Putting Dracula in charge of a blood bank

796-dracula-blood-donation

If you’re investigating a scam or an agenda and you come up with, hypothetically, contributory factors 1 – 5, you can’t then go and say, “Ignore factor 2 because it’s left-field and ignore factor 4 because it’s historic and consequently of little interest to modern readers.” *

Take James Delingpole‘s exposure of the worthy Lord Oxburgh and “GLOBE (Global Legislators for a Balanced Environment) International which has co-opted leading parliamentarians from the main parties in both the Commons and the Lords into advancing the AGW agenda.”  [H/T Cassandra]

A number of things are said about that, including:

GLOBE is very much the kind of body that likes to do things on the sly. Its Memorandum of Incorporation includes this revealing snippet about its purposes: “To provide a forum for ideas and proposals to be floated in confidence and without the attention of an international spotlight.”

… and:

One insider has described Oxburgh’s appointment to lead this supposedly neutral investigation into Climategate as “like putting Dracula in charge of a blood bank.”

… and:

Lord Oxburgh, recently appointed … on the Royal Society’s recommendation …

Now just take that last one – the Royal Society. I’m about to leap in and show the very murky antecedents of the so-called august body the Royal Society but what’s this?  Two fearlessly intrepid pundits of our own ilk, people whom you can’t pull the wool over the eyes of, good friends of mine, caution your humble blogger:

James, you are on a rich vein of corruption here … Don’t dilute the current exposure potential by referring to conspiracies that did occur hundreds of years ago. Stick with current happenings, heaven knows, they are enough.

… and:

I agree with xxxl, focus on the current corruptions. People need to see what is going on now and know that it is wrong and that there is still a chance to change it.

Right then, worthy friends, my hands are tied and I’m not allowed to show the connection from the past which makes it as clear as day WHY these global scams keep occurring, why they manifest themselves the way they do, why there is an almost messianic element to the diatribes and a lack of any high moral value in either the way they operate or in their agenda.

You, the reader, can ONLY understand these things by looking at the historical antecedents, mind wide-open and ready to accept the evidence of your eyes, however personally unpalatable and to say that you can change something by focusing only on the here and now and not on the root cause is the same as saying “treat the current symptom, not the root cause”.

It don’t work, mateys, with the very greatest respect for my two inimitable friends.  Isn’t it a relief then that I never was any good in the obedience department?

Royal Society snippets

#  Robert Boyle, the English scientist responsible for founding the Royal Society, based on Bacon’s concept of the Invisible College”. [article on the Rosicrucians]

#  John Maynard Keynes, for example, opined that “Newton was not the first of the age of reason, he was the last of the magicians.”

#  The English Crown, also fearing the potential devaluation of gold, should The Philosopher’s Stone actually be discovered, made penalties for alchemy very severe. In some cases the punishment for unsanctioned alchemy would include the public hanging of an offender on a gilded scaffold while adorned with tinsel and other items.  [Nova: Newton’s Dark Secrets. (2005)]

#  In addition to scripture, Newton also relied upon various ancient and contemporary sources while studying the temple. He believed that many ancient sources were endowed with sacred wisdom and that the proportions of many of their temples were in themselves sacred. [Ibid]

#  Regardless of his own membership status, Newton was a known associate of many individuals who themselves have often been labeled as members of various esoteric groups. It is unclear if these associations were a result of being a well established and prominently publicized scholar, an early member and sitting President of The Royal Society (1703-1727), a prominent figure of State and Master of the Mint, a recognized Knight, or if Newton actually sought active membership within these esoteric organizations himself. [Wiki]

#  The Invisible College was a precursor to the Royal Society of the United Kingdom.  In its turn the “Hartlibians”, a circle of people around Samuel Hartlib, were the precursors to the Invisible College … In earlier times the term also included certain Hegelian aspects of secret societies and occultism. [Wiki]

#  One distinguishing feature of the Hartlib Circle was its tolerance of hermetic ideas; Hartlib himself had an interest in sigils and astrology. [Keith Thomas, Religion and the Decline of Magic (1971), p. 270 and p. 346.]

# Lomas is anxious to establish that the Royal Society for the Advancement of Learning was founded largely by (Jacobite) Masons. His arguments are a little stretched, but by and large persuasive. Along the way there are some great tidbits about Oliver Cromwell and the Restoration, especially about Charles II and the major Scotsmen of the era.

