Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Insider Transcripts: Extraordinary Secret Recordings

page: 3
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by skeptical2012

All of which makes my argument: The author is an english-speaking protestent. Not a Rabbi steeped in Jewish language, culture, and faith.

Have in mind that this is a translation from hebrew-german idiom. Maybe in the actual recording (which unfortunately I don't have) the speaker whould refer to God with another name and translated as Yahweh in greek.
There are also references to Asmodai, Jedi, Metatron as if it is the same god. Metatron is an archangel of Yahweh according to the Kaballah occult tradition and the bible.


I am detecting a convenience-atron emission indicating the presence of rapidly decaying baloneyum.

Jedi ? Snort.

As for the excuse that it is the translation at fault... I call bushwah on that.

Proof- let's have some proof.




posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by skeptical2012
The transcripts are from a 72 pages published text from HRG back in 1985. HRG is the secret group of researchers that helped to acquire the recordings.
[edit on 9-1-2008 by skeptical2012]


Um... HRG aren't secret any more. Assuming they exist. You see, you've just constantly mentioned them in this self-promoting thread.

Also... Proof. We need proof.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:37 AM
link   
6.......... Management and the collapsing of Nations that we will secretly perpetrate through the Masonic lodges for the year 1995.


7.......... We will lead all the nations of the planet to ask the head of Hellas on the plate for its failure as a international leader of Peace & Security in the upcoming septennium and that will be our moral alibi in order to completely genocide the Andromedian Hellenic race. Hellas is surrounded by our Touranian Mongols brothers of Turkey, Albania, Bulgaria and our Arab brothers of the Mediterranean, and our nation Israel, all the above must remain hidden because of the danger from the revelation of the total genocide of Hellenes we perpetrate for the year 1995

Am I missing something? 1995 came and went and here we are 2008 and this is suppose to have some significance? Shouldn't the date and its passing with none of the above happening show something?



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by jdposey
 


Not really....things take place without the knowledge of the general public.
Power could have been shifted over to the NWO already but we just dont know it yet and miight not until they instill a national curfue. You know what im trying to get at here?
It would take a lot of energy to make all this stuff up...even for the secret society that was recorded. Why would they secretly meet about things they secretly made up? Is it some sort of a dungeons and drangons club where they meet and play fantasy games in a basement? I doubt it since some of this information can be found all over the web, this site specifically and in things like the urantia book etc....
WE have to remove ourselves from the "context" that we are used to. From reading things like the urantia book and seeing posts like the OP's i have to come to the conlcusion that none of us know what the truth is and most of what we were taught were lies.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:51 AM
link   
May I suggest that the OP is merely trying to perpetrate a gobsmackingly clumsy updated version of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?

Jesus Prison Showering Christ, how insane does a post have to be here before some kind of functional limit is reached? It's like an affective disorder convention! A smorgasbord of neuroses.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by GUICE2

You ever think that perhaps these words you are describing do not mean what you think they mean? Even if they are rooted in history.....these secret societies, especially if they are referring to a galactic existence, probably have information that out dates the inception of judaism and the denotations attached to all the language.
This would mean that WE dont know anything about what he is talking abot because everything we know is a lie.





Well, if they don't have the meanings I've presented, how come they are used that way in . . . . every manuscript we have, the Talmud, the Mishnah, the Tanakh itself. I'm not the one claiming that millions of words have been misinterpreted for the last 3000 years by the Jewish community worldwide.

Your argument is doing my work for me. Basically, what you've just argued is . . . that this text has nothing to do with historical Judaism.

IF the author really is using basic Masonic, Jewish and Qabalistic vocabulary in unknown ways, then he is miscommunicating on purpose, or else he doesn't know what the fudge he's talking about. Either way, he's so far beyond the Masonic, Jewish, and Qabalistic communities that to label him as such is more for the purpose of impressing the reader than for placing the author within an actual, real-world intellectual/religious community.


Basically, to salvage some truth-value out of this script, you're starting to throw everything else overboard. You're beginning to jettison things like, umm, real-world judaism, real-world languages like hebrew, real-world institutions like B'nai Brith and various schools of Jewish literary critism.

And what do you have left? You've still got this one document, that doesn't tell you anything useful, since you've now re-defined, or un-defined the meanings of the actual words it uses.

good luck with that.

.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:19 AM
link   
reply to post by dr_strangecraft
 


No i totally see what you mean....but what im trying to say is that perhaps the words meant something different because they are rooted in a history that is millions of years old and not thousands. That is of course if it is true....that would mean that any interpretation we find here on earth is not even close to the truth. So yes....he knows nothing about historical judaism because he is speaking of something rooted in galactic history and not our religious history. Im just talking about context here....often times people become slaves to context and its the reason why most dont even being to entertain issues that are disccussed on this site.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by DogHead
 


Dude out of all the posts on this site....this is the one you deem to be outlandish? Hahaha....come on seriously. Did yo usee the ones about how celebrities are shapeshifting lizards?



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:25 AM
link   
Yes I do. But if I had posted a crude pastiche wannabe version of the Protocols I would be nervous to say the least about how comfortably it fits alongside the reptilian-obsessed maniacs...

Unless of course you are promulgating this anti-semitism as part of a structured white supremacist or as hard as it is to imagine greek-supremacist plot.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by DogHead
 


Anti semitism??
Im sorry but i dont understand what you mean by that....i separate myself from modern day context that most people think in. When i read what this guy posted i just took each name as just that....a name and just saw the conflict as a conflict between two existences. Why label it as antisemitism as if to say i hate jewish people if i beleive the context of this transcript?
These labels dont apply in my opinion because again, we are talking about millions of years of history arent we? Isnt antisemistism a label created by humans who attacthed the denotations and connotations to that specific word and what it may or may not represent?
Also....what is this protocols of the elders you mentioned? What is that? I would love to learn about that as well so can you post a link or something?

