Billy Graham--Evangelist/Satanist? (the Oxnam connection)

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Springmeier railroaded?

Postby Dreams End » Sun Sep 03, 2006 11:50 pm

I will be honest, Lily, explain why I have a bad impression of Cathy O. I haven't read her book. She lives (or used to)here in Nashville and when I found her site I read how she said her daughter had been forcibly committed to a mental hospital in Knoxville. So I wrote to ask if there was anything I could do...sign a petition, whatever.<br><br>Her response: "Buy my book."<br><br>Literally. <br><br>So, if that's her response to someone trying to help her daughter (perhaps naively, I admit) I really am not interested. <br><br>Finally, I would be interested to see the original, first time mention of reptiles as it would correct what you are saying is a misconception. I have assumed that she and Phillips morphed their stories to incorporate up and coming themes and dovetailed with Icke, and not the other way around.<br><br>I don't know that I find the idea of Bush sitting through some holographic projection process to be that much more believable as it's a pretty sophisticated piece of technology (years ahead of whatever is public at the moment) for a decidedly very limited and..well...questionable purpose...especially if she recognized what it was...it didn't even fool her...millions down the drain right there.<br><br>I will keep an open mind due to the parts of her story that check out as well as the fact that similar illogical games seem to be involved with "alien abductees," which I assume to be a MC program of some kind. A LOT of effort to produce a really unclear effect...but that's speculation. So I'm not trying to totally debunk but I would like to see who started talking about repitlians first, Icke or O'Brian and if you have a quote from her first mention, I'd be interested to read it. <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

Re: Springmeier railroaded?

