"It is about vilifying Fawkes for trying to blow up democracy, thereby inviting in the Spanish Inquisition."
The Spanish Inquisition was, um, Spanish. The Portuguese had one too, as brilliantly described in Voltaire's "Candide". Moreover, the Spanish Inquisition began in 1481, and was the last of the purges in the church. Fawkes was executed in 1601, I think, so linking the two seems a considerable stretch, especially as we already know that no Inquisition came to Britain.
"Sophia is a very ancient form of the Goddess of Wisdom. She is known in many traditions by different names but she carries the mantle of intuitive intelligence. Sometimes she is Isis, spreading her wings of ascension. Sometimes she is Asherah, the original bread of life. Mary Magdalene is said to have been an incarnation of Sophia."
It is true that Sophia is the Hellenistic representation of 'Wisdom', but in the biblical tradition it is a word meaning wisdom, rather than an entity, and the word is central to the books of Proverbs, Psalms, the Song of Songs, etc. Who, exactly, has conflated Sophia with Asherah is anyone's guess. As for Magdalene being an incarnation of Sophia, again who is making the allegation, and are they any more reliable than those claiming Magdalene was Jesus wife and the mother of his child?
"Whatever it is... world leaders dressed in robes and pointy hats offering sacrifices at a burning alter at the feet of a giant owl is WORRYING to many.
Does it sound sane to you?"
Phillip Weiss, who spent a week inside the Grove, wrote a book about it. There was little damning in it, although he was remarkably unimpressed.
"You know you are inside the Bohemian Grove when you come down a trail in the woods and hear piano music from amid a group of tents and then round a bend to see a man with a beer in one hand and his penis in the other, urinating into the bushes. This is the most gloried-in ritual of the encampment, the freedom of powerful men to pee wherever they like..."
Ron Johnson's view of the Ceremony of Care is more pointed "My lasting impression was of an all-pervading sense of immaturity: the Elvis impersonators, the pseudo-pagan spooky rituals, the heavy drinking. These people might have reached the apex of their professions but emotionally they seemed trapped in their college years."
Does it sound sane? Well if the only other alternative word is insane, then yes. People have been dressing up to party for centuries. New Year's Eve in Vienna, anyone? Masked balls. That the super rich have some silliness doesn't surprise me, nor does it worry me. I've some real issues to worry about.
ROFL... Yep, booze, prostitutes, and all the drugs = BG = play = orgy... excuse me, have to visit the vomitorium.
What makes it ok for the super rich, 'rule makers' to become 'super rich law breakers'... ? Oh yeah... they are above the law and the law is there to serve them, literally.
I really do not understand you C, one minute you are advocating forced medication; above you seem to be criticising 'average' people for drinking and taking tranqilizers and then proclaiming it as 'PLAY', when the elite indulge in all the excesses imaginable.
What I find difficult to comprehend also is the fact we see a massive scandal when Clinton has sex with Lewinsky and an inquiry budget dwarfing the 9/11 commission budget, and yet at BG... anything goes?
Amount of money allocated for Clinton-Lewinsky investigation: $40 million
Amount of money allocated for the 9/11 Commission: $14 million
"Whatever it is... world leaders dressed in robes and pointy hats offering sacrifices at a burning alter at the feet of a giant owl is WORRYING to many.
Does it sound sane to you?"
Phillip Weiss, who spent a week inside the Grove, wrote a book about it. There was little damning in it, although he was remarkably unimpressed.
"You know you are inside the Bohemian Grove when you come down a trail in the woods and hear piano music from amid a group of tents and then round a bend to see a man with a beer in one hand and his penis in the other, urinating into the bushes. This is the most gloried-in ritual of the encampment, the freedom of powerful men to pee wherever they like..."
Ron Johnson's view of the Ceremony of Care is more pointed "My lasting impression was of an all-pervading sense of immaturity: the Elvis impersonators, the pseudo-pagan spooky rituals, the heavy drinking. These people might have reached the apex of their professions but emotionally they seemed trapped in their college years."
Does it sound sane? Well if the only other alternative word is insane, then yes. People have been dressing up to party for centuries. New Year's Eve in Vienna, anyone? Masked balls. That the super rich have some silliness doesn't surprise me, nor does it worry me. I've some real issues to worry about.
You seem to regard the fact that some people, (of the few who know it goes on), do not like the goings on at BG; as a 'real issue', otherwise why waste time on it?
The attitude of the propogandists above appears to be, keep 'eyes wide shut'.
If the apparent Romanesque indulgences and lawbreaking do not concern you, you are entitled to that view. Do you extend it to all?
"It is about vilifying Fawkes for trying to blow up democracy, thereby inviting in the Spanish Inquisition."
The Spanish Inquisition was, um, Spanish. The Portuguese had one too, as brilliantly described in Voltaire's "Candide". Moreover, the Spanish Inquisition began in 1481, and was the last of the purges in the church. Fawkes was executed in 1601, I think, so linking the two seems a considerable stretch, especially as we already know that no Inquisition came to Britain.
But seriously, yes it is very tenuous and may not be true but the fact that these extremely powerful people are secretly carrying out satanic like rituals annually and breaking the very laws that they impose on others is worrying to many people.
As we've discussed, he's confusing what's likely to be something similar to Athena's owl with Moloch, which was typically a giant bull. The owl shows up all over the world because of the influence of Hellenistic culture in pretty much everything in Western culture, be it via the Greeks or through the Romans. The accounts of "child sacrifice" in various cultures likely originates from a dangerous purification ritual for children, as well as the Romans spread rumors of child sacrifice to make the conquered Carthaginians look brutal and uncivilized[48].
also look on page 15 of the article. I think it should help!
Yes AJ has hyped it up a bit but he has really made some analogies to some pagan rituals... the origins and 'facts' of which are disputed and unclear at best. Personally, I think he was/is wrong to hype it as I think the facts alone are bad enough. Why for example should 'Dull Care' be symbolised as a screaming child by the most powerful people in the world in what amounts to an orgy of illicit drugs, sex and satanic like ritual?
Yes AJ has hyped it up a bit but he has really made some analogies to some pagan rituals... the origins and 'facts' of which are disputed and unclear at best. Personally, I think he was/is wrong to hype it as I think the facts alone are bad enough. Why for example should 'Dull Care' be symbolised as a screaming child by the most powerful people in the world in what amounts to an orgy of illicit drugs, sex and satanic like ritual?
Begone, dull care! I prithee begone from me; Begone, dull care! Thou and I can never agree. Long while thou hast been tarrying here, And fain thou wouldst me kill; But i' faith dull care, Thou never shalt have thy will.
Too much care will make a young man grey; Too much care will turn an old man to clay. My wife shall dance, and I will sing, So merrily pass the day; For I hold it is the wisest thing, To drive dull care away.
Hence, dull care! I'll none of thy companie; Hence, dull care! Thou art no peer for me. We'll hunt the wild boar through the wold, So merrily pass the day; And then at night, o'er a cheerful bowl, We'll drive dull care away.
It's a big party. Of course they drink ( o'er a cheerful bowl), and naturally there's some drugs and sex, just like in ANY large gathering of people intent on having a good time.
And most of them are NOT "the most powerful people in the world", nor do most of the most powerful people in the world attend. SOME people that attend are powerful, but most are simply rich Americans.
What I find difficult to comprehend also is the fact we see a massive scandal when Clinton has sex with Lewinsky and an inquiry budget dwarfing the 9/11 commission budget, and yet at BG... anything goes?
Amount of money allocated for Clinton-Lewinsky investigation: $40 million
Amount of money allocated for the 9/11 Commission: $14 million
Regardless. I mistakenly said Fawkes was executed in 1601, it was actually 1606. There were no Inquisitions in England. Also, and this should be of importance to the assumption that the threat of the Inquisition loomed, the whole point of the Gunpowder Plot was not to 'destroy democracy' but to assassinate King James in order to replace him with his daughter, Princess Elizabeth. Why, because James wasn't as good to Catholics as hoped. James was a Protestant. The Inquisitions were a Catholic thing. And they never came to Britain.
You seem to regard the fact that some people, (of the few who know it goes on), do not like the goings on at BG; as a 'real issue', otherwise why waste time on it?
The attitude of the propogandists above appears to be, keep 'eyes wide shut'.
If the apparent Romanesque indulgences and lawbreaking do not concern you, you are entitled to that view. Do you extend it to all?
I certainly don't regard the fact that some people don't like the goings on as 'a real issue'. It doesn't bother me at all, to be honest - if the annual caperings of wealthy prats indulging themselves in saturnalia bothers you, so be it. Personally, I couldn't give a toss. The reason I became intrigued with this thread was the opening gambit of referring to a pair of Egyptian gods as being Babylonian. As I mentioned, ancient mythologies are kind of my thing.
What lawbreaking? Do you mean smoking cigars in a forest? Or peeing nude? I don't live in California, so the cigars don't really bother me so much, although I certainly hope none of the fools ever starts a real fire. Peeing in the nude, meh.
As for calling others who don't share your certainty that something very suspicious is afoot 'propagandists', that seems a little odd.
Regardless. I mistakenly said Fawkes was executed in 1601, it was actually 1606. There were no Inquisitions in England. Also, and this should be of importance to the assumption that the threat of the Inquisition loomed, the whole point of the Gunpowder Plot was not to 'destroy democracy' but to assassinate King James in order to replace him with his daughter, Princess Elizabeth. Why, because James wasn't as good to Catholics as hoped. James was a Protestant. The Inquisitions were a Catholic thing. And they never came to Britain.
The trouble with 'simply relating facts' is that it negates the purpose of ascertaining the facts in the first place.
Facts are used for a purpose i.e. the point in recording astrological data is that it can be used to predict future events such as the best time to sow seed and the best time to harvest, when there will be an eclipse or full moon and so on. Past data is only useful if it helps the present in some way. Data which is not understood and acted upon intelligently is dry and useless.
That you quote 'there were no Inquisitions in England is irrelevant' to the Gunpowder Plot. The aim of the plot was to reinstate Catholicism in England and if it had been successful would almost certainly have involved rooting out dissenters and the way that was done was via the Inquisition. There was no Inquisition despite the Spanish Armada a few years previously, because the Armada was flung around the coast by storms and the gallantry of the English navy.
There was no Inquisition post 5th Nov, because the plot failed.
Spying and shoot-outs, treachery and torture, not to mention gruesome deaths. The Gunpowder Plot has it all. Why were Catholics so bitter, and what did they hope to achieve?
The year 1603 marked the end of an era. After 45 years on the English throne, Elizabeth I was dying. All signs suggested her successor would be James VI of Scotland, the son of Mary Queen of Scots - the queen who had been executed in 1587 on Elizabeth's orders.
English Catholics were very excited. They had suffered severe persecution since 1570, when the Pope had excommunicated Elizabeth, releasing her subjects from their allegiance to her. The Spanish Armada of 1588 had made matters worse. To the Tudor State, all Catholics were potential traitors. They were forbidden to hear Mass, forced instead to attend Anglican services, with steep fines for those recusants who persistently refused.
James I expressed hostility against the Catholics in order to satisfy the Puritans, whose demands he could not wholly satisfy. In February he publicly announced his 'utter detestation' of Catholicism; within days all priests and Jesuits had been expelled and recusancy fines reintroduced
Debunkers often castigate CT'ers for joining the dots but in essence all the quotes and data parroted are useless unless they are put to good use by extrapolating their meaning. That is how mankind has managed to evolve.
When I write "It is about vilifying Fawkes for trying to blow up democracy, thereby inviting in the Spanish Inquisition.", I have already factored all this into account. Ok, it may not have been the Spanish who brought it if the plot had succeeded but it was quite likely as they would have wanted revenge for the loss of their Armada and would no doubt have jumped at the opportunity.
The trouble with 'simply relating facts' is that it negates the purpose of ascertaining the facts in the first place.
Facts are used for a purpose i.e. the point in recording astrological data is that it can be used to predict future events such as the best time to sow seed and the best time to harvest, when there will be an eclipse or full moon and so on. Past data is only useful if it helps the present in some way. Data which is not understood and acted upon intelligently is dry and useless.
I think though that there might be a danger in an over-eagerness to "understand" data. This eagerness can lead to imposing an understanding on something that really does not lead to that understanding.
Sometimes the intelligent thing to do with data is to recognize that it really does not tell you anything, and move on.
If one has an illness, there is NOTHING wrong with taking medicine for it. It doesn't matter if it is diabetes or a mental illness. like schizophrenia. You made a comment about 'forced medication'. Do you feel it is wrong if parents make their child take their insulin shots? The child in incapable of understanding the why he/she needs something that is painful. In the same way, the schizophrenic can't not understand why they need the 'drugs' . Maybe you prefer the older method of handling such folks, locking them up or killing them as 'witches'.
There is a BIG difference between that and using tranquilizers or booze to relax.
It is a shame that it seems you have lost the ability to unwind and to play.
I think though that there might be a danger in an over-eagerness to "understand" data. This eagerness can lead to imposing an understanding on something that really does not lead to that understanding.
Sometimes the intelligent thing to do with data is to recognize that it really does not tell you anything, and move on.
But it's such a point of personal pride for people who practice conspiracy theorising to collect disparate and esoteric facts and put them all together to tell a cohesive plot.
It's their 'research' and gains them cred with their peers.
Unfortunately they don't see how much their own hand influences the process, or can't seem to understand why their conclusions are not considered valid from a deductive point of view.
I think though that there might be a danger in an over-eagerness to "understand" data. This eagerness can lead to imposing an understanding on something that really does not lead to that understanding.
Sometimes the intelligent thing to do with data is to recognize that it really does not tell you anything, and move on.
I do not agree, data is simply interpreted, whether it is interpreted correctly or not is the issue. One may interpret data one way and someone else another, unless you are inferring 'over eagerness' as an 'undue rush' or bias.
'Junk dna' is a good case in point... that which was initially dismissed as junk or errant has yielded valuable information to others. Different people see things in different ways and data of no interest or meaning to some is interesting and valuable to others. Only the person viewing the data can decide if it is of interest and worth pursuing.
I do not agree, data is simply interpreted, whether it is interpreted correctly or not is the issue. One may interpret data one way and someone else another, unless you are inferring 'over eagerness' as an 'undue rush' or bias.
'Junk dna' is a good case in point... that which was initially dismissed as junk or errant has yielded valuable information to others. Different people see things in different ways and data of no interest or meaning to some is interesting and valuable to others. Only the person viewing the data can decide if it is of interest and worth pursuing.
"Bias" is what I was implying. A cognitive bias to see out connections which ends up with you imagining connections based on tenuous reasoning.
Like starting out with the data that there's an owl statue in bohemian grove, and then ending up with the idea that it's a statue of Moloch. Because you feel that there's something going on at the grove, you tend to give more weight to connections that support this feeling, and less weight to things that do not. Drinking and a few prostitutes becomes a bacchanalian satanic orgy. A twee play on the cremation of car becomes some babylonian blood ritual. Rich men meeting for fun and relaxation becomes the place where presidents and wars are decided.
You have a very strong bias Oxy, even if you don't think you do.
If one has an illness, there is NOTHING wrong with taking medicine for it. It doesn't matter if it is diabetes or a mental illness. like schizophrenia. You made a comment about 'forced medication'. Do you feel it is wrong if parents make their child take their insulin shots? The child in incapable of understanding the why he/she needs something that is painful. In the same way, the schizophrenic can't not understand why they need the 'drugs' . Maybe you prefer the older method of handling such folks, locking them up or killing them as 'witches'.
I think the mental health element rely too heavily on drugs. Of course there is a place for it but many think it over used.
If I may remind you of the penchant for electro therapy and the wanton damage that was done to many people during the time they experimented on many thousands of people... it's easy enough to look up.
There is a BIG difference between that and using tranquilizers or booze to relax.
I refer to the saying: "I would rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy", but again you miss the point as does Alhazred, (others just ignore it). The PLAY that you consistently depict as harmless is ILLEGAL.
Millions of people are in prison for prostitution... many prostitutes start very young. Many people are in prison for drug use, some serving life sentences on three strikes and out. I cannot help but notice that what is good for the goose is not good for the gander. Homosexuality has been ILLEGAL for the majority of the lifespan of BG and it is 'well known' that goes on there. Now be clear, I am not anti gay, I am against one law for them and another for us.
It is a shame that it seems you have lost the ability to unwind and to play.
"Bias" is what I was implying. A cognitive bias to see out connections which ends up with you imagining connections based on tenuous reasoning.
Like starting out with the data that there's an owl statue in bohemian grove, and then ending up with the idea that it's a statue of Moloch. Because you feel that there's something going on at the grove, you tend to give more weight to connections that support this feeling, and less weight to things that do not. Drinking and a few prostitutes becomes a bacchanalian satanic orgy. A twee play on the cremation of car becomes some babylonian blood ritual. Rich men meeting for fun and relaxation becomes the place where presidents and wars are decided.
You have a very strong bias Oxy, even if you don't think you do.
You may well be right Mick, in fact you probably are... but where does it originate?
Could it be that I see the false pretext wars and the wealth and power grabs and abuses and the proven lies and that has something to do with my interpretation of what happens at places like BG. There are millions of like minded people on the planet Mick... I think our concerns, distrust and skepticism is warranted, 'on balance', even if some of the details are wrong. Ok, I admit sometimes I am wrong but on the big issues I think not. I feel it right to use my own mind rather than mindlessly accept things simply because 'authority says'. I am open to new data. Isis is a good one, yes it is wrong to say Isis is Babylonian when she was an Egyptian goddess but in the scheme of things it matters little. Ishtar was the Babylonian goddess and the others, including Isis are essentially the same entity but re branded
It is still true that these ancient ideologies have remained interwoven right through to today and will continue.
If your problem with the activities in the Grove are 'illegal activities', then maybe we should BAN all conventions also.
You mention ECT, and yet there are those that feel that it helped them and that the issues from it were worth the trade off. My Aunt had ECT in the late 50s, early 60s, and it did help her. She was incapable of looking after her children or working and it allowed her to be able to do both afterward. It was used before a lot of medications had been developed.
Let me ask this, HAVE you ever personally suffered from severe depression?
Slightly OT, but its more like thousands than millions.
The one-law-for-them thing is simply about rich people having better lawyers. It's nothing special about the Grove.
Sure it would be ideal if rich people were all responsible and strict law abiders, but they are not. And nobody really expects it. They are just people.
You may well be right Mick, in fact you probably are... but where does it originate?
Could it be that I see the false pretext wars and the wealth and power grabs and abuses and the proven lies and that has something to do with my interpretation of what happens at places like BG. There are millions of like minded people on the planet Mick... I think our concerns, distrust and skepticism is warranted, 'on balance', even if some of the details are wrong. Ok, I admit sometimes I am wrong but on the big issues I think not. I feel it right to use my own mind rather than mindlessly accept things simply because 'authority says'. I am open to new data. Isis is a good one, yes it is wrong to say Isis is Babylonian when she was an Egyptian goddess but in the scheme of things it matters little. Ishtar was the Babylonian goddess and the others, including Isis are essentially the same entity but re branded
It is still true that these ancient ideologies have remained interwoven right through to today and will continue.
I have been very interested in this discussion, Oxy, and it's all in an area unfamiliar to me but very familiar to you, so I have little to offer in return for your due diligence.
What particularly fascinates is that all these things tend to resonate in everyone's mind. They are the memes which consciously or otherwise we all tend to follow. They power our dreams and nightmares. Fact or myth, we are sympathetic to them. They are both dangerous, destructive and also a source of inspiration and creativity. Is this the best of all possible worlds? By themselves these memes are worthless, a minefield. But can good use be made of them? I suggest not, until their true place is established. In the mind. NOT external. NOT 'real'.
By themselves these memes are worthless, a minefield. But can good use be made of them? I suggest not, until their true place is established. In the mind. NOT external. NOT 'real'.
I have a problem with the fact that, millions of people are in prison for crimes that are only crimes because politicians declare they are crimes whilst at the same time committing them. It is hypocrisy, why not make prostitution legal but within sensible rules which protect prostitutes and their clients instead of persecuting the most vulnerable?
Drugs are more complicated but there are many who say that marijuana is much safer and more beneficial especially in pain management and combating cancer than many of the pharma drugs. Pharma drugs are after all derived from natural ingredients.
You mention ECT, and yet there are those that feel that it helped them and that the issues from it were worth the trade off. My Aunt had ECT in the late 50s, early 60s, and it did help her. She was incapable of looking after her children or working and it allowed her to be able to do both afterward. It was used before a lot of medications had been developed.
No C, sorry but I have never suffered from any mental affliction, I like to understand the world around me and attempt to make it a friendlier, better place. I am well aware that a utopia is never going to be possible but the issues which concern me mostly is this war ethic. I actually supported the Iraq and Afghan wars initially, I expected an in and out with benefit to us and the people of those areas but I then started to realise that it was not about 'making things better and more stable' it was about colonization and resources. I have heard the people echo this... they state they were pleased to be rid of Saddam and the Taliban and expected things to get better, water, electricity, hospitals, medicine, schools but it didn't happen... it became clear 'we' were there to plunder and set up puppet regimes... that's when the insurgents started.
I think Goring puts it well and let's face it he should know.
Interview in Göring's cell (3 January 1946)
Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars. Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.
I have a problem with the fact that, millions of people are in prison for crimes that are only crimes because politicians declare they are crimes whilst at the same time committing them. It is hypocrisy, why not make prostitution legal but within sensible rules which protect prostitutes and their clients instead of persecuting the most vulnerable?
I'd agree with that, but what does that have to do with Bohemian Grove?
Do rich people commit prostitution or drug offenses more than poor people? All I see here is people doing what people do. You seem to have some very unrealistic expectation of rich people.
The trouble with 'simply relating facts' is that it negates the purpose of ascertaining the facts in the first place.
Facts are used for a purpose i.e. the point in recording astrological data is that it can be used to predict future events such as the best time to sow seed and the best time to harvest, when there will be an eclipse or full moon and so on. Past data is only useful if it helps the present in some way. Data which is not understood and acted upon intelligently is dry and useless.
That you quote 'there were no Inquisitions in England is irrelevant' to the Gunpowder Plot. The aim of the plot was to reinstate Catholicism in England and if it had been successful would almost certainly have involved rooting out dissenters and the way that was done was via the Inquisition. There was no Inquisition despite the Spanish Armada a few years previously, because the Armada was flung around the coast by storms and the gallantry of the English navy.
There was no Inquisition post 5th Nov, because the plot failed.
Spying and shoot-outs, treachery and torture, not to mention gruesome deaths. The Gunpowder Plot has it all. Why were Catholics so bitter, and what did they hope to achieve?
The year 1603 marked the end of an era. After 45 years on the English throne, Elizabeth I was dying. All signs suggested her successor would be James VI of Scotland, the son of Mary Queen of Scots - the queen who had been executed in 1587 on Elizabeth's orders.
English Catholics were very excited. They had suffered severe persecution since 1570, when the Pope had excommunicated Elizabeth, releasing her subjects from their allegiance to her. The Spanish Armada of 1588 had made matters worse. To the Tudor State, all Catholics were potential traitors. They were forbidden to hear Mass, forced instead to attend Anglican services, with steep fines for those recusants who persistently refused.
James I expressed hostility against the Catholics in order to satisfy the Puritans, whose demands he could not wholly satisfy. In February he publicly announced his 'utter detestation' of Catholicism; within days all priests and Jesuits had been expelled and recusancy fines reintroduced
Debunkers often castigate CT'ers for joining the dots but in essence all the quotes and data parroted are useless unless they are put to good use by extrapolating their meaning. That is how mankind has managed to evolve.
When I write "It is about vilifying Fawkes for trying to blow up democracy, thereby inviting in the Spanish Inquisition.", I have already factored all this into account. Ok, it may not have been the Spanish who brought it if the plot had succeeded but it was quite likely as they would have wanted revenge for the loss of their Armada and would no doubt have jumped at the opportunity.
Your original point was that the bonfires are about vilifying Fawkes for blowing up democracy. You cede this point by correctly linking to an article on the beeb that shows that the plot was about replacing one monarch with another. You then speculate that had the plot the succeeded the Inquisition might well have taken root in England. But that's all it is, speculation. The Spanish Inquisition was primarily directed at Jews and those forcibly converted from Islam. In the main, all the other Inquisitions were directed at heresies WITHIN the Catholic Church, and very seldom at Protestants. Scandinavia at the time was free of the Inquisition, and there were few enough instances in Germany - mainly in the southern regions close by Italy where there were heretical Catholics. Even in Spain, by the late 14th century the number of Protestants being tried by the Inquisition were very few - and in fact the vast majority weren't actually Protestants at all.
It is safe to say that there would have been some persecution of Protestants if the throne had changed hands, just as there was every other time a new King or Queen took power and was of a different religious bent, but to claim it would have led to an Inquisition is simply faulty reasoning. There is nothing in the history books to suggest that anyone of that time was remotely worried about it.
All of this is by and by, and very tangential to Mick's point that there is nothing inherently suspicious with the burning of things in symbolic fires. You do it every year in the UK and nobody bats an eye.
"Homosexuality has been ILLEGAL for the majority of the lifespan of BG and it is 'well known' that goes on there."
Has it? Or do you mean sodomy? Also, keep in mind that we're talking about California, and these are State laws. How many ordinary citizens were convicted of sodomy in California between the first Bohemian Grove party and 1976 when the anti-sodomy laws were repealed (I believe blow-jobs were also illegal under the same law). I'm guessing very, very few. And probably not one in the 20th century, in California. The "3 Strikes" law is brutal, but it has been amended in California to only be used on felons with violent crimes, with those on minor drug offenses being released.
In any case, nobody in their right mind would argue that the rich suffer the same weight of the law as the poor. That's pretty much the key advantage of wealth - being able to avoid the law. So it is, and so it has always been. The shenanigans at Bohemian Grove are fairly minor compared to, for example, Bush and Blair getting away with war crimes.
Are there millions of people in prison for prostitution? I find that hard to believe. Regardless, the laws are generally set up to prosecute the girls rather than the punters, and perhaps that's where we should be more focused.
Oxy, you do understand that depression is not just 'not having a sunny view of the world'. It is caused by a malfunction in brain chemicals. It is just as real as diabetes or heart disease.
I have suffered from severe depression, and it is no fun. What kept me going was the fact that I had a kennel of Irish Setters that depended on me. Without me, they would have suffered. (I was in my 20s, both parents had health issues and my mom's mood swings were unbelievable--later it was found that she had a tumor of the adrenal glands).
There are folks that swear by ECT treatment even today.
There was an interesting piece on the radio this morning about folks with a certain form of bi-polar illness, benefiting from Ketamine
I have a problem with the fact that, millions of people are in prison for crimes that are only crimes because politicians declare they are crimes whilst at the same time committing them. It is hypocrisy, why not make prostitution legal but within sensible rules which protect prostitutes and their clients instead of persecuting the most vulnerable?
I have a problem with priests who say extramarital sex and homosexuality is a sin while doing it, but not every priest does it. What is supposedly going on in Bohemian Grove? I have a hard time picturing George Bush and Donald Trump shooting up heroin and having sex with underage boys and girls.
Let me ask this, HAVE you ever personally suffered from severe depression?
No C, sorry but I have never suffered from any mental affliction, I like to understand the world around me and attempt to make it a friendlier, better place. I am well aware that a utopia is never going to be possible
What does that have to do with suffering from depression? You are reminding me of a co worker I had once. We were talking about someone's alcoholism and he said "I was an alcoholic once, for a month when my girlfriend broke up with me". Clearly didn't know what alcoholism was, and I don't think you know what depression is.
Homosexuality has been ILLEGAL for the majority of the lifespan of BG and it is 'well known' that goes on there. Now be clear, I am not anti gay, I am against one law for them and another for us.
You're losing me with the "illegal" references. Do you think BG is one big bacchanalia? Like Caligula? The mental picture is mind boggling, when I think about people like Henry Kissinger attending. Seems their wives would object also, it it's like one big bachelor party with boys.
You're losing me with the "illegal" references. Do you think BG is one big bacchanalia? Like Caligula? The mental picture is mind boggling, when I think about people like Henry Kissinger attending. Seems their wives would object also, it it's like one big bachelor party with boys.
Kissinger might be a bad example, he was a notorious womanizer and regularly dated models, actresses, etc. I'd say Henry would be one of the most likely of the famous folk to be indulging in wild sex!
Oxy, you do understand that depression is not just 'not having a sunny view of the world'. It is caused by a malfunction in brain chemicals. It is just as real as diabetes or heart disease.
It is a bit off topic, but I do have an interest in psychology, so I am happy to have a discussion on this if you feel it worth starting a new thread.
I am interested in how you can be so certain of the exclusivity of the cause for depression. I have spoken with many people suffering from depression and from my experience there are many factors which brought it on and many ways of dealing with/alleviating it.
I am unaware that sodomy was ever illegal between a male and female or husband and wife. I know it was frowned upon but was it ever illegal? Homosexuality requires that both parties be same sex. That was illegal and included 'cottaging laws' where merely soliciting was a crime. George Michael?
Also, keep in mind that we're talking about California, and these are State laws. How many ordinary citizens were convicted of sodomy in California between the first Bohemian Grove party and 1976 when the anti-sodomy laws were repealed (I believe blow-jobs were also illegal under the same law). I'm guessing very, very few. And probably not one in the 20th century, in California. The "3 Strikes" law is brutal, but it has been amended in California to only be used on felons with violent crimes, with those on minor drug offenses being released.
In any case, nobody in their right mind would argue that the rich suffer the same weight of the law as the poor. That's pretty much the key advantage of wealth - being able to avoid the law. So it is, and so it has always been. The shenanigans at Bohemian Grove are fairly minor compared to, for example, Bush and Blair getting away with war crimes.
You are correct as patently they do not. However, many argue that they should.
Are there millions of people in prison for prostitution? I find that hard to believe. Regardless, the laws are generally set up to prosecute the girls rather than the punters, and perhaps that's where we should be more focused.
The last thing we want is for people in prostitution to be criminalised. We therefore call for decriminalisation for all prostituted people (who are mainly women and children) and the criminalisation of all people who use prostituted people.
This approach has been adopted by Nordic countries such as Sweden, Norway and Iceland – nations which consistently top the global polls in terms of gender equality.
The ‘Nordic model’ completely decriminalises those who sell sex acts whilst offering support services to exit prostitution. It further criminalises the purchase of sex acts to tackle the demand which expands prostitution and fuels trafficking for sexual exploitation.
