‘Human sacrifice’ staged at CERN's Shiva Statue

[OP ED]

Quite.

Re: Crowley: re: nonsense re: inability to comprehend English prose:

I'm tired of this, frankly. I'm tired of having to read books in English to English speaking people who are too lazy to do the work themselves.

The Book of Law has no footnotes except for a passage suggesting that it cannot be read without the context of the other books by the same author. This would probably suffice in any context free of inherent bias. The book itself wasn't published for public consumption until it was contained as part of Magick in Theory and Practice which has the chapter on Bloody Sacrifice which our "guru" quoted in part earlier, and which quotation instigated this derailment from the topic at hand. This chapter, as mentioned by someone other than myself, actually DOES contain footnotes that specifically describe it as being entirely metaphorical (which makes him either a liar or a lazy reader), as indeed the footnotes are very literally occupying more space than the quoted text. Which means guru never read what he quoted and/or somehow considered reading his sources irrelevant.

(the daily mail article fabricated two "misquotes" of the book of the law, at least, although I confess that I started skimming after reading "bisexual" for the fourth or fifth time, my brain automatically interpreting it as being akin to saying "black" or "muslim" or some other adjective relevant only to readers (target) of a certain biased [bigoted] disposition)

(Although as a former freemason myself, I can somewhat sympathize with the general thrust of the argument of your [guru's] "friend", perhaps disagreeing insofar as it seems doubtful that they're genuinely familiar with the source material that they feel so confident discussing, given that if they were they would have noticed the same "misquoted" [fabriacted for sensation] passages that I have alluded to wrt the Daily Mail, perhaps your friend never actually read the book either, relying on the websites of tabloids to do the hard work for him?)

I'm not even slightly interested in elucidating these. Read it [liber AL] yourself, free on Wikipedia. See if you can find the fabricated portions. Then consider WHY someone would feel the need to do this. [to lie outright]

...


I see that [obviously] not everyone claims to be an occultist or indeed to have even associated with them. So much easier it must be for them, moderns, to accept the myth that witchhunts are a thing of past aeons and not still more omnipresent than some of us are comfortable with. I have been in bookstores with bricks thrown through the windows upon which were written "exodus 22:18". I was in the same place later when bricks soaked in gasoline brought fire to my friends' homes and places of worship. We do not take this so lightly. It is not a game. There is no "narrative" here. (I have also been in churches where witch burning jokes were told, from the pulpit, about the exact same people, [which is what they/we are] ---targeted just days later--so much coincidence) [and that is only for a start]

Just so it is clear, this is not academic for everyone.

(I might be inclined to discuss these in detail if I trusted, which experience has taught me not to do so freely, occult societies are secret for many reasons, safety is chief among them)

I have more to say but little time left this evening. [The spirit has moved me]

Love is the Law. There is no other bond that can unite the divided.

[guruilla]

For the sake of those squeamish researchers who only trust The Guardian for their source info:

Colin Batley, leader of sex cult preying on children, could spend life in jail
Judge says 'evil' head of paedophile group operating from quiet cul-de-sac at Welsh seaside town must serve at least 11 years

Guardian, Friday 11 March 2011 15.09 GMT

A former security guard who led a cult from a cul-de-sac in a Welsh seaside town was told he might spend life in jail for committing a series of sex attacks on boys and girls.

Colin Batley of Kidwelly, west Wales, presided over a quasi-religious sex cult that preyed on vulnerable youngsters, forced women into prostitution and indulged in occult rites.

Batley was given an indeterminate sentence for public protection with a recommendation that he spend at least 11 years in jail. Sentencing him at Swansea crown court, Judge Paul Thomas QC told him: "You may never be released."

The judge said Batley, 48, had "besmirched the unsuspecting town of Kidwelly" after moving there from London.

"You formed a community within a community, you were described as evil. That, in my view, is an entirely accurate statement of your character.

"It is likely that you have dedicated your life since you were 12 years old to satisfying your sexual urges by whatever means at your disposal."

Jacqueline Marling, 42 – described as "Batley's right-hand woman" – was jailed for 12 years for her part in the group's crimes.

The cult leader's estranged wife, Elaine Batley, 47, was jailed for eight years. And Shelly Millar, 35 – described during the trial as Batley's sex slave – was jailed for five years.

The cult is said to have been inspired by Aleister Crowley, the late mystic and magician nicknamed the Great Beast who in 1904 published a text called the Book of the Law extolling permissive sex.

During the five-week trial the prosecution claimed "the book" formed the basis for Batley's organisation and he would read from a laminated copy of it while dressed in hooded robes at the start of orgies.

Batley insisted that no cult existed but the jury found him guilty of 35 offences including 11 rapes, three indecent assaults, causing prostitution for personal gain, causing a child to have sex and inciting a child to have sex.


