Were six deaths attributed to the 'Curse of Tutankhamun' actually murders by arch-satanist Aleister Crowley?

By Daily Mail Reporter; 9th November 2011

The mysterious deaths gripped the nation back in the 1920s and 30s.

More than 20 people linked to the opening of Tutankhamun's burial chamber in Luxor in 1923 died in bizarre circumstances, six of them in London.

A frenzied public blamed the 'Curse of Tutankhamun' and speculated on the supernatural powers of the ancient Egyptians.

But a historian now claims the deaths in Britain were the work of a notorious satanist, Aleister Crowley.

Mark Beynon has drawn on previously unpublished evidence to conclude the occultist dubbed " the wickedest man in the world" masterminded a series of ritualistic killings in 'revenge' for the British archaeologist Howard Carter's opening of the boy-king's tomb.

Absolute Rubbish! Anyone with an ounce of sense can see the immediate contradictions in Mark Beynon's research. If there was such a thing as The Curse of Tutankhamen and it was as deadly as Beynon says why on earth would Crowley kill six people instead of simply waiting for the curse to do its work?

After analysis of inquest reports, Crowley's diaries, essays and books, he also argues Crowley was a Jack the Ripper-obsessed copycat murderer.

His 'victims' included Carter's personal secretary Captain Richard Bethell, who was found smothered to death at an exclusive Mayfair club, and Bethell's father Lord Westbury, who plunged seven floors to his death from a St James's apartment where he reportedly kept tomb artefacts.

Other victims were said to be Sir Ernest Budge, a former keeper in the British Museum's department of Egyptian and Assyrian antiquities found dead in his bed in Bloomsbury...

Nonsense! E.A. Budge was 69 years old when Tut's tomb was first opened and died a natural death at 77. He had nothing whatsoever to do with the Tutankhamen dig. He is on record in a newspaper interview as saying 'For more than 30 years I have dug up mummies in ancient lands. No curse has descended on me though I have lived 72 years'. Budge, a world-expert in Egyptology confirmed that there were no curses found in Tutankhamen's tomb. Just WHAT was Beynon researching?

and Ali Kamel Fahmy Bey, a 23-year-old Egyptian prince shot dead by his wife, Marie-Marguerite, in the Savoy Hotel shortly after he was photographed visiting King Tut's tomb.

Mr Beynon says Crowley and Marie-Marguerite had been lovers and Crowley put her up to the shooting.Crowley had motives to tarnish the legacy of Carter's discovery, Mr Beynon argues.

He accuses Crowley of being responsible for the deaths of:-

Raoul Loveday who died on February 16, 1923. The 23-year-old Oxford undergraduate was a follower of Crowley's cult at a Sicilian Abbey. He died on the same day at the very hour of Carter's much-publicised opening of Tutankhamun's burial chamber after drinking the blood of a cat sacrificed in one of Crowley's rituals. Mr Beynon argues that he was deliberately poisoned.

Falsehood! In 1929 Betty May (Loveday's wife) published her autobiography (Tiger-woman) and gave a full account of the incident. She states clearly that Raoul Loveday died from 'enteric' a form of Cholera caused by drinking water from a mountain stream during a hike. She wrote that Crowley specifically warned Loveday not to drink water from any unchecked source before Loveday and his wife set out. Betty May reminded Loveday of this but he drank from the stream anyway. His death had nothing whatosever to do with drinking blood from a sacrifice. For a 'historian' Beynon's research was appallingly incomplete. He appears not to have checked nor challenged lies published by the Daily Express in 1923 during their campaign to presecute Crowley for imagined wrongdoings following publication of his boook Diary of a Drug Fiend The Express made up ridiculous stories of the cat-killing kind to outrage dim British Readers.

Prince Ali Kamel Fahmy Bey who died on July 10, 1923. The Egyptian prince, 23, was shot dead by his French wife of six months, Marie-Marguerite, in London's Savoy Hotel shortly after he was photographed visiting the tomb. Mr Beynon says that Crowley and Marie-Marguerite had been lovers in Paris. She was working as a hostess at the Folies Bergere and he was a regular patron at the same venue. He suggests that Crowley put her up to the shooting.

Complete Misrepresentation! Beynon's search for academic excellence stops short of the actual court records. After a full and widely reported trial it became clear from her own testimony and that of servants and members of her household that Marie-Marguerite lived in fear for her life. Her husband was violent and regularly beat her, choked her and otherwise terrorised her because she demanded a divorce. Months before the argument which terminated in Ali Kamel's death Mrs Fahmy realised she was in a very dangerous position and lodged a notarised document with her solicitor in Cairo to protect her children which was only to be opened in case of her death. This was sequestered by the court and opened. It outlined her complaints against Ali Kamel for killing her or resorting to having her killed. Mrs Fahmy shot Ali Kamel with his own pistol which she had used to defend herself during the last violent argument. There was no premeditation. The trial was over in a matter of days. In his summing up the Judge, Mr Justice Swift particularly brought the jury's notice to the fact that her evidence was consistent and reliable throughout. He also said they could find her guilty of murder, manslaughter or not guilty of all charges. It took the jury only a few hours for them to find her not guilty. If there had been any suspicion of any foul play the jury would have returned a Manslaughter verdict. When the acquittal was heard the court erupted in cheering. When Marie-Marguerite left the court a throng of people outside also cheered her on her way. Thus this can in no way be described as a 'murder' in any sense of the word and certainly not a ritual killing. Crowley had no connection with the incident. He had been in Paris only three times in his life. He was in Paris for a week or so in 1900; spent 9 months in Paris in 1914 and six months in 1928. Thus any contact between Marie-Marguerite and Crowley must have taken place in 1914 SIX YEARS before the shooting. The supposed link between Tutankhamen's Curse and Crowley was that Ali Kamel Fahmy was shot within days of visiting Tut's Tomb. So let's play this out. Crowley being a mad supernatural protector of Tutankhamen's Tomb uses his clairvoyant skills to see into the future and divine that SIX YEARS FROM THEN Ali Kamel Fahmy will be photographed at the tomb. For this 'outrage' Crowley decides to ritually kill Fahmy and dives into his crystal ball again to locate the woman who Fahmy will SIX YEARS LATER choose to become his wife; after finding her he seduces her and then turns her into some kind of Manchurian Candidate who SIX YEARS LATER provokes a series of beatings with Ali Kamel Fahmy as an alibi and then shoots him dead in their room at the Savoy Hotel. Yes, that would make perfect sense for a person devoid of their wits. Beynon's suggestion that Crowley was involved in the Fahmy incident is absolutely preposterous.