Postby rothbardian » Mon Sep 04, 2006 5:27 pm

<br><br>DE--<br><br>I think I sometimes have trouble understanding your particular thought processes-- When you offered O'Brien "help" and her response was (essentially) "send cash"...what was so terribly discrediting about that? According to her (a few other researchers I've read) Nashville is a veritable rat's nest of MC perps/handlers. When a stranger offers to step into her life, I could certainly conceive of her being a little standoffish. I don't know.<br><br>Anyway, going back to this Oxnam thing and the significance of it, as it relates to Springmeier--<br><br>You state: <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"Why does that automatically mean it's a lie?"</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> referring to the comments from Springmeier's ex-wife. <br><br>When did I say she lied? Where do you get that from? She sounds likes she's trying to be truthful, actually. But it's still just a divorce controversy. It looks to me as though he became obsessed with 'rescuing' Wheeler, and allowed it to turn his priorities upside down. Where's the beef? He's a researcher on this subject matter...who went through a divorce. I'm not following your point, somehow. <br><br>If he has sinister and devious motives, I am interested to see where that might be happening. But so far...?<br><br>I think this goes back to a previous observation I have made regarding what an agonizing process it seems to be for some folks here to even develop a 'working hypothesis' or 'working conclusion'. I have referred to the problem of <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>"paralysis by analysis".</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> I don't quite understand what this is all about--<br><br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>1.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> There are powerful evil people squirreled away in the inner core of some secretive organizations...the Masons keep popping up in this regard, over and over. <br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>2.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> They do evil things to children. This penchant for pedophilia among the 'elite' is a worldwide phenomenon.<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>3.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> These same people are bent on world domination. <br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>4.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> There may be some uncertainty as to how interconnected they are. There is the power elite crowd in Europe that, for example, is having their problems with this Dutroux guy right now. Then there are the power elites in the US, and the whole Franklin Cover-up/Gannon/Bush/WarrenBuffet/BarneyFrank bunch of lovelies. <br><br>They do have their regular Bildenberger meetings and Bohemian Grove meetings so...there does seem to be cooperation of some kind on these world domination schemes. And finally....<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>5.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> ...there is a strange preoccupation among them of infiltrating the Christian community. Yes, I will come right out and say that after looking atPat Robertson, Kenneth Copeland, what I've now discovered about Billy Graham, Oxnam, also Michael W. Smith, and last but certainly not least-- George "Bible-believer" W. Bush...it makes sense to me that <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>if the PTB have sought to advance behind a false Jewish front</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> (hence causing a very conveniently misdirecting anti-semitism trend)...<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>they have also sought to advance behind a false Christian front.</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>These are 'working conclusions' I have. As I have said...the wailing, the gnashing of teeth, the hue, the cry, the storms of protest, when one surmises a few of these things at this little discussion board...I don't understand quite.<br><br>Surmise a few things once in a while, for heaven's sake. Form some kind of working conclusions...or at least some <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>working theories</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->, then see if emerging facts continue to fit the theoretical framework. If they do, keep going. If they don't, scrap the theory and try a different one. It's not a capital offense.<br><br>Then there is this allergic reaction to the term "Illuminati". There are these evil powerful people who have organized to take over the world. (See my recent David Rockefeller post.) <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Who cares what they may or may not call themselves??</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> I, for one, could not care less. I have suggested the term "Banananati"...or the "PTB" or the Military Industrial Complex. Whatever.<br><br>One of the problems here is that when theories or ideas are presented (at least for me, many times) these ideas or theories are seized upon and misrepresented as dogmatic conclusions, and the individual and the entire line of conversation he might like to have, are dismissed as 'crackpot'. That's unfortunate. <br><br>I noticed in one of the Johnny Gosch threads, some came forward with the assertion <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"Gosch IS NOT Gannon. That's final. No more discussion is necessary."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> (I'm paraphrasing a bit.) Alrighty then. There just seems to be this odd PC regimen being implemented, so much of the time.<br><br><br>LilyPatToo--<br><br>Your comments were interesting and significant to me. You state: <br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"...people like Springmeier are part of the reason why that level of denial continues to operate in the Liberal community. He's starting to look like a parody of the stereotypical hypocritical holier-than-thou Religious Right Bible thumping conspiracy nut. If Wheeler's material wasn't so accurate, I'd wonder if she wasn't simply used to set him up and knock him down."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br>The point I derive from your comment is that because Wheeler's info is so accurate, you (even as a liberal) are forced to grudgingly admit that possibly Springmeier is a legit researcher, his weird fundamentalism notwithstanding. <br><br>And for me that IS the central challenge here among us who see a hidden network of evil (for lack of a better way to describe it)-- It's the difficulty of spanning culture gaps. <br><br>This research is creating strange bedfellows and some people are having greater difficulty than others, with this. Too many times there is this kneejerk reaction--"I simply DO NOT want to have any agreement with this guy...because I don't like his weird cultural orientation." Score one for the PTB bad guys.<br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
rothbardian
 
Posts: 659
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 11:08 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