Also, the very last part of the book does a plausible job of linking Masonic “philosophy” with the naissance of “scientific thinking.” Finally, the last chapter has an excellent summary of what freemasonry is really about. As Masonic history it does a good job of pushing the origins back to about 1500 A.D. [Joseph G. Wick]

#  He was elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry in 1988. As an ardent Theosophist, Dr Arnikar has tried to evaluate Occult Chemistry from the point of modern science. He is also the author of Essentials of Nuclear Chemistry and Isotopes in the Atomic Age (both Wiley Eastern). [About H. J. Arnikar, Professor Emeritus in Chemistry in the University of Pune]

Look, I could go on and on and on for pages and pages, with references to these two major points:

1.  To present the Royal Society as a neutral, values-free, purely “scientific” society is to ignore the sheer weight of evidence;

2.  All major movements at elite level have a religious component – it’s just not the religion which you or I might think of.

The green movement’s major players come out with this sort of guff:

#  They’re all at Davos. These aren’t terrorists. They’re world leaders. ‘They have positioned themselves in the world’s commodity and stock markets. They’ve engineered a panic, using their access to stock exchanges and computers and gold supplies. They jam the gears. [Daniel Wood interview, 1990, with Maurice Strong]

# The Shamballa force is in reality Life itself; and Life is a loving synthesis in action. We also used the Six Laws and Principles of the New Age to lead us towards creating a vision of how these principles might create patterns for the New Civilization humanity will be constructing over the next 2500 years. [Gordon Davidson and Corrine McLaughlin, who set up the WSI in Washington, D.C. in 1995 were also instrumental in setting up the Valdez Principles, committing corporate America to the Gorean Eco principles now in vogue today.]

Now this is what is being ignored by the vast majority and all sorts of mental leaps are going on.  People will look at the quotes above on the [allegedly] fruit cake Royal Society and accuse me of being left-field, when I’m just the one bringing their own nuttiness into the open.

The so-called “rationalists” – those poor sods who continue to pursue this modern  “dial-in” scientific hoo-hah and say things like: “Well, I only believe what I can see or what is “scientifically proven” and anyway, I don’t believe in religion” – these are the meat which bodies like the Royal Society feed on and the bottom line is simple  – they say there is NO metaphysical, it ain’t scientific.

Well, if that were so, if it were really as they tell the world, then their own occult religious connections, the behind-the-scenes religious studies of the very people behind these so-called “scientific” societies, such as GLOBE and the Royal Society would reject all they are doing in the arcane, occult world, they’d reject it outright.

So, why don’t they?

You’ve already read climate change pundits calling this the new “climate change religion”.  Yes, yes and yes – that is precisely what it is, a hidden religion and the word for “hidden” is “arcane”.  Ask any Mason above the 3rd degree.

What these international bodies are doing is following this dictum:

1.  We secretly follow our own esoteric knowledge, a one world religion steeped in the occult and we are legion;

2.  Christianity is the single greatest threat because it is based on principles of kindness, hope, redemption, nation, family, loyalty and other primitive notions which directly contradict our search for Enlightenment, Illumination;

3.  We therefore obscure the real target by including it in the whole metaphysical world, which we teach is bunkum – we teach that only physical laws are applicable to man [laws determined by us] and on cost grounds, we gradually stop true empirical enquiry;

4.  We set up bodies of arbitration on this, e.g. the Royal Society and monitor who can and cannot post in the journals, we institutionalize these societies and give them the Royal moniker;

5.  We raise whole generations in faux science, including climate science, it is the only “science” taught in schools [real science disappears from schools] and those questioning this are straw-man labelled, ridiculed and marginalized;

6.  We therefore frame the debate, the language of the debate and who can participate in it, we control the media through which it can be disseminated and we follow the Jesuit dictum of getting them young and brainwashing them so that they are impervious to any other ideas;

7.  Those still hanging on to the “old ways” die off as the result of natural attrition and the more pesky get bumped off [allegedly David Kelly, for example], all opposition is removed, the world now Onethinks and away we go with the real agenda.

That’s the state of play but horror of horrors, largely through the Gorean Eco Climate Scam, faux science is now beginning to be questioned worldwide, at all levels of society.  Good old James Delingpole on this.  Though he’s not fully aware what he’s actually debunking, it’s coming out anyway now and all strength to your drinking arm, sir.

