Posts for Tag: Freemason
Illuminati & NASA connection: satanism, Parsons & Crowley
Parsons was also an avid practitioner of the occult arts, and a follower of “Thelema”. He saw no contradiction between his scientific and magical pursuits, and before each rocket test launch, Parsons would invoke the Greek god Pan.
Parsons was chosen by Aleister Crowley to lead the “Agape Lodge”, the Thelemic “Ordo Templi Orientis” (“O.T.O.”) in California, in 1942, after Crowley expelled Wilfred Smith from the position.
Sara Northrup (aka “Sarah Elizabeth” or “Betty” Northrup), began living with Parsons after his wife, Sara’s half-sister Helen Northrup, left with Wilfred Smith. Sara Northrup later married L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology and sometime magical partner of Parsons.
Parsons and Hubbard participated in a ritual known as the Babalon Working which is famous in occult circles — loosely, it was an attempt to summon a living goddess and change the course of history.[citation needed] They were aided in this work by Sampson Bennetts of the Rosicrucian Order and his wife Sara Melian Gabriel, a spiritualist from India.[citation needed]. Almost immediately after Parsons declared the ritual successful he met Marjorie Cameron right in his own home. Parsons regarded Cameron as the “Scarlet Woman”, the fulfillment of the ritual.
Parsons and Cameron then began the next stage of Babalon Working, with Cameron acting as Parsons magickal partner with whom he could sire a “Moonchild”. The Moonchild is traditionally the incarnation of a god, as prophezied in Aleister Crowly’s channeled script “The Book of the Law”. The creation of this Moonchild was also covered in Crowley’s novel “Moonchild”. A child was not conceived, but this did not affect the results of the ritual to that point. Parsons and Cameron soon married.
In January 1946, Parsons, Sarah Northrup, and Hubbard started a boat dealing company named Allied Enterprises. Parsons put in the sum of approximately $21,000— and Hubbard put in $1,200. Hubbard eventually abandoned Parsons and their business plans, leaving a port in Florida with the boat and with Sarah. It is said Parsons retreated to his hotel room and summoned a typhoon in retribution (viz., with an evocation of “Bartzabel”[2] - the so-called “intelligence” supposedly presiding over the planet Mars). A Florida court later dissolved the poorly-contracted business, ordered repayment of debts to Parsons, and awarded ownership of the boat to Hubbard.
The Hubbard/Allied Enterprises relationship lasted until 1947, when Hubbard again defrauded Parsons of a sum of money and ran off again with Sarah Northrup. Hubbard used much of this money from Allied Enterprises to research and publish his book Dianetics, whose “teachings” later evolved into and was superseded by “Scientology.”
Parsons had resigned his leadership of the “O.T.O.” in 1946.
Jack Parsons died on June 17, 1952 in an explosion of fulminate of mercury at his home laboratory. Unsubstantiated rumors of suicide, murder or magical ritual gone wrong have circulated. Parsons stored many volatile chemicals and compounds in his laboratory and had been working to finish a contract for a special effects firm. Though gravely injured, he survived the immediate explosion, but he died of his wounds a few hours later. Distraught, Parsons’ mother killed herself just hours after he died.
Esoteric kitten on Hollywood and mind control
P.S. hostess can be annoying at times.
The toy makers
Twenty-five rules of disinformation
If you have never heard of 25 Illuminati goals, you might want to watch this and perhaps find some resemblance to the article below.
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it - especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the “How dare you!” gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such “arguable rumors”. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a “wild rumor” which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as “kooks”, “right-wing”, “liberal”, “left-wing”, “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”, “radicals”, “militia”, “racists”, “religious fanatics”, “sexual deviates”, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning – simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough “jargon” and “minutiae” to illustrate you are “one who knows”, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues – so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the “high road” and “confess” with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made – but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, “just isn’t so.” Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for “coming clean” and “owning up” to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best for items qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanishing evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can “argue” with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how “sensitive they are to criticism”.
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the “play dumb” rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.
25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.
by Washington’s Blog
Meet your strawman
The story of how everyone has a strawman created for them at birth and how it is used to collect revenue for your government. A fun and informative animation made in the spirit of freedom.
Selling sickness
Why are so many people on drugs? How come people are so much sicker today than they were 50-60 years ago? Or are they really?
These are just a couple of important questions that are answered in the following video documentary, “Selling Sickness”. Never before have so many Americans been on anti-depressants and pharmaceutical drugs in general, and the Pharmaceutical Industry is booming from all the enormous quantities of pills they are selling. Are we really that sick, or are illnesses invented to sell more drugs?
