The Fraudulent Friedmans

[A Phoenix]

THE BACON BI-LITERAL CIPHER DISCOVERED BY ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP IN THE SHAKESPEARE WORKS AND OTHER WORKS OF THE ELIZABETHAN AND JACOBEAN ERA.

[A Phoenix]

ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP AND WILLIAM AND ELIZEBETH FRIEDMAN AT RIVERBANK AND THEIR COMBINED INVESTIGATIONS INTO THE BACON BI-LITERAL CIPHER.

[A Phoenix]

THE FRIEDMANS' TIME AT RIVERBANK WITH ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP INVESTIGATING THE BACON BI-LITERAL CIPHER WAS SURROUNDED IN SECRECY AND MYSTERY.

[Light-of-Truth]

This screen capture almost entirely demonstrates the Friedmans wicked blow to the Baconian cipher argument. "As to the main issue---" :

The schizophrenic duality of this book is that the Friedmans using the very techniques they describe and bash at the same time states "postively" who wrote Shakespeare.

I've noticed from what I've seen the Friedmans will describe ciphers by Baconians, giving good examples from methods that some of us have already learned. But as they promote them and bash them they never share the context, or the "relative" about where they appear. But they knew. That is so important!

Above in the lines that were the Stratfordian boot that kicked all Baconian cryptologists at the time, they demonstrate one the best Baconian examples of what they meant to destroy.

"Who wrote the plays". Then two obvious BACON anagrams/acrostics. Two that is, not one. One with an "f" to make "F BACON."

Starting from the "B" of both BACON's counting the letters to include the second "CON" we have 103 letters, the Simple cipher of SHAKESPEARE. Did you notice the Friedmans did not say "who wrote Shakespeare", they said "who wrote the plays." Odd.

OK, a Stratfordian who totally missed the cipher would tell us, "It is an accident! A coincidence!"

Two realities:

First is that the Friedmans tell the world who wrote Shakespeare in cipher while lying to the gullible Startfordians about their "findings".

Second is that it IS an accident, and a coincidence. That we Baconians who see what appears so obvious is not real.

OK, on the Second option for a moment. The Friedmans wrote this book, were likely paid well to do so. They read what they wrote, and even after the printer had finished they would read the important parts, such as the Intro and Conclusion. To make sure it was right.

If they "missed" this cipher accident, then they were not nearly as skilled as they promote themselves to be. They'd be lost on the B'Hive, not able to keep up. LOL

But I bet they were good, very good, knew exactly what they were doing.

Two BACON ciphers? Remember the cover page? Half of page 62 on Henry IV, Part I that is hidden, cut off, has a double BACON with the word "hang." Two BACONs. "Hang" is also in the very plain text first words of this entire book.

And at the end, on page 288 is a "hanging paragraph". That is a printer term. A "hanging word" is a word that does not fit on the previous page, or sometimes even on the previous line. Printers make them fit, it is professional and the way it is done. I know, I did typeset and layout on a few print magazines. "Hanging words" and "hanging sentences" are not allowed, embarrassing to a designer and printer. Plus it is costly. A "hanging paragraph" is bad, but sometimes happens if the previous pages are already packed and you can bring letters together. In the Friedmans book it appears to me that the letters are actually spread out in the Conclusion, not packed at all. Where that last paragraph could easily be brought into page 287 with minimal effort, it was purposely left hanging. That is an extra page to print, has cost, and is not a perfect design.

Why was page 287 NOT the last page with an unnecessary "hanging" paragraph on page 288? Page 287 was the last "full" page, but myself or any decent typesetter could have brought in the kerning of the letters on a few pages with no noticeable crowding to get rid of the "hanging" paragraph. That would be professional.

Crazy book.

 

 

 

[Allisnum2er]

3 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

Why was page 287 NOT the last page with an unnecessary "hanging" paragraph on page 288?

Hi Rob (Light-of-Truth), very well spotted !!!

Were the Friedmans aware of the importance of the number 188 ?

If it was the case, it could be a way to hide the number 287 as you suggest, and a way to "hang" FRANCIS BACON (100 simple cipher) for ETERNITY (188 simple cipher) 🙂

A crazy book indeed !

Edited June 22, 2022 by Allisnum2er

[A Phoenix]

THE FRIEDMANS AND ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP AT RIVERBANK INVESTIGATING THE BACON BI-LITERAL CIPHER.

[A Phoenix]

                                  THE TECHNICAL AND BACONIAN RIVERBANK PUBLICATIONS.

[A Phoenix]

      FRIEDMAN'S GROUND-BREAKING RIVERBANK MONOGRAPHS ON CRYPTOGRAPHY & CRYPTANALYSIS.

[Lawrence Gerald]

The Irony : William Friedman cracked from the mental stress in helping  crack the Japanese Purple Enigma Code during WWII and  seems to have cracked again in deciphering Francis Bacon the original and  true Purple Enigma

[Light-of-Truth]

PURPLE is 83 Simple cipher, the same as TRUTH.

In all honesty it is sad W. F. F. (33 Simple cipher) cracked under pressure. I understand, but so far I have not "cracked", I'm not afraid of ruining my reputation. Maybe because I have nothing to lose! LOL

Must be a huge burden to carry a public image that demands you fit into a tiny Dot.

I suspect he did not crack because of what he found and was able to share, it is what he found and he could not share. I think that is what causes people to crack. Living with and carrying secrets that can eat you alive. 😉

 

 

 

[Light-of-Truth]

"The Cryptologist Looks at Shakespeare"

A Google search does not give up much. A few mentions, but I do see one page.

https://luna.folger.edu/luna/servlet/detail/FOLGER~6~6~4587~288464:The-cryptologist-looks-at-Shakespea

Reading this one page available on a Google search I hear a familiar voice, W. Friedman. A. Phoenix pointed that out, but I recognize the style. It is a calculated "scientific" formula. That is what he did.

First I notice, without even trying to find ciphers is the first paragraph has "Of" and the second one starts with "B".

O can represent a cipher. Zero, an "O", and the word cypher go waaaaay back. Look it up.

Then what? F and B. Why not! This is a Friedman! FB wrote SS and he knew it. SS= 36 Simple cipher. Why does this image have a 36 at the bottom?

The next paragraphs? Six letter "I"s.

Remember the Friedmans state after providing a Double Bacon cipher immediately after saying "who wrote the plays" the following tip for "Baconian cryptologists" in the their so famous Stratfordian show piece:

"...dot the most relevent i's"...

I wish to see the entire publication. It does not appear to be online, can't find it on Amazon or eBay. A Treasure hunt?

[Allisnum2er]

WOW Rob (Light-of Truth) ! This is another awesome finding. Thank you 🙏👍

Here is , right before to go to work, what I see ... It is said ... 😉 

 

[A Phoenix]

 HI ROB, YANN, & KATE HERE IS A LITTLE PRESENT FOR YOU (SORRY ABOUT THE QUALITY & SCRIBBLES!)                      

                                            THE CRYPTOLOGIST LOOKS AT SHAKESPEARE

                                               [33 LETTERS: 33 BACON IN SIMPLE CIPHER]

In the early 1950s the Friedmans decided to move from their Military Road home on the outskirts of the District of Columbia to a townhouse on 2^nd Street Southeast on Capitol Hill. With the amount of research needed for the work the move allowed them to take advantage of the unrivalled Bacon and Shakespeare resources at the Folger Shakespeare Library and Library of Congress. The libraries were in walking distance of their new dwelling and the Friedmans spent countless hours each day at the Folger carrying out intensive research into the various complex and difficult branches of the subject which they developed into a 611 page manuscript. The title of the manuscript was very carefully and precisely selected by the Friedmans (who secretly knew Bacon wrote the Shakespeare works) ‘The Cryptologist Looks at Shakespeare’ which has 33 letters the number representing Bacon in simple cipher-thus the cryptographic message conveyed by the Friedmans-reads Bacon is Shakespeare.  