roth and I agree? End of world to follow

Postby Dreams End » Mon Sep 04, 2006 8:31 pm

I don't have a lot of trouble with most of what you are saying. Here's the only bit that troubles me about the "Illuminati". It's not a matter of what they call themselves, it's a matter of taking a preconceived idea, borrowing from some quite nasty myths, putting it on top of something real and then cherry picking info to fit the preconception.<br><br>A lot of people use "illuminati" simply to mean secret forces within society calling the shots...but it has an actual meaning because the Illuminati existed. Someone using the term Illuminati is claiming they still exist, unbroken (and that the original Weishaupt group, in term, is Knight's Templar, etc) and, when not delving into anti-Semitic theories recycled onto new turf, you basically get valueless info. <br><br>For example, I grabbed the Dan Brown book when it came out...knowing a bit more than the average person about the things he included in his book and really open to books like "holy blood, holy grail" (since pretty succesfully debunked, though Picknett and Price find layers beneath the hoax). My problem with the book was that it was, from a research point of view (hey, he was the one to put "based on reality" in the book) it was crap.<br><br>so Illuminati often, though not always, is usually associated with similar research "shortcuts" at best, or, at worst, made up crap. <br><br>That actually doesn't disprove that the Illuminati continued (though the record of their dissolution is pretty clear...movements do go underground) though there is nothing in the actual records to indicate that the illuminati were trying to create mind controlled slaves. Their stated objectives were anti-royalist and pro-"republican" (as in democratic, not as in elephant) as well as a general idea of enlightenment thought.<br><br>Could there be more underneath? Sure. Think Hellfire clubs. Think about how Crowley came out of Masonry (which is also what the Illuminati came from) and how much modern occultism borrows from masonic imagery, ritual and symbolism.<br><br>And then there are many who simply appropriate a lineage to sound more "respectable." There was not a single masonic splinter group, I'd wager, that did not claim to be directly descenced from the Templars. They can't ALL be right. And I've seen freemason histories in the bookstore that make claims of origin as far back as Moses! <br><br>So we have these layers. We have the factual truth, i.e. this happened then...then this other guy took over, then they started a new group over there. We have the self-reported lore of various groups, which, a la Umberto Eco, sort of step into a history of their own creation, or should I say co-optation. And then we have the layer of myth from those on the outside looking in, which contains:<br><br>a. some vestiges of the truth (not saying I can judge)<br>b. some old blood libel, anti-Semitic (but not exclusively so) stories of rabbis sacrificing babies to use their blood in Matzoh...a comment on Jeff's current post says just that, in fact. This stuff just doesn't die. <br>c. Rightwing conspiracy which is either organic or deliberately created in an attempt to smear anything remotely "leftist" as satanic (i.e. communists = Illuminati....)<br>d. Organic myth in the nonjudgmental sense of the term..i.e. stories which have some unknowable amount of factual content which morph and adapt to new social realities...<br><br>Now, this isn't just scholarly debate..I realize that victims are victims, regardless of any of the above. All I have is my ability to read, research and ask questions...and because of all the garbage, it's not easy.<br><br>Do yourself a favor and try to find a book called "Ecstasies: Deciphering the Witches' Sabbath." Not because it supports some version of what we are talking about but because the author, Carlo Ginzburg, tries to tease out the layers of historical information within all the witch trial history.<br><br>People like Margaret Murray simply took the "confession" (under torture, mind) as face value which described an actual longlived pagan religion. <br><br>ginburg (like most scholars) says "hold on...that doesn't make sense...they were tortured and much of their confessions fit what the Inquisitors wanted to hear. They'd come to a town and would already have made a big stink about the sorts of things they thought were happening. It was easy to know what they wanted to hear.<br><br>But what about the stuff the Inquisitors DIDN'T want to hear and yet kept popping up? That shows some historical information may be hidden there.<br><br>In addition, the book is important because it shows how the elites (in this case, royalty) also intentionally spread such disinformation. There are three letters, for example, showing things like a plot between a moorish king and either Jews, lepers or simply poor people to poison wells throughout an area. All three letters are different scenarios allegedly by different people...yet all three are in the same handwriting.<br><br>So it's not the "anti-Semite" part I'm wanting people to focus on...because before Jews, it was lepers and simply the poor and I think witches got tacked on later. It's the complex ways these stories get started and how they CONTAIN truth without be entirely true.<br><br>But Ginzburg did find evidence for a longlived shamanic religion in all his research. We should be able to do much more because this is happening now and we have access to so much more information. But everyone should learn some of this history I've mentioned, and the history of the blood libel, etc. A lot of it will be disturbingly familiar....and Illuminati is often (not always) a signpost for me that there may be a good dose of myth in the story. <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

Re: roth and I agree? End of world to follow

Postby rothbardian » Tue Sep 05, 2006 12:07 am

Somewhere, pigs have taken to wing. (I'm kiddin'.) Maybe I'll have more comment later. <p></p><i></i>
rothbardian
 
Posts: 659
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 11:08 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Previous

Return to Religion and the Occult

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests