The basic premise of your question
is not unacceptable but is not necessary. I do not believe the royal family is
in more trouble than most families and the tenet 'Don't complain: Don't
explain' is merely the royal option in dealing with the eccentricities of Man,
which sometimes make the eccentricities of God look tame. You may have been
reading the work of clever writers who translate conflict in a family, real or
imaginary, into drama for the page, stage and a wage. No such risk here! What I
do is the most outrageous and anti-social activity on the Net. I ask you to think,
and if you are asleep, then I have to wake you! Nearly five hundred years ago
the most famous intellectual in the reign of Henry VIII and, perhaps,
the greatest Englishman of all time, Thomas More, wrote in the most published
and widely read book of its day, Utopia, that the common wealth of England was
a conspiracy of rich men.
I have to draw
attention that this monstrous conspiracy of rich men in the spotted and deeply
stained velvet and ermine of the judiciary, executive and administration killed
an English king at Bosworth Field, Richard III, and in the morning of the last
day his enemies saw the dead man walking.
In this last
century, a conspiracy of rich men killed an American ‘king’ in Dallas, JFK, and
there is a conspiracy of rich men in many countries. Keep thinking! Thomas More
also wrote, and mark it well! (p. 97):
'Yet for this
cause you must not leave and forsake the common wealth; you must not forsake
the ship in a tempest, because you cannot rule and keep down the winds...But
you must...study...to handle the matter wittily ['cleverly, intelligently,
ingeniously', OED] and that which you cannot turn to good, so to order it
that it be not very bad.'
My odd study is
Education, Education, Education, (meaning what can be drawn out and not what we
stuff in!) and if I can persuade just one child to study history in a
scientific way, using new technology and the Internet to familiarize the new
methods -- if I succeed in this, I succeed indeed. Two children would be
better. Three, better still!
This statement is
based on a false premise and is incorrect. I am not saying there has been a
plan of deception because of the evidence in Sir Thomas More and his Family. I
have to draw attention to old and newly discovered documentation and other
circumstantial evidence pointing to a highly successful game plan, played by
professionals, from the fifteenth century onwards in England, which the
evidence in the Nostell painting seems to confirm.
#18 "You have showed only one picture and I am
convinced. Are there two?"
If I show you two pictures, will you be twice as
convinced? If I show you three, will you be three times as convinced? Prepare
yourself! There are at least 74 paintings and drawings discovered to date out
of more than 150 works variously attributed to Hans Holbein the Younger
containing personal and political information in a secret method of
communication, not pure code and not purely scientific, developed from a simple
idea first invented by Leonardo da Vinci. The criteria of the theory of the
unconventional symbols (TOTUS) are linguistic equivalents, which make sense
(they must make sense!), relevant to known history. Since the anomalies had not
been seen and examined before now, which is simply astounding, the phenomenon is
systematically examined for the first time.
Buy my book on the detective work and I’ll tell you! For the present,
Masterman made certain boastful claims in The Double-Cross System in the War
of 1939-1945 by J. C. Masterman, publ. YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS, NEW HAVEN AND
LONDON, Second Printing, 1972, which MI5 overlooked and, in hindsight, he
acknowledged as a ‘give-away’ and wished he had never made. For those
interested in the secret history of the war of 1939-1945, these are the
passages:
(1) ‘For the greater part of the war we did much more than practice a
large-scale deception through double agents: by means of the double-agent
system we actively ran and controlled the German espionage system in this
country.’ (p. xiv,
FOREWORD)
(2) ‘This book was written during the months of July-September 1945. At
that time I had been participating in double-cross work for four and a half
years.’ (p. xvii, PREFACE)
(3) ‘The Twenty Committee itself held its first meeting on 2 January
1941, and its last on 10 May 1945. It met every week and held in all 226
meetings. It thus exercised a steady and consistent supervision of all double
agent work throughout the last four and a half years of the war.’ (p. 63)
(4) ‘Any layman, however, can appreciate the fact that, though we were
in wireless communication with the German SS for more than five years and using
German procedure, our wireless experts never, so far as we can tell, made a
serious mistake which could “give away” a case to the enemy.’ (p. 67)
OK?
Reviewed 090900
Last Revision 010401
Click “Back”