The Friedmans enthusiastically entered their manuscript for the Folger Shakespeare Library competition on Elizabethan history which included Shakespeare held in 1955. While the judges were considering the various entries, the NSA sent Friedman to liaise and improve collaboration with the British at GCHQ in Cheltenham. After five weeks Friedman was back in Washington.1 Less than a week later on 3rd April 1955 he suffered a heart attack and he was immediately rushed to the George Washington Hospital. As fate would have it that morning paper carried the headline ‘Washington Couple Win Folger Shakespeare Award’. His recovery was slow and it was another three months till he was discharged from hospital in the July under strict instructions to avoid stress and not to overdo things.

But before anything could proceed Friedman curiously submitted the manuscript to the NSA for “security clearance”,2 as far as the present writer is aware, the only time a work on Shakespeare had required this kind of secret official blessing from the most secretive intelligence agency in the United States of America, which there is reason to believe also has secret links to Bacon’s Rosicrucian Brotherhood.

The publication rights to the book had been secured by none other than Cambridge University Press, Francis Bacon’s old university. It was during his time at Cambridge that Bacon first secretly set in motion his Rosicrucian Brotherhood and many of its early members were drawn from the university and several Cambridge scholars wrote some of the eulogies in the Memoriae published by Dr Rawley insinuating that Bacon wrote the Shakespeare works. The Cambridge University Press, the oldest university press in the world, was granted its letters patent by King Henry VIII (Bacon’s royal grandfather) in 1534 and it was to the University of Cambridge that Bacon dedicated De Sapientia Veterum (The Wisdom of the Ancients).

The editorial team at the Cambridge University Press insisted the manuscript was strictly edited and reduced in size. With Friedman still recuperating from his heart attack the responsibility of editing it for the most part fell to his wife, nevertheless Elizebeth continually consulted him. With security clearance received from the NSA the personnel at Cambridge University Press went over it word by every single word:   

Two editorial assistants in England read the manuscript cold and were instructed to cut, cut, cut. The result was sent chapter by chapter across the Atlantic and the Friedmans read, agreed or disagreed as the case might be, and returned the pages. Parts of the book were thus being set while other parts were still being prepared for the printer.3

The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined was published by Cambridge University Press on ‘4 October 1957’.⁴ The reason for the careful and precisely selected publication date is it conceals a Baconian-Rosicrucian cipher. There are seven letters in the word October and the numbers in the date 4+1+9+5+7=26: 7+26=33 represents Bacon in simple cipher and if the null (9) is dropped from the date it leaves the number 157 Fra Rosicrosse in simple cipher conveying the hidden cryptographic message (from the Rosicrucian Brotherhood) Bacon, Brother of the Rosy Cross, is Shakespeare.

Following security clearance from the invisible hierarchy at the National Security Agency and the extremely close oversight and intense minute editorial scrutiny from unseen personnel at Cambridge University Press, in the preface to The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined, the Friedmans express their coded indebtedness to the one time acting director of the Baconian-Rosicrucian-Freemasonic Folger Shakespeare Library and editor of its organ The Shakespeare Quarterly, for suggesting their manuscript should be turned into a book. To the current director of the secret Baconian institution Dr Louis B. Wright and its various technical staff, most notably Dr Giles E. Dawson, the Friedmans express their coded gratitude for their unstinting support and access to the Folger’s collection of Shakespeareana: 

For the original suggestion that this material (much of which had first been embodied in a lecture) be made into a book-length manuscript we are indebted to Dr James G. McManaway, editor of The Shakespeare Quarterly, who also gave us much encouragement throughout its preparation. To the Director of the Folger Shakespeare Library, Dr Louis G. Wright, and the principal members of his technical staff, Dr McManaway, Dr. E. E. Willoughby, Dr Giles E. Dawson, Miss Dorothy Mason and others, we are grateful for assisting our access to and study of the Library’s collection of Shakespeareana and, even more important, its anti-Stratfordiana, the largest collection of its type in the United States.⁵

 

    1. Ronald W. Clark, The Man Who Broke Purple (London: Corgi Books, 1978), p. 194.

    2. G. Stuart Smith, A Life in Code Pioneer Cryptanalyst Elizebeth Smith Friedman

        (Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers, 2017), p. 168.

