidation of their global governance, which in reality was declared in 1776. That is right folks, American scholarly texts written by so-called historians indicate American independence was declared, but it was ultimately never granted, because the colonies, to this day, are still subject to Roman law, which is known today as Uniform Commercial Code, or admiralty law.

The gold fringe on the American flags below signifies that the country is under British admiralty law of the seas:

This is also why, whenever one tunes into MSNBC to watch ‘live coverage’ of whatever the actors going through the motions appearing to enact laws, one will notice the twin columns of Roman fasces displayed behind the speaker of the house as he stands at the podium to make his address.

As with the passage of so-called history, what one witnesses going on in the American congress is merely a display of grand theater, filled with actors playing out their roles under the cover of pseudonyms.

Why would a self-governing people have any need for elected leaders, especially leaders who are merely hand picked puppets of the Crown Temple board of directors belonging to the masonic lodges controlled by a self-appointed ruling elite of Jesuit jackals?

Long ago, the ruling Jesuit families were advised by their learned courtiers that in order to cement the idea of a globalist philosophy into the minds of the masses and realize their great dream of a globalist order, such a plan could only be carried out under the utmost secrecy and with diligent patience. They were wisely advised incremental progress would be the best approach, utilizing whatever means necessary, whether political or social, in reaching the penultimate goal of global consolidation.

The American revolution was but one step in that direction, merely but one increment or part of the overarching plan. In fact, America, as a corporate entity, was formulated as a military instrument to be utilized in achieving globalist goals.

How many times has one heard America referred to as ‘the world’s policeman’?

In truth, America was established as a corporate entity, subject to a monopoly corporate sovereign presided over by royal charter and bound by the terms and conditions of a contract with East India Tea Company. America continues to act on the world stage only at the behest of its true masters in Rome, the Jesuit military order of the Knights of Malta, and in cooperation with the London Crown Temple multi-national banking consortium.

Many believe, by virtue of living in America, that they are free.

American citizens are not free.

America has never been free.

Notions of liberty are a carefully tailored illusion.

In truth, you are a slave, slaves to a clandestine institution which is centuries old. America does not abide by the timeless virtues of liberty and freedom, but by the byzantine uniform commercial codes of merchant law, or admiralty law, under the auspices of the Crown Temple in the city of London. Has one never wondered, why courtroom flags are fringed in yellow? That is the telltale sign that you are now standing under the legal auspices of admiralty law, and not, as you’ve been taught in public school, the US constitution!

America is not a country, but a corporation!

Every US citizen, by virtue of having been issued a social security ID, is a registered employee, and your name in capital letters on your Social Security card certifies that you are stock of the US corporation. Corporations exist on paper, and since the constitution of the United States exists on paper, it is therefore a contract, containing terms and conditions negotiated between ‘esquires’, or attorneys, called to the bar at the Crown Temple. All attorney’s, whether they know it or not, owe ultimate allegiance not to their paying clients or law partners, but to the Crown Temple, centered in the city of London.

Legally, you are a ‘person’, a term existing on paper describing you as an individual, an artificial entity created by royal charter, prescription, or act of legislature. The legal definition of the US is a number of persons united, in one body, a body of persons.

All of America’s founding fathers, were not only aristocrats with land and title granted by the British king, but were also trained esquires, or attorneys, called to the Temple bar.

The dispute with the king, prior to the so-called American revolutionary war of the eighteenth century, was merely a negotiation of terms and conditions arbitrated by the attorneys at the Crown Temple in the city of London, to settle outstanding legal disputes, between the King and his royal colonial subjects. It is important not to confuse the king with the Crown Temple, for the former is merely an agent of the latter. While the royal houses of Europe may possess actual wealth in terms of land and valuable assets in the way of stocks, bonds, and natural resources, they were, and still are, beholden to the Crown Temple, in order to maintain their vast portfolio’s.

The Crown Temple was established in two parts, known as the Round, and the Chancel. The former, established in 1185, was modeled after the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem, the central headquarters of the chief money lenders. The latter, known as the Chancel, houses the legal apparatus of Crown Temple, and is divided into two parts, one known as the middle temple (Lincoln’s Inn), the other known as the inner (Grey’s Court).