And to you, good reader, so ready and willing to believe, on the Climategate issue, that science is being used for political ends, are you also willing to accept that science was and is being used by bodies such as the Royal Society, also for political ends?  No one is saying that there aren’t scientific truths and physical laws – there are – but using these for political ends is another question again.

Are you willing to uncritically accept a scientific “truth” told you by an Invisible College, for goodness sake?  As this blogger wrote last evening, “I love science,”  but by that he meant Real Science.

Ignoring evidence

* There is a phenomenon I call The Holcombe Syndrome and it comes from the Perry Mason novel The Purloined Parrot:

Perry Mason, advocate, had just finished pointing out an anomaly in Sergeant Holcombe’s evidence in a murder trial and now asked, ‘Does that seem logical to you?’

Sergeant Holcombe hesitated a moment, then said, ‘Well, that’s one of those little things. That doesn’t cut so much ice. Lots of times you’ll find little things which are more or less inconsistent with the general interpretation of evidence.’

‘I see,’ Mason said. ‘And when you encounter such little things, what do you do, Sergeant?’

‘You just ignore ’em,’ said Holcombe.

‘And how many such things have you ignored, Sergeant, in reaching your [current] conclusion?’

To ignore evidence because it doesn’t fit into a preconceived, comfortable area in one’s mind is The Holcombe Syndrome.  In Book Two of my trilogy, there is an erroneous conclusion reached, due to ignoring some vital antecedents, not investigating through to the end:

‘No,’ said Hugh. ‘Exactly the opposite. You know the saying, ‘You’ll know them by their fruits?’ Each little anomaly, on its own, is indicative but not conclusive. But when several anomalies are combined, then that’s danger.’

‘So, why didn’t you pick her?’ persisted Nadine.

‘Because I observed and yet dismissed what I saw.’

… and:

‘Analogy – how would you describe the way I drive, Genie?’

‘Too fast.’

‘And so my road accident would not have surprised you?’

‘Well –’

‘And yet, a glance at my driving record would show that I’ve had two accidents in my history – both involving people walking onto the road straight into my car, which means I was going too slowly for them to hear me.’

‘And?’

‘Why haven’t I had any other accidents?’

‘Tell me.’

‘Because I trust absolutely no one. I would never ride a white line or go near other cars – they’re all idiots. So that night was out of character, unless I’d gone out of my mind.’

… and:

‘The danger is in looking at only, say, 80% of the story, when the last 20% alters the picture significantly.’

‘Why didn’t I pick up on Emmeline and Alana earlier?’

‘Firstly, they were designed to get past your guard. Secondly, your own antennae weren’t picking up clear signals due to your own troubles and that was factored in – to make you less effective. Thirdly, those girls were only bit players, on the peripherique. And there is a fourth point.’

‘Go on.’

‘Sometimes we’re blinded by close association with people. On the grounds that we’ve been working with them for a long time and that they appear to be our kind of people, we make the logical jump that they are, therefore, good people. We don’t really know that – we don’t know who has what hold over them. Are they more likely to betray that or to conceal it?’

May I humbly submit here, either Lord Oxburgh or Kim Philby?

22 comments for “Putting Dracula in charge of a blood bank

  1. March 28, 2010 at 09:25

    Is Shamballa derived from the word “shambolic”?

  2. March 28, 2010 at 11:16

    James- a detail about your history is wrong Hartlib was active long after Bacon and the idea of a college was promulgated.

    That factual point apart I also disagree with your broad points about the origins of the royal society. Firstly it was not a different religion to Christianity that dominated it: Keith Thomas in Religion and the decline of Magic (a book you cite so I presume have read) shows how Christianity included beliefs in magic until the Puritan influence of the 17th Century. To find men like Newton and Boyle as alchemists or masons is not surprising because very few people at that point didn’t believe in alchemy, indeed alchemy was seen as the same as chemistry. But the Royal Society was made up of people who believed in a Christian God: John Wilkins one of the founders was Bishop of Chester, Newton’s notebooks (not published) are littered with theology, John Wallis another founder served at some risk as a minister during the civil war and so on.

    You have a tendency James to lack charity in your judgements. In the past, the lines between magic and religion were not so clearly established: modern religion and modern science are twins that squabble rather than being unrelated. They both exile magic from the arena- that is the point as I said that Keith Thomas makes, a book I’m sure you are familiar with. Considering that, the accusation that the members of the Royal Society were not in the majority Christian is only right if you adopt a definition of Christian that only includes your interpretation of what Christ said. On any reasonable criteria, they were Christians.

    I’ll leave the arguments about the contemporary world to those more expert: though I’m unsure hows much more any alchemic roots to the royal society have to do with it now, than the papal roots of William the Conquerer’s invasion had to do with the English Reformation.

  3. March 28, 2010 at 12:01

    a detail about your history is wrong

    No, it is not wrong. That’s a slide, Tiberius. The point about Hartlib stands because it does not depend on date but on philosophy for veracity, in terms of the argument presented above.

    You have a tendency James to lack charity in your judgements.

    Yes, that is so; when we see the misery and the false constructs of these people, there is little charity for them. In fact, there are far worse than me – there are lynch mobs in the offing for these people – you’ve read much of it lately. Oxburgh is an example of what we mean.

    But the Royal Society was made up of people who believed in a Christian God.

    This is a whole series of posts in itself. Satan himself, [if he exists, which le Vey seems to think, as well as various Masons], believes in a Christian G-d. Mick Jagger believes in one and so do the globalists – this is why they so vehemently deny it and take out ads on the sides of buses.

    That’s the argument I’m making – that the people on both sides know full well what the score is. It’s just the brainwashed in the middle or those brought up in ignorance in schools today [just look at the standard of education now] who believe this “rationalist” claptrap.

    Lack of charity? I plead guilty, Tiberius and my stridency is because of the horrible calamity piece by piece being foisted on an unsuspecting people worldwide. There is no doubt on this – look at any political blog in my sidebar – we are headed for a command and control two-tier state and the Royal Society, as shown in the quotes above, is as culpable as any green loonies like Strong and Co.

    Lack of charity? To people whose agenda is either blindly/unknowingly or wilfully evil? Despair and hope that the scales will fall from the eyes of the former, those who know not what they do but yes, lack of charity for the latter, Tiberius. Do you have charity for those deliberately trying to harm human beings?

    To the common people with no one to defend them? Love and charity, my mission is to help them as far as is possible for me to do. At the moment, to be honest, it is just putting a few quid in charity tins at supermarkets but I have made enquiries how to give a few hours each week in a care capacity. It’s an ongoing thing.

  4. March 28, 2010 at 12:38

    Seeing is one thing but that has to be followed up by doing.

  5. March 28, 2010 at 12:40

    James, I suggest you read my words again, before you put your foot in it!

    My key phrase was :-

    Both of us know that these methods originated centuries ago, and the players bloodlines exist, and are in play, today.

    also my words you copied above…read again.

    James, you are on a rich vein of corruption here … Don’t dilute the current exposure potential by referring to conspiracies that did occur hundreds of years ago. Stick with current happenings, heaven knows, they are enough.

    Your (long) reply says that you didn’t really read my words.

    I was not denying your view and findings of history, I was saying that using them was not the best way of engaging the attention of a modern reader who has little, or no, knowledge of history, and very little inclination to find out.

    I was also pointing out that currently there is on display outright corruption, and law breaking, at all levels, and any number of administrations, and a little thought will lead an observer to certain conclusions.

    So ride the current wave….something readers can relate to.

    That was my message.

    Since you raise other points, I will mention some things.

    I can’t quite follow your logic through the course of your words after that, so if I have mis-read your words/meaning, sorry……but I will mention….

    First, and most important, Wiki is corrupt on many subjects…it is engineered to affect folks who won’t, or can’t go to the source.

    Climate…I have been saying in your forum, since the get-go, that “climate science” was/is a fraud. You took many months to come round to that. I also observe that its exposure has not altered the thrust of the gits energy “investments” or carbon taxes, or carbon credits, etc, which guarantees its fraudulnt nature from the get-go. I also mentioned that the “investigation” would be a cover-up, but I can’t find it.

    You say :-

    You, the reader, can ONLY understand these things by looking at the historical antecedents, mind wide-open and ready to accept the evidence of your eyes, however personally unpalatable and to say that you can change something by focusing only on the here and now and not on the root cause is the same as saying “treat the current symptom, not the root cause”.