One big market is anti-depressants. This documentary starts with exposing the drug Paxil and its horrible side effects. The drug is often prescribed for anxiety, inability to perform in groups, and for people who isolate themselves because they get nervous together with other people. The drug works for many, while they create even more severe depressions in others, and quite a few suicides have been reported. The drug company defends itself by saying that it was not the drug, but the disorder that called for the drug that caused the suicide or severe depression. Nevertheless, it has been proven that most of the victims were not typical “mental patients”, but people with minor problems who had been put on the drug. In addition, when patients have tried to stop taking the drug, the withdrawals are so severe that they haven’t been able to quit the drug, and instead are forced to continue taking it for life. If the drug is working, taking it for life may not sound too bad, but if the drug is causing considerable negative effects and the patient can’t stop taking it, there can be severe consequences where suicide may seem to be the only way out of the misery. Tapering down from the drug hasn’t helped in many cases, and the doctors don’t know how to handle the withdrawals. Nowhere is the drug company informing the doctors and patients that this drug is addictive! Same thing with a whole lot of other drugs, anti-depressants in particular. The drug company producing Paxil was recently sued by a number of victims and family members of those who committed suicide while being on the drug.
Big Pharma are the biggest lobbyists on Capitol Hill, even bigger than the Oil Industry and other giants. They are also spending huge amount of dollars on advertising and ways to indoctrinate physicians to promote and prescribe their drugs. Drug reps are constantly visiting doctor’s offices trying to ‘sell’ their particular samples to the physicians. How do they do that? By bribing the doctors with fancy meals, fishing trips, vacations to expensive places etc., all paid for by the drug companies. Every single prescription the doctors are writing, every shot they are giving, every single pill prescribed to the patients are registered by the drug companies and statistics are made out of the information they get. Thus they can also monitor each and every doctor to see exactly how he/she works and what his/her preferences are. They also create a profile of each provider, so that they know what he/she likes and dislikes. This way they know how to bribe him/her. An example would be a doctor who loves fishing and the drug company simply buys him a wonderful fishing trip to some nice place. It is then very hard for that physician to say no to prescribing their particular drug(s).
Drug reps are the foot people of the drug companies, and one drug rep is telling us in this video that if she comes in to a doctor’s office and is told that her specific drug samples have not been used, or poorly used in favor of a competitor’s drug, she gets the chills, because her employer then knows she did not do a good job with promoting the drug.
The moral of this (or the lack thereof) is that to sell more drugs, the pharmaceutical industry is forced to invent new illnesses to promote and distribute new drugs on the market - illnesses that are not illnesses but normal human reactions and emotions and then classify them as deceases that can be cured with their new drug. People then of course recognize this condition in themselves (because the majority of the population may have it as it is a normal condition in every-day life) and think this drug can help them to deal with it instead of processing it themselves, like they should. In the long run there will be a drug for each and every human emotion and reaction, so that individuals don’t have to think and process their daily challenges and problems anymore; they just take a drug to suppress them. It doesn’t take a genius to see where this is leading…
Fortunately, there are doctors who are tired of being indoctrinated by drug companies, tired of being biased and interrupted in their work by insistent drug reps. Some people may object and say that the drug reps have an important role to play, because samples are essential and crucial for people who don’t have insurance. This is true to an extent, but physicians and people in general should know that these samples are the most expensive brands and many times with severe side effects never spoken of. The drug companies’ thought behind sampling these drugs in the doctor’s offices is to have the providers continue prescribing their expensive drug to the patient who received the sample. After all, if the patient says the drug works, why would the physician want to change to another drug and prescribe that one instead? The usual procedure is to continue prescribing the same drugs they have in their sample closets.
However, here is one example how to go around this problem. In one small community, a doctor’s office consisting of 9 physicians decided to pay $100.00 each a year from their own pockets ($900.00 a year all together) and give it to the local pharmacy in exchange for drug samples. Instead of buying expensive, new drug samples of the kind that the drug reps promote, they instead asked for cheap and vital samples like aspirin, nitroglycerin, cheap diuretics etc., and got quite a collection for that amount. In addition, the pharmacy agreed to come once a month to the doctor’s office and talk about a drug of the doctors’ choice, so that the physicians could be informed from a source that does not have a financial interest in the particular drug. By doing this, they could show the drug reps the door, and as a positive consequence, they were no longer interrupted in their job.
It is very important that this information gets out to the physicians and the public, or we will have a society where every individual is considered sick from the cradle to the grave; everybody will be on pills and perfectly healthy people will be made ill by a sick “health” industry.
Transhumanism and Genetic Manipulation
Over 5 hours radio show with Tom Horn and Steve Quayle discussing about the reality of transhumanism, genetic engineering, cloning, chimeras, DARPA and the military-industrial complex, the supernatural, the return of the Sumerian gods, the Nephilim, star-gates, “aliens” and UFOs, cybernetics, robotics, nanotechnology, biotech, transgenics, the (genetic) Mark of the Beast 666, vaccines, viruses, drugs, DMT, End Time Prophecy, super soldiers, human enhancements, world war, blood rituals, world depopulation amongst other issues that the Luciferian shadow government and Black Budget projects are pushing behind the scenes to bring humans into a new supernatural level (new age) of understanding and attempt to turn us into gods.
Noam Chomsky on history of media and manufactured consent