TransHumanism: Jolie and GaGa, poster children

reply to post by UNIT76


you didn't address anything. It is quite clear you don't understand what transhumanism is.
As for you comments about the cancer gene Jolie has, and her mastectomy to almost completely guarantee a longer life with her family......they are pathetic and rude. If you can't see that she did it in secret and the only public things they've said about it have been to help other women with cancer or these cancer genes that are very real and very scary for them....well.....lets just say i can understand the delusion that you think you know what transhumanism is lol.

My apologies Captainknots, My response was meant to address the OP. That being said, Perhaps I spoke to soon regarding the willingness of the OP to create an open dialog about his or her concerns. And to be fair I do happen to agree with some of what has been said.

I do realize that there are other pressing concerns at the moment and many are focusing their energy and love on the people of Oklahoma, mine included. I'm hoping we can get back to it when the time is right.

..it's all on how we "define" things. our values determine that.
i'd just say our values are different..

like when i said the kid who steals from my wallet is a 'thief'
like when one of you says a pacemaker or walking stick is trans humanism

what do they have in common? in their "intent"?
and how do the two analogies now relate to our discussion?

> grandpa needing a walking stick or pacemaker -doesn't- make him some kind of monster, does it?
> some punk kid going through your property with intent to steal -is- a thief, isn't he/she?

noone wanted to address these things.. choosing only to provide the 'correct' way of thinking (wiki) and the correct definitions.. noone seems to want to think for themselves.. choosing only to remind all that "these are made-up characters, not real"

two words for you: Jocelyn Wildenstein

it's not a pacemaker or a walking stick, she's radically changed her face to look like a cat..
THAT kind of unnecessary augmentation is what i'm trying to draw peoples attention to..

..and people just want to be glib and say "a walking stick is trans humanism"

..too much "discourse" for ya?

reply to post by captaintyinknots

Here's the problem: this is art imitating art, if anything.

if we had a million monkeys at a million typewriters for a million years we'd still be pondering Jocelyn Wildensteins face.. what does it matter where the influences are coming from? what matters is how they're starting to manifest into real life.. we'll see more of this..

Its a blend of a former friend and her own. So it is, like I said, her style, that caught on worldwide. Its became very popular. It has been mimicked in fashion and movies, as all popular trends are. This is in no way indicative of 'transhumanism', and the fact that you think it does worries me a little bit.

i've probably seen more gaga imagery than you think..? if i wanted to associate gaga with trans humanism exclusively i can think of much better pictures than the ones i've used in the OP.. what struck me about them (gaga and jolie) was how the cheeks were both sculpted in much the same way.. that's all. this is not the first time or the last time we'll be seeing that particular "look" either.. i could expand on this right here, beyond a mere "look" and say we've also seen similar trans humanism in a lot of Kylie Minogue videos, and in this stupid will.i.am / beiber collaboration (btw is anyone paying attention to the names of some of these people? WILL.I.AM?)

i do see both gaga and jolie as vehicles, poster-children as i called them. the more somebody knows about jolie involvement with CFR, and what CFR is and does, and how gaga was 'created' and her involvement with "luciferianism" (which we can link to the CFR again) it starts to make an interesting web..

Yeah, you are going in circles alright. You really, REALLY need to do some research on hollywood costume design before you make these silly claims. In the end, it really is quite clear that you have neither an understanding of what transhumanism is, and that you have no idea about how costume and set design are created in movies. Its a nice try, though. I guess.

well, what research would you suggest? when you yourself suggested the costume designer PROBABLY based the character off gaga's style..? see how easy it is for ideas to spead?.. and.see how easy it is to just put 2 and 2 together and get to the same conclusion? ...occum's razor and all that?