    From my point of view, I agree with you.
    However, readers will not explore the invisible college, and why it had to be invisible in its early days, its change to, affect on, etc, the Royal Society. If, like you, they use Wiki, they will get it wrong. This is intentional by whoever contributed to that part, and the editorial persons.

    In many respects therefor, you have failed to correctly identify the historical“root cause.”

    John Maynard Keynes, for example, opined that “Newton was not the first of the age of reason, he was the last of the magicians.”

    He was one of the first in the age of reason, (that age having been destroyed in the west by the power of the church), he was also the last of the “magicians”…until recently. But it wasn’t/isn’t magic.

    And Keyens was a liar in making that statement, and he probably knew that!

    Keynes purchased many volumes and papers of Newton at auction, and was thus able to work through, in detail, his researches. Keynes would have identified many “Hermetic” thought patterns, and many ancient papers. Newton used Egyptian Metrology and planetary observations in his calculations concerning gravity and movements of the planets, since Egyptian records were the most accurate ones available at that time. He was, for example, awaiting the results of a French team of surveyors working their way up South America, striving to establish the circumference of the Earth, (and a few other things) but when he received them he discarded them as inaccurate, the Egyptian ones being more accurate. (Which proved to be correct) Given the long arm of the Roman Church, and its predilection for charges of heresy against anyone engaging in science and opposing its monopoly on thought and wisdom, and the background of English political/religious turmoil at that time, is there any wonder that research methods and invisible colleges, should remain invisible? Just remember who was casting the rocks against scientific research at that time, and the labels they were using, and you will (maybe) understand.

    But to return.

    “Sacred Proportions of Temples” YES, and YES, they had to be. Science, James, not mumbo jumbo, was at work here. It is hidden in numbers and mis-translations. Newton found the key, but no science can advance beyond paper theories without parallel enabling engineering, so Newton was stymied. He re-found the science a few hundred years ahead of the optimum time.

    So yes, Newton engaged in “arcane research”, and the entire western world should be grateful. (and the arcane label was given by the church!!!!!!!!!!!) But as I have mentioned, so many times, seemingly to a wall, the research areas banned by the “Church of God” were SCIENCE BASED And that science would have challenged their monopoly, as did the Templars with the same science. All had to be eliminated.

    Until you come to that realisation, James, all your digging into history will lead to misunderstandings, will show you subtle twists in wiki that you believe to be true, indeed subtle twists everywhere, created by the very powers that you seek to expose, to denigrate sources enimical to their agendas,that you believe to be true. Everything in history is twisted by the writers who had an agenda, fortified by further writers who followed the “master” in order to gain acceptance/power.

    (And that entire paragraph is predicated on my understanding of your remaining words, and as I said, I’m not sure of your meaning.)

    And the greatest twisters of facts were the original semitic writers, closely followed by the roman church, and their followers who sought power. These people still muddy the water at every opportunity.

    If you must use online sources, you will never understand the Rosicrucians.

    To ignore evidence because it doesn’t fit into a preconceived, comfortable area in one’s mind is The Holcombe Syndrome.
    I’m not going to say you are guilty of the above, but you are working hard to get there.
    The invisible college and the royal society at the outset had a noble cause. Old Chrissy Wren didn’t do a bad job, did he. 🙂

    Newton in particular understood the existing debasement of science (at the hands of religion), worked round the problem and found the answers he sought (he even calculated his own log tables long hand to speed up his work!) Keynes public opinion of Newton was political. The historical root cause, as far as the Royal Society is concerned occured later in its history.
    I cannot argue against you when you say the royal society is now debased.

    I (think) I am able to sort through the twists. Others maybe not.

    So I will say it again.

    Deal with the current problems, the one folks can identify with.
    Otherwise they will just switch off.

    (And stop getting your knickers in a twist. 🙂 )

  6. March 28, 2010 at 12:45

    1. In the past, the lines between magic and religion were not so clearly established …

    2. that only includes your interpretation

    1. Take Rhodes, Milner, Bush. Let’s take Bush, as he’s one people are familiar with. He instituted devotionals in the White House for staff. He did not attend. He is seen by the Christian Right as their man.

    Yet he attended Molochian rituals on the west coast, was a member of Skull and Bones and his father was a “thousand points of light” man. Now anyone in the know knows full well what that means.

    2. Nothing depends on my interpretation. It is quite clear in the synoptic gospels and elsewhere about what believers are told to do. There is no “interpretation” in being exhorted not to indulge in the practices of the ziggurat, of Ba’al, of Moloch and yet that is what he is doing.

