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.

 

Occult Law = Must Reveal Intention Prior to Instigating Attack?

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2009 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 




I just have my opinions and am under the misconception
that other people want to hear them.


People might be more interested if you'd stop trying to derail the thread. It is not about the illuminati or whether secret societies exist and after your initial objection the original poster edited her post to clarify.

The OP asked a question about occult law. Why not try discussing that?




posted on Oct, 2 2009 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by cosmicpixie
 


I have studied the occult most of my life.
I know of no such law.
It might help though, to do so, in some cases.



posted on Oct, 2 2009 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by LordBucket
reply to post by network dude
 




I just have my opinions and am under the misconception
that other people want to hear them.


People might be more interested if you'd stop trying to derail the thread. It is not about the illuminati or whether secret societies exist and after your initial objection the original poster edited her post to clarify.

The OP asked a question about occult law. Why not try discussing that?



Ya now Alex Jones briefly discussed this on his show regarding two FOX TV shows (The Lone Gunman and the Simpsons) showing 9/11 symbolism before it happened.

He described it similar to what Vampires have to do in terms of getting invited in to your house. If you invite vampires into your house then you become powerless against them (as I saw in the movie The Lost Boys).

so his theory is that it has something to with them "tricking" you into accepting them in some occult ritualistic way.






Yea... I don't know what to think, but something is going on with FOX that I don't trust.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 09:00 PM
link   
I understand this "law" as Hoffman explains it in his classic Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare: "It is an ancient rule of both the moral and common law that silence connotes consent--silence and a lack of meaningful action constitute consent in the face of these crimes" (page 78).

So when someone alludes to, or hints at, their intention or openly discloses this to their unsuspecting victim and he remains silent he is tacitly approving of the action. It becomes all the more sinister, however, when the plot is released in an altogether beguiling or innocuous format not unlike the guise of "entertainment" for instance. In this way, it becomes all the more difficult to separate the signal from the "noise." In a similar vein this is connected to the concept of the "liability of the bystander" (or hue and cry) since if one witnesses another commit a crime (e.g. stealing or lying or killing etc) or is aware of the intention and yet does nothing he is then as culpable as the offender himself (see Psalm 50:18). IMO this is why America is suffering so much now because she has refused to "change" or repent of her self-destructive ways (e.g. abortion, usury, paper money, sodomy, sabbath breaking, etc.) and is headed for great tribulation (see The Day The Earth Stood Still for a modern take of this biblical concept). Also, there is some historical evidence of this "law" or "tradition" too since if you read Poe's The Cask of Amontillado you will note that the antagonist hints at his evil intentions to his victim before he carries it out on him. And there is some debate whether he was a Mason or simply knowledgeable about the occult fraternity's m.o. since a few of his works seems to allude to this kind of practice.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by cameraobscura
 


Thanks for the well written response.

Silence is consent. But I beleive there is power in getting the individual to deny the existence of a conspiracy.

If a conspiracy is found, then it proves they do not understand the reality of their existence. That then upsets the little box they have for a belief system, threatens to shatter of the tower in which our identity resides, ie Saul getting his mind blown by an Angel. The Fear based aspects of one's ego if out of balance, will then act as a gaurdian of the box. Enforcing order, and turning away anything that endangerous the precious little belief system.

Now these individuals become the perfect "mass consciousness" to drown out any voice of truth.

The cryptocracy knows this and feeds it to us, and then feeds on us.

"They" also know that the few intelligent people not in line with their agenda will be laughed at and isolated from the herd. Knowing that if that person wants to be accepted by the tribe one must get in line with the status quo and let go of such wild accusations. So they can just tell it to our faces, allowing them to be honest in their intentions (which helps them be clear and manifest what they want), therefore putting the responsibility on us to stop "them."

Know the Truth, and the Truth will set you free.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 09:52 PM
link   
conspiray guy - "9/11 was an inside job! It was the shadow government!!"

joe taxpayer - "Really? How do you know that? Show me some proof!"

conspiracy guy - "Look, the way the cover of this magazine is arranged looks like 2 buildings blowing up! The magazine came out a month before 9/11!"

joe taxpayer - "Um, okay why would they reveal that to us before it happened?"

conspiracy guy - "Dude, everyone knows that they have to tell us their intentions before they do this kind of stuff!! It's an occult rule among the elite..."

joe taxpayer - "that doesnt even make sense..."




posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 10:14 PM
link   
If for any reason, I would think that it would be a power trip (ego) for the entity (group) to be able to "tacitly get you to accept it".



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 10:21 PM
link   
First off I'm not an occultist, but I have a theory on this. Its about a focal point, a foundation to impose their will on, even back through time from a future perspective.

Just a theory.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by mynameisjuan
 


Well absolutely, who benefits from "their" actions, it sure as hell ain't mankind.

If they used these tricks to make us stronger, more intelligent indviduals and therefore a stronger species, that would be something. But it seems "they" just want to put us in our place, so they can keep theirs, making us play their games.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by cameraobscura
IMO this is why America is suffering so much now because she has refused to "change" or repent of her self-destructive ways (e.g. abortion, usury, paper money, sodomy, sabbath breaking, etc.) and is headed for great tribulation


Personifying America seems to remove you from having any personal responsibility.

Are you saying that people are homeless, hungry and jobless because of "sabbath breaking"? Is this the answer for all human suffering?

IMO, your reasoning seems rather shallow and judgemental. Almost as though you buy in to the agenda of religious dominionism.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 04:36 AM
link   
I apologize if you took offence at my words. But, I cannot apologize for choosing to believe in a Biblical standard (e.g. Exodus 20:3-17). I am definitely not saying that those who suffer from poverty or oppression or other hardship are deserving of their plight at all. We have all been given the freedom to choose. And every day we are all forced to make a choice. Sometimes we make wise choices, sometimes we make poor choices. But, ultimately we must live with the consequences of our choices. And unfortunately at times many people across the world or across generations who have no choice in a given matter are the ones who suffer undue hardship usually due to the misjudgment of one person alone. And in my experience homelessness, poverty, joblessness, disease, unnatural disasters etc. are usually symptoms or the effects of a greater cause i.e. sin “Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin” (James 4:17). That doesn’t mean that all who are jobless or homeless are deserving of their circumstances anymore than Job was deserving of his loss and suffering in the Bible. And most often the case it’s that “the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all” (Ecclesiastes 9:11). Look at the film Spider-man 3 as a typical example, Parkman, MJ, Osborn, Marko and Brock--they all make selfish choices that end up hurting one another, besides themselves, and it is only in the end that a few redeem themselves by choosing to change (i.e. repent) and do good. Likewise in The Day The Earth Stood Still Benson argues with Klaatu to give mankind a chance to change “to turn things around,” but he refuses saying, “We’ve watched, we’ve waited and hoped that you would change…The decision is made. The process has begun.” Later, he relents, however, admitting that it is at the “precipice” we change.

Also, back to the original subject, it is my belief that it is related to the practice of “hiding messages in plain sight.” And we’ve seen this more recently in The Da Vinci Codephenomenon i.e. the grail legend and the paintings of Leonardo Da Vinci, Poussin, etc. (see www.youtube.com...) as well as in the popular film National Treasure besides historically like Poe’s “The Purloined Letter” and even Shakespeare’s plays. Some also say Jack the Ripper’s identity is revealed in Sickert’s paintings too. Even in the aftermath of 9/11 there was controversy over the alleged use of cryptographic techniques by Al Qaeda via the internet.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join