Shape Shifting is a common trick of disinformation artists. This is how it works and here are some examples in Acadian history:
“Its usual strategy is to begin its work by adhering so closely to the letter of the truth as to be virtually indistinguishable to all but initiated awareness, installing itself through the rhythmic lull of entrainment so as to catch the “congregation” totally off guard when it finally diverges slightly or greatly from the set pattern and so pulls a portion of the truth along with it.”
As educators, we must be alert.
Regarding the story behind the Da Vinci Code, Holy Blood-Holy Grail, Henry St. Clair the Navigator and a bloodline of Jesus, mostly it traces back to a man who confessed, in a court of law in 1993, that it was all a lie.
“After asking Pierre Plantard de St. Clair to swear on Oath – Plantard de St. Clair admitted to the Judge that he lied about everything; whereupon St. Clair was given a serious warning and advised not to “play games” with the French Judicial System. “
The Judge’s search of Plantard’s house uncovered a hoard of Priory of Sion documents, claiming Plantard de St. Clair to be the “true King of France” – the Judge subsequently detained Plantard for a 48 hour questioning. This happened in September 1993 and it was all reported in the French Press.
What Plantard is falsely claiming has some related facts attached to it.
Those who’ve been following this story will ask, “What about Poussin’s “The Shepherds of Arcadia” Why was this painting so important to King Louis XIV. Wasn’t there a tomb found that exactly matched the one in the painting?
The most likely pattern for the Priory of Sion to copy was the French Christian militia called The Compagnie du St.-Sacrament of the 17th century. It acted on behalf of the Guise-Lorraine families, was involved in the pro-Catholic Fronde and made up the core of the regular militia in early America. They are found also at Lake St. Sacrament, the site of the ‘Massacre’ at Fort William Henry in 18th century colonial America.
It was the goal of the Guise-Lorraine and the Guise-Hapsburg families to expand into new territory and increase the population in America. This was sponsored mainly by Antoinette de Pons, along with other Catholic ladies of the court and during a substantial period they sponsored settlements along with educational and religious facilities, hospitals and forts, transportation and everything practical that was needed by the settlers in the Louisiana Territory. They controlled the government in America from within the Catholic Church and its institutions. There was no other government. This was true Acadia in practice by the actual descendants of the Frankish Merovingians and their Indian allies in America.
Plantard and his cohorts continue to push a theory based on the possibility that Jesus Christ had descendents who intermarried with the royal Franks to become the Merovingian Dynasty. This part of the theory may be true. The Merovingians in fact, were the first kings to establish Christianity in the heart of Europe during the Roman Catholic and Byzantine eras and that group of surnames can be traced to the early Acadian American settlers who were Catholic and who are now also settled in Louisiana and beyond. Historians agree that the Merovingians traced their ancestry back to the Benjamites who had fled from Israel to Arcadia in Greece, and this makes perfect sense. Hellenes did consider themselves to be Hebrews. Scholars have long recognized that the Hellene legends coincide with the Old Testament legends.
This is where the falsehood enters in:
“Pierre Plantard de Saint-Clair tried to link himself to King Dagobert II and the Merovingian dynasty.”
“The reconciliation between paganism and Christianity” they tell us was the basis for the Prieure de Sion. This is the dead give-away that they are Pirates, because a Christian cannot ‘reconcile’ with a pagan. In Catholic terms, the word Pagan refers to religions that include human sacrifice, cannibalism, and other such horrors. Therefore, the Prieure de Sion is busted for fraud right out the gate just for claiming such a thing.
Baigent, Leigh & Lincoln, authors of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, which is the basis for the DaVinci Code movie, write:
“The avowed and declared objective of the Prieure de Sion is the restoration of the Merovingian dynasty and bloodline – to the throne not only of France, but to the thrones of other European nations as well.”
Someone wants to rule the world, eh?
It might be true that the words “Holy Grail” are a mistranslation of early French words for “royal blood,” but their claim that the true purpose of Prieure de Sion is to protect alleged royal descendants of Jesus is bogus. What is more bogus is the preparation of the way for their accession to world power. This is not a Catholic doctrine, since Jesus never claimed that his power was of this world. The descendants of Jesus would logically be Catholic or Orthodox, but even if they aren’t, the whole idea that someone is pushing Holy Grail propaganda should be suspect.
God did not want us to have any King other than Jesus Christ, and this we learn from both the Old Testament and New. A confederation of city states, one for each tribe, equal but separate, was the original pattern given to the twelve patriarchs by their father Jacob, and this was the pattern for America. These city states should have as a central authority God alone and no other. The church provides us with all that we need of law making. This is the strict interpretation of the scripture and tradition, like it or not.
Whoever is promoting this Grail agenda is clearly not Catholic.
They also claim that Christ was a descendant of King David, even though Christ himself denied this. There is every logical, archeological and historical reason to conclude that King David never existed, and in fact even the Jewish Encyclopedia states that the name was the result of intended scribal errors and that it applies to another king of a different name.
This myth of bloodline descent from King David is an important part of the false agenda being promoted by books like ‘Holy Blood, Holy Grail’. This includes the myth of Prince Henry the Navigator, another alleged descendant of David. These descendants of David are Jews. Even members of the Jewish mafia brag about being in the tribe of David. They would never, ever allow a practicing Christian among their ranks, let alone a Catholic.
Am I the only person who finds it odd that Jews would claim to be the descendants of Jesus which would then give them the right to rule over the world?
They claim that Jesus had a legitimate claim to be “king of the Jews”. In fact, they are wrong in calling Jesus and his family Jews and this is a basic flaw in their agenda. Jesus was of the family of Zadok, or Zachariah, the High Priesthood descended from Aaron. He was not of the tribe of Judah.
The Jewish Encyclopedia entry for High Priest states, In the early Second Temple Period, the High Priest also acted as political head of the nation, recognized as such by the [Romans] who charged him with maintaining order and collecting and delivery of taxes. The office was in the hands of the Zadokite family until taken over by the Hasmoneans.” This was accomplished when the daughter of Herod married Simon the Hasmonean, who was not a Zadokite, according to Josephus. According to apochrypha, there was a murder of the Zachariah the High Priest Zachariah involved, which may be in addition to the murder of John the Baptist, after which “Appointments to the High Priesthood were made at the whim of Herod”.
Zadok is defined as a priest who is a descendant of Eleazar, son of Aaron (I Chron.5:34). This distinguishes the Zadokites as the only family qualified for the High Priesthood. When the Quran identifies the Virgin Mary as a sister of Aaron, this clarifies that Jesus is Zadokite, therefore in line for the High Priesthood when John was murdered by Herod.
The Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls: “The expression “Sons of Zadok” is found in Ezekial 40.46, 44.15, 48.11. In these passages, a monopoly of the priestly Temple service is claimed for the descendants of Zadok It is inferred from the biblical evidence that a priestly dynasty descendant from the priest Zadok, was high priest during the Persian Period. In the Damascus Document, Ezekial calls them “elect of Israel, those called by name, who shall arise at the end of days.” We are then told that “Connection with the usurped Jerusalem priesthood is plausible”. The characters for Zadok are TSDQ.
- Since the High Priest served in place of a King in Judea, Jesus could then be called King of the Israelites, not Jews. The false claim is that he was “descended from the royal house of the Israelite King David”. One problem is that David was not an Israelite, nor was he the ancestor of Jesus. Jesus himself denied David in the New Testament of course because the Jewish Encyclopedia under the entry for ‘Names of God’ states clearly that David was a name invented out of the word for God, by turning the letters upside down. Therefore, the correct scriptural translation should be that Jesus would sit on the throne of God, not on the throne of David.
- They claim that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and had at least one child by her. If he did, it’s not an anti-Catholic belief and no one would be surprised at all by it. If they did have a child, the number of their descendants could amount to entire nations, and I doubt that any of their descendants would see any logic in having a Jewish monarch today.
- The promoters of this idea believe that Jesus and his sympathizers staged his Crucifixion and Resurrection and that he survived into old age. This is an old heresy and does not explain why Jesus’ fame spread, what inspired people to create Christendom, or the many attested miracles that He and the Saints have performed.
- Part of the promoted idea is that Mary Magdalene and her offspring went to southern France. In fact, there is plenty of evidence that they went to Wales, not Southern France. Jesus used to go to a little town called Purdy, they tell us. There is a very interesting documentary on it which I have previously posted. Just so happens that who was in the South of France at that time were the Pirate Phrygians, a well recorded fact, and this is what the whole story is working around to. It’s becoming clear that they want to claim descent from Jesus and Mary Magdalene, and from that fiction, to rule the world.
- The Sionists promote the idea that Jesus’ bloodline mixed with that of the Franks and started the Merovingian dynasty of the early Middle Ages. This could well be true.
They claim that the Merovingian line extends into the modern “noble” houses of Europe, so Jesus’ descendants are alive today. Legitimate Catholic monarchy was outlawed when Europe became Protestant, thus there are no more ‘Noble Houses’ in Europe. Their thrones, titles, lands, and authority have all been stolen by Pirates. Yes, descendants of Jesus could possibly be alive today, but even so, claiming to be a descendant of Jesus from an illegitimate bloodline that has stolen Catholic Church property and tried to genocide Catholics in world wars is not enough to prove the right to be king, or to even claim that right. The fact is that the word ‘noble’ is a Catholic word that refers to Catholic people who follow Catholic law and it does not include illegitimate descendants of monarchs born out of adulterous unions.
- They claim that this propaganda creates contentions that erode the hegemony of the Catholic Church. Yes, that’s exactly what they want to happen. They are Sionists of the Priory, pagan and anti-Christian. Happily, Catholicism does not justify itself with numbers of adherents. It justifies itself by being the true religion established by Jesus. It’s all a test, baby.
Investigators tell us that starting in 1958 there was a voluminous output of propaganda promoting the idea that Jesus is a Jew and is a descendant of David and has descendants who have the right to claim Kingship over Jerusalem and the world.
Why is this agenda being pushed? Who benefits?
“One of the tactics of liars is to find a means of subtly allying their message with that of the truth so as to generate confusion in untrained minds which would tend on surface evidence to accept these actually contrary messages as equivalent.”
Looking at exactly how they falsify history, it becomes clear that the pirates are inserting themselves falsely into medieval history.
They claim that Godfroi de Bouillon ‘won’ Jerusalem, when this is patently false. Notice how this false construct sounds exactly like the story of King David. Their literature puts it:
“One might therefore term Godfroi de Bouillon as a sort of ’king of kings’, or at least a maker of kings, since he founded the Order of Sion that could crown Kings of Jerusalem.”
“To the south of Jerusalem looms the ’high hill’ of Mount Sion.” By 1099 an abbey had been built on the ruins of an old Byzantine basilica at the express command of Godfroi de Buoillon. “According to one chronicler, writing in 1172, it was extremely well fortified, with its own walls, towers and battlements. And this structure was called the Abbey of Notre Dame du Mont de Sion.”
The truth is that 1099 A.D. was the height of Byzantine power, there would not have been any ‘ruins of an old’ Byzantine basilica, though there would have been a brand new Basilica. This was the mighty Roman Catholic Empire when it was united with the East. Not only was it united with the East, some of its major cities were Damascus and Antioch. Bouillion did not capture Jerusalem, because it was already a Byzantine Christian possession. It was under the control of the Christian dynasty related to William the Conqueror. This section of the Christian empire can be found on old maps and extends to North Africa and Yemen. The so-called Muslims at that time were nothing more than pirates, slave raiders and highway robbers who had to be put down. The name Boullion is, however, very much like that of the ‘last’ Phrygian king Bulan, and Anne Bolyn, and could even be pronounced like Bigot the scandalous early American fraudster. This Phrygian name always shows up in anti-Christian false history.
Acadia and early America plays into the false history when they connect Boullion to Merovingian treasure that ended up in the Mysterious Money Pit in America.
Supposedly these Templars first took the treasure from the Holy Land to the Cathars in Southern France. This just happened to be where the Phrygians were at the time and what they were calling themselves. The Grail fairy tale is to glamorize piracy and to downplay the fact that Christian control of the Holy Land often foiled their plans.
Notice how they fault the Church in their tale: “on the eve of their destruction by the church, they squirreled away the lucre in the Pyrenees.”
They shape shift from Pirate to Christian by confusing the Order of the Temple, the Priory of Sion and the true Knights of Christ which we call the Templars. Most of what they claim is not in any church or historical record anywhere other their own propaganda created since 1956.
The earliest documented report within the church was in “1619 when the Prieure de Sion were involved in the displeasure of King Louis XIII of France”. He evicted them from their seat at Orleans and turned the premises over to the Jesuits who were probably no better at the time. This was during the dictatorship of Richelieu, the most anti-Catholic infiltrator the Catholic Church has ever known, making war upon France from inside the French court, which affected French America and resulted in the arrival of the Compagnie du St. Sacrement in the New World.
The old Catholic monarchy had been usurped by Pirates to the extent that both the titles of Orleans and Bourbon, plus a major monastery like Cluny, were passed into the illegitimate, anti-Catholic branches of the children of King Louis XIV’s mistresses in the early 1600’s. King Louis XIV was so drugged that the court had to step in and one of his mistresses was banished. This was called “The Affair of the Poison” and is a court case that had to seriously consider the affects of curses and witchcraft on a victim.
Priory propaganda tells us that Abbe Seiyes urged Napoleon to marry Josephine Beauhamais because she was a Merovingian descendant, and because her two children by a previous marriage were of this anciently royal stock. These genealogies must have been discovered in 1798 when, on the way to Egypt, Bonaparte detoured to capture Malta and the treasure held by the Knights of Malta.
Napoleon had never been more than a common soldier promoted. He had never been an official or Director of the Revolutionary government during the French Revolution and he had no education, no religion and no father, but he knew the Director Sieyes who we are told had access to royal archives captured by the revolutionary government. This included important genealogies that had been “hidden away” in which he discovered that a direct descendant from the Merovingian King Dagobert II had been maintained up to then.
Abbe Seiyes told Bonaparte to adopt Josephine’s children in order to align himself with this blood line. An Abbe Pinchon involved has a name suspiciously like the ”Pager” surname of Josephine, and so perhaps she was the source of the disinformation because Josephine certainly had no royal blood to speak of.
This bloodline is something that they all cared about a great deal, something out of their reach as pirates who could have all the riches and thrones and palaces by stealing them, but they could never create it all quite like this themselves because it’s not in their blood.
President of the Directoire of France at the time, Viscount Paul Barras’ report is that both Josephine and Napoleon were extremely poor but were trying to pretend to each other that they had lots of money and social standing. They both fooled each other, both married for money, and Josephine actually despised Napoleon for tricking her and for foiling her own trick.
What is interesting is that at precisely this same time Barras wrote that the ancient genealogies ‘must needs be forgotten’. Perhaps the true genealogies were replaced by fake ones, perhaps by Barras himself. He, like much of the Catholic Nobility at the time, established a place where his family carried on quietly in rural Louisiana for another 100 years, almost.
Josephine’s husband whose name is Beauvernois on the geneaologies was the illegitimate descendant from an adulterous affair of Louis XIV. There is no certainty therefore that he is actually the grandson of Louis XIV, and there is room for doubt that Louis XIV was actually the son of Louis XIII. There is even more room for doubt that Josephine’s two children were actually his, judging by her actual reputation. The old family physical resemblances start to disintegrate quickly at this time and there are many sterile marriages. By the time of Louis XIV the look, lifestyle and characters are so different from that of the previous 1500 years of Catholics that it’s shockingly obvious to anyone that these are different people. The faces have become chubby, the noses arched, the dress much more revealing and the fashions gaudy. They look ridiculous. Gone are the modest clothing, prayer books, crucifixes and Madonna and Child paintings. Instead one sees court midgets, lapdogs, astrologers and young princesses dressed like prostitutes.
Josephine’s two maiden surnames are interesting. One traces to Blackbeard the pirate Tascher/Teach/Thatcher which is logical since she grew up on the pirate island of Martinique. Her other surname is Pager, which may be also Bigot. There are various spellings but they refer to the Jewish banking, slave trading and pirate sponsors based out of the city of London at that time.
Here is a small piece of the family tree of the pirates in America.
3d) Philippe, dit chevalier de Lorraine, Abbot of St. Pere, Chartres (1643-Paris 8 Dec 1702); he had illegitimate issue by N de Fiennes
1e) Alexandre de Lorraine dit de Beauvernois (d.by 1725); m. Eva Antoinette von Uffeln
1f) Friederike Wilhelmine (Celle 13 Oct 1702-Hannover 18 Dec 1751); m.Hannover 11 Dec 1731 Friedrich Ulrich Gf von Oeynhausen (d.Hannover 5 Apr 1776)
2f) Sophie Friederike (1708-17 Dec 1730); m.Ottensen 15 Aug 1725 Georg Ludwig Gf von Platen Hallermund (d.18 Aug 1772)
The first name shown is Phillipe, Chevalier de Lorraine who was the notoriously gay illegitimate son of French King Louis XIV.
From these families, which I’ll refer to often in future articles, we find surnames consistent with double agents, Iriquois and Mohawk chiefs, both French and English appointees of the government who control forts, and who hold trade monopolies and commissions for supplying the armies. Among this Hannoverian family we find those who are intermarried with the early English Protestant monarchy and other Protestant monarchies that came into existence, and most importantly, this family is the most likely one that traces to our Freemasonic Founding ‘Fathers’, the early Pirates. What they all have in common are illegitimate birth to titled Lords or Kings, anti-Catholicism and piracy, and they were gaining control of the monarchies in Europe.
This situation should explain why so many Catholics were leaving Europe and getting away from the coast in America.
Researchers are coming to accept that Knights of Christ may have come to the New World long before 1500 AD, in fact, right after the dissolution of the Templar’s order in the 1300’s. So by the time of Richelieu, Louisiana Territory settlements had already had about 300 years to develop. When one considers the even earlier date of the fishing trade, of which we have assize records, the possible first settlement date goes back another 500 years. There is the sighting of a villa by Agricola, who describes the famous tidal bore of that area, which brings us back almost another 500 years.
Because of the Prieure of Sion false history, instead of talking about the Knights of Christ, we are fed a quantity of disinformation about Henri de St. Clair so abundant it’s described as an industry. We could instead be talking about St. Brendan, Antoinette de Pons, King Francois I, the family de la Brousse and the Berard Stuarts and the role of the Catholic Church in the settlement of the New World. We could be translating their letters and books into English, discovering their artwork, music and other accomplishments instead of limiting Acadian history to such a small sliver of time.
Notice that the fictitious Henry de St. Clair has the same name as and is part of the web of lies confessed to by Pierre Plantard de St. Clair in 1993. The fictitious Henry the Navigator points us to the fact that the Knights of Christ were the first navigators to explore America in the 14th century. It’s time to start translating records that are in old Catholic libraries to learn more.
The Cross of Lorraine is found on the St. Louis Cathedral in New Orleans, which dates from the early 1700’s at least. This cross, having two cross-bars instead of one, originated with the ancient French house of Anjou, and was later adopted by the Merovingian-descended rulers of Lorraine in the old Sicambrian heartland on the Rhine. These were Catholics from the Byzantine era, and from a Catholic perspective, it is the experience of our own ancestors, still inside our own genetic memory.
Since the fake history of the Sionists practically parallels the history of the Catholic Acadians, we need to take a closer look at what can be proven, what is in Church legal records, and what is clearly evident.
What we’ll find is that the Acadian dispersal is largely a myth. The Acadians had left the coastal area long before the alleged ‘dispersal’ because they moved to the interior of the continent. There is ample record of this, obscured due to published lies about the forts along the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers, but the truth will out.
The first settlers’ danger was from coastal pirates, so they blockaded themselves behind a giant log-jam and built forts to prevent passage to the interior. There was no easy entrance to the interior of the continent from the East coast and it was blocked by miles of vicious Indians, marshes and swamp to the South. There were Acadian settlements all throughout the interior and at New Orleans by 1750. Wolf’s own embarrassed description of the Acadian ‘dispersal’ at ‘Gaspre’ is to have burnt up a few fishermen’s huts, and of course he’s telling the truth since that area had been pirate infested for many years. The Catholics deserted it long before Wolf’s arrival.
At the site called Acadie was an old fort which had been long abandoned and was subsequently taken over and turned into a pirate haven with a slave colony. Josephine’s husband’s family, Beauvarnois controlled one of those slave forts among several along the coast up to New Foundland. Canadian historians tell us that the black slaves at Acadia were sent to Sierra Leone. This was a dispersion on English ships, but these were not the French Catholics who went to Louisiana. Certainly there were homes burnt by Wolf and others of his party, but the dispersion of ‘Acadians’ on the coast is completely contrary to actual events inside French territory.
By claiming that the French were dispersed, they make it appear that the French were helpless victims of the mighty British, which is precisely the opposite of the truth. The French Catholics and their Indian allies were completely dominant over the Pirates and their English Governors. It was only through lies and fraud that the ‘English’ were able to pretend victory by trading forts between insiders. This information and more can be gleaned from careful reading of the records, and understanding family relationships between people in France and England, especially among the fruits of royal impurity.
It couldn’t have happened under the watchful eye of a strong Catholic Monarchy-Church-Military union. It happened when Richelieu had put all three under the control of hostile and greedy outsiders.
The historians attempt to cover this up for several reasons, only one of which is the question of rightful ownership of the land and the forts, for example Fort Frontenac in Canada. And they don’t want us to know about how they play the insiders game from both sides of every war, surrendering forts to each other to split what they’ve stolen of our belongings, and using the red Phrygian Cap as a signal for ‘insider trading’.
Myths are also created to cover up the role played by the early Puritan colonists in the trade of stolen goods and slaves, especially since Jews played the leading role in that particular commerce. They were all guilty of repeated raids on early Catholic settlements and merchant ships which is actually what fueled settlement on the interior. The Puritans made a business of capturing slaves of any kind, but mainly Indian. The main role of American history as edited today is to defend English style Piracy, which is to say, state sponsored. This must be kept in mind if we are to ever unravel the mess of history, not for the sake of condemning anyone, but for the sake of knowing the truth.
The true idea behind Arcadia, as I see it, was the decision to hide the identity of the royal blood in order to swell the numbers in the interior of America. It was anti-monarchy because it knew the monarchy was a target that could be assassinated, infiltrated and used against the people, just as the abandoned forts had been taken by the pirates and used against the settlers. When so many people shared both the blood and the faith, then there was an opportunity to have an entire race of monarchs capable of handling a direct democracy in the tradition of the Hellenes, under the law of God’s Catholic Church. America was the place where this could happen, but it would take time. As Viscount Paul Barras noted in his memoirs, the time had come to forget the genealogies. The degrees of nobility “must needs be forgotten” as he put it, imitating Dante. In Virginia, and other pirate havens along the coast, the ”knaves were a’plotting”, while Catholics fanned out and filled every available piece of land they could get over the course of 400 years.
I say 400 years, but really more because the “Zeno Map” of the 15th century shows a knight with a sword standing on Nova Scotia, plus other evidence, that gives us Catholic presence very early. ‘Nova Scotia’ reminds us that the Scottish family known as the Stuarts is the same family that was outlawed by Queen Elizabeth I. And why did she put a price on their heads? Because she was illegitimate and they weren’t, that’s why. And where are the Stuarts now? I think that the Prieure de Sion has the job of distracting us from that question.
One author who feels it is worth pursuing the origins of the Cajun people of Louisiana is brushed aside with the adjective ‘weird’ applied to his idea.