...now again, before this goes in circles, my understanding of and definition of "trans humanism" is obviously A LOT different to most of you around here.. just as a bunch of 6th graders will define "good behaviour" completely different to the way a bunch of elderly gentlemen would define good behaviour... but those same old gents will still clip those younger ones around the ear for any infraction - "ignorant of the law" or not.

i leave people to ponder my "crazy utterances" yet again..

and will anyone say if a kid stealing money from a wallet is a thief or not?
i've done some 'extra' work in film, so i know a *little* about set design and costumes.

when you say "it's a nice try" ..i know this means there are 1 or 2 tiny little things just tugging away at your brain.. good.. the worm of curiosity has burrowed its way into your head and laid its eggs >_<

there is nothing major or revelatory in the OP.. it's all about just getting those eggs in peoples brains the program is going to advance regardless of anything i type or don't type.. all i can do is get other people to start thinking about this scene in whole new ways..

Isn't it more alarming that thousands upon thousands of beautiful young people are permanently making changes to their bodies to emulate Kate Middletons' perfect nose or Jennifer Anistons' perfect chin ? Are you saying that these kinds of things are acceptable because these women are what you would consider "beautiful". This to me is the mixed message, and these people more clearly illustrate the blurred line between whats real and unreal.

i read the entirety of your post but this was all i could think to reply to for now..

..it's all connected (think "idol worship")
Middleton, Aniston... don't get me started on either ..and no, they aren't my idea of "beautiful"
"i'd rather be alone and miserable than with someone and miserable.."
they say beauty is in the eye of the beholder.. i'm not gazing at the surface layers

you mention lines being blurred between what's real and what isn't
and i'll reply that celebrities are always used to sell an unattainable lifestyle..
(a bit like a real life barbie doll)

celebrities are clothes-horses, spokespeople, "assets" and "agents"
it's funny how they assert they're in control and doing what they want to do, when we can clearly see Katy Perry doesn't want to do her brazil concert after breaking up with Russel Brand only to have her management pestering her to do it...

Dennis Rodman approached by FBI to be informant on North Korea (etc) - as i said, "assets and agents"

penny, have you seen the pics of Jocelyn Wildenstein?

..am i really out of line when i suggest (in the OP) that somebody might be influenced by these pics and opt for some kind of surgical augmentation of the cheekbones? ..and i suppose this all hinges on finding a doctor willing to do this crazy procedure, right? ..well, if we have doctors removing peoples breasts on account of some gene, is it too outlandish to suggest some doctor will cite 'conflicted body image' as reason enough to change cheekbones? ..we're already seeing this kind of thing with "sexual identity"

..how is any of this not 'transcending' what was once 'human'
because of the "intent" behind it

(this goes way beyond grandpa with a pacemaker or a walking stick)

I fail to see anything even remotely 'cloning' here, but what's more you seem to have absolutely NO idea about what transhumanism is. *facepalm*

here's someone who didn't read the whole topic.. or doesn't retain information.. there's no 'cloning' in this thread because.. uhh, noone's talking about clones... it was "analogy" ..someone already picked up on it, and i already responded to them.. try reading the thread. people who go around just wanting to facepalm people should be careful of what they're looking for..

as for "trans humanism" ...we seem to be defining it differently?

trans-
1. a prefix meaning “across,” “through,” occurring orig. in loanwords from Latin, used in particular to form verbs denoting movement or conveyance from place to place (transfer; transmit; transplant) or complete change (transform; transmute), or to form adjectives meaning “crossing,” “on the other side of,” or “going beyond” the place named (transmontane; transnational; trans-Siberian).
2. a prefix used in the names of chemical compounds that are geometric isomers having two identical atoms or groups attached on opposite sides of a molecule divided by a given plane of symmetry.

meta-
1. a prefix appearing in loanwords from Greek, with the meanings “after,” “along with,” “beyond,” “among,” “behind,” and productive in English on the Greek model: metacarpus; metalinguistics.

it's not that i have NO IDEA, my idea is just a bit more developed than others.. i mean, hey, at least i can differentiate between an old guy with a walking stick or a pacemaker and an actual "cyborg" ..a pump/valve inside a person is hardly the definition of a cybernetic organism, is it?
..evidently i think too much

you didn't address anything. It is quite clear you don't understand what transhumanism is. As for you comments about the cancer gene Jolie has, and her mastectomy to almost completely guarantee a longer life with her family......they are pathetic and rude. If you can't see that she did it in secret and the only public things they've said about it have been to help other women with cancer or these cancer genes that are very real and very scary for them....well.....lets just say i can understand the delusion that you think you know what transhumanism is lol.

right. so because my definition of trans humanism uses different glitter and macaroni it's wrong?
..does it expand any of your thinking though?
or do you still think trans humanism is all about robot arms?

..i didn't say anything about genes (that i'm aware of) do you even read the topic? maybe you got me confused with Another_Nut's comments?

reply to post by UNIT76


dont look at me lol .

I got out of this thread quietly.

I dont think you can argue with some people

And I think you are learning what I mean .

Thanks for the plug though.

And ty penny for the prayers. All of us here in okc need it atm

..so who's watching the 'news' these days?

how long have we been told anorexia is a mental condition?
(some searching online shows this research has been ongoing since 2010 in various parts of the world, but here in Australia we've just an update on the story)

Anorexia nervosa sufferers to take part in world's largest study to find ...
www.abc.net.au/ news/ 2013-05-24/ world-first-study-into-anorexia-nervosa-genetics-links/ 4710266 - View by Ixquick Proxy - Highlight

1 day ago ... Australian researchers are recruiting thousands of anorexia nervosa sufferers to try to find the genes ... Previous studies suggest genetic link

..is any of this starting to make sense yet?

here's a post from 2007, by ConspirayNut23
source > www.abovetopsecret.com...

The NWO does not control absolutely, rather it has influence. What are they doing here? They are seeking even more influence - Gathering some of the most influential Hollywood celebrities. But this one isn’t for them (I doubt she’ll be writing any papers), it’s for us. She will probably become a spokeswoman, whether directly or indirectly for the CFR. The CFR even went through the trouble of posting on their own site an Los Angeles Times article from August 15 of last year…

i underlined the relevant parts

reply to post by UNIT76


I apologize for the delay in responding to your posts Unity, spending the week with family and putting together my Grandpas' Memorial, ATS had to take a back seat.

Back to it, id like to talk about your reference to the thieving kid and the old man with the walking stick

..it's all on how we "define" things. our values determine that.
i'd just say our values are different..

like when i said the kid who steals from my wallet is a 'thief'
like when one of you says a pacemaker or walking stick is trans humanism

what do they have in common? in their "intent"?
and how do the two analogies now relate to our discussion?

> grandpa needing a walking stick or pacemaker -doesn't- make him some kind of monster, does it?
> some punk kid going through your property with intent to steal -is- a thief, isn't he/she?

The difference here that I have been talking about is the difference between the appearance of thievery and the appearance of the walking stick. For example, my daughter put together an amazing gift of photos from our lives together for mothers day. One of those photos is from a small snapshot I keep in my wallet so she had to have gone in there without my knowledge to get it. Is this thieving, I suppose technically it is, but the "intent" was a positive one.

As to the old man with the walking stick, not my example by the way, if this man is a pedophile and utilizing the walking stick in order to appear more infirm, in order to deceive then it turns out that what you thought was the case in both instances are reversed. I'm just pointing out here how knee jerk reactions to appearances are often confused. Which is exactly what you are talking about isn't it ? How confusing it can be.

two words for you: Jocelyn Wildenstein

it's not a pacemaker or a walking stick, she's radically changed her face to look like a cat..
THAT kind of unnecessary augmentation is what i'm trying to draw peoples attention to..

Again Unity, I agree wholeheartedly. What she has done to herself is a perfect example of how long term media exposure and societal pressures can encourage a person to do such things to themselves even though her self image is obviously twisted and she was unable to see that she was a beautiful young woman to begin with.