The three women, who got Egyptian Eye of Horus tattoos apparently to show their allegiance to the organisation, were found guilty of sex-related charges.

Young boys and girls were procured by cult members to take part in sex sessions, the trial heard. The group preyed on vulnerable youngsters, impelling them to join with veiled death threats. Batley was accused of forcing a number of his victims into prostitution.

One man told the trial Batley had repeatedly abused him as a child. A woman claimed she joined the cult after Batley told her an assassin would kill her if she did not take part in an initiation ceremony that began with a lecture on the occult and ended with a sexual assault.

Batley bred rottweiler dogs from his home for profit but kept two – named after ancient Egyptian royals – for personal safety. Several of his victims were made to wear upside down crosses, the court heard.

Despite having operated in Kidwelly for years, the cult had seemingly gone unnoticed by the rest of the town.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/mar ... -sentenced

[OP ED]

Much more readable.

I found only a few mentions of the story in mainstream outlets. Always good to see predators removed from the population. The shame is that it took so long to notice how heinous this person and his group were. It seems that the relevant authorities are equally as inept on the other side of the pond.

[RocketMan]

This thread is epic. An epistolary novel, almost.

[divideandconquer]

Bearing in mind always: this isn't a legal inquiry intended to bring about convictions, but an attempt to map cultural influences.

So true. We'll never know what happened at CERN because CERN is above the law just as so many other powerful people and institutions are above the law. These people will never be held legally accountable so they have the power to create events to, as guruilla said, "map cultural influences". The distribution of images and information--or lack thereof--is weaponized in the hand of these culture creators.

Bringing it back to the accusation of me being on a "witch hunt," I have to cry BS, again, on this one, not least because the whole notion of witch hunts, when it comes to child traffickers and ritual abuse, is mostly or entirely BS. Unless you're going to go all the way back to Salem or the Inquisition, or talk about communists, there haven't been any witch hunts, & certainly not around organized pedophilia, but the exact reverse, a massive cover-up spanning decades and absolving dozens of individuals of crimes, partly or largely via the manufacturing of a false narrative about witch-hunts. (See Ross Cheit's The Witch-Hunt Narrative, please, before citing any "examples." Daily Beast article on it here.)

There is some evidence that supports that the witch hunts of history seem to be initiated and carried out by the "witches" themselves especially in the case of Salem. In other words, that although the "witch hunts" were targeted against innocent people, there was some truth to the claims that initiated them.

Bella Dodd's book, School of Darkness (not to mention her testimony to the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee in 1952 and 1953) explains the depth of penetration that Communism made into the fabric of our nation in the 1930's and 40's, which supports some of McCarthy's claims of communist infiltration into education, the Catholic Church, etc.

[OP ED]

There is some evidence that supports that the witch hunts of history seem to be initiated and carried out by the "witches" themselves especially in the case of Salem. In other words, that although the "witch hunts" were targeted against innocent people, there was some truth to the claims that initiated them.

Seriously? What "evidence" could possibly lead to this notion?
I mean if we're isolated to considering only the infamous european hunts, you're still talking about 300 years, over a dozen countries and 30,000 victims. (Intentionally choosing a low estimate to avoid that particular digression)

"Some truth" should be better defined when used to describe "evidence" in a death penalty case.

....
Also the focus of attention wrt this behavior is always the chtistian west, but the practice was/is widespread. Even in postmodern times. Rural Africa, PNG, Saudi Arabia and India still have ongoing issues with "witch" murdering. The numbers aren't sensational, perhaps only amounting to a couple or three executions a day altogether, but this makes them no less tragic. (the Islamic state is also causing the reported number of occurrences to rise in their territory, but the maths are sketchy, laced with propaganda and therefore hard to ascertain, so I leave them out)

[guruilla]

These people will never be held legally accountable so they have the power to create events to, as guruilla said, "map cultural influences". The distribution of images and information--or lack thereof--is weaponized in the hand of these culture creators.

To clarify, mapping cultural influences is what I am attempting, here & elsewhere; what the social engineers are doing, IMO, is more like terraforming.

There is some evidence that supports that the witch hunts of history seem to be initiated and carried out by the "witches" themselves especially in the case of Salem. In other words, that although the "witch hunts" were targeted against innocent people, there was some truth to the claims that initiated them.

Bella Dodd's book, School of Darkness (not to mention her testimony to the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee in 1952 and 1953) explains the depth of penetration that Communism made into the fabric of our nation in the 1930's and 40's, which supports some of McCarthy's claims of communist infiltration into education, the Catholic Church, etc.