Both portions, or departments, contain the Crown offices of licensed bar attorneys, or esquires, and the various franchise offices of Crown Temple bank. Since the establishment of the Temple church, or Crown Temple, the very organizing principle of society has revolved around the concept of commercial trade, the trading of commercial goods and ancillary services.

Every citizen of the US is by legal definition, a unit of commercial trade, the bond for which can be traded, bought or sold.

The true nature of the dispute between the American colonies and the British king, was not over gaining freedom or liberty for the common man-for that is merely a false perception published in public school history books. In truth, the founding fathers viewed the common man as nothing more than cattle, a vast pool of human resources to be exploited.

In terms of the American Revolutionary war, the real dispute was over the actual land holdings of the noble aristocrats, and the taxes they were forced to pay to the Crown Temple in London. The constitution is merely an internal memo between agents of the Crown Temple, detailing the results of a legal negotiation granting certain rights and privileges. The common man, as usual throughout history, was not at all privy to this negotiation. The constitution does not guarantee anyone’s freedom. Rather, America is still a crown colony, bound by and subject to the patents and charters set down by the Crown Temple.

This concept goes all the way back to the Code of Hammurabi, having to do with merchant law conducted on the high seas. At birth, you were given a name, which from a legal standpoint, constitutes a fictional entity. The name appearing on your birth certificate is your corporate identity, meaning officially you are a stock commodity, a human tax resource, that can be legally levied, bought and sold! This has to do with legal terms and conditions, those things no one ever seems to carefully read before they sign on the dotted line of any contractual arrangement, whether paper or digital.

Every tax dollar collected by the IRS, does not go forward to pay the principle on the national debt, but merely the interest. The tax money collected to pay off the interest on the debt notes put into circulation by the Federal Reserve, goes back to the Crown Temple in London, specifically the middle temple. The IRS, which like the Federal Reserve, is a private corporation, has acted as collection agent on behalf of the Crown Temple since 1921. Every dollar printed into circulation by the Federal Reserve, is merely a paper promissory note, or a promise to pay at some future date, the interest on which can be determined or changed at the whim and caprice of the Federal Reserve Chairman, who acts as agent on behalf of the Crown Temple.

The Crown Temple is an exclusive monopoly, made up of lawyers and bankers. The catch here, is that unlike you, a person, a legal fiction, none of the Inns of Court within the Crown Temple are in fact incorporated, and for good reason. One cannot bring a claim against, in essence sue, a non-corporate entity, thus ensuring the integrity of this byzantine monopoly. This secret society extends to American Inns of Court, existing within every state of the union. These are independent organizations, auxiliaries to the London Crown Temple. Since all courts in the US are governed by Uniform Commercial Code, or admiralty law, the constitution does not apply in any case. This idea or concept, is merely a smokescreen for the public.

The US constitution is merely a legal arrangement made between agents of the Crown Temple, and it’s banking and legal franchises. The preamble containing the bill of rights, beginning “We the People”, does not apply to you and I, only to those affiliated as franchises to the Inns of Court at Crown Temple. This is why, one will often hear a civil case being dismissed when someone tries to base an argument before the bench on constitutional grounds alone. The US corporation is governed solely by admiralty law, the law of the sea, not, as you have been taught in public school, the Constitution composed in the eighteenth century.

A majority of the signatories to America’s founding documents, including the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, founding Constitution, and Treaty of Peace, were in fact esquires, or attorneys, with sworn allegiances to the Crown Temple. The terms of the Treaty of Peace, drawn up subsequent to the cessation of American revolution hostilities in 1783, were negotiated in Paris by Crown Temple esquires Benjamin Franklin and John Adams. Remarkably, all signatories involved in negotiating the terms, of not only the Treaty of Peace, but all of America’s founding documents, were representatives of the same presiding contractual agent, the Crown Temple, and not acting in direct legal opposition.

Therefore, extending from the year 1776, by legal virtue of all subsequent charters, patents, licences, and statutes negotiated by Crown Temple agents, and by virtue of debt notes issued by private banks such as the Federal Reserve, affiliated with Crown Temple, America was legally bound in perpetuity to the Crown Temple, and it’s middle inn, and not, as successive generations of Americans have been fooled into believing, free and independent.