You mention that you are "not looking at the surface layers" but when it comes to Lady Gaga, I would have to suggest that perhaps you are. I feel that this is why she in particular, and again I don't disagree with your inference that TPTB are utilizing imagery to negatively influence people into drastically and permanently harming themselves, she is relentlessly attacked and used as "the poster child" for what is wrong in today's world. This would be like saying that Mel Brooks because he dressed up like Hitler is really encouraging people to accept Hitler as a good guy. Like you said earlier, you have to look beyond what is said about them and her in particular, and look to what she is really saying through representational art.

The difference here that I have been talking about is the difference between the appearance of thievery and the appearance of the walking stick. For example, my daughter put together an amazing gift of photos from our lives together for mothers day. One of those photos is from a small snapshot I keep in my wallet so she had to have gone in there without my knowledge to get it. Is this thieving, I suppose technically it is, but the "intent" was a positive one.

we were talking about "INTENT" (true motivation) ..the true motivation for your daughter wasn't "stealing"
although had the act been seen, it would probably have been construed as theft until pressed for an explanation.
that's logical.

is it logical to reorient the old man with a walking stick into a pedophile?

let's focus on one thing at a time..

..the "true motivation" for the old man wanting that stick is so he can walk easier.
not to be a cyborg.
not to be a pedophile..
..it's fascinating how some minds work..

-you're bringing up deceptive appearances? ..but... isn't... this... what.. i've.. been.. saying.. here.. all.. along?

we've gone in another circle...

As to the old man with the walking stick, not my example by the way, if this man is a pedophile and utilizing the walking stick in order to appear more infirm, in order to deceive then it turns out that what you thought was the case in both instances are reversed. I'm just pointing out here how knee jerk reactions to appearances are often confused. Which is exactly what you are talking about isn't it ? How confusing it can be.

honestly, if you're worried about such things all you can do is supervise your children and educate them.. the price of freedom being eternal vigilance and all that.. it's inevitable that a kid -MIGHT- encounter such a dirty old man, right? ...how about if a similar thing was to happen, but it wasn't a dirty old man in a park, what if it was a dirty lady on a TV set, and it was allowed in homes all over the world? ...any of this making any sense yet?

i'm trying to make this all as simple as i can, really...

You mention that you are "not looking at the surface layers" but when it comes to Lady Gaga, I would have to suggest that perhaps you are.

it's good you don't believe anything i say, but why should you believe anything gaga says either?
who's the more "real" person in all this, trying to interact with you in the deeper way? her or me?
..which one of us is more likely to be telling the truth, do you think?
this is the third time i've asked this now: gaga wants a world where people are free to be themselves but you're telling me she's against this whole body modification thing - so does gaga want a world where people are free to modify their bodies or not?

..noone can seem to answer that one

she can't have things both ways. one doesn't wear body modifications in order to be against body modifications in the same way one doesn't wear a nambla shirt and claim to be against nambla.

the longer this thread goes on, all you have to do is keep going back and seeing what AfterInfinity posted back on page 1 (here: www.abovetopsecret.com...) even pre-empting ALL of this by mentioning "intentions behind the change"

This would be like saying that Mel Brooks because he dressed up like Hitler is really encouraging people to accept Hitler as a good guy. Like you said earlier, you have to look beyond what is said about them and her in particular, and look to what she is really saying through representational art.

do you mean "satire"?

Mel Brooks and gaga are hardly in the same boat here.
it doesn't take a genius to figure out that Brooks is parodying Hitler.
it does require a bit more nous to see what gaga is parodying (hint: she worships lucifer)
propaganda is an artillery shell full of feces ..but it's still all part of the war, isn't it?

and what did Brooks actually *do* while dressed up as Hitler?
..was it anything like Charlie Chaplin as Adolf Hitler? (mockery and ridicule)

does gaga "parody" the body mods, mocks and ridicules them when she gives a concert..?

without any kind of moral foundation nothing makes sense.. this is what they are doing (eroding that foundation)
-did Brooks show the fuhrer's face all mangled-up with bullets, like a certain Tarantino film did?
-would Brooks dress up like Anne Frank for a comedy skit like Woody Allen might?
..there's layers and there's layers

gaga draws attention to "real" issues in the same way Andy Kaufman might've

a commercial seen just this afternoon for the current affairs show "A current affair" (or Today/Tonight)

we're introduced to a young (teenage) girl, sports enthusiast and athlete.. we see a picture of her at a younger age, with a swob in her mouth..

the ad snippet goes on to explain how some kind of genetic testing showed years ago she was destined to be an athlete (..and now years later, as a teen, she does indeed show an aptitude for athletics)

..anyone see where this is all going?

ok, now consider this, as usual one of the members here has made a "i'm a mason, ask me a question" topics.. naturally it degenerates into the usual arguments.. masons are evil, rah rah rah.. here's a link from where i dredged this up from
www.abovetopsecret.com...

ok, now this is a comment in that topic, by member skjord.. i've underlined something that, if you are a tinfoil hat wearer, when you see this, you will start to understand this thread more (if you don't already)

reply to post by IslandMason

Wow. With evidence like that, you just blew it all out of the water. Good thing you linked me an independent source that did an investigation of the matter, instead of a freemasonry website. Wow. Just bravo. *clap clap*

All the predictions are spot on. Let's focus on the WW3 prediction. [my note: they are talking about Albert Pike, and a letter he suposedly wrote to Mazzini...]

"The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other.

Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion...We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil

Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view.

This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time."

[my note- end of supposed letter]

Let's say that the letter is a hoax, and It never exists, (and of course, there is no actual evidence of the letter, I'm not denying this) I also have a few questions for you.

William Guy Carr wrote this in the 50's. Do you know anyone that could make a prediction like that on WW3?

Of course not. And the Middle East situation is obliviously gearing forwards that

. Furthermore; Why do you have people associated with mass murder and war crimes pushing a "New World Order".

Is this some sort of Inside joke? Is it "just for fun" or kicks?

...i hope this is all starting to make more sense as this (topic) unfolds

"the anarchist and the nihilist" ..i was musing on this weeks ago..

“Finally, it is useful to maintain in the lower classes of any nation, the ferment of revolutionary ideas, even those socialists prone to extreme violence. Atheism is bad in itself and to hijack its true purpose and work toward humane antichristian restoration, [p. 605] we need to channel it and mix it with the most exaggerated social doctrines, which are destined for failure, occasioned by a momentary disruption, immediately followed by an energetic reaction.

the above text comes from a swath of information at this website

the reason i'm at that website now is because i'm investigating a debunking of the supposed Albert Pike letters.. from where the quote in the PREVIOUS post (not this one) first references

let me try to make this as clear as possible, the dispute with the Albert Pike letters "AUTHENTICITY" is currently going on in this topic (Master Mason PHA) and seems to be about the section where Pike apparently lays out the plan for three world wars (as though some kind of prophecy) from what i can currently make out - the section i first quoted above (in the previous post, not this one) have also been referenced by three other earlier investigators and from what i can make out, those particular parts are not in dispute -- that's not my concern here, the early DATE of these writings (regardless of WHO wrote them) is my main concern

ok, so now about the excerpt.. as i said, it's from a conspiracy site itself, and is a supposed debunking, and is quite thorough (dear reader, will you also investigate this whole matter as thoroughly as i'm trying to do here? am i trying to spread deception here or am i trying to unravel the truth?)

it starts at this section

The Devil in the 19th-century, by Dr. Bataille, Volume 2, Chapter XXXV, pages 594-606. [p. 594]

“The Plan of the Secret Chiefs”

At the beginning of August 1871, that is to say less than a year after the establishment of Palladism (Supreme Rite), the “learned Luciferian Pontiff” Albert Pike received an important letter from Mazzini....*snip*

now i'm not saying all this has ANYTHING to do with the date 1871, what i am saying is - "the Devil in the 19th century" (an old obscure french publication apparently) IS the historical time-frame we are now referencing with 99.99% certainty, right??? we've finally got something pinned down?

first of all i want to say this - i went to that website, to go apparently further and further back into checking references there, because up until now i hadn't actually READ the supposed "letters", BUT the further back these leads go THE MORE EVERYTHING MAKES SENSE.. now, i am a person who has been researching "conspiracy stuff" ever since i can remember, having first experienced some nasty encounters with what i can only describe as "entities" or "aliens" when i was 3 or 4 y.o but that's not for here, what i am trying to get across here right now is: the "mythology" surrounding this Albert Pike letter, "the war prophecy" and how this is now connecting to freemasonry (apparently) and the persistent nagging claim that freemasonry is of the devil ....so all these "stories" are going back to where they always go.. whoever wrote these "letters" is even more tinfoil than i am..

finally - the significance of this particular post? ..wow.. how do i say it? ...the defenders of the faith (people like myself posting here) maintain "it doesn't really matter if the Albert Pike letters are fake.. it's the early date attributed to the writings and the content and how it turns out to be so accurate in the times we're currently living in" (a similar thing could be said of the protocols, but i won't go there)

dear reader, to me it seems at this stage.. even if these writings were mere fairy tales, the fact the writings themselves can be traced back to such an early date, and the content of these writings... it may as well be a playbook for the 20th century and 21st century now... these writings hold an amazing insight into our current situation (similar to the works of Carol Quigley do)

somewhere in among all my rambling i'd like you to know this, dear reader, i only have this peculiar insight into all this stuff because i've spent my life "researching" it.. from both angles.. i hitchhiked my way to the east and back again (if you understand that reference) ..i've experienced things that have left me a mess for days.. there is SO MUCH related to this because EVERYTHING in the world is related to this influence now.. .. you dont even have to do the "investigation" now, it's all becoming mainstream just like the "lettters" indicate

beware those gaga's and biebers'

..did i drift off-topic a little? seems not.

reply to post by UNIT76


a small but important continuation of the above..

so after reading ALL that material and not just the onslaught of that final "devil in 19th century" portion, ALL of it (the complete debunkers analysis at that web link provided above)

this is what the debunker had to say about it in the end..

Exactly what William Guy Carr was trying to pull, I’ll never know. If you’ve bared it until the end, perhaps you’re disappointed to have found nothing about a prediction of three world wars, Communism, Nazism and Zionist Illuminati – or anything of the sort. A search through the entire book, utilizing relevant word combinations, turns up nothing either. Instead, what it truly represents is the scurrilous fantasies, and militant anti-Catholicism of its author: the impostor Leo Taxil aka Dr. Bataille, who profited handsomely while having a million laughs at the expense of both Christians and Masons; who confessed that his entire corpus of anti-Masonic works – spanning twelve years and representing thousands of pages (including the translated excerpt above) – were a complete and utter fraud; a colossal yet ridiculously farcical hoax.

if the "researcher" there can't even grasp the significance of events portrayed in those early writings, FAIRY TALE or not... then.. honestly, that guy has no business "researching" conspiracies from an objective point of view...

read the material yourself HERE ... can you do that? ALL of it?

..read all of that and tell me you can find no trace of anything related to what's going on today and in more recent history..

it seems to me, the whole analysis is a hit-piece??? because it is so in-depth YET somehow so obtuse and myopic in its investigation. the fact the weblink was given by an apparent freemason (at this website on another topic) as a supposed debunking of the Albert Pike letters (when the person who supplied the material made sure to specify the authenticity was not the issue in the first place) is an indication this is used to support a 'masonic point of view'

IMPORTANT
the debunker, while they've done us a service here and revealed links to Taxil, which effectively squash the "authenticity" of the documents (which is something we've never had contention with, it's the fact that the writings exist and have "all this stuff" in them - "authentic" or no.. this is all we've ever had to go on, stuff with tenuous links like this, unless you've experienced motivating factors for yourself) - in the end, to me at least, this is about as significant to us in these times as various footage of Michael Jackson making various references to the power-structure in our times -only viewed by people some 50+ years in the future.. i think many of them might be saying "michael jackson was no authority on the situation, he was no politician or statesman" (completely overlooking how a celebrity in our day does in fact promote political issues, some are just more *aware* than others)

but i obviously think too much

..now THIS is off-topic but serves as a final conclusion of my readings (following up the analysis, supposed debunking of the "letters") ...it seems i have to post this because the quotes i'm using draw from these sources, the sources are eventually going to cast dispersion on the claims i first make, so something has to be done to address that... because dear reader, now you are going to go back out into the world once more, the battle-ground.. and if you only PARTIALLY have a grasp on this scene... you are going to eventually be drawn into the whole new-age trans-humanism agenda by somebody who really, really seems like they are trying to do you a favor

the problem with the debunker was, the same as the scoffers here earlier in this topic, they lack a SOLID moral base. that's why they quip back with stupid things like "old man with heart pump may as well be trans humanist, walking stick may as well be trans humanist" (..there's nothing "may as well" about it, like there's some kind of "uncertainty" about it? ...then they go on to chide me of the "definitions" of trans humanism) ...the uncertainty is because they are still "undecided" yet they still love to throw those "definitions" around.. i'll leave them to ponder this little conundrum

the stupidity of this - if this "fairy tale" has been in the wild for so long, any number of organized & well intended 'organizations' SUCH AS MASONRY could easily have thwarted all this

it's not about having an inquisitive mind, being smart or being able to "read between the lines" or anything like that.. the key to everything is MORALS and GOODNESS (INTENT).. if you stick to that foundation, you can't help but to tell the difference between what is "good" and what is not.. it's that simple

now back to the topic,
consider this, originally posted by member NoRegretsEver in this topic

Here is a riddle:

What does
Marcheline Bertrand (Angelina Jolies mother)
Angelina Jolie
Shania Twain
Celine Dion
Madonna Ciccione
Hillary Clinton
Chelsea Clinton
Beyonce and Solange Knowles
Avril Lavigne
and Camilla Dutchess of Cornwall have in common?

Zacharie Cloutier.
Who is also a part of the merovingian bloodline.

any of this starting to make sense yet?

reply to post by TheDoctor46

...Yes it is annoying. But the thread does not make sense to me anyway. I re read it just in case i missed something...Well i guess i did miss something....The whole point

you sound exactly like member "Nevertheless" who read the polarity-encoding topic (in its infancy) and said "please tell me this is an experiment to see if anyone can understand this?"

by all means, sir or ma'am, (and both of you?) please feel free to peruse these topics again (now that they are a little more fleshed out)

i know all about 'annoying' (...annoying is akin to "frustrating"..) it usually happens when one person is trying to explain something to another person and not being understood (..i can only blame myself for this)

did anyone see the recent Jared Leto 'in drag' pics.. looking rather like Voldemorte ..and we all remember Jared mouthing off about "how there's too many people on the planet" (etc) and the many other little "insights" into his various 'offerings'

by their fruit, we know them.


wanna know something 'really' crazy? ..if you take another look at that Maleficent poster, you'll see the "stitching" and "needle" on her chest

Since Gaga is kinda winding down they should come up with a new Gaga. Someone even more wild and crazy.

reply to post by spartacus699


thank you for your "contribution".
thank you for 'trying to yank my chain'
thank you for making your own topic (see you there)
thank you for making your position clear.

had to post in here again for the link to appear on the 'my ATS' page
as i'll probably start trying to expand on all this again at a later time..

Does anyone over the age of 12 give a damn about these and I will say it "complete wastes of sperm"?

IF there is one type of person I HATE it's these self serving celebrities!! All of them are pure scum . And to top it off they hold a ceremony for themselves once a year!! Whiny, self absorbed, pathetic excuses for humans.

Then again, without these music celebs and movie people our children would have to actually devote time and effort to learning about the universe and actual life.

It's funny, you really have to admire the so called Elites.....they really know how to cover all their bases. They really need applauding for their superiority over the rest of the world. No wonder they run the world and the rest just die in complete misery and shame for being so controlled and not having the knowledge or the balls to change a damn thing!!