In the moment just prior to speech or writing, we have said or written nothing, yet the whole universe of discourse is potentially before us. This “moment”, prior to any speech or writing, is aptly signified in the Lurianic equation of Ayin (nothing) with Ein-sof (the infinite). A person takes up a pen and is about to write, or takes a breath and is about to speak. In that moment it is possible for him or her to write or utter virtually anything.
Here we should recall Sefer Yetzirah’s dictum that the permutations of primordial letters potentially constitute all that is or could be: “Twenty-two foundation letters: He engraved them, He carved them, He permuted them, He weighed them, He transformed them, And with them, He depicted all that was formed and all that would be formed.”
Imagine, for a moment, that we are approached by a complete stranger, who we perceive is about to open his mouth in speech. Most likely he will utter something routinized and predictable, asking us for the time or for directions to a nearby location. But just possibly he may utter something completely novel, something that we consider to be of poetic beauty or great philosophical moment; he may well say something that has perhaps never been said by anyone before in the history of the universe (he may tell us, for example, that “the Jew’s are the acorns of Shakespeare’s trees”) and say this in any of a number of the world’s languages. He may say something completely nonsensical—stringing phonemes together that (presently) have no sense in any language. If we think about it for a moment, the person about to speak has before him or her an infinity of great magnitude.
The number of sentences, paragraphs and discourses that can be constructed in the English, indeed in any language, has to be amongst the largest of infinities, as it would ipso facto make reference to and be descriptive of all states, numbers, conditions, interpretations, etc. that could exist in any other infinity.
166 visitors yesterday, 218 the day before. Fwiw.
Today, child sacrifice is practiced throughout the world. There has been a resurgence of child sacrifice in Uganda. Witch doctors have been implicated in the mutilation and death of children who were killed in an effort to bring good fortune and wealth to those willing to pay for it. There is also a correlation between child sacrifice and modern-day abortion. Unprecedented numbers of children have been “sacrificed” at the hands of abortionists for the sake of convenience, immorality, or pride. Hundreds of thousands of babies have been killed so that their parents can maintain a certain lifestyle.
Because I feel such intense revulsion toward the murder, torture, sexual abuse, general cruelty that goes on towards children (and animals), I feel obliged to make any efforts that I can to object to what’s happening and raise the issue. You can, if you wish, blank it all out and pretend that this abhorrent stuff is not happening, not any concern of yours.
But I’m gratified that so many other people feel the same troubling disturbance, there’s a huge wave of awareness and willingness to fight this malevolence. I don’t know if it will reach a critical mass sufficient that at long last something effective gets done, but we can but try.
I make no claim to being an especially nice, good, saintly sort of person, but I’ve never felt any inclination or desire whatsoever to behave in these vile ways, it’s almost beyond my comprehension that these things can happen, let alone that there are human beings out there who seem to relish this horrible conduct. So I’m curious to try and understand why it’s happening, how the motivation arises and where this evil comes from.
In the previous comments I posted this video. (There’s no need to watch it, unless you feel inclined, bit long and dull, I’m just providing it as the reference.) The main point the guy is trying to push is that ‘the Old Testament is true’, sort of thing, but he’s not smart enough or objective enough to understand that just because some bits can be demonstrated to be factually supported by evidence, it doesn’t follow that it’s all true. Other parts might or might not be. I think every piece must be treated individually.
Which raises an interesting preliminary point. I don’t think that history can be approached with the same methodology as science. I’ve learned something from George Webb. Just taking the last few months since he’s been running his series, there’s been so many dramatic events and peculiar happenings, hundreds of millions of people’s lives all going on simultaneously. It’s totally impossible to portray ‘the truth’ of it all, as any kind of comprehensive totality.
What he does, is establish some solid facts, that are documented or supported with empirical evidence, and then he extends outward looking for patterns, with conjecture and speculation, hoping to touch new leads that will tie his various strands together. That investigative journalist approach is something like crime detection. Police detectives must have many suspicions about individual persons, but unless they can be caught with damning evidence, the case will not stand up in a court.
So the suspicion sort of hangs in the air, as intuited possibility, unless some dots can be connected to construct something solid. This reminds me also of Nassim Taleb’s ‘fooled by randomness’ ideas. Weird stuff does not necessarily correlate with what it seems to correlate with. I’m going to take a look at some of the strands that have been found and see what sort of conclusions might be possible.
