Group Think

Hi Richard,

My pursuit of the truth has and always will be a very personal one and so I don't care very much if my ideas and thoughts are in disagreement with seemingly like minded folk. I do enjoy fresh perspectives and always open to challenging my own beliefs as necessary however I have not found any need to drastically change my current worldview. I do not concern myself too much with gatekeepers as their tactics soon reveal themselves over time and I still find value in what they have to say.

Let me explain why:

Within the alternative media scene, there is tremendous controlled opposition and what I have learned about these outfits is that they will only reveal that which someone else has already exposed before them. The cat was already out of the bag and so these gatekeepers use damage control and deflection to confuse those who would otherwise be closer to the truth. This is what the role of a gatekeeper is; to limit discussion along acceptable boundaries as espoused by some guru or celebrity. People like Alex Jones do a great disservice to the alternative media scene by steering the audience away from the "meat". I discovered this with Alex Jones by his unwillingness to discuss Dimitri Khalezov's testimony on 911 after repeated requests by his viewers to do so. He will not touch it and for good reason. In other words, when Alex Jones exerts great effort to avoid some topic, I tend to research that topic even more as he is hiding something of substance. The incredible amount of censorship around Dimitri's work and the degree of vitriol used to attack him makes his story that much more compelling to me.

Usually you will find those who reveal the "good stuff" and are given a large and open stage to talk about it are careful to package it up with other nonsense as to discredit it all. This is the tactic of guilt by association or throwing the baby out with the bath water. This is why I do not get caught up with guru worship but listen to everyone and everything and allow my critically thinking brain to filter out what is useless and research further to either accept or discard the rest. Being truly open minded means you listen to everyone and follow no one.

Speaking now about corrupt academics and intellectuals, there are not too many more dangerous than Noam Chomsky. This fraud has corrupted the minds of far too many so-called intellectuals and for good reason; that is his job. He is tasked with leading his flock away from so-called conspiracy theory where truth really resides. As a gatekeeper, he is no different than Alex Jones but serves up his brand of propaganda to a different type of audience. A far more influential class of sheep.

He has created a legion of globalist apologetic dunces who hang on to his every word and fail to see what his role truly is. Many might feel conflicted with Chomsky's unwillingness to embrace 911 truth or his lack of interest around the Kennedy assassination or any type of conspiratorial views of history. His utter contempt for people like Ron Paul is another red flag for me because Ron Paul's message does resonate with so many in the Chomsky camp but they are conditioned to steer clear from anything to do with Ron Paul.

I am sure followers of Noam Chomsky sometimes have a hard time reconciling their feelings because they fail to confront their cognitive dissonance. The blind adoration of the man is truly sickening. The man is dangerous because of what he selectively leaves out of his writing and commentary. You need to dig deeper and reading Chomsky alone will never get you there.

Chomsky's job is simple: To discredit and demonize the United States by placing blame on the world's problems at the feet of this abstract and faceless entity. This is by design to justify the adoption of one world government and it also explains why he often legitimizes globalist agencies such as the UN and World Court. His only condemnation of institutions such as the UN is that it is corrupted by nation states. If you are unable to pick up such nuances, you will be unable to understand Chomsky.

What Chomsky doesn't do is expose the men behind the curtain who truly run the various nation states through their various puppets and secret society networks. If you want to learn who the true power brokers are, you must examine the inner workings of the B'nai Brith lodge, the most influential and powerful of all mason lodges among the many that exist today along with the Hasidic Chabad Lubavitchers who secretly push the occult agenda in various ways to pollute the minds of Jew and Gentile alike. I will have more posts in the future with regards to the Zohar, Kabbalah and how Jewish mysticism is behind much of the decay we now see in society and culture.

Chomskites are the most indoctrinated, feeble minded folks I know because they are conditioned to never venture outside the boundaries set forth by their great messiah lest they be shunned and ridiculed. It is a very effective tactic and keeps the sheep in line. Alex Jones shares a similar modus operandi albeit with a different brand of sheep.

The truth is there, but you have to be prepared to break ranks with everyone and everything and develop strong critical thinking skills. Listen to everyone, follow no one.

Thanks for your suggestions about turning my previous comment into a post (I didn't know there was a difference between "comments" and "posts") but I will just continue to write my thoughts in this Group Think thread. For me, the truth is not a popularity contest and so I may write things that directly contradict the prevailing views of most people in the truth movement but I will stick to my guns and don't care how unpopular my views are. I am not politically correct and will call them as I see them.

I hope the members will enjoy this little thread of mine and I look forward to reading different perspectives from other members as well

Kind regards
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Hi Collectivist,

Thanks for providing your perspectives, some of which I share, Chomsky generally (apparently except for Paul, but for likely different reasons yet? See below) for instance, and others not so much. Not all 3 of us here, as blog posters, agree on everything, which is perfectly fine.

I used to hold most all of your perspectives, but I now think there are better ways to look at them. This whole effort is the result of our efforts to reconcile the many apparent contradictions that are always presented to us. As such, I respectfully think that you are still harboring some Romantic notions that you, and many others would be better off discarding.

I don't hope to change your mind in one sitting, but let's start with some fuel for the fire:

As a former and early (L)ibertarian, I had considered Ron Paul a hero like you. Since that time my perceptions of what all that was about, and the Tea Party (and its namesake event), has been transformed by more information. Context is everything indeed. I had even been willing to grant Paul a pass on his racist newsletter debacle as the typical laziness of many in letting others do or say things in their name. But the bigger problem is understanding Paul and Libertarianism in light of both the Koch Brothers influence and in light of the Southern Strategy of the Republican Party, the once party of Lincoln.

