Yes folks, we’ve caught another royal in the act, and starring on prime time network television.
We’ve caught this particular host actor out before and, if memory serves, she has already been identified as the host actor for one of American television’s most iconic characters, one who starred in her own eponymously entitled and award-winning television production which aired on a major network, a network owned by her royal family.
She has also been identified as having played the public role of a former feminist activist.
But on this occasion, identifying the host actor portraying “Ruth Gordon”, the vintage star of Hollywood movies, television, as well as a staple of American Broadway theater – for some inexplicably strange reason – was more difficult to spot.
Despite this, yet another well-disguised European royal is about to become unmasked.
Many of you may not be at all familiar with the career of “Ruth Gordon”.
Nevertheless, though she is claimed to be deceased, she is still very much alive and, undoubtedly, everyone knows her by another and very famous name.
Recently, while conducting an investigation for another upcoming installment, I came across a video excerpt of an episode of the popular 1970’s crime-drama television production, Columbo, which starred Peter Falk AKA Rod Serling as the LA detective donned in his distinctively rumpled raincoat.
The episode – entitled “Try and Catch Me” (1977) – starred the nasally voiced Gordon as the suspected murderer doggedly tracked down by Lieutenant Columbo. The denouement of the episode spectacularly concludes with Columbo – in his inimitable style – capturing Gordon’s character, whom he suspected all along of having murdered the heir to a fortune, a character named Edmund (keep that name in mind, as it will later serve as a clue to the royal genealogy of Gordon’s host actor as it relates to the details of her “official” biography and her character conversion scheme’s alleged place of birth).
SEE also: Anthony Bourdain: Suicide by the numbers
Listed immediately below, are some links to still images of Gordon’s performance in this television production.
While studying the facial geometry of “Ruth Gordon”, I couldn’t help but become stricken with a persistent notion: this actress had been seen somewhere before while portraying a more familiar and high profile role. Indeed, in addition to her recognizable facial geometry, there were elements to Gordon’s performance – the quality and timbre of her voice, the regal posture belying a rather diminutive physical stature – which appeared all-too-familiar.
Nevertheless, during the span of her award-winning tenure in the public spotlight of the entertainment world, Gordon became known as a respected elder statesman of Hollywood, television, and the Broadway stage, both as an actress and a playwright.
Gordon is perhaps best known for her starring role in Hollywood’s vintage horror film, 1968’s Rosemary’s Baby.
In the following scene, featured in the clip below, not only will you hear Gordon’s distinctive voice, you’ll see another actor you may readily recognize from a past installment, one who has been positively identified as the host actor (John Cassevetes) behind the mask of the recently suicided “reality television” chef, Anthony Bourdain.
So far, that counts as two additional host actors associated with “Ruth Gordon” who’ve both been positively identified as past participants in the phenomenon we’ve come to know as Post-Modern Reality Simulation.
Before delving into the particulars having to do with the professional career of “Ruth Gordon”, as well as any other pertinent information, the first bit of biographical information which we shall notice are the numbers listed as her “official” date of birth: 1896.
The number of 18 equals 666, and both 9 and 6 – considering numerological significance – are symbolic of duality, of both the concepts of black and white (ying/yang), the identical colors appearing on any tracing board displayed in a masonic lodge.
When summed, each of these numbers adds to 24 (2+4=6/33/high-degree Scottish Rite Freemasonry). This alone, indicates Gordon’s official biographers are attempting to tell us something significant concerning her genuine identity.
Additionally, the month and day of Gordon’s birth are listed as October 30.
October is the eighth month (aces and eights/mark of the Jesuit order) and, of course, when the zero is dropped from the number 30 – customary when summing gematria – we are left with the number 3. When spelled out, the latter pair of identical vowels in the word three or EE – if we apply the Law of Occult Mirrored Reversal – equals 33.
Needless to say, at this early juncture in our biographical examination of “Ruth Gordon”, we notice a definitive pattern of information developing, informational elements which serve as telltale clues “Ruth Gordon” may have been a character conversion scheme, a fictional Hollywood and television personality portrayed – like so many we’ve identified before – by a disguised host actor.
QUINCY, “CITY OF PRESIDENTS” – A CLUE?
Gordon’s place of birth is listed as Quincy, Massachusetts, a metropolitan city – the eighth largest in the entire state, according to Wikipedia – adjoining the urban environs of the state’s capital, Boston.
It is claimed “Ruth Gordon Jones” was born at 41 Marion Street.
When applied to The Law of Occult Mirrored Reversal, 41 becomes 14 (double 77/twin lightning charges of Lucifer/angelic transformation).
In English Ordinal gematria, “Marion” sums to 70 or 7 (Kabbalah Zayin, the mind weapon).
When summed in Reverse Full Reduction, the street moniker of “Marion” sums to 38 or 11 (twin masonic pillars of Boaz and Jachin).
According to both well-documented historical chronicles and Wikipedia, Quincy is known as the “City of Presidents”, the birthplace of two of America’s earliest commander-in-chiefs, John Quincy Adams, and John Adams, who was also one of America’s so-called “founding fathers”.
The City of Quincy is also the birthplace of another of America’s founders, John Hancock, who served as Massachusetts’s first and third Governor.
Hancock’s signature appears most conspicuously on one of America’s founding legal documents, the Declaration of Independence.
See any gematria in these accounts which have been culled from “official” sources?
But, of course.
We first observed the number of 8 (aces and eights/mark of the Jesuits) associated with the documented population size of the City of Quincy. Then, there were the number’s 1 and 3 associated with John Hancock’s tenure as Massachusetts’s Governor (1/3=13/summit of Templar/Jesuit/Masonic pyramid and the thirteen ruling elite Jesuit families).
Yes folks, it does appear, the official biographers of “Ruth Gordon” – in their customary and slyly covert fashion – are attempting to tell us something profound about the host actor hidden behind the character conversion scheme’s carefully crafted Hollywood and television persona.
An examination of the genealogy of John Adams, also named Edmund (recall the character name from the Columbo episode mentioned earlier), yields especially interesting results, by way of connections to European nobility and even royalty.
Historians now openly admit many, if not a majority, of America’s presidents possessed direct lineage to several of Europe’s most prominent royal and noble families, including George Washington, who was a descendant of Edward I – also known as “Longshanks” – of England. Both John Adams and his wife, Abigail, possessed family ancestry to the European noble peerage of Shepard, Goushill, and Bohun, ascending through the line of Elizabeth, the daughter of Edward I.
The official biographers of “Ruth Gordon”, by virtue of having listed Quincy, Massachusetts, the “City of Presidents” as her place of birth, seem to be deliberately leading us toward a straight investigatory gate, and covertly hinting at the genuine identity behind her Hollywood crafted mask.
Also telltale, is the location listed as the place of Gordon’s death, Edgartown, Massachusetts.
Edgartown is part of Massachusetts’s 9th congressional district.
The number 9 provides us with yet another example of numerology associated with Gordon’s official biographies.
The number 9, when applied to the occult principle of the Law of Mirrored Reversal, gives us 6 (2 3’s/33).
Primarily, Edgartown is a tourist destination, and includes the island of Chappaquiddick, the sight of another psychological operation in 1969 involving Senator Edward Kennedy (a character modification of American newsman, Ted Koppel), another fictional historical character belonging to a mythical historical construct, the Kennedy family. Edgartown and Chappaquiddick are also both very isolated, which would have made them prime locations for contriving fabricated media events.
Turns out however, “Ted Koppel” AKA Senator Edward Kennedy, Ruth Gordon’s husband of over four decades Garson Canin, and Gordon’s co-star G.D. Spradlin (Spradlin also starred as Senator Pat Geary with Al Pacino in The Godfather) in the 1977 Columbo episode of “Try and Catch Me” have an intriguing connection, a genealogical connection which has been confirmed by image comparison, ear biometric, and facial recognition analysis.
In fact, “Ruth Gordon” and “G.D. Spradlin” are much more closely related – beyond the boundaries of the television and Hollywood film industry – than anyone would have previously imagined.
Throughout his career in Hollywood, Spradlin was known as a reliable character actor but, alas, he never became a huge box office star. He also had the reputation as being typecast. Spradlin was often found to portray savvy but often morally challenged authority figures, and his best-known role, as Senator Geary in The Godfather I, proved to be no exception. Spradlin’s story, along with his connections to “Ruth Gordon”, her husband Garson Canin, and to other prominent American historical and media figures is a fascinating one, of which more details will be published in a separate installment, coming up very soon.
Suffice to say, the morally challenged nature of Spradlin’s Hollywood character roles may more closely resemble those of his confirmed host actor.
In other words, when Spradlin was found to be on-screen, he often merely portrayed himself.
OFFICIAL BIOGRAPHIES MAKE FALSE CLAIMS
The thirteen, ruling elite Jesuit families – by virtue of being the majority share holders of both the Hollywood cinema and music entertainment industries, and the American media – hold sway over a vast and monopolized economic empire.
But this is the secret as to why the phenomenon of Post-Modern Reality Simulation persists unabatedly.
Though the general impression may exist – among the general public – those gifted with the luck of royal primogeniture spend their time lazing around their vast palatial estates indulging in various recreational diversions and amusements, this turns out not to be so.
The truth is rather the opposite.
Rather than indulging in wasteful pastimes, they are diligently working to maximize their families’ profits. Since they own the music recording companies, the movie studios, the television news networks, and the US corporation, they possess the wherewithal – utilizing pseudonyms and biographical false claims which are dutifully verified by third parties sworn to secrecy by masonic oath – to become the very stars of stage, screen, television, and popular music the public admires and adores.
These character conversion schemes become the glittering and charismatic personalities – though they exist as merely facades and manufactured fabrications – upon which the general public grows to develop an unhealthy attachment, bordering on fanaticism and even demi-god worship.
Nowhere is this method of operation more evident than when we consider the “official” details of Gordon’s biography.
With an “official” DOB listed as 1896, there would be no one left around to verify or discount the “official” claims of her early career history. This is part and parcel of the illusion created by the character conversion schemes common to the execution of reality simulation.
For example, Gordon’s biographies claim she began performing on Broadway at age 19, a number which, as we’ve discovered, appears as a symbolic occult signifier. In this case, as well as with so many others we’ve observed in the past, nineteen is symbolic of the Eye of Horus, the Sun, or the light of Lucifer revered by those initiates – often by blood oath – to the highest echelons or rites of the Templar/Jesuit/Masonic global brotherhood.
It is also claimed, Gordon’s very first appearance in the public eye came as an infant.
Apparently, her photograph was used in an advertisement for her father’s employer, Mellin’s Food for Infants and Invalids. At the link provided below, you can see the image which is claimed to be the photograph of the “infant” Ruth Gordon used in an ad for her father’s employer.
Now really folks, does the young girl in the following image resemble an “infant”?
Utilizing keen ocular perceptions, take a closer look at the hands of the figure featured in the photograph. Gordon’s biographers claim this to be an image of Ruth Gordon Jones as an “infant”.
Do the dimensions of Gordon’s most visible appendage in the forefront of the photograph – her unnaturally oversized hand appears to grasp the spine of a very large hardcovered tome – appear to be consistent with the anatomical dimensions expected to be found belonging to a very young or pubescent female child, much less an “infant”?
The image appears, upon closer examination, to be an example of an old fashioned tip-in job.
Gordon’s image example is typical of the type of photograph manipulation created with crude cut and paste methodologies which were commonly used during the era of the 1930’s, 40’s and 50’s. Examples of black and white photographs from these eras, which rarely featured crisp and clear high-definition images, could only be manipulated in such elemental ways before the proliferation of sophisticated photo shop and animation software packages.
Yes folks, Gordon’s photograph is a crudely backdated image, and was created by methods of deliberate image manipulation, similar to those methods that have now, in the 21st century, been perfected with photo shop, animation, and CGI.
Since the invention of the camera, such image manipulations have represented the photographic sorcery which has helped to shape humanity’s perception of the historical record in the modern era.
We have witnessed such methods bring to life, and into the public’s consciousness, the scores of victim simulations reported by the MSM in the wake of Homeland Security’s recent simulated mass casualty exercises.
What other evidence exists – you may wonder – proving this image of the “infant” Ruth Gordon Jones is a purely backdated fabrication?
The image at the link listed above was most likely shot during the era of the mid or late 1930’s. It was later manipulated to appear as if it came from a much earlier era. Through the psychological power of suggestion, the image was created to verify the false claims found in the fabricated childhood biography of the Hollywood character with which the American public came to know as”Ruth Gordon”.
Added to this, image comparison, facial recognition, and voice comparison analysis have confirmed, the host actor portrayed the legendary Hollywood, television, and theater performer known as Ruth Gordon was none other than Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor, better known as Queen Elizabeth II, the sitting British monarch from the royal House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.
Queen Elizabeth II: