|
Post by james1983 on Sept 23, 2020 11:13:50 GMT -6
In 1966 the American society for psychical research moved into a building behind the Dakota building on 73rd street. The society started in the UK in the late 19th century, and chapters were formed in the US. They were dedicated to the study of ghost, telepathy, and all forms of occult "knowledge". About a year and a half later Rosemary's baby was filmed at the Dakota
3 months before Lennon was shot a "psychic" named Alex Tanous (has other aliases) of the American society for psychical research was interviewed in a newspaper where he was asked to make a prediction, he stated a famous individual would be shot in the area. The rest is history. The interesting thing is Alex Tanous was a psychic that was used by police and other agencies to help solve cases. Some people might not find this interesting, but to me it's proof of foreknowledge by someone in law enforcement circles. The psychic society itself is very interesting and would be the type of thing used by intelligence circles. If anyone has more info please share.
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Sept 25, 2020 5:58:43 GMT -6
"Colleague of JB Rhine." If that doesn't just shriek "credibility!" then nothing does. But the connection between Osis and Tanous, and the FAA, is VERY interesting...
|
|
|
Post by james1983 on Sept 25, 2020 8:11:12 GMT -6
What's also interesting are the names involved with the founding of the society in the UK. Arthur Balfour, B.F. Westcott (new Greek bible text fame), Sidgewick, and Blavatsky.
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Sept 25, 2020 9:25:28 GMT -6
Balfour's not actually all that surprising. He was a true intellectual, and one of "The Souls," a network of ruling class men his generation who were deep into philosophy, metaphysics, all the New Age stuff before it was called "New Age." He was most likely gay, but he kept it deeeeeeeeep into the closet. (He may have been transgender or "hermaphrodite.") Letters of Lady Elcho suggest he may have been into S/M (most members of the ruling class were; they were RAISED by the cane.) He only ever had one brief romance with a woman in his early 20s. Never again. He was also a white supremacist and surprisingly (for such an enlightened young man) right-wing politician. Nearly all the other "Souls" were Liberal. He campaigned for the British Protectorate in Palestine to become a Jewish Homeland just so the Jews of Europe would get the fuck out of Europe and go somewhere else. If he'd been alive in 1940, he would have met Rudolf Hess with open arms. He was way into Aryanism (the same way Tolkien was) and only turned his nose up at the Thule Society because he was such snob--not because he didn't believe the same garbage they believed in. FWIW, his brother Francis was an eminent embryologist--just like Ernst Haeckel. And a mountaineer--just like Crowley. (Francis died climbing Mont Blanc.)
And Arthur Balfour was THE DARLING of the British Right. The Left had most of the Intellectuals (especially the Souls) on their team, but everyone agreed Balfour was the brightest bulb in the whole box. He had a floating reading table for his bathtub, and kept another book open on a bookstand on his dressing table so he could read while he dressed. His ability and willingness to understand other people's points of view made him the most lethal debater in Parliament or any other venue. And he relentlessly invested his talent in preserving the Conservative status quo in Britain until the last possible second--even though he himself constantly preached that it was doomed. It's not the Left who are into this [particular] mumbo-jumbo; it's the Right. The Left is Atheistic. The Right is up to their eyeballs in cosmic fairy dust. Reagan. Bush. Goldwater. Hitler. And remember--the Clintons are NOT in the slightest degree "Progressives." She's a Goldwater Republican he's a little to the Right of August Pinochet.
|
|
|
Post by james1983 on Sept 25, 2020 10:41:50 GMT -6
I agree. It's almost like the ruling philosophical elite believe the same thing, but the right tend to dress it up in religious/mystical garb. An example would the the book I'm reading now by Howell. He literally takes occult theosophical ideas and explains them in a scientific atheistic form. There's no doubt he worships the Greek god Pan, but he explains it as a mindless electrical force that gives man the power to start and run their mind like a power source or battery does, he labels this force/god "Deus Universalis". This guy is an expert in what religious ideology does to the human mind. He terms mans religiosity as "Deus Sapien", and likens it to the soul, but refrains from using the term because its unscientific. My jaw dropped when I read page 80 and out of nowhere he states Deus Sapien shouldn't be used to turn man into a "Patsy", he literally uses the word Patsy lol. Take that with page 2 where he gives the violence and crime in New York as a reason for there being no God, when he was implicated and investigated for the crimes he likely referring to. I think he was using these cultists own ideas and "religion" to control them like a cult leader does. He's a master at the psychology of it as the book clearly shows. The book in actually incredible when you take into account who wrote it.
|
|
|
Post by james1983 on Sept 25, 2020 10:54:24 GMT -6
To better understand what I posted he likens "Deus Sapien" to the human psyche the part of man that ultimately becomes deified in the occult. Deus Sapien gets its energy from Deus Universalis which is the mindless, thoughtless, "energy" that governs evolution of the mind (apotheosis), body, and the entire universe. What Deus Universalis really is is the Greek god Pan, or Ein Soph of the Kaballah. Every persons Deus Sapien is linked together like a giant switch board almost, with Dues Universalis providing the electricity. It's nothing more than Alfred Howell trying to take theosophical pantheism, and giving it a "scientific" veneer. Im sure you can understand what I'm trying to get across lol. A hundred pages into the book, and that's basically the outline. That and he bashes Christianity every chance he gets just as Crowley did.
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Sept 25, 2020 15:57:48 GMT -6
Well, it's like the Nazis (and their protonazi predecessors.) First, they started with the assumption that "the Jews" (there is no such thing. Believe me. I'm half "Jewish" on my mother's side. Like Jesus) 1. "... have kept their bloodline (we don't have one. It's a religion; not a race) pure;" therefore, their evil plan to dilute the Aryan race blah, blah, blah. And so we Aryans MUST also keep our bloodline pure. Etc 2. "...have a Messiah figure that keeps them organized, focused, blah, blah, blah." So, naturally, the "Aryans," as the opposite of "the Jews," MUST do everything "the Jews" do, but better. Etc. They even used the phrase, "Aryan Messiah" or "German Messiah." Hitler was literally the one who brilliantly came up with the idea, "Uh, Der Fuhrer sounds a tad more, um, Germanic."
Then, of course, we have the KKK, who go on and on and on about "the Catholics" (a real thing. I'm Irish Catholic on my father's side. Like Jesus) and so, naturally, they had to imitate the Catholics in every way. Right down to the robes. The Nazi SS imitated the Catholic Jesuits in every way, except for the superior education. Even the "Totenkopf" insignia is an early Masonic insignia. It's on half the gravemarkers in Scotland. (We supercilious professor types refer to this particular obsession as "The Other." JSYK.)
Now, in their defense, the first scientists were "magickians." Newton's own theory of gravity is a mathematical (another form of Magick) description of an occult ("hidden") force acting at a distance. The difference between a genius like Newton and an idiot like Neil DeGrasse Tyson or Crowley is simply narcissism. Newton was smart enough to believe in Something Greater and Smarter Than Himself, and "atheists" are too vain to admit such a possibility. And as we all know from our reading, narcissism is the root of all evil.
Let's get more specific. In the super-duper narcissism of someone like, oh, say, AH Howell, his "true system of wisdom" or whatever opens the door to his own apotheosis. That is, he can, like Thoth, BECOME a "god." Soooooo, when he talks about a "god" like Pan, etc, he's referring to the kind of "god" he thinks HE'S on the path to becoming. That's why he believes in that kind of god, but is too vain to believe in what most of us call "God." FWIW, the Mormons pretty much believe the same thing. But they do NOT admit that outside the "church." That's what makes Mormonism a "cult" in most definitions of the word. Or other horseshit cults like Theosophy, who teach that "Jesus didn't actually die on the cross." Now, I'm NOT trying to say any religion is "true," but I'm only pointing out that the DEFINITION of "Christianity" is the DEATH of Jesus on the Cross. That's the whole frigging point of Christianity: the belief that "Christ died on the Cross." Even if you look at Christianity and the "Life of Christ" as a "mystery religion" (by re-enacting certain crucial [get it?] experiences in the life of the man-god, one becomes a god in the same manner. Like the ancient Egyptian pharaohs believed they were doing) in which the man Jesus achieves apotheosis, it's by DYING, not by "not-dying." I think you get my point.
So, of course, they're going to be obsessed with "debunking" their straw-man version of Christianity while simultaneously convincing themselves they ARE "Christ." But that's the problem with narcissism--you spend more and more and more mental effort (dare I say it? Psychic energy?) convincing yourself you're "right" by obsessively deriding the Other Belief, the one you are deep-down afraid IS right.
Now, here's where it gets interesting. The narcissistic self (not the true self) will often defend itself from the painful truth by distracting or aenesthetizing their conscience with drugs, or obsessive behaviors, like alcohol, or compulsive gambling. Or, they might become obsessed with proving that their narcissistic self is "successful." In a bullshit cult like Theosophy or Scientology, the Believer will need to "prove" they are becoming as "powerful" as they believe they are becoming. So, they go out of their way to get away with committing terrible crimes. "See? I got away with it! I must be right!" It's the same thing with a compulsive womanizer. He constantly needs to "score" again, to prove that he is a successful womanizer. Constantly. The constant shitting on Christianity, which preaches (whether it lives up to it or not) humility and charity is a dead give away of a narcissistic personality that is deathly afraid of allowing itself to realize that Christianity is "right" after all, and that they are going to die and go to hell, after all. I'm not saying that's "true;" I'm just saying, these guys were immersed in the prevailing religion and spent the rest of their lives pretending, to themselves, that they were too "smart" or "enlightened" or "strong" to believe it. Their descriptions of Christians as "stupid," "weak," etc are again, The Other--the Self that their narcissism is deathly afraid they'll see in the mirror. In other words, methinks the atheist doth protest TOO much.
Now, here's where it gets weird. When said narcissist also happens to be a sociopath--watch the fuck out. There is NOTHING they are incapable of doing. Sociopaths don't do "downers" like alcohol and and heroin, because they don't have a conscience they need to aenesthetize. If they do any drugs at all, it's usually performance-enhancing "uppers" like cocaine or meth or LSD. They feel frustrated by the rules of society, but only in the same way that a tiger feels frustrated by the bars of a cage. Give them an excuse to ignore the rules, like, oh, say, Scientology, and we're all in BIG trouble.
|
|
|
Post by james1983 on Sept 25, 2020 20:22:29 GMT -6
It's like he's trying too hard to convince himself of what he thinks he believes. I think the guy is what Romans 1 would call someone who has been given over to a reprobate mind. I didn't know until a few years ago that Jesuit Bernard Stempfle "helped" Hitler write Mein Kampf.
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Sept 26, 2020 9:22:51 GMT -6
Yeah. And look how Hitler thanked him.
|
|
|
Post by james1983 on Sept 26, 2020 14:08:18 GMT -6
He probably outlived his usefulness, that or it was a way to put distance between the Jesuits and Hitler. All one has to do to see papal complicity in WW2 is look at who helped Ante Pavolic kill hundreds of thousands of people in similar fashion. Priests were leading death camps in Croatia. I'm not saying all priests were complicit, those that weren't were killed.
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Sept 27, 2020 7:06:23 GMT -6
For years, Thulists and other antisemites all across "pan-Germany" knew how badly they needed a veneer of Catholic respectability. They infiltrated the Church in German speaking nations the same way pedophiles infiltrated the Church.
|
|
|
Post by james1983 on Sept 27, 2020 19:26:24 GMT -6
I see it the other way around. I see WW2 as a way for the Vatican to gain back control of a united Europe like they had in the Middle Ages before the Protestant revolution. There were too many priests complicit for it to have been a takeover in my opinion. All throughout Germant, Italy, Spain, and Croatia you seen priests marching with the troops, and "blessing" guns, tanks, and airplanes with holy water just like they did in Germany during WW1. Hitler himself said that he wanted to establish a third reich, he said the second reich was Germany under Otto Von Bismarck, and the first reich was the Holy Roman Empire. There was an attempt at uniting the Holy Roman Empire again. In fact the reichsconcordat that was signed with the Vatican is still in effect today. I also don't find it coincidental that the Axis countries were mostly countries that were once part of the Holy Roman Empire. Spain might as well have been an Axis country, they supplied man power and money. Just my opinion.
|
|