Rewriting history may seem like a rather quixotic notion.
After all, one doesn’t lack understanding as to why creating such blatant contradictions to that body of historical knowledge in which generations of American public school students have been psychologically conditioned to unquestioningly believe, would largely be perceived as foolhardy, perhaps even absurd.
Or – does applying critical thought and analysis in questioning the bedrock tenets of American history seem absurd only because its veracity has largely been held on purely faith alone?
Is it that the myth of America’s sixteenth president, Abraham Lincoln, seems so seductively indelible only because – rather than reflecting a truthful and verifiable historical account – the historical narrative associated with that particular historical figure was designed to reflect and even exalt those higher virtues the American nation would like to believe it inherently embodies?
The obvious question remains: how can such mythical historical narratives, based wholly upon lies, withstand truth’s penetrating probe of critical analysis?
The answer: they can’t and they won’t.
That is why critical thought and analysis regarding America’s historical narratives are eschewed and even scorned by the social conditioning and indoctrination methods that have been assiduously utilized on generations of American public school students.
Therefore, as loyal readers shall soon discover, when put to any modicum of critical analysis, the alleged assassination of Abraham Lincoln represents a fraudulent historical narrative that was designed to create the indelible image of a mythical and heroic martyr, rather than an accurate, verifiable and chronological portrayal of an historical event capable of withstanding analytical scrutiny.
There are many potential historical parallels that can be drawn between the character of Abraham Lincoln’s alleged assassin, John Wilkes Booth, and the assassin of John F. Kennedy nearly a century later. Prior to their alleged acts of murderous treachery, various media organs seemed to delight in building up both Booth and Oswald to possess characteristics which could then be conveniently used to set them up at the scene of the crime, as it were.
Prior to April 14th, 1865, the night in question of Lincoln’s assassination at Ford’s theater, Booth had been repeatedly fingered as a Confederate sympathizer.
Numerological analysis of Booth’s official biographies reveal it is heavily coded.
Firstly, there is Booth’s place of birth, Bel-Air (occult god Bal or Baphomet/Prince of the air) Maryland, 25 miles (7, Kabbalah Zayin, the mind weapon) from the city of Baltimore. Secondarily, biographies tell us Booth’s family owned a plantation with slaves and, that the family had emigrated from Britain in 1821 (12/21/777).
That latter biographical tidbit acts as an immediate clue as to Booth’s genuine identity,
In such cases, there are always kernels of truth that can be exhumed from tissues of lies.
There is also a story associated with Booth that tells of an encounter with a gypsy palm reader while he was still a very young man. The story details that at the time, the young Booth was attending a boarding school, Saint Timothy’s, located in Cockeysville, Maryland.
One shall take note of that moniker, Cockeysville.
It seems, when concocting the dubious biographies of their mythical characters, the ruling elites just cannot resist their vulgar, token references to the reproductive organs of the male anatomy.
But, folks, that is part and parcel of how their spells are woven.
At any rate, the anecdotal narrative of Booth’s odd encounter – it is claimed the gypsy was a transient living in the woods near the school – informs that the gypsy’s palm reading predicted a rather interesting harbinger:
“Ah, you’ve a bad hand, the lines all cris-cras! It’s full enough of sorrow. Full of trouble. Trouble in plenty, everywhere I look. You’ll break hearts, they’ll be nothing to you. You’ll die young, and leave many to mourn you, many to love you too, but you’ll be rich, generous and free with your money. You’re born under an unlucky star. You’ve got your hand in a thundering crowd of enemies – not one friend – you’ll make a bad end, and have plenty to love you afterwards. You’ll live a fast life – short, but a grand one. Now, young sir, I’ve never seen a worse hand, and I wish I hadn’t seen it, but every word is true by the signs. You’d best turn a missionary or a priest and try to escape it.” (https://rogerjnorton.com/Lincoln72.html)
While examining period images of Booth, one took note of the strangest anomaly concerning his moustache. In looking especially closely at the photograph available at this link, does it not appear as if Booth’s moustache has been attached by adhesive and, in fact it appears to be falling off over the left side of his mouth:
It also is worthy to note that all the photographic artifacts left to posterity concerning the Lincoln “assassination” event, seem to have been doctored or manipulated in some way, shape or form.
Booth’s account of his encounter with the palm reading gypsy is reminiscent of the prefabricated but always dramatically overwrought human interest sketches reported by the MSM in the wake of yet another simulated mass casualty event concerning some “crazed” gunman or other, such as Adam Lanza, another of history’s fabricated boogeymen. Elite families such as the Rockefellers, however, have always had an array of administrative scribes and academics in their direct or indirect employ who are always charged with creating such badly imaginative tripe.
The key point to remember though folks, is that Booth was also a renowned actor and, as an accomplished purveyor of the theatrical trade, he had been showered with critical accolades, particularly for his performance in Richard III.
Richard III is, of course, a Shakespearean production.
The works of Shakespeare hold not only an intimate relationship with the philosophical essence of Freemasonry, but as shall be revealed shortly, the tragic narratives of Shakespeare’s plays, especially those in which actor John Wilkes Booth is claimed to have starred, possess startling narrative parallels with the story of the 16th US president’s assassination. Such narrative parallels have been observed before, as in the case of the alleged tragic death of Diana Spencer, the Princess of Wales (See:Diana: The myth made people’s princess (Part IV)
In the case of Diana Spencer, the story of her death was but a symbolically theatrical reenactment of older myths. These mythical reenactments are then presented to the general public and, through the phenomena of psychological conditioning and reinforcement, are intended to become unquestioningly perceived as an accurate, chronological recording of history.
The story of Abraham Lincoln, yet another mythical, historical character portrayed by a host actor born into an elite, prominent family, is no exception.
Research into Booth’s theatrical resume, extending from his first performance in Richard III at age seventeen, indicates the synopses of all of the Shakespearean productions in which he appeared have a predominant preoccupation with bloody assassinations of kings or other nobles of high station, fratricide, and inter-family squabbles resulting in the lethal struggle for power or murderous acquisition of a monarchial throne.
Turns out folks, John Wilkes Booth was yet another mythical historical character portrayed by a host actor who incredibly, in the case of the Lincoln assassination narrative, portrayed a role mirroring tragic Shakespearean themes and characterizations he had previously acted out while starring in the theater.
His legendary utterance upon having assassinated President Lincoln on the night of April 14, 1865 at Ford’s theater, “Sic semper tyrannis”, which roughly translates from the Latin into “thus always to tyrants”, is said to have originated with the legend of Julius Caesar, the Roman consul who was assassinated in the Roman senate during the 1st century AD by Marcus Junius Brutus and a cohort of senatorial conspirators. Regarding this event, many scholars seem to have fallen in line with the historical consensus Caesar’s assassination represented the end of the Roman Republic and, the beginning of the imperial monarchy. It could be so argued, the assassination of Lincoln centuries later represented the death of the American republic, in lieu of a virtual monarchial succession of Rockefellers and Rockefeller minions that went on to dominate the American political process.
Not surprisingly, Julius Caesar was yet another Shakespearean stage production listed on the acting resume of the character of John Wilkes Booth.
As alluded to earlier, there are a pair of conspicuously evident clues contained within the mythical narrative of Lincoln’s assassination. The most prominent of these, is the fact John Wilkes Booth was an actor most renowned during his lifetime for his character portrayal in Shakespeare’s Richard III along with other Shakespearean productions well-known to theater patrons. The other, is that history tells us Booth’s assassination of Lincoln took place at Ford’s theater. Loyal readers shall recall that in the wake of the simulated JFK assassination, Lee Harvey Oswald was apprehended by Dallas police in a downtown movie theater. Recall too, that the alleged mass casualty event of 2012 in Aurora, Colorado, also took place in a movie theater.
This narrative component, whether the public realizes it or not, acts as an enormous clue as to the ruling elite’s method of operation in theatrically acting out classical myths to create epic stories which are then perceived as chronological history. For, those that have the power to make history, therefore control the prevailing perception of the masses.
The concept of theater is synonymous with the occult philosophies of the International Brotherhood of Freemasonry, the very same secret society that is now responsible for not only executing but subsequently protecting the operational integrity of the numerous staged mass casualty simulations so often promoted by the corporately owned mainstream media. The secret of this occult philosophy represents the alchemical process of transforming mythical ideas into perceivable, material reality, that the light of such myths may shine forth, penetrating through the dark prism of the subconscious to eternally reflect upon the conscious mind.
