Satanism on TV Again
I find it entertaining and goofy. Of course the Grammys went viral with the latest example. I always think back on those Olympic opening ceremonies with babies, the grim reaper and the big coronavirus. Haha....
- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
3931
Apr 10, 2020 3:53:58 PM EDT
Q !!Hs1Jq13jV6 ID: ba29f9 No. 8748891
https://twitter.com/SeekretAgent/stat...
The credibility of our institutions [Constitutional Law that governs our Great Land [Our Republic]], and our ability to regain the trust and faith of the American people, all depends on our ability to restore [EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE LAW] by prosecuting those responsible [Blind-Justice].
Treasonous acts [sedition] against the Republic [the 'People'] of the United States [START - LEAD-IN].
Infiltration [rogue] at the highest levels of our gov, media, corps, etc.
Planned & coordinated [D/ F].
This is not about politics.
Something far more sinister [evil] has been allowed to flourish through all parts of our society.
It has been protected and safeguarded.
It has been camouflaged to appear as trusted.
It has been projected [normalized] by stars.
[CLAS 1-99]
One must only look to see.
[SYMBOLISM will be their downfall]
This is not another [4] year election.
"Be on your guard; stand firm in the faith; be courageous; be strong."
You are not alone.
We stand together.
Q
3931
Apr 10, 2020 3:53:58 PM EDT
Q !!Hs1Jq13jV6 ID: ba29f9 No. 8748891
https://twitter.com/SeekretAgent/stat...
The credibility of our institutions [Constitutional Law that governs our Great Land [Our Republic]], and our ability to regain the trust and faith of the American people, all depends on our ability to restore [EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE LAW] by prosecuting those responsible [Blind-Justice].
Treasonous acts [sedition] against the Republic [the 'People'] of the United States [START - LEAD-IN].
Infiltration [rogue] at the highest levels of our gov, media, corps, etc.
Planned & coordinated [D/ F].
This is not about politics.
Something far more sinister [evil] has been allowed to flourish through all parts of our society.
It has been protected and safeguarded.
It has been camouflaged to appear as trusted.
It has been projected [normalized] by stars.
[CLAS 1-99]
One must only look to see.
[SYMBOLISM will be their downfall]
This is not another [4] year election.
"Be on your guard; stand firm in the faith; be courageous; be strong."
You are not alone.
We stand together.
Q
"The smoke of satan has entered the Church"
Link provided: https://popehead.substack.com/p/jago
My grampy was a Mason, and he would never have been involved with anything sketchy.
Aware of any nefarious actions by the leaders.
I also met and sat with a 33 rd degree Mason and his extremely skittish wife who looked to see if she could answer basic conversational Questions at a wedding dinner.
He made my skin crawl. We later found out he violently abused his wife. I find it unlikely that either of your grandfathers used the symbolism
That the Illuminati use today. My Grandfather was a Catholic and a member of the Knights of Columbus. Many evil things done by Catholics particularly the Jesuits. My Grandfather was a good man, but many evil fuQs in the Catholic leadership over many years.
The thing is, there are millions of members and it is inevitable some bad ones are lurking around.
We can agree on that.
Today it does seem that in the largest organizations in the world , the criminals seem to rise to the top.
Like the Us Govt or most any Alphabet agency, virtually all Fortune 500 companies and Universites , elected ( more like selected) officials
Or Media companies, or Pedowood.
I can't ever remember him attending a meeting (assuming they have meetings).
The article brought to us above by Dobrien has a link to an obviously bad actor (Italian, can't recall the name as I type), who was offering a lodge up to the 92nd degree. There is no such degree as 33 is the highest. The person was a charlatan creating what is known as a "clandestine lodge" for personal gain. They were common during the late 18th and throughout the 19th centuries. Today, part of our acceptance into the fraternity is to be told any Mason joining a clandestine lodge or even dealing with a "mason" of such a lodge will be thrown out.
Freemasonry came out of being "hidden" officially in England in 1717 when the Grand Lodge of England was formed officially. Here's an interesting link if you want to know more (not a Masonic site). https://www.grunge.com/241147/the-his...
