By: Naji Ali Amhaz

President Trump once made a provocative statement, saying, "If it weren't for us, Europe would be speaking German." To this, King Charles III replied with a poignant phrase during his visit to the United States: "You must know that if it weren't for Britain, you (America) would be speaking French today!"

This exchange is not merely a political jab; it encapsulates one of the most complex, deep, and peculiar historical conflicts in the modern world: the "Anglo-American" struggle and its hidden roots. This veiled dispute, whose essence has been grasped only by a limited elite of the initiated, has had its secrets buried just as "Hiram" was buried. Its true dimensions are understood only by those who possess the "password" and can decode its symbols.

The story begins shortly before the outbreak of the French Revolution around 1720, when French Masonic lodges began to operate with unprecedented momentum, laying the ideological framework to liberate the French people from the absolute authority of the Church. In contrast, the British Kingdom was profoundly Masonic, reaching the very throne itself. At that time, the French elite formulated three fundamental pillars for the lodges, which served as the cornerstone of their philosophy:

The first pillar was the adoption of the "White Book" as an alternative constitution to the three celestial books (the Torah, the Bible, and the Quran). The justification for this philosophical and psychological shift was that it was illogical for the French Revolution to rise against the Church—as a symbol of religion—while its members simultaneously swore oaths upon a religious text. To them, this contradicted the core of the secular revolution.

The second pillar was allowing women to join Masonic lodges and granting them the right to access all secrets and high degrees, provided they proved their merit and worthiness to attain such intellectual honor.

The third pillar established "Universal Masonic Citizenship." This meant that a Masonic brother was considered a first-class citizen in any country governed by Masonry, regardless of his geographical origin or race—be he European, American, or even from the "Yellow Race" (a term then used for subjects of the Ottoman Empire), or from Africa or East Asia.

However, Britain rejected these three principles categorically. Its response to the first pillar (religion) was that religion is an essential structural factor in the life of nations and must be enshrined and popularized because it facilitates global control.

According to the pragmatic British vision, it is easy to lead a religious country without military effort or exorbitant costs; it is enough to control the religious leader, who in turn guides the masses, thereby securing control over society and its wealth. London believed that dismantling religion, while theoretically liberating, would inevitably lead to "Great Chaos" and complicate the mechanisms of hegemony. This British foresight was the product of deep colonial experiences in an empire where "the sun never sets."

Regarding the second pillar concerning women, and although the Protestant Church (the foundation of the British Crown) later allowed the ordination of women, the British Masonic rejection was based on a historical religious legacy that viewed leadership and priestly roles as the exclusive domain of men, much like the Catholic, Jewish, and Islamic traditions of the time.

As for the third pillar regarding citizenship, British lodges supported it only partially, considering that a Mason has priority over others in obtaining nationality and political privileges, but only under strict criteria dictated by "British Centrality."

This fundamental divergence sparked a dangerous secret war between Paris and London that seems to be raging to this day. The British accuse French lodges of being the primary instigators and financiers of the American revolutionaries against the British Crown (1775–1783). This war of independence, led by the prominent figure George Washington—who was initiated into Masonry in Virginia in 1752 and attained the rank of "Master Mason" in 1753—ended in separation from the Crown. Although Washington followed the Scottish Rite, the influence of the French Mason, the Marquis de Lafayette, on him was profound, described as a "father and son" relationship. Lafayette was the vital artery that provided financial support, weapons, and French military aid.

Britain never forgave France for its role in ousting it from the American continent. It retaliated against Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte in 1799 by destroying his fleet at Acre, preventing his occupation of it and marking the beginning of the end for his Eastern ambitions. In turn, the French did not forget the Masonic dispute over the status of women; in 1876, the French government gifted the United States the "Statue of Liberty" to solidify the French Masonic vision regarding women. It is said that the facial features of the statue carry Alexandrian Egyptian imprints, a symbolic response to the shelling of French ships and a tribute to George Washington, who was the founding member and first Worshipful Master of Alexandria Lodge No. 22 in Virginia.

The British responded by rigidly adhering to their customs and rituals. Even the late Queen Elizabeth II, despite being granted the "33rd Degree" to enable her accession to the throne in 1952 following the death of her father, King George VI (who served as the Provincial Grand Master for Middlesex), remained distant from full ritualistic practice. Seventy years later, King Charles III brought these symbols back to the forefront, appearing with full Masonic regalia and rituals during his investiture as King.

Those who rule the world do not engage in absurdity or chaos. For them, an error, no matter how small, is considered catastrophic. From this, we realize the fundamental difference between "rogue states" living in turmoil and nations whose affairs are managed with the precision of a clock, where every signal, every word, every symbol, and every fragment of conflict extends to roots reaching deep into history—three centuries back, and perhaps deeper than we can imagine.

Share

Comments

Add your comment