by Dreams End » Thu May 25, 2006 1:10 pm
<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I have put this photo of Karl Marx out there (twice now). In this photo, he has very carefully placed a crescent pendant over his wrist. He is also doing this Masonic thing with his hand. It is a very interesting picture, to say the least.<br><br>I have also passed along the historical fact that the early Bolsheviks literally referred to themselves as Spartacusts in a direct salute to Weishaupt...and which by all rights, indicates a direct connection between Weishaupt and Marxism. I have more evidence like this but...I've received no comment from anyone here. No interest so far, so I think I may refrain from putting out too much more effort, if I'm only going to encounter a very strong cynicism.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I saw the photo once before but never saw any other evidence presented when I challenged your assertion that the "Illuminati" paid Marx to invent socialism. You replied that you might go through and dig up the links but that was the last I heard of it...so I missed it.<br><br>You are intriguing, Roth, because you are clearly intelligent. Folks like you on this board constantly mistake me and certain others for debunkers...never believing in conspiracies. The sum total of my posts (many from before you were around) clearly show that this is not true...but I still insist on high standards. Either this stuff is important and we should get it right or it is all a game of let's pretend and ghost stories in the night and it doesn't matter. <br><br>One of the big mistakes made in conspiracy research is the confusion of correlation with causation. Two things happen in chronological proximity: therefore one cause the other. But there are always other explanations that have to be looked at, such as genuine coincidence or a third event that causes the other two. For example, a study that shows that the number of electronic doodads a business executive has (cell phones, pda's etc) corresponds with heart attack risk doesn't show that these doodads cause heart attacks...they could be indicative of a high stress lifestyle and THAT could be the cause.<br><br>Or take your Spartacus assertion. While I've never seen that, and once again we are left wondering where this info comes from, it makes perfect sense that both Weishaupt and Bolsheviks would choose that appelation. Spartacus led a SLAVE revolt against Rome...so naturally any movement that styles itself (true or no) as opposing an unjust system might use this term. And Spartacus preceded the Illuminati by millenia, no?<br><br>I don't know what that pendant is. You claim to know. HOW do you know? That's always the essential question. To me it doesn't even look like a crescent. It looks like the light part on the outside goes around too far to be a crescent and may even be a complete circle since we can't see the far side of the pendant. But if it IS a crescent, why not assume he is Muslim? Given his take on religion, that's just as (un)likely.<br><br>In general, people toss out "Illuminati" did this or that with really no evidence. Much of the train of thought goes back to Jewish conspiracy theory. I say this, again, not to accuse you...but to explain that if you want to get into conspiracy research you really need to understand the lay of the land. Much conspiracy research is mostly conspiracy and very little research. Even more often, it starts with an assumption and then cherry picks factoids that seem to support this assumption. This is why I've seen very similar stuff about Bolsheviks but replacing Illuminati with Jews. Long explications of how Trotsky was Jewish (he was) and Lenin was Jewish (he wasn't, as far as I can tell.) And the causation, correlation problem surfaces. Jews were not well treated under the Tsar...or have you not seen "Fiddler on the Roof"? So it is natural many Jews would join anti-Tsarist schemes of all sorts. It's also natural that international Jewish groups would support anti-Tsarist schemes of all sorts. And they did. And this, then, is turned around to show how the Jews "ran the Revolution".<br><br>Again...every time I bring this up, people get off on the wrong point. I'm explaining the genesis of a particular strain of conspiracy theory. You can track its development pretty easily. <br><br>The illuminati did exist, of course. I've yet to see one piece of evidence that they continued to exist beyond the time they were outlawed, however. They may have...but I've never seen it. It's the same with the Knights Templar. And if you don't think these sorts of theories can hang around and be given a very thick veneer of scholarly respectability, then you obviously have not rushed out to see the Davinci Code...which is more garbage than the book was...and I'm someone who BELIEVES there is some interesting secret history there. The book was just poorly researched and the Priory of Sion was a hoax from the beginning. Now, it may have been a hoax directed for some more hidden groups plans...but nevertheless the straight up version of that story is just b.s. (Picknett and Prince have a book that says just that, focusing in detail on the rightwing, synarchist ties of the Priory...but I really, really digress...coffee + Concerta = Chatty Cathy)<br><br>These things are very important to me for a couple of reasons. One, is that I am a leftist (not a liberal...a liberal, in my view, is someone who thinks the best way to get poor people to shut up is toss a few more crumbs...I am anti-capitalist). Obviously, we aren't going to agree on that. But I bring it up because I believe that leftists simply ignore way too much of this conspiracy theory which allows less reputable folks to spin how it comes out. The mainstream left still does not have a way of talking about the Kennedy assassination, for example. It's the rightwing that does that, for the most part. Weird, since Kennedy is a liberal icon. <br><br>There are a lot of reasons why this is, but I am still amazed. Leftists want to look at oppressive structures in society. Fine, but when someone in some country gets assassinated SOMEBODY, a person, with a name, does the shooting..and somebody ELSE ordered it...likely on the orders of someone still higher up. THAT is conspiracy, pure and simple. As I've said before, at its best, conspiracy theory is not mutually exclusive with left analysis...it simply names names.<br><br>Now, when you get into satanic worship (which I guess was the topic up there somewhere) you have a real credibility problem, beyond any other forces making leftists look the other way. I know of two different men, for example, who got quite famous claiming to have been satanic "high priests" on the Christian speaker circuit...both of whom were lying. They were popular speakers and likely "saved many souls" with their talks. One of them even kept practicing occult stuff as he was making the rounds with his "confessions." I'm happy to say that one of them (I am too lazy to go look up the names at the moment, but will if people are interested...) was outed by the Christian media...that's the way it should be. UFO hoaxes should first be exposed by UFOlogists, for example. Keep your own house clean and reputations in tact.<br><br>In any event, I think leftists miss a very large boat here. And partly its because the source, or at least apparent source, of much of this material is so "unrigorous"...and I haven't even GOTTEN into Larouche. <br><br>Also, since I do believe (with some, but not enough, evidence) that there are both RA networks and MC activities that tie into this and that there is also a nexxus there with neo-fascist groups and the whole narco/armsdealer/intel substrate that seems to underly much of the facade of government and "democracy", I think we need to be MORE rigorous..not less. It matters. My wife is DID as old timers here know. I don't know what all happened to her...and so far all we know about is abuse from her father (and likely mother). And that's not good...but when she is carving a pentagram into her leg and fighting her own hand as it goes to her throat with a knife (as happened a few months ago...it's not fun to call the police on your own wife) one needs to be open to even darker possibilities. I don't talk about these with her, but I did make sure her therapist was open to this so she would not dismiss "anomolous" memories that might emerge. Since my wife identifies as Wiccan, she has no negative view of a pentagram...so if she starts to have memories of a pentagram in a negative context, that will tell us that there may have been something else going on. This therapist tells me that she's worked with several cases of RA that she found "convincing." She did not go around verifying the truth of them, but found the victims to be very credible, the stories internally consistent, and as she is VERY rigourous about not ascribing any particular cause to DID, she knows she certainly did NOT lead these women into these "fantasies." So she's quite open to the possibility.<br><br>So, I wait in a state of a "don't know mind". I don't even press her for details, but SHOULD anything beyond "simple" family abuse come up and SHOULD she want to see if it's more than just fantasy, then I feel prepared to lead that effort. She may not find any such thing. She may find it and choose not to talk about it. I don't know. I do know the memories have started coming. Sarah, the alter "without a mouth" who clearly holds many secrets has started to share those secrets. It's not much fun for her...but there's a certain amount of emotional energy that's been freed up that was being used to keep all this bottled inside.<br><br>I bring this up not for sympathy (though I continue to receive it from other members of this board) but to show my perspective. Every time I question an assertion people think I'm dismissing everything. That is so clearly untrue that it exasperates me. But this is important...it's not a game. If it turns out to be a local airforce base that has used my wife for experiments in childhood (one victim reports going to this same base so I don't rule that out)...it's important that we know THAT and not simply assume the "Illuminati" network was controlling her every move. <br>That is disempowering...it says she has no hope and the bad guys will alway win. IT MAKES THEM INTO GODS. <br><br>But I understand the reality of dissociation and how torture can induce control. My wife fights it every day. Her family (so far, JUST her family) are in her head. When she discloses, she is "forced" to harm herself with cutting and suicide attempts. Deliberate programming? Maybe, or maybe just years of "don't tell or bad things will happen" getting internalized...unfortunately, multiples often have some aspects of their abusers right in there with them.<br><br>But when I try to research this stuff and continually come across undocumented, unsourced, illogical assertions that clearly muddy the waters far more than they settle them, it is very frustrating. More than once I've decided all of it was bullshit made up by earnest believers and nefarious hucksters. It's the "Finders" of the world, the "Dutroux cases", the Franklin coverups that keep reminding me that this stuff is really happening. But it does not help victims of abuse or "satanism" to simply subscribe to any and all email urban legends that come along. <br><br>And most often, Illuminati theory is just that. <br><br>Let me give you one case and point in this already overlong screed. The Wizard of Oz. <br><br>I keep hearing that the Wizard of Oz is used by various types of programmers as an iconography to hang various programs on. People I respect say this is true. When I research it on the internet, I never find anything except one long, paragraph-indentation deprived piece by Fritz Springmeier that is NOT internally consistent and doesn't even make sense in many places. It's the ONLY such "analysis" I've ever found. And it is HORRIBLE. <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.apfn.org/apfn/oz.htm">www.apfn.org/apfn/oz.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>It goes into this really complex analysis of what the different characters represent (Auntie Em=Blavatsky, for example) with no evidence whatsoever. Now, I think Baum was a theosophist, so who knows..maybe it's in there. But this doesn't prove anything about how it might be used in programming. And it's really a terrible bit of "research" and Springmeier has his own issues, including having an affair with the woman he "rescued" from the Illuminati. <br><br>So I dismiss the whole thing out of hand. EXCEPT...EXCEPT...EXCEPT...my wife's younger parts LOVE to have Oz books read to them. And these books were originally owned by her mom as a child...who is ALSO DID. Oz books, handed down from one generation of DID woman to the next. AND, one of the younger parts says she can go to OZ, but only when she's already asleep and says "there's no place like oz" over and over. But she only goes to one spot and only talks to the cowardly lion...not even her favorite character. To top it off, this was supposed to be a secret she was not to tell anyone. sounds uncomfortably like a hypnosis script. <br><br>Do you see why this is important to me? NOT because I want to debunk it all, but because I want to make SOME sense of it all. SOMEONE did these things. Not Adam Weishaupt...but someone in Cincinnati. Certainly her dad but maybe others. And if there is good, solid, helpful information out there that is not being seen because of bullshit like the oz piece I linked to, then this bothers me. It's not a game. My wife is hovering in suicidal ideation much of the time right now. She's constantly punishing herself for disclosing...and though I am very optimistic...she may not even make it. I have to be prepared for that, though I really don't think that she will succumb. <br><br>I know it's frustrating. THEY...in all their manifestations, don't leave clear evidence always. Sometimes correlation is the best we can get. And I do use correlation as a way to sniff out possible connections. But that's not proof. And the demand for proof is not just about wanting to dismiss this sort of thing. It's also about wanting to have a strong case. And you know what, there's so much disinfo, lies, exploitation and b.s. out there, that it is perfectly understandable that many dismiss this outright. <br><br>So, to sum up, if you want to suggest things like "Marx worked for the illuminati" you'll not get a sympathetic hearing from me without something approaching evidence. You can call that a "refusal to believe." in fact, that's what it is..my BELIEFS do not determine what is true or not. I try very hard to OVERCOME my beliefs to see if they are blinding me. <br><br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
