Trailspotter
Senior Member.
Here's another coincidence: number of venues hosting Olympic events around GB? 33! Blimey!
Just 30 venues:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/2012/venues
and only 302 sport events
Here's another coincidence: number of venues hosting Olympic events around GB? 33! Blimey!
I actually touched on this they are occultic they find "power" in projecting symbolism, not that it works I'm not an occultist.Um, that's kind of what I'm wondering at this point. So, the Powers That Be decided to use all of these nefarious symbolic numbers . . . why? It's not like it's exactly a secret. I mean, apparently anyone can just look at the whole thing, add up the numbers and realize that they're up to no good. What's the point of that?
eta: I agree with plane. This portion of the thread definitely deserves a boot to the Off-Topic folder.
Correction - Oswald was right and you are wrong
Transport Plan - London 2012 Olympics
2.16 The London 2012 Olympic Games will be staged at 33 competition venues across the UK. Figures 2.3 and 2.4 highlight the locations of each venue and the ...
and from www.telegraph.co.uk › Sport › Olympics › London 2012
13 Aug 2012 – To the soundtrack of Kate Bush's Running Up That Hill, performers heaved 303 white boxes, representing the 303 Olympic events, to the centre of the stage to build a white pyramid'
Ha, it's the classic theorist defense. "all the mistakes don't matter, because we have so much evidence". It's like Richard Gauge's ramble when he was shown that steel beams could actually quickly collapse from a kerosene fire.
8:35 here:External Quote:"This is the reason I say it's irrelevant, because they have experiments like this that show that steel weakens in fires, it's easier and more profound for me to say 'it's irrelevant', you can turn the steel into a noodle, I will still, we still have the evidence of explosive controlled demolition."
Not until every last shred of "evidence" is perfectly addressed will you be convinced, and since there's an infinite number of points you can raise, there's no end to it.
Aaaaand another thread degenerates into someone asking lee to make a point, and him refusing to actually make one.
eta: By the way, thanks for the avatar, Mick, if you're the one who picked it out for me.
Thank you. And my point is that they seem to be cherry-picked meaningless coincidences.
That was post 236 in the thread (2+3+6 = 11), and your 1073rd post (1+0+7+3 = 11). You joined in September 2011, The string "lee h oswald" with spaces has 11 letters, without it has 9 (9/11 duality). "Senior Member" without spaces has 11 letters. The word "coincidence" has 11 letters.
Coincidence?
![]()
[Edit] And why post at a meaningless time like 7:33? I was confused by the automatic conversion to PDT. Of course that's 14:33 GMT.1+4+3+3 = 11. It must have taken you forever to plan and execute such a magnificent array of synchronicity!
I have no idea what you are talking about. You think I disagree with your numerology because I don't have the balls? I'm disagreeing with it because I think it's wrong.
I do not understand how, for someone who is supposed to be into 'debunking', you can make such sweeping statements.
The one about "ALL world leaders want a "new world order" in some respect or another. They all want the world to be a better place", is a good example.
It really says nothing about whether there is a NWO as described in the NWO conspiracy theory. You could equally say 'Everyone wants the world to be a better place', the question is, 'better for who' and 'who suffers from the change'?
As far as symbolism and numerology goes, it simply isn't a 'theory' in any sense of the word, it is historical and living fact; you only need to look at hieroglyphs, heraldry, religion, occultism, freemasonry and a lot more documented fields.
If you would like to clarify your position on numerology and symbolism that would probably be the easiest way to start.
Filibuster away, it's what you do best.
Funny that Pinochet - the fascist, remember him? - was put in power by a CIA backed coup (lot's of death and disappeared, the usual US thing for upstart democratically elected non-white people). Pres Allende, the democratically elected president, was murdered. That all took place on what day? Have a guess - 1973 ......9/11! Blimey, what a coincidence....I'll say it before you do, saves time.
Oh yeah, and then there's the Pentagon, you know the building where lots of misery for little brown people gets planned, that one - the 77ft high occult symbol and hub of war allegedly struck by flight er, 77 on 9/11....what about it, you say? Well, the groundbreaking ceremony took place in 1941, remember? You'll never guess what the date was....9/11/41. Isn't the world just full of coincidence?
My numerology? No, not mine.
By "your numerology" I was specifically referring to a post that Lee had just made:
So I thought that there seemed nothing significant in the coincidences he brought up, and that it was simply cherry picking.
I understand that symbolism and numerology exist, and that people sometimes pick dates for specific reasons. I just don't think Lee's examples were anything other than cherry picked coincidences, often slightly shoehorned (the Pentagon is actually mostly 73 feet high)
Point well taken and understood. As a point of interest, can you substantiate the 73 feet statement?
External Quote:To protect the vista of neighbouring Arlington National Cemetery, the Pentagon's height was strictly limited to 77 feet 3.5 inches (24 metres)
So I guess the question is if the 77' 3.5" was chosen for some kind of symbolic reason, or it was just a random number determined by the layout of the site and visibility requirements for Arlington.External Quote:Height of Building (ft.) 77' 3.5"
Most of the statistical data presented here are approximate, even when the numbers are not rounded. Most of this data was compiled in the 1950s. Changes in the building since have resulted in changes in the numbers, making difficult to render precise figures.
6) These 'significant elements', are capable of any atrocity (inc 9/11), to further their aims for a 'world government' or 'New World Order', something akin to 'The Federation' in Star Wars.
73 feet is the number commonly given for the section that was hit by the plane, so I'm thinking that's the height of the sides. The front of the building is higher. Other areas might be lower. If you ask Google, it says 75 feet:
![]()
The 77 feet comes from:
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/450323/Pentagon
External Quote:To protect the vista of neighbouring Arlington National Cemetery, the Pentagon's height was strictly limited to 77 feet 3.5 inches (24 metres)
Which limits the highest point, but does not actually say any point is that high.
The Pentagon itself says:
http://pentagon.osd.mil/facts-area.html
So I guess the question is if the 77' 3.5" was chosen for some kind of symbolic reason, or it was just a random number determined by the layout of the site and visibility requirements for Arlington.External Quote:Height of Building (ft.) 77' 3.5"
Most of the statistical data presented here are approximate, even when the numbers are not rounded. Most of this data was compiled in the 1950s. Changes in the building since have resulted in changes in the numbers, making difficult to render precise figures.
Not to pick a nit.......but it was "Galactic Republic" then "Galactic Empire" after Senator Palpatine declared himself Emperor. There was a Trade Federation in the earlier years, but they were basically pawns of the Sith.
Just wanted to be clear.
Boy....I need a vacation...
Good God! Oops...![]()
External Quote:Taken from: Secret Teachings concealed within the Rituals, Allegories, and Mysteries of all Ages
By Manly P. Hall
From Preface: Hall self-published this massive tome in 1928, consisting of about 200 legal-sized pages in 8 point type; it is literally his magnum opus. Each of the nearly 50 chapters is so dense with information that it is the
equivalent of an entire short book.
From chapter: The Ancient Mysteries and Secret Societies
Which Have Influenced Modern Masonic Symbolism
p. 21
WHEN confronted with a problem involving the use of the reasoning faculties, individuals of strong
intellect keep their poise, and seek to reach a solution by obtaining facts bearing upon the question.
Those of immature mentality, on the other hand, when similarly confronted, are overwhelmed. While the
former may be qualified to solve the riddle of their own destiny, the latter must be led like a flock of
sheep and taught in simple language. They depend almost entirely upon the ministrations of the
shepherd. The Apostle Paul said that these little ones must be fed with milk, but that meat is the food of
strong men. Thoughtlessness is almost synonymous with childishness, while thoughtfulness is symbolic
of maturity.
There are, however, but few mature minds in the world; and thus it was that the philosophic-religious
doctrines of the pagans were divided to meet the needs of these two fundamental groups of human
intellect--one philosophic, the other incapable of appreciating the deeper mysteries of life. To the
discerning few were revealed the esoteric, or spiritual, teachings, while the unqualified many received
only the literal, or exoteric, interpretations. In order to make simple the great truths of Nature and the
abstract principles of natural law, the vital forces of the universe were personified, becoming the gods
and goddesses of the ancient mythologies. While the ignorant multitudes brought their offerings to the
altars of Priapus and Pan (deities representing the procreative energies), the wise recognized in these
marble statues only symbolic concretions of great abstract truths.
People may find this short extract from Manly P Hall's of interest as well:
It's an interesting quote because it speaks to one of the factors that keep conspiracy theories alive - the sense of self-importance and validation that the adherents get from their possession of secret knowledge. You see this all the time in their language - being "awake", not being a "sheep". They also generally claim to have excellent observational skills, and a perfect memory. Many conspiracy theorists feel they are part of the "discerning few".
All people like to feel special, not just Masons.
![]()
Well that is certainly one way to view it, (the debunker's school of thought) and I concede it is probably a factor in some cases, but I would argue this falls down in the majority as the key factor in conspiracy theories is 'distrust of TPTB' and the desire to 'SPREAD the knowledge/idea', which would logically be counterproductive to the concept you expound of 'self-importance and validation due to secret knowledge and superiority'.
Evidentially, the language is predominantly, 'wake up' rather than as you suggest 'look at me I am so clever because I am awake'. 'Don't be a sheeple', 'research yourself', 'bring about change', 'stop the secrecy', 'make people accountable', 'look at the big picture (geopolitics)', 'look at the likely motives and the consequences', 'who benefits and who is penalised by certain events/actions'.
Someone shared a video that noted in great depth how the common man has had more and more freedoms over the last 3,000 years. Their conclusions was this is all part of the elite's plan.
So we see a constant state of flux where freedoms are easily lost. Attempts are made time and time again to enslave the populace and the struggle to remain free is relentless.External Quote:John Ball: 'My good people, things cannot go well in England, nor ever shall, till everything be made common, and there are neither villeins nor gentlemen, but we shall all be united together, and the lords shall be no greater masters than ourselves. What have we deserved that we should be kept thus enslaved? We are all descended from one father and mother, Adam and Eve. What reasons can they give to show that they are greater lords than we, save by making us toil and labour, so that they can spend? They are clothed in velvet and soft leather furred with ermine, while we wear coarse cloth; they have their wines, spices and good bread, while we have the drawings of the chaff, and drink water. They have handsome houses and manors, and we the pain and travail, the rain and wind, in the fields. And it is from our labour that they get the means to maintain their estates. We are called their slaves, and ;f we do not serve them readily, we are beaten. And we have no sovereign to whom we may complain, or who will hear us, or do us justice. Let us go to the King, he is young, and tell him of our slavery; and tell him we shall have it otherwise, or else we will provide a remedy ourselves. And if we go together, all manner of people that are now in bondage will follow us, with the intent to be made free. And when the King sees us, we shall have some remedy, either by justice or otherwise.'
After the rebellion was over, the rebels were told:
Oh miserable men, hateful both to land and sea, unworthy even to live, you ask to be put on an equality with your lords! You should certainly have been punished with the vilest death, if we had not determined to observe the things which had been decreed towards your messengers. But because you have come in the character of messengers you shall not die at once, but shall enjoy your life that you may truly announce our answer to your fellows.
Take back then this answer from the king: Serfs you were and serfs you are; you shall remain in bondage, not such as you have hitherto been subject to, but incomparably viler. For so long as we live and rule by God's grace over this kingdom we shall use our sense, our strength and our property so to teach you, that your slavery may be an example to posterity, and that those who live now and hereafter, who may be like you, may always have before their eyes and as it were in a glass, your misery and reasons for cursing you, and the fear of doing things like those which you have done.
Someone shared a video that noted in great depth how the common man has had more and more freedoms over the last 3,000 years. Their conclusions was this is all part of the elite's plan.
Would you care to elucidate on this?
Mick, I am amazed by the video you posted, (The Story of Your Enslavement), is that the video you intended. The reason I am amazed is because it puts across, (extremely eruditely), exactly what I and many others have been trying to say.
I can readily see the argument that freedoms are given to the common man by the elite but with the express purpose of 'increased productivity', but from your previous post I inferred you were suggesting benevolent intent, which I now realise you were not.
Many people are comparing the U.S to The Roman Empire in its final phase. I think this is an apt comparison.
Thanks for sharing, I found it very interesting
Would you like to share your view of the film?
It says that we are not like animals in that we can be threatened with future punishment, we are enslaved by the ruling classes into "tax farms" run on the "mafia model" (indirect de-facto ownership through coercion) , where our freedoms are an illusion, schools only exist to indoctrinate useful young workers, global conflicts are manufactured to keep us in line, and that all we have to do is "wake up". But we it also says we have more freedoms than at any time in history, because the elite figured out we work better that way.
I'm not clear though exactly what freedoms are denied me. Is is just the freedom not to pay income tax, or is there something else?
And what happens when enough people wake up? What will the world look like?
Good. Perhaps you'll get a handle on emergence next.I am amazed by the video you posted
Good. Perhaps you'll get a handle on emergence next.
External Quote:Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.
No country can afford to have its prosperity originated by a small controlling class. The treasury of America lies in those ambitions, those energies, that cannot be restricted to a special favored class. It depends upon the inventions of unknown men, upon the originations of unknown men, upon the ambitions of unknown men. Every country is renewed out of the ranks of the unknown, not out of the ranks of those already famous and powerful and in control
The government, which was designed for the people, has got into the hands of the bosses and their employers, the special interests. An invisible empire has been set up above the forms of democracy
A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men who, even if their action be honest and intended for the public interest, are necessarily concentrated upon the great undertakings in which their own money is involved and who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom. This is the greatest question of all, and to this statesmen must address themselves with an earnest determination to serve the long future and the true liberties of men.
Section VIII: "Monopoly, Or Opportunity?", p. 185. Note that this remark has been used as the basis for a fake quotation discussed below.
Let me say again that I am not impugning the motives of the men in Wall Street. They may think that that is the best way to create prosperity for the country. When you have got the market in your hand, does honesty oblige you to turn the palm upside down and empty it? If you have got the market in your hand and believe that you understand the interest of the country better than anybody else, is it patriotic to let it go? I can imagine them using this argument to themselves.
The dominating danger in this land is not the existence of great individual combinations, — that is dangerous enough in all conscience, — but the combination of the combinations, — of the railways, the manufacturing enterprises, the great mining projects, the great enterprises for the development of the natural water-powers of the country, threaded together in the personnel of a series of boards of directors into a "community of interest" more formidable than any conceivable single combination that dare appear in the open.
Can't really get my head around the concept of emergence. Any better links on that?
The bolded part there is the key. Emergence here simply mean "arising from" - i.e. there's a social order, but it does not come from planning (conspiracy), but instead comes from "a combination of self-interested individuals who are not intentionally trying to create order".External Quote:Spontaneous order, also known as "self-organization", is the spontaneous emergence of order out of seeming chaos. It is a process found in physical, biological, and social networks, as well as economics, though the term "self-organization" is more often used for physical and biological processes, while "spontaneous order" is typically used to describe the emergence of various kinds of social orders from a combination of self-interested individuals who are not intentionally trying to create order through planning.
Better than the Wikipedia article?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence
The Spontaneous order article might be more relevant, it's kind of a subset of emergence:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_order
The bolded part there is the key. Emergence here simply mean "arising from" - i.e. there's a social order, but it does not come from planning (conspiracy), but instead comes from "a combination of self-interested individuals who are not intentionally trying to create order".External Quote:Spontaneous order, also known as "self-organization", is the spontaneous emergence of order out of seeming chaos. It is a process found in physical, biological, and social networks, as well as economics, though the term "self-organization" is more often used for physical and biological processes, while "spontaneous order" is typically used to describe the emergence of various kinds of social orders from a combination of self-interested individuals who are not intentionally trying to create order through planning.
So it seems like there's a plan, but it's just emergence. Society naturally forms into hierarchical structures - not because there's some plan to do so, just that's whats happens when unconnected individuals act in their own self interest.
Ok, lets accept that 'emergence' occurs, like 'life emerging from chemicals' or 'a natural order of things, (food chains)' or 'religion emerging to make sense of the world around us', but once the emergence progresses, 'planning/conspiracy through intelligence' is the logical progression in order to maximise the benefit to the conspirators/planners.
It would simply be a recognition of a naturally occurring 'emergent benefit' which is then capitalised on and refined.
Ergo, emergence is only the catalyst but planning/conspiracy is the result and forms the greater part of the change/evolution
So how would that work? The top 1,000 richest people in the world all get together?
I'm sure there is SOME planning and conspiracy in the world - that's quite natural. But what's the actual scale of what you are suggesting?
As an example 196 individual donors who have provided nearly 80 percent of the money raised by super PACs in 2011 by giving $100,000 or more each.
http://www.salon.com/2012/02/16/the_196_people_who_will_choose_our_next_president/
The U.S is an http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military%E2%80%93industrial_complex Military Industrial Complex spending as much as the entire rest of the world on armaments and yet this subject is hardly, if at all, mentioned by Romney or Obama. (Oh I just heard Obama bragging about spending more militarily year on year)
Civil liberties? Well Indefinite Internment without trial?
Believe me, I'm not fan of that. I think the drone attacks are a bad idea. The indefinite detention is a bad idea. The level of military spending is far too high. But this does not lead me to think there's some small global elite pulling all the strings. Certainly not rigging the election in this incredibly backwards manner.
It says it all. We need to be careful that everyone pays some taxes in order for this to be clear to all. At present 90% of taxes are paid by only 50% of us, and over 33% of all taxes are paid by the top 1%. For many, there is no motivation or need to understand Hand's words.External Quote:"Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as
possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the
treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes.
Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister
in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone
does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any
public duty to pay more than the law demands."
If this simplistic argument shows anything it is that there is no clear division between emergence and design/planning.
There is if that distinction informs your actions.
Consider the watchmaker argument for the existence of God. If you found a watch on the beach, you could tell from its design that someone must have designed it. There's no way that all those cogs and springs could have simply formed by accident. So there must be a watchmaker. So with nature, and humans, things look like they are designed. We have two complicated eyes, surely there's no way our eyes could have been formed "by accident", so there must be a watchmaker for humans. A God.
But there need not be. Humans emerged through a process of random mutation and natural selection. The watchmaker was blind. The watchmaker was the process of evolution. No design. No planning.
Does it matter? Of course it does. If you think that God created you, and hence God is all powerful, and knows what you are doing, and is judging you, and might not let you into heaven, then you will live your life very differently than if you think you are simply a lucky self-aware assemblage of stardust, with the universe yours do to with as you choose.
Likewise, if you think everything around you is a planned illusion and a lie, that a secret elite cabal has enslaved you, that income tax is no better than Mafia extortion, that our freedoms are an illusion designed to enslave us, that everyone around you is a mindless sheeple, then you are going to have a very different life than if you think this is just the way things ended up through the natural evolution of society, and it's a lot better than it was 200 years ago, and really you DO have the freedom to do pretty much whatever you want, even if some people are getting more than their fair share.
So yes, I'd say there is a clear division.