Black Dahlia

This is a diversion. I am tired of Covid and everything around it. We’ve been writing about it here now for nearly a year. The public has bought in, and with the false flag attack on the Seat of Government on Wednesday, I see Biden in the future, along with martial law, military checkpoints and travel permits. It’s all gloomy, and I am up to the gills with it. I have two projects in store, this one below, and John Wayne Gacy sitting nearby. I am using them because at this point I need uplifting stories. Covid is too gruesome. I need some cheering up.

“On gross pathology, we have a female Caucasian. Muscle tone indicates her age is between sixteen and thirty. The cadaver is presented in two halves, with bisection at the level of the umbilicus. On the upper half: the head is intact, facial features significantly obscured by massive ecchymoses, hematomas and edema. Downward displacement of nasal cartilege. Through-and-through laceration from both mouth corners across masseter muscles, extending through temporal mandibula joints and up to both earlobes. No visible signs of neck bruises. Multiple lacerations on anterior thorax, concentrated on both breasts. Cigarette burns on both breasts. Right breasts almost completely severed from the thorax. Inspection of upper half abdominal cavity reveals no free-flowing blood. Intestines, stomach, liver and spleen removed.”

The above is part of an official autopsy report on the corpse of Elizabeth Short, the Black Dahlia, one of the most famous unsolved murders in U.S. history. It unhappened in Los Angeles in January of 1947. I only became aware of it because as I drive about doing daily business, I listen to comedy channels on SiriusXM. I came across something resembling the following, one of the best laughs I get in my daily life.

I am quoting below from James Ellroy’s fictional account, The Black Dahlia. The comedian I heard described the Dahlia’s wounds in detail, probably not too different than what follows. It is a quote from Ellroy’s fictional detective, Bucky Bleichert.

“It was the nude, mutilated body of a young woman, cut in half at the waist. The bottom half lay in the weeds a few feet away from the top, legs wide open. A large triangle had been gouged out of the left thigh, and there was a long, wide cut running from the bisection point down to the top of the public hair. The flaps of skin beside the gash were pulled back; there were no organs inside. The top half was worse: the breasts were dotted with cigarette burns, the right one hanging loose, attached to the torso only by shreds of skin; the left one slashed around the nipple. The cuts went all the way down to the bone, but the worst of the worst was the girl’s face. It was one huge purple bruise, the nose crushed deep into the facial cavity, the mouth cut ear to ear into a smile that leered up at you, somehow mocking the rest of the brutality inflicted.”

I wish I had caught the name of the comedian. I can only speculate, and am probably wrong, that the comedian was perhaps Anthony Jeselnik, one of my favorites, who likes to lead his audience to gruesome and unexpected punchlines. After describing the brutal death of Elizabeth Short, the comedian made a mild apology, telling his audience that he understood this was brutal material. But, he said, that aside from that, he had to wonder,

“What could this woman possibly have said to make a guy that mad?”

OK, share my humor or not. I add a touch of levity because I think of Black Dahlia as OJ, Part One. It did not happen. There was no corpse. The graphic violence was the product of a script writer, told to loosen all the bolts of decency and let fly with a tale of a human monster to haunt all our nightmares and our awake time as well. It was a scripted horror show, but not real.

There are, to my knowledge, only a few photos of Elizabeth Short. I offer two, as it is hard to tell which of the rest are real and which fictionalized renditions.

I do not know the origins of either of these two photos, but the one on the left looks like a professional shot. The one on the right is said to be Ms. Short after arrest for underage drinking in Santa Barbara in 1947. I am somewhat intrigued by her eyes, as her pupils are half covered by the eyelids in both photos. Maybe she was tired in a long photo shoot.

On the left I see an earring, and on the right the another, perhaps the same. Since she supposedly dropped out of high school in her sophomore year in Medford (MA), the left photo is not high school graduation. I am seeing a well-dressed young woman who is perhaps in the job market, perhaps looking for film work. Maybe better, a college shot, a sorority sister getting ready to face husband, children and regular mundane life in the early postwar era.

That would negate the high school dropout story.

In both photos I am seeing clear skin and eyes. The photo on the right has a sharper and more focused image. She is either naturally angry or told to appear so. She does not look drunk or hung over. The hair on the left is well coiffured, and on the right a little mussed up. But in each the eyes are clear, if looking upwards, and the face and skin smooth and attractive. The lighting on each is from above (note the shadow under the chin). I would imagine that in a mug shot, which is what the photo on the right is supposed to be, the lighting would be at eye level, and would be done in such a way that facial features are starkly highlighted. Mug shots are not done for sake of flattery.

Also note that her hair in both photos extends to just above shoulder line. These photos originate in a very close timeframe.

My guess, two photos, one touched up for glamor, the other touched down to look angry.

This woman, who may indeed be “Elizabeth Short,” was perhaps taken from Intelligence sources in California and asked to pose as part of a psyop. I do  not think her involvement went beyond use of her image in photographs. This person was perhaps a college student, and told thereafter to go about her normal life. Born in 1924, she would be 96 if still alive, unlikely. If she is indeed Elizabeth, she is from the peerage. More about this later.

I have been reading the work of Michael Connelly, the author who has given us characters like Harry Bosch and Mickey Haller, the Lincoln Lawyer. I like his writing, but a friend suggested I also look at James Ellroy, whose “LA Quartet” includes not only Black Dahlia, but also LA Confidential, made into one of the better cop movies I have ever seen. I found Ellroy’s writing (at least in Dahlia) to be a stark contrast to Connelly, his characters unvarnished, corrupt and violent. Connelly’s have moral compasses.

I have a habit of putting 3M flags on paragraphs in books I want to revisit, and I placed several in the Dahlia pages. Ellroy made numerical references, and without fail, they were spook markers, at least in my mind. It was the usual, cleverly disguised 8, 11 and 33’s. “This guy is juiced,” I thought. Here is a brief bit of bio from Wiki:

Ellroy was born in Los Angeles, California. His mother, Geneva Odelia (née Hilliker), was a nurse, and his father, Armand, was an accountant and a onetime business manager of Rita Hayworth.[2] After his parents’ divorce, Ellroy relocated to El Monte, California, with his mother.[3] When Ellroy was 10 years old, his mother was raped and murdered on June 22 1958.[4] Ellroy later described his mother as “sharp-tongued [and] bad-tempered”,[5] unable to keep a steady job, alcoholic and sexually promiscuous. His first reaction upon hearing of her death was relief: he could now live with his father, whom he preferred.[6] The police never found the perpetrator, and the case remains unsolved. The murder, along with reading The Badge by Jack Webb (a book comprising sensational cases from the files of the Los Angeles Police Department, a birthday gift from his father), was an important event of Ellroy’s youth.

None of the names, Lee Earle Ellroy (given name), Odelia or Hilliker turn up at, maybe not significant. It seems odd that Ellroy, now famous and well known, does not show up there.

Anyway, Ellroy is not the subject of this post. I merely find it interesting that his mother supposedly died so violently, and that he writes in the same manner. Black Dahlia would be a natural for him. Both cases are unsolved, oddly. Ellroy’s account of the murder of Elizabeth Short is admitted to be complete fiction. In the book (spoiler alert), the case is solved and Bucky Bleichert ends up a happy ex-cop. Neither seem real enough for me.

However, before plunging into Wiki, I am curious about Elizabeth Short. Was she a real person? Or, was her image merely used in a psyop? I went to and punched her in and got the following:

Note that her father’s name is not available, or “scrubbed,” as some might say.  We know nothing about him. That could be natural, not wanting to be known as the father of a woman who died in such ignominy. But the same does not apply to her mother, Phoebe Mae Short. I was able to follow her ancestry back twelve generations to this guy:

The Sawyer line comes out of Northamptonshire, about 70 miles north of London. One of that line, Edward Sawyer (1608-1674) emigrated from the UK to Maine in the 1600s. His descendants, all the way up to Phoebe Mae Short, came from Maine. ( lists 86 names under Sawyer, and 97 under Short, with plenty of variations. However, I do not understand that website – I do not know why all those names are assembled as they are. It all seems random, or at best disorganized.)

What to make of this? I’ll refer back to it, and remember, it is not my expertise. I have found in other research that notorious people of fame and infamy are often from the peerage. See, for instance, my work on John Brown (with input from Kevin Starr, a writer with us at that time). Brown was ‘juiced’, ancestry going far back in the peerage, much like Elizabeth Short.

It is time now to visit the official “Elizabeth Short” back story. From this point forward, I am relying on Wikipedia (LOOT, or Lies of Our Times) for the official account of the Black Dahlia matter. It is twelve pages with an additional nine of footnotes and other matters. It is some of the most spook-laden reading I’ve done, and I’ve spent my share of time with Wiki. 11,33, and 8 are all about. Just to get the ball rolling, see how Wiki lists the location of the corpse:

I don’t know, but that location could have done with one less “3,” making the longitude “118.33.”

Short was said to be born in a Boston suburb Medford, on 7/29/1924, the third of five daughters. Around 1927 the Short family relocated in Maine … travel the generations through, as I did above, and you’ll find that the Sawyer line, Elizabeth’s lineage, settled in Maine in the 17th century. Generally in the peerage, the oldest child inherits the fortune, the second and third male child become military officers or ministers, and those after are often enough sent off to seed the colonies, taking ownership of land in the process. (Think, for instance, … Mayflower.) I would assume that Phoebe Mae Short had roots up there, and probably land. This, then, was not a poor family. She, at least, was landed gentry.

Elizabeth, suffering from what appears to be childhood asthma, spent her winters in Florida, with friends. She is said to have had lung surgery at age 15. Come 1929, the year of her father’s (fake) death, she quit high school.

Her Dad, “Cleo” Short, is said to have built miniature golf courses, but lost most of his savings in the ’29 crash. In 1930 his car was found abandoned on the Charleston Bridge, and suicide was the assumption. No body ever turned up – how do I know this? He turns up alive later. In 1942, twelve tears after his fake death, he turned up working at the Mare Island Naval Shipyard in San Francisco Bay. This was one of the major ship building sites in the U.S. since its inception in 1852. (It was closed in 1996 to become prime real estate). Since we know so little of Cleo, I can only suggest that he might have faked his death in order to take reassignment. In such situations, I would assume that provisions are made for the family left behind, so that Phoebe probably did not have to take work as a bookkeeper to support them, as Wiki says. He would then be military Intelligence, which makes the miniature golf courses an odd line of work.

The other possibility, of course, is that he abandoned his family and ended up in California, the land of opportunity, fueled by military contractors, and became a mere laborer in a ship yard. I’d have to do more reading on this to make that case or the other, and for purposes of a blog post, I am not going to do that. Just perhaps see, as I did, that due to peerage and circumstances of fake death, this family is suspicious.

Elizabeth met Major Matthew Michael Gordon, Jr., a decorated Army Air Force officer at the 2nd Air Commando Group, during her winters in Florida. Given their five year age difference, she would have been a teenager.  Gordon, five years her elder, was deployed to China Burma during the war, and during that time wrote to Elizabeth to propose marriage. She accepted (he 26, she 21). However, he died on August 10 (aces and eights, as MM would remind us), 1945 at age 26. (Did I mention this Wiki post was laden with spook markers?).

Liz with boyfriendIn 1943 she moved to California to live with her father, Cleo. While there she met Army Air Force Lieutenant Joseph Gordon Fickling. Note the name “Gordon” again. Coincidence? Probably, but I do note that in the peerage, family names are usually used as middle names.  These two could be related. There was apparently a romantic connection with Fickling, but nothing serious took hold, he envious of her flirtations with other men the story goes. I am curious, however, that of the three most important men in her life, two were military officers, and the other worked in a military shipyard. It’s beginning to look like Elizabeth, supposedly a high school drop out, was well connected. The photo to the left might be Elizabeth with either Gordon or Fickling, but my bet is Fickling since it looks like California, and Gordon was shipped off to Burma while she was there.

That in mind, I want to revisit this photograph. It’s been bugging me. Reading the James Ellroy version of Elizabeth’s life in Los Angeles, I had the impression she was at least a part time prostitute, a two-way swinger, a drunk and finagler. The day before her death she was with a married man. She slept with numerous men and women, kept company in dark bars, and generally led a dissolute life. The photo says none of that. It says that Elizabeth was well-heeled, well-dressed and coiffured. She had no reason to sit for this photo. She was a high school dropout, a swinger with no prospects. Ellroy had her participating in pornographic movies. She never tried out for a straight movie part, so this is not a photo taken for an agent to shop around. Without finishing high school, there is no graduation photo, and anyway, this woman looks to me to be in her early twenties.

Why then the photo?

I am reading college, maybe a sorority, maybe graduation from college. I am seeing well dressed, well bred, and well brought up. Nothing in the Ellroy book, itself laden with spook markers, reads anything like this photograph.

On January 9, 1947, Short returned to her home in Los Angeles after a brief trip to San Diego with Robert “Red” Manley, a 25-year-old married salesman she had been dating.[26] Manley stated that he dropped Short off at the Biltmore Hotel located at 506 South Grand Avenue in downtown Los Angeles, and that Short was to meet her sister, who was visiting from Boston, that afternoon.[26] By some accounts, staff of the Biltmore recalled having seen Short using the lobby telephone.[e] Shortly after, she was allegedly seen by patrons of the Crown Grill Cocktail Lounge at 754 South Olive Street, approximately 0.4 miles (0.64 km) away from the Biltmore Hotel.[26]

We read above about the demise of Elizabeth Short, the body moved after death to be displayed at longitude 118.333 West. In Ellroy’s book, hundreds of cops and detectives set out to solve the crime. It was a nationwide story of great interest, much like the OJ Simpson case. In Wiki, there are 750 cops from various agencies working the case, and yet for all of the intelligent effort and ability, nary a clue as to the attacker ever emerged. She was last seen at the Biltmore before turning up at 118.333 West. (There were suspects, and I would guess books claiming to have solved the case (in addition to finding Amelia Earhart in the process), but I attribute all of that to the second market’s ability to continue to make money on events like this.)

Black Dahlia

The image above is said to be the crime scene. Here’s Ellroy, again:

“A large triangle had been gouged out of the left thigh, and there was a long, wide cut running from the bisection point down to the top of the public hair. The flaps of skin beside the gash were pulled back; there were no organs inside. The top half was worse: the breasts were dotted with cigarette burns, the right one hanging loose, attached to the torso only by shreds of skin; the left one slashed around the nipple. The cuts went all the way down to the bone, but the worst of the worst was the girl’s face. It was one huge purple bruise, the nose crushed deep into the facial cavity, the mouth cut ear to ear into a smile that leered up at you, somehow mocking the rest of the brutality inflicted.”

Gruesome as this is, I must look and if you cannot, then follow me: I see no large triangle gouged out of the left thigh, maybe obscured. I see no large bisection in the upper part of the lower half of the body. I see no cigarette burns on the breasts. The right breast is a blur, but I do not see it hanging loose. Of course, we cannot see the face.

I can see withholding the photos of the crime scene. This is the only one I could find purporting to be real. It is indeed gruesome, and the primary urge is to look away, not to study detail. But the photo does not fit with the autopsy report or the Ellroy novel.

Above is another shot, this time covered with a suspicious looking blanket. Notice something missing? “… the nose crushed deep into the facial cavity, the mouth cut ear to ear into a smile that leered up at you.” This is an obvious fake, maybe a movie or TV still.

I think it only logical to conclude that we have no photos of the Black Dahlia crime scene. That may be due to there being no crime scene, no body. If they existed, they would have surfaced by now. (Remember, we live in a country that allowed autopsy photos of a dead president to be published.) If that is hard to believe, think again about OJ Simpson, and the hundreds of cops and hours of detective work that went into a nationally sensationalized set of a fake murders, including a “real” court case. Los Angeles is the product of the military and the entertainment industry. Military intelligence had to be all about, including within city government and LAPD. Were they capable of pulling off such a hoax? Yes.

I want to look again at the information on Elizabeth Short. Note that she has four sisters: Virginia Mae, Dorthea, Private and Muriel. It’s not unusual to see “private” in genealogy reports. In fact, the father of these five girls is listed as private. But I am going to suggest something, perhaps a reach, but perhaps explaining the origins of “Elizabeth Short.” What I suggest is that the Cleo and Phoebe Short had four daughters, not five, and that the image of the “private” one became “Elizabeth.” It was used in a large and well crafted psyop out on the West Coast. There was no Elizabeth Short. There was only image and back story, much of it later supplied by Ellroy. The rest was smoke and mirrors, all done in a city with major film studios.

Another speculative possibility: The “Private” daughter is Elizabeth Short. She became her own body double.

If I am right, the fourth of Cleo and Phoebe’s daughters is the image above, but we do not for certain know her name. She went on to college, probably married, raised children, and died sometime in this century. That was all they needed in 1947 to run a psyop – a photo.

If you’ve a better explanation, I hope to see it in the comments. Black Dahlia has psyop written all over it.

PS: I originally planned this article for tomorrow, Monday, as I wanted Stepher’s piece to be on top of the page for another day. I accidentally hit the “publish” key early this morning, even as the piece needed lots of editing, and had some facts wrong (her having met Fickling in California, not Florida). I have now done that editing and correcting, shortening and clarifying, hopefully making it more readable.

122 thoughts on “Black Dahlia

  1. I saw the Brian DePalma movie (based on Ellroy) – was not impressed with the craft of the film but can’t remember my criticisms.
    I think I remember reading that the case was also used indirectly in The Big Sleep or one of those Bogart movies – there was some implied sex ring used by wealthy men in the background of one of those flicks, and maybe that was part of the Black Dahlia backstory as well?
    Photo of crime scene looks very fabricated… Grass hand drawn in over body, shadows on blanket also look brushed in to give it form, like it was just a flat stencil shape, weird exposure, etc.


  2. Wiki: “On February 2, 1947, just two weeks after Short’s murder, Republican state assemblyman C. Don Field was prompted by the case to introduce a bill calling for the formation of a sex offender registry; the state of California would become the first U.S. state to make the registration of sex offenders mandatory.”[64]

    And they’re still going at it (Sept. 11, 2020):


      1. Rita Hayworth brings Orson Welles (“juiced”) into the frame. One of her husbands was a Kahn, ((1949–51) to Prince Aly Khan (son of the Aga Khan III)) an ancient bloodline family.


  3. Mark, this is a superb summary and investigation you have done into the life and death of the alleged “Black Dahlia”, or Elizabeth Short (I kept thinking of another probable psy-op Elizabeth Smart). If I can put my two cents in, I would just say that I am of the opinion the Ruling Psychopaths LOVE more than anything to put out in the atmosphere a lot of Fairy Tales to entertain, attention-divert, confuse, and horrify us, the Peasants, so that our minds will stay occupied and jammed up with a steady stream of fear, panic, nonsensical facts and figures, folly and shenanigans, and most of all, high suspicion of anyone and everyone we may come in contact with virtually anywhere in our daily lives, including our own homes (home invasions), our children’s schools (school shootings), or places of employment (disgruntled employees gone “postal”). These Tales also serve to provide any potential Psychopathic Peasants with the tools utilized by the fake murderers as well as detailed instructions on how crimes are committed, development and planning for a crime, and the ideology and motive used to justify the fake murder.
    Also, I am just about 99% positive that the person in the photos alleged to be the Elizabeth Short a/k/a The Black Dahlia is a male. While many men are said
    to “look better than real women” when disguised as such, my immediate gut instinct shows lots of masculine energy coming from the photos I have reviewed of this person. This, if my instincts are correct here, would be another indicator of the possibility Ms. Short was a spook or born of an elite bloodline family. Just my thinking. Thank you for the well researched paper.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I saw a lot of photos, but also know there have been movies and TV shows, so I stuck to two that I knew to be (were said to to be) Short.

      [I did come across a photo of her and Fickling, which I have added, She is stunningly attractive in that photo.]


  4. My kind of post, Mark!
    My two bits: The glam shot of Short looks typical of the times. My mother had a head shot like that done about the same years. (She was a bookkeeper) The photographer liked it so much he blew it up and put in the front window of his studio to show how good he could be.
    Parents put their kids in front of a professional’s camera from an early age. My mother had my brother and I sit for our last formal portrait in our early 20’s.
    It’s the mug shot that puzzles. First, though, there’s a touch of the Hapsburg jaw in evidence. And to my mind, she does look tipsy, or at least is affecting such a state. Mouth breathing, heavy eyes, tousled hair. Frankly, she looks like she just rolled out of bed. Is that a nightgown she’s wearing? As they used to say, she has not “put on her face” to go out. A teenage girl worth a second look and out for some underage drinking probably would have dolled up. Even a chippie making rent, surely. I think this model is made to appear to the appalled public as “fallen”.
    Its not done with a flash which would be the suspected standard for a police photo.
    Since its all one big act, the mug shot may be the single contribution from the actress playing Short. And I do mean actress- the forehead looks too vertical to be a tranny- (“Gal” Gadot, anyone?)

    The Hodel Hypothesis
    There was a story, backed by a book, floating around several years ago involving an alleged abortionist to the stars named George Hodel. I won’t go into the details as Waki has plenty of conjecture to chew on, but I will say the guy reeks of spookery; able to come and go, in and out of the country even though allegedly a prime suspect in the Short case and several others.
    In my view, the revisionist history of George Hodel, a history primarily offered by his step-son Steve Hodel, a retired LAPD homicide detective, no less, is devised as a lint catcher to ward off information about Hollywood after dark’s potential scandals. Dropping the fiction of a serial killer into the rumor mill of show biz ground zero is an effective way to keep other names out of the tabloids. Think Jimmy Savile, a good comp for the Hodel phantom.
    That said, who would be involved in an op such as this? Well, Hodel was a licensed doctor so the corpse playing Short could be purloined from the morgue and dressed up for maximum mystery. And, best of all, one of Hodel’s fellow libertines was the surrealist shutterbug, Man Ray, the perfect choice to direct the principle photography.
    The narrative then follows on three photos: The “before” glam shot full of ripe and fertile potential any girl and her mother would want to display- The “during” mug shot indexing the wages of sin- And the “after” photo of a sad child dumped in a ditch, a pile of discarded life. Such a tragedy! Call my agent!

    Their Boy Ellroy
    I was somewhat unnerved when I read James Ellroy’s autobiography, “My Dark Places” many years ago.
    Like Ellroy, my father was Hollywood little people, my mother tangentially connected to the aero-space industry and a buxom redhead. I’m a decade younger than Ellroy, but I grew up in Pasadena and my cousins lived in El Monte. I knew well the skunk towns east of LA, as Ellroy labeled them, including the school where Ellroy’s mother’s body was allegedly found.
    I clearly recall the drive-in diner where his mother was last seen alive the night she was offed.
    But what really threw me was that in one chapter of his autobio, he winds up in a little dump of a town named Kanab, Utah. My old man had a near fatal heart attack in that town and for Ellroy to pass through there put his story over the coincidence line. I thought something was trying to get through to me.
    I don’t anymore.
    Ellroy is a platformed storyteller and one has to step back to imagine a slightly different version of his life.
    One: His father managed peak value Rita Hayworth. That is not a job one gets by answering an ad in a local fishwrap. (Hayworth’s bio is even more ridiculous: Dance partner with her Mexican father who routinely raped her from the age of twelve. Even so, she marries juiced husbands- His Orsinity and then some client prince of the oil companies. Sure.)
    Two: His mother is a nurse and a drunk and floozy. Possibly. I know nurses can be susceptible to pharma abuse. But that usually kills a libido. Given that the old man was Rita’s confidante, I suspect the Ellroys could have been beards and that Jimmy (Real name Leroy Ellroy) could be a royal bastard and his folks were caretakers.
    Ellroy relates tales of juvenile delinquency to give himself some street cred. He claims to have regularly broken into homes in the Los Feliz district of LA and pinched the knickers of some of his female classmates.
    Likely, he was recalling the home interiors and personalities of his peers when he hung out with them after school. One does not routinely break into houses in Los Feliz. If caught, he would not have been allowed to attend school with the children of those homeowners.
    He claims he was a caddy for the white shoes of society. Likely he was apprenticing with connected uncles and their lodge brothers.
    Mom’s murder: Her behavior mirrored Short’s. Her body was found with her overcoat covering her upper half, leaving her lower torso and legs exposed. Hmmmm…
    Ellroy blatantly admitted he exploited his mother’s murder to hock his novel. Methinks he retooled an old fiction to jump start his sideways drifting career.
    That career, to my mind, has one major element in it that is hard to substantiate but I will offer it anyway. His novels are used as therapy for cops.
    If you watch the film “Ramparts” which Ellroy wrote, you will see what a troubled cop goes through to hang onto his job and rapidly disintegrating family. From what I’ve read and from a little personal contact with cops, keeping a stable private life together is extremely difficult. Having an author who depicts a fictional universe that resonates with the average flatfoot without condescension- and lacquered over with seemingly ironic racism- would be of real value to (Your Town’s) Finest.
    That and Ellroy’s conventional reading of “true” crime “history” would identify him as useful to the agenda. Not a job one gets by answering an ad in the local birdcage rug.


    1. Good input! I was hoping for this.

      On the professional photo, I accept that it was real one, but only thought it odd that the subject was a high school dropout living a wasted existence and on the opposite coast at the time taken. It simply did not jive with the narrative. She is in her twenties, and ergo in California, living the low life.

      Bringing in a cadaver? Never occurred to me. But it makes sense, the mutilation of the face essential to hide the real identity. I thought the same thing about John Denver, where sheriff and coroner were one and the same. I suspected the plan was in place and depended on arrival of a body washed up somewhere.

      I was hoping you could add some information on Mare Island Naval Shipyard, as I only guessed it became prime real estate. Elizabeth’s father turning up there twelve years later is an unanswered clue to something, as I saw it, and a vole, if not a rabbit hole. Was it a spook palace?


      1. Best guess is that Elizabeth was attached to the family by intel but spent most of her time in Florida where the asthma excuse could explain her absence. The father turns up at Mare Island, probably as one of the architects in house (Masonic wink) and goes about his business fighting the war. His wife and kids may have been loaners as well, or divorce was the agency but intel needed inconclusive evidence to allow a split. Divorce wasn’t that easy back then. Maybe the wife was offered potential suicide in order to remarry quickly. His fake daughter also appears on the west coast and in ’47 has her bio and photo inserted into the narrative. (Some of the photos of her are among the worst fakes I’ve ever seen) Mare Island was a major port but with the conquering of the Far East complete, and most of the Navy tech obsolete, the developers moved in with the government’s blessing. That all seems above board, as much as real estate grabs can be above board. I remember vacationing out there as a kid and it was paradisiacal at times. The mothball fleet docked in the Carquinez Straights was a favorite site of mine.


        1. Carquinez Straights looks idyllic … the kind of place where one could spend a childhood, like my own Beartooth Mountains. Available photos do not show a mothballed fleet, by now moved or dispersed or disassembled. Elizabeth was a beauty, and I was reluctant to look into her supposed sisters. Another comedian I like, Jim Jeffries, talks about how the bulk of humanity are fours and fives, and how the bulk of mating goes on within those groups, people seldom stepping out. Elizabeth was a nine or ten, a stunning beauty. I suspect her “sisters” are/were fives and sixes. I did get a sense of the Hapsburg chin after you mentioned it, it might be there. But out of this I get recruitment and selection for a psyop due to her physical appeal, a professional backstory, and none of it traceable because she was not there. Ergo, an unsolved crime. And, a cadaver.

          I miss your writing, but I know you have your own pursuits. I am Covided out, and am going back into the gutters to dredge out the good stuff. John Wayne Gacy caught my eye because of the name and the fact that he is said to have murdered 33 boys. Maybe so. The curiosity for me, having to do with all serial killers, is fictitious victims. They have to be made up out of backroom efforts, fake obits and backgrounds planted and made real by use of newspapers. That’s a big task. Never-ending intrigue.


          1. The mothballs were moved out in waves a while ago. Sitting there in the water, they were literally dissolving in rust and lead paint. Alka-Seltzer tablets of pollution. Speaking of cadavers, Ed Gein looks to me like a mid-west reboot of the Dahlia op, with extra preversions added to the morgue cadavers.
            There’s a book by Colin Wilson, title escapes me, about how crimes change with the times. Given that these sex/murder things are fake, it would interesting if I revisited that book with what I know now. If I recall, the sexual mores of the times had a direct impact on the type of crimes committed, according to Wilson.


              1. That sounds like the right title. The Ripper meme was infused within the American culture of the time of Gein. Daffy Duck and Porky Pig do a spin on the Ripper about the same time in the fifties. Dr. Strangelove, of course, quotes the concept. The Black Dahlia may have taken its cue from that hoax, but it may have been also a big opening to lay the groundwork for later female victim hoaxes, like Kitty Genovese, which took the terror into New York in the 60’s as a twin to the Boston Strangler (indeed, ripper inspired) nonsense. Hodel isn’t sited as a serial killer, but I think the beta stage ended with the operational debut of The Boston Strangler as pop culture icon. A major motion picture followed and, if anyone recalls the Zal Rule, that should clue you in on the fakery. (The star was Tony Curtis, nee Bernard Schwartz, “husband” of Janet Leigh, star victim of the Gein inspired “Psycho”- full circle) Plus, DeSalvo was never charged with any murders. And you can be sure he never spent a second in prison. Hell, he may have never existed.


      2. Dave McGowan wrote a detailed analysis of this too. For me it is one of the many invented stories to implement the Serial Killer idea. Of course useful for derivatives too. Hollywood killing their own. lol.


  5. Is why “traditional” ship bottoms were painted red, as red was the original “non fouling” paint.

    Of course, they eventually integrated toxic chemicals into other colors.


  6. Hi Mark et al! I have been a reader for well over a year now, having been tipped off to POM by MM’s denunciations of same. My curiosity piqued, I dove in. A breath of fresh air and fresh ideas are a tonic for the soul. Since you are seeking relief from the seemingly-endless Rona onslaught, might I request a facial analysis of Aaron Rodgers and Ellen?
    And yes, the Dahlia reeks to high heaven…


      1. Thanks for the welcome, and I feel the same about MM. He can be hilarious, that’s for sure. Stephers is a solid-gold add to the site, btw.

        I have taken a look at Aaron and Ellen D; their faces seems to be somewhat of a match, especially the eyes, smile and maybe the ears. That was my request, since you are looking for a break…maybe F v M facial matches aren’t a thing, but if you do take a glance at them and there’s no match, my bad!


        1. Kind of comical, as I have only in the past suspected that Ellen is “reverse” closeted, that she’s really straight, with a professionally written backstory, or maybe like what our Bokanovsky Brats often appear to be, asexual. So I grabbed a couple of photos just to humor you, and with Ellen’s I saw eyes that are very closely set, and I thought this will never work, as when I blow the heads up to equalize the pupil distance, she will be a balloon. Then I took another look at Rodgers, and his eyes are very close together too. I had other stuff to do so had to drop it, but that is where it stands. This might be fun.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. I forgot this. Sorry … will follow through tomorrow. If they align, it is going to be hard to understand the dynamics. I do think, no matter what, that Ellen’s story about her girlfriend dying in a car crash, and then resolving to be the first woman comic to be called over to sit with Johnny Carson … reads like melodrama. It is a professionally written backstory. The move in those days was to get gays out in the open and accepted. She was a hire.

            But another problem … I am happy for them that they can now lead normal lives. Just like with Intel being behind the civil rights movement … blacks needed that, needed validation. So did gays.


  7. Hi Mark, thank you for following through with this. It is not close, but there are some elements that jibe, like the chin, ear shape, and the deep-set eyes. Maybe a 40% or so? Cheers!


        1. I’ll look into that, thanks. I was under the (perhaps false) impression that Aaron Rodgers is gay. [Just out of curiosity, as they play one another this weekend, I ran Tom Brady against Rodgers. Not even close.]


            1. I forgot that Rodgers has the gaydar on him routinely. He bearded with Danica Patrick for awhile and a woman(?) named Olivia Munn.
              Back in the 70’s an NFL running back named Dave Kopay came out- I believe he had retired by then. He said at least 10% of the NFL was gay. By chance I met his brother when he was my brother’s boss 30 years ago. Huge guy. According to my brother, the Kopay family completely disowned Dave.
              Given Rodgers earning potential via endorsements, if he is in the closet, its strictly a business decision. Same with Gyllenhaal, I imagine.
              You would think that at this late date it wouldn’t matter, but it does. Old people watch the bulk of the movies and TV and we still hold to certain ideas.


  8. I tried to do an overlay for Martha Plimpton/Amy Sedaris. When I saw them I was shocked how much they look alike. The overlay is pretty good. I can’t figure out how to put it in this comment though.

    I also noticed Liam Neeson looked like someone, but of course I can’t remember who it was. Not sure if you’ve looked into Liam.

    Love your batches!


      1. Amy is 9 years older. She’s had work done, Martha, not so much. Like Drew Barrymore, Martha Plimpton refuses to give up her baby fat. Close call.


  9. You should also look into the Victor Licata axe murder case. That story is full of anomalies and numerology markers. It was sensationalized and weaponized by the establishment media to demonize marijuana/cannabis and it set the stage for the criminalization of the medicinal weed until recently.

    “On October 16, 1933 (me: just a few weeks shy of Halloween, coincidentally), 21-year-old Victor Licata used an axe to murder his parents, two brothers, and a sister while they were asleep. All died from blows to the head. The next morning police discovered a confused Licata in a bedroom of the family home. He was wearing a clean pressed shirt and trousers, although beneath the clean clothes his body was smeared in blood (me: try to make sense of that if you can).[3] His family were all buried at the Italian Club of Tampa Cemetery…”

    Despite this, Wiki continues:

    “Licata was never prosecuted for murdering his family (me: rather odd). He was examined by psychiatrists eleven days after his arrest and was diagnosed with “dementia praecox with homicidal tendencies” (me: AKA shizophrenia). This made him “overtly psychotic” with a condition that was “acute and chronic”. It was determined that he was “subject to hallucinations accompanied by homicidal impulses and periods of excitement”. He was committed to the Florida Hospital for the Insane in Chatahoochie, Florida on November 3, 1933. His medical file does not reference his marijuana usage.[5] On October 15, 1945, Licata and four other patients escaped. All were quickly recaptured, except licata. Years later, he visited a cousin in New Orleans and was recaptured by the police with the assistance of the cousin. He was then incarcerated at the Florida State Prison in Raiford, Florida. A few months later, on December 4, 1950, Licata committed suicide by hanging himself. [7]”

    Don’t the Lizzie Borden axe murders hoax come to mind? I bet the scriptwriters simply recycled that story and made a few alterations that suited them best.


  10. “Even though evidence indicated that Licata had long been suffering from psychosis, the Press turned the Licata case into a drug-use cause célèbre.[8] Evidence shows that a year before the murders, Tampa police had filed a petition to have Licata institutionalized for mental illness. But it was withdrawn when the family vowed to increase their oversight of his behavior.[2] Mental illness ran in the Licata family, and prison psychiatrists speculated that he had inherited his insanity as his parents were first cousins. One of the brothers he slew was a diagnosed schizophrenic and his paternal granduncle and two paternal cousins had also been institutionalized for mental illness.

    Nevertheless, the role that marijuana had to play in the murders led it to be cited by proponents of anti-drug laws as evidence of “marijuana-crime-insanity”.[9] The case served to inspire media depictions of normal people driven to criminal insanity by the “evil weed” such as the notorious 1936 exploitation film Tell Your Children (a.k.a. Reefer Madness).[10]

    In 1941, Cornell Woolrich under his pen name William Irish published the dime novel Marihuana: A Drug-Crazed Killer at Large. The story is about a man who goes on a murder spree after being exposed to marijuana for the first time. The book exploits the marijuana-crime-insanity trope popularized by drug prohibitionists who used the Licata case as an example.”


  11. “The foremost proponent of the Licata story was Harry Anslinger, Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics from 1930 until 1962, who used the case to insist that marijuana usage caused insanity and criminality.[11] In his highly influential 1937 article “Marijuana, Assassin of Youth” he wrote about Licata and his crimes.[12][13] Anslinger reused the story during his testimony at the Congress hearings for the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937:[14]

    It was an unprovoked crime some years ago which brought the first realization that the age-old drug had gained a foothold in America. An entire family was murdered by a youthful addict in Florida. When officers arrived at the home they found the youth staggering about in a human, slaughterhouse. With an ax he had killed his father, his mother, two brothers, and a sister. He seemed to be in a daze …

    He had no recollection of having committed the multiple crime. The officers knew him ordinarily as a sane, rather quiet young man; now he was pitifully crazed. They sought the reason. The boy said he had been in the habit of smoking something which youthful friends called “muggles”, a childish name for marijuana …

    As this is written, a bill to give the federal government control over marijuana has been introduced in Congress … It has the backing of … the United States Treasury Department, including the Bureau of Narcotics, through which Uncle Sam fights the dope evil. It is a revenue bill, modeled after other narcotic laws which make use of the taxing power to bring about regulation and control.[15]”


      1. From looking at the information above, the whole Marijuana scare was another massive taxing racket on the American sheeple, just like every other major scare in history (WWI & II, War on Terror, H1N1, Coronavirus, etc.) They needed an excuse to steal more money for themselves, so that’s what they did. Plus, the anti-cannabis scare acted as a form of social control. Bet the Du Ponts got a cut of that cash, too.


      2. Not to mention that the whole Marijuana scare of the 1930s acted as a convenient distraction from more important things happening, such as the expansion of federal power & funding in response to the manufactured “Great Depression” (passage of Social Security, SEC, etc.), which gave the ruling class incentives to loot from the national treasury and other federal agencies of more tax revenue. It was also a distraction from the upcoming Second World War, which was another massive money grab. I have to give them credit where credit’s due, for they have managed to fleece America (and the world) royally then.


    1. Not a mystery why Anslinger would ride the dope angle when the leading culprit would have been assumed to be some form of congenital syphilitic condition, given the inbreeding and generally deplorable conditions people like this lived in. Syphilis was a huge terror in the thirties, equal to the AIDS hysteria later.

      But, Anslinger was instructed by the duPonts to demonize hemp at every turn to allow synthetic and expensive alternatives to enter the economic bloodstream.

      There may have been a Licata character, but I’d suggest VD is the more plausible cause to exacerbate any congenital dementia. And being nuts, he would never have to stand trial and be subjected to public scrutiny. And labeling his family as nuts would dampen a great deal of sympathy from the public for his victims, the natural reaction being something like ‘no great loss to the human gene pool’.

      It’s a well designed op to keep people fearful but in stasis. Meanwhile, the pollutants to the environment and our blood streams via DuPont compromise our health and allow them to sell us their cures.


      1. But, Anslinger was instructed by the duPonts to demonize hemp at every turn to allow synthetic and expensive alternatives to enter the economic bloodstream.

        Of course, as the DuPonts created these expensive synthetic products to be sold to the general public, and the hemp industry was getting in the way of that, so it had to be destroyed. But ultimately, it’s always about using fear to control people, as well as to financially exploit their induced fears.


      2. There may have been a Licata character, but I’d suggest VD is the more plausible cause to exacerbate any congenital dementia. And being nuts, he would never have to stand trial and be subjected to public scrutiny. And labeling his family as nuts would dampen a great deal of sympathy from the public for his victims, the natural reaction being something like ‘no great loss to the human gene pool’.”

        For the first sentence, I’d opt for completely fictional. I haven’t seen any provided evidence that looks anyway convincing to me. More likely, he was portrayed by different crisis-actors who bore remote similarities, but not much else that was needed to fool the 1930s public. But there never was a Licata who was real, nor was his family real. It’s all conjured-up from thin air (like money). At least that’s my opinion on the whole thing.

        As for the latter sentences, I couldn’t agree more. To desensitize public opinion towards bloodshed and gore, they sometimes like to portray it very comically, as well as constantly inundating the masses with crude fearporn propaganda. That way, no one will really pick-up on anything unusual and, in this case, to manufacture support for harsher restrictions and penalties on our way of life.

        As for Licata’s alleged insanity barring him from being tried in the court of law, it reminds me of Lee Harvey (or Hervey, take your pick) Oswald, whose life was “ended” when someone pulled the trigger, thereby ruling him out as a potential witness for a case about a crime that never happened. They clearly incorporated that part of the Licata hoax for the JFK script.


      3. And Tyrone, when it comes to profiting off a fake crisis, keep in mind that the 1937 Marijuana Act was a tax bill. Since the “government” in this country was created and is owned by powerful merchant families like the DuPonts, that guarantees they will always have a share of the money pit – money which they also create through “private” central banks like the Federal Reserve – achieved by taxation and other means of payment. When a cannabis user paid a tax on marijuana, a certain percentage of “their” money goes to the corporate state imposing the fee. So not only did they weaken cannabis as an industry, they also made money directly from it’s destruction by taxing its products. Wickedly brilliant, if you ask me.


        1. Not to mention, this all happened under the auspices of the U.S. Treasury Department, which specializes in not only making and selling bonds, but also distributing the FED’s fiat money and collecting that same money back via “gov’t” tax collectors like the IRS yearly. The Bureau of Narcotics was formed by the U.S. Treasury in the early 20th century to reportedly tackle with the illegal distribution of drugs. So this indicates that this was one gigantic financial, as well as political, racket from the very beginning. Otherwise, what does the treasury have to do with public health? Why didn’t they create their own separate federal department – similar to the Dept. of Justice, for example – under congress or the executive branch to tackle the problem, if there was no ulterior motive largely inspired by want of monetary gain and political power?


      4. It’s also not a coincidence that the DuPonts played a role in the French Revolution. So not only do they own the production and sales of a myriad of products, most notably chemicals, they also play key roles in big hoaxes. Not surprising, as it’s par for the course.

        “Du Pont initially supported the French Revolution and served as president of the National Constituent Assembly.

        He and his son Eleuthère were among those who physically defended Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette from a mob besieging the Tuileries Palace in Paris during the insurrection of 10 August 1792. Condemned to the guillotine during the Reign of Terror, du Pont was awaiting execution when Robespierre fell on 9 thermidor an IV (27 July 1794), and he was spared.”


        1. After the 1789 Revolution, du Pont moved to the United States, where his family first established the DuPont corporation in 1802, before it went defunct in 2017 and merged with Dow Chemical (reminds me of the Monsanto-Bayer merger in 2018). He also was a good friend of spook Thomas Jefferson, who also was American ambassador to France. Birds of a feather flock together.

          “In the United States, du Pont developed strong ties with industry and government, in particular with Thomas Jefferson, with whom he had been acquainted since at least 1787 and who had referred to him as “one of the very great men of the age” and “the ablest man in France.”[4]

          Du Pont engaged in informal diplomacy between the United States and France during the reign of Napoleon. He was the originator of an idea that eventually became the Louisiana Purchase, as a way to avoid French troops landing in New Orleans, and possibly sparking armed conflict with U.S. forces.[citation needed] Eventually, he would settle in the U.S. permanently; he died there in 1817.

          His son Éleuthère, who had studied chemistry in France with Antoine Lavoisier, founded a gunpowder manufacturing plant, based on his experience in France as a chemist. It would become one of the largest and most successful American corporations, known today as DuPont.”


          1. This goes to show you that even then, they were robbing America blind behind its back. I’m sure Du Pont’s sweetheart deals (Louisiana Purchase, etc.) had cost the Federal Treasury a pretty penny, which the American tax sheeple had to pay in return as compensation for his scheme. I’m sure they’re enjoying all their stolen riches now.

            Speaking of which, I think the Louisiana Territory is something to look at in the future. Perhaps we may de-spin the party line and discover something interesting. Au revior, for now.



      5. And speaking of chemicals, Mathis recently addressed the use of flame retardants in his essay Our Buildings Are All Wrong, among other problems of modern life.

        There’s also a fact sheet on this pertinent subject. It’s been shown that conventional flame retardants contain highly toxic chemicals that are detrimental to human health and development. Not to mention that people often douse their fabrics with cleaning detergents that are just as toxic when washing them. And we wonder why so many are ill?


        1. The DuPonts were also involved in the creation of synthetic polyester, which brings a wide host of problems to the world, including infertility. It is one of the most clever and invasive forms of population control ever invented.

          “In 1926, United States-based E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co. began research on large molecules and synthetic fibers. This early research, headed by W.H. Carothers, centered on what became nylon, which was one of the first synthetic fibers.[32] Carothers was working for duPont at the time. Carothers’ research was incomplete and had not advanced to investigating the polyester formed from mixing ethylene glycol and terephthalic acid. In 1928 polyester was patented in Britain by the International General Electric company.[33] Carothers’ project was revived by British scientists Whinfield and Dickson, who patented polyethylene terephthalate (PET) or PETE in 1941. Polyethylene terephthalate forms the basis for synthetic fibers like Dacron, Terylene and polyester. In 1946, duPont bought all legal rights from Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI).[34]”

          “Twenty-one healthy volunteers were divided into three equal groups. The first group was dressed in underpants made of 100% polyester, the second wore underpants of 100% cotton, and the third wore a 50/50% polyester/cotton mixture. With an electrostatic kilovoltmeter, the electrostatic potentials were measured 1 h after wearing the pants once during the day and a second time at night. The test was repeated 4 times, each on a separate day. No electrostatic potentials were detected on the cotton underpants. The polyester pants showed the highest potentials (mean 338.9 +/- 25 SD V/cm2), while the mixed polyester/cotton pants produced less than half that level (mean 148.3 +/- 16 SD V/cm2). The readings during the day were higher than those at night, probably due to the higher temperature during the day. This study could explain the cause of diminished spermatogenesis in dogs dressed in polyester pants. A new theory is put forward holding that the polyester underpants create an “electrostatic field” across the scrotal sac that disturbs the testicular and/or epididymal function.”

          “By the end of the 24 months there was a significant decrease in sperm count and motile sperms, with an increase in abnormal forms (P < 0.001); the testicular biopsy showed degenerative changes. After garment removal the semen character improved gradually to normal in 10 dogs; two remained oligozoospermic. There were insignificant changes (P > 0.05) in hormones during the study. In contrast, the cotton and control groups showed insignificant changes (P > 0.05) in all the aforementioned parameters during the 36 months of the study. The polyester pants thus had a deleterious effect on spermatogenesis in the dogs which was, however, reversible in the majority of cases. The cause of this effect is unknown, but it may be assumed that the electrostatic potentials generated by the polyester fabric play a role in it.”

          Effects on pregnant women. Please excuse the use of lewd phrases in the following quoted text from the 2007 study:

          “The bitches wearing cotton, wool and polyester-cotton mix as well as five of the seven wearing pure polyester garments had normal serum estradiol and progesterone during pregnancy and produced normal offspring. The remaining two animals of the group wearing pure polyester showed low serum progesterone levels in the first month of pregnancy and had spontaneous abortions. Mating was attempted in these two bitches during the subsequent estrous cycle without making them wear polyester garments. Serum levels of reproductive hormones were normal and they produced normal offspring. EP was detected on the skin of only the polyester-dressed groups, and was higher in the pure than in the mixed polyester groups.”

          This is not by accident, either. As we all know, people like the DuPonts are ardent eugenicists who favor the culling of unwanted segments of the human population, or what Henry Kissinger calls “useless eaters*, and they have been at this for a century. For example, in the 1930s and 40s, E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. clandestinely gave huge financial and technical support to Nazi Germany in order to advance their eugenics programs and their war economy. They helped develope the chemical Zykon B, a pesticide that was allegedly later used in the gas chambers of Nazi death camps.

          “Hebrew University doctoral candidate Nadan Feldman has identified what he believes is a web of ideological connections between American chemical giant DuPont and Nazi Germany.

          Spending several years digging through financial and regulatory reports and back and forth correspondence between DuPont and the Nazis in US and German archives, Feldman told Haaretz that “the main motive” in cooperation between the Delaware-based firm and German companies like IG Farben, makers of the infamous Zyklon B chemical used at Nazi extermination camps, was ideology …. to further the cause of the Nazis.

          DuPont & Co. also helped develop military technology for the Nazis via I.G. Farben, without which Hitler could’ve never became a formidable player in European geopolitics.

          “According to Feldman, DuPont established a technology-sharing agreement with IG Farben that allowed the exchange of “critical knowledge for war production.” In turn, this allowed the Nazis “to start the war,” Feldman maintains, with the development of new technologies such as synthetic rubber.

          This partnership between DuPont and the Nazis, and presumably IG Farben, lasted until 1943, which was well into World War II after Nazi Germany had already made considerable headway in taking over much of Europe. It also lasted beyond the point when the Nazis attacked the USSR, and even after the Nazis declared war on the U.S. itself.”


      6. “Meanwhile, the pollutants to the environment and our blood streams via DuPont compromise our health and allow them to sell us their cures.”

        As well as acting as convenient forms of population control. You can be sure that with the advent of such pollutants infecting our existence that human population numbers have decreased. Same with weapons and vaccines.


  12. Another serial murder story that merits some attention is the “death” of the Princesse de Lamballe, nee Marie-Thérèse-Louise de Savoie-Carignan (of the royal House of Savoy, a Black Nobility bloodline in Italy. They also helped install fascist spook Benito Mussolini, btw). According to historical legend, she was killed by the Parisian mob in the September Massacres of 1792, which happened weeks before the abolition of the Bourbon monarchy by the French National Assembly (21 September).

    There are ample accounts about how she died, many of which give contradictory and embellished details. Some say she was raped and tortured, others say she was beaten and stabbed to death – before or after she was beheaded and had her head stuck on a pike for display. Some claim that not only her head, but her entire body and entrails were dismembered and either placed on pikes, pitchforks and bayonet stubs or were cannibalized by the sanguinary mob. They then brought those remains to the Temple prison (built by the Knights Templar of all people in the 13th century as a fortress) for Marie-Antoinette to see, although she never saw it.

    “The princesse de Lamballe was most fearfully tortured for four hours. My pen jibs at giving details; they tore off her breasts with their teeth and then did all possible for two whole hours to force her back to consciousness to make her death the more agonising.” – Count Axel von Fersen to the Duke of Södermanland, Regent of Sweden, 19 September, 1792

    “I saw a woman appear who was as pale as her linen, held up by a counter clerk. They made her climb up onto a heap of corpses. They told her over and over to cry, Long live the Nation! She refused. Then a killer seized her, tore off her dress, and opened her stomach. She fell and was finished off by the others. Never was a similar horror offered to my imagination. I wanted to flee. My legs weakened. I fainted… When I came to myself, I saw the bleeding head. I was told that they had had it washed at a wig maker’s, curled, made up, put on the end of a lance to present it to the Temple. This ill-fated woman was Madame de Lamballe.” – Rétif de la Bretonne, Vingt Nuits à Paris (1794)

    Afterwards, she was allegedly buried in an unmarked grave. (It is also important to note that Louis & Antoinette were allegedly buried in unmarked graves after their “executions” a year later.) Lamballe’s remains has never been recovered. For a person of such notoriety, I find it to be very odd. Reminds me of the suspicious lack of ceremony surrounding Mozart’s feigned death.

    More tellingly, like Mozart and so many others, Lamballe was also a Freemason. She was one of the initiated ‘grand dames’ that oversaw Oriental Freemasonry in pre-1789 France. As we all know, Masonry played a huge role in the French Revolution, and Lamballe was a key first-hand witness and accessory to what was going on at the time. So that indicates to me that her downfall was not as it appeared, as ‘The Brotherhood’ running secret society networks like “Free & Accepted Masonry” never ‘eat their own’; they protect their own. (She also played some role in the Diamond Necklace scandal, involving her best friend Queen Marie-Antoinette, again.)

    “Outside of her formal duties, however, she was often absent from court, attending to the bad health of both herself and her father-in-law. She engaged in her close friendship with her own favorite lady-in-waiting Countess Étiennette d’Amblimont de Lâge de Volude, as well as her charity and her interest in the Freemasons. De Lamballe as well as her sister-in-law became inducted in the Freemasonic women’s Adoption Lodge of St. Jean de la Candeur in 1777, and was made Grand Mistress of the Scottish Lodge, the head of all the Lodges of Adoption, in January 1781: though Marie Antoinette did not become a formal member, she was interested in Freemasonry and often asked Lamballe of the Adoption Lodge.[2] During the famous Affair of the Diamond Necklace, Lamballe was seen in an unsuccessful attempt to visit the imprisoned Jeanne de la Motte at La Salpetriere; the purpose of this visit is unknown, but it created widespread rumors at the time.”,_Princesse_de_Lamballe#Lady-in-waiting


    1. Apparently, there were many rumors that Lamballe and Antoinette were lovers (sound familiar to JFK & Lem?) In a Duplessis painting, Lamballe is shown with her right nipple half exposed. Perhaps she was playing with the busybodies by taunting them with subtle references to such sordid court gossip, which later seeped into the Parisian gutter press?


      1. While refreshing my look into the du Pont bloodline, I stumbled upon a very interesting find. It’s been said that the founder of the family fortune, Éleuthère Irénée du Pont, married a lady by the name of Sophie Madeleine Dalmas in 1791. Sophie bore a resemblance to the above Princesse de Lamballe, who allegedly died a year after Dalmas’ marriage at the La Force prison during the September Massacres. It’s said that Éleuthère and his father were also incarcerated at La Force shortly after the Reign of Terror ended, which is a huge clue.

        Sophie du Pont:

        Marie Therese de Lamballe:

        And as I’ve shown before, the du Ponts enjoyed a close relationship with French royalty before the French Revolution in 1789. Éleuthère’s father was made a noble by Louis XVI in 1784 and enjoyed a prosperous career as a chemist in France. He and his father were also witnesses to the events of August 10, 1792, as they directly participated in evacuating the French royal family from the Tuileries as it was being ransacked by the mob. Of course, that was faked, too. In my humble opinion, these facts further lend credibility to my hypothesis.


        1. Éleuthère’s death is also suspicious. Apparently, Wikipedia claims that the cause of his death wasn’t established, which prompts me to ask if his passing was another hoax. I find it convenient that it happened a few year before the manufactured Crash of 1837. What’s even more intriguing is he “died” on Halloween, which is on October 31. So the whole thing was a spook fest.

          “Du Pont died on 31 October 1834 in Philadelphia.[8] The cause of death was unspecified, due to “conflicting reports of either cholera or a heart attack.”[7] He was buried in the Du Pont de Nemours Cemetery on the family property in Wilmington.”

          I bet he made a killing off of his hoax. Certainly, his life insurance policy paid him well.


        2. Actually, Éleuthère’s father, Pierre Samuel du Pont de Nemours, wasn’t a chemist. I got him confused for another person who was actually a famous chemist named Antoine Lavoisier, who Pierre was a good friend of.

          Antoine himself has a very interesting backstory. Like the du Ponts later on, he enjoyed a deep interest in chemistry and made many contributions to the field, such as “changing the science from a qualitative to a quantitative one”, which includes his law of conversation of mass, a theory which states that the mass of an object always remains the same regardless of changes in the object’s shape or size.

          His financial history is also worth studying. Apparently, he was reportedly convicted of tax fraud, among other crimes, and guillotined during the Reign of Terror. Much of his fortune came from the Ferme Générale, which is said to have been “one of the most hated components of the Ancien Régime” due to its regressive and violent workings as a tax-collecting agency for the French Crown. Much of the funding for his scientific research came from the agency.

          Like Pierre du Pont, Lavoisier also received significant royal patronage, financially and otherwise, throughout his career. The massive support he received helped to propel his scientific works gaining undue attention and credence amongst those in the scientific community in 18th-century France.

          And like Pierre, Antoine was born into nobility and wealth, albeit his was more prominent than du Pont’s family. His mother, Emilie Punctis, “belonged to a rich and influential family” that were members of Parisian high society as aristocrats. His father was promiment lawyer at the Paris Parliament.

          His story exemplifies the sentiment that always rings true: it’s often not what you know that determines success, but who you know.


        3. Here’s another picture of Dalmas, this time with one of her children and in the late 1790s or the early 1800s:

          Here’s a painting of Lamballe, circa 1780s:

          I must say, the resemblance is pretty strong for both women. They both share an overall delicate countenance, although in the first painting they emphasize her double chin to contrast the second picture where she doesn’t appear to have one. As these are portraits and not photographs, we should not expect them to make perfect copies of their likeness. In fact, it’s inevitable that we’ll see embellishments in the portraiture of famous sitters (as it happens all the time), so discernment is very much merited here.


          1. In fact, I don’t think Dalmas ever had a cleft chin in reality. I think they simply added one in her paintings to mess with people. After all, artists do embellish their sitters likeness when painting them, as I said before. For instance, Vigée Le Brun was famous for polishing the imperfections of her clientele in artistic renditions of them, especially when they sat for official portraits (e.g. Marie-Antoinette).


          2. They claim that Dalmas was born in 1775, so she would’ve been in her mid-20s when the first painting was painted. Yet, she looks much older in that painting. Lamballe was allegedly born in 1749, so she would’ve been in her late 40s when that painting was first made, which matches with the appearance of Dalmas as she appears in the first Picture. Clearly, they are fudging with the birth dates to stir our brains.


    2. In contrast to the morbid descriptions of Fersen and Bretonne mentioned above, the account of one revolutionary clerk, who himself witnessed the purported remains of Lamballe, made shortly after her “death”, paints a less gruesome picture.

      His descriptions indicate that other than her head being missing, her corpse was in relatively intact condition, with many of her valuables still on her person. This first-hand report contradicts given testimonies that mention her clothes and body parts being ripped to shreds by the mob or her body being mutilated by stab wounds and bite-marks by her assassins.

      Considering the fact that Lamballe’s demise happened in plain sight, in front of hundreds of bystanders, on the streets of Paris, one would expect that the testimonies of those on or near the spot would be fairly consistent and less gruelling if the version presented in the Quinze-Vingts report was accurate.

      “In the year 1792, …. on the 3rd of September, there came before the Permanent Committee of the Section of the Quinze-Vingts …. bearers of the body of the ci-devant Princess Lamballe, who had just been killed in the Hôtel de la Force and whose head had been carried by some other persons through the open streets at the end of a pike.”

      The report continues with the following details of what was found on the victim’s person, which is lengthy. This reaffirms the assumption that the corpse was in surprisingly decent condition despite assumptions to the contrary.

      “They informed us that they had found the following articles in her garments : — A small book with gilt-edged pages, bound in red morocco and entitled The Imitation of Jesus Christ, a pocket-book of red morocco, a case containing eighteen national assignats of five livres each, a gold ring set with a moveable blue stone, beneath which was some fair hair tied in a true-lover’s knot, with these words above it : It was blanched by sorrow ; a piece of the root called racine d’ Angleterre, a little ivory penholder with a gold pen and two little circles of gold, a little knife with two blades and a tortoiseshell-and-silver handle ; a corkscrew of English steel, a little pair of pincers in English steel for pulling out hairs, a small sheet of ordinary cardboard with a picture bearing some indecipherable words, a list of linen and other garments on a piece of paper, two little glass bottles with gold tops, one containing ink and the other some wafers of various colours, and a sort of picture with a design on both sides of it, representing on one side a flaming heart wreathed with thorns and pierced with a dagger, with this legend below : Cor Jesu, salva nos, perimus, and on the other a flaming heart pierced with a dagger, embroidered all round with blue silk ….”

      It then mentions that her remains were buried by the said authorities in the Foundlings’ Cemetery in Paris, shortly after they were retrieved. It doesn’t mention, however, the exact details of her burial, such was what part of the cemetery she was buried in or whether her grave was marked or not, although it does note that a report was drafted which does or did mention the details of the body’s internment at the cemetery.

      “And on the same day, at seven o’clock in the evening, Citizen Jacques Pointel, residing in the section of the Haymarket, No. 69, Rue des Petits-Champs, appeared before the Committee of the Quinze-Vingts section, asking us to use our authority in the matter of burying the ci-devant Princesse de Lamballe’s head, which he had just succeeded in securing. Since we could but applaud the patriotism and humanity of the said citizen, we, the undersigned commissioners, instantly proceeded to the Foundlings’ Cemetery, and there had the head buried, and drew up the present report of the said burial, in order to promote the truth and make sure of the facts at the time.”

      Source material: Extract from the Original Minutes of the Quinze-Vingts Section (pgs. 55-57), as shown by G. Lenotre in The Last Days of Marie Antoinette (1907):


      1. For those who may be confused with the terminology of the above-mentioned docket, ci-devant is French for “former” or “then known as”. During the revolution, the term was used derogatively to describe former members of the “Ancien Regime” of pre-revolutionary France and anyone, in general, who wasn’t an ardent French revolutionary.


  13. Or, there may be an esoteric meaning imbued to this piece. Perhaps a reference to the half moon? The moon itself represents the feminine energy in the occult teachings, in contrast to the masculine sun energy (that’s where we get the ‘Sun King’ (Le Roi Soleil, alias for Louis XIV) from, I suppose. You see the sun symbology referenced everywhere in Versailles). Add the fact that the above sitter was an ardent Freemason – therefore, having access to the mysteries – and was female, it starts to make sense.


    1. I believe the half moon could be a reference to duality – the Masonic black-&-white idea, the concept of light and dark (figuratively and, in this case, literally). It all will make sense when you piece the puzzles together.


  14. Before the Princesse de Lamballe met her untimely “death”, she made numerous travels in and outside France. She was always on the move, even before the 1789 Revolution. For instance, while Marie-Antoinette and her family attempted to escape Paris in June 1791, Lamballe successfully escaped Paris at the same time, having first went to Brussels, then to England where she rallied support for the French monarchy, before reportedly returning to France in late 1791. Knowing that her death was likely faked, I suggest that she never went back to her shared house arrest in the Tuileries – at least not when the revolution was still active. She probably continued her stay in England or Brussels under an assumed alias (or aliases) for some time. Even her close friends were imploring her to not come back, so she had no reason to return at that point.


    1. I like those who keep an old thread alive.

      Thanks for nice input 🙂

      Oftentimes one will see the crescent moon facing upward underneath a Christian cross.

      I know not what to make of any of it. Crescent moon is big with the Turks.


      1. Yes, indeed. That’s also where the croissant (which is a version of the Austrian crescent pastries) got its inspiration from. Marie-Antoinette came from Austria, and it’s been said that she was fond of her home country’s version of the French croissant.


        1. My apologies, but butting in: My immediate thoughts are that she bounces around like an Intel agent. At a certain point, she’s spent- that is, too many people start to suspect- so her persona is given a muddy demise, which can’t be properly verified because of the shit-storm of conflicting “details”, tho’ the bottom line of all the opposing narratives lead back to the claim she is “DEAD”, so stop looking for her… A spook is cashiered and she is sent to some other land to portray another asset in another intel info stream. Who she really was initially was likely a clever bastard whelp of the main bloodlines and was assigned anew… Thoughts?

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Seems like it, although I wouldn’t say she was a “bastard” (that is, illegitimate). Her parents were legitimate European Black Nobility – the most powerful and incredibly wealthy in Europe, if not in the entire world – and she was born a Princess of Savoy, heiress to the royal Savoyard fortune until she married into the French aristocracy – shortly before Marie-Antoinette arrived in France and married the French Bourbons.

            She definitely was an “agent” or an actress of some sort, because it appeard she was playing a role the entire time, just like her friend Marie-Antoinette. But as people started to become suspicious of her – due to her association with the ‘L’Autrichienne’, as MA was popularly known, who was suspected of abetting France’s enemies through cryptic correspondence and secret committees with their representatives and emigres, not to mention including in all manner of depravity with Lamballe and co. – it’s possible that they couldn’t keep her in the public eye any longer, so they simply killed off the character in the pivotal moment of the French Revolution for dramatic effect. During her mock trial, she was accused of having knowledge of and/or being an accessory to counter-revolutionary plots emanating from the French court at the Tuileries. Perhaps that’s a clue as to who she really was.

            When her husband, the Prince de Lamballe, died, she inherited a massive fortune from him and became incredibly close with her in-laws, the Penthièvre family, attending their many functions including “charity” work (which was one of her favorite pastimes. The Masons are famous for their “charities”, too. No coincidence, IMO). Initially, due to her play of generosity, she was very popular with the people, so much so that they dubbed her the “Angel of Penthièvre”. She was the Princess Diana of her time (Diana would also suffer a mysterious “death” in Paris, again, but hers was less brutal, two centuries after Lamballe’s).

            After his death, the Princesse de Lamballe became immediately close to Antoinette, who was then Dauphiness, which then developed into a life-long friendship, although it did lag occasionally when new friends entered into the inner circle of ‘The Austrian Woman’, as Marie-Antoinette’s adversaries called her. As the Queen’s popularity with her subjects started to sink to new lows, so did Lamballe’s, who became known as a “greedy royal favorite” and the ‘L’Autrichienne’s’ lesbian ‘sapho’.

            And as a final topping on the cake, I mentioned before that she was Ben Franklin’s best buddy before his death in 1790 – two years before hers. Both were also Freemasons. So that pegs her as the ultimate royal spook, like everyone else we’ve uncovered before.


          2. “My immediate thoughts are that she bounces around like an Intel agent. …. A spook is cashiered and she is sent to some other land to portray another asset in another intel info stream. Who she really was initially was likely a clever bastard whelp of the main bloodlines and was assigned anew…”

            Speaking of which, it’s documented that during the revolution, Lamaballe played an active clandestine role in diplomatic affairs. Her visit to the U.K. in 1791 was one of them. I suspect that’s where she finally settled, along with her good friend MA as Maria Fitzherbert.

            “After October 1789, …. she once again took up her duties as superintendant in charge of ceremonies, this time at the Tuileries. There are some hints that she was more actively involved than is at first sight apparent in the machinations of the captive court”*. Her name **appears, for instance, in a list of recipients of secret payments from the Ministry for Foreign affairs. At time of the flight to Varennes she embarked from Dieppe with a passport signed by Montmorin in April 1791 and successfully reached England. If the 19th-century Secret memoirs of the Princess Lamballe are to be believed, she was involved in a whole series of manoeuvres to discover the disposition of the Pitt government. ….

            Shortly afterwards the Princess was denounced by Committee of Surveillance of the Legislative Assembly and also pinpointed in the Revolutionary press for her involvement in … the secret machinations of the Court. No doubt at the very least she had some role as intermediary in the manoeuvres of the so-called “Austrian committee” and knew the identities of compromised Revolutionaries such as Sombreuil, Brissac, Valdec de Lassart, Thierry de Ville-d’Avray, through whom the Court had attempted to influence the decisions of the Revolutionary government.”


            “Previously often unwilling to entertain in the queen’s name as her office required, during these years she entertained lavishly and widely in her office at the Tuileries, where she hoped to gather loyal nobles to help the queen’s cause*,[2] and her salon **came to serve as a meeting place for the queen and the members of the National Constituent Assembly, many of whom the queen wished to win over to the cause of the Bourbon Monarchy.[5] It was reportedly in the apartment of Lamballe that the queen had her political meetings with Mirabeau.[2]

            In parallel, she also investigated the loyalty among the court staff through a network of informers.[2] ….

            She departed France from Boulogne to Dover in England, where she stayed for one night before continuing to Ostend in the Austrian Netherlands, where she arrived on 26 June. She continued to Brussels, where she met Axel von Fersen and the count and countess de Provence, and then to Aix-la-Chapelle.[2] She visited Gustav III of Sweden in Spa for a few days in September, and received him in Aix in October.[2] In Paris, the Chronique de Paris reported of her departure and it was widely believed that she had gone to England for a diplomatic mission on behalf of the queen.[2]

            …. During her stay abroad, she was in correspondence with Marie Antoinette, who repeatedly asked her not to return to France.[2] However, in October 1791, …. the queen was requested to set her household in order and dismissed all office holders not in service: she accordingly wrote officially to Lamballe and formally asked her to return to service or resign.[2] This formal letter, though it was in contrast to the private letters Marie Antoinette had written her, reportedly convinced her that it was her duty to return, ….”



            1. It’s interesting that the Princesse employed a “network of informants” – that is, spies – to keep tabs on the people around her on behalf of the French crown. That alone indicates that she herself was an intelligence asset of some sort, most likely working for the same bloodlines who, through underground Masonic networks (which she was a member of) and through agents placed in key positions (like de Brienne, Necker, and d’Orleans), engineered the French Revolutions of 1789, 1830, and 1848.


          3. “…. so her persona is given a muddy demise, which can’t be properly verified because of the shit-storm of conflicting “details”, tho’ the bottom line of all the opposing narratives lead back to the claim she is “DEAD”, so stop looking for her…”

            Reminds me of the alleged death of Count Axel von Fersen. He also allegedly suffered a brutal death at the hands of the mob – this time in Sweden, his native country – despite his high-rank which naturally would afford the best security money could buy at the time. Supposedly it was because so many people in the kingdom was highly suspicious of Fersen and were jealous of him, hence the reported hostility towards him. I suspect, like in Lamballe’s case, his demise was another hoax. Knowing that he was a prominent crypto-Jew, no harm could ever touch him. At least no mitigatable harm could teach him, since he’s protected. It’s no coincidence both were good friends (and rumored lovers) of Marie-Antoinette.



            1. It’s also odd that throughout the entire debacle, the royal regiments in Stockholm did nothing to stop the violence imputed on Fersen by the mob. That alone is an indicator of a fake, IMO. It reminds me of the Olof Palme story, where he and his wife were allegedly wondering in the streets of Stockholm (again) at night without any security detail around to protect them from harm. Or the JFK story, where the president had no U.S. Secret Service nearby to safeguard him and his entourage from danger.


  15. PS- My old man knew a woman who was an FBI mole, inserted into a milieu that had connections to drug cartels. She had to be witness protected inside the FBI because she became too well known within the criminal drug system she was informing on. She was “married” to a European dancer, supposedly a Mormon, who “died” during a practice workout. The long and short was that this handler got her ensconced within the Mormon culture in Salt Lake City, the last place these druggies would look for her, and her partner, once she was established, vacated his role as assigned, and moved on. Believe it or not, but my father was a brilliant actor and I love it-


      1. (Sorry, this was meant to be published underneath the last comment I published below, which mentions ciphers. As I am working from a tablet during my free time (b/c it’s more convenient for me than carrying around a computer), I sometimes face dilemmas that I normally don’t suffer with a PC. I hope this clears up some things.)


  16. Another famous death hoax is that of Queen Anne Boleyn. We’re told that her execution took place near where a jewelry store now stands within the complex of the London Tower – rather than the spot where executions normally take place – which is rather odd. But the most odd thing about her fake death was the suspicious lack of ceremony that surrounds her burial. Allegedly, she was interned in an unmarked grave inside a church on the grounds of the prison fortress, along with her brother George Boleyn, etc., etc. This makes no sense, given her notoriety in English high society. Some may argue that this was part of Henry VIII’s campaign of removing Anne’s existence from history postmortem, in which he almost successfully destroyed any contemporary reference of his disgraced 2nd wife that could get his hands on. But at least her family could’ve intervened to claim her body and bury her on their family plot, if she really did die. Again, all the usual markers of a fake.

    So what really happened to Anne Boleyn if she wasn’t killed? Before her entrance into the English court, Anne spent much of her time in France, where she received her training at the French court. There, she was femme-de-chambre to Queen Claude. I suppose she retired there after she cut any direct ties with King Henry and faked her death. The same also likely happened to Mary Stuart decades later, who too faked her demise.


      1. My guess is these were cousins or half siblings or some other close blood combination. The fact is, inbreeding snuffed out this line of Henry’s. They had to go to Scotland to keep the connection going. I’m certain inbreeding ends dynasties, not wars and whatnot. They have to shift to other branches in the tree to maintain continuity. I think the hidden hands, not the visible monarch, decides who gets a shot at producing an heir. For some reason, Henry’s search for a viable womb was too public. This was a public relations war.


        1. Indeed. The women above could have been cousins (or hidden sisters). Since all European royalty and nobility are related to each other by several generations, that was highly possible. I think partly why Henry married these six women was because of their similarities to each other (at least physically). He was attracted to a certain type of female – one that was delicate in physical nature, but was also the life of the party and was highly intelligent, as well as loyal. All these women shared these attributes to some degree.

          As for inbreeding in royal lines, I couldn’t agree more. The Spanish Habsburgs are one perfect example of inbred copulations gone wrong (as if the practice of mating with relatives isn’t weird enough). Learning from this, they since normally married blood relations that were not too closely tied – usually 10th cousins or something like that.


        2. “I think the hidden hands, not the visible monarch, decides who gets a shot at producing an heir. “

          As well as who gets the shot at playing monarch. In the fake War of the Roses, the Stanleys paved the way for the rise of the Tudors. Basically the phony war was a cover for a series of disputes among the families. There wasn’t so much actual fighting as there was a lot of discord about how would play dress-up as king, backdoor deals, and people changing characters and places when convenient. Just like the fake Napoleonic wars, financed on all sides by the Rothschilds, who, like the Stanleys in medieval England, were the kingpins of Bonaparte and all the heads of Europe. Just like the English Revolution, where factions within the court and aristocracy couldn’t agree on pretty much anything, so they stated a fake political revolution to oust one branch of the Bloodlines with another, until calm was reached.


          1. Napoleon himself most likely was yet another invented character, played by an actor or multiple actors, (see e.g. Richard Whately’s “Historic doubts relative to Napoleon Buonaparte”).
            Especially interesting is J.B. Pèrés’s “As if Napoleon never existed or Grand Erratum, source of an infinite number of errata as noted in the history of the 19th century”, in that he goes to great lengths describing how the whole life and works of Napoleon could be seen as if modeled around a Sun God, like Jesus, Mithra, Apollo, etc., implying that, just by cherrypicking any sort of coincidences, even the most outlandish conspiracy theory can be concocted (such as that Napoleon never existed and was an invented symbolic Godlike figure).
            Sort of “don’t fall for nutty conspiracy theories” ante litteram.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. Oh, definitely. I believe somebody already uncovered the Napoleon fake a long time ago. I believe he was portrayed by a Jewish banker from Hamburg named Salomon Heine. Miles Mathis exposed Napoleon as a crypto-Jewish actor in his paper on the Corsican general years ago. All they had to do was change his hair color with dyes (or swap his wig) and change his make-up. Even their signatures match:


              The same could be said about other historical characters who probably never existed either, especially when you go back several hundred or thousand years. For example, very few, if any, primary sources survive that support Cleopatra VII’s existence, as a bulk of contemporary evidence have been allegedly destroyed in the burning of the Library of Alexandria in ancient Egypt (convenient).

              “Egyptian sources on this famous queen were mostly lost when the library of Alexandria was destroyed. Cleopatra’s primary residence was located in the delta area of Egypt where archaeological remains are notoriously poorly preserved. The Egyptian record of the historic Cleopatra is sparse, so the accounts of those who hated and feared her speak that much louder.”


              “Since no contemporary accounts exist of Cleopatra’s life, it is difficult to piece together her biography with much certainty. Much of what is known about her life comes from the work of Greco-Roman scholars, particularly Plutarch.”


              Plutarch was born in 46 AD, 7 1/2 decades after Cleopatra’s “death” in 30 BC (historians believe she “died” on 10 August of that year; aces & eights, Chai, dead-man’s hand). As he wasn’t the last Egyptian queen’s contemporary, his stories about her weren’t first-hand accounts. (He also published Life of Caeser, a literary piece on Cleopatra’s partner.)


              The histories aren’t even sure who was her actual mother, only merely suggesting that Cleopatra V/VI (her namesake) was the likely candidate. Not much is known of what happened to her after 69 BC. At least we know, for example, who Jesus’s mother was, and he is a fictional character. That’s how murky her story is.

              Cleopatra VII was born in early 69 BC to the ruling Ptolemaic pharaoh Ptolemy XII and an unknown mother,[33][34][note 13] presumably Ptolemy XII’s wife Cleopatra VI Tryphaena (also known as Cleopatra V Tryphaena) …. Cleopatra Tryphaena disappears from official records a few months after the birth of Cleopatra in 69 BC.[41][42]”



              1. According to Plutarch, “Cleopatra” also spoke Hebrew, as well as Greek, Egyptian, Latin, etc. While studying the Jewish language isn’t conclusive evidence that someone is a Jew, it is often a clue of a famous person’s Jewishness. For example, Nicholas II, who was a cloaked Jew (his maternal line was Jewish), knew Yiddish, which is a bastardization of Hebrew, and even wrote to Lenin’s father (of all people) in that language.

                “There was sweetness also in the tones of her voice; and her tongue, like an instrument of many strings, she could readily turn to whatever language she pleased, so that in her interviews with Barbarians she very seldom had need of an interpreter, but made her replies to most of them herself and unassisted, whether they were Ethiopians, Troglodytes, Hebrews, Arabians, Syrians, Medes or Parthians.”


                And, of course, we can never forget the compulsory hook nose:

                This last one is especially telling: the other side of this Cleopatra coin sports what looks like a Phoenix, a symbolic reference to the ancient Phoenicians (Jewish Ca’ananites).

                The phoenix is also commonly seen in Egyptian mythology, so it’s not out of place to see it in coins and illustrations sporting Cleo’s profile.



                1. Standards of beauty change over time, but man, that is one unappealing schnoz. Yikes! Kick that one out of bed, and not for eating crackers. I wonder, since they often choose relatives to play famous people in the movies, if Elizabeth Taylor’s bloodlines run back to Egypt?


                  1. I wouldn’t be surprised if Liz Taylor was distantly related to Cleopatra. At least she didn’t inherit the more gross features of her ancestors, and thus was very passable for Hollywood. I’m sure we’ll find out the answer to that question with deeper research. Best wishes.


                  2. “I wonder, since they often choose relatives to play famous people in the movies, if Elizabeth Taylor’s bloodlines run back to Egypt?”

                    I haven’t yet seen any evidence pointing to a direct blood relation between Liz Taylor and the ancient Ptolemaic dynasty that Cleopatra was born into (AKA Egypt’s “Thirty-third” (33) dynasty, btw), but I have found many Peerage and Jewish names in her genealogy. She was a Wilson (think Woodrow Wilson), a Warmbrodt, a Rosemond, a Perigo, a Stylles/Stilles (think Harry Styles), a Swyft (think Taylor Swift), a Howell, a Warner, a Pembleton, a Jessop (think Violet Jessop, a Titanic survivor), a Skidmore, ​and, of course, a Taylor, etc.


                    The Taylor branch hosts several colonels (military intelligence) and many prominent aristocrats. If you click on Lewis Taylor (1780-1874), you’ll find that he’s descended from a line of colonels on his paternal branch, starting with his father Colonel Joseph Taylor, his great-grandfather Colonel James Taylor, “of King & Queen” (hinting royal lineage?), and the list goes on.



                    Further up the male line, you’ll find Dr. Rowland Taylor (1510-1555), Archdeacon of Exeter, who was allegedly burned at the stake for practicing heresy against the Catholic Church by Tudor queen Mary I. (His aunt was also named Elizabeth Taylor). He even has a Wikipedia page dedicated to him, so he’s not a nobody.



                    Rowland’s great-grandfather was Sir William Taylor, II (1429-1493), who was “Master of the Rolls of the Court of Chancery”, according to Geni, possibly under the reign of Plantagenet king Richard III. He was married to Lady Joane Gilbard. His paternal grandmother was a Marshall.

                    His ancestor was Sir John Taylor, I (1327-1377), who was a knight to Edward III. Legend has it that his ancestor was Baron Taillefer, who “accompanied William the Conqueror in his invasion of Great Britain.” That indicates this family has been crypto-Jewish from the beginning, as William the Conqueror was a Jewish bastard.


                    The Taylor branch stops at Sir Hanger Taylifer, AKA Taillefer, who was born in 1256. His daughter-in-law was Marie de Montgomerie. Hanger’s wife is unknown, so there may be more revealing links through his spouse’s line.


                    In Lizzie’s other lines (Lewis), she’s related to Augustine Warner (1610-1674), prominent Virginia politician and planter. He was the ancestor of George Washington and Robert E. Lee, further proving that she’s related to everybody famous. She’s even related to Queen Elizabeth II via Warner.

                    Augustine Warner, Sr. (September 28th 1611 – December 24th, [1] 1674), was an English-born Virginia planter and politician. The progenitor of a prominent colonial family, and great-great grandfather of President George Washington, he was born in Norwich, Norfolk, the son of Thomas Warner and Elizabeth Sotherton. Augustine arrived in Virginia in 1628 at the age of seventeen, one of a group of thirty-four settlers brought in by Adam Thoroughgood. His first land acquisition came seven years later, when he patented 250 acres (1,000,000 m2).

                    Besides a son, Augustine Sr. had two known daughters. One married David Cant, the other, Sarah, to Lawrence Towneley, an ancestor of General Robert E. Lee.”


                    Augustine Warner was the great, great grandfather of George Washington, and an ancestor of Robert E. Lee. Queen Elizabeth II is a direct descendant of Augustine Warner I through the Bowes-Lyon family and the Earl of Strathmore. Warner Hall is referred to as the home of the Queen’s American ancestors.”

                    Geni goes on to state that:

                    “By the 1650’s, Augustine Warner had acquired over one thousand acres through land grants spanning Virginia, it has been rumored that he was granted nearly 33,333 acres total throughout Gloucester County. …. he became politically influential. Captain Warner was a member of the King’s Council of the Royal Governor of Virginia until his death. This included being Justice and Burgess of York and Gloucester Counties between 1652 and 1658. This enabled him to advise the Governor on many important matters. He was named Speaker of the House and known as Speaker Warner at this time. He became Captain of the Virginia Militia and received commission from the Governor “Gentlemen.” He aided the Dutch with the attacks on the Virginia Fleet of Hampton Roads.”


                    Impressive, eh?


                    1. Elizabeth was married at one time to the recently deceased John Warner, a Senator from Virginia. I had the privilege of sitting across a desk from him as he described a business colleague of mine as a “man walking down a hallway with a deck of cards in his back pocket, cards falling out as he walks.” Still trying to figure that one out. The colleague, call him Tom, was a run on talker, but also quite good at his business of finding natural gas underground, which was why he was dealing with Warner. Post-Warner he came upon a very large field in Colorado that easily made him a millionaire, I don’t know how many times over.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    2. Upon looking at John Warner‘s family tree at geneanet, I found that through his ancestor George McDaniel Tinsley (1771-1872) he has Taylors in his family, starting with Margaret Taylor (1705-1782), so he may’ve been a cousin of Elizabeth Taylor by several generations.


                      He’s also a cousin of First Lady Edith Bolling, who was the wife of Woodrow Wilson (we have seen Wilsons in Liz Taylor’s family tree), via Elizabeth W. Tinsley (1803-1860), daughter of Lucy McDaniel (1766-1857) and James S. Tinsley (1761-1853) (Lucy’s 2nd-g-grandfather was Thomas Tinsley (1618-1702), so she was probably related to her husband by blood). It’s quite an exlusive world of interrelated bloodlines.


                      She’s also related to other famous people, including Pocahontas, Thomas Jefferson, and Martha Washington. It’s a big club, and y’all ain’t in it.

                      Edith Bolling Wilson, through many generations, is a direct descendant of the famous American Indian, Pocahontas. Other famous people such as Thomas Jefferson, Robert E. Lee, Martha Washington, and Letitia Tyler can be linked to Mrs. Wilson.”



                    3. John Warner’s early years offer us plenty of clues pertaining to his connections to the usual suspects. He also worked in the “military industrial complex” before he entered politics, so he was military intelligence from the start.

                      John William Warner III[2] was born on February 18, 1927, in Washington, D.C., to Martha Budd and John William Warner, Jr. He grew up in the District, where he attended the elite St. Albans School before graduating from Woodrow Wilson High School in February 1945.

                      Warner enlisted in the United States Navy during World War II in January 1945, shortly before his 18th birthday. He served until the following year, leaving as a petty officer third class. He went to college at Washington and Lee University, where he was a member of Beta Theta Pi, graduating in 1949; he then entered the University of Virginia Law School.”


                      Before his famous marriage to Liz Taylor, he married Kate (Catherine) Mellon, who was the granddaughter of banker Andrew Mellon, U.S. Treasury Secretary (1921-32) and founder of the National Gallery of Art (NGA). Andrew came from the prominent Mellon banking family of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Admittedly, Warner’s first marriage helped realize his financial and political aspirations.

                      “In August 1957, Warner married banking heiress Catherine Conover Mellon, the daughter of art collector Paul Mellon and his first wife, Mary Conover, and the granddaughter of Andrew Mellon. By his marriage, Warner accrued substantial capital for investing and expanding his political contacts.”


                      Andrew Mellon:




                      (As we all know, the mainstream art market is a cover for money-laundering and weaponized propaganda by western intelligence, the CIA being the most prominent example. But that’s for another discussion.)

                      To be continued.


                  3. But back to the important question of Liz Taylor’s possible genetic link to the Pharaohs. It’s well documented that a large percentage of Europeans, including Britons, share descent from the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt, most notably Europe’s royal and noble families. As I said previously, the pharaonic bloodlines never died out; they simply went into the shadows and returned as today’s ruling class. (The Egyptian pharaohs also had reddish hair, which is a relatively common trait amongst Jews and Europeans.)

                    “We find that ancient Egyptians are most closely related …. to Neolithic Anatolian and European populations. …. When comparing this pattern with modern Egyptians, we find that the ancient Egyptians are more closely related to all modern and ancient European populations that we tested, likely due to the additional African component in the modern population.”


                    “A Swiss genetics company has claimed that up to 70 per cent of British men are related to the Egyptian Pharaoh Tutankhamun. …. The results showed that ‘King Tut’ belonged to a genetic profile group, known as haplogroup R1b1a2, to which more than 50 per cent of all men in Western Europe belong, indicating that they share a common ancestor.”


                    “Scientists who managed to obtain full genome sequences of Ancient Egyptians for the first time have concluded the people of the pharaohs were more closely related to modern Europeans and inhabitants of the Near East rather than present-day Egyptians.”


                    And finally, the cherry on the cake: there’s a legend that an Egyptian princess named Scota sailed to the British Isles and established Scotland, which was named after her. If true, it may indicate that some of the pharaonic royals settled in what is now the U.K. and Ireland.


                    Some believe that she was actually Queen Meritaten, the eldest daughter of Queen Nefertiti and Pharaoh Akhenaten. What became of this illustrious royal is unknown to mainstream history, as she seems to have disappeared from the records, along with her partner Smenkhare (who probably became Scota’s husband Gaythelos) – or so it appears. 😉




            2. Here’s the book you were alluding to:


              Napoleon Bonaparte was basically a precursor to Adolf Hitler and his shenanigans as Führer of Nazi Germany. Interesting how the years preceding and succeeding Hitler’s reign were similar to Bonaparte’s: a country that went through a (manufactured) revolution that replaced a monarchy with a republic, years of socio-economic disparity and dysfunction, a “leader” rising up the ranks to become dictator and later emperor (in all but name) of vast lands, defeat & humiliation, and finally a new social order (post-WWII period) established after massive world conflicts. The more things change, the more they stay the same.


  17. “This woman, who may indeed be “Elizabeth Short,” was perhaps taken from Intelligence sources in California and asked to pose as part of a psyop.”

    As I stated previously, California is full of military bases, so it’s definitely possible that she was recruited from military intelligence to partake in this hoax. When they were finished with her, they simply changed her role and she went on to play a new character or just settled down to live a “normal” life outside of public viewing, with the perks of being paid tons of money to clasp her little pie-hole.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s