Jack the Royal Ripper
I was watching a program a few months back and I paused it! I was told by the Holy Spirit that Jack the Ripper was a Freemason! I was stunned. Although I shouldn’t have been considering all the secrecy surrounding the whole organization of the Freemason/Illuminati/Rosicrucian society. But, still….I was stunned!
It made sense why he was never caught. It made sense why the case was about ravaging women and killing them in the worst ways. It was so transparent now. You see, higher elitists don’t like women! Really, it’s true. Are the killings are part of an elaborate ritual to continue in male dominance over the women in this world?
Now, consider this who do vampires target? Women! You see, when I was finishing the article on vampirism, I came across this information. It fit like a glove. It was another piece to the puzzle. Shockingly, most people don’t know of it.
MITRE SQUARE & WHITECHAPEL
Many of the town folk believed that the highest in the land were involved in the killings. And believed to be part of the government therefore the murderer was not to be had for they had a vested interest in keeping his identity sealed. In 1973, what is called “Ripperologists’ (people who fancied themselves as a person to collect research on the subject), told that ‘Jack’ was not one man but a carefully organized cabal. They were carried out in order to avoid a Royal scandal by a ruthless and powerful group using the Masonic lore as a cloak for their crimes.
Joseph Sickert, son of the painter Walter Sickert comes forward with this story:
Sickert’s story revolved around the Prince of Wales’ household. In 1883 his wife, Princess Alexandra, had asked the young painter Walter Sickert to introduce their eldest son Prince Albert Victor (Eddy to his friends) to the artistic and literary life of London. Sickert introduced Eddy to one of his models, a pretty Irish Catholic girl called Annie Elizabeth Crook.
They fell for each other and, according to Sickert, went through two clandestine marriage ceremonies, one Anglican and one Catholic, soon afterwards Annie became pregnant. It was contrary to the 1791 Act of Settlement which disbarred any person marrying a Roman Catholic from succession to the Throne. The tide of Republicanism was rising and would culminate during Victoria’s Golden Jubilee year in the Bloody Sunday riots of 1887.
So when the Palace authorities were tipped off by one of Eddy’s coachmen, they acted swiftly and ruthlessly. Prince Eddy was dragged and confined to court. On the same day the luckless Annie Crook was abducted and confined for a hundred and fifty-six days in Guy’s Hospital by no less a figure than Queen Victoria’s Physician-in-Ordinary and Physician to the Prince of Wales, Sir William Gull. Certified insane by Gull, Annie lived for most of her life in institutions, spending her last days in the Lunacy Observation Ward of St George’s Union Workhouse. This madman of a doctor also performed a partial frontal lobotomy on her, reconciling her as docile and complaint, thusly able to be controlled by these monsters.
According to Sickert’s account, when the Prince and Annie were taken from their Cleveland Street rooms, Mary Kelly was out walking the baby. When she returned and learned what had happened, fearing she was in great danger she fled back to the district she already knew well from her days in the Refuge—Whitechapel. The baby Alice then passed into Sickert’s care.
Back in Whitechapel Kelly befriended three local streetwalkers to whom she boasted of her Royal connections. In the Spring of 1888 the quartet, led by Kelly, demanded money from Walter Sickert, threatening otherwise to make the story public. Walter immediately passed word to Eddy who informed his father. The Prince of Wales discussed the threat under terms of the greatest secrecy with trusted fellow Masons in the Red Apron Lodges and with Brothers in the Royal Alpha Lodge. A special meeting at the Lodge by the Royal Masons known as the “Princes of the Blood Royal’. It was agreed that for the sake of the realm Kelly and her friends must be silenced ( a blood sacrifice, if you will)—although the group which undertook this mission, according to Sickert’s account, went far beyond what had originally been contemplated. The action group was largely drawn from the Royal Alpha Lodge and included Sir Richard Gull, Lord Randolph Churchill, Eddy’s former Cambridge tutor J. K. Stephen, and Sir Charles Warren, Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police (who took no active part in the killings but who helped mastermind the cover-up). To drive them about their business they recruited the coachman who had betrayed Prince Eddy to the Palace authorities, one John Netley.
Confirmed with a modus operandi, the murders were planned and performs by more than one person and according to a Masonic ritual, similar to a fox-hunt!
So, who was the ringleader of this murderous gang? None other than the prominent Freemason, Secretary of State for India, the Leader of the House of Commons and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lord Randolph Spencer-Churchill, father of the future prime minister, Winston Churchill.
Churchill was not only the ‘brains’ behind the entire operation, but he was also personally responsible for the cutting of Masonic emblems and symbols into the bodies of the victims, whilst William Gull’s skilled surgeon’s hands of performed the organ removals.
The group set about discovering the blackmailers’ whereabouts, then systematically plotted their executions. The campaign opened on 31st August with Mary Ann Nichols as their first victim and continued with the killing of Annie Chapman on 8th September. In turn each woman was lured inside the coach, then killed and mutilated in the way that the three ‘Juwes’—Jubela, Jubelo and Jubelum, the murderers of Hiram Abiff—were executed in the old Masonic legend. Their throats were ‘cut across’, their bodies torn open and their entrails ‘thrown over’ the left shoulder.
On 30th September there were two further killings but on that night things did not go so smoothly. As the murderers were dumping that night’s first victim, Liz Stride, in Berner Street, they were interrupted and had to abandon her corpse before its ritual mutilation had been completed. More alarming still, the night’s second victim, Catherine Eddowes, was, according to Sickert, almost immediately discovered to have been killed in error. It seemed that poor Eddowes had for some time lived with a man called John Kelly, had often used his surname, and so had been wrongly identified by the gang’s underworld informants as the leading blackmailer, Mary Kelly.
That mistake nearly led to the group’s undoing. In the belief that this was to be the climactic move of their campaign, the group had arranged Eddowes’ corpse, more completely mutilated than any of her predecessors, in Mitre Square opposite the Masonic Temple and close to the Whitechapel Road. They had chalked on a nearby wall a triumphant postscript to the whole affair. A policeman copied it down in his notebook:
The Juwes are
The men that
Arriving on the scene Sir Charles Warren, to the astonishment of his underlings, ordered that the chalked epitaph—presumed by observers to be in the killer’s hand—should be immediately hosed down and erased. The reason he gave was that he did not want anti-Jewish sentiment to be inflamed, but Sickert suggested the real reason was that too many insiders would recognize that the message referred not to the Jews but to the Juwes of Masonic legend, and would know the killers’ identity.
Meanwhile, rumors of the killer’s associations with Masonry and with the Royal Family continued to grow. It was not until 9th November that Kelly was finally tracked down. To use the coach again was too dangerous so she was dispatched in her own Dorset Street lodgings, more bloodily mutilated than any of her fellow-conspirators, her throat slashed, her body brutally cut apart and her intestines arranged ritually about the room.
There is in existence a police drawing of the last person to be seen with Mary whilst she was still alive and this bears an uncanny resemblance to no less a person than Lord Randolph Spencer-Churchill himself. Of course, this particular ‘lead’ was never followed-up by the Masonic-controlled and run Metropolitan Police.
J.K. Stephen, again according to Abberline’s diaries, actually went to the police, made a full confession and surrendered himself in a fit of guilt but of course no arrests were made and Stephen was also released without charge. Abberline resigned his position with the force and retired forthwith as a direct result of his disgust at the inaction and cover-up on the part of the police. Indeed there are still files in existence in Scotland Yard that have been sealed forever to prevent the truth from ever being revealed.
When Prince Eddy found out that his wife had been lobotomized he had a nervous breakdown and was never the same again thereafter.
Sickert fled the country upon hearing the news of Annie Crook’s abduction and took up residence in Dieppe, France in an attempt to protect the child, Alice. When Alice grew up, she and Walter Sickert became lovers and in turn had a child themselves who went by the name of Joseph Sickert – who kept Inspector Abberline’s diaries unpublicized for 50 years after inheriting them from his father.
In the meantime, Prince Eddy, his mental health by now completely shattered, was given into the care of the Earl of Strathmore who owned Glamis Castle in Scotland. The royal family then blatantly lied to the world and announced that Eddy had sadly passed away at the age of only 28, on the 14th January 1892 due to influenza, but of course Eddy was still alive and being held in Balmoral Castle having not yet made the final move to Glamis.
Balmoral is approximately 1000 feet (300 metres) above sea-level and as such is partly surrounded by steep cliffs. This was the intended site for the planned murder of Eddy to be undertaken by Randolph Churchill and John Netley the coachman. The prince was pushed from the cliff-top but somehow managed to survive his fall and after the passage of two days had endeavored to crawl all the way back to Balmoral where he was found at the door by his disbelieving hosts.
It was decided after this that the best option would be to just incarcerate him at Glamis for the rest of his life and the Earl of Strathmore agreed to undertake this task on behalf of the royals in return for one simple favor. The favor he stipulated was that one of his daughters be allowed to marry a future king of England.
Poor Eddy died in 1933, forty one years after his ‘official’ death date and during this time, his mother visited him only once, but took a photograph of him which she apparently sent to her cousin. This photograph is still in existence and shows a much older Eddy thoughtfully painting a picture which would sadly never be seen by anyone outside the walls of Glamis Castle.
The pact between Strathmore and the royal family was eventually fulfilled in 1923 when Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon (his daughter, b. 1900) married the future King George VI of England after originally being betrothed to his brother, the former King Edward VIII (he of abdication fame).
In 1936 George ascended the throne upon his elder brother’s abdication and Elizabeth became his queen consort. Elizabeth of course was more commonly known as the Queen Mother and the mother of the current incumbent of the family firm, Queen Elizabeth the second. She went to her grave in 2002 without ever revealing the secret and thus the world was never aware of this unholy pact.
Freemasonry was now riven. Some Masons, shocked by what they had heard and suspected, resigned from the craft. Others remained tight-lipped, for senior members of the Brotherhood were after all offered a choice. The oath they had taken stated that the secrets of another Master Mason ‘shall remain as secure and inviolable in my breast as in his own, when communicated to me, murder and treason excepted; and they left to my own election…’
As a Master Mason Henry Irving elected, then and for the rest of his life, to keep any secrets he may have learned ‘secure within his breast’. It is, however, likely that the turmoil over the Whitechapel killings lay behind his unexpected decision to drop the still-popular Faust from the Lyceum program, and instead open his tenth season with Macbeth, a play in whose title role he had previously enjoyed only modest success. The timing, with the production opening on 29th December, 1888, was surely deliberate. One can readily imagine the frisson in the Lyceum when Irving’s Macbeth, gaunt, with straggling moustache and looking, as Ellen Terry commented, ‘like a great famished wolf’, padded across the shadowy hall in Dunsinane, thrust aloft the glittering blood-stained daggers and hissed triumphantly to his fellow-conspirator, ‘I have done the deed!’.
Stoker, too, attempted to shut out the secret nightmares, but his was a more volatile nature. He was a far less committed Freemason than Irving7, and after the Ripper killings confined his activities to occasional visits to the Masonic literary society, The Golden Dawn. But the ritualistic horrors of the Whitechapel murders were later to erupt onto the pages of his most famous novel. For Dracula is a gothic fantasy whose imagery derives in large part from the gruesome particulars of ‘Jack’s’ reign. Indeed, in an introduction to a 1901 edition, Stoker says as much. Dracula’s crimes, he says, ‘originated from the same source, and…at the same time created as much repugnance in people everywhere as the notorious murders of Jack the Ripper…’
Dracula is an extraordinary book. For the most part it is set in late Victorian Britain, but it is a world way from the music and gaiety of fin de siècle society. Its characters play out its drama in near-darkness and for the most part in an anxious closeted silence. The group pursuing Dracula speak to each other, and to themselves, in strangely encrypted passages, as if they are somehow complicit with his activities. Again, although he generates a general terror, the Count’s victims—all women—number no more than five, and we are never told why, from all thousands available to him, the Count selects those few ‘brides’. His victims, when found, are arranged in the same quasi-sacrificial fashion as those of the Ripper:
‘On the bed lay two women, Lucy and her mother. The latter lay furthest in, and she was covered with a white sheet, the edge of which had been blown back by the draught through the broken window, showing the drawn, white face and the look of terror fixed upon it. By her side lay Lucy, with face white and still more drawn. The flowers which had been round her neck we found upon her mother’s bosom, and her throat was bare, showing the two little wounds we had noticed before, but looking horribly white and mangled.’ (p177)
The wounds in the throat—recalling the Apprentice Mason’s pledge to uphold all secret mysteries on pain of ‘having my throat cut across’—are one example of the book’s frequent allusions to Masonic practice. Another is Harker’s first meeting with Dracula, where he waits in darkness outside the door and, after a ritual exchange, is led into a windowless room and thence into the light (p25ff). Throughout the book ‘darkness’ and ’light’ are as symbolically important as in Masonic ritual. Cumulatively the effect is to make the cult of vampirism an inverted reflection of the cult of Freemasonry.
Many commentators have observed that Stoker’s Dracula resembles Henry Irving in appearance:
‘His face was a strong—very strong—aquiline, with high bridge of the thin nose and particularly arched nostrils; with lofty domed forehead, and hair growing scantily round the temples, but profusely elsewhere. His eyebrows were very massive, almost meeting over the nose, and with bushy hair that seemed to curl in its own profusion. The mouth, so far as I could see it under the heavy moustache, was fixed and rather cruel-looking, with particularly sharp white teeth; these protruded over the lips, whose remarkable ruddiness showed astonishing vitality in a man of his years. For the rest, his ears were pale and at the tops extremely pointed; the chin was broad and strong, and the cheeks firm though thin. The general effect was one of extraordinary pallor.’
Nina Auerbach has gone further and claimed that it was Irving as Mephistopheles which ‘gave Dracula his contours’. Mephistopheles was not the prime inspiration for Dracula. Stoker did not begin making formal notes for the novel until 8th March 1890, when Irving’s portrayal of the clean-shaven Mephistopheles was a distant memory. With his wolf-like, pallid features, straggly locks on high forehead and heavy moustache, the Count most certainly resembles Irving—but Irving in his role as Macbeth.
Irving no less than Stoker will have recognised the similarities between his own position and that of the character he was playing, for Macbeth is also tormented by the knowledge of murders which he did not commit but about which he cannot speak. But whereas Irving kept his secret knowledge, and his art, in separate compartments Stoker’s nightmares erupted on to the tormented pages of Dracula. None of Stoker’s books was so much revised and so frequently rewritten. It was not finally published until 26th May 1897, by which time the Ripper had receded from the newspaper headlines, the reign of terror had evaporated, and the trustworthy Henry Irving—at the specific recommendation of the Freemason’s Grand Master, the Prince of Wales—had been rewarded with his knighthood.
It is sometimes overlooked that the ‘vampirism’ of the novel is not an inherited but a transmitted condition. Dracula is not a supernatural figure, as Mephistopheles is, but a grievously blemished mortal. In his final second, the Count achieves redemption:
‘It was like a miracle; but before our very eyes, and almost in the drawing of a breath, the whole body crumbled into dust and passed from our sight.
I shall be glad as long as I live that even in that moment of final dissolution there was in the face a look of peace such as I never could have imagined might have rested there.’
Yet in spite of its Christian denouement Henry Irving disliked Dracula intensely. This, we may surmise, was not because he had any rooted objection to horror stories—his frequent playing of The Bells and Eugene Aram testify to that—but because he read the book’s sub-text only too clearly. The route to redemption lay in ridding oneself of one’s secrets, i.e. shedding the Masonic code, just as the Count in his death agonies sheds the curse of vampirism. This Irving could never do.
Stoker’s most recent biographer describes events at the Lyceum at the pre-publication copyright reading of Dracula on 18th May 1897, when the tension between the two was evident. Stoker had desperately wanted Irving to play the Count but he had adamantly refused. In the event:
‘Count Dracula was a Mr. Jones, most likely Whitworth Jones, whose roles veered towards an assortment of wizards, kings and demons, including Mephistopheles. More than anything, though, Stoker wanted to woo Irving to a role he saw as the crowd-pleaser the financially-strapped Lyceum needed…
The reading concluded after four hours…Stoker approached Irving in his dressing-room…and asked “How did you like it?” “Dreadful!” he replied.’
The reading of Dracula was not mentioned in any of the first lives of Irving (including Stoker’s) nor in contemporary accounts of his Lyceum management. After it, there was a greater coolness between the two men. Irving no longer took Stoker’s advice on all things financial, and disastrously under-insured the Lyceum scenery stock before its destruction by fire in 1898. Stoker ‘had no part in the matter and no responsibility’ when Comyns Carr’s Syndicate then took over the Lyceum, after which, during the last seven years of Irving’s life, as Stoker himself observed with masterly understatement, he ‘was not able to see so much of him as I had been in the habit of doing throughout the previous twenty’.
In those last years Irving turned instead to his confidential private secretary, Austin Brereton, who wrote in 1908:
‘From the summer of 1898, I acted for Henry Irving in an official and confidential capacity. He found it necessary, for divers specific reasons, to have his interests guarded, in certain directions, in the newspaper world, and I was his trusted representative in these matters. From this time until his death, he told me much of his life’s story…
In these circumstances, I was not greatly perturbed when the tragic death of the actor caused a flood of biographical material to pour forth from the press. In regard to the various books which have lived through the intervening years, that by Bram Stoker has won a well-merited popularity. It is full of entertaining gossip and reminiscence…’
It is now possible to speculate more confidently on the reasons Brereton had for suggesting that Stoker’s ‘popular’ biography did not fully reveal the essence of the man. As a leading Freemason in those troubled times Irving had borne a moral burden to which Stoker’s loyal account dare not allude. Only now can we be certain about the real nature of those mysterious ‘interests’ to which Brereton refers, and of the terrible secrets Henry Irving took to his grave. [link]
Evidently, the previous entry comes from the book, “Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution” written by Stephen Knight 1976. In 1970, a British surgeon, Dr. Thomas E. A. Stowell, published an article entitles, “Jack the Ripper–A Solution?“ He was said to have gained access to the private notes from the Queen’s personal physician (who Knight believes was Jack the Ripper), treated the royal family.
Additional Interesting Information
Many people understand that the Freemasons/Illuminati/Rosicrucian members are IN FACT homosexual! These members control the world finances, food and many other necessities of this world. But, we must remember they need women to keep producing the heirs to their bloodlines. This is most likely the only reason they keep women by their sides.
With this being said, it is obvious that these men are high ranking Royal bloodlines. Although they have women by their side they must satisfy their sexual needs to be with men.
The Cleveland Street Scandal
The Cleveland Street scandal occurred in 1889, when a homosexual male brothel in Cleveland Street, Fitzrovia, London, was discovered by police. At the time sexual acts between men were illegal in Britain, and the brothel’s clients faced possible prosecution and certain social ostracism if discovered.
It was rumored that one of the brothel’s clients was Prince Albert Victor, who was the eldest son of the Prince of Wales and second-in-line to the British throne. It is said that officials were involved in a cover-up to keep the names of the Prince and others out of he scandal.
In Stephen Knights masterpiece, “Jack the Ripper: The Final Solution”, he explains how Britain’s entire political system at the end of the 19th century was threatened by the hidden facts Prince Albert Victor (“Eddy”) was not only bisexual, but also that he instigated a series of explicit love-letter with a young boy employed there.
Surprisingly a man in possession of these letters turns out to be none other than Aleister Crowley! He had them for many years but eventually they were lost or even destroyed.
1. The handwritten letters seemed to have excellent penmanship and great precision went into the thought of the words within.
2. These murders were said to be enacted by a trained physician. And this only gives insight that these serial ritual murders were indeed executed with great skill and technique.
3. Mitre & Square = Masonic symbols
4. Apron from crime scene is a clue. He ‘wiped his hands’ on it. Or more explicitly ‘they wiped their hands from it’ with each killing. Of course, the apron have obvious reference to the Masonic organization.
5. Long (policeman) patrolling the area at 2:20 am….22 is a symbol of Freemasonry. Returning at 2:55 am…again double number increase the power or emphasis on their magick.
6. 2 “^” marks on one of the victims face clearly brought together form an “M”…also it can be arranged as a Square & Compass.
7. 3 Juwls? The first ruffian, named Jubela, struck Hiram across the throat with a 24 inch gauge. The second ruffian, named Jubelo, struck Hiram’s breast, over the heart, with a square. The third ruffian, named Jubelum, struck Hiram upon the forehead with a gavel, whereupon Hiram fell dead. His blood, therefore, was shed within the temple.
The “Blood Oaths”
1º-First, Jubela—”O that my throat had been cut across, my tongue torn out, and my body buried in the rough sands of the sea, at low water mark, where the tide ebbs and flows twice in twenty-four hours, ere I had been accessory to the death of so good a man as our Grand Master, Hiram Abiff!”
2º-The second, Jubelo—”O that my left breast had been torn open and my heart and vitals taken from thence and thrown over my left shoulder, carried into the valley of Jehosaphat, and there to become a prey to the wild beasts of the field and vultures of the air, ere I had conspired the death of so good a man as our Grand Master, Hiram Abiff!”
3º-The third, Jubelum—”O that my body had been severed in two in the midst, and divided to the north and south, my bowels burnt to ashes in the center, and the ashes scattered by the four winds of heaven, that there might not the least track or remembrance remain among men, or Masons, of so vile and perjured a wretch as I am; ah, Jubela and Jubelo, it was I that struck him harder than you both. It was I that gave him the fatal blow; it was I that killed him outright;”
This makes me question as to the injuries sustained by each woman. Were they parallel to the 3 Ju’s?
Then, almost immediately, the phrase is erased from the WALL by a high-ranking police official! Clean-up or cover-up?
Knight even eludes to the fact that the victims were dispatched according to age-old Masonic ritual, even the mutilations (disembowelments) were said to be dealt with in such a way as the Freemasons dealt with ‘traitors’.
People who were involved in bringing the cases to justice were either let out of the country, killed, persecuted, or just plain imprisoned to keep their mouths shut.
After all, conspiracies of States are always informative due to the depths through the depravity of what men will do to preserve the status quo of the power elite and ruling class.
Many people in the past have died for coming against these elitists. And even the author Stephen Knight mysteriously died after publishing, “The Brotherhood: The Secret World of the Freemasons”.