The generally believed portrayal of how America was founded, chronicled in public school history books, and other scholarly history texts, is a complete fiction, and represents a colossal lie. This lie has been perpetuated through false perceptions promulgated by public schools and American universities of so-called higher learning.

America’s judiciary, filled with esquires beholden via verbal and written oath to the Crown Temple, have purposely misinterpreted the terms and conditions of America’s founding documents, in order to keep this secret undisclosed to the American public. But, words, the interpretations of which often have two meanings, one for the elites and yet another for the common man, have always been the keenest weapon in the ruling elite’s arsenal, cleverly and judiciously utilized in the maintenance of their hegemony over the masses.

According to Francis Bacon, in his text ‘The New Atlantis’, conquest and settlement of the North American continent, with its potential for the mining of vast natural and human resources, would exist as an ideal beachhead from which to launch a powerful catalyst in the formation and realization of a globalist feudal order presided over by the thirteen elite Jesuit families.

Bacon’s ‘The New Atlantis’ was in many ways the first to represent a blueprint for colonization of America, and advocated the idea that the North American continent as a whole “would become a paradise in which men would follow reason, become gods and work for a universal republic that would then replicate the Utopian conditions of America throughout the known world.”

Does this sound familiar folks? Why, it should.

For, Bacon’s sentiments were echoed by President George W. Bush during the run-up to America’s involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, that America only sought to “bring democracy to the world.”

It must be noted Bacon was a Rosicrucian, a secret society of elite European nobility harboring grand global schemes and Utopian philosophies based on Pythagoras and Plato’s Republic (a text expressing the idea that only the elite were fit to rule) that would eventually evolve into the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, the first lodge of which was established on American shores in Boston and known as St. John’s Lodge.

Today, the Scottish Rite’s Northern jurisdiction is centered in Lexington, Massachusetts, the location of the first alleged skirmish between colonialist regulars and British forces. The Jesuit superior in Rome is the true master of the international brotherhood of Freemasonry, and the Jesuit order was responsible for composing all the Rites. The quote below is from one of the order’s most elder and respected brothers, Manly P. Hall, direct from page 3 of his 1944 text, “The Secret Destiny of America”:

“Freemasonry is the Church of Satan masquerading as a fraternal mystical philanthropic order. It fronts for Masonic and Cabalist central bankers who started the US as a vehicle to advance their New World Order.”

An important source conveniently overlooked by mainstream historical scholars, is Bernard Fay’s text published in 1935, entitled “Revolution and Freemasonry.” In this text, Fay explains that the original thirteen American colonies were rather isolated by religious affiliations, customs, racial profiles, as well as governing political structures. But, the brotherhood of masons had a solution to unite the disparate colonies by appearing to foment a revolution. Knowing that most colonists still considered themselves loyal to the British crown, they knew nothing short of the most egregious psychological manipulations would stir them to emotional furor in opposition to the crown.

However, as any American can attest who remembers the surreal events of September 11, 2001, nothing unites a people against a common enemy, real or imagined, like the concept of fomented war, even under the flimsiest of pretext. Fay goes on to explain exactly what the brotherhood of masonry planned to do in uniting the American colonies:

“Masonry alone undertook to lay the foundation for national unity in America because, as a secret society, it could spread throughout the colonies and work steadily and silently. It created a limited but very prominent class of people a feeling of American unity without which there would have been no United States.”

The masons are masters of theater, and historically recorded events such as Paul Revere’s ride (Revere was a high degree mason belonging to the St. John’s lodge) and even the famous Boston Tea Party, much like the recent Boston Bombing were just that, theatrical presentations designed to create iconic images that would reflect upon the memory of historical posterity. In truth, those that participated in the so-called party were sworn masons, partaking in staged theater designed to place in the minds of the hoi polloi something revolutionary may have been happening.

Another important so-called ‘Founding Father’ actor was Benjamin Franklin.

Turns out, old Benny Franklin was not who you thought he was. As suspected, his official biography is filled with more than curious anomalies. Franklin was neither patriot nor a founding father, but an aristocrat with direct genealogical relations to King George III. There also exists empirical evidence Franklin may have been a British spy.

Old Benny was an intelligence agent. Not only that, Franklin was a high degree Scottish Rite Freemason. These two historical omissions alone indicate the official narrative popularly proffered by mainstream texts should be held to question.

One wonders if mainstream historical scholars are truly cognizant of the rancid manure peddled as American history. Perhaps they are, and continue to play their cards close to the vest for fear of losing their precious tenured positions at prestigious universities should they dare to publish the truth. The biography of Benjamin Franklin is no exception, as shall immediately be demonstrated. What follows shall loom large, in that Franklin’s close genealogical relations to both King George III, and high British nobility, have significant bearing on the true identity of George Washington, America’s first president.

One is informed by mainstream history that Benjamin Franklin’s origins were humble. In fact, it is claimed he was the son of a candlestick maker. This biographical detail, on it’s face, seems contradictory compared to the high adventure and rapid upward mobility detailed during Franklin’s formative years. Most, if not all of Franklin’s young life, reads like the grand creation of Hollywood scriptwriters, rife with narrative improbabilities and convenient plot devices.

Though history tells us America’s key founding father was a learned and wise figure, one learns rather surprisingly he was not well educated, and that Franklin in fact advanced no further than what today would be considered a grammar school level education. And yet, one reads that not only did Franklin later achieve feats of great and innovative scientific invention, but while still in the bloom of adolescence, Franklin absconded to Philadelphia, where historians tell us he soon began a newspaper with generous financial aid provided by the governor of Pennsylvania.

Franklin’s biography also informs, while still in his teens, he traveled by ship to Britain, and once there, was provided bed and board at the home of a wealthy nobleman. Traveling by ship was even more expensive than via horse and buggy, and certainly not a mode of travel readily available to the working class-unless, that is, they were employed to work on board swabbing the decks or carrying cocktails to the cabins of the wealthy passengers. Yet again, historians would have the public believe Franklin, once arrived in Britain, happened to discover another man of aristocratic means to help him out on his unlikely path to success, wealth, and fame.

Really folks? Is it likely, then or now, a young runaway with merely a grammar school education would interest wealthy men as a prospective business partner?

By all accounts, Franklin was either blessed with uncommon fortune, or perhaps there is another possibility. Which leads to more closely examining Franklin’s genuine background. Turns out, old Benny’s true family origins were much grander, and far from humble. The first indication invalidating Franklin’s working class background came from examination into the family relations of his mother, Abiah Folger.

The Folger family tree extends back to the first American colonial settlements in Virginia and Massachusetts, in what became known as Salem Village. Wouldn’t you know it, not only did Franklin help compose the legal document establishing the terms and conditions of America’s ‘independence’ , but he composed the official legal charter that established the royal territory that later became known to Americans as the state of Virginia.

Additionally, historians want the public to believe the Folger’s and other families who settled in America were fleeing from religious persecution, rather than to establish profitable commercial outposts for East India Tea company, a corporate entity formed and sanctioned by royal charter. Indeed, the Folger’s had close family ties with British nobility and to royal bloodlines, and were not, as the history books would have the public believe, humble and pious pilgrims.

The stories spun by American historians concerning the Puritans and the Pilgrims bravely establishing a new world for the cause of religious freedom is pure propaganda, Yet, this is the prevailing historical narrative settled in the public mind and left unquestioned. Let’s face it, if historians were to tell the truth about the Folger’s and other so-called Puritan arrivals in America for strictly commercial purposes, that would tend to give away the ruling elite’s entire game of wealth and power acquisition, wouldn’t it? In light of the royal and noble heritage of the Folger family, how is it that Josiah Franklin, a humble candlestick maker met and married a rich debutante? Delving deeper into the Folger family tree, one learns Abiah Folger’s grandfather was a “Knight of the Body” to King Henry VII.

