~YOU~ Are The REAL Illuminati!!!

reply to post by Hefficide


Define "institutional knowledge" in this setting, if you'd be so kind. Examples and the like.

reply to post by Hefficide


intresting,

reply to post by Hefficide


Okay M. Night Shyamalan

reply to post by EnigmaticDill

Originally posted by EnigmaticDill
This thread is so full of crap.

Thanks for the opinion! If it is crap, it is well sourced and researched crap.

Originally posted by EnigmaticDill

Actually the term Illuiminati is used to broadly describe a group of people that have been "Illuminated" by Luciferian initiation. Which is described as having molten light poured into your brain, its extremely painful, and you end up with a mind so detactched from reality, with maligned hatred for God and humanity, isnt that interesting.

This then allows them access to higher forms of supposed "enlightenment" which actually equates to you copulating with a fallen angelic spirit in which you both share of Blood and engage in sexual rituals which in most cases results in the death of the person involved.

The lower levels of Freemasonry and the like are just dabbling scratching the surface of the massive New Age deception that is created by Satan. It really has nothing to do with normal human God fearing people.

Thank you for proving my point about the demonization of enlightenment and knowledge - and how, since it can no longer be controlled, the new tactic is to poison it with dis and misinformation.

And you didn't even have to source any of it to help me out!

~Heff

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Hefficide

 

Wait - you're using Dan Brown as source material? Isn't he an unreliable source?

Other than the banner graphic and to ask people to set aside any influence the author might have had upon their opinions? No.

~Heff

reply to post by Hefficide


I saw in one of your earlier posts that you were linking Dan Brown for reference material, as though using his work to support your ideas.

reply to post by subject x


That example can also apply in regard to social engineering. Changing the use of words to alter meaning. I'm not sure if "bad" itself comes into play - but it does illustrate the same concept. We associate taboo behaviors with certain words. If you can alter the context of the word, then you also take stigma away from the taboo.

In the case of illumination the opposite is the case... making something positive into a taboo.

~Heff

Originally posted by ldyserenity
reply to post by Hefficide

 

By those standards, I only ever heard of maybe three enlightened individuals. I certainly wouldn't deem myself enlightened, I am just a student with much more to learn as even those who may think they are enlightened. That's really the truth.

If you refer back to the op, the etymology of the word "enlightened" was discussed:

enlighten (v.)
late 14c., "to remove the dimness or blindness (usually figurative) from one's eyes or heart;" see en - + lighten. Old English had inlihtan. Related: Enlightened; enlightening.

Thus it merely means to learn - or even the desire to learn. Not a mastery of knowledge or a state of higher being. Just "in the light", in a way of speaking.

~Heff

reply to post by Hefficide


So are all the evil men that are now often refered to as Illuminati, actually the good guys?

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Hefficide

 

Define "institutional knowledge" in this setting, if you'd be so kind. Examples and the like.

In the case of what I am debating, one could apply this concept of institutional memory - or institutional knowledge in a variety of ways. A specific example is the very medium we are communication upon right now. The fight to control certain kinds of computer code, outlaw others, and restrict information exchange is certainly a very real part of life - in countries the world over. Governments dictate to Google what it may and may not provide to citizens when they search, for example.

It can also apply to skilled trade. University tuitions are skyrocketing, at least in the US - making access to knowledge increasingly class based and restricted.

I cannot source it right now, as I don't recall which book I read it in off hand, but one author suggested that, in the time of Leonardo Da Vinci it was possible for a resolved and intelligent man to learn just about all there was to learn. A gifted man could literally be something of a walking library containing the sum of human knowledge.

Today? People go to 12 years of school and, in some cases, 12 more and, in the end, all they've really "learned" is a very specific and narrow field. They get a base understanding of other subjects but an expertise in just one discipline. And that discipline can be so specialized as to be inapplicable elsewhere. Think computer engineer, molecular biologist, etc.

There is a lot of knowledge that vested interests don't want you to possess, but which your great grandparents ( or add a great or two ) might have considered common knowledge. Like that aspirin is made from white willow bark, etc.

Knowledge is the number one commodity in the world. And vested interests want control of it. If we allow them to accomplish this...

Back to the dark ages we go.

~Heff

reply to post by MJHerbman


That's a vague statement IMO.

Are all of the men who others suspect of being in a group called the "Illuminati" evil? I have no idea, as I haven't met any of them. But the lists I see of supposed "Illuminati" can be laughable.

Evil is subjective and our notions of it tend to be outdated. Motives and circumstances often speak to the hearts of men. A very rich and manipulative man may believe himself to be doing good - even has he destroys lives. A poor man may rationalize robbing a liquor store to feed his kids as a just act. Definitive "evil" is a very difficult thing to address.

In my mind, the fact that less than 1% of humans control 99% of the wealth is an evil. That a very small handful of men control all media is an evil.

But that's all an aside from the main topic. Word association and the psychological impact it can have upon a people as a whole. For example, thirty or forty years ago "crack" was something in sidewalk or the punch line in a joke about a plummer. Today? Totally different association - and totally different emotional revulsion to the word.

In that same sense, "illumination" - literally light, learning, wisdom.... has become negatively associated as well. Our ancestors toiled in the darkness of lack of knowledge for one and a half millennia. During this time all power was consolidated into a very small circle. It was the rediscovery of learning and knowledge, through the advent of printing that allowed our forefathers to begin to crawl out of that darkness.

Now there are those who want to place us back into that state. If they do call themselves "Illuminated" then it is a sick and twisted joke - on purpose - to mock the fact that illumination is what keeps them from total power.

~Heff

Illuminati thinks they are better then everyone with no hearts rich to the teeth

but the TSOTAC members have true spirits

"Truth Seekers of the Awaken Community"

Ben81 - Founder
Heff - CoFounder

reply to post by Hefficide


Well, I am a bit confused about your op.

If the intent was to use the Illuminati to make illumination itself look bad, then either the group consists of evil men, or the groups consists of good men that were put in a bad daylight by an evil power.

Which one of the situations do you say it is?

In that same sense, "illumination" - literally light, learning, wisdom.... has become negatively associated as well. Our ancestors toiled in the darkness of lack of knowledge for one and a half millennia. During this time all power was consolidated into a very small circle. It was the rediscovery of learning and knowledge, through the advent of printing that allowed our forefathers to begin to crawl out of that darkness.

Are saying this has devolved since the founding of the Illuminati? I think the average person knows more, and has acces to more infromation than ever before.

And personally, I have no negative association with the word enlightenment, or the idea, because of the bad image of the Illuminati at all. I can't even imagine why anyone else would either.

It's a real stretch imo.

I may be missing a point, if there is one.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Please point me to that earlier post where I sourced Dan Brown - other than in the first paragraph of the OP where I said :

To begin with, let us dispense with all preconceived notions we may have. Let us, for a few minutes, disregard Adam Weishaupt and his Bavarian creation. Let us cleanse our minds of any ideas placed there by Dan Brown or other fictional authors. Freemasonry, the Bildeberg Group, Bohemian Grove, The Trilateral Commission, The Council on Foreign Relations, and all other associations we implicate upon the word "illuminati", cast aside for just a few minutes, I beg of you. Just so we can approach these ideas with a clear head and without prejudice... and let's just look at the word for a minute:

IE a specific statement to NOT consider Dan Brown.

Thanks in advance!

~Heff

reply to post by Hefficide


Its not demonization though its reality. Theres actually quite alot of information on it out there and witness and testimony of what actually goes on in these high level occult groups, alot of these words are much older than what your using as a source for example so how could they really know, you can be sure they enjoy any deflection away from their actual activities. Whos to say the word is not actually a specific experience. The word Illuminati by its very nature is in its inner workings utilizing what you would call biblical pheonmenon on many levels. Who'd a thought maybe the Bible has some validity? Because you can find enough people out that that will tell you what they are really doing. These words are modern spins on old tricks. I'd say you need to go to the source and farther back but they are realitvely modern words. But old in practice so to speak.

It makes me think of all the groups intermingled with traditions of man and false teachings, that say Satan doesnt really exist and keep away from profound aspects of the Word or Jesus. How can you believe in only parts of it, kind of half hearted.

hehe nice thread, from early days of learning conspiracy i always had a feeling that if illuminati truely existed, i doubted they were bad guys. They wanted knowledge to the average joe, they wanted power to the average joe. They wanted us to be free. Yet today they are described and perceived as the "evil master minds"... The enslavers of hummanity... when its far more likely that its the knights templar / bloodlines just spreading propaganda against their enemys... the enemys of monarchi!... Anyways fun thread, nice read S&F

Originally posted by EnigmaticDill
reply to post by Hefficide

 

It makes me think of all the groups intermingled with traditions of man and false teachings, that say Satan doesnt really exist and keep away from profound aspects of the Word or Jesus. How can you believe in only parts of it, kind of half hearted.

edit on 9-10-2012 by EnigmaticDill because: (no reason given)

I don't recall saying that I believe in any part of either the Illuminati nor the bible?

As it happens, I do consider myself Christian, but no denomination that I have found, to date, matches my view of what "The Way' is.

Where Satan is concerned? That's a deeply complicated subject that is argued in the religious forums daily and can be understood, or misunderstood in a plethora of ways. But I believe you are implying that either I ( or the groups I am discussing ) practice secular humanism. Am I correct in this assumption? It's a bit off topic but it can and does relate.

Without going into any detail ( because we could literally fill hundreds of pages parsing through it ) "religious" people believe in a God, and, thus, behave according to that Gods will. One could use the comparative of a parent or boss even. We obey our superiors in a structured society. Luciferianism or Satanism is sorely misunderstood by most religious people. It is not worship of any fallen angel. It is worship of self. Simplified - religious people say "I deny myself this pleasure because..." and "Satantic" people say "I refuse to deny myself this pleasure based upon intangibles".

But none of this has anything to do with enlightenment or knowledge at all. For example, I was a boy scout and learned basic first aid. Later in life I went through the process of getting myself certified in first aid by the Red Cross. I learned things, things that have come in handy a few times. In fact, at the scene or a car accident some years ago, it is possible that my skills saved a womans life. If I had not possessed those skills she would almost certainly have bled to death or fallen into fatal shock before paramedics could arrive.

Knowledge is not inherently good nor evil. It is knowledge. It is a tool. How we, as individuals choose to use that tool is where the difference lay.

Nuclear power versus nuclear bomb.
Penicillin versus mustard gas.
Computer virus versus awesome new app.

How we apply the tool makes the entire difference.

In my OP I asked people to set aside preconceptions and simply look at a word. A word that, by definition should be empowering, noble, and on par with "freedom", "justice", "dignity", "charity", "respect" and many others.

Yet it is not. It is vilified and made distasteful. Why? By whom? For what end?

We can see the same thing happening now with other words. "Liberal" is now, for some, a synonym for "communist". "Conservative", for others, is now equal to "Nazi".

Who benefits from these positive and helpful concepts being twisted and redefined? It sure is not the average person who only wishes to learn, and to be kind to others and conservative in behavior. Yet, here we are... Angry, blaming one another, and learning to hate words that empower us as human beings.

Do I believe there is a small group of people, out there somewhere, dressed in black hoods and carrying out mock human sacrifice during sex rituals? Unfortunately there are a LOT of idiots in the world who probably do these kinds of things for kicks. But are the in control? Do they refer to themselves, exclusively as "the Illuminati"? I personally doubt it.

You want to see real evil? Pick just about any global conglomerate and attend their board meetings. Then you'll see the real enslavement of men and the faces of those who want us too docile and uneducated to understand the evils they subject us to.

~Heff

Call me shallow but I starred and flagged just cause you put ministry in your op.

But really, I think the thread is a reminder of how important knowledge has been to us as humans. We have progressed because of knowledge, and I agree with beezer, knowledge comes from experience, which is separate of education.

My brother once told me "knowledge is power" and I think that is what makes people's skin crawl when they talk of those secret societies you mentioned....the thought that there could possibly be groups of people, sitting at the top of the pyramid, that have secret knowledge that entitles them to a huge amount of power. That is what makes us so fascinated with these sort of groups....

But i really must question if in fact these groups truly have "secret" knowledge,or if perhaps they have the same knowledge as the rest of us, they have just used that knowledge to a different degree. I ask myself this question constantly whenever I read threads about such conspiracies.

Wouldn't it be shocking if we did finally learn the "truth" about such groups, and the "truth" was, they do not possess any "hidden" knowledge but instead simply used their own knowledge in such a way as to make themselves highly successful?

I am not saying this is the case, but I have to wonder if it might not be possible that being enlightened is not some spooky illumanti only thing, but rather it is people who are bright enough to take their knowledge and excel.

Of course for the purposes of being on ATS, it is more fun to speculate in the other direction, but really we do not know. And I doubt we will ever get "full disclosure" from any of these groups, so it is up to us to decide if the conspiracy is true based on the information we do have. I personally feel that as of right now, I do not have enough information or experience to say it is true or false.

As far as taking back the word, well.....for me it wouldn't fit, because I do not feel illuminated, I still feel very much in the dark on these subjects...and life in general. sometimes I feel like I am only scratching the surface and still have a long ways to go before I really can say I am "enlightened" on any real level. Just another reason I am on ATS.....I am only a seeker of the light.

I'm starting to think the whole point of this thread is what the "new age" is all about.

When mankind really understands as a whole, that knowledge is the ultimate power. There is far too much ignorance out there to be brothers quite yet.

We owe it to every other human on the planet, to work together. The Illuminati is you, and you owe it to everyone else to spread knowledge and truth.

Share all things, including your knowledge.

Its pretty simple to fathom...

reply to post by Mijamija


You've hit upon the exact concept!

If you get to the top you find people who have a LOT of money and usually, but not always, a lot of charisma. They usually have Ivy league educations and are generally smart people. But you can seriously go to your own towns "homeless" area - where the poor and homeless tend to congregate or are herded - and probably find a few minds every bit as sharp, insightful, and capable.

What makes one guy with a 160 IQ a CEO and another guy with a 160 IQ homeless is a debate for another thread. But the point is that the CEO didn't get where he is based upon any secret knowledge. And, even if his company does involve "secret knowledge" - like maybe a defense contractor - it's not his secret knowledge in play. It is the combined knowledge of his employees being utilized and marketed.

Since the pyramid shape is associated with this, I'll use that as a metaphor. Imagine two pyramids stuck together to resemble a diamond shape. Now imagine that one of the small ends represents the end of the dark ages - the growing mass representing the expansion of mans learning, and knowledge.

History is very clear that once that bottle opened up ( the knowledge of the ancients went mainstream again ) we entered into a cycle of extreme growth, with regard to science, medicine, art, culture, etc. This empowered the average person in ways that were not previously possible. Now one didn't have to be a priest or courtesan t have access to information.

Unfortunately the people who used to have exclusive rights to these skills were now left obsolete. The Church and the Monarchs of the world no longer served the function that has gotten them into power as Rome fell. So they adapted as information became more and more mainstream. But immediate measures started to come into play once that data stream was opened. Is it a coincidence that the Spanish Inquisition began around 1480, just a few decades after mass media came into being - through the advent of the Gutenberg printing press ( 1450 )? I say "No". I offer that it was a direct reaction to loss of exclusivity and power. The Church saw the peril their monopoly was in and went on the offensive, knowing full well that somebody like Martin Luther would eventually come along and challenge the status-quo - and he'd have a literate or at least better informed public to support him.

And the Monarchs during this period? Well, the War of the Roses, schisms in The Holy Roman Empire, and various other European outbreaks of unrest also trace to this same "opening of the gates of information". Some may be coincidental - others very obviously were not.

IMO the discovery of the New World changed the paradigm for Nobility and allowed a "compromise" if you will. The idea of Empire. If one cannot enslave their own population because the population has become informed... well then you find illiterate cultures to plunder and rule.

This stalemated the issue for awhile. But, as the American Colonies, and France began to demand liberty and true freedom... and other colonies and territories also began to rebel ( Ironically due to the Church incidentally bringing literacy with it, to the new regions as a means of trying to secure their own power in the new lands ) the stalemate failed. The power base began to shift towards the masses again.

Somewhere in all of this the idea of social engineering first began to show its face. Propaganda was realized to be a very effective tool. The idea of lying with purpose showed to be a very promising way of keeping an empowered society from exercising its own power. In this time period actuarial tables were invented, psychology started to branch off from philosophy, and social manipulation skills that, once, were only used in small groups, were adapted for mass production and consumption.

Part of that? The art of language and how to use it as a tool of manipulation. Madison Ave makes ALL of it's money using this skill, as do politicians, spin doctors, etc.

So if Madison Ave can make us crave a Snickers.... then why couldn't they also make us despise Snickers if they so chose? They obviously could.... if it were in their interest to do so.

And a literate, well informed public? Not in their best interest.

~Heff