    When you adopt practices which are clearly spelled out as wrong, in terms of the scripture of a particular religion [without going into the rights and wrongs of what you’re exhorted to do – that’s another discussion] and you still try to retain the politically useful designation of the religion and know you’ll get away with it because the average person is illiterate in said religion, then that is disingenuous and disqualifies that person from adopting that designation.

    We’re not arguing for or against the religion itself here – only about those adopting the name. For example, if my religion, Zog, has three main planks to its platform – that one must love Zog, keep women in subjugation and throw stones in the Great Lake once a year and if I fail to throw those stones on the grounds that all religions are much closer historically than in modern interpretations and that the three planks are not meant to be taken literally these days, that we’ve moved on from that, then that view that we’ve moved on might well be correct but one thing is for sure – the person saying this has forfeited the right to be called Zogan.

  7. March 28, 2010 at 12:52

    James, the whistle blower on JPM on thurday was hit by a hit and run in London Yesterday.

    Like I said, there is a rich vein, forget the history and silly squabbles, it is here, now!

  8. March 28, 2010 at 13:01

    Xxxl, you show your fundamental misconception about history because your original paradigm about the metaphysical is flawed. There is no point arguing it because you will not budge on Wren, magik or even gnosis.

    Therefore, all your conceptions which flow from the original misconception cannot be argued with because we are on two different planes in making those arguments.

    However, as I wrote, to only look at the here and now is treating the symptom of a very old malaise while it is the root cause which needs treating. The criminals in the FOMC will not be stopped by chopping off their heads because new ones from the same source, the same feeding ground, will then pop up – they are legion. They’ll bide their time and insinuate themselves in again.

    There is no historical precedent that people ever became enlightened about these intergenerational criminals. Whether the evil source is the demi-urge or something else, the concealment of such is a fine art.

    What hope? I believe that chopping off the heads gives us a space in time when things are a bit better for a while and pursuing purely political paths, e.g. getting us off fiat currency and back to responsible fiscal policy is also efficacious for some time.

    The very fact that you and I disagree over the root cause shows that the chance of that being resolved is a long way in the future.

    You will say that that is precisely what you’ve been trying to get across to me – to look only at what can be achieved in the here and now.

    I say that even in this post and comments thread, understanding of the issues of the whole have been furthered and therefore it is legitimate to look in detail at the historical roots.

  9. March 28, 2010 at 13:05

    Jesse

    I am glad that although Mr. Maguire and his wife are shaken they will apparently be all right.

    The related story on his allegations regarding manipulation in the silver market is here.

    I hesitate to say anything more at this point, except curiouser and curiouser.

    Well, at least that removes much of the doubt about the criminality currently going on.

    silly squabbles

    Not in the least. Getting people to see the root cause is not a “silly squabble”. It’s actually quite fundamental to being able to find the solution.

    The invisible college and the royal society at the outset had a noble cause.

    Yes it did and what happened is precisely what happened in other fields too – it was hijacked. Take the feminist movement, for example and why so many women are angry at how they’ve deviated into strange paths.

    Everything noble in its original conception, e.g. the ideals of the Royal Society were then prostituted and the source of the prostitution has always been the same, as Churchill drew attention to. Cassandra argues over the word Enlightenment and its definition, as well as over post-modernism. Words, words, meaningless in themselves unless the values attributed to those words are agreed before debate takes place.

    Fascinating is how the fiat bank crept back after the Andrew Jackson demolition. Now in that is a lesson on how to counter JPM et al today.

  10. March 28, 2010 at 13:07

    And here is some more

    Internationally, the US sinks lower and lower.

  11. March 28, 2010 at 13:27

    you show your fundamental misconception about history because your original paradigm about the metaphysical is flawed. There is no point arguing it because you will not budge on Wren, magik or even gnosis.

    Therefore, all your conceptions which flow from the original misconception cannot be argued with because we are on two different planes in making those arguments.

    Clearly your knickers are still knotted.

    Correct, I will not budge.

    There was no religion, only worship of persons, bloodlines, and a dying scientific base. The bloodlines expoited those scientific remnants for their own ends, and encouraged/demanded personality worship.

    Sound familiar?

    JC was an exception. That was his downfall.