Today, there are scammers pretending to be Masons who specifically target Masons and others to get money for fake charities. I have been contacted several times by these thieves and we all have to be careful.
Edit add: I forgot to mention I never explored York Rite. Didn't have the time.
You're very knowledgeable about this.
w.dw.com › edward-heath-pedophile-investig...
Oct 5, 2017 — After decades of speculation, British police have said new evidence presents a serious case against Edward Heath. The former prime minister ...
The Satanist Cult of Ted Heath: Ethical Implications of ...https://www.cambridge.org › european-psychiatry › article
by R Kurz · 2016 — Seven UK police forces are currently investigating the alleged involvement of the late Edward Heath (Prime Minister 1970–1974) in a child ...
Police chief '120 per cent convinced' Edward Heath was a ...https://www.independent.co.uk › UK › Crime
Feb 19, 2017 — Chief Constable Mike Veale, of Wiltshire Police, is reportedly convinced by testimony from alleged victims of the former Conservative Prime ...
Edward Heath Latest to be Accused of Child Abuse Claimshttps://www.beltramiandcompany.co.uk › news › edwar...
At least five police forces have conducting investigations into accusations of child abuse against former Prime Minister Edward Heath.
Chips that Sovereign Nationalism to pieces.
Genocide is clearly a big part of the agenda and Raping white girls doesn’t hurt Their murderous plans.
He predicted all this in the 1970s, except for the part of it being by design.
The first link sends me to a dead server, the second one sends me to a page of advertising and an invitation to celebrate LGBTQ+ History month, the next two are also advertising. None of them is an article about Heath.
OK, with that said prospective members petitioning any lodge in my State (NY) over the last decade or so are given a strong background check. Criminals, especially pedophiles are immediately black balled. That doesn't mean no criminal masons exist, but it means they are weeded out as soon as discovered. Even if not a criminal, there will be no Satanists in my lodge - trust me on that!
I notice the opening line in your post states he WAS top dog. Did the Brit masons throw him out?
Edit add: I found an article on him regarding the pedophile accusation (and other stuff), but my browser won't let me copy the link. The publication is called "The Week" and the article is "Who was Edward Heath? And what was his secret?". It doesn't say anything about Freemasonry, but that's not what it's about. He's been dead for a while.
The School system is pushing transgender bullshit,
and racism against whites with a Marxist agenda ,
My daughter is a school teacher . The whole public school system is a disaster , that doesn’t make all teachers Marxists.
I knew the Vatican had elected a Marxist pope, but hadn't realized how wide the corruption had spread.
If they ever recover from this, they'll have to fumigate the place and reconsecrate everything, like after the time of the Borgias.
It depicts children being abused. BTW the Podesta brothers were within 1 mile of where Madeleine McCann disappeared. The mug shots of the suspects look exactly like the Podesta’s. https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...
https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...
In a fascinating twist of fate My mom was a Cohen may she R.I.P.
Here they are, in order of publication and events:
The Last Jihad
The Last Days
The Ezekiel Option
The Copper Scroll
Dead Heat
The books center around the main character, Jon Bennett, a highly successful investment banker who gets swept up into increasingly alarming international events.
The books are political thrillers that depict Jon's spiritual journey, all during the End Times.
I can't recommend this series highly enough.
Why did "Birds of a feather" just pop into my ancient head?
Its a photo of Chuck Schumer sitting on a beach with a hairy chest while kissing a little girl on the mouth on Pedo Island.
How me dino would love to rip that POS to pieces!
It's frightening.
People who are openly evil have no respect for human life, and will act accordingly.
I think it is a sign of something, when people take an attitude toward something which many people have held as sacred and revere (for instance, God), and then try to caricature it by applying it to something which has become the symbol of depravity, and utter evil.
It looks like they want to take the capacity for reverence, (even if it has been mistakenly applied), and trash it, and throw garbage all over it, on purpose to destroy the capacity for it. I be-
lieve this is what has been identified as nihilism.
I have seen examples of religious people really experiencing reverence for their God, at times, and in some ways it is sometimes beautiful, if mistaken. That is not something I want to just crassly dump garbage all over.
