Black Nobility Exposed Video With Names, page 14

privacy

Pages: << 11 12 13 14 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 23 times

reply posted on 11-4-2011 @ 06:39 PM by Getsmart

reply to post by King Seesar

Hi King Seesar,

I think you've made an excellent point. A close friend of mine was shown a Thought Monitoring System at Stanford which they told him could scan the thoughts of anyone whose coordinates you entered. It appears that they may have graduated to other levels beyond Ultra.

GS

reply posted on 11-4-2011 @ 11:27 PM by mistermonculous

Originally posted by Getsmart
reply to post by mistermonculous

Hi Mister Monculous,

Actually I haven't lost my sense of humor as you gave me a good laugh when you made what seemed to be a reference to me as a person with a delicate mind and prone to paranoia. While the first is quite true of my childhood, and understandably so, and the latter became a logical response to very threatening circumstances, I have become "rather solid" psychologically speaking, possibly due to having to overcome many difficulties.

I beg your pardon regarding my earlier statements. They were insensitive, and just as I have no means of confirming or refuting a significant proportion of the information presented here, I also have no means of ascertaining your psychological state.

Regardless, your sifting through the discrepancies in this thread is quite attentive to details as possibly being more relevant than more salient points. At ATS this is not customary, and is at least for me a welcome renewal of the discussion.

As for my keen eye for detail, well; I am an avid follower of breadcrumb trails, and have been known to spot cunningly hidden Easter Eggs well into June.

Is your background in the esoteric and the occult, leading to a certain distance towards mundane preoccupations which are subliminal if not downright holographic ?

My areas of interest are varied and ever-changing. Emerging mythologies, however, comprise a topic which has always illicted inordinate facination in me. It is here on the ragged edge of Western culture, where the twin fountainheads of fear and faith gush untempered by reason or mitigating facts that the new myths are to be found.

Are you experienced in structuring influence on others' minds and if so was this on your own or within a group with such a vocation ?

My word, no! To the contrary, I am strongly inclined to think that public discourses such as the one we are currently engaged in are precisely the sort of thing which acts as a tonic against that sort of thing. In fact, I am taken with the notion that public discourse encompassing a diverse and numerous cross-section of participants is key to our collective development.

During a recent discussion on the subject of the social value of internet forums, a good friend pointed out that the internet is not ancient Greece, to which I replied; "Quite right, but I remain a Greek." By which I mean that upholding this sort of principle should not be situationally dependent, and that even should the forum body consist of poorly educated and belligerent participants (a common complaint among users), that the exchange of ideas holds a value which transcends the quality of the ideas being expressed.

Let the record state, furthermore, that CIAgypsy's last post resolved many of my questions to my satisfaction.

There are three qualities in a poster which I find distasteful in any context: disingenuousness, a tendancy to muddy the semantic waters, and vulgarity. I believed her to be exhibiting two out of the three traits listed above, and was a tad garrulous toward her as a result. Though my reservations were allayed by her last post, I still disagree with her on the point of relativism in communication.

I agree that a perfect understanding between two parties in any given conversation can, by definition, never be reached due to the subjective nature of the mind. I agree also that one is not responsible for the the listener's biases, nor for how the substance of one's communication is ultimately interpreted by the listener. I still feel the speaker bears a responsibility to make a good faith attempt to have their ideas (and should there be an emotional subtext, their motivations) accurately apprehended by the listener. This may entail framing one's
conversations with the temperament and biases of the listener in mind, though not to the extent that the content is compromised. If the aim is not to be correctly understood, then what is the point of communicating at all?

I would also doggedly aver that presenting oneself as subscribing to an idea one believes to be false is fundamentally dishonest, however benevolent one's intentions might be. It also seems to me to be a particularly ineffective form of communication.

Regards,
M.

reply posted on 11-4-2011 @ 11:40 PM by King Seesar

reply to post by Getsmart

Yea i'v posted a link to a youtube video a few times where Donald Rumsfeld admited they were working on such things as direct energy weapons, he said this a few years back so it's no secret they have this technology and it should come as no suprise that there testing it on people.....

As far as the Thought Monitoring System at Stanford this technology has been around for a little while there just now perfecting it which is scary, i'm on record as saying this type of technology should have never been created it's in direct violation as our rights as humans too have free willl....

On a related note did you know that they have created a stereo system in which when placed in a certin direction only the person wanting to listen to music or what ever can here it and no one else it's beamed right into your head via satellite, some one on here posted a topic about it not so long ago, both the Monitoring System you talked about and the the stereo system i'v talked about are some of what is implemented in direct energy weapons.....

reply posted on 13-4-2011 @ 10:32 PM by Getsmart

reply to post by mistermonculous

Hi Mister Monculous,

No apologies needed, I actually like getting a candid glimpse of the impression I may make on other people, even if I find it is quite different from my self-image. It is true that I have pushed prudence to the extreme due to possibly unsettling experiences in the past as well as because of the need to fend off a barrage of misfortunes which most people have difficulty in believing can exist is such measure. It is easier to be cautious and then relax, than to be carefree and contend with the unexpected.

Regarding your observations about discussions being worthwhile, we can assume that when those who meet are sufficiently different to warrant an exchange yet sufficiently receptive to one another to learn this is known to be the source of civilization. So I'm glad to meet you here and hope to chat again soon. Today this is especially important because of the concerted or incumbant effort to decivilize our world by those who might have an interest in substituting for our ideas and values their own interest and control. Meanwhile, back on topic... with an anecdote.

I grown up, and a young man, I asked a childhood friend who a member of one of the old Italian families of Black Nobility, in marriage. We had known one another for some 15 years and our romance was as passionate as they get. My proposal became the laughing stock of her entourage, posted onto her kitchen wall for its share of jeers. That's what they like, it is a culture of humiliation and mockery whenever sentiment is sincere. It has in some instances merged with the 'real' jetset, not those "nouveau riches" in the people magazines. They are so creepy that some even believe them to be stealth aliens posing as humans, given their utter absence of humane propriety.

Getsmart

reply posted on 13-4-2011 @ 10:37 PM by Getsmart

reply to post by King Seesar

King Seesar,

I shall recontact my friend who is overseas at this time. I'll ask him some more details but will protect his identity. What is interesting is that he was shown this for professional reasons, having to do with the Stanford University, and they showed it to him "in operation" which really freaked him out. He didn't mention how it worked as it didn't appear that they were sharing its technology with him, only what it could do. He told me they could tune into ANYBODY's brain, read their mind and even change their thoughts !

GS

reply posted on 23-4-2011 @ 01:58 AM by Getsmart

I'm back in touch with him and will give more info on that unit at Stanford. In the meanwhile here's an interesting piece about MK Ultra Mind Control programming, in which Human Sacrifice is used to exercise power over other people's minds by satanic abuse: at minute 7:00 we learn of the CIA's involvement aided by Nazi scientist Dr Josef Mengele who concludes at minute 9:50 that "Trauma bonding and mind control work best when the victim is forced to kill someone they love, usually a Twin".

YouTube Link

It is important to note that this method of controlling people's minds using human sacrifice in rituals is ages old, dating back further than most known religions and spans most continents. The contemporary undercurrent beneath today's political power and informational influence is a branch of such a Satanic sect which was carried forward from Babylon to Canaan, on to the Khazar region and later through to Venice and its Black Nobility as well as further North into the Bavarian Illuminati which expanded into the USA from whence it was founded.

For this reason we will note a similarity in methods and practices between what is revealed in this thread, namely the ritual abuse by the Saxe Coburg Gotha family ruling both the United Kingdom and Belgium with its other branch, and those revealed as being quite extensive among the Illuminati in the USA and elsewhere in the world. Given what they go through to gain access to the lofty Elite and its power, one can legitimately say that they have sold their souls to the devil.

For the CIA with its hosts of Nazi experts did little more than extend massively beyond the natural boundaries of a few select families the methods used for gaining total power over people's minds and will. CIA mind control is therefore only the corollary of Aristocratic Rule using whatever means might be required to gain total power. For this reason the CIA has been known to be just as ruthless as the worse tyrants, and for no mystery has gone on to undertake during the past half century a wide sweeping sponsorship of tyrants and dictators.

CIA/NSA Satanist Inter-penetration at minute 2:00

YouTube Link

Getsmart

edit on 23-4-2011 by Getsmart because: the Satanists are our Leaders running the world !

reply posted on 24-4-2011 @ 06:33 AM by King Seesar

reply to post by Getsmart

Cool can't wait to hear about the unit at Stanford in the mean time here is the video link to Donald Rumsfeld from a few years back admiting that America is working on direct energy weapons.....

www.youtube.com...

Here's another video detailing what a TI (Targeted Individuals) is and sometimes gos through....

www.youtube.com...

Also if anyone is a target of such technology or is being gang (organized) stalked or is just intrested in the mater here's a website were you can learn more about these types of things......

www.freedomfchs.com...

edit on 24-4-2011 by King Seesar because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 2-5-2011 @ 06:57 PM by Cesearesque

Originally posted by Getsmart
reply to post by King Seesar

Hi King Seesar,

I think you've made an excellent point. A close friend of mine was shown a Thought Monitoring System at Stanford which they told him could scan the thoughts of anyone whose coordinates you entered. It appears that they may have graduated to other levels beyond Ultra.

GS

Wouldn't something like this be illegal? It would seem that some inventions would be a violation of human rights and therefore illegal! Have you actually seen this machine work yourself?

reply posted on 7-5-2011 @ 04:22 PM by Bobicus1980

Woh! Those are some creepy a$$ videos!