    If you believe the Pauline heresy, you are not the man I thought you were. If you believe the delusional crap of gnosis, you are not the man I thought you to be. If you hold metaphysical as worthy of debate…ditto.

    The old semitic scribblers with their distortions have screwed your mind, and millions of others, for thousands of years.

  12. March 28, 2010 at 13:31

    The invisible college and the royal society at the outset had a noble cause.

    Yes it did and what happened is precisely what happened in other fields too – it was hijacked. Take the feminist movement, for example and why so many women are angry at how they’ve deviated into strange paths.

    Everything noble in its original conception, e.g. the ideals of the Royal Society were then prostituted and the source of the prostitution has always been the same, as Churchill drew attention to. Cassandra argues over the word Enlightenment and its definition, as well as over post-modernism. Words, words, meaningless in themselves unless the values attributed to those words are agreed before debate takes place.

    Fascinating is how the fiat bank crept back after the Andrew Jackson demolition. Now in that is a lesson on how to counter JPM et al today.

    I absolutly agreee.

    Strike at the head….but first, identify it.

  13. March 28, 2010 at 13:42

    If you believe the Pauline heresy, you are not the man I thought you were.

    Ah but I don’t. I’m no Pauline at all. “Everything noble in its original conception, e.g. the ideals of the Royal Society, was then prostituted and the source of the prostitution has always been the same.”

    You and I both know this. 🙂

  14. March 28, 2010 at 15:08

    I just read that final link over again.

    My Gawd…the shit should hit the fan now.

    I scanned the weekend press for details of the CFTC hearings, non that I could find… I would have thought the FT would have picked it up..

    Now this…I’ll keep looking but not expecting much.
    ….would expect a run on physical….

    Silence will be an indication of MSM culpability.

    This is the axis, NY, London, I have been banging on about, the axis that the world should now know about….

  15. March 28, 2010 at 15:10

    The entire edifice should now be undermined and trembling.

    Intersting times.

  16. March 28, 2010 at 16:09

    xxxl,
    Is this revelation at this time, well, timed.

    Is it not an open secret that most of the worlds physical gold has already been salted away, by parties unknown, supposedly replaced by vaulted stores of gold plated tungsten.

    In order to bring about more chaos, undermining the worlds financial systems yet again, now the fractional reserve paper trading elements of gold may be brought to light, where global traders and hedge funds are unable to deliver physical gold against contracts, another global scam to be bailed out by taxpayers as National Treasuries will this time be at risk where they thought they had real gold reserves, but in fact hold worthless tungsten.

  17. March 28, 2010 at 16:11

    Thinking on….it may yet prove that Gordon Brown was aware, and so sold our real gold into the market at the right time, but it will also prove his culpable knowledge.

  18. March 28, 2010 at 17:19

    Hmmmm, well charity is a Christian virtue: you may remember that Christ said that you should turn the other cheek if you were ever insulted.

    Let us leave that aside though: they believed in the Christian God as practising Christians, they believed in it like you believe in it James. The men of the royal society were just as Christian as you are: interpretation does matter James, if you know your Paul or the Gospels you will know that even the way that you read them is fallible, has been changed by your own sin. You cannot read those documents as God intends you to read them and therefore you have no ability to understand them fully, anymore than any other fallen human being. To say you do is to arrogate yourself to a godhead and to blaspheme. The point of the Gospels is that you can only interpret and your interpretation might be wrong.

    Incidentally you do believe in a Pauline God because everything you know about that God is refracted through either Paul or the Gospel writers.

    Lastly XXXL or whatever you call yourself, dismissing history as silly or not relevant is the road to folly- it matters but not as a vast conspiracy (that is another road to folly).

  19. March 28, 2010 at 18:48

    Didn’t know you were so religious, Tiberius, sorry to offend. I promise I shan’t mention the Holy Handgrenade of Antioch. 🙂

  20. March 28, 2010 at 20:44

    Gracchi, or whatever you call yourself…

    You best read my comments again

    Carefully this time.

  21. March 28, 2010 at 21:24

    Having spent all weekend in bed with the flu, head hurts, muscles hurt; with nausea to boot I was hoping to find something edifying to read.

    Oh dear, you lot need to get a grip. I’m never seen a thread descend it such patronising language here, you’re making Gracchi look effortlessly superior for once.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please copy the string a3UBMO to the field below: