Illuminati symbolism and numerology, like in the olympics

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
Mick, you gave him much more slack than he deserved. When he gave a "fact" and it was proven wrong, he just came up with another "fact". There is no discussion or resolution with folks like that. They never admit they were wrong...they just change tack. Of course I'm not telling you anything new.
 

cheeple

Member
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.
I actually touched on this they are occultic they find "power" in projecting symbolism, not that it works I'm not an occultist.
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
Just 30 venues:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/2012/venues

and only 302 sport events


Correction - Oswald was right and you are wrong

Transport Plan - London 2012 Olympics
www.london2012.com/...
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
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 ...

'..performers heaved 303 white boxes, representing the 303 Olympic events, to the centre of the stage to build a white pyramid'

every example he gave was correct, every challenge you made was wrong - for the record
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
There were 302 events. But the point is really not his (your) inaccurate or even accurate use of figures. It's the silly interpretation put on them.

Don't try to post here again. You've been banned. Move on.
 

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
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'

Am I? What kind of argument it is - citing somebody's miscalculations. They may have planned to have up to 33 venues, but in this Transport Plan only 29 are listed in Figure 2.1. Anyway, it was a first edition of the plan, there were some changes made later. There have been 30 venues at the end, in which 302 sets of medals have been won - 302 sports events. If one adds the opening and closing ceremonies, there will be 304, but not 303.
 

Spongebob

Active Member
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.

"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."
Content from External Source
8:35 here:


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.

It's like Richard Gauge's ramble when he was shown that steel beams could actually quickly collapse from a kerosene fire.

Did he? I could use this info - do you have a link please Mick?
 

PCWilliams

Senior Member.
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!

As i read your post the time was 10:56!!!!! (1+0)*(5+6)=11 !!!!!!!!!!

That is FREAKY!!!!

JK

:)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
U

Unregistered

Guest
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.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
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.

By "your numerology" I was specifically referring to a post that Lee had just made:

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.

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)
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
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?

However, I would like to suggest that it is unscientific/irrational to disregard such coincidences as postulated by LHO lightly. Having said that, I agree the theory needs to be tested against a control group/s, which appears to be the process embarked upon and abandoned by this thread, but I would also argue, and I am sure you would agree, such testing should be with as little preconception as to outcome, as possible.

Belief systems undoubtedly affect outcomes if not kept in check and can easily result in as you aptly put it, 'shoehorning' of facts to conform to belief, (whichever belief that is).

This is definitely a complex subject and I guess it really depends on how interested people are in exploring it objectively.

Probability/chance is undoubtedly a science which affects everyone's actions at every level, right down to the primaeval sub conscious level i.e (can I take that piece of meat without getting attacked by the lion), to contemporary big business decisions, i.e. (does x multi-billion $ enterprise offer acceptable 'risk/rewards ratio').

I think LHO's premise works on the following basis:
1) There is an elite
2) The elite, (for good or bad), have inordinate powers when it comes to shaping the world in which 'we' live
3) The elite's roots are derived from powers conferred upon or wrested by priests in the ancient religions and which still exist today in organisations, fraternities and societies which have remained secret over centuries, (for fear of persecution).
4) The ancient religions used symbolism and numerology to convey esoteric (hidden) meaning to initiates, (who were enlightened through teachings as to the true meanings), whilst at the same time exoteric meaning, (knowledge that can be ascertained by anyone) means something completely different.
5) Significant elements of the elite view the mass populace as ignorant, profane, useless eaters, livestock, expendable, undesirable, holding mankind back from his destiny, (to be as gods).
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.

I do not know how much merit there is in the numerology/symbology of 9/11 but one thing is for sure, the world changed significantly following that event, so effectively we already have a NWO. Personally, I feel it is a much more oppressive and uncertain world. The question is, how will it evolve.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Point well taken and understood. As a point of interest, can you substantiate the 73 feet statement?

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
To protect the vista of neighbouring Arlington National Cemetery, the Pentagon’s height was strictly limited to 77 feet 3.5 inches (24 metres)
Content from External Source


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
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.
Content from External Source
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.
 
Last edited:

Gunguy45

Senior Member.
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.

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...
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
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
To protect the vista of neighbouring Arlington National Cemetery, the Pentagon’s height was strictly limited to 77 feet 3.5 inches (24 metres)
Content from External Source


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
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.
Content from External Source
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.

Thanks, I am not really clear about the alleged significance of the 77 anyway, is it simply that the Pentagon is supposed to be 'officially' 77' high and it was hit by flight 77 or is there more to it?

It seems the debatability of even such a readily available 'fact' as the Pentagon's height is indicative of the difficulty in reaching any agreement on any subject or theory. It is therefore no surprise that the more esoteric things become entangled, convoluted and disputed and therefore become virtually unfathomable and splinter into 'this' school of thought or 'that' school of thought. Much like religion in general.

I am convinced that the heart of the vast majority of 'Conspiracy Theories' is rooted in the public perception and distrust of 'secret societies' and their perceived infiltration into the elite/ruling class and or government/corporations.

The concept appears to be that a NWO is planned which is defined as a 'Benevolent Socialist World Government'.
People look at the atrocities carried out by the German National Socialist Party, (Nazi) and Communist Party's of Russia, China, N. Korea etc and are naturally skeptical about the 'benevolence' of such a regime.

No one can deny the Globalist intent, it is talked about openly and is aspirational in many politicians expressed views. And of course there are rational arguments which underpin it.

Acts such as 9/11, especially when taken in the context of the multiplicity of anomalies, are therefore viewed as a means to an end of NWO, ergo it is an 'inside job'

Couple this with the endemic fraud perpetrated by 'The Banks'/Financial Institutions which have further enriched the elite at the expense of the common people and add to that the militarization of the U.S police/Homeland Security and FEMA 'coffins' and 'concentration camps', (bearing in mind the promotional films made by the SS depicting Auschwitz as a 'holiday camp' with Jewish children skipping around playing happily) and you undoubtedly have the fertilest of ground for such conspiracy theories to spring forth, which they have.

Anyway, back on topic, it seems 77 is a significant number in numerology: "77 represents a higher octave of 5", whatever that means.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/atlantean_conspiracy/atlantean_conspiracy39.htm
"Numbers are a key to the ancient views of cosmogony ... spiritually as well as physically ... to the evolution of the present human race; all systems of religious mysticism are based upon numerals.”

W. Wynn Westcott, “The Occult Power of Numbers”
The numbers 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 33 and all multiples of them have esoteric meaning to the Brotherhood and are used in a variety of ways.They are geometrically encoded in brand names and encrypted in corporate logos.

Unlucky Friday 13th?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_Templar
On Friday, October 13, 1307 (a date sometimes spuriously linked with the origin of the Friday the 13th superstition)[25][26] Philip ordered de Molay and scores of other French Templars to be simultaneously arrested

An alternate?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friday_the_13th

Numerology

Also at: http://www.halexandria.org/dward332.htm , we find:
"Shortly after 600 B.C.E., the Greek philosopher, Pythagoras, founded the first university and developed his theory of numbers. These theories are the basis of all natural law today and are also the foundation for the occult science of Numerology. Pythagoras determined that everything progressed in predictable cycles, and assumed a relationship with respect to the alphabet -- i.e. the Sumerian idea that letters, gods and goddesses were assigned numbers relative to their station. "

"Liber OZ" (or "Book 77") is a single page by English author and occultist Aleister Crowley purporting to declare mankind's basic and intrinsic rights according to Crowley's philosophy of Thelema.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liber_OZ

If anyone is interested and merely as an example of how convoluted and contentious investigation of this type of thing can be, here is a link to the history of the Saturnalia:

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Hebrew_Roots/Neglected_Commandments/Idolatry/Satan's_Birthday

The Saturnalia (which means 'sun-stop') is the week-long pagan festival of the winter solstice which began on December the 17th as the sun was seen to be rising further to the south and thought of as "dying". By December the 25th, the ancient world's solstice, it could be recognised as beginning to turn northwards again and was said to be "re-born" and therefore was proclaimed to be the birthday of the sun-deity.

Note how 'this one' is aka 'that one' etc.

I include it also as an alternative origin of Christmas, as an example of esoteric and exoteric interpretation.

Some may also find http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=lucifer of interest as it is often put forward that Lucifer is 'knowledge', the serpent in the garden of Eden etc and figures prominently in Masonic ritual.

Sorry if its all considered a bit off topic or lengthy but there 'was no compulsion to read it' and I thought it may help in getting a flavour of the history/controversy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
U

Unregistered

Guest
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...

Lol, I will concede graciously to your superior knowledge on that.
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
Good God! Oops... :rolleyes:

Thanks for reading Jazzy and your comment. 'Rolleyes' noted but at least you read it.

People may find this short extract from Manly P Hall's of interest as well:

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.
Content from External Source
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
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.

 
Last edited:
U

Unregistered

Guest
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'.

The above is standard procedure/principle in ascertaining 'the truth' in criminal and scientific investigation. When these procedures/protocols are seen not to be utilised in respect to life/world changing events, many people question why.

Where there is an absence of the above, conspiracy theories will naturally spring forth.

To use an analogy, politics is as complex as the weather, massive storms and terrible events can and do arise from seemingly distant and unrelated small actions. It is not always easy to make correlations/connections but that is no reason not to try, not to examine and question.

In short 'conspiracy theories' mostly result because the 'official version of events' does not 'ring true' or blatant lies and inconsistencies become apparent. Conspiracy theories are a quest for transparency and truth. As in any process, there may well be errors or manipulations but the quest is real and true.

Paraphrasing Manly P Hall; many people feel they are no longer 'the ignorant multitudes' of aeons gone and deserve to be treated with the respect they feel they deserve; by not being fed with the 'tainted milk of lies and deceit' but with the 'meat of truth'.

Further, such people would like to raise the consciousness of the remaining 'ignorant' such that they too may be fully aware. Indeed in the absence of this, there is little prospect of change being brought about.

The vast majority of conspiracy theorists work on the premise that the government is supposed to be a 'government of the people, by the people and for the people' = DEMOCRACY and 'The People', want it back. They do not want to be used and abused and herded and trampled and beaten into submission by a militarised police force which should be there to serve and protect. They do not want atrocities carried out in 'Their Name'.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
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'.

I'd agree that the "awake" seem motivated to "wake up" the sheeple. So I don't think it's a deliberately exclusionary mindset. However I think the appeal is still partly that it's being part of some kind of elite. Sure they want to wake everyone up, but the "look at me I am so clever" is still there, if not explicitly. It's like christian missionaries who "share the good news".

I think the unfortunate reality of the world is that the world is very very complicated. Sure there's people at the top, and they have a disproportionate amount of power. But this result and their actions seems to me to be more the emergent result of a complex system, and not some straightforward conspiracy.

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.

I don't think conspiracy theories are ultimately a quest for the truth. Conspiracy theories are a quest for a simple tangible understanding of the world that is really complex and chaotic. It's a search for a frame of reference, when the real frame of reference is ponderously huge and innumerably multi-dimensional. It's a natural human tendency to seek patterns in things. A tendency that evolved from a time 100,000 years ago when the world really was quite simple, but now it's complicated, and that tendency is broken.
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
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.

Most people would agree the common man has gained more and more freedom over the last 3000 years but this has been fought for at great cost. Freedom isn't free.

I think a good example is the Peasant Revolt of June 1381. http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/peasants_revolt.htm "One man had emerged as the leader of the peasants - Wat Tyler". Is it symbolic or merely coincidence that 'Tyler' is an 'office' in Masonry. Many say it is not coincidence: Evidence presented by John J. Robinson in his book, Born in Blood: The Lost Secrets of Freemasonry, shows that the secret organisation behind the revolt were the Knights Templar (or their descendants), who's order was officially dissolved 69 years previously by Pope Clement V. Furthermore Robinson shows that the underground Templar orgnisation in Scotland and England at that time became the Freemasons, which still exist today.
After the revolt was put down; rebel leaders confessed to being agents of a Great Society, said to be based in London.

During the revolt there were concentrated and especially vicious attacks on the religious order of the Knights Hospitaller of St. John, now known as the Knights of' Malta. Not only did the rebels seek out their properties for vandalism and fire, but their prior was dragged from the Tower of London to have his head struck off and placed on London Bridge, to the delight of the cheering mob.

There was no question that the ferocity unleashed on the crusading Hospitallers had a purpose behind it. One captured rebel leader, when asked the reasons for the revolt, said, "First, and above all ... the destruction of the Hospitallers." What kind of secret society could have had that special hatred as one of its primary purposes? A desire for vengeance against the Hospitallers was easy to identify in the rival crusading order of the Knights of the Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem.

While destroying Hospitallier property the rebels protected property originally owned by the Templars. Rolls and records in what had been the principal church of the Knights Templar in England were removed from the building before being destroyed, avoiding any damage to the church itself.

http://www.fantompowa.net/Flame/wat_tyler_1381.html
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.
Content from External Source
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.

I think, were it true the elite held the best interests of mankind at heart, we would not now be seeing the vast enrichment and empowerment of the elite which is clear to all. This enrichment and empowerment is clearly at the expense of the common man who is being placed under a yoke of slavery and bondage by usury and debt.

At the same time the U.S military budget, at a time of massive national debt verging on bankruptcy, is equivalent to the 'whole of the rest of the world's military budget combined.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/06/defense-spending-fact-of-the-day_n_1746685.html
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
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?
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
The video was in this thread:
https://www.metabunk.org/posts/18036


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?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
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?

I said previously:

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?

I think the comparison of the US to the Roman Empire is partway reasonable, but Empires don't fall like they used to. The British Empire just faded away. America's power will wane as China's grows.

My biggest criticism of theories like this video are that A) I see the actions of the "Elite" as simply arising from the expected actions of millions of rich and active individuals, and not part of any great plan or conspiracy. B) It just says "wake up", not what should be done, or where we should be heading.
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
Good. Perhaps you'll get a handle on emergence next.

Can't really get my head around the concept of emergence. Any better links on that?

I can get my head around Woodrow Wilson though; seems highly relevant to today and he is definitely not talking about communism:

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Woodrow_Wilson

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.
Content from External Source
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Can't really get my head around the concept of emergence. Any better links on that?

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

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.
Content from External Source
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".

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.
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
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

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.
Content from External Source
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".

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
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
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?
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
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/

But in a wider sense, I will defer to Woodrow Wilson as previously quoted.

The U.S is an http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military–industrial_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?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
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.
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
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.

Well this is the core, it seems that very few Americans actually support these types of things which then leads people to query, where is the democracy... is it simply a thin illusion to cover the reality. If the people do not want it, who does? Someone/'some collective' or something must; is it by design or emergence or more likely IMO some combination of the two.

I may have misunderstood but my interpretation of emerge/nce is the opposite of merge/nce. The former being the 'natural' process of the separation of the whole into subdivisions; lets say like cream naturally separating to the top from milk.

Nowadays we have homogenised milk which incorporates design and process to stop this otherwise natural separation from occurring. Ergo did homogenised milk emerge or was it created. Did it emerge naturally due to people having a preference for homogenised milk or was it created due to some marketing or financial advantage.

If this simplistic argument shows anything it is that there is no clear division between emergence and design/planning. I would define the difference between planning and conspiracy as the former being 'open' and the latter being 'secret'.

I hear Obama is now talking about reducing military spending which is at least going in the right direction IMO but to what degree will this happen.

I also hear that tax rises are on the cards but again who will that affect; probably those who are least able to afford it.

Corporations and the really wealthy simply 'avoid' taxes and this is worldwide. Low earners and especially 'employees' are unable to afford themselves of this luxury and are disproportionately affected.

http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog/Learned.Hand.Quote.6BF7

"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."
Content from External Source
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.
-- Richard S, Sioux City, IA

I know that the wealthy actually contribute more tax in physical terms but when compared in terms of what they should be contributing, 'in the spirit of the law', i.e. not using controversial tax loopholes and even blatant tax evasion using 'offshore tax havens', there are trillions uncollected.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/15/us-britain-starbucks-tax-idUSBRE89E0EX20121015
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2012-06-20/how-the-k2-tax-avoidance-scheme-works/
http://www.wealthprotect.co.uk/

I'm sure I don't need to go on as the list seems endless. And of course there is the thorny problem of what should those taxes be used for.It is undoubted that some form of tax system is necessary to provide for the 'needs of government infrastructure and defense etc but do Americans really support $600 billion of their tax dollars being spent on weapons?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
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.
 
U

Unregistered

Guest
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.

Are you stating the path of the world, inc mankind, technology, political idealism, religion etc is simply a product of emergence?

Would this connote a 'fatalistic' view?

I have already stated I accept 'emergence theory' as the source of life, be it on this planet or any other and I acknowledge its role in many other aspects but once you have intelligence, which we are claiming to have, emergence then becomes subject to manipulation by intelligence and power.

Using Christianity as an example: it emerged as a small cult, spent 300 years being kicked around, analysed and argued about until Constantine decided for whatever reason that he believed in it. The rest is history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great_and_Christianity

Similarly with Henry VIII and the protestant religion.

Clear evidence of emergence being changed to suit the purpose of the powerful.

Of course if you wished you could argue that these are examples of emergence in the sense that 'a victor emerges from a battle', but I do not view it this way.

Anyway, as this is a thread on Illuminatti and symbolism, I post a 'you tube' video on that subject which may cause some further 'rolleyes' lol; and an interesting article on 'compulsory RFID implants for humans'.

http://www.littler.com/files/press/pdf/16166.pdf

“My
initial reaction to the implanting of employees
with microchips is that this is not something
you’re likely to see widespread use of for some
time,” said Deitchler. “There has already been
pushback by employee privacy advocates
with employers using employee monitoring
and data storage devices employing GPS
and radio frequency identifi cation tags, and
that reaction has come without the added
issue of the invasive aspect of embedding
a chip into the skin. Alternative methods to
accomplish the same goals (primarily access)
for the foreseeable future such as standard
security cards, even biometric methods such
as fi ngerprint and retina scans, will continue to
be preferred by the vast majority of employers,”
Deitchler continued.
Not all employers are seeking alternatives
to microchipping their employees and instead
are turning to organizations like VeriChip Corporation,
one of the most prominent device
makers. VeriChip claims its RFID systems are
installed in over 4,000 locations in healthcare,
security, government and industrial markets

Illumicorp Initiate Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42N6LrEpPyI&feature=watch-vrec

I believe it originates from Matt Anderson
http://manderson.us/FILM/ but is no longer included on their website although a few 'stills' of the set (inc the presenter) are still available at http://manderson.us/FILM/PHOTOS/

It is suggested it is " obviously a parody of the idea, made by Manderson Film".

How much 'truth' is in there is obviously according to the viewer's perception but it makes some pretty good connections in terms of symbolism and numerology associated with NWO.
 
Top