Modern Examples Of Individuals Who Promote The Lie That Occult Theory is “Real”

This library article is a stub that will be added to as we go along here. It will highlight individuals and their books, texts, etc., that continue to promote the lie that covertexts like magic or the occult (Kabbala, bible etc.)  – where the entire subject is a code – are actually true. This would also include the subjects of conjuring spirits, fallen angels, demons, God, the Devil, supposed ancient Greek history, so on and so forth.

– published January 4, 2018 –


You are now in
The Reading Library ——->
REAL History section.


Where we both lift the veil on real history


and where we debunk FALSE history.

Today’s article is part of a new collection called: Ancient Methods of Coding Scientific Knowledge.

It is primarily a debunking of false history.

* * *


Modern Examples Of Individuals Who Promote That Occult Theory is “Real”

(and true)


By Virginia McClaughry


Example #1

David Livingstone

This is our first example of an individual continuing in the tradition of the use of spurious fairy tales and occult declamatio sources as “history”. Whether as turnip-eater or slavemaster coder, is not a topic for this article.

Turnip-Eater – one who thinks a covertext is really true as written.

This I did that to men of learning and men deeply engaged in the study of magic, it might, by the Grace of God, be in some degree intelligible, while on the other hand, to the thick-skinned turnip eaters (imperitis Rapophagis) it might for all time remain a hidden secret, and be to their dull intellects a sealed book forever. (Trithmius;Stegonographica Book III)

The example treatise is Terrorism and the Illuminati by David Livingstone published in 2007 and heavily promoted at the conspiracy school website starting in 2015. PDF available here. Livingstone is considered tightly connected to Jewish-Conspiracy author Henry Makow. It could be considered that they are both operating from the same “template” of propaganda.

The first thing you need to understand here is that this book is trying to promote the Jewish Illuminati dominates the world theory. The basis of the Illuminati Conspiracy Theory has been fully documented in my recent library article that it was invented specifically to try and target Thomas Jefferson with it at a key time in history. Then, in this post, you can read about who, historically, has resurrected it, why, and what was going on plus who started adding “the Jews” into the mix.

This is the company that Mr. Livingstone is in keeping with.

Now to his book –

Example 1, section on The Scythians.

According to Josephus, “…the Ten Tribes who are beyond the Euphrates till now, and are an immense multitude, whose numbers cannot be estimated.”

[…] the land of the Scythians, in southern Russia, whom Josephus and others had identified as the ancestors of Gog and Magog.


He’s using a declamatio fabrication as a source.

From my article Backdated Overpopulation Myths and The Forging of The Bible – where the below excerpt is cutting into a long list (p. 137) of supposed “sources” I was examining –

[…] Flavius Josephus, the Jewish priest and historian (37/38 – 100 AD). Quotes from Alexander Polyhistor.

[…] Alexander Polyhistor (c.105 – 35 BC), Greek philosopher, geographer and historian. He was imprisoned by the Romans in the war of Sulla against Mithridates of Pontus and brought as a slave to Rome for employment as a tutor. Then he was released and lived in Italy as a Roman citizen. His original writings have not survived, but he is quoted by Eusebius, Syncellus, Josephus, Atheneus and Clement of Alexandria.

You will notice that every single one of the main “sources” has this declaimer:

“His original writings have not survived…”

with the excuse of:

but he is quoted by


Strike one.

So much for Livingstone’s “history” of the Scythians then – which, by the way, Scythians is the GREEK name given to these people the same time as all these other declamatio sources showed up. (late 1400’s early 1500’s). It’s kind of like naming the Nesilim Hittites. That is NOT what they called themselves. But that’s the important point here. These Vatican and British liars and forgers are forever doing this to muddy up everything even more than it already is.

The truly scary thing though, is not that a conspiracy author said this. It is that actual historians themselves do the same thing! Livingstone is merely following in that tradition in the portions I pulled out.

Next, his Chapter 2 on The Kabbala – what does he have as his main “origin” source? You guessed it, another declamatio fabrication.


Essentially, while the Kabbalah can be traced back to Babylon, it was not there that its initial doctrines were expounded in literary form, but in ancient Greece.


Rather, the earliest elaboration of Kabbalistic doctrines takes place in Greece, among the so-called philosophers, and particularly Pythagoras, and later Plato, who has long been regarded as the godfather of this tradition.

