It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Oxford University and Secret Societies.

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Driver
LOL calling Icke or Jones dis-informers is totally ridiculous.



And you know all about ridiculous, don't you?




posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 06:04 PM
link   
Why is it ridiculous? Prove me wrong! Oh but of course, you cant can you?



posted on Apr, 26 2005 @ 06:23 PM
link   
I always wanted to find out what the word "Democracy" ment and well I dug this up off the BBC site quite the interesting read.

www.bbc.co.uk...


What's in a word? We may live in a very different and much more complex world, but without the ancient Greeks we wouldn't even have the words to talk about many of the things we care most about. Take politics for example: apart from the word itself (from polis, meaning city-state or community) many of the other basic political terms in our everyday vocabulary are borrowed from the ancient Greeks: monarchy, aristocracy, tyranny, oligarchy and - of course - democracy.

The ancient Greek word demokratia was ambiguous. It meant literally 'people-power'. But who were the people to whom the power belonged? Was it all the people - all duly qualified citizens? Or only some of the people - the 'masses'? The Greek word demos could mean either. There's a theory that the word demokratia was coined by democracy's enemies, members of the rich and aristocratic elite who did not like being outvoted by the common herd, their social and economic inferiors. If this theory is right, democracy must originally have meant something like 'mob rule' or 'dictatorship of the proletariat'.


anyone else think this is interesting???

I know, I know its off subject, I didn't want to start a new thread.

[edit on 26/4/05 by Hunting Veritas]

[edit on 26/4/05 by Hunting Veritas]



posted on Apr, 27 2005 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Drivel
I said directly desended from Longhsanks...


So you did. Since you know so much about it perhaps you'd like to share with us all the difference between 'directly decended from' and any other form of 'descended from'.




posted on Apr, 27 2005 @ 06:13 AM
link   
Err pretty simple really and you call yourself a genealogist?



Genealogies of the presidents of the USA



posted on Apr, 27 2005 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Drivel
Err pretty simple really and you call yourself a genealogist?

Genealogies of the presidents of the USA


I went to visit that site...


Due to lack of interest this site will not be updated. It will remain online until the domain expires in May 2006


Sums it up really.


Do you want to try again and explain what the difference is between 'descended' and 'directly descended'? And perhaps whilst you at it you can explain what the really very interesting graphic proves. Do you think there might perhaps be just one or two other people that have been missed off the tree?

www.swinhope.myby.co.uk...


By way of a final corroboration, let us look at the problem from the opposite end as it were. Instead of asking how many ancestors we should have, let us ask how many descendants a typical citizen of 1300 might have today. For family size I'll use the present average of 2.2, although this is certainly an underestimate for all but the last 60 years or so. How many descendants would he have today if his children, grandchildren and so on for 23 generations all had 2.2 children? The answer: 75,114,133 people in generation 23, plus of course the survivors of generations 21 and 22. In other words, all of us - with a few left over for the colonies. What applies to my "typical citizen", would equally well apply to virtually anyone alive in 1300.


[edit on 27-4-2005 by Trinityman]



posted on Apr, 27 2005 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Whatever due... it is a fact that the people in power today are directly genetically related to eachother and belong to the same blood stream that all the Feudal era kingships belonged to even wayy back into ancient Egypt with the Pharo's and even before than in Babylon, maybe even Sumer too.



posted on Apr, 27 2005 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Drivel
Whatever due... it is a fact that the people in power today are directly genetically related to eachother and belong to the same blood stream that all the Feudal era kingships belonged to even wayy back into ancient Egypt with the Pharo's and even before than in Babylon, maybe even Sumer too.


Yes but it's also a fact that millions of other people are equally related. Your point, such that it is, is utterly meaningless. We're all related.

(Incidentally, do you know how much genetic material is still around from the Ancestor after 23 generations? 0.00001192% or apprx 1 part in 10 million)



posted on Apr, 27 2005 @ 10:28 AM
link   
Listen.

The royal families of Europe who regined the planet all through the Medieval, Tudor and Victorian period were from the same bloodline of the Pharoaes, Emporers, ect, ect that ruled the planet during ancient times and its this same bloodstream that is in control today... in all positions of power and finance.

All the differant royal bloodlines come from a single bloodline BTW.

The 13 Illuminati families are the off-shoots but their are about a dozen other lesser significant but still, highly involved Illuminati families such as the Bush's.



posted on Apr, 27 2005 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Back of subject now

www.trosch.org...


Founders of Freemasonry in Britain dedicated to the free exchange of ideas. First Grand Lodge meeting held and the Goose and Gridiron Ale House in London on June 24, 1717. Almost from the beginning there were hidden agendas. Now known as Freemasons they were instrumental in the formation of secret organizations and also fraternal clubs such as Rotary, Kiwanis, and Odd Fellows.


I think the masons will be interested to see this.



posted on Apr, 27 2005 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hunting Veritas
Back of subject now

www.trosch.org...

I think the masons will be interested to see this.


Well, I was prepared to go along with this but I'm afraid I didn't get any further than the first paragraph.


One rule is that members must lie even to their wives
concerning privileged knowledge and associations.
In court Masons must lie to protect brothers they know to be guilty.


Both of these statements are entirely untrue. Not only do they have no basis in fact, but freemasons are specifically told that their fraternal obligations to their brothers falls way behind their obligations to their family and the law.

Both in the Charge to the Initiate in the First degree and again in the obligation in the Third, it is clearly outlined to a freemason that their duty to God, their country, the law and their family outweigh and exceed any obligation to a fellow freemason.

Given that I know the above quote to be a gross slanderous lie, why should I pay any further attention to a webpage which is prepared to post such nonsense?



posted on Apr, 27 2005 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hunting Veritas
www.trosch.org...


Founders of Freemasonry in Britain dedicated to the free exchange of ideas. First Grand Lodge meeting held and the Goose and Gridiron Ale House in London on June 24, 1717. Almost from the beginning there were hidden agendas. Now known as Freemasons they were instrumental in the formation of secret organizations and also fraternal clubs such as Rotary, Kiwanis, and Odd Fellows.


I think the masons will be interested to see this.


That page is the biggest sack of crap I have ever read. And believe me, I've read many sacks of crap. That one pretty much tops them all, I can't believe that someone, such as you, who pretends to "Deny Ignorance" is actually touting around something that false and obviously agenda-driven. Do yourself a favor and open your eyes, bro.



posted on Apr, 27 2005 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by sebatwerk
That page is the biggest sack of crap I have ever read. And believe me, I've read many sacks of crap. That one pretty much tops them all, I can't believe that someone, such as you, who pretends to "Deny Ignorance" is actually touting around something that false and obviously agenda-driven. Do yourself a favor and open your eyes, bro.


I just said it might be interesting for you to read, I didn't say anything about believing it.

Open my eyes to what exactly??? The corruption of the political system, the fact that many millions die everyday because of our politicians and financial leaders to keep the 3rd world in debt.

Ok I can agree with you on some of the things on that page not everything typed up on some website is FACTUAL information but still do these clubs and organizations not exist????

United Nations, Order of Skull and Bones, Rhodes Scholars, Bilderbergers, The Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), The Committee Of 300, Club of Rome, Round Table, New Age Order, International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, Adam Smith Institute, Mont Perelin Society, Business Round Table, B'nai B'rith, Brotherhood of Freemasons, and many others. (Two of many key men: Rothchild, Rockefeller)

The people in these clubs and organizations DO control the lives of millions if not billions of people all over the globe. I don't like the idea of these people all together in one place to discuss problems without criticism from others.



posted on Apr, 28 2005 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hunting Veritas
I just said it might be interesting for you to read, I didn't say anything about believing it.

Open my eyes to what exactly??? The corruption of the political system, the fact that many millions die everyday because of our politicians and financial leaders to keep the 3rd world in debt.


Sigh, you really have no evidence that this is happening, so why claim it as fact? Besides, wouldn't the world, including powerful people, benefit more if a 3rd World country was able to gain strength and become an economic power and trade partner?



The people in these clubs and organizations DO control the lives of millions if not billions of people all over the globe. I don't like the idea of these people all together in one place to discuss problems without criticism from others.


Again, I would LOVE to see all the evidence you have that supports your theory. You must have some pretty convincing stuff in order to be so absolutely sure. In any case, powerful people have just as much right to privacy as we do, so don't be a hypocrite and condemn politicians for meeting in private, and then criticize them for passing laws like the Patriot Act, that supposedly infringe on the right to YOUR OWN privacy.



posted on Apr, 28 2005 @ 04:02 AM
link   

Sebatwerk
Sigh, you really have no evidence that this is happening, so why claim it as fact? Besides, wouldn't the world, including powerful people, benefit more if a 3rd World country was able to gain strength and become an economic power and trade partner?


All I do is express an opinion I didn't say a thing about any of it being true.

Ok lets be square about this if these CEO's, financial and political leaders are not up to anything sinister then I'm sorry.

I don't think that everyone that attends these meetings etc. are bad people but the people pulling the strings are. As for the 3rd world, Why are they in debt, when in actual FACT Africa used to be very wealthy indeed, that is until they had it stolen from them and became enslaved. They are in debt to this day and we could wipe the slate clean with ease.


Again, I would LOVE to see all the evidence you have that supports your theory. You must have some pretty convincing stuff in order to be so absolutely sure. In any case, powerful people have just as much right to privacy as we do, so don't be a hypocrite and condemn politicians for meeting in private, and then criticize them for passing laws like the Patriot Act, that supposedly infringe on the right to YOUR OWN privacy.


Funny that, how they managed to throw together an act that is HUGE in such short amount of time. Its because this Act was ready before 911. They knew it was coming and done nothing. Heres the Problem now get the reaction from the public using the media but guess who had the solution.

Ok I'm pretty sure everybody is fed up as am I with using 911 as an excuse for all these theories but it wasn't until 911 that people started asking questions.

I still have skepticism for theories until they are proven right or wrong.



posted on Jul, 7 2011 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hunting Veritas
Actually can anyone tell me why people from all over the world come to Oxford for education when they could go to havard or yale and many other good universities why choose Oxford????

Bill clinton studied there so did his daughter and just a few other famous people.

Seriously people stop listening to to your government and make up your own bloody minds about education.

Why is london the centre for time???? GMT is 0 any other time is either before or after the london time.


You have much of your information wrong. Bill Clinton did not apply to Oxford he originally attended Georgetown University. He then received the Rhodes scholarship for Americans to attend Oxford, once he was awarded this he attended Oxford for two years, then finally he transferred to Yale and finished his law degree.

Also the "center of time" GMT is not London itself it is Greenwich, which is an observatory used to tell GMT. Most official and scientific data is in UTC not GMT.



posted on Jul, 7 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   
In my opinion there are five key means of mass-manipulation: media, education, politics, banking and religion. Every significant institution will have been created, infiltated or destroyed by men serving a dark agenda of which these servants are completely oblivious to. How are they so oblivious to this? Well, they will have been selected due to their self-serving nature, and men that are so devoted to their own 'success' rarely give an honest answer to themselves if they even ask themselves a question of their morality.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join