The secret of the Illuminati and why they are identifiable yet unstoppable.

Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
The secret of the Illuminati and why they are identifiable yet unstoppable.

The secret of the Illuminati and why they are identifiable yet unstoppable.

The Illuminati is a natural consequence and phenomenon of our monetary system. It cannot help but exist, whether we want it to or not. That is why it is unstoppable.

Who controls the Illuminati?
Collectively, we do. Directly and through our governments. They are in plain sight at the top of our socio economic demographic pyramid.

The Illuminati is a known group of people or corporations whom we allow to operate. It has been manipulating and controlling society for many years with Government and societal approval and collusion. Let me be clear. The Illuminati exist because we all allow them to. We allow ourselves to be led and manipulated to their ends. All of us including you support them every time you take a job or buy a product. We contribute to their coffers and agenda daily while at the same time, they cannot help but contribute to our welfare. This is of course a minimal contribution on their part. This being the only drawback to the present system.

Should the Illuminati be stopped?
No. If they ever did disappear, we would invent a new Illuminati.

Why not stop them?
Because society would go to chaos and our socio economic demographic pyramid would collapse. This collapse would only be for a short time. It would soon resume its natural and uncontrolled shape.

Should the Illuminati be given more power?
Yes. They could stabilize our common and bring a higher long term profit and wealth for all.

Will we give them more power?
No. People fear what is already there and fear their own power to rule and control the economy. We are cowards and fear that we lack the wisdom and thus allow chaos to run our economy.

If you are wise, you will know that you can know who the Illuminati are and you will also know that you are helping them exist.

Are you aware of this?

Their secret identities are in plain sight to the wise. If you do not know them yet or how you are helping them exist, let’s chat.

Regards
DL


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4562
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Greatest I am wrote: The

Greatest I am wrote:
The Illuminati is a known group of people or corporations whom we allow to operate.

 

Ok, then name some names and provide some evidence. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5487
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
(No subject)


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10687
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
While I know for a fact that

While I know for a fact that the average rich guy works to ensure he and his stay rich by meddling in politics and economics, that's a far cry from a global conspiracy.
Fact is that many of these rich guys also work their asses off to make other rich guys poor, because they are competition.

Never assume conspiracy when simple stupidity will suffice.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


tonyjeffers
tonyjeffers's picture
Posts: 482
Joined: 2012-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Me

GIM wrote:
If you do not know them yet or how you are helping them exist, let’s chat

that would be me. fill me in

 

"...but truth is a point of view, and so it is changeable. And to rule by fettering the mind through fear of punishment in another world is just as base as to use force." -Hypatia


x
Bronze Member
Posts: 591
Joined: 2010-06-15
User is offlineOffline
Yeah

Vastet wrote:
Never assume conspiracy when simple stupidity will suffice.

And when normal human self interest will suffice.

 

More Illuminati:

http://www.sherryshriner.com/

 

extracts follows:

 

 

The Beast Prophets in the churches today will LEAD the persecution and extermination of the REAL believers of the Most High! They are working together with the NWO and Illuminati and the Alien New Age to kill the real Christians so there is less opposition to Sananda playing the "Jesus" of the Bible and the coming New Age Alien Deceptions.

They are building their lists of those who will oppose and resist their agenda and they are going to begin FEMA roundups this year to eliminate the opposition. Prepare folks!  - Sherry Shriner

 

And also!!!

The real truth behind zombies!

Obama incarnated by Amun Ra in an Indian cave!

Brain eating vaccine

 

 

 


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1474
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Greatest

Beyond Saving wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:
The Illuminati is a known group of people or corporations whom we allow to operate.

 

Ok, then name some names and provide some evidence. 

Illuminati Members List 2012

Apart from D’banj other well known members of the secret cult Illuminati are

  • Beyonce
  • Bob Dylan
  • Bob Marley
  • Britney spears
  • Cypress hill
  • David bowie
  • Dr dre
  • Eminem
  • Jay z
  • Dbanj
  • Madonna
  • Nicki Minaj
  • Aretha Franklin
  • Paris Hilton
  • Jim Carey
  • Justin Bieber
  • Kanye west
  • Lady gaga
  • Lil Wayne
  • Madonna
  • Marilyn Manson
  • Michael Jackson (turned against them)
  • Nas
  • Notorious B.I.G
  • Rihanna
  • T pain
  • Tupac Shakur (but then turned against them)

 

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


x
Bronze Member
Posts: 591
Joined: 2010-06-15
User is offlineOffline
Chortle

Tapey wrote:

(but then turned against them)

 


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Greatest

Beyond Saving wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:
The Illuminati is a known group of people or corporations whom we allow to operate.

 

Ok, then name some names and provide some evidence. 

You have not quite grasped what I wrote.
The only evidence available is the fact that we have a top to our economic pyramid.
That is where the so called Illuminati sit and rule in their chaotic way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhZk8ronces

Pick any country, look at the top of the pyramid, name those there and you have your Illuminaty. They of course will not name themselves that.

Regards
DL


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote: You

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

You have missed the message as well. There is no conspiracy even as there really is, in a sense, an Illuminati. It's members just do not recognize themselves as such.

Please see the link above.

Regards
DL


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:While I know

Vastet wrote:
While I know for a fact that the average rich guy works to ensure he and his stay rich by meddling in politics and economics,

--------------
Yes. A natural thing to do for all of us.
It is called survival.
---------------

that's a far cry from a global conspiracy. Fact is that many of these rich guys also work their asses off to make other rich guys poor, because they are competition. Never assume conspiracy when simple stupidity will suffice.

It becomes global when all countries are doing the same and they are.

It is far from stupidity.

Do you not try to do what is best for you and place what is good for others as a benefit only if it hapens to come about, as a secondary goal?

I think we all work that way.

Regards
DL


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
tonyjeffers wrote:GIM

tonyjeffers wrote:

GIM wrote:
If you do not know them yet or how you are helping them exist, let’s chat

that would be me. fill me in

 

 

 

Ok.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhZk8ronces

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO24XmP1c5E

Simply stated, great wealth can only come from taking advantage of the markets or labour.

If you work or consume then you are contributing to the Illuminati.

Look at the top of the economic pyramid in your country, and at it's top, you will see members of the Illuminati,----even as they themselves do not know that they are in that group.

Regards
DL


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10687
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Greatest I am wrote:It

Greatest I am wrote:
It becomes global when all countries are doing the same and they are.

Except they aren't. No two countries on this planet share the exact same goals, nor the methods to obtain those goals. If there was an overreaching common strategy, I'd have seen it by now. As would those few who are smarter than myself.

Greatest I am wrote:
It is far from stupidity.

I disagree. If there is a global conspiracy, then the conspirators are some of the dumbest people to ever draw breath.

Greatest I am wrote:
Do you not try to do what is best for you and place what is good for others as a benefit only if it hapens to come about, as a secondary goal?

I think we all work that way.

Regards
DL

No.
Yes, my first interest is my own survival, but I live in a prosperous nation that looks out for its people. As such, survival is rarely something I need to worry about. Therefore the prosperity of everyone can be and is my concern. It's part of why I back socialism over capitalism.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10687
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
If I had to sacrifice myself

If I had to sacrifice myself to better humanity, I would. Even if I was never recognised for it. Even if I were villified because of it.

I'd MUCH rather everyone had all the necessary tools to thrive than have my personal level of comfort be as high as possible.

Yeah, I'm not typical of my species, but neither am I unique.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4562
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Greatest I am wrote:Beyond

Greatest I am wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:
The Illuminati is a known group of people or corporations whom we allow to operate.

 

Ok, then name some names and provide some evidence. 

You have not quite grasped what I wrote. The only evidence available is the fact that we have a top to our economic pyramid. That is where the so called Illuminati sit and rule in their chaotic way. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhZk8ronces Pick any country, look at the top of the pyramid, name those there and you have your Illuminaty. They of course will not name themselves that. Regards DL

 

So rich people exist, therefore rich people are a global conspiracy? You are even nuttier than I thought you were initially. I think Tapey is probably closer to the truth. The Illuminati is everyone who has multiple #1 hits on the billboard top 40. In fact, the top 40 isn't really about the popularity of the music, it is actually a secret message telling all the other Illuminati the chain of command for the week. 

 

See, I can make up batshit crazy stuff too. 

 

Oh and your link which I guess you intended as evidence that JFK was warning us about secret societies? Yeah, try reading the transcript of the whole speech in context. Cut and paste a presidents remarks and  you can make them say pretty much whatever  you want. 

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Research/Ready-Reference/JFK-Speeches/The-President-and-the-Press-Address-before-the-American-Newspaper-Publishers-Association.aspx

Note the date: April 27th 1961, 10 days after the Bay of Pigs, if you don't know what that is get a history book. JFK was discussing the necessity of increased government secrecy during the conflict with communism while maintaining a free press. Just look at how much your little clip butchered the speech to ensure that no context was available.

 

President John F. Kennedy wrote:

 

    Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen:

     I appreciate very much your generous invitation to be here tonight.

     You bear heavy responsibilities these days and an article I read some time ago reminded me of how particularly heavily the burdens of present day events bear upon your profession.

     You may remember that in 1851 the New York Herald Tribune under the sponsorship and publishing of Horace Greeley, employed as its London correspondent an obscure journalist by the name of Karl Marx.

     We are told that foreign correspondent Marx, stone broke, and with a family ill and undernourished, constantly appealed to Greeley and managing editor Charles Dana for an increase in his munificent salary of $5 per installment, a salary which he and Engels ungratefully labeled as the "lousiest petty bourgeois cheating."

     But when all his financial appeals were refused, Marx looked around for other means of livelihood and fame, eventually terminating his relationship with the Tribune and devoting his talents full time to the cause that would bequeath the world the seeds of Leninism, Stalinism, revolution and the cold war.

     If only this capitalistic New York newspaper had treated him more kindly; if only Marx had remained a foreign correspondent, history might have been different. And I hope all publishers will bear this lesson in mind the next time they receive a poverty-stricken appeal for a small increase in the expense account from an obscure newspaper man.

     I have selected as the title of my remarks tonight "The President and the Press." Some may suggest that this would be more naturally worded "The President Versus the Press." But those are not my sentiments tonight.

     It is true, however, that when a well-known diplomat from another country demanded recently that our State Department repudiate certain newspaper attacks on his colleague it was unnecessary for us to reply that this Administration was not responsible for the press, for the press had already made it clear that it was not responsible for this Administration.

     Nevertheless, my purpose here tonight is not to deliver the usual assault on the so-called one party press. On the contrary, in recent months I have rarely heard any complaints about political bias in the press except from a few Republicans. Nor is it my purpose tonight to discuss or defend the televising of Presidential press conferences. I think it is highly beneficial to have some 20,000,000 Americans regularly sit in on these conferences to observe, if I may say so, the incisive, the intelligent and the courteous qualities displayed by your Washington correspondents.

     Nor, finally, are these remarks intended to examine the proper degree of privacy which the press should allow to any President and his family.

     If in the last few months your White House reporters and photographers have been attending church services with regularity, that has surely done them no harm.

     On the other hand, I realize that your staff and wire service photographers may be complaining that they do not enjoy the same green privileges at the local golf courses that they once did.

     It is true that my predecessor did not object as I do to pictures of one's golfing skill in action. But neither on the other hand did he ever bean a Secret Service man.

     My topic tonight is a more sober one of concern to publishers as well as editors.

     I want to talk about our common responsibilities in the face of a common danger. The events of recent weeks may have helped to illuminate that challenge for some; but the dimensions of its threat have loomed large on the horizon for many years. Whatever our hopes may be for the future--for reducing this threat or living with it--there is no escaping either the gravity or the totality of its challenge to our survival and to our security--a challenge that confronts us in unaccustomed ways in every sphere of human activity.

     This deadly challenge imposes upon our society two requirements of direct concern both to the press and to the President--two requirements that may seem almost contradictory in tone, but which must be reconciled and fulfilled if we are to meet this national peril. I refer, first, to the need for a far greater public information; and, second, to the need for far greater official secrecy.

 

 

The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.

     But I do ask every publisher, every editor, and every newsman in the nation to reexamine his own standards, and to recognize the nature of our country's peril. In time of war, the government and the press have customarily joined in an effort based largely on self-discipline, to prevent unauthorized disclosures to the enemy. In time of "clear and present danger," the courts have held that even the privileged rights of the First Amendment must yield to the public's need for national security.

     Today no war has been declared--and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired.

     If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of "clear and present danger," then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent.

     It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions--by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.

     Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.

     Nevertheless, every democracy recognizes the necessary restraints of national security--and the question remains whether those restraints need to be more strictly observed if we are to oppose this kind of attack as well as outright invasion.

     For the facts of the matter are that this nation's foes have openly boasted of acquiring through our newspapers information they would otherwise hire agents to acquire through theft, bribery or espionage; that details of this nation's covert preparations to counter the enemy's covert operations have been available to every newspaper reader, friend and foe alike; that the size, the strength, the location and the nature of our forces and weapons, and our plans and strategy for their use, have all been pinpointed in the press and other news media to a degree sufficient to satisfy any foreign power; and that, in at least in one case, the publication of details concerning a secret mechanism whereby satellites were followed required its alteration at the expense of considerable time and money.

     The newspapers which printed these stories were loyal, patriotic, responsible and well-meaning. Had we been engaged in open warfare, they undoubtedly would not have published such items. But in the absence of open warfare, they recognized only the tests of journalism and not the tests of national security. And my question tonight is whether additional tests should not now be adopted.

     The question is for you alone to answer. No public official should answer it for you. No governmental plan should impose its restraints against your will. But I would be failing in my duty to the nation, in considering all of the responsibilities that we now bear and all of the means at hand to meet those responsibilities, if I did not commend this problem to your attention, and urge its thoughtful consideration.

     On many earlier occasions, I have said--and your newspapers have constantly said--that these are times that appeal to every citizen's sense of sacrifice and self-discipline. They call out to every citizen to weigh his rights and comforts against his obligations to the common good. I cannot now believe that those citizens who serve in the newspaper business consider themselves exempt from that appeal.

     I have no intention of establishing a new Office of War Information to govern the flow of news. I am not suggesting any new forms of censorship or any new types of security classifications. I have no easy answer to the dilemma that I have posed, and would not seek to impose it if I had one. But I am asking the members of the newspaper profession and the industry in this country to reexamine their own responsibilities, to consider the degree and the nature of the present danger, and to heed the duty of self-restraint which that danger imposes upon us all.

     Every newspaper now asks itself, with respect to every story: "Is it news?" All I suggest is that you add the question: "Is it in the interest of the national security?" And I hope that every group in America--unions and businessmen and public officials at every level-- will ask the same question of their endeavors, and subject their actions to the same exacting tests.

     And should the press of America consider and recommend the voluntary assumption of specific new steps or machinery, I can assure you that we will cooperate whole-heartedly with those recommendations.

     Perhaps there will be no recommendations. Perhaps there is no answer to the dilemma faced by a free and open society in a cold and secret war. In times of peace, any discussion of this subject, and any action that results, are both painful and without precedent. But this is a time of peace and peril which knows no precedent in history.

II

     It is the unprecedented nature of this challenge that also gives rise to your second obligation--an obligation which I share. And that is our obligation to inform and alert the American people--to make certain that they possess all the facts that they need, and understand them as well--the perils, the prospects, the purposes of our program and the choices that we face.

     No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed.

     I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers--I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: "An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them.

     Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed--and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment-- the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution- -not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants"--but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion.

     This means greater coverage and analysis of international news--for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security--and we intend to do it.

III

     It was early in the Seventeenth Century that Francis Bacon remarked on three recent inventions already transforming the world: the compass, gunpowder and the printing press. Now the links between the nations first forged by the compass have made us all citizens of the world, the hopes and threats of one becoming the hopes and threats of us all. In that one world's efforts to live together, the evolution of gunpowder to its ultimate limit has warned mankind of the terrible consequences of failure.

     And so it is to the printing press--to the recorder of man's deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news--that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent.

 

 I would say that a good portion of what was skipped is quite relevant to what President Kennedy was saying. Don't believe everything you read on the internet, at least not without a small effort at research first. 

 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
I don't know about

I don't know about Illuminati, but there are many powerful semi-private groups that should not exist. If there are Illuminati, I don't know what else they want if they already sit in these institutions.

G8, Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Comission, Club of Rome and so on. They could have done what United Nations suggested, things like meeting MDGs or erradicating malaria forever. But they didn't and didn't even try. There are some decent people attending some of these groups, but I believe the groups and institutions that do nothing good should be dissolved or have their records and accounts checked by some international authority. 

With exception of United Nations, I believe it is a weak but relatively innocent and potentially useful governing body, not a beginning of sinister New World Order. Even if UN couldn't do its job, we'd need something pretty much like it, only with USA having no right of veto Smiling

 

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10687
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
That wouldn't be any more

That wouldn't be any more fair than the current system.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
The Illuminati is a

The Illuminati is a fragmented (and mostly inert) organization and creator of the Aquinas Protocol, developed by Bob Page. They also helped in creating the Gray Death as well the Gray Death vaccine.


 

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote:No! Is

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

No! Is truth! Bob Page is about to lead the civilized world on a downward spiral to armageddon! Save yourselves!

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


NoMoreCrazyPeople
atheistSuperfan
NoMoreCrazyPeople's picture
Posts: 969
Joined: 2009-10-14
User is offlineOffline
  I did a hole 2-3 week

  I did a hole 2-3 week binge research session on the Illuminate a few years back when I was made aware of a freemasons lodge near bye and was always curious what the heck they were all about.  Starting with the freemasons you end up on the illumatti pretty quick and the tales go deep.  Rumors of satanism, strange rituals like burning giant owls in the forest at secret gatherings all dressed in special robes, swords... that kind of stuff.  I thought the idea was that the illumatti was 13 or so "bloodlines/families" who assemble and have a "plan" of some kind, whatever that may be, some of these families being the rockefellars, the rothchilds...  To that simple definition I'd say there's probably a very good chance very wealthy people gather and make plans to stay wealthy, that doesn't seem far fetched or like a conspiracy atall, it almost seems innevitable.  But world domination, planned terrorism, mass population reduction, complete control over the people and their money through the banking system etc ... and all rest seems a little over the top but who knows.  It is well known their are many "secret" or exclusive groups who gather like the bildoberg group, there's probably alote of influencial people who gather and have a plan, who really knows what their plans are they could be having epic expensive catored and decorated wild orgies at these private gatherings for all we know?

 

In the words of george carlin (i'm like 99.9% sure it was him who said it):

"and people call you a conspiracy theorist when you say these men at the top are up to something, imagine that huh... people with money and power, getting together and having a plan...ya what an unreasonable thought, well I guess I'm a fuckin conspiracy theorist then."

 

I think the idea isn't to to make firm claims like the op without providing sufficient evidence.  It could be true, but like we always say, without sufficient evidence, its just one of infinite possible things we haven't disproven yet so no good reason to put all your eggs in that basket.  op, you might want to lay off making so many bold truth claims without providing sufficient support evidence other that saying things like "common people, wake up their all out to get us man," and such unconvincing ways of persuading us to believe.   Its kind of like the rational position on aliens, most here and many around the world believe in not only the likelyhood of alien life, but even the innevitablity of it.  But that doesn't mean we believe billy from down the streat was abducted by reptile aliens from planet nititu like he says he was...  Or that grey aliens certainly exist because we have some to a common vision of them. You feel me op?

 


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Greatest I am

Vastet wrote:
Greatest I am wrote:
It becomes global when all countries are doing the same and they are.
Except they aren't. No two countries on this planet share the exact same goals, nor the methods to obtain those goals. If there was an overreaching common strategy, I'd have seen it by now. As would those few who are smarter than myself.
Greatest I am wrote:
It is far from stupidity.
I disagree. If there is a global conspiracy, then the conspirators are some of the dumbest people to ever draw breath. .

 

As I stated in the O P, there is no conspiracy. It is naturel in our economic system.

 

Regards

DL


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:I don't know

Luminon wrote:

I don't know about Illuminati, but there are many powerful semi-private groups that should not exist. If there are Illuminati, I don't know what else they want if they already sit in these institutions.

G8, Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Comission, Club of Rome and so on. They could have done what United Nations suggested, things like meeting MDGs or erradicating malaria forever. But they didn't and didn't even try. There are some decent people attending some of these groups, but I believe the groups and institutions that do nothing good should be dissolved or have their records and accounts checked by some international authority. 

With exception of United Nations, I believe it is a weak but relatively innocent and potentially useful governing body, not a beginning of sinister New World Order. Even if UN couldn't do its job, we'd need something pretty much like it, only with USA having no right of veto Smiling

 

I agree that the U. N. needs to change it's veto system.

 

Regards

DL

 


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote: I

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:

 

I think the idea isn't to to make firm claims like the op without providing sufficient evidence. 

 

There is no such thing as sufficient evidence to show that something does not exist.

 

Regards

DL


Sinphanius
Sinphanius's picture
Posts: 284
Joined: 2008-06-12
User is offlineOffline
Don't Look Left, there's nothing to see there...

@Kapkao:

Idiocy, Pure Idiocy.  There is no such conspiracy.  Trust me, I know...

Bloody Purists...

When you say it like that you make it sound so Sinister...


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3388
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
uh-huh.  well, regardless

uh-huh.  well, regardless of whether or not they play dress-up or engage in stupid rituals, we always just called them the bourgeoisie.

they can be cured by agitation, organization, and a generous helping of bullets.

 

 

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10687
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Greatest I am wrote:Vastet

Greatest I am wrote:

Vastet wrote:
Greatest I am wrote:
It becomes global when all countries are doing the same and they are.
Except they aren't. No two countries on this planet share the exact same goals, nor the methods to obtain those goals. If there was an overreaching common strategy, I'd have seen it by now. As would those few who are smarter than myself.
Greatest I am wrote:
It is far from stupidity.
I disagree. If there is a global conspiracy, then the conspirators are some of the dumbest people to ever draw breath. .

 

As I stated in the O P, there is no conspiracy. It is naturel in our economic system.

 

Regards

DL

And as I pointed out, the OP doesn't work because too many organisations work at cross purposes.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:uh-huh.  well,

iwbiek wrote:

uh-huh.  well, regardless of whether or not they play dress-up or engage in stupid rituals, we always just called them the bourgeoisie.

they can be cured by agitation, organization, and a generous helping of bullets.

 

 

 

 

Yes, and be quickly replaced by the next batch We know who has the wealth and power so violence is not required of desired.

Do try to add maturity to your thinking.

Regards
DL


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Greatest I am

Vastet wrote:
Greatest I am wrote:

Vastet wrote:
Greatest I am wrote:
It becomes global when all countries are doing the same and they are.
Except they aren't. No two countries on this planet share the exact same goals, nor the methods to obtain those goals. If there was an overreaching common strategy, I'd have seen it by now. As would those few who are smarter than myself.
Greatest I am wrote:
It is far from stupidity.
I disagree. If there is a global conspiracy, then the conspirators are some of the dumbest people to ever draw breath. .

 

As I stated in the O P, there is no conspiracy. It is naturel in our economic system.

 

Regards

DL

And as I pointed out, the OP doesn't work because too many organisations work at cross purposes.

Hint. U. N. and G20 for starters.
Be some countries at cross purposes or not, the vast majority will have to get on board if the bulk of the world get’s in.

Regards
DL


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10687
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Neither of those

Neither of those organisations have the kind of power talked about here.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Luminon
SuperfanTheist
Luminon's picture
Posts: 2455
Joined: 2008-02-17
User is offlineOffline
Kapkao wrote:The Illuminati

Kapkao wrote:

The Illuminati is a fragmented (and mostly inert) organization and creator of the Aquinas Protocol, developed by Bob Page. They also helped in creating the Gray Death as well the Gray Death vaccine.

Support Bob Page! His universal constructors at Area 51 will nanotechnically produce tons of tasty karkians and greasels for our tables and solve the global hunger problem. All the restaurants at Wan Chai district in Hong Kong already work on the transgenics cooking recipes.

Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:  I

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:

  I did a hole 2-3 week binge research session on the Illuminate a few years back when I was made aware of a freemasons lodge near bye and was always curious what the heck they were all about.

Their 'mission statement', more or less.. isn't "new world order" or shapeshifting, spacefaring reptile-oriented.


The "Free Masons" basic objective is right there in their organization's name: they seek to build freedom.

It's worth pointing out that many of our "founding farthers" were Masons or later joined the masons after the Revolutionary War.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Luminon wrote:Kapkao

Luminon wrote:

Kapkao wrote:

The Illuminati is a fragmented (and mostly inert) organization and creator of the Aquinas Protocol, developed by Bob Page. They also helped in creating the Gray Death as well the Gray Death vaccine.

Support Bob Page! His universal constructors at Area 51 will nanotechnically produce tons of tasty karkians and greasels for our tables and solve the global hunger problem. All the restaurants at Wan Chai district in Hong Kong already work on the transgenics cooking recipes.

Good one, Lum

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3388
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Greatest I am wrote:Do try

Greatest I am wrote:
Do try to add complacency to your thinking. Regards DL

fixed

 


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:Greatest I am

iwbiek wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:
Do try to add complacency to your thinking. Regards DL

fixed

 

 

I never thought I'd see you two go have at each other...

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


NoMoreCrazyPeople
atheistSuperfan
NoMoreCrazyPeople's picture
Posts: 969
Joined: 2009-10-14
User is offlineOffline
Kapkao

Kapkao wrote:

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:

  I did a hole 2-3 week binge research session on the Illuminate a few years back when I was made aware of a freemasons lodge near bye and was always curious what the heck they were all about.

Their 'mission statement', more or less.. isn't "new world order" or shapeshifting, spacefaring reptile-oriented.


 

The "Free Masons" basic objective is right there in their organization's name: they seek to build freedom.

It's worth pointing out that many of our "founding farthers" were Masons or later joined the masons after the Revolutionary War.

Y a actually I was pretty surprised to find out in general, the free masons seem well intentioned, a group of "bretherin" who gather and support in eachother in their lives and encourage eachtother to live honorable lives...something like that they say.  I had a 30 minute conversation with one of the head members of the lodge near by, he came off very nice and proud to represent the group.  He did however freely admit in few words that some of the rituals and initiation process' traditional to freemasonry are very old and some might seem very odd to outsiders.  I knew the simpsons comedic version "the stone cutters" was a pardody of rumored freemason activities.  I replied with: "something like swords, silver goblets, chants..." with a chuckle,  he said "haha...well,you'd have to come see..."  I was very curious back then, it turns out their are like 20 mlllion or so freemasons around the world and everyone of us knows 1 or 2 and have no idea.  I was entertaining the idea of checking it out just for fun but the one hanger that I couldn't get past was that the number 1 game ender requirement to be a freemason is that you accept and state openly that a higher power and "god" of some form exists, and that I couldn't do even for the sake of curious investigation into the group.

Freemasons obviously have a big part in the history of the west, and europe before it.  They are still, a suspiciously strange group, one I would imagine at the top levels has many juicy secrets.  I would guess of the 20 million freemasons today, 19.99999999... million of them are restricted from information held for the more influencial and connected members.  

But, who knows, you'd have to go for a meeting yourself, I never made it to one...lol.  The rule is to get into one you have to be invited, so you have to approach an active mason, and if you do it is their duty to open the door once asked. 

   


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Sinphanius

Sinphanius wrote:

@Kapkao:

Idiocy, Pure Idiocy.  There is no such conspiracy.  Trust me, I know...

Bloody Purists...

As I was saying, "The Illuminati is a fragmented (and mostly inert) organization".

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3388
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Kapkao wrote:iwbiek

Kapkao wrote:

iwbiek wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:
Do try to add complacency to your thinking. Regards DL

fixed

 

 

I never thought I'd see you two go have at each other...

you think about me way too much.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:Kapkao

iwbiek wrote:

Kapkao wrote:

iwbiek wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:
Do try to add complacency to your thinking. Regards DL

fixed

I never thought I'd see you two go have at each other...

you think about me way too much.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)