Aubrey Herbert , died September, 23, 1923. Shortly after Marie-Marguerite's acquittal, Aubrey Herbert, the half-brother of Lord Carnarvon, died of blood poisoning after a routine dental operation went suspiciously wrong at his private hospital in Park Lane. He had only recently returned from his own trip to Luxor. Mr Beynon speculates that Crowley was behind the death and may again have used Marie-Marguerite to do his dirty work.

Wrong again. Referring to Herbert's death, Beynon is quoted as saying that a 'a routine dental operation went suspiciously wrong' but this is completely misleading. Towards the end of his life Herbert became totally blind. He was given very bad medical advice to the effect that having all his teeth extracted would restore his sight. The dental operation was NOT routine in any sense of the word and the procedure weakened an already poorly man which resulted in blood poisoning from which he died in London on 26 September 1923. The Fahmy and Herbert cases are totally non-related.

Captain Richard Bethell, died November 15, 1929. Howard Carter's 46-year-old personal secretary was found dead in his bed at Mayfair's exclusive Bath Club. Bethell was said to have been in perfect health. It was initially thought that he died of a heart attack but his symptoms raised suspicion that he was smothered to death as he slept. Crowley had only recently returned to London and was often a guest of novelist W. Somerset Maugham at the club.

No he didn't! Captain Bethell actually died from Emphysemia and was not smothered. Over 100 people regularly dined at the Bath Club. Beynon may as well accuse Somerset Maugham of being the killer - at least he was a member which Crowley wasn't!

Lord Westbury, died February 20, 1930. Bethell's father, Lord Westbury, 77, was believed to have thrown himself off his seventh floor St James's apartment. But Mr Beynon found that it was practically impossible for an elderly man to have climbed out onto the window ledge and suggests that Crowley threw him off.

'Practically Impossible'? The idea that 77 year olds are unlikely to throw themselves off high places or will not strive to do so because of infirmity is a complete and utter nonsense. Males aged 75 and over have the highest rates of suicide in nearly all industrialised countries, and among many of these nations suicide rates increase with age.. In the U.S.A. and Britain statistics show that more people die from suicide than from homicide yet Benyon completely dismisses the suicide idea EVEN THOUGH LORD WESTBURY LEFT A HANDWRITTEN SUICIDE NOTE. To Mark Beynon it is more likely that Crowley pushed Westbury to his death even though there is not a scrap of evidence to suggest it other than his personal suspicions. Just what is Beynon playing at?

Edgar Steele , died February 24, 1930. Only four days after the death of Lord Westbury, Mr Steele, 57, died at St Thomas' Hospital after a minor stomach operation. Mr Beynon speculates that Crowley was behind the death. He was in charge of handling the tomb artefacts at London's British Museum.

Misrepresentation: Edgar Steele died from post-operative shock or Septic Shock (Sepsis). There is a high risk of Septic Shock even today, which is why the medical profession keeps it quiet. In 2006 research showed that between 30% to 50% of all operations may result in death through septic shock. (in the USA there are more deaths from septic shock than there are for lung and breast cancer combined. (i.e. 215,000 deaths annually)) Source: S68 CLEVELAND CLINIC JOURNAL OF MEDICINE VOLUME 73 • SUPPLEMENT 1 MARCH 2006) In modern health care there are many ways in which some people can be saved from septic shock but that was not the case in the 1930s. Beynon appears so obsessed with selling his Crowley-linked Tutankhamen Curse that he overlooks the evidential value of causal effects of this kind which de-mystify the case.

Sir Ernest Wallis Budge , died November 23, 1934. A former Keeper in the British Museum's Department of Egyptian and Assyrian Antiquities, he was found dead in his bed in Bloomsbury aged 77. A friend of Lord Carnarvon, he had been responsible for displaying the artefacts from Luxor. Mr Beynon says there is evidence that Budge and Crowley were associates on the London occult scene.

Speculation contaminated with Imagination! Budge was a respected and noted academic with decades of successful archeology behind him. He was a pillar of the Establishment and there is no evidence to suggest any magical or occult link between Crowley and himself. The reverse is more likely for in an article on February 21st 1930 headed Laughs At Curse; Superstition of Fools, Budge is interviewed and ridicules any idea of supernatural involvement. "There was nothing in the tomb to poison them. No curses are written on the tombs. They are elsewhere written only on papyri, and directed against people stealing or damaging the book...... Smiling, and shaking his white head, Sir Ernest said : "Examine these deaths. Lord Carnarvon died a few weeks after Tutankhamen's tomb was opened, because he was there when the mosquitoes were brought up by the south winds and was bitten. Instead of bathing his face, he allowed the scabs to remain, and then shaved them off. Erysipelas then developed. There is no curse, and there is no reason why anybody should be frightened..."

THE CURSE OF KING TUT

The curse of the mummy began after a series of terrible events occurred following the discovery of King Tut's tomb.

Legend has it that anyone who dared to open the tomb would suffer the wrath of the mummy.

A few months after the tomb's opening tragedy struck. Lord Carnarvon, 57, was taken ill and rushed to Cairo. He died a few days later. The exact cause of death was not known, but it seemed to be from an infection started by an insect bite.

The Cause of Death WAS known, it was erysipelas caused by an infection, presumed from an insect bite. Beynon may have overlooked the fact over one million (1,000.000) deaths a year are caused by insect bites (Malaria).

Legend has it that when he died there was a short power failure and all the lights throughout Cairo went out. His son reported that back on his estate in England his favorite dog howled and suddenly dropped dead. Even more strange, when the mummy of Tutankhamun was unwrapped in 1925, it was found to have a wound on the left cheek in the same exact position as the insect bite on Carnarvon that lead to his death.

Mystification! What? The EXACT position? How did Beynon work this out seeing as how mummified skin tightens and shrinks? Was Tut's cheek bitten before or after death? Did Beynon have a death-mask of Carnarvon's face to measure? Of course not! The statement 'same exact position' is completely speculative and designed to portray an exactness and certainty which simply does not exist. It should have read 'in the approximate position' but when one is trying to convince readers of an unproven theory using pathetically weak circumstancial evidence certainty can often convey what the evidence does not. In any case what is Beynon trying to infer with this claim? Everyone knows Tutankhamen was assassinated for political purposes; probably poisoned. Why would a mark on his mummy's cheek have any significance for Carnarvon? Is Beynon speculating that a supernatural mosquito which could divine the future bit Tut and then came back again to haunt Carnarvon after 3000 years to give a sign for ghost-hunters? Such ridiculous ideas are replete in Mark Beynon's pot-boiler and simply underline that it is all low-grade speculation.

By 1929 eleven people connected with the discovery of the tomb had died early and of unnatural causes. This included two of Carnarvon's relatives, Carter's personal secretary, Richard Bethell, and Bethell's father, Lord Westbury. Westbury killed himself by jumping from a building. He left a note that read: 'I really cannot stand any more horrors and hardly see what good I am going to do here, so I am making my exit.'

Factually Incorrect! Firstly the assertion that people died of 'unnatural causes' is completely untrue. All of their deaths had a simple forensic explanation. Secondly, Egyptologist Herbert E. Winlock (see below) examined the evidence in 1933. Of the 26 people present at the opening of the burial chamber, only 6 had died up till then. Of the 22 of the 26 people who were present at the opening of the sarcophagus only 2 had died within 10 years. Only 10 of the 26 people who had watched the unwrapping of the mummy had succumbed and none of them had died within the next decade! In fact, many of the people who had the most contact with the king's mummy lived long and productive lives. One has to wonder at the level of scholarship in this 'book' if such basic facts are ignored. (source:)

The gods of his own religious philosophy, Thelema, were mainly drawn from ancient Egyptian religion. He believed himself to be a prophet of a new age of personal liberty, controlled by the Egyptian god Horus. It is likely he would have found Carter's excavation sacrilegious, the historian said.

Misleading Guesswork and Prejudice! Crowley's magical system and beliefs drew from ALL mystical religions and philosophies. Crowley had no complaints or criticisms about archeologists and was thankful for their work. He frequented the British Museum and when in Egypt visited the Cairo Museum where he once discovered keys to a past life in the Stele of Revealing on display there, but he also spent time in Asia and the far east learning their magical methods too. There is absolutely no indication in any of Crowley's voluminous writings that he was against archeology or any other aspect of science, in fact the reverse is the case - he was a thoroughly modern intellectual, as evinced by his magnum opus The Equinox a series of ten volumes which had as its stated intention, "The Method of Science, the Aim of Religion" The idea that he would have harboured a grudge against archeologists enough for him to begin killing them is absolutely ludicrous and the suggestion is as mischievous as it is shameful.

In his book, London's Curse: Murder, Black Magic and Tutankhamun in the 1920s West End, Mr Beynon pins seven deaths on Crowley, six of which took place in London.

Crowley, who was born into a wealthy upper class family in 1875, had a controversial doctrine for life of 'Do What Thou Wilt'. The bisexual heroin addict gained notoriety for advocating sexual promiscuity and prostitution.

Factual Inaccuracy: Crowley did not advocate prostitution, he advocated 'free love'. This is a similar kind of slur to that aimed at poor old Stephen Ward who killed himself when he was used as a patsy for the British Establishment during the Profumo Scandal in the 1960s. Ward was surrounded by good-time girls and because of his 'lax' morals was tried for living off prostitution. Something he, in fact, never did. Has Beynon fallen into the same tired stereotypes in order to discredit Crowley? For all the world Beynon's arguments seem to be following the same trajectory as that of fundamentalist christians in trying to establish as a fact, the lie that Crowley was a satanist who committed ritual human sacrifice. The falsehoods in London's Curse will be grist to their mill. Is Beynon a fundie agent-provocateur or is he just irresponsible?.

He never mentions the deaths in his diaries but often wrote that his mood had 'lifted' the day after them.

Illogical Inuendo! If Crowley never mentioned the deaths in his diary how would Beynon know that Crowley's mood had risen because of them? It might have risen because it was sunny that day, or because other things had pleased him.

The satanist was also obsessed with Jack the Ripper. He wrote in his diaries that he believed the locations of five of the Ripper's murders in Whitechapel in 1888 formed a pentagram; an important star-shaped symbol in satanism. Mr Beynon claims the locations of five of Crowley's 'murders' form a copycat pentagram.

Compounded Error upon Ignorance! Come on! Who DOESN'T have a theory about the identity or motives of Jack The Ripper! There are literally hundreds of books claiming to have insider information on the Ripper's identity and each of them have more or less barmy ideas about it. It is amazing to see Beynon highlight Crowley's 'Ripper Pentagram Location' theory and lard it with occult inuendo whilst totally failing to mention that Crowley also had an earlier and more prominent Ripper theory which used a 'seven squared' Calvary Cross (see drawing alongside) as a location finder- because at that time most people thought the Ripper had killed seven victims. Crowley published his Calvary Cross theory in his book Confessions in 1930! Thus during the period covered by Beynon's book Crowley was fixed on his Calvary Cross theory of the Ripper. Years later, (circa 1937) Crowley learned there were only five definite Ripper victims and he superceded his Ripper Crucifix Location theory with the Pentagram theory which Beynon refers to. This later pentagram theory wasn't actually published until after Crowley's Death. Beynon therefore apparently avoids the Ripper Calvary Cross theory which is more pertinent and which has been published in numerous editions of Confessions since 1930, in favour of the rare Pentagram Theory which more appropriately matches his storyline. But, if we are to be persuaded by Beynon to jump to stereotypical prejudices about pentagrams then the revelation of the Ripper Crucifix Theory would by Beynon's yardstick presumably indicate that the Ripper was a mad Christian killer and had nothing to do with occultism, yes? Beynon may be described as a 'historian' but he's certainly no mathematician; any five random points when joined up always DO produce a pentagram, that is geometry! So this 'revelation' proves absolutely nothing but the gullibility of some people to believe madcap conspiracy theories. How for example, did Beynon miss the astonishing discovery that Euston, Charing Cross, Waterloo, Liverpool Street and London Bridge railway Stations make up an inverted pentagram proving conclusively that victorian railway architect Philip Hardwick must have been an Arch-Satanist and baby killer. Not! Crowley was 13 when the Ripper killed his five victims. Is Beynon actually trying to suggest that Crowley waited 34 years to begin copy-catting ripper killings? And, on this Ripper theme, there's one last crucial contradiction which Beynon completely ignores: NONE of the killings he attributes to Crowley were copy-cat Ripper killings. The Ripper disemboweled his victims and took parts of their bodies away. None of the people who died whose deaths Beynon is trying to pin on Crowley were mutilated so how can it be a copy-cat killing? THERE IS NO LINK BETWEEN CROWLEY AND JACK THE RIPPER.