Furthermore, in delving beneath the superficial historical narrative, one quickly discovers there are other facts concerning both Booth and the owner of Ford’s theater that more than hint at the identification of the main host actors that portrayed the roles of Lincoln and his assassin in this grand, historical ruse.
In the case of John T. Ford, his business interests and that of the Rockefeller family coincided to further advance the large scale development of America’s industrial expansion. Ford was not only a theater owner, he owned majority financial interest in some of the nation’s major railroad concerns in the states of Ohio and Maryland. Booth himself was also invested in oil exploration in Pennsylvania, a state which would later become a political and economic stronghold for the Rockefeller family headed into the twentieth century.
Loyal readers shall also recall that a Rockefeller family member has been positively identified as having portrayed the political character of former Philadelphia mayor, Frank Rizzo (See: The death of Kings and false prophets).
It seems all the principals involved in the Lincoln assassination’s psychological operation had financial interests in furthering America’s revolution of industrial expansion. Cleary and without fail, following the money trail when conducting investigative research will always lead one to the perpetrators of the crime. Keep in mind too folks, that subsequent to the Lincoln assassination event, John T. Ford’s theater was immediately closed, and then rebuilt, which parallels the actions of the latter-day perpetrators of large-scale psychological operations, where in each case (Sandy Hook elementary/9/11 ground zero) forensic evidence that could have been examined to further facilitate an official investigation’s conclusions were not only immediately tampered with, but completely destroyed in the wake of the event.
Before the age of all-pervasive digital and social media, it would have been rather a simple matter – with Ford’s theater closed off during the evening hours and guarded by reportedly over two-hundred armed troops – to stage a masonic, ritualized Shakespearean reenactment that would later be reported to the general public as the assassination of their president. Keep in mind as well that, the prominent family of merchant bankers, the Rockefellers, along with other prominent families harboring mutual financial and political interests, were in control of all major newspapers and periodicals, and those they didn’t control, they could easily have afforded to pay off or compromise their editors into printing whatever information would expediently sell their preferred historical narratives.
With such vast financial resources at their disposal, the Rockefellers could also have afforded to put one of their own family members into the White House under a pseudonym for the purposes of overriding constitutional tenets and, with executive orders to stage a war, successfully create their new industrialized commercial order out of a state of manufactured chaos.
And in fact, this is precisely what they did.
The ulterior purpose of inciting the appearances of a civil conflict was not only to siphon billions of dollars from the tax payers under the guise of a manufactured state of emergency or war, but to saddle present and future generations with the burden of high-interest bearing debt to fund their grand program of America’s industrial and commercial revolution.
Alluding to official historical biographies once again, historical scholars would have the general public believe that John D. Rockefeller was a self-made man, and that his father was a small-time con man.
As to that, William Avery Rockefeller AKA Doctor William Levingston (Levinson) may have been a con man, but his cons were certainly not to be considered small. As one has detailed previously, the Rockefeller’s fast track plan to commercially industrialize America and the West was grandiose indeed, the seeds for which did not bloom in the fertile imagination of a small-time con man.
Although the history books have propagandized (propaganda which serves to perpetuate the prevailing global commercial system) several generations of public school and university students that the Rockefellers became the most prominent family of American businessmen simply due to hard work and old fashioned American can-do gumption, such an assertion is tantamount to pure propaganda and only repeated by those who’ve never bothered to plumb historical depths beyond what is superficially presented by mainstream publications and sources.
In truth, if one happens to meticulously trace the genealogy of the Rockefeller family, they shall eventually discover that the family moniker is an alias and yet another historical bluff. The genuine family name is Levinson, a family name with connections to the establishment of the East India Tea Company that sought to control the heroin trade in India and Asia, as well deep genealogical ties to the noble and royal families of Scotland, England, and Holland. These noble and royal genealogical relations stretch back to William the Conqueror (See:History and the lies agreed upon) and to perhaps as far back as the 5th century AD.
LINCOLN ASSASSINATION A RITUAL REENACYMENT?
Loyal readers have discovered that in the case of the Rockefeller family of merchant bankers, there have been several examples of family members who have not only participated in the planning of historically impactful psychological operations, but starred as host actors for many of the most well-known and historically legendary characters (See: What really happened to JFK assassin Oswald? (Part III)
Extensive research has demonstrated, that not only are historical events scripted with numerological markers and acted out with the willing participation of elite family members to portray the mythical characters, but the narratives themselves are oftentimes discovered to have been drawn from older, historical myths. Additionally, the participants in a grand, ritualized event such as the Lincoln assassination, may telegraph their future involvement in ways which signal to their fellow brothers of the masonic order as to the roles they are willing to play in the mythical reenactment. In the case of the character of the 16th US president, one shall notice that in this photograph, Lincoln’s host actor is signaling that his character shall portray the one who is to be symbolically sacrificed for the good of the order’s grand agenda:
Here, in this period photograph of John Wilkes Booth, one can observe he is giving the sign of allegiance to the order of the Freemason Royal Arch:
And again, here in this image, the alleged general of the Union armed forces during the American Civil war, Ulysses S. Grant can be observed performing the identical sign of Freemasonic allegiance:
Ulysses S. Grant
Could it be any coincidence that Lincoln’s alleged assassin and the general of the US armed Union forces would be posed in the identical fashion, signaling to their brothers in the masonic order of their true intensions? The way of communication for the International Brotherhood of Freemasonry has always been via the sound of silence, which should bring new meaning to the famous Simon and Garfunkel song.
The historical figures posed with occult gestures were all portrayed by host actors hailing from the prominent merchant banking family of the Rockefellers.
John D. Rockefeller:
John Wilkes Booth:
William Avery Rockefeller Junior:
Ulysses S. Grant:
William Avery Rockefeller Senior:
John D. Rockefeller and his younger brother, William Avery Rockefeller Junior, have been historically credited with the establishment of the Standard Oil Company and along with their father, William Avery Senior, were both heavily invested in America’s future industrial and commercial expansion. Once the political groundwork had been laid through executive order and extra-legal process which was made to appear as legal, John Davison Rockefeller, in the guise of the fictional character of Abraham Lincoln, could be symbolically sacrificed in lieu of his brother in the masonic order and fellow business partner, Andrew Johnson (sums to 160 in English Ordinal gematria/7 Kabbalah Zayin, mind weapon/Full Reduction/11/11X7=77/twin charges of Lucifer’s lightning/angelic transformation) who was portrayed by steel tycoon, Andrew Carnegie.
The Rockefeller’s knew that without the mass production of steel which would greatly aid in the building of railroads and also facilitate major upgrades to America’s infrastructure, their grand plan for America’s industrial and commercial expansion would be rather difficult. As a businessman, Carnegie was known as a micro-manager. Early in his career, he travelled to England to visit various steel mills and brought back with him the Bessemer process which essentially revolutionized the American steel industry going forward into the twentieth century.
Carnegie’s brief tenure in the White House was most likely a token gift for having discovered the Bessemer process which the Rockefellers knew would greatly speed forth their grand plans for industrial expansion.
Like Rockefeller puppet Richard Nixon more than a century later, Johnson’s impeachment was yet another example of political theater, devised so that the patriarch of the Rockefeller family, William Avery Senior, could step in as chief executive to watch over the family’s grand project of commercial industrialization and bring it to full fruition.
Meanwhile, with the family patriarch, William Avery Senior, operating under the pseudonym of Ulysses S. Grant and in firm control of the White House, the Rockefeller elder was in a prime position to ensure that his two sons, John Davison and William Avery Junior, could further monopolize the oil industry as executives of Standard Oil Corporation. William’s carefully chosen pseudonym, Ulysses, is a nod to yet another mythical character which appeared in Homer’s Iliad and the Odyssey. Like the fake presidential character of Harry S. Truman, Grant’s middle initial of S is apparently a phantom moniker, signifying nothing, and appears to be completely superfluous.
In summary, the “assassination” of American president “Lincoln” was merely but one component in a grand criminal scheme devised by the Rockefellers in their plans to dominate America’s economic and political endeavors.
To judge from the grandiose cover story that has been construed as American history for well over a century, it is fair to say they well succeeded.