-Caveat Lector-
from:
Priory of Sion/Digest395
-----
Message: 12
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 22:52:16 +0000
From: Ros Calverley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OLD TOPIC: How many wives?
<snip>
You're not proposing Mary as the originator of the Cathars, are you?
Steven Runciman makes an excellent case in 'The Medieval Manichee' for
Catharism being an Eastern European import, derived from Bogomilism
(Bulgaria). In any case, though the Cult of the Black Virgin in the
South of France is pretty old, it's not _that_ old. The earliest shrines
are 11th century. Any proposal to link this cult to Mary M. or to an
even earlier Goddess cult has to overcome this time difference somehow.
R.
=====
Message: 13
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 15:23:43 -0800 (PST)
From: La Colombe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Fwd: [CTRL] "Osiris's Grave" Detected Near The...
>
> Frank McGovern wrote:
> >
> >
> > But I heard it called the Library of Knowledge, and supposedly is
accessible
> > somewhere under the ground between the two paws of the Sphinx.
>
> > The rumor was that this Library was to be opened Jan. 1 2000 to
the world.
>
Was this Cayce's prophecy (which I believe referred to an earlier date,
thinking about it), or another rumour? There's so much speculation,
prophecy, conspiracy theory and wishful thinking surrounding the
Pyramids and Sphinx that I'm quite confused by now.
>
> > This article on the Tomb of Osiris is quite interesting - seeing
as it is in
> > water.... Hmmmm water in an area that hasn't had a lot of rainfall
in years.
>
True - but I guess even a desert must have a water table somewhere. But
the thing that struck me most about the story was not only the royal
connection, but Zaki Hawass. I mean, this guy's famous! He's _the_ most
prominent Egyptian Egyptologist, with dozens of publications in
scholarly journals to his credit, and he simply wouldn't come out with a
statement like this if he didn't mean it. He's got far too much to
lose.
<snip>
=====
Message: 18
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:17:48 -0800 (PST)
From: Tim Carmain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lords, Sirs and titles
---Andrew Ormston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> From: Andrew Ormston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> (actually, I don't know who asked this question...)
> >So "Prince" Michael is not a prince?
> >Are you sure about this. Has anyone ever asked him > >for evidence?
He claims to be elected as "President > >of the European Council of
Princes".
> >Is this phoney?
It isn't the organization that's phoney - it's anyone and everyone who
has ever been associated with it, including Michel Lafosse, aka
"Prince Michael Stewart of Albany".
(This part is apparently from Mr. Ormston)
> Plenty of people have asked for evidence for his > prince-ship. He
has offered and given his evidence. > When researched, some of this
evidence has shown to > be flawed. Some of the more ancient genealogy
may be > correct, but the recent "tie-ing in" to older > evidence
appears not to be bona fide. His explanation > is that history has
been changed. History has > undoubtedly been changed. But this global
statement > should not give a carte blanche excuse for claimants.
The most common ploy for fraudulent royalty claimants is to cite
established genealogies as proof of their heritage, but to change a
small detail in their favor. This is typically cited as being the
result of some sinister plot or another to deprive them of their
rightful inheritance - a cover-up. In Mr. Lafosse's case, he offers
photocopies of purported Vatican documents showing his descent from
the only son of Prince Charles Edward Stuart by his second wife. The
only problem is that Prince Charles Edward never had a second wife,
having still been legally married to his first wife when he died. At
this point controversy becomes a mere contradiction. It is therefore
only by scrutinizing the evidence offered that one can arrive at a
definite conclusion for or against written history. The Vatican
archives do not contain the original documents that Mr. Lafosse offers
as proof, as he claims. Furthermore, the documents - purportedly the
work of different authors, for different purposes at different times -
appear to have been written by the same hand. The grammatical errors
attributable to a rudimentary grasp of Latin are evident and repeated
in each document. One would assume that a Vatican scribe would have a
stronger grasp of the language. As the originals cannot be produced,
they also cannot be examined for authenticity. In light of these and
other inconsistencies in Mr. Lafosse's story, we are left to draw our
own conclusions.
>
> To go back to the dictionary definition. He has not > yet shown
himself as son of a sovereign or any of the > definitions. I can
discuss this at length if you > wish. I have access to research done
on Prince > Michael by several people. If researchers on this > list
want point-by-point counter evidence, I have it. > BTW, I have met and
spoke to Michael on many > occasions and he is a charming man and
certainly > comitted to his cause. I have no 'axe to grind'
> - but truth.
IMHO, I would be merely sceptical, but not altogether unconvinced, if
such a claimant had nothing to produce in his or her favor. However,
Mr. Lafosse has produced documents which he claims prove his identity.
They unfortunately raise more questions than they answer. Why is the
execution so poor? Where are the originals? Where can this "evidence"
be corroborated? Why is it that his entire claim rests on assertions
of re-written history that haven't been proven elsewhere, or even
raised before for that matter? The simple truth is that Mr. Lafosse
cannot offer anything more substantial than his word; and as his word
conflicts with literally thousands of published sources, it is going
to take something more substantial than a few battered photocopies of
documents executed in bad Latin to convince me that is is, as he
claims, a Stewart.
I've had the priviledge (?) of meeting several claimants of dubious
validity, and I can say without reservation that everyone of them was
charming beyond words. Unfortunately, that doesn't make them
legitimate.
Tim Carmain
=====
Message: 19
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 19:31:23 -0700
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FTSM)
Subject: Re: Fwd: [CTRL] "Osiris's Grave" Detected Near The...
>From: "Frank McGovern" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Yes,
>
>But I heard it called the Library of Knowledge, and supposedly is accessible
>somewhere under the ground between the two paws of the Sphinx.
>
>I have also read that the underground area in Giza is filled with tunnels
>and chambers that go on forever.
>
>The rumor was that this Library was to be opened Jan. 1 2000 to the world.
>
>
>This article on the Tomb of Osiris is quite interesting - seeing as it is in
>water.... Hmmmm water in an area that hasn't had a lot of rainfall in years.
>
>FXM
Actually, some amateur archaeologists and a geologist came up with some
interesting information on the age of the Sphinx just a few years back.
They pointed out that a lot of the striations from the Sphinx are not
horizontal (caused by wind/sand) but are vertical (rain fall). According
to geologists (an international feud broke out between geologists and
Egyptologists) this placed the Sphinx at least around 10,000+ years old.
At around 7000-8000bce, there was still sufficient rainfall occurring in
the region to cause that marked of erosion. For geologists, therefore, the
erosive patterns were indicative of an advanced civilization operating in
the area 2-3000 years before current Egyptologists have placed Egyptian
civilization coalescing.
On the same subject, the group who first posed these questions ALSO did
ultrasound analyses of the area about the Sphinx (looking specifically for
any secret passages and/or chambers). The technique yielded the existence
of a cubic room (I believe 40' x 40' x 40') between the paws of the Sphinx
(supposedly the chamber Cayce predicted). The ultrasound also suggested
the presence of several subterranean passageways running about the Sphinx.
Unfortunately the Egyptian Ministry of Antiquities (I believe that's the
name) shut down their permits to work in the area immediately afterward
(thanks to the pressure placed upon them by several prominent Egyptian
archaeologists.
That's everything I know about the Sphinx. I find it extremely interesting
that someone was allowed to dig in the area AND that such claims are being
made about the possible contents. Perhaps they didn't like the thought of
American amateurs getting credit for such an incredible find. Then
again--since we're on a partial conspiracy mailing list--perhaps certain
initiated individuals already knew what could be found down there and
wanted control of its release? ;)
Regardless... hopes that helps. BTW, I've JUST begun reading The Second
Messiah while at work on breaks (so I've only gotten about 90 pages in).
While, as Queribus stated, their conclusions can be a bit hasty and/or
naive, plus their Masonic origins seem to get the better of them
occasionally, there's a good deal of useful information to augment
HBHG/TML.
--FTSM
P.S.: Cayce was a right, Queribus... the chamber between the paws of the
Sphinx
which he foresaw HAVE already been found. ;)
-----------------------------------------------
Virtud iunxit mors non separabit.
One in Two -- Two as One.
@} --,--'-----
-----
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