The cult Orpheus, known as Orphism, became the basis of the philosophical cult developed by Pythagoras.12

12 – Livingstone source given: Alien Wisdom, p. 142


Both Pythagoras and Plato are completely fictional creations.

Pythagoras, was a creation of a group of people calling themselves the Pythagoreans, who alleged that this was as per Plato, who is alleged to be a student of Pythagoras. As an overview of this article, what you have here is a Lord of the Rings story, medieval style. If any readers are familiar with J.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings trilogy, then you may also know that there were additional books expanding on the fictional history, lineage, geography, language etc. etc. of the “world” encapsulated in the Lord of the Rings story. This is exactly what is going on with the so-called “Greek Thinkers”,

[…] In 1877, The Royal Masonic Cycloepædia of History, Rites, Symbolism, and Biography, was compiled and edited by Kenneth R. H. Mackenzie IXo (who called himself Cryptonymous). He was a Theosophist, he was a friend of Samuel Mathers (future founder of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn), and was also a Hon. Member of the Canongate KD-winning Lodge, No. 2, Scotland. Mackenzies book was published in New York, by J. W. Bouton, 706 Broadway. Mackenzie, prior to 1874, claimed that he was “in contact, with six adepts of the Hermetic Brotherhood of Egypt” and he founded The Society of Eight, to which he only admitted “master” occultists.

In his book p 731, (articles Theosophical Society of New York and Theosophy), Mackenzie says:

“It is a noticeable fact that neither Zoroaster, Buddha, Orpheus, Pythagoras, Confucius, Socrates, nor Ammonius Saccas, committed anything to writing. The reason for it is obvious. Theosophy is a double-edged weapon and unfit for the ignorant or the selfish. Like every ancient philosophy it has its votaries among the moderns; but, until late in our own days, its disciples were few in numbers, and of the most various sects and opinions.

[…]See how Mackenzie then offers an explanation for this, with the tactic of “it’s obvious” heading the explanation up, followed by the whammy of that the truth is “unfit for the ignorant and selfish.”

– As referenced in Scientology Roots chapter 37, in turn referencing Scientology, A Masked Branch of Masonic Judaism originally published by the 123jump authors at the Scribd website in April 2010. The referenced Pythagoras article within, has been appropriated and used without permission by several opportunistic New Age con-artists, such as this example. At one time, the original also appeared at a website called – Light of the Great Fire – article titled: Pythagoras – or Lord of the Rings Medieval Style.


I think that it’s important to point out that see that line: “unfit for the ignorant and selfish.”? That’s almost verbatim to the excuse given by the Jesuits for hiding astronomy and other information cloaked in Chinese symbolism.

From my as yet unpublished Why China part 2

Even in China, during this time of Nurhaci kicking out all the foreigners (1617) which was just one year after the Vatican had officially banned Copernicus, the Jesuits were still using it.

However, they still managed to slither in the same old trickery and sleight-of-hand in how they transmitted their knowledge, as well as constantly ascribing their proficiency as being a mysterious and mystical reason (the way they told it) – a come on to get people interested in the ‘power of god’ – get it?

No one else seemed to know how to do what they did except their ‘special’ chinese people and no one could make heads or tails out of their instructions except for the converted.

How convenient…

Vincent price - that is NOT funny

That’s the key thing though here, the how of the transmission.

You see, Ricci and von Schall had arranged to cloak the knowledge that they were supposedly freely offering in these Chinese books, in complex symbolism and legends so that only the ‘initiated’ could actually understand and use them.

That is VERY key, because it proves that the Catholics (and yes, the British) have long withheld practical knowledge from people by cloaking it in mysticism, allegory, and “legends”.

In China, the Jesuits used dragons to do that, did you know that?


This deliberate symbolization was not ancient knowledge as many later hired propagandists have tried to have believed.


no shaking head

That’s a point-blank lie.

It was created right here in time by the Jesuits.

The Jesuits, together with their Chinese “convert” Xu and his descendants, cloaked their astronomical in symbols like the above as follows.

The sky ecliptic was divided into four sections. Each of these sections contained seven mansions, and together they formed the 28 Mansions. The 28 Mansions may be considered to be equivalent to the zodiacal constellations in Western astronomy, although they reflected the movement of the Moon through a sidereal month rather than the Sun in a tropical year. This enabled the ancient Chinese to mark the travelling positions of the Sun and the Moon, as well as to determine the time and seasons for their special holidays and important occasions – just as requested to the Jesuits by the various Emperors involved.