Knight or Esquire of the king’s body was a distinguished position, affording the title holder close and intimate access to the king, and the possibility of great influence. A generation going forward, one learns that yet another Folger family relation, Sir William Brereton also entered royal service and became Groom of the Privy Chamber to Henry VIII. In truth, Franklin’s ancestors were noble landholders and landlords, and in return for their loyal royal services were given generous grants of land both in Cheshire and the Welsh Marches. These genealogical facts alone discredit the official biography and humble family lineage of Benjamin Franklin.

From this new understanding comes further questions. Could it have been possible the young Franklin did not merely run away from his humble childhood abode located on colonial Boston’s Milk Street, but was sent on a mission at the behest of the British crown, and that once in Philadelphia, met with others also tightly associated with the British crown? Could it be, the purpose of Franklin’s newspaper was to sew the seeds of revolutionary propaganda in the public mind, to begin heralding the popular historical narrative of the American Revolution that would echo into posterity?

The question remains, if these facts regarding Franklin, though buried beneath reams of historical texts proclaiming the mainstream line, are readily accessible to anyone belonging to the general public willing to look for them, why do historical scholars continue to peddle such egregious lies?

It’s clear that Benjamin Franklin, from an early age, was groomed for royal service just as his ancestors had been. To hide this fact and discourage further speculation, mainstream historians have lately developed the line of distraction that there was a family rift between Franklin and his son, Sir William, a British loyalist. Franklin’s son was knighted by the British crown. A clear picture is developing, in that both Franklin and his family were the key linchpin in not only helping to spread the propaganda of revolutionary fervor around the American colonies, but in creating the narrative of events that would, in future, become perceived as American historical memes. This is the key job of counter-intelligence agents, to spread propaganda and create psychological operations to influence an enemy’s perception of reality. In this case, it could be argued, the targeted enemy were the American colonists. However, the psychological operation Franklin began is still ongoing nearly two-hundred fifty years later. Psychological operations are also the hallmark of Freemasonry, an organization dedicated to creating political and historical theater and keeping them as secrets on behalf of the wealthy and powerful ruling elites.

It’a also noteworthy that Franklin was involved in the Freemason’s Hellfire club.

The Hellfire club was an exclusive gathering of English noble gentlemen, established in the mid-eighteenth century by Parliamentarian Francis Dashwood. The club’s motto was “fay ce que voudrais”, which in English translates roughly to “do what you will.” Sound familiar? It should. That was the very motto espoused by one Alistair Crowley, another famous, or infamous high level Freemason and British spy.

In reality, the Hellfire club was the hub for the planning of international intelligence intrigues and espionage capers. In an article published in Argosy magazine’s July, 1970 edition concerning a summary commentary of Richard Deacon’s “A history of the British Secret Service”, one reads this: “England’s infamous Hellfire club, a band of orgy loving rakes, doubled as the center of British espionage during the American Revolution. According to the author’s evidence, Franklin was a member in good standing known to the British Secret Service as Agent number 72.”

Deacon’s book goes on to detail some or nearly all of Franklin’s curious relationships with noble or aristocratic gentlemen who possessed either direct links to the British Secret Service, or at least close affiliations. According to Deacon’s text, some of Franklin’s close friendships at the club included Lord le Despencer, Chancellor of the Exchequer, who was known to be, like the renowned American founding father, a rakish libertine, and Chevalier d’Eon de Beaumont, who it is rumored was once sent to spy on the Russian court in the guise of a French noblewoman. Apparently, his disguise went over so well he was named lady in waiting to the sitting Czarina. Deacon notes that the American founding father first met the French spymaster Chevalier in London in the early 1770’s. Reportedly, D’Eon had powerful enemies at the English court, and would pass on information to Franklin of various court intrigues in exchange for briefings on French affairs and secret plans that were later passed on to the English. According to Deacon’s text, there is a surviving letter from a Richard Oswald written while in Paris passed through diplomatic channels to Lord Shelburne on July 11, 1782, referencing peace negotiations:

“they (the American colonies) have shown a desire to treat and end with us on a separate footing from the other Powers, and I must say, in a liberal way, or at least with greater appearance of feeling for the future interests and connections with Great Britain than I had expected. I speak so from the text of the last conversation I had with Mr. Franklin.”

More damning still, is an item of correspondence from John Vardill, a clergyman and British spy, which to this day is kept in the British Museum of London. According to Deacon’s text, the letter reveals Franklin passed on to London information about sailing dates, shipments and supplies to America, even the details of cargoes. Added to this, according to Deacon, there is evidence that Franklin and a co-conspirator, Silas Dean, had embezzled funds from the treasury of the Continental Congress for their own personal use. This evidence was later corroborated by a post-revolution Congressional committee, which after having examined the accounts, found a deficit of over one-hundred thousand pounds. And then, there is Franklin’s own words written in an essay entitled “Observations of my Reading History in Library”:

“The great affairs of the world, wars, revolutions, etc.,” Franklin expounded, were primarily conducted by those who, “acted from selfish interests, whatever they may pretend.” Revealing as this may be, and however damaging to the historical legend of one of America’s renowned founding fathers, will Americans still persist in their conditioned fictions regarding America’s history?

So America’s cherished founders may not have been who scholarly historical documentation claims.

In the case of George Washington, often labeled the founder of America, the gulf between objective fact and mythical historical portrayal shall prove to be sharply drawn.

The historical accounts of Washington’s life, and that of the military victory over Great Britain, may have been wholly cut from mythical cloth.

Repetition, rather than corroborative examination, is often the magical ingredient in cementing historical fact. Indeed, if history has demonstrated anything, it is that if a story is repeated often enough, emerging as a resounding echo in the callow ears of succeeding generations, then that story is believed to be objective fact. Objective examination shall reveal the crux of historical myth often rests upon such repetition, both in print and through word of mouth.

After all, if enough people in positions of authority claim possession of objective truth, even when absent of critical examination, then many shall still reason it must be unquestionably so. With the masses emotional investment, the lie transforms into a psychological virus and is thereafter perceived as truth. This is the distorted logic the ruling elites rely upon to sell their lies as truths. Such is the case with General George Washington, who allegedly led a previously untested and comparatively poorly trained continental army against what was arguably, up until that time in the eighteenth century, reputed to be the most fearsome and well disciplined military machine yet assembled in the history of military conflict.

And yet, seemingly against great odds, Washington and his rag tag band somehow emerged victorious, so the history books claim.

The unlikelihood of this scenario seems to have escaped historical scholars and students of American history alike. Furthermore, Washington’s rather dubious military record prior to taking command of the rebel continental forces seems to have escaped the notice of most historical scholars, embarrassing accounts which have been omitted from public school and university history texts. This is rather curious, since Washington’s incompetence as a military commander prior to the American revolutionary conflict was rather well documented.

However, historical scholars, and the American general public, seem respectively stricken with selective memory syndrome on the one hand, and willful blindness on the other.

Considering further, perhaps this is not so incredible. Given the ‘war on terror’ conspiracy theory concocted by the US government still persists a decade and a half proceeding in the wake of September 11, 2001, it becomes obvious the arrested public mindset of puerile patriotism, at least in America, finds no utility in searching for any documented facts which may betray the stubborn persistence of such conditioning myths.

So it is with the story of America’s colonial rebellion against the British crown. The masses assume the story to be true simply because it is handed down from a pedestal of scholarly authority.

After all, high school teachers and college professors couldn’t have willfully misinformed entire generations of students-or could they?

Though virtually omitted from most American history texts, there exist certain documented accounts of the youthful George Washington’s military record, none of which, at least from the perspective of unfettered objectivity, turns out to appear very flattering. In truth, such accounts are a stunning indictment of both Washington’s inexperience and almost bumbling incompetence. Some of these accounts go so far to document Washington may have been solely responsible for launching what was alleged to have been the long and bloody French and Indian conflict. And yet, history texts claim this is the incompetent military field commander defeated the very same superior forces that would later sack the White House in 1812, and allegedly drove the historically vaunted Napoleon from the battlefield of Waterloo a mere three years later?