It is evident, and this is a revelation i have made just from being a member of this site and looking through all the different topics and posts....it is evident that there is a galactic confrontation that is about to take place and probably has been ongoing for as many years as there are stars. Years....we cant even measure it like that but you know what i mean. For as long as existence has existed, there was some galactic conflict that non of us know anything about. Yet we see the shadows of such happenings or what has happend through our religions, myths, and legends. YEt those are just SHADOWS....then it was left to man to create meaning and thats where we are now but if you beleive in something more than what we already know then how can you not see that whatever it is that we are all seeking is so far above our words, language, and thought process that we cannot PROVE them beyond any human reasonable doubt because our reasoning essentially doesnt apply?



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by GUICE2Im just talking about context here....often times people become slaves to context and its the reason why most dont even being to entertain issues that are disccussed on this site.


I don't think context is the reason 'most' don't entertain the issues discussed on this site.

It's one thing to post something that looks like a tossed word salad and claim that it's from a secret meeting of rappin' 5% lizard rabbis from another galaxy who are going to take over the world 13 years ago, and a completely other thing to make something like that 'stick' without someone carting you off to a room where you get fed three times a day and dress in communal clothing and underwear.

Context is important. Content without it is ignorance. To quote a passage (using the 'meeting' transcript in this thread as an example) without it's context allows the writer the ability to distort its meaning into something it was never meant to be.

Your pal,
Meat.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by GUICE2
These labels dont apply in my opinion because again, we are talking about millions of years of history arent we?

No, I don't believe we are. We're talking - using an accepted language that is not millions of years old - using words that have specific meanings.

I'm not saying that to be argumentative. However, it's patently obvious that the language used is based on the accepted definitions of the words of said language.

Your pal,
Meat.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:04 AM
link   
I am going to assume that this is nothing to get excited about...BUt the only thing that popped into my mind was the fact that there are massive, huge beyond reason craft..rectangular ships, that are fooling around in the rings of Saturn as we speak. There are threads about it on ATS already that show them.

The talk of ' Saturnalians ' caught my attention because of the huge ships..and they may be TOTALLY unrelaated to this..but for some reason it occurred to me that some slim connection might be worth at least a passing thought. What do you think?



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by GUICE2
Why do you feel if you even had to ask? Just post the information because im sure that there are several people on here that will devour the information like a starving great white shark.


i call ats members "piranhas" to my friends. I explained to them if you want to discover the truth about a matter, post it on ats because they will attack it like a bunch of piranhas! this is a good thing.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by mmmeat
 


Well... let me provide an example where context defines a peoples train of thought. The whole thing with jesus' divinity and mary as his wife.
The bible uses words that describe mary (dont know the word off hand) as his jesus' wife....but only in the context of that time because now the word used in the bible as an adjective for mary magdelane actually means something different. I hope you understand a little about what im trying to say....



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
I am going to assume that this is nothing to get excited about...BUt the only thing that popped into my mind was the fact that there are massive, huge beyond reason craft..rectangular ships, that are fooling around in the rings of Saturn as we speak. There are threads about it on ATS already that show them. {snip}
What do you think?


Honestly, after reading all three (thus far) pages in this thread, TWICE...

I think that I obviously do not drink enough.

Happy-hour anyone?



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by GUICE2
reply to post by mmmeat
 


Well... let me provide an example where context defines a peoples train of thought. The whole thing with jesus' divinity and mary as his wife.
The bible uses words that describe mary (dont know the word off hand) as his jesus' wife....but only in the context of that time because now the word used in the bible as an adjective for mary magdelane actually means something different. I hope you understand a little about what im trying to say....


Not really. Probably because it's out of context.


It's very DaVinci Code to believe that Mary Magdalene was Jesus' spouse. But that was a work of fiction that took certain portions of other works and - in a very Forrest Gump-like way - blended them into a very compelling story (and a less compelling movie).

What you're talking about may not be in the Bible. It could be in the apocrypha or maybe it's from a Gnostic writing. You find the part and I'm willing to go over it with you.

In the meantime, I stand by by opinion and my lament regarding context and ATS.

Your pal,
Meat.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:36 AM
link   
lets not forget that the transcribed recordings in this thread has not been discussed in ATS before, i did some searches and found nothing.. I also took some random lines from the text and googled it, I found no match. (It would be just my luck if someone now finds a web page with this already transcribed).

OK, assuming ATS is the first to review these transcript(s), then surly we should wait until more are posted before we dismiss them outright.

Will the OP please post more. You have my attention.

Regards
Freelancer



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by mmmeat
 


Im talking about the word companion i believe.....and it could have been in the apochrapha (is that how you spell it hahahah) but im not sure.
Either way that word, as described by some scholars, literally meant marriage in those days and now it means just friends i guess, or someone who keeps you company. I was just trying to say that you cannot judge language that is supposed to be describing a history that is millions of years old by our modern day contexts. I dont even think something like this can even be properly translated to where we can all understand its full meaning. Lost in translation.......probably lots.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Dear friends,
I am close to finish the translation of the 2nd transcript with extremely out-of-the-box context. I am trying hard to do a decent job in order to keep context as close to the original as posible.
I have to warn you though. Be prepared. It is very extreme, way out of the mainstream. Only for Open-minded non-dogmatic people..

I hope you will enjoy reading it as I enjoyed translating it.


[edit on 10-1-2008 by skeptical2012]





new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join