Satanic sex cult that's snaring celebrities

Originally posted by King Seesar
Ted Gunderson was the former head of the FBI in California and he exposed secrets of all this crap going on in terms of the blood cults and so on and i have studied the man for a long time, i rank him up there with Bill Cooper, the way i see it Guderson was anything but a dis-info agent, while i might not have agreed with everything he said about J. Edgar Hoover, Gunderson was on the right path...

Not exactly...

Theodore L. Gunderson (November 7, 1928 - July 31, 2011[1] was an American Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent In Charge and head of the Los Angeles FBI. He was most famous for handling the Marilyn Monroe and the John F. Kennedy cases. wiki

...and we know how well those investigations turned out.

You've chose your pill. Be happy.

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


Im not going to stand here and say the man is a saint far from it and i didn't appreciate him not seeing how what J. Edgar Hoover did in certain situations was wrong...

But we all change my friend and towards the end of his life he tried to do the right thing and he did help people out and he made a good impact at the end i think we should all be so lucky...

As far as what pill i took i chose the green one i like spearmint...

The greatest trick the devil ever played was convincing you he's not real.

If you want your mind blown go here:

vigilantcitizen.com...

Originally posted by Kang69
The greatest trick the devil ever played was convincing you he's not real.

If you want your mind blown go here:

vigilantcitizen.com...

Already stopped by there about a hour ago i think the site contains some good info some times in pointing out the esoteric/symbolism in certain areas, however the one thing i don't like is they make everything out to be a conspiracy which simply is not true in all avenues....

I think if you take about 50 percent of what is said there as legit and 50 percent of them going way overboard you will be alot closer to the truth and you too can take the green pill lol......

reply to post by Saurus

In my opinion, celebrities should be able to belong to whatever orders they like, without having to be tortured by the press with lies and tales about the nature of their involvement.

I'm sorry, do you really believe these rich, rich celebrities are being 'tortured' by a few newspaper articles?

If so, your definition of torture and that of most everyone else are very, very different. These celebrities are part of a plot to popularise the occult, and they are simply acting dumb on cue, making out like the whole arrangement is just some kinky supercool nightclub for the popular kids (or for those who want to be supercool and popular, this awesome cult can get you there..!!)

In addition, perhaps you could explain how the sacrificing of children in order to lock lesser demons into a state of obedience is anything BUT Satanic*..? Is it normal to want to summon demons? Do you actually know what demons do, or what black magicians use them for?

*Basic definitions and all that - again, you seem to be struggling.

When the OTO was established, do you suppose it was intended to be a godly path of righteousness, truth and justice? No. It was intended as an enchanting sophistry of esoteric symbols, on the surface, concealing an antichrist melting pot of hedonistic debauchery, black magic & demon worship beneath, in the deeper waters. How you expect anything resembling truth to come from a cult that sets itself in direct opposition to simple ethical principles, let alone to the acquisition of godly virtue, I do not know.

And here's a heads-up, in case you are merely ignorant (as opposed to deliberately planting misinformation &/or defending the cult to gain their favor...) Don't presume for a second that the 'good buddies' you mentioned, who either are - or claim to be - members of the OTO, have either the truth, or your best interests at heart.

Do you realise how deep the river Styx actually runs?

The persons in the heart of such groups are essentially diabolical, in the truest sense of the word. Modern adepts are following orders that were laid down a long, long time ago, and the plans are nearing fulfilment, though they will not succeed. Read 'Moonchild' by Aleister Crowley (carefully) and see what you can see.

It is not a good idea to be involved with demonic cults.

Originally posted by FlyInTheOintment
When the OTO was established, do you suppose it was intended to be a godly path of righteousness, truth and justice? No. It was intended as an enchanting sophistry of esoteric symbols, on the surface, concealing an antichrist melting pot of hedonistic debauchery, black magic & demon worship beneath, in the deeper waters. How you expect anything resembling truth to come from a cult that sets itself in direct opposition to simple ethical principles, let alone to the acquisition of godly virtue, I do not know.

I am not a member of the OTO so I don't claim to "know" anything about it. But these are the same type of things uneducated people say about freemasonry. I am not going to defend Crowley and his eccentric ways, but the OTO from the description many members have given is nothing at all like you claim. In fact, those are the things fanatical Born again pseudo-Christians would come up with. Demonize what they don't understand. All of it.

Studying esoteric symbolism is not satanic at all. It's something God loving people have taught and learned for centuries.

Don't fear it, understand it.

Like Ke$ha!! ;p A lot of Kesha's stuff is Satanic though.

Originally posted by definity
I have been reading up about this society and it seams that Mr Aleister Crowley a poet an magician pretty much had a vision in Egypt and wrote the book of Law and made the religeon Thelema (Th LEE Ma) which is like big part in the organisation I wouldn't go as far to say that the book of law is a bible since there are a few books I believe.

One thing as struck me as cool is when you leave they give you a letter of congratulations because the principle of this organisation is to be free, also you don't have to pay any money to go up the ranks so its already one up on Scientology.

edit on 24-4-2013 by definity because: (no reason given)

Haha. Ok then. Why do i pay dues then? It's,not free, and the higher u go the more u pay. The caliphate oto is all about yes sir n money.

reply to post by network dude


so are they having sex on the alter then or snuffing out burning tapers

They proly wont let NORMs join RIGHT???

Cause Peaches Geldof

reply to post by network dude


You think I'm uneducated about the stuff Crowley got up to? Have you read any of his work entitled "Confessions"..?

If you have, you'll know all about his rituals involving what were termed 'the Aethers', and so you will know for certain that he was most definitely involved in conjuring demons, and indeed was possessed by them on a goodly number of occasions.

If you have read any more about Crowley, perhaps his work entitled "Moonchild" you will know that he had a number of long-term goals that were entirely rooted in opposition to the generally accepted principles of ethics.

Further, by his own mouth/ pen, he has stated that on a number of occasions he set up rituals involving severely perverse behaviour, including bestiality, as a means of opposing the Godhead and ascending in the ranks of the forces of darkness.

I am not uneducated, and I'm sorry, you have absolutely NO right to comment on what the OTO is or is not, if you cannot see far enough past the defence of your club (masonry, which I don't actually have a problem with in general terms, so there's another false assumption you made) to realise that all secret clubs are not created equal, either in structure, intention, methods or beliefs. If you haven't even educated yourself on what Crowley did & said, how can you possibly comment on the nature and purpose of the OTO..?

Additionally, just because you happen to know a couple of people who are involved (so they say) in the OTO, that doesn't mean you are privy to their true intents & purposes - they themselves may not be aware of the intents & purposes of those more senior to themselves. Besides which, as you will be keenly aware, secret clubs will often, um, how to put this - keep things SECRET from those who are not in the club.

Crowley had long-term plans for his legacy which you either know nothing about, or are feigning ignorance regarding. And so what if I'm a Christian? I wasn't always a Christian, I was a staunch atheist (decided at the age of 8 that God couldn't possibly exist, at least not the God of the Bible, because I was too aware of science & couldn't resolve the conundrum of why the Christians were teaching the Garden of Eden story as literal fact...) Afterwards, I looked at every single available spiritual path, deliberately avoiding Christianity because it seemed too narrow-minded. I really didn't want to be a Christian, but a clear experience of the Truth eventually set me free, in spite of myself even. I became a Christian after some very strange/ bad experiences, which ultimately had quite devastating consequences, between the age of 12 and 20 (I began seeking spirituality aged around 17).

My family has ties to masonry, some other secretive groups & senior military intelligence circles; further, as a result, I know things based on personal experience that would scare the s%*t out of the majority of people in this world.

The secret societies are not all bad. But the OTO was founded with specific evil intent.

Going back to the rituals for a moment - did you know Crowley led a ritual to make a male goat have intercourse with a woman? This was deliberately done as a symbol of willful separation from Christ (the goat representing those who have rejected Him in the Book of Revelation) and deliberate rebellion against the Universal Law (issued in the OT by YHWH as part of the commandments, that bestiality is punishable by death) In designing, leading and participating in these sorts of rituals, Crowley was making a statement of rebellion against Truth, Righteousness & Justice, emphasising a deliberate choice to join with the forces of darkness. In fact, it is claimed that by his magical prowess, as a result of literally (by logical definition) evil choices, he ultimately became a 'demonic' spiritual being whilst living in the physical realm on Earth, working in harmony with the forces that he conjured.

And no, I'm not a right-wing fundamentalist who believes you MUST accept Christ whilst living on Earth in order to inherit salvation. I believe that when presented with evidence of His care & involvement in your life, or His Universal sovereignty, or when circumstance/ personal sin leaves you feeling hopeless, you should make the sensible choice.

The healthy do not need a physician, and all that.

God is merciful and compassionate beyond what most people can understand - many Christians fail to properly grasp that aspect of Truth, and some have lost all compassion as a result.

reply to post by network dude


Just to iterate further, and with less of a defensive posture - I actually agree with you on the last point you made, regarding a study of esoteric symbolism. Properly done, I believe it does lead people towards a virtuous path, and I suppose that the obvious character/ doctrinal flaws of a number of Christians makes it impossible for many seekers to count it as a valid expression of spirituality.

However, we are all wise to be cautious concerning the risks inherent in actual magical ritual, and the dangers of attempting to learn from a man who willingly set himself in opposition to proper standards of ethical conduct, who conjured and worked with literally evil demonic beings, who ultimately became similar in essence to the beasts he called upon.

reply to post by FlyInTheOintment


So, you are a member of the OTO? Could you elaborate on the teachings and why they are like they are?

I merely used Masonry as a reference to the OTO as it's a secret society which I do not know about, whereas I do know about masonry. And hearing all the puffed up lies brought by those who fear and don't understand it, I am now very cautious about believing slander of another organization based on someone's word alone. Having asked some brothers who were also members of the OTO, their explanation was one that did not make me think it's satanic, or sexual, but deeper into the philosophy and magic. (which I am just now trying to comprehend)

Like when I joined masonry, I had no real way of knowing what I was getting into except the word of the friends whom I trusted. Since I trusted them, I took a leap of faith. I don't know you and sorry to say, I don't trust you, so I am not ready to take your word over others about what it is, unless you bring first hand knowledge which I can verify.

Pleas don't take offence, I am just not going to jump on the slander bandwagon with no knowledge of what's being slandered.

reply to post by network dude


The only thing I see from your response is polite (compared to your usual style) yet somewhat aloof deflection - you are spinning the debate on its head, refusing to answer my questions, and setting up a falsehood which claims that if I'm not a member of the OTO, then I can't possibly have a valid opinon concerning it. Does that count as a strawman? I'm not a pro-debater & wasn't trained as such, but one way or another, you're spinning this thing - simply in order to avoid answering my questions, to avoid explaining why you leap to the defence of an entire organisation on the say-so of a couple of people. ''Trusted brother'' or otherwise that's a damn silly thing to be doing. I don't defend all of Christendom because I am a Christian, and neither do I defend all politicians simply because a trusted friend is a politician.

The comparison is even more astute when it comes to the defence of a secret order founded by a black magician who conjured demons & designed rituals involving bestiality, wouldn't you agree?

These friends of yours, if indeed they are friends and not mere masonic acquaintances, may not be initiated into the upper realms of the OTO, and even if they are, do you think they would tell an outsider anything that might damage the reputation of their order?

There's a famous quote from OTO as regards the 'law' they revere, you are sure to know it:

''Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law''

Quite a monstrous statement in and of itself - 'Do what pleases you, no restrictions'. However, when you look at the other supposedly complementary tenet of OTO doctrine, as follows:

''Love is the law, love under will''

You can discern two things. Firstly, the beginning of a PR campaign, to deflect attention from the dark underbelly of the group. Secondly, you can see deception.

Why? Because it is clear from simple application of logic that two distinct 'laws' are being described, though each statement is supposedly supportive of the same principle. In actual truth, one law is prime, designed to hide behind the other. Two distinct realms of conduct disguised by mollycoddling as one and the same - which they cannot possibly be.

Doing ''what thou wilt'' as ''the whole of the law'', is quite clearly a statement that has no roots in ethical conduct - there is no way on God's green earth that anything relating to 'love' can be inferred from the first statement. The second statement has thus been crafted to offer a pretence of positive limitation upon the first - allegedly (as they supposedly describe the same rule of law) binding the interpretation of the first to some form of ethical conduct.

You are surely smart enough to realise that such 'pseudo-ethical-binding', applied after the event, to the amoral primary statement of OTO's 'lawcode' is entirely logically fallacious, correct?

Deception is thus rife before we even get through the front door. Case closed.

I'm curious as to why you have not tried to defend the founder of the movement from my criticisms, instead attempting to deflect with a defence originating in the pseudo-authoritative commentary issued by two (alleged) members of the OTO. I presume you haven't attempted to defend Crowley because it is impossible to defend him, for he has literally confessed all, and others have testified about what he got up to & believed, and taught, again in abundance. Despite the wealth of material that demonstrates Crowley to have been an amoral black magician with a perverse heart of stone, you seem to think that the order he founded will have somehow declined to follow the example of the 'master' who started the ball rolling, choosing instead to follow a path diametrically opposed to his affectations of darkness?

You also state, with reference to your own quest into masonry, that you had no real idea what you were getting into. That is then used to support the false assertion that without membership, it is impossible to know what the OTO do/teach/believe. In all truth, the only thing your personal story (as used here) demonstrates, is that you are either too trusting for your own good, too lazy to research, senseless, or greedy for the gains that masonic connections are able to provide.

It does nothing to validate your assertion that nothing can be known about the OTO unless you take a 'leap of faith' & sign up.

Honestly, I'm stunned at the lacklustre response to my posts. Maybe you think I'm some sort of redneck who has no stomach for deep research into the occult. You must have missed the part where I told you I was part of a family with SS and military intelligence connections? The wolf has been on my case for 20+ years - the first ten of which sent me on a 'white rabbit' descent into hellish surreality, prior to liberty in Christ.

reply to post by network dude


I'm also interested in your take on Crowley's use of steganography in his written works. You know, the codes that are hidden from sight as even being codes, let alone the risk of interpretation by the wrong people.

'Moonchild' seems to be a good example of what I refer to.

As an aside, do you know what is meant by the term 'Moonchild'?

Originally posted by littled16
reply to post by Saurus

 

I think that any order which isn't a part of mainstream religion is going to be labeled a cult and all sorts of libelous assumptions are going to be printed about them as any story containing words like "Satanic" or "sex cult" are going to sell. Throw in celebrity devotees and the dollar figures climb substantially. It's rubbish but it sells.

Its not quite rubbish. The OTO openly states they follow The Book Of Law written by Crowley. Crowley was a drug using sex fiend who desired to be possessed by demons and ancient spirits, and claimed he was possessed when writing that book. Lots of snake and sun worship, classic pagan and satanic archtypes.

OTO is a black magic cult by definition if they follow that book. There is most likely sex and ritual abuse embedded in their occult systems.

Originally posted by FlyInTheOintment
reply to post by network dude

 

As an aside, do you know what is meant by the term 'Moonchild'?

Moonchild is a term for an infant that is conceived or born through ritualistic ceremony. The cult plans for this type of child to be raised within the rites and ceremonies, they receive abuse and programming starting at the age of 1.5 to 3 years old to split their consciousness into controllable alter states. Kubrick's last film Eyes Wide Shut is specifically about these ritual abuse systems and the dissociative identity that they create.

reply to post by FlyInTheOintment


First i want to state i think network dude is cool and have no issues with him or you or anybody, so i don't want to get in the middle of your guys DEBATE....

But you said something that resonates with me and that is the seemingly contradictory statments of ''Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law'' and ''Love is the law, love under will'' it is deceit because they are opposed however i don't believe in the actual concept of duality so i don't see a black or white i see many colors meaning many sides to a story....limiting your self and thought just to two oppsing forces is wrong in my opinion even if you want to say it's a gray area it still is a third option rendering duality useless in a sense...

So you must look at things from a more wide open bases and the thing is you are right saying those two sayings contradict so you must look at who said it and that would be Aleister Crowley and what was his motive??? from everything i read about Crowley he didn't use majik the way it was supposed to be used quite the opposite...

What i'm getting at is both statements are in contradictory but look who wrote them and by that sense they would both be black so there is really no contradictory statemates because it came from Crowley they would both fall under the category of black gvivng him credit to any statement he made is not what you intended and he doesn't deserve it, if one choses to practice majik in my opinion this is not the man to follow...

reply to post by defcon5


I agree ultimately the two statements that were referenced above ''Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law'' and ''Love is the law, love under will'' ultimately are not contradictory as i explained above, however i don't think he is the one people should go to if they want to get into majik but that's just my opinion...