Here you should focus on the meaning of the deep Paul political alliance with Mitt Romney as detailed by Webster Tarpley in his Just Too Weird. As you know, Romney is a top Mormon, but not just any Mormon, but a descendant of insiders who went so far as to flee the USA, to Mexico, so as to continue their practice of polygamy (which I don't really give a damn about other than that, as the Mormons practiced it, it was usually not by the free choice of the women). More importantly is the Romney (and Huntsman) family roles in taking the Mormon Oath of Vengeance against the United States of America, their role in the First Civil War (with Utah) and the Mountain Meadows Massacre. Even more important is that given that all religions, and most cults, are political tools of some elite interests, what then was, and is still, the geo-political function of the Mormons within the USA and elsewhere? The symbols on their holy temple (where they claim not to take the Oath of Vengeance anymore) underwear help point out the answer, but it is apparent we'll have to do some discussion about that as well.

In relation to the Paul's and my mention of the Republican Southern Strategy is in relation to the political and ideological remnants of the Old South. And here, we get into what I mean as another dark legacy of Romanticism, and its elitist co-optation of the concept of a pure res publica. In this co-optation, the average man is sucked in and convinced that he too, can become like the gods, and own slaves to do his bidding, etc., etc.. And after all, this is what the Bible says, now that the average man gets to read the words of the divinity. As I discussed in Black Collared Magic, everything is grist for the mill of co-optation.

But why must we (you) take as a given that things weren't being rigged in the 'abstraction' of the United States of America, and from the very colonial beginning no less? Collectivist, the wider facts say otherwise to your, and what was once my Romantic, operating premise. When it was once said that 'America' was an 'experiment' one might pause and ask what one like Bill Clinton might think as an answer to that. Whose experiment and for what purpose?

I'm running out of time for right now, and look forward to continuing this discussion.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Hi Collectivist, I was curious about whether Noam Chomsky is linked to B'nai Brith, Lubavitchers, Kabbalah and so forth. When these sorts of questions come up, these days the first place I go is "Jew or Not Jew dot com". Here's what they say about Chomsky:

"By now Jews in the US are the most privileged and influential part of the population. You find occasional instances of anti-semitism but they are marginal." — Noam Chomsky

Hooray! We wouldn't have thought so, but this is Noam Chomsky! The father of modern linguistics! One of the most cited academics! Recently named the top living intellectual!

So let's invite everyone from across our Christian nation, Jew and gentile, build a campfire and sing kumbaya. It's over! After thousands of years, anti-semitism is over! Kumbaya, my lord, kumbaya...

"Anti-semitism is no longer a problem. It's raised, but it's raised because privileged people want to make sure they have total control, not just 98% control." — Noam Chomsky

Oh. Hmmmm. Really? Oh. Hmmmm.

Maybe anti-semitism is not over after all. We have a shining example right here.

Verdict: Sadly, a Jew.​

In other words: if he's B'nai Brith, he's a deep cover double agent, eh? And for Alex Jones, they don't even have an entry!
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Collectivist, or not,

I am usually the cynical one, but one can take Jerry's reply as an indicator that we've been down this road a few times. So take Jew or not Jew, dot com, for what it is, or is not, worth. In any case, if you have read and paid attention to my first two posts, you should be strongly getting the idea that I (and Jerry at least) believe the whole wider Abramic issue, where you claim to be heading into the vortex, is a big identity scam. One that ironically operates much like the Biblical shibboleth.

And further more, the player that has benefited more from this identity scam in the last two thousand years is the Roman Church and its elite sponsors, including its faux opposition, the British elites. And it is one underlying premise of the Flavian Roman Origin theory that the Romans, who were past masters of 'conquer and divide' took the remaining Pharisaic Jews under their wings and incorporated them profitably under the new Christian system. The Christian theology of which is that these Jews are necessary to the system as the buffer class foils, or scapegoats, to protect the elites from the masses. Or maybe one might cynically say to 'shield the elites'. Say with a Red Shield, if you know what I mean.

As such, one must argue, like John Kaminski, that yes, we're correct, but those evil bastards have bit the noble hand that fed them. Oh, woe for the days of monarchical feudalism, where everyone happily knew their place. The problem is, you're going to be finding the Hidden Hand everywhere you look, including places that you don't want to find it. And the Kabbalah, and its widespread roots.

As for a better view of American history, as I briefly mentioned, I suggest that you look up Saussy's Rulers of Evil, which you can find online, as it costs north of $60 now. But with even more reading you'll figure out that the USA, and the rest of the world is just a covert and co-opted playground for the gentil descendants of the Romanized Euro-elites, and yes, some of their hofjuden sheepdogs. In their eyes, if you are not gentil, then you are just another sheep to be sheared: white, black, or otherwise.

The people who became known as the Eastern Liberal Establishment are the descendants of the Loyalists, who we didn't send back to England. Why do you think that was? But, you like so many others want to believe that there was some golden Camelot that we can go back to. Never was, Never, Never. Every important event in American history has these issues, not just 9/11, yet most Truthers are willing to cherry pick and say, let's just role back the clock. Some say let's just do the typical Catholic BS and blame the Jews, like the Church taught us to, even though they claim otherwise now.
 
First of all, as an agnostic, perhaps slightly on the theist side, I am against all forms idol worship; in this realm or elsewhere and so I do not worship Ron Paul, the fathers of the constitution or Jesus Christ. Although I am in strong opposition to ALL popular movements such as the tea party movement and occupy wall street, I do agree with some of their points. I am a strong proponent of family values which just so happens to coincide with many Christian values and the views of certain tea party members however I find it quite offensive to be lumped in with one group or another so please refrain from labeling me a disciple of Ron Paul, Christian or Libertarian. Understand that I do not vote as doing so would be an admission of accepted legitimacy to a corrupt system so how can I be a Libertarian? The beast must be starved if the intent is to kill it so my own best defense is to not participate in these fabricated movements. Using labels are just clever tools created by elitists to divide and conquer people.

