In the last installment, I indicated more information would be provided concerning Benjamin Franklin, one of America’s so-called founding fathers. Like everything else proffered by mainstream historical scholars, the information withheld or omitted is often the most pertinent.
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 a 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.
Yes, you read that right, folks.
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.
Alas, they are not. That is, until now!
Right from the outset of research into the official biography of so-called American founding father Benjamin Franklin, one became immediately aware most of the pertinent information regarding his activities prior to and after the alleged American Revolutionary war were found in texts not readily available to the public-not even at the local public library.
Of course, this only served to heighten one’s suspicions something was amiss concerning America’s official history.
Thankfully, employing the requisite diligence and patience, these hidden facts derived from texts not readily available to the American public can now be brought to light. It also became painfully obvious the official mainstream story regarding the founding of America is not only a manifest lie, the essence of the story smacks of pablum written for those prone to a lack of inquisitiveness. Upon merely cursory analysis, it is clear, the story of America’s founding offered from one’s earliest days matriculating at public school represents a cruel farce, lacking in both logic and rational narrative.
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.
Son of a candlestick maker
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.
Given that at this time in the eighteenth century social classes remained rather rigidly defined, it seems highly unlikely that a high profile public figure would readily loan money to a vagabond runaway from Boston. Barely into his teens, there was no prior resume indicating Franklin possessed either the necessary business acumen to run a newspaper or the technical skill needed to operate a printing press. Wealthy men, both then and now, are not keen to invest in risky business ventures. Unless, of course, there is evidence of historical omission, and historians have never bothered to fill in the missing details that would complete the true picture of what really happened, and why.
Regular and loyal visitors to Newsspellcom.org know that newspapers, and the media in general, are ideal tools with which to spread propaganda, tools which are used to manipulate public perception. Loyal readers have also learned that the mainstream and alternative media are under the control of intelligence agencies. But there are other logistical problems with the wild tales spun by Franklin’s biography. In those days, travel was rare, and there were as yet no major road systems in the American colonies facilitating mass transit. During this period of history, American proletarian populations were mostly isolated in small farming communities, while the rich and the wealthy congregated in the major cities. In depth investigation also revealed that while running a newspaper under the apprenticeship of his brother James, the young Franklin was involved in the commercial trade of silks and other dry goods. Upon further investigation, one has learned that commercial trade of such goods was and is often utilized as a cover for intelligence operations.
Furthermore, the only forms of travel available in the eighteenth century were via horse and carriage, and that particular mode of travel was expensive, begging the question of how it was this humble son of a candle maker with little or no money was able to effortlessly travel such a great distance from Boston to Philadelphia.
Did the young Franklin hitchhike? Did he perhaps walk the entire distance-from where did he obtain money for food and lodging during a journey that may have occupied several days?
There is also the improbability he would discover such a willing and wealthy angel to provide him with the funds necessary to start a newspaper business.
Unless, things were planned that way.
Even under the slightest of scrutiny, the plausibility of these biographical details unravels. 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 led one 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.
Franklin’s mother and royal lineage
Loyal readers may readily recognize the name Folger from a previous article found here on Newsspellcom.org concerning the Charles Manson psychological operation (See: Actors in history’s grand stage play part VII). 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’ (See: How Crown Temple rules America), but he composed the official legal charter that established the royal territory that later became known to Americans as the state of Virginia. Starting to see the connections here, folks?
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.
If you’re not convinced yet folks, further research reveals a 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 lend discredit to 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?
What is it they are trying to hide?
Well, folks, speculative intuition indicates if a genuine history were written concerning America’s founding, invalidating the legend of one of it’s more renowned founders, then the people may begin to question as to whether or not their country is truly free and independent, creating chaos for the ruling elites-chaos which they may not be able to reshape into their desired order.
Was Ben Franklin an intelligence agent?
In truth, 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. Yes, you read that correctly, folks, 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. Which leads to an examination of Franklin’s involvement with 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, folks. For, that was the very motto espoused by one Alistair Crowley, another famous, or infamous high level Freemason and British spy (See: Actors in history’s grand stage play part VI). It has been written that the ‘brothers’ belonging to this exclusive club indulged in debauchery of all sorts, including cavorting with prostitutes and performing public sacrifices to deities Venus and Bacchus. Such claims, unaccompanied by empirical evidence, should rightly be dismissed as nonsense. Doubtless, there may have been hi-jinks going on behind closed doors at the club, and Franklin was acknowledged by contemporaries to have been a rather convivial man. One should consider however, this is precisely the sort of pseudo-religious and morbidly titillating nonsense always peddled by INTEL to mesmerize the public and to keep them from investigating what was really going on behind closed doors at the infamous Hellfire club. 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, 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?