Mr Beynon said: 'When I researched these deaths, Crowley's name popped up again and again. There is plenty of circumstantial evidence linking him to all the deaths. I have just put all the pieces of the jigsaw together.' Mr Beynon paints a picture of a dangerous schizophrenic known to have murdered his servants in India.

Now Beynon really is scraping the bottom of the barrel. No, Mark Beynon, you haven't put ALL the pieces of the jigsaw together; you've found a handful of circumstancial pieces which can be made to look like they fit each other if you gratuitiously ignore facts which cancel them out. Tutankhamen's tomb was discovered on 26th November 1922. The first salvo in the constant campaign by Beaverbrook's newspapers to discredit and defame Crowley was from the Sunday Express of November 26th 1922! The very same day. Revelations about Crowley and Tutankhamen ran in parallel in the headlines for years afterwards but there was no causal link between the two. Additionally, Beynon may think Crowley was a schizophrenic but there is no medical evidence to support that contention and Crowley never received treatment for it. By using the term 'dangerous schizophrenic' it looks for all the world as though Beynon is trying to convince the reader that Crowley was a psychopath given to violent actions against others. If that is the case then it is a downright falsehood. The allegation that Crowley murdered his servants in India is completely disingenuous. It is based on the lie which was first floated by the British Press where John Bull magazine actually accused Crowley of being a cannibal! This unproven allegation was based on a third-hand story to the effect that, when out on one of his mountain-climbing expeditions, Crowley ran out of food and a rumour went round that he had survived by eating two of his native bearers! Beynon's 'research' is so good that this ends up being portrayed by him as a case of murder! The man's work is laughable.

He socialised with Ripper suspect Walter Sickert and Mr Beynon argues that Crowley used the Ripper's killing spree as inspiration for his own efforts years later. Crowley believed that the Ripper's murders had afforded him special powers, including invisibility. Mr Beynon says that he thought his murders would also render him invisible. To test his theory, he famously walked through London's Cafe Royal restaurant ridiculously dressed in a mustard-coloured cloak adorned with occultist symbols. When customers fell silent and were too perturbed to speak to him, he assumed they could not see him.

Absolute Rubbish! This is so ingenuine that we might very well accuse Beynon of dissassembling. The story about Crowley and the Cafe Royal is just that - an unverified anecdote. Crowley was there and did take to wearing dramatic robes and cloaks during that period of his life but the 'invisibility' bit was a joke. There was never any link with invisibility and the Ancient Egyptian Religion, Crowley was introduced to formulae of occultic invisibility by S. L. Mathers who was researching them from ancient grimoires from the classical world, not from ancient Egypt. Jack The Ripper was seen, chased and nearly caught several times, therefore was hardly invisible and this of course may reveal Beynon's convoluted thinking. The Cafe Royal Invisibility Legend is included in Beynon's tale because it makes Crowley appear to THINK he was invisible to others but wasn't. If we are to believe Beynon's tosh about the Crowley-Ripper link, Jack The Ripper also used invisibility spells and thinking he was occultly invisible was nearly caught because of it! Hence because it is impossible for anyone to say for sure that the Ripper DIDN'T think himself invisible, nobody can likewise decry Beynon's claim that Crowley was similarly deceiving himself using the same magical formula! Incestuous logic! But WE can dismiss this claim. The only time Crowley admitted to experimenting with Magical Invisibility was outlined in the memoires of CR Cammel who knew Crowley well. Crowley explained to Cammel the magical process of redirecting mass attention onto a point of focus which allowed the person doing it to go 'unseen'. It brings to mind the Indian Rope trick. Crowley told Cammel in the 1940s that he had used this technique only once, in Sicily and that 'when the Fascists raided his Abbey of Thelema at Cefalu, he passed through them unseen.' . Walter Sickert was NOT a suspect in the Ripper Murders. The Sickert involvement theory did not appear until the early 1970s. Sickert was not included in the original police investigation. In hindsight some conspiracy theorists who believed in a masonic-style Royal Satanic conspiracy judged that Sickert's paintings were too realistic to be simply paintings and that he was therefore involved! They might as well have said the same about the artists who penned the line-drawings of victims and locations which peppered the popular newspapers at the time! Even so the theory is that Sickert was involved only tangentially in a cover up and thus not the killer himself. Sickert was part of the famous London's Camden Town group which became a centre of artistic and creative society. Crowley, also a painter and bohemian, moved in the same circles like hundreds of other people who knew and lauded Sickert's talents and style. These connections with the Ripper murders were never made during Sickert's lifetime and so any casual acquaintence between Crowley and Sickert is not as Beynon is inferring. Ripper Latest: Ripper Latest: New DNA Evidence Proves Beyond Doubt That Jack The Ripper was in fact  Aaron Kosminski "Kosminski was one of several suspects at the time but police did not have enough evidence to convict him, despite identification by a witness. Kosminski was 23 when the murders took place, and living in Greenfield Street, just 200 yards from where the third victim, Elizabeth Stride, was killed. He was a pathetic creature, a lunatic who achieved sexual satisfaction from slashing women to death in the most brutal manner. He spent the rest of his life in Leavesden  Asylum and died from gangrene at the age of 53, weighing just 7st." Jack the Ripper unmasked: Benyon's theory that Walter Sickert was the Ripper and had an influence on Crowley who later ritually murdered others in a copy-cat fashion can now be seen to be complete and utter falsity.

Outlining his macabre theory, Mr Beynon said: 'So much of Crowley's belief system was steeped in ancient Egypt. 'He would have seen the opening of Tutankhamun's tomb as desecration. 'This was a man given to extensive world travel and yet we know he was in London when at least four of the six deaths occurred.' He added: 'I hope the book will appeal to anyone with an interest in crime or London history.