Indeed, official mainstream history is often found rife with such glaring contradictions. Consulting Washington’s biography, there too, one discovered the usual anomalies. In similar fashion to fellow ‘Founding Father’ Ben Franklin, it is written Washington had no formal education beyond what was considered elementary levels, and yet, like our old friend Benny, George went on to scale the heights of achievement beyond that of other living mortals, even among those of the so-called ruling class. Improbabilities aside, as a young man Washington became adept at the land surveying trade, but reportedly dissatisfied, the future wealthy plantation owner and celebrated leader of men soon acquired larger ambitions.

In the case of George Washington, could it be his historical character was a mythical identity upon which could be built the foundation of a new nation’s cultural heritage – a heritage of bravery in the classically romantic fight for individual freedom against political tyranny? Or better still, could not the creation of mythical stories like the battle of Fort Necessity, and the battles of the American revolutionary war, have also served to well conceal the true royal and noble heritage of the host actor portraying an historical character, as well conceal the assiduously planned grand scheme of global collectivism planned by the thirteen ruling elite families – the iron hand of the Holy Roman Jesuit global empire well hidden by the velvet glove of a superficially established democratic republic? The royal and noble heritage of George Washington, the seminal figure in the founding of America, runs a great deal more deeply than that of Ben Franklin.

Washington possessed a greatly extensive royal genealogical descent. Traced through Washington’s grandmother, Mildred Warner, the ancestry of America’s first president extends back to the early middle ages, all the way to Charlemagne, the first French king who is alleged to have united all of Western Europe and founded the feudal system, and to Brian Boru, the last High King of Ireland. Additionally, Washington’s male line can be traced back to Duncan I, the first king of Scotland (best remembered as the king betrayed by Shakespeare’s Macbeth), while it appears many of his subsequent male ancestors married into British royalty. Some other prominent royal ancestors of Washington include William I aka ‘The Conqueror’ and his son Henry I, as well King Edward III, who founded Britain’s Order of the Garter.

More revealing still, is the origin of the Washington family name from William de Hertburne (who just as an aside is directly related to the Hollywood family of Cathryn Hepburn), who upon decree from the Bishop of Durham and after marrying Margaret, the sister of Scottish kings Malcolm IV and William the Lion, assumed tenancy of many valuable parcels of land near the village of Wessyngton near the rivers of Tyne and Wear. This is quite significant, given that traditionally, the Bishop of Durham accompanies the new King or Queen when they are both crowned and anointed. Today, the castle is referred to as Washington Old Hall. It should be noted that in masonic and Jesuit traditions, a residence designated as ‘Hall’ is often where important and far reaching political decisions are made by the highest level decision making principals.

Regarding investigations into George Washington’s genealogy, a glaring pattern of deliberate deception became quite evident. Essentially, what mainstream genealogists have done, is to cleverly and systematically utilize misdirection and deliberate confusion to confound the masses and frustrate those curious enough in thoroughly researching the truth of the matter.

However, this is not so surprising.

The semantic distortion of language, including the deliberate tampering of proper names, are some of the most effective weapons the ruling elites possess in their arsenal of psychological weaponry. Curious that much of Washington’s genealogy, particularly on the maternal side, has been scrubbed from most of the sites online.

Thus, what is it historical scholars are trying to hide on behalf of their paymasters the ruling elite Jesuit families concerning the true identity of America’s first president, elected not by the masses of colonists, but by 69 (Kabbalah tree of life mirror reflection of 6, representing the heart or the higher virtues, and 9, representing mankind’s lower nature of material desire) members of the continental congress, many of whom were either Scottish Rite masons or sworn Esquires of the middle Crown Temple in London.

While the mythical historical characters of Franklin and Washington were being used to condition the masses to accept a new republic appearing to rest on democratic principles, the ruling elite families planned to use this illusion as a political vehicle, through which the reality of their global system of uniform but centrally controlled material commercialism could be made eventually manifest. Part of that grand plan was to stage mythical battles that in totality would appear in the history books as the American revolution, with General George Washington starring as the mythical hero of the grand narrative.

Could it be, the so-called battles of the American revolution, much like the staged drills of Sandy Hook, Columbine, and Boston bombing, were nothing more than staged masonic theater, a series of military drills staged with the cooperation of occupying British troops and Hessian mercenaries?