Back to that video. It seems well established that some hardline fundamentalist jews objected to the rule of their leaders in Jerusalem, so they moved south into Egypt and ended up on that Elephantine Island in the Nile, where they set up their own community and followed their religion in the way they preferred. The Egyptian state used them as mercenaries to guard Lower Egypt, the Nubian end.
This was hundreds of years before Christ, Socrates was in Greece, Gautama Buddha in India. Those jews remained in Egypt for many generations. What’s interesting is that they kept abundant records on papyri, some of which have survived, and these writings tell us a lot of fascinating information.
It seems that in addition to the worship of their main god, Yahu (the spelling and pronunciation are variable and contentious, IAWE, I’ll probably be substituting with ‘God’, capital G.) as with the rest of the jews, they also worshipped other gods.
It’s well known that Abraham is considered the founding patriarch of Judaism, (Abram) Christianity and Islam (Ibrahim) and the father of monotheism. The Old Testament account states him to be the descendant of Shem, one of Noah’s sons.
At some point in Isaac‘s youth, Abraham was commanded by God to offer his son up as a sacrifice in the land of Moriah. The patriarch traveled three days until he came to the mount that God told him of. He commanded the servants to remain while he and Isaac proceeded alone into the mount. Isaac carried the wood upon which he would be sacrificed. Along the way, Isaac asked his father where the animal for the burnt offering was, to which Abraham replied “God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering”. Just as Abraham was about to sacrifice his son, he was interrupted by the angel of the Lord, and he saw behind him a “ram caught in a thicket by his horns”, which he sacrificed instead of his son. For his obedience he received another promise of numerous descendants and abundant prosperity.
I hesitate to interpret that story for you. You will entertain your own meanings, depending upon how you frame it within your worldview. Biblical literalists may take it on face value, others as a myth, atheist materialists or humanists will have another view, and so on.
Isaac trusts his father, who is intent upon murdering Isaac and burning the corpse as an offering to God, and Abraham lies to Isaac about the plan. But then God changes the plan and provides a ram trapped in a thicket which Abraham uses as a substitute instead of killing his own child, Isaac.
Some like to see the incident as illustrating Abraham’s religious virtue, in that he was totally submissive, accepting and obedient towards God’s commands.
It’s a gruesome tale, but no more so than many in the folk literatures of Europe the Middle East and Asia. According to wiki, modern scholars doubt the possibility of ever verifying that these characters really existed. ‘..archaeologists had “given up hope of recovering any context that would make Abraham, Isaac or Jacob credible ‘historical figures'”
According to the biblical account, Abraham was nine or ten generations after Noah. 25 years to a generation is the standard estimation by scientific historians, so one might guess approximately 250 years after Noah’s Flood. If that flood had any relationship with the melting of the glaciers and sea level rise, then it might be dated roughly to 9-11,000 BC, but that’s vague and uncertain.
Some scholars point to indications that the Abraham story is actually from the Iron Age, others have suggested the second millennium BC. I don’t know what the DNA evidence has to say as to Abraham being the common progenitor of the Hebrew and Arab peoples.
I suppose you could see the event as recording a transition, from a barbaric and instinctive cultural milieu, where people behaved according to whim, to someone developing a degree of self-awareness and self-reflection to modify their conduct in the light of a conscience, or what Freud called super-ego. If that holds up, then the instructing voice of ‘God’ can be equated with an aspect of personal psychology which arbitrates and leads to a more deeply considered behaviour.
So just because the human sacrifice as an offering to a deity was the traditional cultural route, a person discovered free will to change and not follow that route.
So the ego listens to the super-ego instead of semi-consciously obeying the id.
Anyway, whatever went on in Abraham’s head, the child sacrifice tradition did not stop, if the Old Testament is to be believed, because much later we get Leviticus 20:2-5 “Say to the Israelites: ‘Any Israelite or any foreigner residing in Israel who sacrifices any of his children to Molek is to be put to death. The members of the community are to stone him. I myself will set my face against him and will cut him off from his people; for by sacrificing his children to Molek, he has defiled my sanctuary and profaned my holy name.
If the members of the community close their eyes when that man sacrifices one of his children to Molek and if they fail to put him to death, I myself will set my face against him and his family and will cut them off from their people together with all who follow him in prostituting themselves to Molek.’” Many other Old Testament passages affirm God’s zero-tolerance for child sacrifice.
King Solomon became involved in this horrendous practice, as recorded in 1 Kings 11:4-11, “As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods, and his heart was not fully devoted to the LORD his God, as the heart of David his father had been. He followed Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians, and Molek the detestable god of the Ammonites. So Solomon did evil in the eyes of the LORD. . . .
On a hill east of Jerusalem, Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the detestable god of Moab, and for Molek the detestable god of the Ammonites. . . . The LORD became angry with Solomon because his heart had turned away from the LORD, the God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice. Although he had forbidden Solomon to follow other gods, Solomon did not keep the LORD’s command.”
The conventional dates of Solomon’s reign are circa 970 to 931 BC, normally given in alignment with the dates of David’s reign. He is described as the third king of the United Monarchy, which would break apart into the northern Kingdom of Israel and the southern Kingdom of Judah shortly after his death. Following the split, his patrilineal descendants ruled over Judah alone.
The Hebrew Bible credits him as the builder of the First Temple in Jerusalem. It portrays him as great in wisdom, wealth, and power beyond any of the previous kings of the country, but ultimately as a human king who sinned.
Seems legitimate to raise the question, whether these sacrifices to Moloch (also spelled Molek, Molech) or other deities may have persisted over the last three millennia or so, up until the present day (Bohemian Grove). Of course, this is the well-known Blood Libel, regarded as an aspect of anti-semitism. If you can be bothered to find a list of all the historical occasions where this accusation has been recorded, it’s alarming long and rather shocking. Again, it seems legitimate to ponder, was there really so much smoke, but never any fire ? There’s a page here making the case from the jewish perspective, so you can draw your own conclusions. If such a practice had been practised over the centuries, I cannot imagine that the perpetrators would admit it ‘Of course, we murder children, isn’t that the normal thing to do ?’ because such an admission would invite punitive measures, wouldn’t it ?
BLOOD LIBEL, the allegation that Jews murder non-Jews, especially Christian children, in order to obtain blood for the Passover or other rituals: most blood libels occurred close to Passover, being basically a another form of the belief that Jews had been and still were responsible for the passion and crucifixion of Jesus Christ, the divine child; a complex of deliberate lies, trumped-up accusations, and popular beliefs about the murder-lust of the Jews and their bloodthirstiness, based on the conception that Jews hate Christianity and mankind in general. It is combined with the delusion that Jews are in some way not human and must have recourse to special remedies and subterfuges to appear, at least outwardly, like other men. The blood libel led to trials and massacres of Jews in the Middle Ages and early modern times; it was revived by the Nazis. Its origin is rooted in ancient, almost primordial, concepts concerning the potency and energies of *blood . In the early 2000s a controversy among scholars surrounded the argument that the blood libel began in the Middle Ages in the wake of the sacrifice of Jewish children by their parents during Crusaders raids on Jewish communities on their way to the Holy Land.
This is a sensitive emotive topic, particularly in these times when we appear to be watching our freedom of speech vanishing before our eyes. I regard free speech as an essential foundation stone for any decent, civilised soceity. If we have not learned that much, then the last couple of thousand years of lessons have been wasted.
I’ll probably never forgive Graeber, Carson, and the rest of the anarchists, the Occupy bunch, who support the moves to close down all discussion via the Blac Bloc and Antifa. I’ve been shocked and infuriated that this is coming from the Left and the Islamist lobby and so called Progressives. I am disgusted with those people, and ashamed that I used to support them and was fooled.
I don’t want to be prosecuted, or end up like Salman Rushdie, living in hiding protected from assassins by secret service police. On second thoughts, I don’t have Rushdie’s high public profile and the secret service policemen are probably the ones who perform the assassinations in this country. I don’t want Rushdie’s prominence, nor to get involved in legal nonsense, like some people who draw cartoons or question the so-called Shoah.
My life is quite tolerable the way it is, there’s no reason for me to gratuitously exceed the bounds of what authorities demand, however unreasonable. I’m laying out my personal opinions, and readers can judge them and come to their own conclusions. I believe it is my right to do this, under the United Nations Charter of Human Rights, regarding freedom of expression. If we don’t want truth, then what have we become ? What then do we want ? Anti-truth ?