Each section of the sky is assigned to a mythological creature, collectively known as the Four Symbols.

See? So to the “uninitiated” it didn’t really mean anything to them beyond their basic understanding of what the various creatures were that were depicted.

It goes much further than this though, the Jesuits also brought in their obsession with coding things by numbers, seven constellations here, seven there, and so on, all of which themselves had colorful cloaking in terms of other mythological creatures.

Skeksis, characters from Dark Crystal, are portrayed in much the same way. Cloaking knowledge in symbols and all manner of what-not, supposedly because the knowledge is deemed unfit for the “uninitiated” and must be protected.


gif by Virginia


But make no mistake – this so called “ancient” knowledge ONLY happened during the slavemaster infection time period when the Brits and Catholics began going to China and trying to bring it under their thumb.


Continuing with the whole Pythagoras fabrication here, this also went on in China (by the Jesuits) during the time they were fabricating what we get given as Confucianism.

Why China, part 1

There is an excellent 1997 book called Manufacturing Confucianism by Lionel M. Jensen, which I came upon after I had already independently formulated my estimate of the slavemaster situation in China, Japan, India, in regards fabricating religions and history.

First, a word – filiation.

It means: the manner in which a thing is related to another from which it is derived or descended in some respect.

Now have a look at this quote from Jensen’s book, especially in light of the Ricci quote I opened with.

“…required the Jesuits to seek out what was common in the experience of two very different cultures, to locate lines of filiation. These lines were ultimately manufactured-not discovered…whose founder Ricci called “Confutious,” 3

So. Everything you think you know about Confucious?

Is a lie.

Jesuit Matteo Ricci made it up.

Twentieth-century Jesuits have also invented a term to try and explain away just how gross what was done in China really was, they call it accomodationism.


I’ll give you a few brief examples – and it is simply astounding that universities actually teach this as somehow true – take a look at some excerpts from this description found at Indiana University about the so-called Analects of Confucious.

…thinkers encountered the teachings of Confucius through Jesuit missionaries

There it is, first came from the Jesuits. That’s Ricci right here in the late 1500’s early 1600’s.

Confucius did not put into writing the principles of his philosophy; these were handed down only through his disciples. The Lunyu (Analects),

Nothing was put in writing. “handed down” means the Catholic invented Oral Tradition excuse.


Now look at this from my Backdated Overpopulation Myths article –

By 1577, Pope Gregory XIII established the Collegio Pontifico Greco in Rome to “receive young Greeks belonging to any nation in which the Greek Rite was used”, and also for Greek refugees in Italy as well as the Ruthenians and Malchites of Egypt and Syria. The construction of the College and Church of S. Atanasio, joined by a bridge over the Via dei Greci, was begun at once.

These young men were made to study the “sacred” sciences (meaning fictional histories and Catholic propaganda) in order to spread it among their fellow-countrymen to facilitate the reunion of the schismatical churches.

They were using them as agents, in other words.

You can see what the real point of all that “support” actually was by the Catholic Church – simply a ruse to try and gain (and keep) control.

Our more restive faction of Nesilim, however, had other plans.

Their first goal was teaching certain Europeans Greek, so that the spread of propaganda could begin. Then came the truly ludicrous cover of “discovered” or “newly retrieved” classical (Greek and Latin) texts of supposed antiquity. Forgeries, in other words. This is also when Latin really got going as a supposedly “ancient” language – it was not.

“I shall call it LATIN.”




Venice’s Aldine Press produced – now there’s a euphemism – editions of all the “great Greek authors” (like the fictional Aristotle and the “newly discovered” Plato) for libraries across Europe.

These declamatio forgeries formed the backbone of the undeservedly famous Vatican Library founded by Pope Nicholas V – a little known fact.


Now have a look at Livingstone’s other source given for the Plato/Kabala fiction.

…According to Aristobulus, a third century BC Jewish philosopher, Plato had access to translations of Jewish texts.

You guessed it. Aristobolus is yet another declamatio figure.

So much for the “Kabala” as sourcing from Plato/Pythagoras then.

Strike two.

Now have a look at the source note just following #12 (for Chapter 2 of Livingstone’s book).

13 – Eusebius. 13.12.1f.


Yet another declamatio figure, a particularly prolificly used one, no less.

