You are here

Josh Reeves-L. Ron Hubbard and The Georgia Guidestones

21 posts / 0 new
Last post
laneigile
Josh Reeves-L. Ron Hubbard and The Georgia Guidestones
euxconcen
Thanks for sharing, Laneigile

Thanks for sharing, Laneigile. What did you like about it? What did you find interesting or compelling?

Some context would be helpful.

Hubbard is fascinating, but in the end he himself is still just a further example of the same "contact from beyond" archetype.

It was all through trance work, imo

laneigile
No respect for Scientology

I personally know a girl which was member of satanic cult - her computer was filled with images in gothic style. Every image had motive of young naked woman with devil-like creature around. Her mind was infected with some special type of ideology. She become like that after falling in love to a handsome man which put some drug in the drinks and completely changed her mind.
To build a monument you need a money,special permissions and favor of people from politics. If you and me try to build a monument we wouldn't be allowed.
I don't admire any sect or drug. It's fascinating that from the pool of the people which do evil things to other people, majority would be punished and minority would be praised if they do the dirty work for state.

I don't respect Hubbard and Scientology in any way. Tell me please which archetype of man you would be fascinated?

euxconcen
I do not understand the

I do not understand the connection between the girl you know and Hubbard. Are you saying that she was in scientology?

Anyone who is stupid enough to fall for this stuff deserves whatever they have coming to them.

I admire the magician more than the audience, my friend!

laneigile
No, it is some other sect. At

No, it is some other sect. At some point in life everyone is vulnerable. And when some magician better then you trick you, would you think the same? We are god-like and self-confident when we are young and healthy.

May you please tell me which archetype do you admire?

euxconcen
I agree with your first point

I agree with your first point: at some point, everyone is vulnerable.
I disagree with your implicit assumption: we can save them, too! That is pretty arrogant, in my opinion. People are on their own journeys and need to go through what they must go through in order to form their lives. Nobody else can save them from any of that.
I find it funny that conspiracists really wanna save people from being duped. That moral instinct is really no different from the state-sanctioned media that wanna protect people from conspiracies! Both are overprotective and both are overbearing and both are arrogant.

As Jung said, "the right way is made of wrong turns". And there is nothing you or I or the NY Times or James Corbett can do to change any of that. It is just arrogance to think that we can save people from the "dark" element in life.

good grief, ask the Chinese about the dark element in life. They built it into their philosophy long before any other civilization, as far as I can tell. Long before Zoroaster, believe you me

As for the archetype, the magician is an archetype, is it not? So is the trickster. So is the Jesus-resilient-rising from the grave.

I admire them all. We are mesmerized. We fall. We rise again. That pretty much sums up life, if you ask me.

How about you?

stiffy
euxconcen wrote:
euxconcen wrote:

I find it funny that conspiracists really wanna save people from being duped. That moral instinct is really no different from the state-sanctioned media that wanna protect people from conspiracies!

You're right, it is instinct to want to save people from being duped, or harmed in any way. I don't understand what you mean when stating that the corporate media wants to "protect people from conspiracies". The last thing they want to do is protect people. I thought it was obvious that their job is to promote their conspiracies while smearing the truth as "conspiracy theory".

euxconcen wrote:

It is just arrogance to think that we can save people from the "dark" element in life.

I don't think saving people from being duped is anywhere near as all encompassing as that.

conspyre
euxconcen wrote:
euxconcen wrote:

I disagree with your implicit assumption: we can save them, too! That is pretty arrogant, in my opinion. People are on their own journeys and need to go through what they must go through in order to form their lives. Nobody else can save them from any of that.

But we have to as a moral imperative, and yes there are those that can, and must be saved, or what good are we as a species? I recommend watching and really digesting the Patryck Vega documentary Eyes of the Devil and I believe you'll find yourself incapable of holding this position. Conveniently I have that available here. https://conspyre.tv/video/4504/eyes-of-the-devil-by-patryk-vega?channelN...

In my locality, the school board met to decide to override Federal law, State law, and the Nuremberg code forcibly vaccinating all of the students with an experimental gene therapy that's proven 100% effective in killing animals, so they skipped the animal studies. This 3minute clip is must-see, and I'll tell you, I'd rather be the woman in this video, than the man-on-the-mountain observer thinking "nobody can save them" https://conspyre.tv/video/4868/human-rights-attorney-gives-3-min-of-vax-...

laneigile
Quote:
Quote:

And there is nothing you or I or the NY Times or James Corbett can do to change any of that.

There were some hard periods in my life, and I got help from, let's say, people which doesn't know me. So, when I achieved some better position in life, I naively taught that I can help others. Maybe 1 of 20 people really received something useful from my knowledge or services. In my case I hope it wasn't arrogance.
What's the problem - I was immature! Psychology say that you are mature when you stop trying to change other people (even providing the help). Not only that, one of the pillars of relationships (friendship or love) is accepting the other side as it is. I needed many years to understand that and still, sometimes I struggle to accept this natural law.

Quote:

good grief, ask the Chinese about the dark element in life

I agree that Chinese culture is older. But look at the west - you will find many ancient traditions flirting with the evil, e.g. Gnosticism, Satanism and Kabbalah. Why priests of all religions insist on necessity of evil? Because we humans do not have another natural enemy to fight with. So, others will create evil, and those which doesn't learn, work and help others would be wiped out from Earth. This is also convenient way to create hierarchy in the society. There are some variations, like Hegel's dialectics, but basic premise is quite simple and elegant. Also 10% of the population are psychopats by nature.

This is quite good article about magician you are talking about:
https://scottjeffrey.com/magician-archetype/

I'm familiar that in some branches of freemasonry and satanism Jesus is considered as Highest priest, after "resurrection” he traveled to India and Egypt writing books about magic.

euxconcen
Thanks, friends. I just want

Thanks, friends. I just want to say how much I appreciate your willingness to take a chance and post your opinions on these boards.

Laneigile: I definitely appreciate your thoughts here on these boards. First things first: *I* am arrogant. So please do not think that I was singling anybody else out! Mainly I am trying to think through the whole idea of moral imperatives. Nietzsche famously claimed that:

Although the most acute judges of the witches and even the witches themselves, were convinced of the guilt of witchery, the guilt nevertheless was non-existent. It is thus with all guilt.

If you meditate on that quote, I think there is a clue about action, belief, superstition and truth which we can never shake off (“we” here means “he who seeks to condemn others”).

Stiffy: hello! I am postively delighted to receive your comment. Thank you for posting, and please post more!
I think perhaps you and I may be approaching it from different vantage points: I am talking about the pattern-behind-patterns whereas I think you are talking more about the in-your-face reality. I do not see media conlomerates as a “thing”: there are too many people involved. It is more of a swarm, which can be directed hither or thither by winds or other directional forces. Individual members of the swarm do indeed believe they are doing the right thing. And just look at Google searches or any other “fact check” note these days that seeks to offer “state-sanctioned” advice on topics that relate to conspiracies. So the individual members do indeed want to “protect” people (whether or not the corporations that pay them see more profit in one view or another).

Conspyre: it is really, really great to see you post and participate here. You obviously are in a unique position to help many members here get their videos and clips out to others. Again, I am not saying “don’t do it”, I am talking about the pattern, the archetype, and the fact that we tend to do what it is that we think is right. I am just cautioning against the ignorance against whatever it is we think is “right”. For that, see Nietzsche’s wise counsel above.

/end of sermon brothers

stiffy
euxconcen wrote:
euxconcen wrote:

I do not see media conlomerates as a “thing”: there are too many people involved.

 

The peons know they won't have a job unless they toe the line. They learn to suppress their soul, or find a job doing real journalism elsewhere. The rich talking heads are paid off with obscene contracts. The ones that get out write books condemning their industry. Some of those books are here.

euxconcen wrote:

Individual members of the swarm do indeed believe they are doing the right thing.

Most of them know they aren't. Only the fools do, and I believe they are the minority these days.

euxconcen wrote:

And just look at Google searches or any other “fact check” note these days that seeks to offer “state-sanctioned” advice on topics that relate to conspiracies.

A huge proportion of them are bots.

conspyre
I see that philosophically,

I see that philosophically, this board operates at a level that, how shall I say it... I, personally, in all probability will never get around to adding Nietzsche to a reading list that I will never get around to reading, really, this quip may be the first time I've considered it. ;-)

IMO not only are media conglomerates "a thing", as with any corporate structure they are a tool for the use of those in control and these days, every available resource is weaponized. Whether that be through control from the Board of Directors level, through spooks embedded throughout the organization, and the rest under blackmail, the phrase all assets deployed comes to mind. But this is concen, far be it from me to explain how these sumbitches do business. ;-)

I spent some time "fighting in the trenches" on Twitter before I got tired of rebuilding accounts. The amount of bot activity there is insane.

euxconcen
cheers, guys.

cheers, guys.

I've noticed that most members here who speak up and make their view known seem inclined to believe there is an evil invisible hand behind it all, but I do not. Correlation is not causation.

I didn't say anything about media conglomeration not being about control. I don't know why you both mention it. I am not disagreeing.

I did say that media conglomeration is a process, not a product. That is what I meant by "not a thing": It is a swarm of individual parts, not a single corporate body (not a thing). To say that every person who performs an act of journalism adheres to an evil invisible agenda is farcical, from where I sit. Some do, some don't, and some are undecided. How else can you explain the culture war between the NY Times and the Fox network? Anybody who works at either institution is evil? Really?

I was also distinguishing between control, protecting/saving others, and doing what you believe is justified. And I pointed out that conspiracists play a part in opinion-making, and this part is not so different from the sweep of forces at work more broadly. An impulse to believe in invisible hands is equally algorithmic and reflexive unless tempered by ruthless rationality.

That's it. That was my point.

stiffy
euxconcen wrote:
euxconcen wrote:

most members here who speak up and make their view known seem inclined to believe there is an evil invisible hand behind it all, but I do not. Correlation is not causation.

It's easy to underestimate the intelligence of ConCen's vocal minority.

euxconcen wrote:

To say that every person who performs an act of journalism adheres to an evil invisible agenda is farcical, from where I sit.

That's why I'd never believe such binary thinking. The majority here know that reality is not the black and white world that the propagandists want to paint us into.

euxconcen
stiffy wrote:
stiffy wrote:

It's easy to underestimate the intelligence of ConCen's vocal minority.

What's that supposed to mean?

stiffy
euxconcen wrote:
euxconcen wrote:

stiffy wrote:
It's easy to underestimate the intelligence of ConCen's vocal minority.

What's that supposed to mean?

Assuming you meant ...

euxconcen wrote:

most members here who speak up and make their view known seem inclined to believe there is an evil invisible hand behind it all, but I do not. Correlation is not causation.

... it's supposed to mean that it looks like you are underestimating the intelligence of most vocal members here.

euxconcen
stiffy wrote:
stiffy wrote:

... it's supposed to mean that it looks like you are underestimating the intelligence of most vocal members here.

Hahahaha! You're saying that anybody who disagrees with another person thinks that other person is stupid? hahaha, beautiful. Just what we need: amongst all other differences here, now we are mudslinging.

hahaha

stiffy
euxconcen wrote:
euxconcen wrote:

You're saying that anybody who disagrees with another person thinks that other person is stupid?

If I said something is not white, did I say it is black?

laneigile
Backbone of complex networks of corporations: The flow of contro
euxconcen wrote:

cheers, guys.
I've noticed that most members here who speak up and make their view known seem inclined to believe there is an evil invisible hand behind it all, but I do not. Correlation is not causation.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301233015_Backbone_of_complex_n...

To spice up conversation, some researchers proved that there is absolute control.

ConCen
This documentary is interesting:
conspyre
re>Dark Clouds over Elberton,

re>Dark Clouds over Elberton, this has been added to my shortlist of media to watch & thanks for pointing this out.

re>Hidden Hand, there is so much I could say here, but it all edits down to yes, absolutely, and could point you to a, b, c, ..., x, y, z, but just go to my site and click on stuff lol. I will say that if it isn't evident that the globalist new world order that they've been warning us was going to make a play for global government is 1) real 2) doing so in the present tense, then I have to ask. Am I in the right concen?

Since this thread is in the Religion, New Age & Occult section, I have to mention that I have some background here. Here's a quick story that some may find amusing. While I was active in a Golden Dawn lodge ran by a 31° Mason, he got together with a couple of his 31° buddies and an original copy (in German) of the first three degree rituals for the original Bavarian Order of the Illuminati, translated it to English, and performed it at Pantheacon 2007 to initiate ≈150 people into the order. We handed out "table lodge" instructions so they could hold their own initiations, and initiate further Minervals (1=0°). The website bavarianilluminat.us has long gone defunct, who knows what havoc these pagan initiates have gone on to wreak in the world. Yes, I still have in my wallet, and posit that I am therefore, an initiated, card carrying member of the Illuminati should you care to know about my credentials. Come to think of it, I always forget this part, I'm also a Pope, as I also carry an authentic Pope card from Robert Anton Wilson. LOL. Fnord. But, I digress.......

Log in to post comments