Beynon's pot-boiler is the worst kind of book. It pretends to be an authoritative modern re-analysis of the facts but is in reality simply a tabloidesque offering in a bound jacket. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Crowley thought the opening of Tutankhamen's tomb was a desecreation. In fact his voluminous writings show no interest in Tutankhamen. The boy-king was a minor short-lived pharaoh and has little magical or religious significance to esotericists. There were 25 Westerners Identified by Howard Carter as present in Egypt during the opening of the tomb who were potentially exposed to the Curse. Fourteen of them died over a period of decades in ways which Tutankhamen Curse afficionados think was suspicious. Crowley was in London when Six of those died. Which means he wasn't in the locality when eight others died. Crowley was not implicated in any of the 8 other deaths even using the pathetically lax criteria Beynon employs. So who is supposed to have killed those? Scientific research undertaken by Mark Nelson here which measured the length of survival after date of potential exposure to the supposed curse resulted in the following findings: Results: In the 25 people exposed to the curse the mean age at death was 70 years (SD12) compared with 75 (13) in those not exposed (P=0.87 for difference). Survival after the date of exposure was 20.8 (15.2)v 28.9 (13.6) years respectively (P=0.95 for difference). Female sex was a predictor for survival (P=0.02). Conclusions: There was no significant association between exposure to the mummy’s curse and survival and thus there is no scientific evidence to support the existence of a mummy’s curse.

'I was fascinated researching London in the 20s and 30s. 'On the surface, it was very glitzy and glamorous but there was a dark underbelly that provided the ideal stage for this story. 'Everyone was obsessed with the supposed Curse of Tutankhamun striking down high society victims. 'But until now, no-one has ever realised that they may well have been murdered.'

You mean nobody has had the gall to suggest such a blatantly untrue and scientifically precarious conclusion by ignoring available facts to the contrary. We mentioned earlier in our comments that the curse itself has not been established beyond question. Howard Carter who lead the expedition and dig said there was no item, seal or engraving on the door or the inside of Tutankhamen's tomb which contained any curse of any kind. On February 24th 1930 Carter was telegraphed news by the London Evening Stadard of another death from the 'curse' and replied tersely "Rumours of the curse are a libellous invention." In the early 1980s Humphrey Evans interviewed Richard Adamson one of the then surviving people who was closely involved in the Tutankhamen dig for his piece Curse of The Boy King, (The Unexplained pp785) for first hand knowledge about how the curse started. Adamson said that as an ex military policeman he had been given the job of securing the tomb and stood guard many nights throughout the dig. Adamson vowed that it was Carter himself who had invented the curse idea in November 1922 when the tomb was first discovered in order to keep people away and preserve his exclusivity agreement with the New York Times newspaper and later came to regret it. In the same vein he said Carter also issued contradictory and unreliable press reports on finds to mislead non NYT journalists and keep Times hacks ahead of the game. These facts and all the facts I have outlined above are easily available for any professional journalist or 'historian' to research. Did the author turn a blind eye to anything which interfered with his sensational conclusions? Whether he did or didn't his book is quite simply rubbish and not worth the trees which have been cut down to produce it. Believe in it at your peril.

John Freedom, Mortlake December 2011,

CROWLEY SANK THE TITANIC! Iceberg story is cover-up for Satanic Sacrifice Crowley was on board, says cabin steward John Enery. 'When I opened his trunk to unpack his clothes I was astonished to see a very large can-opener with satanic symbols on it.' John escaped drowning at sea by jumping into a life-boat whilst wearing women's clothes, including a very nice laice chemise with silk suspender belt, fishnet stockings and a red velvet garter; an outfit he just happened to have lying around. John said he got to know Crowley well on the voyage but he always threw an icy stare whenever John asked him about the giant can-opener. After the captain had called Abandon Ship, John checked Crowley's trunk and, sure enough, the giant can-opener was missing. Historian Hyam A Greadysvine has just published a 500 page book on the sinking of the Titanic based on John Enery's account. 'It had nothing whatsoever to do with any Icebergs - that's a myth!' Crowley was The Wickedest Man in The World.

CROWLEY BEHIND HINDENBERG DISASTER It Blew Up For No Apparent Reason, The Hydrogen Had Nothing To Do With It. In 1937 I was an 18 month old child but clearly remember seeing Crowley at the back of the crowd holding a Block II systems designated XM41E1 Surface to Air Missile and laughing maniacally just before the Hindenberg went up. People have since asked me how Crowley could have obtained an XM41E1 when they weren't invented till 1963 but that's easy. Time Travel dear boy! I mean, he was a Black Magician wasn't he? Crowley was The Wickedest Man in The World you know.

CROWLEY STARTED FIRST WORLD WAR FOR SATAN Conspiracy to Kill German and British Christians My Serbian Grandfather always told the tale about how he saw Crowley jump up on the Landau and shoot Archduke Franz Ferdinand dead, then thrust the pistol into the hands of Gavrilo Princip. Under torture Princip confessed anything his torturers wanted to hear including the fact that Crowley's objective was to start a war to kill millions of people for Satan. You see, it had nothing to do with ultra-nationalism, and power-hungry politicians it's always the Satanists what did it, after all Crowley was The Wickedest Man in the World

CROWLEY PILOTED JAP PLANE AT PEARL HARBOUR Black Magician kills 2,000 and blames it on Yamamoto Because Crowley was a Nazi Spy working for Himmler's Thule society he had advance notice of the impending Japanese air-strike on Pearl Harbour and joined Yamamoto on his Flagship to lead the attack. Historian, Lee Yngtwat's new book reveals that Crowley often gloated that he personally blew up the Arizona whilst people on the ground heard him shouting 'Hail Satan! Death to The Christians!' from his open cockpit. Independent observers have questioned whether it was really possible for Crowley's voice to have been heard above the explosions, gunfire and noise of the plane's engine but Lee Yngtwat told the Daily Mail ' My informant can lip-read. Look, some have said that we should make allowances because Crowley was 66 and a confused man due to his life-long use of prescription drugs however somebody once said he was the Wickedest Man in The World and that's good enough for me. I mean the crimes of guys like Hitler, Stalin, Polpot and Herod pales into insignificance when compared with the things Crowley was said to have done, although I can't quite remember exactly what those were but everyone is shocked so it must be true! Yes. Crowley easily deserves the title of the Wickedest Man In The world. He was a SATANIST for godsakes! Anyway, that means we can trash the memory of a dead man who can't answer back as well as making money out of him to boot. It also has the decided advantage of not conflicting with actual facts which my professors have already written about therefore It needn't go out for peer review and I won't get slated - Good init?' Lee Yngtwat is just in it for the money.