Regarding the Blood Libel, I’d much prefer to believe that no jews (or anyone else) ever murdered any child, prefer that the thought never needed consideration, as some sort of religious or magical ritual, and without hard evidence, that has to be the null hypothesis. Innocent until proven guilty.
However, things get much more tricky, because of the Sabbateans, and Jacob Frank. According to various sources, which I believe are substantive and authenticated, that particular jewish cult, started by Sabbatai Tsevi, inverted all morality. The logic was that their new Messiah would finally appear when everyone had finally become pure and good, OR when everyone had descended into evil and depravity.
And because it was obviously impossible for everyone to be totally good, because it’s hard to be a person with high ethical conduct and unimpeachable morality, then the way to go was the opposite route, God’s Left Hand Path, and for everyone to be as wicked as possible. Because when the entire world is corrupted, then the Messiah will appear, to save his Chosen, and will obliterate all the rest. Or something like that.
So the Sabbatean Frankist jews (who became the Donmeh crypto-jews) indulged in every kind of debauched behaviour, whatever was the opposite of the original injunctions from God. Instead of honesty, deceit becomes a virtue. Instead of sexual loyalty to a husband or wife, licentious orgiastic perverted sex becomes virtuous. In short, what’s good is evil and what’s evil is good, because by corrupting everyone this will hasten the arrival of the Messiah.
This is akin to the beliefs of some Hindu sects who have a similar belief system, where nothing is forbidden, and the most disgusting offensive practices are seen as being vehicles toward divinity and enlightenment, eating human flesh and faeces, that sort of thing. These ideas filtered out of India into the British Raj and came into English circles from the early 1800’s onward, and mingled with such as the HellFire Club and the many secret soceities that lead to Crowley and similar figures.
In fact, if you start digging, the connections and ramifications that extend in all directions from this kind of belief multiply to such an extent that I will never be able to cover them all in this essay.
Prince Charles boasted in an interview that he is related to Dracula, or some such. Well, that’s not the Bram Stoker version which inspired many movies, but the real vampirical Count Dracul, Vlad the Impaler, who, (from memory), was taken as a hostage when a child, to the Ottoman Court in Istanbul, where he was traumatised in various ways, and where he witnessed and learned various occult and torture rituals which he put into practice later when he returned to rule in Romania. There’s connections to Elisabeth Bathory, the serial murdering countess, whom Soros admires.
There’s a connection from there to various Russian secret cults from which Rasputim learned stuff, and a connection to Maria Abramovic and her ‘spirit cooking’ (involving blood, breast milk, semen, and self-mutilation, and so forth) Abramovic being a favourite of Hillary Clinton, Podestas, Lady Gaga, numerous other celebrity names.
There’s also the many cross connections between proven and prosecuted paedophiles, Jimmy Savile, Prince Charles, Ted Heath, Lord Mountbatten, and a very long list of eminent elite figures in British soceity over the last few decades, Lord Alpine, Lord Greville Janner, and many more. Most of Margaret Thatchers cabinet and party hierarchy.
Another strand is the Knights Templar, who are said to have originated in a guild of knights intent on protecting the pilgrim routes to and from Jerusalem. However the suggestion has been made that their real mission was kept a secret, involving research into whatever mysteries had been known by King Solomon, regarding occult knowledge, the original Temple, and so forth.
As is well known, the Templars were suppressed by the Pope and the French monarch, their leader was tortured and supposedly admitted various perverse sexual practices and other immorality. There’s also an account that says that they discovered some sort of ultimate secret, deriving from Ancient Egypt, where a person is tortured to death, then beheaded, and the head kept preserved in a jar. These heads could then be consulted as oracles on significant occasions, when they would magically provide the answers to various enigmas.
It’s said that the Templars vanished after their wealth and land was taken, but it’s also said that they went underground and became united with various other secretive Masonic type groups, such as the Knights of Malta, whose membership you can find with google, it lists the names of all the usual suspects.
I think this video gives an excellent summary of how the Sabbateans (Donmeh) link to Rothschilds, the bankers, the Illuminati, the Masons and so on
Of course, some people will say that the connections are tenuous, imaginary or fabricated, but there’s actually some amazing documented evidence that was written down at the time, in code, and only very recently decrypted.
And here we are brought right up to the present time by Ronald Bernard.
And a second link in case that one gets taken down
There’s many more linkages that can be made. Tavistock is a big hub which has strands shooting off in many directions. There were numerous secret fraternities which demanded shocking initiation rites before you got accepted into the inner circles. I think this is standard procedure, well understood and researched by anthropologists, in many ethnic groups. Same sort of thing happens, formally or informally, in pretty much any club you want to join, be it the Yakuza, Triads, the bikers, Round Table, Skull and Bones or the Vehm.
Which takes us to the various occult groups that flourished in Germany during the Nazi period, the death camps and their experiments (Mengele) and Operation Paperclip, when they moved to the USA (MKUltra and related projects) and South America with the assistance of the Vatican.
If you want, you can indeed make a line of connections which can be extended all the way from Ancient Egypt up to the CIA, MI5/6, Mossad, and contemporary events, somewhat in the manner that David Icke has done, with ritualised sexual abuse, torture and murder, often of innocent children, being used as a tool or weapon all through the centuries.
One point I have not mentioned is that apparently Sabbatai Tsevi’s inversion of the usual ideas of what’s good and what’s bad, are said to have been rooted in one of the several versions of Kabbalah, that which was outlined by Luria. I don’t know a lot about that, but RB was trying to research the original contents, fwiw.
From these premises the Sefer Yezirah draws the important conclusion that “good and evil” have no real existence, for since everything in nature can exist only by means of its contrast, a thing may be called good or evil according to its influence over man by the natural course of the contrast.
Throughout the course of history, several accounts have been recorded describing rituals and practices resembling mind control. One of the earliest writings giving reference to the use of occultism to manipulate the mind can be found in the Egyptian Book of the Dead. It is a compilation of rituals, heavily studied by today’s secret societies, which describes methods of torture and intimidation (to create trauma), the use of potions (drugs) and the casting of spells (hypnotism), ultimately resulting in the total enslavement of the initiate. Other events ascribed to black magic, sorcery and demon possession (where the victim is animated by an outside force) are also ancestors of Monarch programming.
It is, however, during the 20th century that mind control became a science in the modern sense of the term, where thousands of subjects have been systematically observed, documented and experimented on.
One of the first methodical studies on trauma-based mind control were conducted by Josef Mengele, a physician working in Nazi concentration camps. He initially gained notoriety for being one of the SS physicians who supervised the selection of arriving prisoners, determining who was to be killed and who was to become a forced labourer. However, he is mostly known for performing grisly human experiments on camp inmates, including children, for which Mengele was called the “Angel of Death”.
Here’s Crowley’s version of Kabbalah, which is, as I understand it, only one of several differing versions of what Kabbalah is about. I have never studied Kabbalah in any great depth, so I’m happy to admit ignorance and possible naivity.
What do we do with all this evidence of apparent spirit oppression? In particular, can it be squared with the materialist worldview of Western psychiatry? Is “demonic possession” always to be placed within quotation marks, or can we leave them off? Are “spirits” the hallucinations of a sick brain, or do they have an independent existence? I think every reader must grant, however grudgingly, that on the surface the accounts above—out of thousands of similar reports reaching us from all over the world—point to a dualist metaphysics: We are one kind of being, and spirits are another. We are visible, and they are not. We are subject to the laws of physics, and they are not. We have physical bodies, and they do not. Yet they are as conscious as we are, as individual as we are. And many of them claim to have lived on earth before.
How medical doctors and social scientists should adjust their view of possession will be the subject of a follow-up essay.
Of course, I’m well aware that there are many rationalist materialists (e.g. McPherson) who dismiss much of this stuff as superstitious nonsense and ‘conspiracy theory’ (which term was invented by the CIA to discredit anyone who refused to believe the ludicrous absurd official version of the Kennedy assassinations) and you, the reader, may yourself be one such.
However, I’d make the point that it does not matter whether you yourself ‘believe in’ spirits, Satanic rites, or whatever. What matters is that others most definitely do, and that there are a lot of them and their creepy sadistic malign activities have real effects in the real world, viz. the tremendously shocking and inexplicable numbers of missing children, as documented in verifiable official records.