I've not heard anything about this but what I began to see while reading Cheit's book was a pattern relating to many of the child abuse cases that were eventually reframed, and dismissed, as "witch-hunts." They began with medical evidence, credible children's testimony, and other strongly corroborating material; then, at a certain point, often when other investigators (often but not always self-identifying as Christian) became involved and began leading witnesses, making exaggerated claims and baseless accusations, and so on. I had assumed this was a case of real abuse followed by an understandable panic reaction that interfered with the investigation, and in some cases it probably was. But the more I read of the data (Cheit refers to court records, primarily), the more it struck me how effective this was as a deliberate strategy to undermine the investigations. Coerce children to make claims that aren't true, accuse innocent people, confabulate evidence, all under the guise of trying to expose the evil-doers, and pretty soon you can't find the real culprits or victims for all the straw ones, and of course, the whole thing begins to look like a witch-hunt. Juries were often unable, or unwilling, to distinguish between individual cases, and they had a tendency to lump all the accused together as if all the charges were equally valid (human beings have low tolerance for ambiguity). Hence, since there were obvious cases of wrong accusations, the jury tendency was to exonerate them all. With hindsight, this couldn't have worked out better for the perpetrators if it had been a conscious strategy at work, which is exactly what I think it was.

This isn't to say there aren't individuals who throw bricks through windows and lynch innocent people based on fear of the supernatural and/or rank ignorance & bigotry; as a onetime occultist & street Tarot reader (yes, Thoth deck), I have been on the wrong end of (a mild version of) that sort of suspicion & distrust and yeah, it really pissed me off, and yes, it's pretty ironic to find myself accused of being on the other end of that polarity now. But in terms of organized persecutions/mass hysteria, I am no longer convinced they happen without at least some foundation in reality, at least in recent times. It's telling that people, like Levenda, who throw the 'witch-hunt' phrase about to counter inquiries into child sexual abuse refer back to the McMartin case, which is demonstrably not a case of hysterical overreaction, much less confabulation, but which remains the template for this sort of alleged phenomenon in recent history. That suggests that there are no real cases, for otherwise, why cite a provably bogus one as the primary precedent?

[Novem5er]

Last year in our local school district, there were three cases of student-teacher sexual misconduct. This is a medium-sized community serving maybe 10,000 students (as opposed to places like Miami) so these were all very big news and shocked the community. Now, about witch hunts, alongside these three cases a couple other accusations sprang-up that ended up being completely unfounded, but those professionals were still drug through the mud, embarrassed, and likely still have a stigma attached to them.

And a couple principals lost their jobs because they mishandled the situations. Remaining principals are on high alert, realizing that, not only could children under their care be at at risk, but that their 20+ year careers could be destroyed if they don't spot something out of place and fail to file the proper paperwork on suspicion.

The local community here has a real Jekyll & Hide relationship with teachers now; on one hand they are celebrated professionals who sacrifice a lot to care and educate children, but on the other hand, any number of them could be predators in disguise and, thus, they are not to be trusted.

Just this week a little girl went home and told her parents that a substitute teacher choked her in the middle of class. Her parents called the police and an investigation ensued. After a few days, the sheriffs dept released their findings, which was that there was no evidence that any abuse took place. There was no physical evidence and none of the other students witnessed the act (which supposedly took place in the middle of a classroom). The parents of the girl are refusing to accept the findings and are demanding further investigation and many in the community are right at their side.

And the sub? He's ruined. I have great empathy for teachers (having been one for many years), but even I can't comment on what happened. Was the little girl lying? Confused? Or did the substitute get away with it? Everything is tainted.

It feels like a witch hunt. Teachers are scared. Administrators are on edge and hyper vigilant. Parents are distrustful and students realize that they can be victims, but also accusers - (It was Goody Nurse!). It's not a good time for people, here.

[OP ED]

All the more reason for more surveillance to clear things up.

[tapitsbo]

OP ED is being sarcastic, I think, but the power to manipulate and tamper with surveillance on behalf on its inevitable owners and managers is amplified with its increasing prevalence.

[Neither]

Just as a follow-up post: I received an email today from someone following this thread who hasn't registered here & who preferred to share their thoughts privately with me. (BTW I know of people who have tried to register at RI but haven't ever made it "in.") Since some of what he wrote dovetailed closely with arguments I wanted to make, I asked him I could quote him & save myself some time. He said OK. This person is an ex-Freemason, who recently left the lodge.

So, you linked to an article in the daily mail about some really awful people doing really awful things to innocent people while reading/taking their cues from this "holy book" of crowley. Are we to say those people also "read it wrong?" I don't think so. A lot of that evil behavior is prescribed...right there in the "scripture." Again, if the world ends and some group of people 500 years from now find the botl and decide to build a religion out of it, they are going to get up to the same sorts of sinister crap because their new bible "tells them so."