    3. Ronald W. Clark, The Man Who Broke Purple (London: Corgi Books, 1978),

        p. 196.

    4. Ibid., p. 196.

    5. William F. Friedman and Elizebeth S. Friedman, The Shakespearean Ciphers

        Examined An Analysis Of Cryptographic Systems Used As Evidence That Some

        Other Author Than William Shakespeare Wrote The Plays Commonly Attributed

        To Him (Cambridge University Press, 1958), p. viii.

 

[Light-of-Truth]

Looks like this chapter:

XI - Numerical cipher "seals;" Rosicrucian emblems; Baconian numerology

396-430 (34 pages)

Was edited and reduced to this chapter:

XII - Odd Numbers

169-187 (18 pages)

A. Phoenix, have you read "The Cryptologist Looks at Shakespeare"?

If so, did anything stand out that would require NSA security to review? 🙂

 

 

[A Phoenix]

THE FRIEDMANS & 'THE CRYPTOLOGIST LOOKS AT SHAKESPEARE' (33 LETTERS BACON IN SIMPLE CIPHER)                 AND ITS SECURITY CLEARANCE FROM THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY (NSA).

Hi Rob,

Yes I have read 'The Cryptologist Looks at Shakespeare'. I read it in stages when I was not aware that it had been submitted to the National Security Agency for 'Security Clearance'. Nothing immediately stood out that would excite the attention of the invisible powers (The Rosicrucian Brothers were known as the 'Invisibles') at the NSA. But that is not to say pages might not have been removed from the typescript by the NSA, although this would seem unlikely, when in all probaility Friedman knew it might require security clearance (the NSA had previously taken a very close look at his publications including his Riverbank publications which were later classified as well as some of his lecture notes).  But of course, we can not preclude the possibility, that the Friedmans inserted secret hidden messages in the typescript that went undetected by the National Security Agency! 

[A Phoenix]

                                   THE BACON BI-LITERAL CIPHER RIVERBANK PUBLICATIONS.

[A Phoenix]

 THE BACON BI-LITERAL CIPHER RIVERBANK PUBLICATIONS AS LISTED IN THE FRIEDMANS' TYPESCRIPT        'THE CRYPTOLOGIST LOOKS AT SHAKESPEARE' NOW HELD AT THE FOLGER SHAKESEPARE LIBRARY. 

[A Phoenix]

THE ANONYMOUS BACON BI-LITERAL CIPHER RIVERBANK PUBLICATIONS: A CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE.

[Allisnum2er]

Dear A Phoenix , many thanks for this INCREDIBLE Bacon-mas gift ! 🙏 ❤️

I just took a look to the "Contents" page of "The Cryptologist looks at Shakespeare" (157 short cipher 😉 ).

This page is a true gold mine !

Here is what I.C. 😊 ...

Notice the missing letter "i" in "rosicrucian" that allows to align the letter "r" with the other letters of TUDOR !

 

 

 

 

[Allisnum2er]

Notice the anagrams of bacon on each side of the anagram of tudor.

(I like the "a" of Bacon that is the "a" of "ham" in "Cunningham" 🙂 )

[Light-of-Truth]

It would seem to me the "Royal" secret could be the reason why the NSA might be involved. Think about it; Bacon, Bond, Dee, 007, and the factual history of Bacon's role in the British Secret Service make it a "sensitive" topic. Nobody with secret clearance would want to embarrass the Royal family, especially when they may be privy to the secrets already.

I like to think one day Prince William will share the Truth, and mention he was named after Bacon (William Tudor).

😉

 

[Allisnum2er]

 

Edited June 23, 2022 by Allisnum2er

[A Phoenix]

THE SECRECY SURROUNDING THE FRIEDMANS AND THE BACONIAN RIVERBANK PUBLICATIONS.

[A Phoenix]

THE SYSTEMATIC SILENCE OF THE FRIEDMANS.

[A Phoenix]

THE BACON BI-LITERAL CIPHER AS DECIPHERED BY ELIZABETH WELLS GALLUP ENDORSED BY          CAPTAIN J. A. POWELL A SENIOR MEMBER OF US CIPHER INTELLIGENCE (MI8).