Seekers of the truth must realize that history is constantly being revised and hidden by tyrants so to regurgitate the work of celebrated academics is yet another example of idol worship. Chances are, if the material is readily available, it has already been co-opted. That is not to say these works should be ignored but instead of regurgitating the interpretations found in a few books, try thinking for yourself for a change and resist the urge by others to define who you are. Dogma is the enemy of truth.

The knee-jerk reaction to my last post clearly demonstrates a lack of understanding of my position with regards to Zionism, Jews and the occult, especially with the remarks about Chomsky being a double agent or the coy remark about Rothchild, if you know what I mean. Anyway, I hope to better articulate this position with more posts in the future however I will say that the goal of the Zionist movement, in my view, is to destroy not only Christianity, but Islam and especially Judaism for the purpose of bringing about something far darker. I have tried many times to explain this position to others but unfortunately it always comes back to the tired reactionary themes of antisemitism or the Jesuit angle. Both are a waste of my time and serve to deflect investigation from my own pursuit of the truth.

I am out of time here but will post more in the near future ...
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Hello Collectivist: I apologize -- I did read too quickly and misunderstand your position about Chomsky. I agree that he is playing a gatekeeper function, and I wonder if you also would agree that his public personae seems to be what is sometimes derided as "self-hating Jew" rather than any classic type of Zionist? That's all I was trying to say, and now that I re-read your words, I realize that you didn't say anything to the contrary.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Hi Collectivist,

Yes, you're correct that we both had a knee jerk response to your prior reply. Over the years I, at least, am used to having my antenna raised by certain things, perhaps sometimes unfairly. In this regard perhaps it was your ironic choice of pseudonym, followed by what appeared to me as the typical attempts to drag me (or us) down a hole I don't want to be in. As such and per your last reply, I'm looking forward to further elaborations on your take.

It may turn out that we can reconcile our positions, in which you indicate that your atypical view is yet different than mine and Jerry's atypical one.

Also, thanks for providing the basis for your ideology. We have much agreement there. I have no problems with the vast majority of Christian, Judiac, or Muslim sheep, other than that they are enablers of the other class of people that run their institutions. And I don't vote for the exact same reason as you.
 
The Hegelian dialectic has been employed for centuries for directing and controlling societies well before the time of Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. There is ample material on the internet as to its use throughout history, its proponents and the philosophy behind it. The triad of thesis, antithesis and synthesis, which is often used to describe the Hegelian dialectic, is an effective mechanism for reconciling ideas or beliefs that appear to oppose one another.

This is how Wikipedia describes it:

The thesis is an intellectual proposition.
The antithesis is simply the negation of the thesis, a reaction to the proposition.
The synthesis solves the conflict between the thesis and antithesis by reconciling their common truths and forming a new thesis, starting the process over.

This approach is perfectly valid for addressing the mental stress experienced when holding two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at the same time. How we decide to confront cognitive dissonance is another matter. As I have mentioned before, I resist all forms of idol worship and refuse to subscribe whole cloth to any ideology even as I may agree with many of the positions which would appear to be diametrically opposed. The purpose of these ideologies is to neatly divide and conquer entire groups of people who have been swindled into taking a side. To the elitists, it matters not which side is chosen just as long as the groups, sufficient in size, have been properly defined and led by key facilitators. This is why idol worship is a critical tool of the ruling class; any dissent or opposition to their agenda is carefully controlled by a select few who wittingly or unwittingly often lead their flock head long into danger rather than salvation. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and it is often led by false prophets who outwardly come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

For me, the solution is simple: Listen to everyone, follow no one. Separate the message from the man. Develop strong critical thinking skills and think for yourself.

I will close this post with a couple of quotes that demonstrate my point. In future posts I hope to give some concrete examples of how this dialectic is being used to usher in one world government and spirituality ...

Matthew 7:13-14, "Enter through the narrow gate, for wide is the gate that leads to destruction, and many are those who enter through it. But the gate is narrow and the way is strait that leads to life, and few are those who find it."

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I- I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference. - Robert Frost
 
The United States is an occupied nation. It has been so for quite some time. Those who occupy her have done so through secrecy and control of its political leadership. These rulers have utter contempt for traditional American values and have done everything in their power to morally and spiritually corrupt the nation from the top down.

She is no longer a nation of free men but rather a prostituted land whose controllers deceive patriots into fighting their globalist wars for them. The Globalists use these useful idiots to blindly invade nation after nation in the false belief they are fighting in defense of their country. The false flags that have precipitated all the wars in the last hundred years have been banker wars who now wish to redefine the narrative as they move closer and closer to one world governance.

The plan from the onset was to use the military might of the United States to undermine the sovereignty of lesser nations through force until such time as the great Goliath itself is reined into a one world governing body. Public opinion has always been carefully managed by the facilitators of this great conspiracy to these ends and, until very recently, they have worked to paint the actions of the United States and other western powers as justified and necessary to combat tyranny abroad.

This next phase demands that public opinion turn against the United States in favour of a greater global authority. The new narrative being that it is incumbent on us all to ensure the survival of this planet by bringing all world conflict to an end by trusting some benevolent global body to govern us all. This is the deception behind the Hegelian dialectic, a framework for guiding our thoughts and actions into conflicts that lead us to accepting a predetermined solution.

This push towards compromising our national identity will of course create a great conflict among those who hold strong nationalist views and it will create a great deal of tension and division.

Tension, created by diversity, is essential to the dialectic process. It energizes members and -- when manipulated by well-trained facilitators -- produces synergy. You can't guide people toward synthesis (compromise) unless there are opposing views -- both "thesis and antithesis." That's why the consensus process must include all these elements: a diverse group dialoguing to consensus over a social issue led by a trained facilitator toward a pre-planned outcome.

I want to provide a striking example of this concept in action, listen to this interview in its entirety and see if you can pick up this facilitator's nuanced support for globalism as an alternative to militarism by learning “the art of compromise.” The reporter points out Australia, under his leadership, took part in the slaughter of East Timor but, like Chomsky, blames everything on American exceptionalism. This is the evidence that those who bring about world conflict are the same ones providing the solution as described by the Hegelian dialectic. Too many sheep in wolves clothing to stomach I know but these videos are quite instructive in how the game is played.