Sounds like this "ex-freemason" hasn't even read The book of the law. Or more like hasn't studied it because TBOTL is almost incomprehensible if you just read it just like that

[MacCruiskeen]

OP ED is being sarcastic, I think, but the power to manipulate and tamper with surveillance on behalf on its inevitable owners and managers is amplified with its increasing prevalence.

Yes. And the easiest, safest and most popular way for the owners and managers of surveillance video evidence to "tamper with it" is for them to simply refuse to release it whenever it fails to support their case. Or else to release only carefully-selected bits of it (stills, even), with the explicit or implicit sarcastic subtext: "Satisfied now, tinfoil-hatters?"

Cf. Pentagon 9/11 ("Here we see an airliner hit the building") and Boston marathon ("Here we see Dzhokhar dropping the backpack"), in neither of which cases the released images actually clearly showed what they purported to show. It was enough that they appeared to show it, to any casual observer (i.e. to nearly everyone). The fact that most people think they have seen video evidence of the 9/11 hijackers checking in for their final flights (they haven't) is probably the crassest example of how easy it is to deceive the public in this way. (Especially when the public wants to be deceived.)

[guruilla]

Sounds like this "ex-freemason" hasn't even read The book of the law. Or more like hasn't studied it because TBOTL is almost incomprehensible if you just read it just like that

What you mean I think is not incomprehensible but something else. The language of BOTL is mostly quite easy to understand. What's with this recurring line of argument anyway? "If you understood BOTL that way then you got it wrong & so your interpretation and any acts it might have led you to commit in your erroneous reading of it are 100% irrelevant to the book itself." Talk about pretzeled (or Orwellian) logic. I personally object to these arguments so strongly not because I am on the witch hunt but because I "studied" BOTL for going on 20 years (& yes, read all the commentaries) and am still far from convinced that the book/AC isn't prescribing literal behaviors. He took "strange drugs" because the Book told him to, didn't he? Unfortunately this side discussion belongs at another thread. But anyway.

I want to say something about the thread topic but the only thing that came to mind recently is the question of mirror neurons: when we watch a set of actions, including simulated ones, we have the experience of committing those actions, at a neurological level at least (or should that be "at least"). This video didnt seem to "work" because most people didn't get "into" it at all, rejected it as false and phony, even more so I think than if it had been in a (say) Stanley Kubrick movie (where the action wasn't really any more ludicrous but was better shot and scored). But perhaps this is part of why there was such a strong rejection of it as phony, pre-empting any other questions as to wtf is going on here (fake = prank = mystery solved).

Other relevant context is Terror Management Theory: remind people of death and they become less open, flexible, or reasoned, more reactive, hostile, and dogmatic. I'd say this thread demonstrates something of this sort. (It's more charged than usual for a supposedly trivial news story)...

[MacCruiskeen]

Re. Eyes Wide Shut (1999), the last film by one of the most technically accomplished cinematographers in history, a man who was also a notoriously painstaking perfectionist:

1. Something that always struck me about the orgy scene is the moment when the woman on the balcony shouts "Stop!" Kubrick uses a "crash zoom" to home in on her. It's an effect that was first developed in the Seventies and was then so over-used that it soon became widely regarded as boring and a bit silly. Un-hip and unusable. But Kubrick chose to use this cheesy, embarrassingly-dated "drama-heightening" effect right at the climax of his final work. And it's the only time he uses it in this film. (Had he ever used it in any film? I don't think so, but correct me if I'm wrong.*)



His style is famously dry, cool and distanced. And all his movies are very carefully crafted, right down to the smallest detail.

2. The same actress has several lines of dialogue at that point,and had previously had a scene with Tom Cruise, warning him that he was in "terrible danger". And her acting is really strikingly wooden. Unnecessarily wooden. And she is even wearing a full-face mask, so re-dubbing her lines would not have posed even the slightest difficulty

Why did Kubrick choose to leave it that way? Why did he choose to "mar" his own final work with such cheesiness(es)? It can only have been deliberate. It seems to me he was going out of his way to add an element of ridiculousness to the whole sinister scene. To give it a whiff of amateur dramatics and Hammer Horror; of kitsch. To make it solemn-silly, to make the audience titter uncertainly.

And yet the threat is real, as the end of the film makes clear. (The mask on Cruise's bed, and the card handed to him through the gate.) So is the wealth and the power.

* ON EDIT: I've just remembered, he used it at least twice in The Shining (1979/80): when the twins appear in the corridor, and when Shelley Duvall sees the man in the gorilla suit. Seventies.

[guruilla]

Yes, except that the whole film is filled with impossibly wooden acting and high-cheese content scenes; so besides the use of a zoom this moment doesn't stand out especially in this regard...?