Again going back to my Backdated Overpopulation Myths article – let’s have a look at who that is because it sits right in the middle of a veritable clusterfuck of bullshit identities, starting with Berossus.

So who’s Berossus? Well…a’ round-robin we go again.

Berossus, of course, doesn’t have any actual documents directly written by him – as usual, they are “lost to us”. Only two “excerpts” are said to be around, but even those are spurious because they were supposedly contained in the Chronological Canons of Eusebius which are…wait for it…”lost to us”!

Once you pull yourself outside of the story about him, there is an alleged “history of babylonia” – with the flood story – that gets sourced to this other fictional character named Eusebius.

So who’s Eusebius, you say…

Well, we already are in this maze of unverifiable, and NO documentation, starting from the “oldest” story of the Flood, so it’s not much of a surprise to see another one added into the mix. All part of the long con trying to make this look real, when it wasn’t.

Let’s make sure we know where we are in this maze. So far, we have Lucian, fictional, then we have somebody called Berossus who supposedly documents this flood story, also fictional, but it’s actually from Pausanias, also fictional, who we are told actually got it from Eusebius….

See what’s happening here?


And it gets worse.

OK, so we say, maybe there’s proof of this Eusebius character’s writings. But, what do we get right out of the starting gate?

Oh look! It’s lost.

“The work as a whole has been lost in the original Greek, but it may be reconstructed from later chronographists of the Byzantine school who made excerpts from the work, especially George Syncellus. The tables of the second part have been completely preserved in a Latin translation by Jerome, and both parts are still extant in an Armenian translation.”

Oh god. So much for him being real either, then.

But, look! We are told that his work (Eusebius) was “reconstructed” by “later chronographists”.

From where?


The “Byzantine” school, which I believe is actually a reference to the people, the declamatio/forgers, that came from Constantinople.

So, here we are again in the 1400’s/1500’s.

But hey – let’s go ahead and take it on down, just so you can see just how false this all really is, and just how involved they make their lies as part of trying to gain your trust that it is real – part of why I call it a long con.

So, we’ve got these alleged “reconstructions” of Eusebius from:

  1. George Syncellus and
  2. Jerome

Does George hold up as a valid person, or is he yet another fictional character?

Let’s see.

George’s chronicle was continued after his death by his friend Theophanes; Theophanes’ work was heavily shaped by George’s influence, and the latter may have had a greater influence on Theophanes’ Chronicle than Theophanes himself. Anastasius, the Papal Librarian, composed a Historia tripartita in Latin, from the chronicles of George Syncellus, Theophanes Confessor, and Patriarch Nicephorus.


Trouble already.

So, now we have added in-between George (who was conveniently dead at the time) and us, some guy named Theophanes the Confessor, some guy named Anastasius the librarian, and some other guy named Patriarch Nicephorus. They are, of course, all completely unverifiable.


We have our first clue to a possibly real book by one of them – “Historia tripartita“, and a backdated reference of a questionable source. That being Anastasius, the librarian/archives person who supposedly lived around 810 AD. That’s obviously questionable, since we get the “lost” thing happening when it comes to trying to track down any works supposedly by this guy.

It gets really weird from there though, because first of all, the title of this alleged work was actually “Chronographia tripartita”.

This book doesn’t even show up until 1642 (or 1649) in Paris, of all places, theoretically. However, what is highly questionable about even that date, is that the publication of that book (listed for sale) was in our other funky period of time when lots of declamatios and forgeries began for the second time, which was the 1800’s.

In a book of that time period, we also see the other two authors works mentioned.


Reference – Catalogue of Printed Books and Manuscripts in Various Languages, Now on Sale by Payne and Foss.


The date of that book is 1837, and these supposedly almost two hundred year old books are being sold at that time by a British company.

Another source (the 7th Duke of Devonshire’s library) gives a Paris publication date of 1642, (not 1649) however. That source wasn’t published (giving the different date) until 1803.

There were a couple of sources showing an interim 1700’s date of printing, but nowhere near as many as during the 1800’s re-vamped promotion of these materials.

Considering that we’re dealing with a “first” printing date of more than 800 years after the fact of this alleged “compiler” that included Berossus flood story, and it had been done right in the middle of the British/French big spate of “copies” of the early declamatios (plus declamatio-ing the declamatios that was going on at that time as well) – I find this to be highly spurious.

So much for that then.


Strike 3.

* * *


Example #2

TBA – to be assigned.