CROWLEY HIJACKED ENOLA GAY Atom Bomb Had Horns Drawn On It Documents recently released under the Freedom of Disinformation act included this formerly secret photograph of Crowley just prior to taking off in Enola Gay. He mentioned to his crew in passing that he expected to Satanically Sacrifice 350,000 people with the Atomic Bomb and then to blame it on the Pacific War effort, but as he was an infirm 70 year old at the time and died a year or so later they just put it down to grumpiness. Crowley was well known for being The Wickedest Man in The World.

SATANIST CROWLEY ASSASSINATED KENNEDY Crowley's Ghost Hypnotised Oswald To shoot Kennedy in first Manchurian Candidate killing New documents released under the Freedom of Misinformation Act reveal that Marina Oswald confessed to CIA interrogators that Crowley had appeared to Oswald in a dream and told him how to charm three 'magic bullets' one of which after hitting Kennedy turned around to also shoot Governor John Connally. Although kept secret at the time this amazing fact helped the Assassinations committee to nicely avoid evidence of more than one gunman and a conspiracy wrap for the killing. The truth has been revealed in an exclusive interview with Al Odalies, a historian who is helping us increase our circulation without a jot of proof. We know you're dim enough to buy into it whenever a 'historian' says the words Assassination and Kennedy in the same sentence and the crapometer goes right off the scale when we include the words Satanist and Crowley as well. After all, Crowley was the Wickedest Man in the World. Easy money!

CROWLEY SACRIFICES 75 MILLION PEOPLE TO THE DEVIL Black Death was Black Magic Strategy - Baccillus only killed nice people. Back in the middle of the 13c Aleister Crowley was only minus 427 years old but pious people who lived at that time have left us categoric proof of his involvement in spreading the Bubonic Plague in the form of this genuine woodcut showing a satanist invoking the devil of disease which, says Alwaze Anangle, a historian, is umistakably that of Crowley's form. Alwaze Anangle's new book Earn A Million by Writing Books For Suckers With The Most Outrageous Claims Without Any Factual Evidence - Nobody Will Ever Check It And Your Publisher's PR Person Will Just LOVE You For The Free Publicity It Generates', contains absolutely incontrovertible evidence to prove this is the case because many people who knew Crowley admitted that he coughed exceptionally frequently by modern standards and eventually died.... and he was of course The Wickedest Man in The World. Anangle's book is being serialised by newspapers who should know better but are in the death throes of paper news with desperate editors who have lost any shred of self-respect they once had printing rubbish which at one time would have kept them awake at night fearing withering criticisms from their peers. .

To be continued.............

In Crowley's youth his parents and relatives 'force-fed' him Christian extremism which he resisted and rebelled against enough for his fanatical mother to accuse him of being The Beast mentioned in the Book of Revelation. The young Crowley revelled in his contrariness and the nickname stuck but his origins had nothing to do with any satanic links. Rather his interest in the occult must have stemmed from a dislike of the dead-hand of fundamentalist Christianity.

He was put through a classic English gentleman's education, first at Malvern and Tonbridge and later Cambridge where he was happy and fulfilled. Crowley was an accomplished mountain-climber taking a crucial part in the first British expeditionary campaign to climb Chogo Ri (K2) and then Kanchenchunga in the Himalayas before Everest was conquered by Hilary. Crowley was a brilliant chess-player, a Poet, a Painter and Novelist publishing a series of detective stories under the banner of Simon Iff.

Crowley was also one of the most prodigious writers on esoteric matters that the world has ever known. Heir to a sizeable fortune after his father died Crowley was able to indulge himself in travel to exotic destinations and his command of semitic languages enabled him to produce translations of Eastern esoteric writings which impressed academics of the time.

After having imbibed of everything currently then occult within England Crowley developed his own magickal system of Thelema which began to attract converts, and the disparaging glances of the British Establishment. To avoid the small-minded repression of England Crowley moved to Sicily where he purchased a typical native cascina or farmhouse and set up his 'Abbey of Thelema' there in Cefalu where magick and free-love could express themselves.

A coterie of supporters visited the 'Abbey', the locals accepted Crowley and for a while things went well until Raoul Loveday, a brilliant young Oxford graduate who had devoted his life to Crowley's system died from enteritis. Conditions in the 'Abbey' were somewhat primitive with no running water or power etc. Crowley had recently come under criticism from the tut-tut brigade for writing Diary of a Drug Fiend, a powerful novel with autobiographical sections. After Loveday died Betty May returned to England and was pressed by the tabloids to tell salacious stories. Most British newspapers jumped on the bandwagon with outraged late-Victorian prudery but One newspaper in particular, John Bull, lead the frenzied attack:

CROWLEY - THE WICKEDEST MAN IN THE WORLD?:

The phrase 'Wickedest Man in The World' which is often quoted by supposedly independent authors and writers, has probably done more to discredit Crowley than any other appellation. It was a headline originally coined by the editor of John Bull on 24 March 1923. This self-righteous hack had for some weeks been campaigning against Crowley. The Sunday Express had for eight weeks previously fielded similarly hysterical headlines such as:

'The King of Depravity'

and

'A Man We Would Like To Hang'

(yes, really, and the true irresponsibility of their sensationalism can be seen when it is realised that execution by hanging was still in force at the time!).

Yet another headline read ,

'A Human Beast Returns'

and many other similarly scurrilous statements based on sourgrapes kiss-and-tell informants and even downright fabrications of the wickedest kind.

For example, John Bull actually accused Crowley of being a cannibal! This lie was based on a third-hand story to the effect that, when out on one of his mountain-climbing expeditions, Crowley had ran out of food and a rumour went round that he had survived by eating two of his native bearers!

Source: Crowley and The Human Sacrifice Smear (Frater Marabas) OEXP063 An EXCELLENT article with lots of rare historical perspective. Full article available for download here:

After the Abbey of Thelema incident Crowley continued to work on his magical system right up until his death in 1947 but was wary of broadcasting his 'synthesis of religion and science' except to those who sought him out.

Crowley's unique talents and contribution to modern society was that he presaged the sexual and religious liberation of the 1960s half a century before everyone else caught up. This is one reason why he was included in the montage of famous people on The Beatles' Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Heart's Club Band record cover (though fundamentalist Christians will tell you the oft quoted lie that it was because The Beatles were Satanists too!). Creative and artistic types know what Crowley was trying to accomplish and take him and his statements allegorically, unlike the fundies who are still stuck in a 19th century literal mentality. Crowley wasn't a satanist and never termed himself a satanist, in fact in 1932 he actually sued Nina Hamnett, the author of a book The Laughing Torso which portrayed him as a Black Magician. Crowley's sex magic may not have been appropriate to Christian eyes but it wasn't Black, it wasn't Satanic and it only involved consensual sex with adults.

Since the 1970s Crowley's work has been appreciated by hundreds of thousands of people. Many thousands around the world follow his magical and religious system and most artists, and poets realise their debt to him. His self-sacrificing scientific experiments with Opium and Cocaine and his writings on these drugs presaged the 1960s psychedelic movement. His subjective writings about Heroin and Cocaine (which we add were not banned substances at the time and were being used recreationally by many creative people) are still referred to by pharmacologists and psychiatrists today as powerful source-works.

In the modern world Crowley's projects and activities would seem unexceptional yet historians who should know better ( and those with a sectarian axe to grind such as Christian fundamentalists who often try to hijack his infamy as 'evidence' of Satanic Ritual Abuse), are still trying to present Crowley as some kind of ultimate evil and proof of the existence of Satanic Networks.

Those who did not live through the Profumo crisis, which brought down a Conservative government in 1963, now look back on Profumo and Christine Keeler in astonishment that affairs of sex could be mixed with affairs of state to cause such extensive and destructive political ramifications. Today, 26-year-old Katia Zatuliveter an alleged Russian Spy accused of liaising with Russian intelligence services while working as a researcher for 65-year-old Liberal Democrat MP Mike Hancock, with whom she had an affair, is almost a joke, yet in 1963 Stephen Ward committed suicide over a very similar situation. That was how prudish the press and politicians were in the early sixties. How much more outrage would a free-spirit like Crowley cause in the early part of the 20th century?

Because of the unrepressed attitude which Crowley, amongst others, groundbroke, freedoms of sexual preference are now taken as a right by the majority of people who benefit from them. It is to my eyes more than despicable for people like Mark Beynon (see left) who have seized the opportunity to use the freedom from censorship which people like Crowley paid for with blood and tears, to write titilating nonsense pandering to the worst-fears of puritans and thereby provide the forces of unreason and oppression with the ammunition to close in on artists and authors who are at the leading edge today. Beynon should be utterly ashamed of himself but what has been writ cannot be unwritten and his spectacularly stupid diatribe will remain as a monument to his ignorance for the rest of his life.

What Crowley did was shocking for those at the time, because of their suppressed religious and sexual world-view. The Establishment rounded upon him because he dared to liberate himself and others. They tried to destroy his system of free-thought by besmirching his honesty and his honour yet his axiom 'Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law, and its corollary 'Love is The Law - Love under will' , could easily have been the battle-cry of most post 1980 Yuppies! As it is the media have parasitically preyed upon Crowley for the past half a century and the lies have grown in the telling. They were lies when they started out and they are even bigger lies today.

As for Crowley, he would have just LOVED to find himself still winding-up the puritans over half a century after his death. Crowley prophesied in his writings that this would happen because he knew the mentality of the do-gooders who just couldn't leave him alone. He knew they would play into his hands and that his future notoriety was assured. The fools themselves have done more to promote Crowley's magical and philsophical system by trying to censor and suppress it, than Crowley himself could ever have done alone.

"I am the Beast, I am the Word of the Aeon. I spend my soul in blazing torrents that roar into Night, streams that with molten tongues hiss as they lick. I am a hell of a Holy Guru!"

Wickedest Man In The World Competition Death Count Table Now look here old chap, if you are going to get hot under the collar about how shocking Mr Crowley was you aught to be armed with the FACTS...We don't call him The Wickedest Man in The World for nothing... Jack The Ripper = 5 Murders (5 definite, another 4 probable but not certain) The French Ripper (Joseph Vacher): = 11 murders The Yorkshire Ripper (Peter Sutcliffe) = 13 murders all women. The Boston Strangler (Albert DeSalvo) = 13 women. Jeffrey Dahmer = 17 Men and Boys Monster of Dusseldorf (Peter Kurten), world's worst serial Killer = 79 murders. Urgh! Wicked! But not wicked enough apparently for that coveted title of The Wickedest Man in The World: Who else? Ah yes, The Professionals: Jean Bedel Bokassa = Shooting dead of 100 schoolchildren etc. etc. Lieutenant William Calley = 500 dead in a couple of hours at My Lai massacre. Richard The Lionheart 2,700 hostages beheaded at Acre Klaus Barbie = 4,000 Jews executed in Vichy France. Alexander The Great = 6,000 residents of Thebes put to the sword. Sadam Hussein = Largest Single Poisoned Gas Attack Halabja = 5,000 deaths Vlad The Impaler = 30,000 merchants 'eviscerated, decapitated, dismembered. Arthur 'Bomber' Harris = 35,000 in the Dresden Firestorm WWII Ivan The Terrible = 60,000 in the Novgorod Massacre alone Idi Amin - 400,000 Polpot = 1,700,000 Stalin = Millions. 22,000 Polish prisoners executed on his personal orders at Katyn. Hitler = 6 million jews 'Final Solution' etc. That's enough mass murderers. Gag! Very, Very Wicked men, but not Quite the Wickedest Man in the World ..... Hello! Whom do we have here? Ah...Aleister Crowley = Er...NO murders actually, not one body - but there was that one ever so slightly suspicious accidental death of Loveday. Yes, yes, I know his wife said it wasn't Crowley's fault but I mean, who are we to believe? Then again Crowley did sacrifice a frog once. That's very Nasty. Almost as nasty as biology students in dissection class. That's It! That's Him! Numero uno. Mr Nasty. As plain as plain could be. He MUST be the nastiest. Why? Because we can forgive a man genocide (Alexander 'the Great' unnecessarily and viciously killed millions with his war machine but he's still considered 'great' isn't he?) however we can't ever forgive Crowley for being an occultist. Crowley MUST be the Wickedest Man in The World! So there! Sickening List Here of Hundreds of Vicious Psychopaths, Cannibals, Necrophiliacs and Baby Killers - but take my word for it - none of them are anything like as wicked as wicked Mr Crowley was. I think.

We've Heard It All Before. So What's New? London's Curse Just a Rehash of Earlier Claims? Nothing New Save For The Crowley Fantasies The original sensational publicity surrounding the Tutankhamen 'curse' went right around the world. This is the way the Australian Adelaide Mail reported it in 1930. You will see that a large part of Beynon's book appears to rehash this eighty year old research adding a thin slice of rich cream on the top in the form of spurious, weak or provenly fictitious links to Aleister Crowley. Is Beynon one of those 'most credulous and ill-informed persons' that Herbert Winlock was referring to? Mark Beynon Falls For 80 Year Old Tabloid Lie Note particularly that this 1930 syndicated news story was responsible for one of the most fundamental errors which underpins belief in the existence of Tutankhamen's Curse. Resorting to Dr J C Mardrus, a French, translator, the reporter words the text ambiguously and leads readers to believe that a curse was found on the tomb when in fact there was none. This article has been recounted and used as a source so many times since by various writers that the idea that a curse was engraved above the door to Tutankhamen's tomb has become widely accepted. Even though Carter later maintained that there was nothing of that ilk in the tomb. In fact Mardrus was referring to another stele or engraving, The Stele of Malediction which was an EXAMPLE of an Egyptian curse. It had nothing to do with Tutankhamen's Tomb but in the absence of corroboration for the legend the British Press wove the untruth into the story to mislead the reader and it has suckered most commentators over the years, including, it would appear, Mark Beynon. Proof That No Inscription Existed A rare photograph taken by Howard Carter of the sepulchre door behind which Tutankhamen's mummy was placed, shows that nothing appears 'above' the doorway. This is standard for all tombs - the Egyptian authorities weren't stupid; they realised any such curse would simply be an 'enter here' sign to graverobbers. All entrances to tombs were invariably disguised. Remember folks - You heard it first at the SAFF.

Is The Mummy's Curse The Curse of The Mummy?

Of course the newspapers went wild following the discovery of the intact Mummy of Tutankhamen and after Lord Carnarvon's untimely death the speculation of the Mummy's Curse began but there had already been a legacy of imaginative horror stories about re-vivified mummies wreaking revenge upon the living and it was already firmly fixed in the mind of the superstitious. I am indebted to Paula Guran at http://www.darkecho.com/darkecho/horroronline/mummy1.html for the excellent analysis of mummy literature (below) which she penned in 1999.

Return of The Mummy Part 1: (partial excerpt)
by Paula Guran

The earliest recorded scary story involving a mummy was published in 1699 by a Frenchman, Louis Penicher, in Traité des embaumemments selon les anciens et les modernes. More than a century later the decipherment of hieroglyphs provided writers with more fuel for their fiction.

The first known first mummy story in the English language, Mummy! Or A Tale of the Twenty-Second Century, was a novel by Jane Webb Loundun. Published in 1827 soon after Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, it shares its theme of a reanimated being. In it, civilization is morally bankrupt and on verge of collapse in this science fictional London of 2126 . The resurrected mummy of King Cheops, in an effort to set his own corrupt past right, sets about restoring the economic, moral, and social stability of the twenty-second century.

Perhaps surprisingly, Edgar Allan Poe's single mummy tale, "Some Words with a Mummy" was not horrific at all. Published in 1845 in American Weekly Review, the farcical story was based on the then-popular mania for unwrapping mummies.

Theophile Gautier's novel The Romance of the Mummy (1856) offered the first historically accurate story set in ancient Egypt and was also the first to introduce the romantic element of falling in love with a mummy. His story, "The Mummy's Foot," (1863) explored the romantic theme as well as the magical properties of mummies. Iras, A Mystery, a 1896 novel by H. D. Everett is an early example of a reanimated mummy as an object of love rather than frightening, vengeful creature.

"Lot No. 249," an 1892 story by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle may have been the first use of a revivified mummy as a sinister character. A mummy, acquired at an auction along with its case (thus the "lot number" of the title), is brought back to life and sent out to murder people. In his earlier (1890) story, "The Ring of Thoth," Doyle employed the theme of lovers united across millennia. as well as featuring two ancients who drank a potion to become immortal. These melodramatic thrillers were riding the crest of late nineteenth century mania for all things Egyptian, a mania that was also fed with similar work like Guy Boothby's novel Pharos the Egyptian (1899) and Sax Rohmer's later mummy stories.

In 1906 Bram Stoker, the author of Dracula, provided inspiration for much future fiction and many movies when he became the first to connect revivified ancient Egyptian female royalty with a living modern-day heroine. In his novel, The Jewel of Seven Stars, a queen's tomb is discovered and her soul inhabits the body of the beautiful daughter of an Egyptologist as she awaits full resurrection via a ruby containing seven seven-pointed stars. Algernon Blackwood's much more interesting story, "The Nemesis of Fire" (1908) presumably used Stoker's rather flawed novel as its basis.

* The Mummy, 1932. The movie features the story of an ancient Egyptian priest mummy called Imhotep (Karloff), who is resurrected in the present day.
* The Mummy's Hand, 1940. Not a direct sequel to the 1932 film, only the resurrected mummy theme is the same. This film features Kharis (played by Tom Tyler), another Egyptian priest turned living dead mummy. Some flashbacks, using scenes from the original film, feature Karloff.
* The Mummy's Tomb, 1942. Direct sequel to the 1940 film. Tom Tyler is replaced by Lon Chaney, Jr. in this and the next two films. Tyler, however, still plays Kharis in flashbacks to Ancient Egypt.
* The Mummy's Ghost, 1944. Direct sequel to the 1942 film
* The Mummy's Curse, 1944. Direct sequel to the first 1944 film
* Abbott and Costello Meet the Mummy, 1955. Indirect sequel/spoof of the first five films.

Source: Wikipedia

Ends:

John Freedom, Mortlake, December 2011

Crowley Did Not Kill Anyone. Crowley Did Not Advocate Human Sacrifice. Crowley Did Not Sexually Abuse Children. Crowley Did Not Advocate the Sexual Abuse of Children. Crowley Was Not A Satanist. Crowley Was Not A Black Magician. Crowley Was Not A Freemason. Crowley Was Never Investigated or Prosecuted By The Police. These are The Truths, Yet See Here for How The Fundies' Lies Were Accepted and Repeated in Court by a Judge who was Utterly Misinformed Judge Thomas said in court: 'You have fully lived up to the ideals of your mentor Aleister Crowley - you used the occult to further your sexual excesses - children were kept as toys for sex purposes.