I do not see nihilism as particularly attractive.
Whether you believe in mysticism or not these folks are real, they are everywhere, they cover their asses, and flaunt it in your face.
Making that spectacle public enough to be on CBS and validated by pfizer is only to desensitize people, make it acceptable so they can push it more with less resistance.
If nothing else even an objectivist must acknowledge that actual evil exists and that it is actively alive and working in the US and elsewhere, as evidenced by the sheer magnitude of missing and exploited children.
Is either, both, or neither force anti-human? That's an interesting question, TBH. I think the answer to that depends on the very nature of humanity itself - including not only its current state but its past and potential states as well. Where did we come from, why are we here, and where are we going? Those are the questions of theology. Objectivism - in so far as I have been able to determine - remains rather mute on these points.
It can be difficult because of evolutionary protective emotions that in the modern world would not be appropriate for the context and cause what might be considered evilness if acted on in modern times.
Like I said, don't get stuck with something outside to direct your reason or why of having been born. Your purpose for living must be selfish. If not you are just an amoral animal and as a human doing whatever makes you feel less pain. As Rand put it, your goal and reward for living your life experiencing your own happiness. The hard part is deciding what cost that happiness is. The most important costs are honesty and making rational choices, i.e.,being moral and correcting poor choices, i.e., correcting your immoral choices.
Following are the important differences between the brain and the mind:
Brain
Mind
Brain is the central organ of the human nervous system
Mind is a faculty that manifests itself in mental phenomena such as perception, thinking, sensation, reasoning, memory, etc.
Brain: It is made up of blood vessels and nerve cells.
Mind:It is not made up of any cells and is hypothetical.
Brain :It has a definite shape and structure.
Mind: It does not.
Brain coordinates, movements, feelings, and different functions of the body.
Mind :It refers to a person’s conscience, understanding and thought process.
You can touch the brain.
You cannot touch the mind.
The debate on the difference between the brain and the mind has been going on since the time of Aristotle. The mind is considered pure vibrating energy, whereas the brain is considered a physical manifestation of the mind. The above differences might have helped us understand how the mind and brain are two different entities.
What exists are matter and radiation. Those have relationship called energy. They can compose fields in which matter in action transfer or exchange momentum. Radiation in the form of photons transfers momentum. Momentum, mass, energy, mind, life, concepts, etc. do not have substance. They are mental, i.e., brain processes related to what exists in objective reality.
Let us also differentiate between thoughts and actions. What does the mind actually do? The mind/nou (Greek)/psyche is separate from the brain. It processes thoughts and converts them into actions. It is the mind which governs us - not our thoughts. It is the mind which structures and orders thoughts and then transforms those thoughts into actions. It is the mind which animates us and differentiates us from any other individual.
What is a moral choice if not a good choice? The Greek Hedonists advocated for their own "happiness" yet one need only look at their actions to question the true morality of such an ideology. Modern ideologies all claim to pursue their own happiness, but not all can be true.
And how does one actually go about correcting poor choices? Such exist in the past and can not be unmade. In some cases not even restitution is sufficient. What then?
Please tell me about some of those experiences. Perhaps I can see where you are coming from.
I have never seen any evidence for any forces or fields other than those known to science. I do see a lot of attempts to explain things by positing undiscovered or even mystical means for explaining how living bodies and mindful brains exist and operate.. Whatever, that does not remove individuals from the reason for all good and evil actions causing joy and pain among humans and other animals.
Individual human brains are sufficient to explain all of human history by their logical use of reason both with true or false premises. The search for ancient aliens or gods or external unknown forces helping humans, begs the question as to where are they. I am hoping your mental experiences can give me some new knowledge about objective reality.
I will tell you that one of my personal experiences came during the death of my baby twelve years ago. She wasn't quite one and died from something the doctors later wrote up as myocarditis. It took two additional days for the doctors to finally admit what we knew and acquiesce to our wishes to take her off life support. I knew it when she left, however. Her presence didn't dissipate or disintegrate. She left for other realms. And every now and then I can feel her peeking in on me as if to say "Hi!"
"Individual human brains are sufficient to explain all of human history..."
To argue such is to argue that man is destined only for suffering as the vast majority of human history revolves around suffering and pain. An alternative is to posit that we learn the hard things - including suffering - so that we may more fully enjoy life in the next realm. It is hard to appreciate what one has not experienced.
How can you equate individualism to being destined only to suffering? If that is true then if there is a caring powerful god, all you end with the same suffering and the belief like my sister of some heavenly afterlife listening to heavenly music for eternity, not understanding eternity. I hope she got her wish years after breast cancer and killed in a traffic accident at 50. Or my 76 year old christian brother who died last month from cancer and for two years unable to feed himself or all the other god fearing humans that I can no longer interact with after they suffered and died. Seems like it is best to try to enjoy any happiness you can achieve by living a honest moral life.
The human brain can create bodily feelings of something near by or touching the one's skin. Happens to me from time to time. Could it be my mother near and touching me though having died seventy years ago? I do know how strange things can happen with brain activity. I suffered from panic attacks in grad school and tried low dose LSD, didn't want hallucinations from a full dose messing with neural transmitters with even a little able cause strange mental effects. First there was nausea and a lot of gagging over a sink follow with stabbing at a table over and over and salivating followed by the weird feeling of the saliva going back into the glands. After that calmness and watching a physicist smoking pot describing the ceiling.
I am a non-militant atheist and do not, other than during short discussions, try to convince others. I did not hate those how threatened me with eternal suffering or the christian neighbor woman who threatened to ring my neck if I ever walked on her side walk.Or many other good Christians who told me to go to hell. They had their lives to live but must have feared my unbelief.
I Was not indoctrinated as a small child in a secular type family where we learned moral lessons from stories about honest and truthful famous persons. I was the oldest of seven puss two dead in miscarries in nine years. I learned to cope with illnesses and long cancer death of my mother at the age of 13. At no time did I find need to pray and today would consider it irrational grovel for favors from some lord.
I didn't make that argument. I argued the contrary: that suffering in this life allows us to more fully appreciate happiness not only in this life but the next. Does one enjoy health without experiencing sickness? Does one appreciate companionship without experiencing separation? And though it may seem like a schtick, it does build character. Do we grow stronger through an easy life or because we rose to overcome challenges?
"I did not hate those how threatened me with eternal suffering or the christian neighbor woman who threatened to ring my neck if I ever walked on her side walk.Or many other good Christians who told me to go to hell. They had their lives to live but must have feared my unbelief."
They understand neither "hell" nor "heaven" nor have developed the compassion or tolerance of a true follower. I can understand Rand's criticism of and contempt for them; it is unfortunate that they are a majority of those who call themselves Christians. (As you can probably tell, I don't have a particularly positive opinion of the current Pope, either.)
"At no time did I find need to pray and today would consider it irrational grovel for favors from some lord."
And I wouldn't fault you for any of that. I am very grateful, however, for conversations with a loving Father.
Consider the following two (opposing) hypotheses: 1. There is no such thing as a creator or supreme being, 2. There is a creator or supreme being.
What would be the method to examine and prove either of these? For the first, one would of necessity be forced to examine and understand every aspect of the universe. In other words, in order to positively assure yourself there was no such thing as a supreme being you would in effect have to become it!
The second actually presents several intellectual challenges. First and foremost, one would have to actually study and define what characteristics would have to exist in such a being. IE you would have to study religion. Science can't help here. If you failed, it wouldn't necessarily rule out that existence, either. Instead, you would have to challenge the set of characteristics attributed to that being and/or the identification method being utilized as either could be part of a failed hypothesis. When one looks closer, one begins realizing that attempting to prove the second hypothesis is actually the only way to go about proving the first anyway!
Something to consider.
This is not mysticism is empirical evidence of one to validate the logical and reasoned existence of the other.
Agree?
"Consider the following two (opposing) hypotheses: 1. There is no such thing as a creator or supreme being, 2. There is a creator or supreme being."
To even form an hypothesis requires some evidence to be confirmed or rejected. If those are premises to be used logically they must first be shown to be true in objective reality else logic will not give a real result. Anything can be shown true because of a false premise.
No need to go further than having no evidence of something to discard an hypothesis. If evidence is found, then an hypothesis can be formed and possibly be investigated. It is epistemologically irrational to try to prove a negative. It is impossible to prove nothing.
"The second actually presents several intellectual challenges. First and foremost, one would have to actually study and define what characteristics would have to exist in such a being."
How do you study the properties of something for which one has no evidence? In science one studies existents and forms theories which predict other things. If they don't exist the theory has to be modified or discarded. A theory can predict something not known to exist as in physics where the positron and neutrino were predicted and found many years later. There are theories such as the supersymmetry extension of the standard model for particles for which no predicted particles have been at great cost.
The acceptance of properties of that for which there is no physical evidence is irrational.
Theology has done that for millennia with good properties for god along with some evil punisher evil god created to help the good god explain its failures. Without evidence, wishful thinking will define whatever god will best govern humans for whoever desires power and be faithfully be believed in by being herded.
Incorrect. Evidence is a result of testing the hypothesis, not a basis for its construction. A hypothesis is a prospective conclusion formed from underlying assumptions which rationally connect. The test of the hypothesis serves as either verification or rebuttal of at least one of the assumptions.
"No need to go further than having no evidence of something to discard an hypothesis."
Remember that a hypothesis consists of one or many assumptions which include the measurement or observation methods. One must be very careful to employ the correct analysis tools and methods or one may arrive at an erroneous conclusion as a result. One of the most notable is that in positing the hypothesis of a supreme being, we are not positing the existence of a static object or process, but of an intellect and power with autonomy and volition which both exceed our own. Thus the critical need to identify valid observation methods and accept that these - of necessity - may be subject to the cooperation of that superior intellect. If we constrain the test to only what we allow, we are almost certain to fail.
"A theory can predict something..."
You're mixing terminology. In science, a theory is something which has already been proven repeatedly through extensive testing. Examples include the Theory of Relativity, etc. It's precedent is the confirmed hypothesis and its antecedent is the Law, such as the Law of Gravitational Attraction.
"Without evidence, wishful thinking will define..."
One can not arrive at a correct conclusion without conducting a valid test. I would strongly caution you against impugning others for that which you have not undertaken. It isn't "wishful thinking" to desire one's own happiness and continuance. To the contrary, it is the object of existence.
"A theory can predict something..."
"You're mixing terminology. In science, a theory is something which has already been proven repeatedly through extensive testing. Examples include the Theory of Relativity, etc. It's precedent is the confirmed hypothesis and its antecedent is the Law, such as the Law of Gravitational Attraction."
A theory satisfies all known knowledge which it deals with. It is not safe from failure. New knowledge and ideas or mathematical calculation, as in the case of GR predict new knowledge from the theory. Does that knowledge agree with objective reality? If it does the theory survives, if not the theory must be corrected or discarded. GR came about to explain the relativity of accelerated motion while SR dealt with uniform motion. GR dealt with in particular gravitation and predicted the correct perihelia shift of the orbit of Mercury and other planets and the curvature of light by large masses. Those were verified by experiments, so the theory held. The theory still holds over more than 100 years of confirmed predictions such as clock rates in gravitational fields and will fail with the first contradiction with objective reality.
Some theories such as quantum physics, which are probabilistic in nature, predict the probabilities for what measurements find.
To your point ,I Agree. the symbolism in that performance of “unholy” clearly represents the invisible enemies
Hegelian philosophy …Master/Slave/War
The devil was clearly Master and they even had a cage for a female slave. I did not watch a lick of that show but did see the ugly Satanic lowlight.
LSD used to break down the belief systems, and rebuild them.
Evil not only exists... It can be created, controlled, and DIRECTED!
MKUltra brought to you by operation Paperclip and a continuation of the NAZI project.
If you have any links please share.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOPF8...
Before the guest author even was introduced . The narrative portrayed by Vincent Bugliosi and the media don’t make sense until you learn of Mansons parole officer. Today we find the FBI has almost every mass shooter on the radar and many seen by the same FBLie therapist prior to their killing sprees. Mansons therapist was expert at LSD and mental suggestions. Well we could call it MKUltra.