 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
The Hegelian dialectic has been employed for centuries for directing and controlling societies well before the time of Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. There is ample material on the internet as to its use throughout history, its proponents and the philosophy behind it. The triad of thesis, antithesis and synthesis, which is often used to describe the Hegelian dialectic, is an effective mechanism for reconciling ideas or beliefs that appear to oppose one another.

This is how Wikipedia describes it:

The thesis is an intellectual proposition.
The antithesis is simply the negation of the thesis, a reaction to the proposition.
The synthesis solves the conflict between the thesis and antithesis by reconciling their common truths and forming a new thesis, starting the process over.

This approach is perfectly valid for addressing the mental stress experienced when holding two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at the same time. How we decide to confront cognitive dissonance is another matter. As I have mentioned before, I resist all forms of idol worship and refuse to subscribe whole cloth to any ideology even as I may agree with many of the positions which would appear to be diametrically opposed. The purpose of these ideologies is to neatly divide and conquer entire groups of people who have been swindled into taking a side. To the elitists, it matters not which side is chosen just as long as the groups, sufficient in size, have been properly defined and led by key facilitators. This is why idol worship is a critical tool of the ruling class; any dissent or opposition to their agenda is carefully controlled by a select few who wittingly or unwittingly often lead their flock head long into danger rather than salvation. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and it is often led by false prophets who outwardly come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

For me, the solution is simple: Listen to everyone, follow no one. Separate the message from the man. Develop strong critical thinking skills and think for yourself.

I will close this post with a couple of quotes that demonstrate my point. In future posts I hope to give some concrete examples of how this dialectic is being used to usher in one world government and spirituality ...

Matthew 7:13-14, "Enter through the narrow gate, for wide is the gate that leads to destruction, and many are those who enter through it. But the gate is narrow and the way is strait that leads to life, and few are those who find it."

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I- I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference. - Robert Frost
Hi Collectivist,

Yes, Hegel's is a formal expression of the much older concept as understood by the Romans and others. Similar perhaps, if not identical situation, as for Machiavelli with The Prince? Of course, such as the principle of Yin and Yang encompasses natural dialectics, and which expression of encourages a seeking of 'balance', which your Matthew verse might imply as well. And of course, human contrived dialectic constructs might include both a false thesis and a false antithesis, correct?

Do you think that Jesus meant this message exclusively for his esoteric inner circle, or rather for wider humanity? This given his distemper for Greek pigs (or maybe it was just the sows?).

So, from what you say above, I am anxious to hear you elaborate what your antithetical and agnostic vision(s) of one world government and spirituality is/are. But, as a seemingly logical extension of your expressions of American Exceptionalism (as in your next comment in this thread) and similar prior expressions, would you be in favor of expanding American statehood to the whole Earth and thus making it all exceptional? If that happened, hypothetically, would that be a one world government under your construction, or would the fact that there would still be different states be sufficient? Or would we further need to roll back Lincoln's federalism in favor of the confederation?

BTW, I am going to urge Jerry to rename our byline to: "Beyond the Next New World Order". But you (or Joe even) might have an even better one?

Also, you should start new threads as your subsequent posting subject / topic shifts. As such, I'll ask Jerry to look at splitting this thread into one or more threads. This will make it easier for readers to navigate.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
The United States is an occupied nation. It has been so for quite some time. Those who occupy her have done so through secrecy and control of its political leadership. These rulers have utter contempt for traditional American values and have done everything in their power to morally and spiritually corrupt the nation from the top down.

She is no longer a nation of free men but rather a prostituted land whose controllers deceive patriots into fighting their globalist wars for them. The Globalists use these useful idiots to blindly invade nation after nation in the false belief they are fighting in defense of their country. The false flags that have precipitated all the wars in the last hundred years have been banker wars who now wish to redefine the narrative as they move closer and closer to one world governance.

The plan from the onset was to use the military might of the United States to undermine the sovereignty of lesser nations through force until such time as the great Goliath itself is reined into a one world governing body. Public opinion has always been carefully managed by the facilitators of this great conspiracy to these ends and, until very recently, they have worked to paint the actions of the United States and other western powers as justified and necessary to combat tyranny abroad.

This next phase demands that public opinion turn against the United States in favour of a greater global authority. The new narrative being that it is incumbent on us all to ensure the survival of this planet by bringing all world conflict to an end by trusting some benevolent global body to govern us all. This is the deception behind the Hegelian dialectic, a framework for guiding our thoughts and actions into conflicts that lead us to accepting a predetermined solution.

This push towards compromising our national identity will of course create a great conflict among those who hold strong nationalist views and it will create a great deal of tension and division.
...
Hi Collectivist,

If I still accepted your wider framing of the issue, as I once did, I would agree with your analysis 100%. However, I still agree with you that the 'next phase' of global 'harmonization' is to trash the USA, and all others that are cowed into going along. In my opinion this is a replay of what happened with Napoleon and Hitler before, all with the desired outcomes for the Hidden Hand.

But, as I tried to explain to you previously, the foundational history of the USA is not the fairy tale that we are taught. Through hundreds of years of idiotic, false dialectic religious wars (one of which I briefly discussed in Black Collared Magic), the former serfs and gentry of Europe were gleeful to come to America and Providentially 'take' land (and much more) from the barbaric Red Man (sounds Satanic to me) granted to them by the Divine Right of the King(s).

But for the collaboration of Freemasons (like Hellfire Franklin), your now useless (perhaps from over illumination?) Jesuits, and Lords Baltimore and Bute's (Stewart) influence over George III (Hanover again), we would all still be happy subjects of the Episcopal British Crown, except for the slaves that is. But if the Masonic Boston Tea Party didn't happen then we could not have the latest Hegelian stage presented to us now.

I know that you are going to tell me I am wrong here, but this time, I would prefer an elaboration of why that is, beyond your previous summary dismissal. Surely you have a underlying historical and non-platitudinal basis for this Exceptionalist Thesis that is coherently detailed, and also in line with your agnosticism. In other words, why should I believe you that this thesis, as you present it is a true one? Rather than a false one which the globalist backers of Nike and Christ 'Victorious' are using as a subtle foil?

'There is no better slave than one who honestly thinks he is free.' - Goethe paraphrased​

For what it is worth, I believe you will find a better ally, than Jerry or I, for your position with Joe Atwill, and hopefully we can draw him into the discussion.
 
Hi Richard,

It is my opinion that the Roman Catholic church is no longer a dominant power. The creation of the second Vatican council to me is a pretty strong signal that the institution has been taken over. It is likely Freemasonry too has changed. Banking families are most likely the dominant power today however I am open to new ideas. Why do you believe Jesuit control is still in intact?
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
The church itself is just a corporate shell for its human sponsors to hide behind, this is the way it has been from the beginning. As such, it has no brain or Hokey Spirit but its Curia's Collective mind, which includes their respective families' interests. Here I will invoke the analysis which I made in Black Collared Magic, to wit, that this is functionally a form of disguised Communism (not socialism), where an elite group asserts all effective ownership through divine or other means and as manifested in feudalism. This is also the British Church of England system, which was a fake reformation, as controlled opposition.

The church sponsors were, and are, its elite families, Biblically known as the Predestined Elect (Calvin was a scam as well - the dialectic twin of Loyola, both attendees at the Sorbonne). For instance, the Medici were a banking family, yet you are claiming now, like Malachi Martin and others, that this church only now has been taken over by outsiders. This claim is usually made with that the Masonic Illuminati has done this evil deed.

By the way, as this site's name refers to the Flavians, the Flavians were a banking family, in what became Switzerland no less. To digress profitably, and not so incidentally, it was from Switzerland that the money came to the USA for the Louisiana Purchase, via Albert Gallatin's family 'Savoy' (Sabine - Roman elites) banking ties. Gallatin came here immediately after the Revolutionary War because he was overwhelmed by American Exceptionalism, whereby he became a land speculator and political manipulator in western PA. He then bailed George Washington out from going into bankruptcy, before becoming Sec Treasury for 3 Presidents.

The Church, and most all of its 'schismatic branches' broadly speaking, consists of an outer exoteric body for the sake of the hoi polloi sheep and bizarre 'true believers' and an inner church for the elites. From this inner church is manifested the dark metaphoric side of 'Satan', via numerous vehicles such as the numerous variants of Masonry, from which it scares the beJesus out of the paranoiacs that want their security and faux freedom. Satan, is a necessary and integral component of the 'Judeo-Christian' theological schema. One cannot rationally complain about Satan without dissing God/Yahweh, or any of God's other fallen sons and brothers as well. And if you believe in Jesus, then you are also a Satanist. It's all metaphorical BS in any case.

As such, Masonry is just a maize of ever changing shells, as per the covert needs of the day, and includes your Lubavitchers. The Pope (the AnteChrist) says to stay away from secret societies, so the Protestants, who think they have freed themselves from Satan, all rush to join Masonry. Sadly hilarious.

You cannot be more wrong about Vatican II. It's purpose was to bring the fake schisms back into the fold, functionally if not otherwise. The Anglican Church of England has been in several serious talks about doing just that, only having difficultly over women priests, celibacy, and homosexuality issues. Big deal, the important aspects are its functionality over geo-politics, aka 'real estate'.

Vatican II has been especially effective in eviscerating the so-called 'liberal' denominational Protestant churches that were the 'visible' backbone of the WASP culture and power structure. Go to such a church on Sunday today, if you can still find one, and you'll see mostly a bunch of old people, who rent their church out to other congregations more in line with the VII ecumenical zeitgeist.

The evangelicals and Pentecostals all serve their political sheepdog functions within the same system. It is they who whip up the nationalistic political fervor in the Red States and regions that mirror the Zealots and Sicarii of Palestine. All for the same general purpose, to be the bloody fuel and grist for the Jesuit's Futurist replay of the End Times, hence the 'Next' New World Order.

Ironic that the evangelicals, wanting a return to Catholicism's hokey spiritual 'warmth' in the early 1800's, initially took the course of avoiding temporal politics like the plague. Saying their reward was in the next realm. Boy have things changed with the likes of Reverend Huck a Shuck singing Cat Scratch Fever with Mr. Wang Dang Doodle and the Mama Grizzly. Who has sold their souls to the Devil?

The USA was designed to be the visible vanguard shield of the shadow Roman Empire. Its military and government is modeled on that of Rome's, functionaly and appearancewise. The architecture of governance is Roman and we have the two fasces in the House of Representatives. Despite the rhetorical denials of loving 'peace', real history proves that we have an agenda that supports the land acquisition and usage elites, whether the old patrician blood or mixed with the new equites. What is the root of the word 'patriot'?

I believe in having constant Fidelity to the unvarnished and unconstrained Truth, not in Always unknowing Faith constrained by Man's religion or conceited confirmation bias. That's what Semper Fi should mean, but in English it renders as Always Faithful. Fool them once shame on them, fool them a dozen times and now you get 22 suicides a day.

Unfortunately, with all the distractions lately, I will need to recover a link to what a descendant of the Hapsburgs (an official of the EU) recently stated about the function of the EU today, as a reincarnate manifestation of the Holy Roman Empire. Old money works quietly and dies hard. But what would he know, he's obviously a tool of the Lubavitchers. No, its all part of the same system, there was nothing new in the Old Testament, it was all cribbed from earlier sources, except for the 'historical' enforcement of the new monotheistic system of 'convert or die', that is.

When so many tell me to ignore the obvious, then I do indeed take the path less traveled.

So if the Roman Church is dead, then it was all for nothing? Really? A New Age simply means that the old age has ended, or is in the process. But don't fear the Money Men, in banks or otherwise, will provide a New Boss. It will still need its renamed version of the Jesuits, operating ever quietly behind the scenes, inciting others to action with Guy Fawkes masks and such. Ever wonder why the various Roman orders structurally mimicked the older pagan religious orders?
 
I read your article Black Collared Magic last night. I can see where you are coming from with regards to the Jesuits however I feel your analysis is quite dated. Power changes hands from time to time and I doubt you will agree with me that this century was one where transition of power occurred. Your apparent bias, cemented by years of focused study of the Jesuits and Catholic Church, while impressive, unfortunately diverts your attention away from what truly is going on today and who the main actors are. Given your views, I simply do not see how they accurately reflect current events. I would be fascinated to hear your take on how you see things playing out in the coming months and years as this is what I try to do myself. Perhaps after some time we can compare notes and see how the grand chess game plays out.

You are obviously a voracious reader and quite intelligent and in fact I agree with quite a lot of your points, however what interests me most is what all of this means within the context of the world we live in today. These are terribly dangerous times and I do my best to make sense of it all so that I can navigate the dangerous waters ahead.

I hope you do not take this post negatively as my intent was simply to describe my areas of respectful disagreement. I find your views quite interesting and I would really like to hear your take on what is happening in Putin's Russia. I am very worried about his close ties with the Chabad Lubavitch in Russia and that spiritual orthodox priest who shadows him everywhere he goes. Religious mystics and Czars don't have a good track record. That said, I am not yet prepared to accuse him of playing his part in yet another Hegelian dialectic (at least not yet). He has played his cards quite well thus far (perhaps too well if you know what I mean). I am reminded of how fast Hitler rose to power, how loved he was, and how it ended. Perhaps I am naive however I believe Hitler's downfall was a disaster for the Catholic church and a windfall for the Zionists.

Is Putin, like Hitler before him, just another tool of the elite or is he in genuine opposition to them? Thoughts?
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Hi Collectivist,

Like I said, I didn't expect to win you over in one shot. ;)

You are most correct that Hitler was a disaster for the Catholic Church, but only in terms of the common persons and congregants in Europe, who were much more aware of the Church's dealings with Hitler, than Americans and others. You are also correct that power shifts, ... somewhat, and goes with the money, but here I think you might be underestimating the amount of Dark (old silent) Money there still is in the system. And that, in my and some others' view, the Anglo-American-Zionist structure is all part of the Roman system and playbook. 'The more things change the more they stay the same.'

Similar with Hitler and the Nazis having such a dramatic impact was the domestic American impact of the JFK assassination, in combination with Vatican II. The impact here was to just as effectively destroy the old WASP system of complete dominance over the American Catholics. Again I am not including Evangelicals or Pentacostals as part of the WASP system. My point, isn't to focus on the RCC, so much as to point out that the fake schisms (one's for manipulative appearance sake) were suddenly erased except for a few irrelevant diehards.

If Collectivist was going to arrange a New Age Transition based upon the Biblical outline that would motivate a bunch of rabid Red State Zealots to gleefully participate, then I hope you aren't going to tell me that you are going to ignore that the global stage has to be set so as to motivate the desired audience? Let's say that you agree here for the sake of discussion. Then who is setting the stage, and who wrote the script?

http://investmentwatchblog.com/what-do-they-know-why-are-so-many-of-the-super-wealthy-preparing-bug-out-locations/

You might say, but its not a script, its a holy prophecy. I would laugh at this prospect, but if I am wrong then, this is God's plan and we would be best not to complain, ... about anything, including Lubavitchers. Just make some popcorn and melt the butter. But I have different conception of what the 'creator' is and my place in the cosmos, and it doesn't fit with this YHWH entity of the Jews or Christians of any variety. As such, did you read my Peoples of the Flavian Book? You'll see there that there is evidence of an incestuous relationship between the elite Romans and the elite 'Judeans' at least (ignoring Khazars in this aspect). And there is a lot more than what I stated there.

It is all consistent with the theme of Joe's Caesar's Messiah where there is a close relationship between the Flavians (and more actually) and these particular Jews, including the famous Maccabees.

I briefly discuss some of these things in my next post about 'sheepdogs' which will be ready soon. And then there is more to come.

The Hegelian Dialectic system works really good, so why fix something that isn't broke. Jerry and I can trace the system back further than the synthesis of Christ, which is a 'grafting' of the Roman branch onto the Root of Jesse from Isaiah. That Root of Jesse which is predicted to conquer the world, just like the goddess Victory standing astride the 'GLOBE' (not a flat pancake).

As such, I suspect that Putin is part of the playbook as well, but I have wondered about whether he could be a rogue player. I say most likely he is in the Hegel spin cycle. You wont like it, but it has roots from the split in the Eastern and Western Churches.

Check this out for what it is worth: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/02/10/pravda-putin-threatens-to-release-satellite-evidence-of-911/

And then read Jerry's latest post about micronukes.

Keep getting interrupted in my search for the EU quote which is quite cogent to our discussion. Later...
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Hi Rick & Collectivist,

I'm having trouble finding anywhere that Collectivist directly used the term "Exceptionalism" except in reference to the views of an interviewer in a video that he linked, and Collectivist is quite critical of the views expressed by that interviewer. The closest thing I can find to an Exceptionalist statement in anything Collectivist wrote is this:

The United States is an occupied nation. It has been so for quite some time. Those who occupy her have done so through secrecy and control of its political leadership. These rulers have utter contempt for traditional American values and have done everything in their power to morally and spiritually corrupt the nation from the top down.
She is no longer a nation of free men but rather a prostituted land whose controllers deceive patriots into fighting their globalist wars for them. The Globalists use these useful idiots to blindly invade nation after nation in the false belief they are fighting in defense of their country. The false flags that have precipitated all the wars in the last hundred years have been banker wars who now wish to redefine the narrative as they move closer and closer to one world governance.
In other words, if Collectivist believes in any form of American Exceptionalism, he is referring to a long time ago.

I don't believe that America was never really a paradise on Earth or an example that we would hold forward as a perfect Utopia. But at the same time, perhaps we are all in agreement that there's been some sort of downward trend, and that the average person in America used to enjoy more freedom than they do now, that there was more truth and less propaganda in the mass media, and that politicians were less venal and corrupt than they are today? If so, perhaps there's some value in Collectivist's attempt to analyze what might have changed?

Rick: "a majority of mainstream denominational Protestants, at least, both North and South were members of the KKK". Really?
 
Most people forget the United States was once a non-interventionist nation and only through government infiltration has it led to the concept of American exceptionalism. The men who fostered this new identity continue to expand their ranks and so my earlier post was simply to point out that the american identity has changed from what it once was. The interviewee, for example, states it is due to American exceptionalism, embedded within the American DNA. I disagree with that assessment.

That said, there have been successful efforts by the media, academia and governments to change the American identity both abroad and domestically but these efforts have been made at the expense of the original American experiment. George Washington's farewell address (some of which I agree with, some not) gives you an accurate account what the original view of Americanism was and what threatened it. The new Americanism is a perversion of that vision that unfortunately is beginning to stick, while those truly responsible for the decay of the american republic are never held accountable.

For me it comes down to a question of morality. As much as I hate to admit it, the more Christian morals are attacked, the more susceptible we become to replacing it with something entirely different, something far worse. Although my own code of ethics or morality is not in complete agreement with Christianity, there are sufficient areas of agreement which I have arrived at through my own life's experience and investigation to conclude there is something inherently wise about it. The problem with Christianity is the idol worship attached to it and its constant redefinition by the Catholic Church, Evangelicals, Mormons and others with a separate agenda..

Christianity is not the problem we face today, however; Jewish mysticism and the occult, however is far more dangerous.

What I am trying to understand is the morality of those who wish to rule as I believe strongly they are pushing an agenda to force us all into accepting it. The video I presented earlier about the Kabballah is but a glimpse at how society is being conditioned to legitimize the occult not only within the spiritual or religious realm, but within the scientific and philosophical realms as well. I hope to describe this more in another post as it pertains to the growing Lubavitch movement. If it is OK, I would prefer to keep my writing within this Group Think thread please.

By the way, I misread Rick's statement about the JFK assassination but my own assessment of that event remains as-is.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Hi Guys,

Thanks Collectivist for clarifying your position on Exceptionalism. Sigh, we all - including me too often, like to communicate in shorthand and overuse pronouns, and assume that the other party will grok the message. My interpretation of your statement below was that you were defending this concept as in to paraphrase: 'he (the reporter, like Chomsky, blames everything on American Exceptionalism [sic]. This is the evidence that those ...'

The reporter points out Australia, under his leadership, took part in the slaughter of East Timor but, like Chomsky, blames everything on American exceptionalism. This [the blaming - rs] is the evidence that those who bring about world conflict are the same ones providing the solution as described by the Hegelian dialectic. Too many sheep in wolves clothing to stomach I know but these videos are quite instructive in how the game is played.​

As one who hated post-grammatical 'English' in school, I was almost flunked once, so what the hell do I know? In my fucked up head, rattled by billions of unwanted demonic tenants that can not be evicted, I thought you said they were wrong about Exceptionalism. Mia culpa, mia culpa, mia maxima culpa.

I tend today to be very verbose, ever failingly to my chagrin, in the dubious effort to try to avoid being misunderstood. I learned this in my former operative hi-tech tekton days when I was confronted with the need to translate Ringlish (Russian English) into American English as part of the normal conduct of business communications. I suddenly realized just how bad my communications skills were. But at least I knew what the difference between the use of the article 'a' and the article 'the' was. I once had an all day argument with my partner about some critical communication we needed to make, when all of the sudden I realized that the problem was because of his Ringlish in that he thought that 'a' and 'the' were interchangeable. Big problem, and previously I was only worried about Civil War soldiers on Tonka Trucks.

In the same vein, in that general time period I was once working on one of our machines in our customers facility when the owner, an 'old school' engineer of first generation Baltic origin came in the room and asked me how matters were proceeding. When I answered with a common vague expression, I was severely upbraided, and in my mind I thought, "What an asshole!" Turned out to be one of the best lessons in my life.

OK, so now we can take Exceptionalism off the table, and continue to more productively disagree about the rest.

Tension, created by diversity, is essential to the dialectic process. It energizes members and -- when manipulated by well-trained facilitators -- produces synergy. You can't guide people toward synthesis (compromise) unless there are opposing views -- both "thesis and antithesis." That's why the consensus process must include all these elements: a diverse group dialoguing to consensus over a social issue led by a trained facilitator toward a pre-planned outcome.

It is also important to realize that there is another 'organic', so to speak, nature to dialectic process, than either the eternal and primal opposites of all existence or the Machiavellian Wedgie, so to speak, of human contrived opposites. For instance, when an innovation (of whatever sort) arises then it, by default, creates a flux vacuum that must be filled in 'reaction' to the innovation. "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." This also gets one to the Law of Unintended Consequences, and we haven't even begun to get to Lubavitchers yet.

I revisit your 'dialectics' because I think it is sometimes a problem when humans, including me, both react to, perhaps otherwise morally inert innovations and/or react to the reaction to such innovations. Mercantilism, Industrialization, and Capitalism changed the prior environments radically for everyone as if a series of massive Earthquakes under the old feudal 'caste-class' system. For some, the benefits were aplenty and evidence that God looked on them with even more favor, while for 'most' others the rising tide turned the piss-ants into the trickle down piss-ons.

For those who God favored (as always), the Elect, and especially important for those sheep and sheepdogs who excessively aspire to commercially enter the Ivory Halls of the Elect, is the need to contextualize the reaction of the piss-ons in various negative direct or occulted / obscured cultural constructs. Today, you can even buy a title into the peerage, as the system acknowledges the need to both fan the vanity of the aspirants in numerous ways and also build the illusion of upward mobility for all which in the aggregate is not possible under the present mechanisms that encourage disproportionate wealth distribution.

'If you just weren't so xxxx lazy, then you wouldn't need to suck off my or God's tit.' If hard work led closer to the Elect, then I and many others would be there. It might lead there, if you understand and are able to access and apply those other necessary factors. But sometimes, merely getting one's nose fertilized is all that matters. And sometimes, the 'charity' extended from the 'divine' institutions are ironically coming from secular tax dollars via numerous streams. But the system of the current iteration of the Matrix is optimized to heavily favor wealth accumulation via making money with money over that of the 'pay for effort', disproportionate control over land, state lotteries (removing wealth from the lowest strata in aggregate), etc.. Workers are needed, but there is a seemingly bottomless supply and God demands that we make ever more.

As I have come to understand it the elites developed an obscure cultural language of control. They have always known how to do this, so as to help maintain their elect position. This includes 'religion'. This includes terms such as Patriotism, Exceptionalism, Providence, Manifest Destiny, Justification, Ultimate Sacrifice, Hero, etc..

As such, perhaps it might do for you to examine whether or not the specific examples of such obscure or occult language, and such, use is being employed either by the elites (across time as the economic structures morph) against the masses, or vice-versa. The Postmodernists claim that their 'language' vocabulary, and art is nothing but a rebuttal to the obscured language of the elite. Fighting fire with fire, so to speak. They even have terms for such as context inversion, which is a frequent ploy in religious texts, and politics (a nice term for dialects, yes?)

I think that this is your, and Atwill's, burden then. Are we being led, or warned, or both?

As I asserted in Black Collared Magic that the Libertarian mantra that there is 'no Class War' in America is severely delusional, but rather is a great ideal. I think that you are experiencing a similar misperception about such as American Isolationism. It was an ideal expressed by some early on to 'avoid foreign entanglements'. This great sentiment is just that, a great sentiment. The hooks were already in place from the beginning as I said before. If you investigate this further you will see that this is yet another rabbit hole.

And cogently, in the larger picture, there is Lutz's exposure of how Adam Smith's famous Hidden Hand message was radically modified in context via the change of one word, from that of his prior use of the famous expression in his prior lesser known work. Did Smith make the change, or did the Hidden Hand of his editor? One has to read more to understand Smith's prior framework, which Lutz does, to decide what Smith's real nature was, etc..
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Rick: "a majority of mainstream denominational Protestants, at least, both North and South were members of the KKK". Really?
Yes I meant that, but maybe it was only several millions (men of course). I was shocked when I learned it. This happened in the second iteration of its existence in the 20's or 30's(?). Most people are familiar with the first iteration after the Civil War and so are contextualized to think of it as mostly a Southern phenomenon, or wherever those people have migrated to perhaps. Like Protestants who reactionarily rushed to join Masonry when the Pope decried it, and also fled it en masse when Morgan was killed, there was a woman murdered in Indiana (?) that led to its exposure and then members, WASPs by necessity, fled en masse. All buried down the memory hole. This is just one example of how Christians can be so extremely divided into different flocks of hateful chosen sheep and then, when the Hidden Hand of Oz waves, all is forgiven.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Since we're keeping everything on one thread, and the second applies(?) to Castor and Pollux, or ... :

(BTW, I had to split this off from my longer reply because I ran into the 10,000 character comment limit.)

As I was preparing what to say in the longer (one above) reply, I happened to catch the following apropos lyrics to two songs on my current playlist. I almost never have full focus on such lyrics, but rather lyrics are just part of the general cacophony for me.

So tired that I couldn't even sleep
So many secrets I couldn't keep
I promised myself I wouldn't weep
One more promise I couldn't keep

It seems no one can help me now,
I'm in too deep; there's no way out
This time I have really led myself astray

Runaway train, never going back
Wrong way on a one-way track
Seems like I should be getting somewhere
Somehow I'm neither here nor there

Can you help me remember how to smile?
Make it somehow all seem worthwhile
How on earth did I get so jaded?
Life's mystery seems so faded

I can go where no one else can go
I know what no one else knows
Here I am just a-drownin' in the rain
With a ticket for a runaway train

And everything seems cut and dried,
Day and night, earth and sky,
Somehow I just don't believe it
Address : <http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/s/soul_asylum/runaway_train.html>

The cycle repeated,
As explosions broke in the sky,
All that I needed,
Was the one thing I couldn't find,

And you were there at the turn,
Waiting to let me know,

Chorus:
We're building it up,
To break it back down
We're building it up,
To burn it down
We can't wait,
To burn it to the ground.

The colors conflicted,
As the flames climbed into the clouds.
I wanted to fix this,
But couldn't stop from tearing it down.

And you were there at the turn,
Caught in the burning glow.
And I was there at the turn,
Waiting to let you know.

We're building it up,
To break it back down
We're building it up,
To burn it down
We can't wait,
To burn it to the ground.

You told me yes
You held me high
And I believed,
When you told that lie.

I played solider,
You played king,
And struck me down,
When I kissed that ring.

You lost that right,
To hold that crown,
I built you up,
But you let me down.

So when you fall,
I'll take my turn,
And fan the flames,
As your blazes burn.

And you were there at the turn,
Waiting to let me know.

We're building it up,
To break it back down,
We're building it up,
To burn it down,

[We can't wait,
To burn it to the ground.
So when you fall,
I'll take my turn,
And fan the flames,
As your blazes burn. X2

We can't wait,
To burn it to the ground...
Address : <http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/l/linkin_park/burn_it_down.html>
 
Top