(Part 1)



VISION/DREAM  6-23-04 - I saw a list of 8 words under each other:
They were light blue on a white background.


Then I saw 8 doors laying down - they were white with light blue. Each of these doors had a scene on it like the drawing of a light blue foot either coming or going through the door.  Then I saw 7 or 8 small cabins side by side with these 'closed' doors on them.


Here are the definitions of these words:

A. cabal: Fr. intrigue, club, society; popularized in England from the initials of the ministers
         of Charles II  (1671)

     1. a small group of persons joined in a secret design or scheme; junto.

     2. the intrigues of such a group; plot, v.i. (caballed (-bald'), caballing] to form or join in a  
         cabal; plot, intrigue. - SYN, see plot

A small number of persons organized for the purpose of engaging in secret or private intrigue is a cabal. Cabal was originally a Hebrew word that meant “a secret.” Today it is usually a term of reproach with a sinister connotation. In England the word was used throughout the 17th century to describe certain secret or extralegal councils of the king.

B. cabala: n. [J.L. cabbala; Heb. qabbalah, received lore, mysterious doctrine
          <qabal, to receive, take]

gematria :

     1. an occult religious philosophy developed by certain Jewish rabbis, based on a
          mystical interpretation of the scriptures.

     2. occultism; mystical or secret doctrine. Also spelled cabbala, kabala

C. cabalic: adj. cabalistic

D. cabalism: n. occult doctrine

E. cabalist n 

    1. a person who believes in the cabbala

    2. a mystic

F. cabalistic: 1 adj. 

    1 of the cabala

    2 secret, mystic

G. cabalistical: adj. cabalistic

H. cabin: n. [M.E.  caban; OFr. caban, cabane; Pr. cabana; L.L. capanna. hut]

     1. small, roughly constructed house; cottage.

     2. an officer's quarters, originally in a deckhouse of a ship; hence,

     3. any enclosed office, bedroom, or living quarters on a ship, or quarter under the cabin
         trunk of a small vessel

     4. an enclosed space for passengers in an aircraft.

     v.t. to confine in or as in a cabin; cramp.


Charles II, king of England, Scotland, and Ireland

1630–85, king of England, Scotland, and Ireland (1660–85), eldest surviving son of Charles I and Henrietta Maria. 1

Early Life
Prince of Wales at the time of the English civil war, Charles was sent (1645) to the W of England with his council, which included Edward Hyde (later 1st earl of Clarendon) and Thomas Wriothesley, 4th earl of Southampton. In 1646, Charles was forced to escape to France, where he stayed with his mother and was tutored by the philosopher Thomas Hobbes. In 1649, Charles vainly attempted to save his father’s life by presenting to Parliament a signed blank sheet of paper, thereby granting whatever terms might be requested. 2

Exiled King
After his father’s execution (1649), Charles was proclaimed king in Scotland and in parts of Ireland and England. He accepted the terms of the Scottish Covenanters and went (1650) to Scotland, where he was crowned (1651), after agreeing to enforce Presbyterianism in England as well as Scotland. In 1651 he marched into England but was defeated by Oliver Cromwell at the battle of Worcester. Charles then escaped to France, where he lived in relative poverty. The Anglo-French negotiations of 1654 forced Charles into Germany, but he moved to the Spanish Netherlands after he had concluded (1656) a treaty with Spain. 3

Restoration and Reign
In 1660 Gen. George Monck engineered Charles’s Restoration to the throne, and the king returned to England. Charles had promised a general amnesty in his conciliatory Declaration of Breda, and he and Clarendon, who became first minister, acted immediately to secure passage of the Act of Indemnity, pardoning all except the regicides. Charles also favored religious toleration (largely because of his own leanings toward Roman Catholicism), but the strongly Anglican Cavalier Parliament, which first convened in 1661, passed the series of statutes known as the Clarendon Code, which was designed to strike at religious nonconformity. The king attempted unsuccessfully to suspend these statutes by the declaration of indulgence of 1662, which he was forced (1663) to withdraw. 4

Charles’s government endorsed the foreign policy of the Commonwealth with its Navigation Acts, which contributed to the outbreak (1664) of the second of the Dutch Wars. While the war was being waged, London suffered the great plague of 1665 and the fire of 1666. Clarendon fell from power in 1667, the year the war ended, to be replaced by the Cabal ministry. 5

Charles then took England into the Triple Alliance (1668) with Holland and Sweden, but he simultaneously sought the support of Louis XIV of France, with whom he negotiated the secret Treaty of Dover (1670). By this treaty, designed to free the king from dependence on Parliament, Charles was to adopt Roman Catholicism, convert his subjects, and wage war against the Dutch, for which Louis was to advance him a large subsidy and 6,000 men. In 1672 the third Dutch War began. Many suspected it to be a cloak for the introduction of arbitrary government and Roman Catholicism. Charles was forced to rescind (1672) his second declaration of indulgence toward dissenters, to approve (1673) the Test Act, and to sign (1674) a peace with the Dutch. 6

Thomas Osborne, earl of Danby, became chief minister on the disintegration of the Cabal and inaugurated a foreign policy friendly to Holland. Charles, unable to secure money from an increasingly hostile Parliament, signed a series of secret agreements with Louis XIV, by which he received large French subsidies in return for a pro-French policy, although he feigned sympathy with the anti-French movement at home. His alliance with Louis, however, was broken (1677) by the marriage of his niece Mary to his nephew (and Louis’s archenemy) William of Orange (later William III). 7

Anti-Catholic feeling in England exploded (1678) in the affair of the Popish Plot (see Oates, Titus), in which Charles did not intervene until his wife, Catherine of Braganza, was accused. However, the affair was made use of by the 1st earl of Shaftesbury, who led a movement to exclude Charles’s brother, the Catholic duke of York (later James II), from succession to the throne, promoting instead the claim of Charles’s illegitimate son the duke of Monmouth. 8

In 1681 the king dissolved Parliament to block passage of Shaftesbury’s Exclusion Act, and thenceforth Charles ruled as an absolute monarch, without a Parliament. His personal popularity increased after the exclusion crisis and particularly after the unsuccessful Rye House Plot. He took steps to root out the supporters of exclusion (now known as the Whigs) from positions of power, coercing municipal governments into obedience by the threat that he would rescind the city charters. 9

Charles died a Roman Catholic and was succeeded by his brother James. He had no legitimate offspring but many children by his various mistresses, who included Lucy Walter, Barbara Villiers (duchess of Cleveland), Louise Kéroualle (duchess of Portsmouth), and Nell Gwyn. 10

Character and Influence

Charles was a ruler of considerable political skill. His reign was marked by a gradual increase in the power of Parliament, which he learned to circumvent rather than manipulate. The period also saw the rise of the great political parties, Whig and Tory; the advance of colonization and trade in India, America, and the East Indies; and the great progress of England as a sea power. The pleasure-loving character of the king set the tone of the brilliant Restoration period in art and literature. 11

See contemporaneous accounts by G. Burnet, J. Evelyn, and S. Pepys; letters ed. by A. Bryant (rev. ed. 1955) and H. Pearson (1960); G. N. Clark, The Later Stuarts (2d ed. 1956); D. Ogg, England in the Reign of Charles II (2 vol., 2d ed. 1962); J. R. Jones, Charles II: Royal Politician (1987). 12

The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. Copyright © 2003 Columbia University Press.

Cabal - The ministers

(kbl´) (KEY) , inner group of advisers to Charles II of England. Their initials form the word (which is, however, of older origin)—Clifford of Chudleigh, Ashley (Lord Shaftesbury), Buckingham (George Villiers), Arlington (Henry Bennet), and Lauderdale (John Maitland). Although they were never a working ministry, one or more of this group dominated court policy from 1667 through 1673.
Royal Conspiracy: Princess Diana Names Her Killer

Uri Dowbenko

Did Princess Diana know who was plotting to kill her? Diana gave a handwritten letter to her butler Paul Burrell, 10 months before she died, to keep as "insurance" for the future. In the letter, revealed in Burrell's book "A Royal Duty," the princess knew she was marked as an "inconvenient woman."

Diana, who died in an August 1997 car crash in Paris, named the person she believed was plotting against her, predicting her own death, when she wrote, "This particular phase in my life is the most dangerous...(Name Redacted) is planning 'an accident' in my car, brake failure and serious head injury in order to make the path clear for Charles to marry."

Meanwhile, author Patricia Cornwell is conveniently claiming to have "solved the Diana mystery," muddying the waters as she did with the Jack the Ripper Murders. Cornwell absolved the high-ranking Royal-Masonic Cabal of the deaths of the prostitutes, as described in the late Stephen Knight's book "Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution.

"The conspiracy included Sir William Gull, the Queen's physician and Sir Charles Warren Commissioner of Police and member of the Ars Quator Coronatorum Masonic Lodge, confidants to Queen Victoria herself, wrote Knight.

"A great deal is at stake if the Establishment considers it necessary to operate a full scale cover-up," writes Knight. "For the truth of the Jack the Ripper affair to have been painstakingly concealed can mean nothing less than State security was at risk, or that someone high in the Government or the Royal Family was involved."

As it was with the Murder of Princess Diana.

Author Stephen Knight explains how Britain's entire political system at the end of the 19th century was threatened by the hidden facts -- Prince Albert Victor ("Eddy") was not only bisexual, but he had married a Roman Catholic girl and fathered a child with her. Evidently these debaucheries were so scandalous that the Ruling Class would not abide even the slightest hint of this revelation.

When a group of working girls decided to blackmail the Royals, the Marquess of Salisbury, then Prime Minister, had to take care of the problem. He entrusted Sir William Gull, physician and abortionist to the Royal Family, for the mission.

The deliberately engineered panic, i.e., the murder of five prostitutes, was done according to Masonic ritual. The ritual murder and disembowelment "met with such ghastly success because of the audacity with which they were executed," said Walter Sickert, Knight's informant whose painter-father had intimate knowledge of the Cleveland Street murders. This so-called "audacity" is a trademark of Masonic "mischief-making."

"All Jack the Ripper victims were dispatched according to age-old Masonic ritual," Knight continues. The mutilations of the "unfortunates" were done according to Masonic tradition, the standard way of dealing with "traitors." In fact, the oath recited by initiates promises a ghastly death and mutilation -- in the case of "betrayal."

Meanwhile the UK Mirror's editorial reflects a growing concern about the Princess Diana Murder and Cover-up: "Today's Mirror front page is one of the most dramatic and devastating we have published in our entire history."

Diana's letter reflects her understanding of the diabolical nature of the Royal Family and the House of Windsor. The UK Mirror, which published the letter, said it could not reveal the identity for fear of a lawsuit. It printed a photograph of part of the letter, with the name blacked out.

Before sealing the letter in an envelope marked "Paul', the princess told Burrell: "I'm going to date this and I want you to keep it. Just in case."

Burrell writes in his book -- "But, with the benefit of hindsight, the content of that letter has bothered me since her death. For this is what she wrote 10 months before she died in that car crash in Paris:

"I am sitting here at my desk today in October, longing for someone to hug me and encourage me to keep strong and hold my head high. This particular phase in my life is the most dangerous. (The princess then identified where she felt the threat and danger would come from) ... is planning 'an accident' in my car, brake failure and serious head injury in order to make the path clear for Charles to marry.

"I have been battered, bruised and abused mentally by a system for years now, but I feel no resentment, I carry no hatred. I am weary of the battles, but I will never surrender. am strong inside and maybe that a problem for my enemies.

"Thank you Charles, for putting me through such hell and for giving me the opportunity to learn from the cruel things you have done to me.

"I have gone forward fast and have cried more than anyone will ever know.

"The anguish nearly killed me, but my inner strength has never let me down, and my guides have taken such good care of me up there.
Aren't I fortunate to have had their wings to protect me..."

Burrell said Diana believed she was regarded as a nuisance once she and Prince Charles were divorced in 1996.

The cover story for Diana's murder was cast in stone with a French inquiry in 1999 that concluded the car crashed because the driver had been drinking and traveling too fast. But there has never been an inquest in Britain.

The UK Mirror, which published the letter, said it could not reveal the identity for fear of a lawsuit. It printed a photograph of part of the letter, with the name blacked out. Before sealing the letter in an envelope marked "Paul', the princess told Burrell: "I'm going to date this and I want you to keep it. Just in case."

According to the Mirror, these are the unanswered questions about the death of Princess Diana.

* What really happened to Diana's Mercedes that night?

* Did she receive the medical treatment she required?

* Was she pregnant?

* Had she taken drugs?

* Was the car's driver Henri Paul really drunk?

"The British people have an absolute right to know what really happened to their princess," the Mirror editorial continues. "The British people deserve nothing less and must get nothing less."

And that goes for the rest of the world too...



Royal Conspiracy: Princess Diana Names Her Killer

Did Princess Diana know who was plotting to kill her? Diana gave a handwritten letter to her butler Paul Burrell, 10 months before she died, to keep as "insurance" for the future. In the letter, revealed in Burrell's book "A Royal Duty," the princess knew she was marked as an "inconvenient woman."

Diana, who died in an August 1997 car crash in Paris, named the person she believed was plotting against her, predicting her own death, when she wrote, "This particular phase in my life is the most dangerous...(Name Redacted)


Meanwhile, author Patricia Cornwell is conveniently claiming to have "solved the Diana mystery," muddying the waters as she did with the Jack the Ripper Murders. Cornwell absolved the high-ranking Royal-Masonic Cabal of the deaths of the prostitutes, as described in the late Stephen Knight's book "Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution.


Princess Diana: Did Prince Philip Order Her Death?

According to the UK Sun, Mohamed Fayed, the father of Dodi Fayed, Princess Diana's friend and lover, said that a frightened Princess Diana had been threatened by Prince Philip weeks before she died in a fatal "car accident" with his son Dodi, Diana's friend and lover.

Fayed said: "Diana told me personally during a holiday in the South of France, 'If anything happens to me, make sure those people are exposed. The person who is spearheading these threats is Prince Philip'."

This threat corresponds to the letter received by Diana's butler Paul Burrell, in which Diana predicted her own death by "car accident." She wrote "(Name Blacked Out)is planning a 'car accident' in my car."

In a sworn deposition, former MI6 Agent Richard Tomlinson states that he was shown documents by MI6 officer Dr Nicholas Bernard Frank Fishwick,the MI6 officer who at the time was in charge of planning Balkan operations, which "on closer inspection turned out to be an outline plan to assassinate the Serbian leader President Slobodan Milosevic.


Princess Diana: Did MI6 Stage 'Car Accident' Plot?

(Editor's Note: Paul Burrell, Princess Diana's butler, has revealed a letter from Diana in which she said she feared that someone was "planning an accident in my car." The sworn testimony of former MI6 agent Richard Tomlinson below describes his knowledge of a MI6 plot to assassinate Serbian leader President Slobodan Milosevic with a very similar scheme. Photo shows Diana's handwritten note predicting her death by 'Car Accident')

MI6 and Diana, Princess of Wales
Sworn Testimony by former MI6 Agent Richard Tomlinson

Attached below is a sworn and testified statement that I have made on 12th May 1999 to the enquiry into the deaths of the Princess of Wales, Dodi Al Fayed, and Henri Paul. I firmly believe that MI6 have information in their files that would assist Judge Stephan's enquiry. Why don't they yield up this information? They should not be entitled to use the Official Secrets Act to protect themselves from investigation into the deaths of three people, particularly in the case of an incident of this magnitude and historical importance.


Princess Diana Murder Conspiracy: MI6 Operation? (continued)

I firmly believe that there exist documents held by the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) that would yield important new evidence into the cause and circumstances leading to the deaths of the Princess of Wales, Mr Dodi Al Fayed, and M. Henri Paul in Paris in August 1997.

2. I was employed by MI6 between September 1991 and April 1995. During that time, I saw various documents that I believe would provide new evidence and new leads into the investigation into these deaths. I also heard various rumours - which though I was not able to see supporting documents - I am confident were based on solid fact.

3. In 1992, I was working in the Eastern European Controllerate of MI6 and I was peripherally involved in a large and complicated operation tosmuggle advanced Soviet weaponry out of the then disintegrating and disorganised remnants of the Soviet Union.

During 1992, I spent several days reading the substantial files on this operation. These files contain a wide miscellany of contact notes, telegrams, intelligence reports, photographs etc, from which it was possible to build up a detailed understanding of the operation. The operation involved a large cast of officers and agents of MI6. One more than one occasion, meetings between various figures in the operation took place at the Ritz Hotel, Place de Vendome, Paris. There were in the file several intelligence reports on these meetings, which had been written by one of the MI6 officers based in Paris at the time (identified in the file only by a coded designation).

The source of the information was an informant in the Ritz Hotel, who again was identified in the files only by a code number. The MI6 officer paid the informant in cash for his information.I became curious to learn more about the identity of this particular informant, because his number cropped up several times and he seemed to have extremely good access to the goings on in the Ritz Hotel. I therefore ordered this informant's personal file from MI6's central file registry.

When I read this new file, I was not at all surprised to learn that the informant was a security officer of the Ritz Hotel. Intelligence services always target the security officer's of important hotels because they have such good access to intelligence. I remember, however, being mildly surprised that the nationality of this informant was French, and this stuck in my memory, because it is rare that MI6 succeeds in recruiting a French informer. I cannot claim that I remember from this reading of the file that the name of this person was Henri Paul, but I have no doubt with the benefit of hindsight that this was he.

Although I did not subsequently come across Henri Paul again during my time in MI6, I am confident that the relationship between he and MI6 would have continued until his death, because MI6 would never willingly relinquish control over such a well placed informant. I am sure that the personal file of Henri Paul will therefore contain notes of meetings between him and his MI6 controlling officer right up until the point of his death.

I firmly believe that these files will contain evidence of crucial importance to the circumstances and causes of the incident that killed M. Paul, together with the Princess of Wales and Dodi Al Fayed.

4. The most senior undeclared officer in the local MI6 station would normally control an informant of M. Paul's usefulness and seniority. Officers declared to the local counter-intelligence service (in this case the Directorate de Surveillance Territoire, or DST) would not be used to control such an informant, because it might lead to the identity of the informant becoming known to the local intelligence services. In Paris at the time of M. Paul's death, there were two relatively experienced but undeclared MI6 officers. The first was Mr Nicholas John Andrew LANGMAN, born 1960. The second was Mr Richard David SPEARMAN, again born in 1960. I firmly believe that either one or both of these officers will be well acquainted with M Paul, and most probably also met M. Paul shortly before his death.

I believe that either or both of these officers will have knowledge that will be of crucial importance in establishing the sequence of events leading up to the deaths of M.Paul, Dodi Al Fayed and the Princess of Wales. Mr Spearman in particular was an extremely well connected and influential officer, because he had been, prior to his appointment in Paris, the personal secretary to the Chief of MI6 Mr David SPEDDING. As such, he would have been privy to even the most confidential of MI6 operations. I believe that there may well be significance in the fact that Mr Spearman was posted to Paris in the month immediately before the deaths.

5. Later in 1992, as the civil war in the former Yugoslavia became increasingly topical, I started to work primarily on operations in Serbia. During this time, I became acquainted with Dr Nicholas Bernard Frank FISHWICK, born 1958, the MI6 officer who at the time was in charge of planning Balkan operations.

During one meeting with Dr Fishwick, he casually showed to me a three-page document that on closer inspection turned out to be an outline plan to assassinate the Serbian leader President Slobodan Milosevic. The plan was fully typed, and attached to a yellow "minute board", signifying that this was a formal and accountable document. It will therefore still be in existence.

Fishwick had annotated that the document be circulated to the following senior MI6 officers: Maurice KENDWRICK-PIERCEY, then head of Balkan operations, John RIDDE, then the security officer for Balkan operations, the SAS liaison officer to MI6 (designation MODA/SO, but I have forgotten his name), the head of the Eastern European Controllerate (then Richard FLETCHER) and finally Alan PETTY, the personal secretary to the then Chief of MI6, Colin McCOLL.

This plan contained a political justification for the assassination of Milosevic, followed by three outline proposals on how to achieve this objective. I firmly believe that the third of these scenarios contained information that could be useful in establishing the causes of death of Henri Paul, the Princess of Wales, and Dodi Al Fayed. This third scenario suggested that Milosevic could be assassinated by causing his personal limousine to crash.

Dr Fishwick proposed to arrange the crash in a tunnel, because the proximity of concrete close to the road would ensure that the crash would be sufficiently violent to cause death or serious injury, and would also reduce the possibility that there might be independent, casual witnesses. Dr Fishwick suggested that one way to cause the crash might be to disorientate the chauffeur using a strobe flash gun, a device which is occasionally deployed by special forces to, for example, disorientate helicopter pilots or terrorists, and about which MI6 officers are briefed about during their training.

In short, this scenario bore remarkable similarities to the circumstances and witness accounts of the crash that killed the Princess of Wales, Dodi Al Fayed, and Henri Paul.

I firmly believe that this document should be yielded by MI6 to the Judge investigating these deaths, and would provide further leads that he could follow.

6. During my service in MI6, I also learnt unofficially and second-hand something of the links between MI6 and the Royal Household. MI6 are frequently and routinely asked by the Royal Household (usually via the Foreign Office) to provide intelligence on potential threats to members of the Royal Family whilst on overseas trips.

This service would frequently extend to asking friendly intelligence services (such as the CIA) to place members of the Royal Family under discrete surveillance, ostensibly for their own protection. This was particularly the case for the Princess of Wales, who often insisted on doing without overt personal protection, even on overseas trips.

Although contact between MI6 and the Royal Household was officially only via the Foreign Office, I learnt while in MI6 that there was unofficial direct contact between certain senior and influential MI6 officers and senior members of the Royal Household. I did not see any official papers on this subject, but I am confident that the information is correct. I firmly believe that MI6 documents would yield substantial leads on the nature of their links with the Royal Household, and would yield vital information about MI6 surveillance on the Princess of Wales in the days leading to her death.

7. I also learnt while in MI6 that one of the "paparazzi" photographers who routinely followed the Princess of Wales was a member of "UKN", small corps of part-time MI6 agents who provide miscellaneous services to MI6 such as surveillance and photography expertise. I do not know the identity of this photographer, or whether he was one of the photographers present at the time of the fatal incident. However, I am confident that examination of UKN records would yield the identity of this photographer, and would enable the inquest to eliminate or further investigate that potential line of enquiry.

8. On Friday August 28 1998, I gave much of this information to Judge Herv Stephan, the French investigative Judge in charge of the inquest into the accident. The lengths which MI6, the CIA and the DST have taken to deter me giving this evidence and subsequently to stop me talking about it, suggests that they have something to hide.

9. On Friday 31 July 1998, shortly before my appointment with Judge Herv Stephan, the DST arrested me in my Paris hotel room. Although I have no record of violent conduct I was arrested with such ferocity and at gunpoint that I received a broken rib. I was taken to the headquarters of the DST, and interrogated for 38 hours.

Despite my repeated requests,I was never given any justification for the arrest and was not shown the arrest warrant. Even though I was released without charge, the DST confiscated from me my laptop computer and Psion organiser. They illegally gave these to MI6 who took them back to the UK. They were not returned for six months, which is illegal and caused me great inconvenience and financial cost.

10. On Friday 7th August 1998 I boarded a Qantas flight at Auckland International airport, New Zealand, for a flight to Sydney, Australia where I was due to give a television interview to the Australian Channel Nine television company. I was in my seat, awaiting take off, when an official boarded the plane and told me to get off. At the airbridge, he told me that the airline had received a fax "from Canberra" saying that there was a problem with my travel papers. I immediately asked to see the fax, but I was told that "it was not possible". I believe that this is because it didn't exist.

This action was a ploy to keep me in New Zealand so that the New Zealand police could take further action against me. I had been back in my Auckland hotel room for about half an hour when the New Zealand police and NZSIS, the New Zealand Secret Intelligence Service, raided me. After being detained and searched for about three hours, they eventually confiscated from me all my remaining computer equipment that the French DST had not succeeded in taking from me. Again, I didn't get some of these items back until six months later.

11. Moreover, shortly after I had given this evidence to Judge Stephan, I was invited to talk about this evidence in a live television interview on America's NBC television channel. I flew from Geneva to JFK airport on Sunday 30 August to give the interview in New York on the following Monday morning. Shortly after arrival at John F Kennedy airport, the captain of the Swiss Air flight told all passengers to return to their seats.

Four US Immigration authority officers entered the plane, came straight to my seat, asked for my passport as identity, and then frogmarched me off the plane. I was taken to the immigration detention centre, photographed, fingerprinted, manacled by my ankle to a chair for seven hours, served with deportation papers (exhibit 1) and then returned on the next available plane to Geneva. I was not allowed to make any telephone calls to the representatives of NBC awaiting me in the airport. The US Immigration Officers - who were all openly sympathetic to my situation and apologised for treating me so badly - openly admitted that they were acting under instructions from the CIA.

12. In January of this year, I booked a chalet in the village of Samoens in the French Alps for a ten day snowboarding holiday with my parents. I picked up my parents from Geneva airport in a hire car on the evening of January 8, and set off for the French border.

At the French customs post, our car was stopped and I was detained. Four officers from the DST held me for four hours. At the end of this interview, I was served with the deportation papers below (exhibit 2), and ordered to return to Switzerland. Note that in the papers, my supposed destination has been changed from "Chamonix" to "Samoens". This is because when first questioned by a junior DST officer, I told him that my destination was "Chamonix". When a senior officer arrived an hour or so later, he crossed out the word and changed it to "Samoens", without ever even asking or confirming this with me. I believe this is because MI6 had told them of my true destination, having learnt the information through surveillance on my parent's telephone in the UK.

My banning from France is entirely illegal under European law. I have a British passport and am entitled to travel freely within the European Union. MI6 have "done a deal" with the DST to have me banned, and have not used any recognised legal mechanism to deny my rights to freedom of travel. I believe that the DST and MI6 have banned me from France because they wanted to prevent me from giving further evidence to Judge Stephan's inquest, which at the time, I was planning to do.

13. Whatever MI6's role in the events leading to the death of the Princess of Wales, Dodi Al Fayed and Henri Paul, I am absolutely certain that there is substantial evidence in their files that would provide crucial evidence in establishing the exact causes of this tragedy. I believe that they have gone to considerable lengths to obstruct the course of justice by interfering with my freedom of speech and travel, and this in my view confirms my belief that they have something to hide.

I believe that the protection given to MI6 files under the Official Secrets Act should be set aside in the public interest in uncovering once and for all the truth behind these dramatic and historically momentous events.


US Spy Tapes Reveal Diana Was Pregnant 

"We have been aware for some time of the existence of these documents and we have an ongoing action in the United States through the Freedom of Information Act to gain access to them."

Mr Al Fayed believes the Americans were monitoring Diana because they were concerned that her anti-landmine campaign threatened their defence industry interests. The information was also shared with the British and French intelligence services, he believes.

Mr Al Fayed said it raises fresh fears that she and Dodi were murdered.

Last night NSA sources told the Sunday Express the tapes contain "very sensitive material".

But the spy agency has indicated it would look favourably upon a request from the new Royal Coroner, Dr Michael Burgess, to have them at the inquest into Diana's death he is due to hold later this year.

NSA sources indicate the 1.051 documents contain transcripts of intimate conversations between Dodi and Diana in the month they spent together before their fatal car crash in Parish five years ago this coming August.

Both the Queen and Prince Charles have agreed the inquest should be held before the end of the year. Palace sources indicate it is time to bring closure to the last unresolved link in the death of the Princess.

The inquest is seen as an important step in the continuing careful packaging of Camilla Parker-Bowles as the future partner of Charles.

In the aftermath of Diana's death, the Queen opposed an inquest. She feared it could cast an unfavourable spotlight on the way the Royal Family responded to Diana's death.

But the unprecedented success of the Golden Jubilee celebrations has convinced the Queen's advisers the inquest should go ahead.

Only members of the Royal Household will sit on the jury.

Royal Coroner Dr Burgess has said there will be "important issues to consider. Should Diana have been taken to hospital from the crash scene sooner than she was? The speed of the car and the use of seatbelts are also relevant and important questions".

But undoubtedly the most important questions will be answered by those vital NSA documents. Finis

The Sunday Express, 23 June 2002
By Gordon Thomas 


Diana Death Conspiracy - An Assassination (Part 2) (continued)

(Paris tunnel -- 31 august 1997) I was lucky at that time, while the accident took place, I am 60 metres from the spot. When I heard a very loud sound came from the tunnel, I jumped from one of my friend's bike (who is now detained) to inspect the scene. I could see a hand of someone waving at us to seek some help. With a terrible shock, I found that was the hand of princess.

"I could not see her face clearly, as a warm blood streaming all over her face. She still alive and crying painfully. With "discourage feeling", I forced myself to take some picture of her -- (the pictures and negative are with me now and I am not intend to sell it for profit). >From the distance, I could see people already gathering to see what was happening there. I do not understand the world, for accusing us (photographers) for Diana and Dodi death. As a matter of fact, It looks like all people of the world pointing at us as we are the greatest criminal of a crime that we did not responsible. I still remember the words came from Diana's throat before she died. "Help... someone outside plan to kill us".

A spokesperson for the Fayeds and the Ritz said that although Dodi had been "examined" by a pathologist in Britain before he was buried, this had not been a full postmortem examination, and that no blood samples were taken.

Lawyers for the photographers have questioned such procedures. "The behavior of passengers in the investigation of a car accident is very important," said one. Another said he would very much like to know how much, if anything, Dodi had drunk that evening and whether he would have been lucid.

Of course absolutely no postmortem of any kind, which could precisely indicate the direct cause of death, was done on the body of Princess Diana.

Paris police have said that after the accident occurred the ambulance took nearly half an hour to get to the scene. Also the police have confirmed that they were escorting the ambulance back to the hospital but then became separated. The ambulance arrived at the hospital much later and the drivers claimed to have lost their way! This was reported on many European radio channels. Why aren't the identities and records of these so-called ambulance drivers being released?

Witness accounts recorded by TV crews directly after the tragedy stated that there was an initial impact or explosion, then the sound of metal scraping followed by the sound of a very loud crash when the vehicle hit the tunnel structure. These descriptions were edited out of subsequent broadcasts and have not been heard since.

What was the initial sound caused by? If a massive crash could somehow be instigated, the time, location, and condition of the armor-plated limousine would assuredly create some delays in any occupants not killed receiving medical attention, which itself could be of a terminal sort administered by specially assigned agents who, while returning to the hospital in the ambulance, inconceivably lose their way!

Has the scenario being presented -- of all those photographers riding motorcycles and trying to take pictures of the inside of a car with tinted windows travelling at 120 MPH, at night, in a dim narrow tunnel -- been seriously called into question, as it seems it should ? Does anyone really believe that one or more of these paparazzi on motorcycles actually attempted to cut off a large automobile at such speeds?

(Nonetheless it's now certain that at least one other vehicle did intentionally impact the Mercedes in the tunnel.)

Does it seem the least bit likely that Diana, Dodi and their bodyguard would drive off in a vehicle with a man supposedly so completely inebriated? Why has it been claimed that Mr. Paul sped rapidly away from The Ritz to evade the paparazzi when there was no antagonism or ill will demonstrated before the Mercedes left The Ritz and video footage shows the car leaving at a reasonable speed?

Although earlier reports had the Mercedes going 120 miles per hour, more recent bulletins from Paris say experts estimated the car's speed at about 75 miles per hour.

Why would anyone drive at such a dangerous speed just to get away from photographers? Photographs can't cause bodily harm. If indeed the vehicle was traveling even the lower speed, it would seem likely Paul and the other occupants of the Mercedes were trying to get away from something considerably more sinister than photographers.

Yet another troubling inconsistency is the fact that early news reports said that the events of the crash were captured on video by traffic surveillance cameras in the tunnel. Yet subsequently this was completely denied. If there are cameras in the tunnel, why wasn't the crash filmed? That in itself seems quite suspicious. If there was no film taken then why the reports saying there was such film?

Yet another thoroughly contradictory series of news items to add to the already extensive list of such.

With all the initial hue and cry about the paparazzi being a factor in causing the accident, nearly all still photographs and videos shot before, during or after the tragedy have been seized. The potential for manipulation of such evidence under such conditions is astronomical.

In addition to the inexplicable delay in the arrival of the ambulance and emergency personnel, there were reportedly serious difficulties in removing Diana and the other victims from the specially reinforced body of the limousine, which led to an additional delay of nearly an hour.

Also, again inexplicably, during this time Diana was left to wait on the roadside while all the other victims were extricated from the wreckage before she was put into an ambulance. How could anyone not question why Diana was not immediately airlifted out on an emergency medical helicopter but was instead unconscionably made to wait and was then driven at a bizarrely slow pace by an ambulance crew who supposedly couldn't find their way back to the hospital?! And this in a major modern city like Paris? Not bloody likely! (The ambulance however did manage to conveniently ditch their police escort).

Diana was very much alive after the crash, and was in fact sitting up, gesticulating and a one point telling the medics to leave her alone; yet we are told that all the most technologically advanced medical resources that our present-day world and her wealth could command were not able to save her.

The public should be told precisely how she died, of what specific medical condition and exactly where and at what time her death occurred, as well as who was present. If she in fact died of heart failure, and there was little or no initial emphasis on head wounds in her case, why was the supposed existence of massive head wounds used as the reason Diana did not have an open casket funeral?

Also questionable was the fact that instead of being hooked up to state of the art life support equipment at Salpetriere Hospital, Diana was cut open and her heart massaged directly by a physician.

Despite strenuous contortions and permutations of certain investigators attempting to make unwanted facts disappear or to create the desired facts out of thin air in order to promulgate a bogus and fanciful theory regarding the cause of the crash, apparently some members of the Paris police have decided to actually look at the evidence and listen to the witnesses.

An AP bulletin from Paris dated September 17 does indeed indicate that Paris police now believe a second vehicle was in fact involved in the crash, and possibly even a third. It states, "French television reported Tuesday that investigators are considering the possibility that another car was involved in the crash.

The report on France 2 said red shards of glass, apparently from brake lights, were found at the crash scene - but that the Mercedes' brake lights were still intact". Perhaps the Paris police force is reluctant to play along in covering up the awful truth about this miserable and sickening political assassination.

Another item datelined Paris, September 17, reads in part as follows (emphasis added): Authorities investigating the crash that killed Princess Diana are examining parts of a second car that were found at the scene of the accident, a police source said today.

Pieces of a tail light and traces of paint that are not used on the Mercedes car that carried Diana were found at the scene and are being tested in a police laboratory, the source said on condition of anonymity

Similar traces were also found on the rear-view mirror of the Mercedes, the source said. An AP news item from later the same day stated that Paris police, based upon new evidence, are considering the possibility that even a third vehicle may have been involved.

Latest reports are that pieces of this mysterious vehicle became embedded in the Mercedes, as it struck Diana's car with such extreme force.

The London Times report mentioned at the beginning dated Sept. 21 says that there is a highly credible witness who had provided significant and invaluable testimony on this aspect of the events to the Al Fayed lawyers several weeks ago.

This testimony was passed on to authorities but was apparently intentionally buried. Thankfully it has now resurfaced. The newspaper quoted Gary Hunter, a British lawyer who was in Paris on Aug. 31 celebrating his wife's birthday, as saying he saw a small black car fleeing at high speed from the crash that killed Princess Diana. He saw the car from the window of his third-floor hotel room. Witnesses had initially said they saw a small, black hatchback, possibly a Fiat Uno, near the smashed Mercedes. Hunter said he was watching television when he heard an "almighty crash" at 12:25 a.m.

From his window he saw people running toward the tunnel and then saw a car turning from the area by the tunnel exit and roaring down the Rue Jean Goujon, the street below. "I heard the screeching of tires. I saw a small dark car turning the corner at the top of the road. I would say it was racing at 60-70 mph," Hunter stated.

"My own feeling is that these were people in a hurry not to be there. I am confident that the car was getting off the scene. ... It looked quite sinister." (emphasis added.) Hunter said the car could have been a Fiat Uno or a Renault. The Times article also said the lawyers passed the testimony on to investigators, who, incredibly enough, apparently ignored it.

Certain witnesses interviewed right after the tragedy on CNN said that immediately after the event some people were around the car and that one man in a three piece suit screamed at them in French; that there was 'liquid on the ground'.

Understandably, the witnesses were afraid of another explosion, and so backed away as instructed. Of course, if there was someone in the tunnel just moments after the crash, clearing away witnesses, he would almost certainly be part of any assassination operation.

It is now clear that early reports of the crash suggested Diana was injured, but that her life wasn't threatened, according to the French doctor who treated her for some time at the scene before the ambulance took her to the hospital.

The doctor, who happened by and stopped to help, said she was "moaning" gesturing in every direction". Unconscious people do not moan and gesture in every direction. Early interviews with Dr. Frederic Mailliez also have him saying that he saw the Princess "thrashing about", and that her condition "did not seem desperate."

The presence of this doctor who just happened to be at the crash site when the tragedy occurred could be viewed as questionable; certainly it could have been a coincidence but it may not have been, and we have only his word as to what actions he took which affected Diana's physical condition. His location gave him an incalculable ability to drastically impact the course of events -- especially Diana's physical wellbeing.

In addition, the Fayed camp claims that at the hospital Diana was able to give a last message to an unknown person in England, so obviously she was fairly conscious for quite some time after the crash. The crash occurred at just past midnight, but Diana was not declared dead until 4 AM. Also, what was this message and who was it to? Did it implicate someone perhaps?

Something is terribly wrong about the death of Princess Diana. The factual evidence presented herein makes it fairly clear that her death was no accident. Diana was killed intentionally.

Diana Spencer was a human being of course, with some of the failings and weaknesses which that connotes. However, by most accounts she was a kind, decent person, who demonstrated genuine empathy with the underprivileged, the infirm, the oppressed and the ignored; those traditionally considered to be of lower social standing than she; also, for what it may be worth Diana was a true "blueblood" royal of England's House of Stewart.

Diana's constant and wholehearted support for numerous charitable endeavors worldwide, and her extraordinary enthusiasm, energy and more recently direct political activism in so many causes which sought to improve the lives and circumstances of great numbers of humanity was thoroughly commendable, and clearly came from the heart. These definitely were not things she had to do.

Diana seemed determined to use her position for the greater good. The tremendous worldwide outpouring of sadness and grief on the part of the general populace also came from the heart and was unprecedented, except perhaps for that following the Kennedy assassination. The response was certainly an indication of Diana's formidable and widespread popularity.

Perhaps Princess Diana's potential independent financial power by way of her boyfriend, a wealthy movie producer, was becoming a serious political threat to the status quo. The senior Mr. Fayed had been quite influential in bringing about the downfall of the Conservative government which held power for so long in England This fact would have hardly endeared him (or his son) to certain major British power brokers; in fact they detest Mr. Fayed and many liked Diana hardly a little more.

Diana herself was becoming more and more overtly political in her campaign against the use of land mines and in her visits to promote peace efforts in Bosnia, etc. This was a threat to the stated New World Order objective of a destabilized Russia and a wary, edgy Western bloc (Europe, the U.S. and allies).

The Royal Family is a major player in the high-stakes game of position within the New World Order, and international arms sales including land mines provide a substantial portion of their necessary operating capital.

Some objectives of the removal of Diana as a significant influence in our world could be: to keep Diana from "interfering" with the further development and education of her two boys, Princes William and Harry; to derail Diana's ever-more-effective international peace efforts (Great Britain is a major exporter of land mines); to send a message to and set an example for other members of Royalty, other world political figures and the entire human population; and to prevent a marriage to a member of the Saudi royal family.

The fact that her companion Mr. Al Fayed was an Arab or Semitic in race is probably a one of the lesser reasons for this assassination. The fact that Diana was of the House of Stewart, Britain's true and rightful royal family, and not of the House of Windsor, the German (Hessian) royal family which usurped the British throne centuries ago and still holds power, could be somewhat of a factor, as is the issue of who would exert the most influence over the further upbringing of her two children, heirs to the British throne.

The Royal Family is rid of someone they unquestionably saw as a troublemaker and a source of significant embarrassment; a thorn in their side and a monkeywrench in the(ir) works. In addition, the mainly Conservative power structure in Britain despised her and her humanitarian and peacemaking agenda and resented having to pay for her security.

They and other governments may have had concerns about her increasingly political activities in light of her great popularity, perhaps also concerns about her knowledge of (and willingness to make public) certain information which could prove troublesome to the New (One) World Order, or things of that nature.

Dodi Al Fayed had in fact purchased an engagement present for Diana the very day of their deaths, and a public announcement of an engagement would undoubtedly have been imminent. It has been suggested by a U.K. correspondent that this provided a powerful incentive in terms of time for British intelligence to "remove" Diana immediately.

Once the news of her engagement to Dodi was made public, any such "accident" would certainly be considered much more suspicious. This jewelry was in fact initially reported missing from the wreckage (along with approximately 30,000 francs). It reportedly later turned up and was given to the Spencer family. It may well have been intentionally removed by operatives on the scene, and later replaced when it was realized that the existence of the gift was already too widely known.

Even a brief but thorough study into the forces which have a measurabl and significant impact upon the course of international policy and the political and social conditions in which the human race exists, will disclose the continued importance of royalty as one of such forces and prompt realization that its ability to influence the course of these events is (still) quite substantial.

As a general example of such influence, all contemporary national banks in existence today such as The U.S. Federal Reserve Bank are modeled upon the Bank of England, founded by Britain's King William 111 as a private, for-profit institution which loans money at interest to the national government to pay government's operating costs, thus discreetly enforcing tremendous economic control (at least!) over entire human populations.

The Royal Family is a unquestionably a key element of the George Bush's so-called New World Order, with a considerable network of supporters firmly entrenched in the United States political system. Certainly both Ronald Reagan and George Bush were unabashedly pro-Monarchy in great number of major foreign policy decisions implemented during their terms.

Most assuredly another ardent supporter is Bill Clinton, who was a Rhodes scholar, meaning that he was hand-picked, groomed and educated at the expense of The Council of Rhodes to one day take his place as a world leader dedicated to bringing about the fundamental objective of the Council -- a one-world government.

Mr. Clinton, indeed, seemed peculiarly upbeat when making his public statement about Princess Diana's death; some reports had him "smirking" during his brief comments. Clinton also didn't even bother to offered any valid reason at all for his refusal to attend Diana's funeral.

Given that Princess Diana had recently focused considerable energy and attention on the continuing unjustifiable use of land mines and was campaigning vigorously for their global abolishment, the Clinton administration's current vehement opposition to the recent land mines treaty overwhelmingly approved by 89 nations and widely supported internationally is certainly noteworthy and surprising, even if nothing more than coincidence and bad timing politically for Clinton. Great Britain is one the world's leading exporters of land mines, Bill! Their production and sale most definitely fill the coffers of some of the British Royal Family's more ardent political supporters.

Following are the four news stories mentioned above regarding the medical condition of "bodyguard" Trevor Rees-Jones. I have emphasized the most important sections and have edited the items slightly for the sake of brevity.

In and of themselves these four items indicate deliberate distortion and manipulation of information. This can only be an attempt to suppress the truth, and realistically, that truth could only be that Diana's death was not a tragic accident but a deliberately and methodically planned and executed political murder.

A host of other inconsistencies and highly troubling questions have been raised which the protective and investigative agencies of both countries as well as the mainstream media have almost totally sidestepped. This very fact in itself seems quite suspicious. It should be, indeed it is imperative that the events and circumstances of the tragedy be thoroughly and completely investigated and examined for the slightest indication that it may have been more than a shocking and virtually inexplicable accident! A great number of such indications have just been cited, many of which have been known from the very beginning of the terrible events.

When all is said and done, we have all lost someone truly special, and it appears clear that once again it was no accident, but a deliberate act intended to deprive the human race of one of it's brighter luminaries and finer leaders. The late Princess of Wales, Lady Diana Spencer, will be long and deeply missed.

Copyright 1997 John A. Quinn, NewsHawk Inc. All rights reserved

(The preceding article is from NewsHawk)

++ NewsHawk subscriptions cost $15 US for three months, payable by MONEY ORDER only, made out to JOHN QUINN (of course cash is OK, but inadvisable for snailmail).

++ Any donations of funds should also be sent as a money order made out to JOHN QUINN

++ Mail donations and payments for subscriptions to:

John Quinn
PO Box 106
Laytonville, Calif. 95454





Who really controls world events from behind-the-scene? Years of extensive research and investigation have gone into this massively documented work. In this 624 page, large format book, Fritz Springmeier discloses mind-boggling facts and never before revealed truths about the top Illuminati dynasties. Discover the amazing role these bloodlines have played—and are now wielding—in human history, with family names such as 

 The Astor Bloodline   

 The Bundy Bloodline

 The Collins Bloodline

The DuPont Bloodline

 The Freeman Bloodline

 The Kennedy Bloodline

 The Li Bloodline

 The Onassis Bloodline

 The Reynolds bloodline

 The Rockefeller Bloodline

 The Rothschild Bloodline

 The Russell Bloodline

 The Van Duyn Bloodline

 Merovingian (European Royal Families)

Interconnected families:

The Disney Bloodline

The Krupp Bloodline

The McDonald Bloodline

You’ll also learn of the secretive, Chinese Li family, which operates with impunity in the U.S.A. and around the world. Along the way you’ll find out why President John F. Kennedy and actress Grace Kelly were killed; who created the United Nations; who controls the two major U.S. political parties; how the Rothschilds invented and control modern-day Israel; who secretly founded false religions such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses; and much, much more. A literal encyclopedia of rare, unbelievable information!

Bilderberg: The ultimate conspiracy theory
By Jonathan Duffy
BBC News Online

The Bilderberg group, an elite coterie of Western thinkers and power-brokers, has been accused of fixing the fate of the world behind closed doors. As the organisation marks its 50th anniversary, rumours are more rife than ever.

Given its reputation as perhaps the most powerful organisation in the world, the Bilderberg group doesn't go a bundle on its switchboard operations.

Telephone inquiries are met with an impersonal female voice - the Dutch equivalent of the BT Callminder woman - reciting back the number and inviting callers to "leave a message after the tone".

Anyone who accidentally dialled the number would probably think they had stumbled on just another residential answer machine.

Leiden in Holland, the inauspicious base of the Bilderberg group
But behind this ultra-modest façade lies one of the most controversial and hotly-debated alliances of our times.

On Thursday the Bilderberg group marks its 50th anniversary with the start of its yearly meeting.

For four days some of the West's chief political movers, business leaders, bankers, industrialists and strategic thinkers will hunker down in a five-star hotel in northern Italy to talk about global issues.

What sets Bilderberg apart from other high-powered get-togethers, such as the annual World Economic Forum (WEF), is its mystique.

Not a word of what is said at Bilderberg meetings can be breathed outside. No reporters are invited in and while confidential minutes of meetings are taken, names are not noted.

The shadowy aura extends further - the anonymous answerphone message, for example; the fact that conference venues are kept secret. The group, which includes luminaries such as Henry Kissinger and former UK chancellor Kenneth Clarke, does not even have a website.

This year Bilderberg has announced a list of attendees
They include BP chief John Browne, US Senator John Edwards, World Bank president James Wolfensohn and Mrs Bill Gates

In the void created by such aloofness, an extraordinary conspiracy theory has grown up around the group that alleges the fate of the world is largely decided by Bilderberg.

In Yugoslavia, leading Serbs have blamed Bilderberg for triggering the war which led to the downfall of Slobodan Milosevic. The Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, the London nail-bomber David Copeland and Osama Bin Laden are all said to have bought into the theory that Bilderberg pulls the strings with which national governments dance.

And while hardline right-wingers and libertarians accuse Bilderberg of being a liberal Zionist plot, leftists such as activist Tony Gosling are equally critical.

A former journalist, Mr Gosling runs a campaign against the group from his home in Bristol, UK.

"My main problem is the secrecy. When so many people with so much power get together in one place I think we are owed an explanation of what is going on.

Timothy McVeigh was among those who believed the conspiracy theory
Mr Gosling seizes on a quote from Will Hutton, the British economist and a former Bilderberg delegate, who likened it to the annual WEF gathering where "the consensus established is the backdrop against which policy is made worldwide".

"One of the first places I heard about the determination of US forces to attack Iraq was from leaks that came out of the 2002 Bilderberg meeting," says Mr Gosling.

But "privacy, rather than secrecy", is key to such a meeting says Financial Times journalist Martin Wolf, who has been invited several times in a non-reporting role.

"The idea that such meetings cannot be held in private is fundamentally totalitarian," he says. "It's not an executive body; no decisions are taken there."

As an up-and-coming statesmen in the 1950s, Denis Healey, who went on to become a Labour chancellor, was one of the four founding members of Bilderberg (which was named after the hotel in Holland where the first meeting was held in 1954).

The alternative - the WEF welcomes journalists
His response to claims that Bilderberg exerts a shadowy hand on the global tiller is met with characteristic bluntness. "Crap!"

"There's absolutely nothing in it. We never sought to reach a consensus on the big issues at Bilderberg. It's simply a place for discussion," says Lord Healey.

Formed in the spirit of post-war trans-Atlantic co-operation, the idea behind Bilderberg was that future wars could be prevented by bringing power-brokers together in an informal setting away from prying eyes.

"Bilderberg is the most useful international group I ever attended. The confidentiality enabled people to speak honestly without fear of repercussions.

"In my experience the most useful meetings are those when one is free to speak openly and honestly. It's not unusual at all. Cabinet meetings in all countries are held behind closed doors and the minutes are not published."

That activists have seized on Bilderberg is no surprise to Alasdair Spark, an expert in conspiracy theories.

"The idea that a shadowy clique is running the world is nothing new. For hundreds of years people have believed the world is governed by a cabal of Jews.

"Shouldn't we expect that the rich and powerful organise things in their own interests. It's called capitalism."



... willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by
the World Government." -- Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians ...

... President of the United States (D) Confirmed Mason. Clinton, A Rhodes Scholar,
a CFR member, a Trilateral Commission member and a Bilderberger participant. ...

THE NEW WORLD ORDER. WHAT IS IT? BELIEVE IT OR NOT!!! IT'S ALREADY HERE!!! ... The History and Significance of the New World Order. Agenda Of NWO Power Groups. ...

THE NEW WORLD ORDER. A GOOD THING? THE DREAM AND THE REALITY. by Dee Finney. 9-25-2001. ... People Who Have Written Positively About the New World Order. ...

NEW WORLD ORDER. During the period 1992-1994 ... Gravity Wave. 1990. President Bush delivers New World Order speech. Nutrition Labeling and ...

... 9-30-2001 - WIDOWED MOTHER WINS HER KIDS BACK IN COURT. 9-27-2001 - THE NEW WORLD ORDER - A GOOD THING? updated 1-4-2002 - THE NEW WORLD ORDER - THE OTHER SIDE ... - 17k - Cached - Similar pages

... The trend of this change will be to bring about a new world order that will prepare the way for the Antichrist and the coming tribulation. ...
... ~~~~~. More on the Committee of 300. More on the New World Order. Immigration Cases and Law. Dreams of the Great Earthchanges - Main Index.
... Ex Government engineer tortured to death for revealing to the American public "black" government projects and engineered atrocities towards the New World Order ...

The Changing of the Guard - Part One: Corporate Media ...
... 1871. As William T. Still writes in the utterly-essential text New World Order: The Ancient Plan of Secret Societies, (pub. 1990 ...

THE CHANGING OF THE GUARD - Part Two: Illuminati Revealed
... The USSR has been promised fourth position in the New World Order, BEFORE the role the US would have, because the USSR has been more helpful and cooperative ...

... Welcome to the New World Order. Included in the material below is an excerpt from one the the CCW's papers on the New World Order. ...
... information. From: Gulag America. (New World Order's Concentration Camp Program). During ...
... was the National Security Advisor to Bush, was interviewed by Charles Bierbauer of the Cable News Network (CNN) and used the term "a New World Order." During a ...

... The Cabal speaks about the 50 gates of intelligence which would be all the possible objects of the knowledge, summarizing the creation, while 32 ways of the ...
... In both Arab esoteric studies and in Judaic Cabal, such numbers form anagrams and extend the power of words: eg, 93=Greek Agape, 398=Neshek, the serpent, and ...