Mark Dice: "The Illuminati is Bull Crap"

[jts]

14:45

Published on Apr 19, 2013

"The Illuminati is Bull Crap." Mark Dice schools the person who posted the craziest comment of the week.

[caroljane]

Jerry, you are doing it again. Trying to force us to watch videos by not giving summaries.

Needing distraction from the terrorist manhunt and the Leafs crisis, I actually clicked on this one. The Bilderberg catering bill and the Skull and Bones were as far as I got.

Please for the sake of courtesy, outline the main points of the audio and video gems that you feel we need to experience in person and real time. Most of us have not got 14 minutes to throw away on something we have heard or read many times before.

[jts]

Here is the summary.

Published on Apr 19, 2013

"The Illuminati is Bull Crap." Mark Dice schools the person who posted the craziest comment of the week.




Subscribe to http://www.YouTube.com/MarkDice
http://www.Facebook.com/MarkDice
http://www.Twitter.com/MarkDice

Check out The Illuminati: Facts & Fiction in paperback on Amazon.com, or e-book on Kindle, iBooks, Nook, or Google Play. http://www.amazon.com/Illuminati-Fact...

Mark Dice is a media analyst, political activist, and author who, in an entertaining and educational way, gets people to question our celebrity obsessed culture, and the role the mainstream media and elite secret societies play in shaping our lives. Check out Mark's books in paperback on Amazon.com or e-book on Kindle, iBooks, Nook, or Google Play.

Mark frequently stirs up controversy from his commentaries, protests, and boycotts, and has repeatedly been featured in major media outlets around the world.

Several of Mark's YouTube videos have gone viral, earning him a mention on ABC's The View, Fox News' O'Reilly Factor, CNN, Drudge Report, TMZ.com, and other mainstream media outlets. Mark has also been featured in (or attacked in) the New York Post's Page Six, Rolling Stone Magazine, USA Today, The New York Daily News, and in major papers in Pakistan and Iran.

Mark Dice appears in several documentary films including Invisible Empire, The 9/11 Chronicles, and has been featured on the History Channel's Decoded, Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura, the Sundance Channel's Love/Lust: Secret Societies and more. He enjoys enlightening zombies, as he calls them, (ignorant people) about the mass media's effect on our culture, pointing out Big Brother's prying eyes, and exposing elite secret societies along with scumbag politicians and their corrupt political agendas. You can support Mark's work by sending a PayPal donation to Donate@MarkDice.com or by using the Donate link on MarkDice.com.

He has called into several top-rated talk shows dozens of times, including the Sean Hannity Show, Glenn Beck, and Michael Savage, and verbally battles with the hosts on various issues since he has never been asked to be a guest on them as of yet. Audio of some of these calls are then posted online.

The term "fighting the New World Order" is used by Mark to describe some of his activities, and refers to his and others' resistance and opposition (The Resistance) to the overall system of political corruption, illegal wars, elite secret societies, mainstream media, Big Brother and privacy issues; as well as various economic and social issues.

Dice and his supporters sometimes refer to being "awake" or "enlightened" and see their knowledge of these topics as part of their own personal Resistance to the corrupt New World Order. This Resistance involves self-improvement, self-sufficiency, personal responsibility and spiritual growth.

Mark Dice is the author of several books on current events, secret societies and conspiracies, including his newest book, Big Brother: The Orwellian Nightmare Come True which is available on Amazon.com, Kindle and Nook. While much of Mark's work confirms the existence and continued operation of the Illuminati today, he is also dedicated to debunking conspiracy theories and hoaxes and separating the facts from the fiction; hence the "Facts & Fiction" subtitle for several of his books. He has a bachelor's degree in communication from California State University.

If you have an iPad or Android tablet, then you can download the Kindle app and then download any of Mark's books from the Kindle store for only $6.99 or $7.99. Some of them are also available in e-book on Google Play. Or you can get paperback copies from Amazon.com too if you prefer a physical book. They are not available in stores. A lot of work and research went into them and they'll save you countless hours of web surfing or YouTube watching in your search for pieces of the puzzle. Your support also funds more of Mark's videos and other operations. Equipment, software, travel, and the props all cost money, so by purchasing his paperback books and e-books, you are helping The Resistance continue and your help is greatly appreciated. Be sure to subscribe to Mark's YouTube channel, and look him up on Facebook, and Twitter. http://www.YouTube.com/MarkDice http://www.Facebook.com/MarkDice http://www.Twitter.com/MarkDice http://www.MarkDice.com

[caroljane]

Blackadder episodes excluded.

[caroljane]

No, it isn't a summary, it is a resume. It doesn't say anything about what the guy says in those 14 minutes. Bar tabs, Skull & Bones --that is my summary of the first two minutes.

[caroljane]

And no, I do not need to "learn" about elite secret societies, as if they are so powerful they would not be allowing the likes of Mark Dice to talk about their elite secrecy.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I didn't see the video, but I'll probably watch it to get a handle on Dice. I suspect I will find him a mixed bag, but I'll wait and see.

I'm not too fond of the title, not even marketing-wise. It presumes to provoke a controversy where there is none in the public mind. So rather than appeal to a mainstream polarity, it attracts folks who think conspiracy nuts all wear tinfoil hats--including him. But this is my opinion from a marketing view, not any comment on the substance. Like I said, I'll wait and see. He just might be great in substance, but sucks at headlines.

As to the Illuminati, I once saw a lecture by G. Edward Griffin where he explained the reason the Illuminati has become such an icon in the conspiracy theory realm. It was the organizational structure of the ancient Illuminati from the 1700's the inner circle to outer circle format, adopted by Cecil Rhodes for a secret structure he set up and funded. This is documented and was leaked over the years, so that seems to me to be the most reasonable explanation why it keeps surfacing in an exaggerated manner in the conspiracy world by the fringe. There is a kernel of truth to it, but kernel is all some of the more emotional conspiracy people need to go off into La-La Land and totally discredit even the kernel.

If anyone is interested and doesn't mind watching an entire lecture, here is one by Griffin called The Quigley Formula where he explains it. (This lecture seems to be from 2008, but I haven't found credible information about it yet.) I find it very interesting and Griffin does a good job as speaker. He's not boring.

Griffin's documentation is impressive. Sometimes I have trouble with some specific conclusions he draws and I'm not too comfortable with his John Birch Society affiliation, but not the general gist of his expose. In my eyes, he's a serious scholar (see The Creature from Jekyll Island : A Second Look at the Federal Reserve for example) and one of the guys fighting the good fight.

Also, for those who don't like to watch that much video and prefer to read, here's a 2007 transcript of a similar lecture by Griffin in text format. It's slightly different, but the lecture is essentially the same.

TRANSCRIPT OF SPEECH G. EDWARD GRIFFIN November 2007

Michael

[syrakusos]

Eric Emerson Schmidt (born April 27, 1955) is an American software engineer, businessman, and the Executive Chairman of Google.[3] In 2012, Forbes ranked Schmidt as the 138th-richest person in the world, with an estimated wealth of $7.5 billion.

From 1997 to 2001, he was Chief Executive Officer of Novell. From 2001 to 2011, he served as the CEO of Google.

Schmidt served on the board of directors of Apple Inc. He also sat on the boards of trustees for both Carnegie Mellon University and Princeton University.

In June 1980, Schmidt married Wendy Susan Boyle (born in Short Hills, New Jersey, in 1957). They lived in Atherton, California, in the 1990s. They have two daughters, Sophie and Allison. The two separated in 2011. That year, Schmidt dated Lisa Shields, a communications executive for the Council on Foreign Relations.

Schmidt is also a member of the Bilderberg Group, and attended the Swiss 2011 Bilderberg conference in St. Moritz, Switzerland.

It is believed that Schmidt's visit to North Korea had major influence on the lifting of the ban on foreign travelers ability to use wireless internet on their mobile devices while in the country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Schmidt

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I just listened to 1'30" of the Dice video.

I stopped.

I can't stand that kind of condescending crap.

So I don't know about his substance. I'm just not interested in finding out, either.

His style--punching one strawman after another with lots of smarm and going for the straw knockout--sucks worse than his headline abilities.

It's pure propaganda mode, and not even good propaganda at that.

Michael

[BaalChatzaf]

I just listened to 1'30" of the Dice video.

I stopped.

I can't stand that kind of condescending crap.

So I don't know about his substance. I'm just not interested in finding out, either.

His style--punching one strawman after another with lots of smarm and going for the straw knockout--sucks worse than his headline abilities.

It's pure propaganda mode, and not even good propaganda at that.

Michael

I found his picking on grammar and punctuation quite trying, so I quit listening.

[Jerry Biggers]

I didn't see the video, but I'll probably watch it to get a handle on Dice. I suspect I will find him a mixed bag, but I'll wait and see.

I'm not too fond of the title, not even marketing-wise. It presumes to provoke a controversy where there is none in the public mind. So rather than appeal to a mainstream polarity, it attracts folks who think conspiracy nuts all wear tinfoil hats--including him. But this my opinion from a marketing view, not any comment on the substance. Like I said, I'll wait and see. He just might be great in substance, but sucks at headlines.

As to the Illuminati, I once saw a lecture by G. Edward Griffin where he explained the reason the Illuminati has become such an icon in the conspiracy theory realm. It was the organizational structure of the ancient Illuminati from the 1700's the inner circle to outer circle format, adopted by Cecil Rhodes for a secret structure he set up and funded. This is documented and was leaked over the years, so seems to me to be the most reasonable explanation why it keeps surfacing in an exaggerated manner in the conspiracy world by the fringe. There is a kernel of truth to it, but kernel is all some of the more emotional conspiracy people need to go off into La-La Land and totally discredit even the kernel.

If anyone is interested and doesn't mind watching an entire lecture, here is one by Griffin called The Quigley Formula where he explains it. (This lecture seems to be from 2008, but I haven't found credible information about it yet.) I find it very interesting and Griffin does a good job as speaker. He's not boring.

Griffin's documentation is impressive. Sometimes I have trouble with some specific conclusions he draws and I'm not too comfortable with his John Birch Society affiliation, but not the general gist of his expose. In my eyes, he's a serious scholar (see The Creature from Jekyll Island : A Second Look at the Federal Reserve for example) and one of the guys fighting the good fight.

Also, for those who don't like to watch that much video and prefer to read, here's a 2007 transcript of a similar lecture by Griffin in text format. It's slightly different, but the lecture is essentially the same.

TRANSCRIPT OF SPEECH G. EDWARD GRIFFIN November 2007

Michael

G. Edward Griffin has been a lecturer and writer for The John Birch Society, at least since the late nineteen-sixties. I attended a lecture by him at Flick-Reidy outside Chicago around that time as a book promotion for his "The Fearful Master." (about the U.N.) .I doubt that he has changed his spots since then. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._Edward_Griffin The Carroll Quigley theory (which refers to a brief reference about Cecil Rhodes and a group he allegedly founded, "The Round Table." As I recall, Quigley in his book Tragedy and Hope, does not even mention the Illuminati, the Council on Foreign Relations, and other "suspects"that Birch Society founder, Robert Welch, darkly implicated as tools of :"THE INSIDERS" (a conveniently vague term that Welch substituted for his more graphic but inflammatory, "comsymps.") Welch had bought into the Illuminati theory but it was stressing the credulity of even the Birchers by his attempts to tie a rather pathetic conspiracy by Illuminati founder Adam Weishaupt, quite efficiently squashed by the Bavarian government police, to modern day (1950s-1960s) communism..

Professor Quigley http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carroll_Quigley was rather startled to find that his book (which was actually a long and plodding history of foreign relations from a British perspective) had become the favorite of the Birchers, who were buying up copies and I think even arranged to have it reprinted after it had gone out of print. The few paragraphs that got the Birchers so excited (is there such a thing as an "ideological orgasm?) was an almost casual aside that there was indeed a semi-secret society (The Round Table) that favorably influenced foreign policies of the Western nations. That's right, he thought their influence was beneficial in that efforts of its members, primarily diplomats and industrialists, may have helped avoid or reduce some conflicts, and furthered Western "liberal" capitalism. His book, an academically-oriented tome, was largely ignored and probably not read by many. That is, until the Birchers saved it from well-deserved obscurity.

I happened to be attending a university at that time, so I rushed to the library to see if the book was the "smoking gun," that the Birchers were proclaiming....

I hate to be anti-climactic, but it is not the "Holy Grail." of conspiracy theory. It is a rather long book, I think 800-some pages. It has virtually nothing that Dan Brown could have used in his extremely successful conspiracy novels. "The Round Table" is very similar in function to the Council of Foreign Relations (which, of course, the Birchers think is also part of the plot. What is their proof? Well, practically all Western diplomats, prominent politicians, and wealthy industrialists are members...umm, sorta like the American Medical Association is composed of doctors).

As for G. Edward Griffin,..I'm tempted to paraphrase Robert Welch's description of Dwight Eisenhower as a communist in his book, The Politician, ..."G. Edward Griffin has been an agent of The John Birch Society, secretly advancing Birchism, consciously serving the Birch conspiracy all of his adult life...."

Griffin may be a fascinating lecturer and author, but his Quigley conspiracy does not hold up under even a cursory examinationt. Outside of Birchite circles, he has little credibility with other conservatives (Birchers are usually shunned - which is too bad because occasionally they have something useful to say) Maybe he should consult Dan Brown.

But hey, you like conspiracy? Tired of waiting for Dan Brown's next potboiler, "Inferno" (Dante, you see, left secret messages, or something, in his The Divine Comedy). Here's an article that covers them all, including of course The Round Table, The Illuminati, the Masons, etc., etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World_Order_(conspiracy_theory)#Round_Table

[Jerry Biggers]

Postscript to above:

This whole discussion of New World Order and liberal conspiracies is just a smokescreen for the REAL CONSPIRACY to take over the world.

Forget the lefties,... Michael Moratta has exposed THE TRUTH in his article here on OL, The Objectivist Conspiracy: Why Capitalists Plan to Destroy the World Economy.

Michael, to protect himself from ARIan Men-in-Black, placed it in the "HUMOR" section.

So don't worry. We run the place.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Jerry,

You misrepresented several ideas that are in the lecture, claiming Griffin is promoting one thing when he said the exact opposite.

I won't go into them, though. I will only say Griffin may have promoted things the way you said way back when, but, if so, he certainly has evolved.

Let the reader look, see what interests him, and come to his own conclusions.

I stand by my endorsement.

But then again, I only know what I have looked at.

Also, I have Tragedy and Hope, and The Anglo-American Establishment, (both by Quigley and both mentioned by Griffin in the video), and I have skimmed through them, but I have not yet read them. I looked at your Wikipedia link on Quigley and it mostly supported what Griffin claimed in the video.\

EDIT: btw - For the reader, you can get free PDF versions of Quigley's 4 books at the Wikipedia link: Carroll Quigley. These links look like they will last, but you never know with the Internet. I just got the two I did not have.

Michael

[Jerry Biggers]

Jerry,

You misrepresented several ideas that are in the lecture, claiming Griffin is promoting one thing when he said the exact opposite.

I won't go into them, though. I will only say Griffin may have promoted things the way you said way back when, but, if so, he certainly has evolved.

Let the reader look, see what interests him, and come to his own conclusions.

I stand by my endorsement.

But then again, I only know what I have looked at.

Also, I have Tragedy and Hope, and The Anglo-American Establishment, (both by Quigley and both mentioned by Griffin in the video), and I have skimmed through them, but I have not yet read them. I looked at your Wikipedia link on Quigley and it mostly supported what Griffin claimed in the video.\

EDIT: btw - For the reader, you can get free PDF versions of Quigley's 4 books at the Wikipedia link: Carroll Quigley. These links look like they will last, but you never know with the Internet. I just got the two I did not have.

Michael,

I was rather startled by your statement that I had misrepresented the views of G. Edward Griffin, "claiming Griffin is supporting one thing, when he said the exact opposite." So I went back and read the transcript of his speech. I regret to say that Griffin, in his speech, is promoting the same unsubstantiated conspiracy theory that he was years ago. Perhaps, in his books, he provides some real documentation, but he does not in his speech.

I don't know if we really want to get into this, as the Bircher's views are not taken seriously outside of the JBS and similar or allied groups (for example, Rev. Pat Robertson, World Net Daily, and some others). They have essentially been "read out" of the Conservative movement by National Review (i.e., Bill Buckley) and allied journals, and organizations (such as CPAC, The Claremont Review of Books, Modern Age, ISI, YAF, The American Spectator, etc.).

But, one might say that National Review did the same to Ayn Rand. She, also, was read-out of the Conservative movement (curious, because she never claimed to be a Conservative). That is true, but for entirely different reasons: the Birchers have become persona non grata largely due to their attributing world events as being controlled by an evil conspiracy (and strongly implying that those who do not acccept the Birch explanation are either dupes, or are part of the conspiracy, themselves), whereas Rand was rejected largely because of her atheism and her ethical system opposing Christianity (Buckley made that quite clear - he opposed her views because they were a threat to Catholicism and Christianity in general, but not because of any conspiracy theory advocated by her). And, of course, Objectivism is also opposed by Birchers for the same reasons.

Getting down to Mr. Griffin's speech, after he finishes with his folksy introduction, he finally gets down to the subject of his talk. the Quigley Theory of a conspiratorial groups, or allied groups, that are attempting, or are already, controlling the world. From that point on, Griffin displays almost a textbook case of conspiracy thinking composed of vague overgeneralizations, unsupported (to put it mildly) assertions, stupendous leaps in logic, and attributions of all sorts of evil intent for which he provides no proof. If he tried this in a court of law, he would be ripped to shreds. But when he is speaking to True Believers, he can get away with it.

The problems with conspiracy theory is that it claims to see an overarching conspiracy that has defied detection by everyone - except the conspiracy theorists themselves, and this massive, apparently invincible, worldwide conspiracy has been doing this for hundreds, or thousands of years. But only a select few has "seen through" their schemes and have opposed them - but generally, the Birchers are not taken seriously by most people (of course, to the conspiracy theorists, this only proves how super-powerful the conspiracy really is - they have infiltrated everywhere)..

As Tibor Machan (and others) have pointed-out, if its such a super-secret all-powerful conspiracy, how come we all "know" about it? If it's that powerful, why have they allowed others to talk about and expose them - why aren't they silenced?

Another problem, and a more serious one, is that conspiracy theory advocates have pulled a neat trick: they make all kinds of wild and extravagent assertions without any irrefutable facts to back them up, - and then demand that skeptics prove them wrong. This is a methodological trap that, generally, most skeptics do not fall in to. There are not many books attempting to disprove conspiracy theory assertions. Why? Because the claims are usually so fantastic and have such little, if any, "evidence" (flimsy circumstantial evidence that, once examined, displays serious flaws) to back them up. For most skeptics, they have better things to do.

(Revised, 4/21/13)

[BaalChatzaf]

As I keep telling folks, the surest evidence in favor of The Conspiracy is the total lack of evidenced for it. Try as you might, you will not come up with any clear unambiguous evidence for the theory. Such evidence as you find could have several interpretations. That shows how clever the Conspirators are. They have covered their tracks perfectly.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Jerry,

You're pushing the Griffin thing to the point of demonizing him. That's OK with me, but Griffin does give correct information from what I have been able to see so far and, frankly, I'm just as surprised at your aggressive attack as you are at me taking him seriously. Like I said, I don't agree with some of his conclusions, but I have not seen anything resembling the way you portray his talk.

In your first criticism, you claimed that he seriously exaggerated Quigley's stuff about Rhodes, yet the very title of one of Quigley's books Griffin relies on is The Anglo-American Establishment: From Rhodes to Cliveden.

When I look at the quotes, yep, it's there as Griffin said. The circles and so forth. It's all there.

Griffin also wrote what is universally considered the best work on the Fed. It's a classic and universally admired. The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve. There are 329 Amazon reader reviews as of this post and almost all of them are 5 stars. The overall rating is 4.7.

That many five-star reviews is not an influx of sock-puppets. Amazon's algorithm does not allow it.

That shows me Griffin is not a tinfoil hat conspiracy theorist. (I do admit his Laetrile campaign sounds over the top, though.)

I'm personally not interested in who got read out of what movement, whether Griffin should properly be discussed on an Objectivist board, etc. etc. etc.

I know very little about The John Birch Society except it went through a really kooky phase where the leader thought Eisenhower was a communist sleeper agent or something. I really can't give many details because I only read this stuff in passing, and I also read in passing that it has cleaned up its act in more recent times, but I have no wish to defend the organization. I agree with the constitutional stuff and individual rights stuff I have read, but I just don't know that much about it and don't really care. I said the connection between Griffin and this organization makes me slightly uncomfortable, and that's it. Not hatred. Not full sanction. Not scalding hot. Not freezing cold. A lukewarm sort of thing. Room temperature. And it's mostly based on the kooky phase years ago.

I have no dog or pony in the conservative movement show of the 60's and I just don't find it relevant to the information I can look at and verify today. I see what I see and I can't not see it.

As to what is discussable on OL, hell, we can discuss Aleister Crowley on OL if someone found something interesting in him (which I don't). I've even looked at Scientology here (and some people went nuts), but now one bestseller book after another is coming out about it and basically saying the same stuff I did. (See the most recent two, Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood, and the Prison of Belief by Lawrence Wright and Beyond Belief: My Secret Life Inside Scientology and My Harrowing Escape by Jenna Miscavige Hill and Lisa Pulitzer. Both give the good and the bad, which is the approach I use to look at everything. Jenna's is more negative, of course. But she's family. Both mention what the good things Scientology does that attract people and get them entangled in it, which is one of the things that interest me. How they do what they do. But I got some flack for even wanting to look and see what works and what doesn't. It puzzles me when people don't want others to look.)

You're tone shows you have a deep-seated hatred of Griffin. You're my friend and I'm cool with that. I have my own hatreds, but Griffin is not one of them. I only know what I look at, and what I have seen so far leads me to different conclusions that the ones you have presented so far.

Sorry I can't be on board with your conclusions, but I'm just not part of the world where that comes from.

(I feel a bit like the Muslim-Jew thing where people want me to take sides and start yelling, but I step back and look at what makes sense regardless of side. Then say what I think. Then both get pissed at me.)

Like I said earlier, I prefer to let the readers look and come to their own conclusions. Your view is certainly something they should take into account. But so is mine. Maybe I am missing something and later will come to a different conclusion. I doubt it, but who knows? I still have a lot of reading in front of me. I know me, so I know I'll look critically as I go along since you are so vehement and I respect you. But I also know I will use my own criteria and make my own independent conclusion. And I have not seen anything close to what you have said so far.

(I've got a pretty good track record of reversing myself when I see the facts add up, so I trust me to do it if I should ever honestly come to feel like you do. At the moment, though, I stand by my conclusions.)

I say let each one look and decide for himself.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

As I recall, Quigley in his book Tragedy and Hope, does not even mention the Illuminati, the Council on Foreign Relations, and other "suspects"that Birch Society founder, Robert Welch, darkly implicated as tools of :"THE INSIDERS" (a conveniently vague term that Welch substituted for his more graphic but inflammatory, "comsymps.") Welch had bought into the Illuminati theory but it was stressing the credulity of even the Birchers by his attempts to tie a rather pathetic conspiracy by Illuminati founder Adam Weishaupt, quite efficiently squashed by the Bavarian government police, to modern day (1950s-1960s) communism.

Jerry,

I really don't want to go into this, but here is part of the problem. I'll discuss this one so you see I am not just pulling this stuff out of thin air..

Here is what Griffin said in the transcript:

Now, those of you who have studied this thing, you recognize that name. Adam Weishaupt was the founder of the Illuminati and we all know a little bit about the Illuminati because it was disbanded in Bavaria shortly after it was formed, and their secret records and notebooks and so forth were seized and placed into the public records, so you can go to a library today and read verbatim the organizational structure of the original Illuminati.

. . .

The fact is that we have had many organizational imitations of the Illuminati and this secret one that we’re talking about here created by Cecil Rhodes is a perfect example.

So which is it? Was the Illuminati disbanded in the 1700's or was it somehow tied in to communism in the 20th century?

Griffin says it was disbanded. You say Welch (and imply that Griffin) claim it was current to the 20th century in a conspiracy theory you like to mock..

Although Griffin did not go into the Illuminati thing as thoroughly in this lecture as he has done elsewhere, here is a very brief account of what he has said.

When Cecil Rhodes was trying to set up his secret organization, he thought long and hard about how to do it. He travelled a lot and studied different organization systems. On one travel to Europe, he came across the old existent records of the 1700's secret Illuminati society--the one that was disbanded. He liked the structure of inner circle and outer rings so much, he modeled his own organization after it.

The connection is that Rhodes used a similar structure. That's all. That's it.

Similar structure. Otherwise there is no connection at all.

But that's not the impression one gets from your words. You make it seem like Griffin, Welch, Birchers, whatever are preaching that this thing survived down through the centuries, that they distorted Quigley's words to somehow "prove" it, yada yada yada.

I don't know about Welch and the Birchers, I only know about Griffin because I am familiar with some of his things.

Think about this. The organization of the USA was partially based on ancient republic structures. Does that mean the Founding Fathers were trying to resurrect the Roman Empire in a secret conspiracy? How would you react if I claimed that? It's the same logic. All they did was look at the ancient structure and did something new with it.

Ditto for Rhodes. Old structure as blueprint--and only blueprint--for new thing. And that blueprint was merely organizational to boot. None of the religion went with it. Inner circle. Outer rings.

That is exactly what Griffin has said in every place I have seen him talk about this. Maybe he has said different things elsewhere, but I have not seen them.

This is just one difference I have with what you claim. There are several. But I don't feel like spending the time going into them as I feel if there is such a wide gap over something as simple as this, we will go at this stuff for weeks and get nowhere.

So I prefer to let the reader decide for himself if he is interested enough to look.

I only brought it up originally in my first post to say that the old Illuminati organization does not exist anymore and present why I believe the rumors persist that it does.

I don't even know what the Dice dude in the OP thinks about the Illuminati. I couldn't get past the smarmy condescension in the video to become interested enough to find out.

Michael