So Charlie was taught how to MKUltra the girls.
The NAZIS never lost they just gave up Germany and the Prussians just took over the countries that were fighting them. What was Hitlers goal? To take over all of Europe. What’s the EU? The infiltration has been going on for many decades.
Lots of people in the ancient world didn't believe in Baal or Moloch, but that didn't stop the ones who did believe from slaughtering untold numbers of children in their names.
“I believe the terrorist is both capable and prone to acts of unspeakable evil, and you don't. I'm right, and you're wrong. It's not because I know more than your government. I don't. I know less. But I believe that evil forces make evil people do evil things. That's how I anticipate what can and will happen next in life. That's how I got to be the head of the Mossad, young man. And why I'm good at it. It's going to be one hell of an August, and my country is going to suffer very badly because your country doesn't believe in evil, and mine was born out of the ashes of the Holocaust” – “The Last Jihad”, by Joel C. Rosenberg
I think that there are some people who go to college, and hear their professors say, "There are no absolutes." That is a false and evil statement. One should not just accept it, and use it as an excuse not to oppose evil. It must be fought, at different times and at different ways, but resolutely,
So there you go mr head of mossad.
God created Nature
to look at a baby and not see God is beyond my understanding
read Darwin's Black Box to get a clue
It was an unholy war, and it was winner-take-all. There could be no truce, no cease-fire, no hudna, as it was known in Arabic. You were either on the offense, or you were losing.
The thoughts rushing through Bennett were alien to everything he’d been taught to believe. They smacked of the very intolerance and judgmentalism he'd been so relentlessly warned against back at Georgetown and Harvard. But what was 'tolerance' in the face of terror? Wasn't it surrender? Wasn't it suicide?” – “The Last Days”, by Joel C. Rosenberg
Just wondering whether your view of a theory is that it is 'written in stone' as Rand considered her philosophy Objectivism, or as others and myself, that it is correctable and extendable.
If one wanted to, one could assign confidence intervals to various stages: 10% to a new hypothesis, 60% to a proven hypothesis, 90% to a theory, and 99.99% to a Law. Note that even with a Law one lacks 100% confidence in its accuracy simply to acknowledge the limitations of human knowledge. (Short of omniscience, I don't know that one could get to 100%).
And I'm not sure I would credit Rand with believing her philosophy to be 100% accurate. That seems rather... hard to believe.
https://theobjectivestandard.com/what...
is a good summery of Objectivism as an absolutist system. That seems to be the view of The Ayn Rand Institute while The Atlas Society seems to be open for some change for any objective errors that might be changed.
Does the secular base of Objectivism matter to you? It does not allow for any supernaturalism. Because of the rational base for Objectivism, I find that many nonsecular believers still like the philosophy.
To me, a more logically consistent view (and IMO the one Objectivism should have taken) is that of the agnostic. The agnostic admits that a higher power could be possible because it is one's own limitations - either in imagination or experience - which are the limiting factor. I support the position of the agnostic because I believe that any search for Deity must be undertaken of one's own free will and choice and that the relationship and experience resulting from an honest search are intensely personal and sacred.
Logically, I can't resolve the fundamental flaw in atheism's premise: that such can't prove their own hypothesis without becoming exactly what they claim does not exist! What makes this all the more glaring is that those very atheists demand proof from everyone else when they should be seeking it themselves. (Most even when presented with evidence simply dismiss it or downplay it.)
Most of all, however, atheism to me is limiting. It can't explain the origins of life or existence. It can't explain fundamental purpose. To me, those are questions which any true and encompassing philosophy/religion absolutely has to be able to answer. Had Objectivism simply adopted agnosticism, it could maintain an objective view on the question of God. Not coincidentally, I believe this is also the primary reason one sees few proselytes to Objectivism.
(No really....watch it again.)
My objectivity is rapidly failing.
I’m trying to replace it with apathetic nihilism but that’s not going very well.
I could make a case for a creator. But that’s something for everyone to decide for themselves. I know what I believe. If I’m wrong then it doesn’t matter. But if I’m right then everything matters.
We are free to choose. By design.