So, here’s the thing, modern Secret Societies trace their origins back to the Math Cults of Pythagoras but we all know they existed before that. In ancient Greece it was necessary to have a wife so that one could procreate, but you taught your Philosophy to a young male who converted to your “Religion” and learned your “Philosophy”.
I am not condoning or condemning, I am just explaining. Who am I to live in condom-NATION of my moral and intellectual superiors who have more bandwidth and obviously better, moneyed, connections than I possess?
In Greek mythology, Ganymede is a divine hero whose homeland was Troy. In one version of the myth, he is abducted by Zeus, in the form of an eagle, to serve as cup-bearer in Olympus. Homer describes Ganymede as the most beautiful of mortals:
[Ganymedes] was the loveliest born of the race of mortals, and therefore
the gods caught him away to themselves, to be Zeus’ wine-pourer,
for the sake of his beauty, so he might be among the immortals.
The myth was a model for the Greek social custom of , (Pedophilia) the socially acceptable erotic relationship between an adult male and an adolescent male. The Latin form of the name was Catamitus (and also “Ganymedes”), from which the English word “catamite” is derived.
Is literally a reference to Greek Homosexuality, Pedophilia, and Trauma-based mind control.
How is James Alefantis one of the most powerful men in Washington D.C. if he only sells pizza (a pedophile metaphor for under aged pussy)? “Hot Dogs” is a metaphor for under aged, male, sex slaves. Ancient Greece never ended. Ancient Rome never ended. The Democrat thought plantation was never given up. It was just expanded in order to include all of us. WE ARE ALL SLAVES.
I started trolling and debating Atheists long ago but it wasn’t until 2012 that I really started sinking my teeth into them. My criticism of Richard Dawkins and his God Delusion book was that he had conflated Atheism with Hatred of God and created a Meritocracy of Mocking & Ridiculing the Religious. Being exposed to Nazi propaganda (as he was) in British schools (and as C. S. Lewis described) he created the Neologism “Meme” by benchmarking the Pollock Joke used by the Nazis as a form of Psychological warfare.
Atheists claim that they aren’t organized so they can’t be a religion, but they are organized enough to have lawyers and lobbyists that attack small towns with vexatious litigations in order to remove semi-religious, secular objects of veneration that are popular with the majority of residents.
Atheists claim that humans are innately moral and therefore don’t need Organized Religion (as did Devin Patrick Kelley), ignoring the fact that Neural Myelination and Epigenetics is created by repeated patterns that were passed on to children through cellular memory. Which means that in order to become “innately moral” mankind had to exert some moralizing influence on itself, namely, Religion. If all religions were equal all people would be equally morally evolved, which is obviously not the case.
If Atheism is a Morally Superior, Saving Grace, which absolves all people of their ignorance and makes them more intelligent and a connoisseur of Science then please explain to me how the God of Scientism didn’t restrain this Sociopathic Atheist from committing this crime.
Richard Dawkins is directly responsible and has leaked his own guilt by saying, “I have mixed feelings about the decline of Christianity, I feel it might be a bulwark against something worse (Islamic Terrorism).” And that tweet was most likely prompted by myself.
Hating God doesn’t make people smarter, more scientific, or more moral. It makes them obsessed.
Einstein said, “Science without Religion is Lame. Religion without Science is Blind.” Why? Because religion is the legs of science and science is the eyes of religion. Conscience is a juxtaposition of the prefix “Con” with the word “science”. “Con” means “with”. Con-Science means “With Science” so what is “With Science”? What is with science and has a moralizing influence on science? What is the connotation (con-notation) of the word “Conscience”?
Congratulations, We got Donald Trump elected so now it’s on to phase 3 of the Ban Sharia Agenda started in 2014 with the participation of Atheists, Jews, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Kurds and many others from all over the world. It would have been useless for me to mention this before now but we have successfully changed the future for the 2nd time in as many years by shifting human consciousness.
In order to get Sharia Law banned in America and the Civilized World we need President Donald J. Trump’s administration to DEFINE what constitutes a Religion. To begin that process I will start by briefly describing what Religion is based on my research into Proto-Indo-European and the Evolution of Rational Thought through History.
The root word of “Religion” is “Lig” which is Latin for Link, so Religion is Relinking or connecting which presupposes that Religion itself is not Dogmatic but necessarily is associated with change. Religion is also Relationship because it determines how we are connected or in Relationship with one another.
Philosophy is a conversation between Man and God’s Soul in the form of the World. The Philosophy created is the Soul of the Man that created it. When other people adopt that Philosophy it becomes a Religion. When they adopt that philosophy they are then in Relationship with The World and the Phenomena in the world in the same way that the original Philosopher was.
“The Soul is, in a way, Phenomena.” ~Aristotle.
Men could only get into Heaven if they had Souls, which means a Philosophy defined as a World View that was Known and not concealed and which informed the Ideas, Words, and Actions of the person that subscribed to that Belief System. The Philosopher could falsify his philosophy by not adhering to the Praxis (Practice/Process) of the philosophy or if it was demonstrated that his philosophy was false and couldn’t create good results in the world by Describing, Prescribing, and Predicting events, Science is the Explanatory Art. What that means is that the Philosophy had to be Rational in order to be considered a Valid Philosophy.
The Philosophy had to presuppose a Meritocracy of some sort that didn’t create Disparate Impact and therefore wouldn’t be considered Arbitrary which is synonymous with Tyranny and therefore Irrational. Since the only Meritocracy that doesn’t create Disparate Impact is one of Reason & Results, most philosophies claimed to worship the God of Reason. A Meritocracy of Reason doesn’t create Disparate Impact because the difference in status is created by the Skills and Abilities of the Individual and not the Philosophy itself. It is the only way to maximize the value created by the Philosophical Family which is Rational because it contributes to the Survival of that Religion.
Islam, however, is not Rational because it is Arbitrary. Instead of creating a Meritocracy of Reason & Results it creates a Meritocracy of being like Mohammed. Women and Non-Muslims are immediately precluded from this Meritocracy. Islam isn’t chosen it is forced upon people, they are converted on threat of death and are murdered if they attempt to leave the Fake Religion. Non Muslims aren’t granted any status and are treated as objects lower than animals. Therefore Islam is Arbitrary & Irrational, therefore Islam is not a Valid Philosophy, therefore Islam is not a Religion.
Religions are Moral Systems that increase the Moral Evolution of the person who adopts the Philosophy. Islam takes Violent, Tyrannical, Immorality, rationalizes it, and REBRANDS it as Morality. Based on the current definition of “Religion” literally anything could be turned into a religion. I could say, Raping Children is my religion, or Cannabalism is my religion, smoking Crack Cocaine is my religion, or Torture & Murder is my religion. While there is a Separation of Church and State there can never be a Separation from Morality and state because the General Will creates the Laws by which the State is Governed which means that the Rituals, Sacraments, & Values of the “Religion” must never Usurp the Values that come from the General Will since one is protected by and comes from the other and not the Reverse. The Sovereign which comes from the General Will can’t and mustn’t consent to protecting Values that are directly in opposition to it’s own Existence. That is unsustainable, suicidal, and irrational.
Every State has an Idea/Ideal/Idol that Represents the Highest Form of the Good (God) and therefore the body of Laws which they agree to uphold and be governed by. That Corpus of Logos/Law determines the Rights and Responsibilities of the Citizen. It Maximizes the Freedom of the Citizen by making them more than the sum of their parts. According to Jean-Jacques Rousseau, if people don’t willingly participate and they are unwilling to Leave, they must be forced to be free. It must be presupposed that those moving to the United States are doing so because they have some idea of what our Values are, they embrace them, and they are willing to defend them to the death if that is necessary.
It is OK to be a Muslim in the United States of America & the Civilized World but Sharia Law is not and will never be Welcome. Nobody should be allowed to teach or practice Sharia Law. The Wolves always want to hide among the sheep and claim to be sheep. Jesus was like Moses in that as a Law Giver he contributed to the Moral Evolution of the Law and separated the Violently Stupid wolves from those that followed the God of Reason.
Since Reason is the Antithesis of Tyranny it can never be Tyrannical. A bias towards Reason, therefore, can never by Tyrannical and the Civilized Western World must have a bias towards Reason in order to survive.
I have been delaying the writing of this blog but it has been on my mind for about 1 year. The reason that I waited this long to publish it is because I wasn’t sure that people would be ready for it, but now I know that if I wait much longer it will be too late. I was planning on writing this before it was exposed that Unapologetic NAZI George Soros was working closely with the Obama/Clinton Regime to destroy Western Civilization by massively importing Syrian Rape-fugees. It does appear that while Richard Dawkins was a useful idiot pawn for the New World Order agenda he might have begun to regret his roll as he has made statements that hint at remorse.
The Obama/Clinton Regime are no longer even attempting to not appear corrupt, they are openly flaunting their corruption and their disdain for the Rule of Law. They are so invested in their success that they can’t allow their Conspiracy to be exposed or thwarted because if it is that means that they will not only be considered Traitors, and Guilty of Treason, they will eventually be considered Enemies of Mankind and Good on Earth.
The Night of the Long Knives, also called Operation Hummingbird or, in Germany, the Röhm Putsch, or sometimes mockingly Reich Murder Week, was a purge that took place in Nazi Germany from June 30 to July 2, 1934, when the Nazi regime carried out a series of political extra-judicial executions intended to consolidate Hitler’s absolute hold on power in Germany. Many of those killed were leaders of the Sturmabteilung, the Nazis’ own paramilitary Brownshirts organization; the best-known victim was Ernst Röhm, the SA’s leader and one of Hitler’s longtime supporters and allies. Leading members of the left-wing Strasserist faction of the Nazi Party, along with its figurehead, Gregor Strasser, were also killed, as were prominent conservative anti-Nazis. (SOURCE)
In spite of having been falsified over and over again, some atheists continue on insisting that all religions are the same, in spite of the fact that the vast majority of violence on earth is done by Muslims. Atheists continue to assert that both Judeo-Christianity and Islam have reprehensible practices mentioned in them ignoring both time and logic. The parts of the bible that they complain about were written in the Abrahamic Law Code not the Mosaic or Messianic Law Codes. They were written IN BABYLON when that kind of behavior was the norm and when the Jews were individuating from the Tyrannical, Genocidal mentality which is now Iran & Iraq.
Atheists and Muslim apologists argue that Muslims in general are peaceful (ignoring that 1 of the 5 pillars of Islam is Zakat which funds the mujahedeen) and that violent Muslims are doing it incorrectly. We are going to examine this premise logically. You might consider this Arabic exegesis:
Naskh (نسخ) is an Arabic language word usually translated as “abrogation“; It is a term used in Islamic legal exegesis for seemingly contradictory material within or between the two primary sources of Islamic law: the Quran and the Sunna. Several Qur’anic verses state that some revelations have been abrogated and substituted by later revelations. Which are understood by most Muslim scholars as pertaining to the verses of the Quran itself.
The principle of abrogation of an older verse by a new verse of Quran, or within the Hadiths is a well established principle in Sharia. The possibility of abrogation between these two primary sources of Islam, though, has been a more contentious issue. The allowability of abrogation between sources has been one of the major differences between the Shafi’i and Hanafi fiqhs, with Shafi’i sect of jurisprudence forbidding abrogation by the Sunna of the Qur’ān, while Hanafi sect allowing abrogation by the Sunna of the Qur’ān.
Let’s examine the logic of this practice, if you are going to use the philosophy of Islam you are making a tacit appeal to the Authority of Mohammed. In doing so you have to admit that Mad Moe knew himself better than anyone else, he also knew what he thought when he was younger. So if he contradicted himself you have to assume that the last thing he said was more correct than the first thin he said or else you have to offer some explanation for the disparity which would presuppose the person making the judgment has more authority than the prophet that they follow which would be illogical.
In the same vein Atheists and Muslim apologists have to admit and acknowledge that while the Judeo-Christian scriptures started off more violent than they ended (after all Jesus was not a murderer and didn’t condone murder, while Mohammed was a child raping genocidal, serial, murderer) that Judeo-Christianity is peaceful and therefore actually a religion of peace as are most other major religions in the world.
Anyway, the Muslim apologists might be able to fool the weak minded Atheists and Lib-tard progressives but in their heart of hearts they know that they are lying and that Islam is not a religion of peace and can never evolve. I call on all Atheists to drop this line of reasoning and I condemn Richard Dawkins for the first chapter of his book The God Delusion.
A cabal is a group of people united in some close design together, usually to promote their private views or interests in a church, state, or other community, often by intrigue, usually unbeknownst to persons outside their group. Cabals are sometimes secret societies composed of a few designing persons, and at other times are manifestations of emergent behavior in society or governance on the part of a community of persons who have well established public affiliation or kinship. The term can also be used to refer to the designs of such persons or to the practical consequences of their emergent behavior, and also holds a general meaning of intrigue and conspiracy. The use of this term usually carries strong connotations of shadowy corners, back rooms and insidious influence. The term is frequently used in conspiracy theories; some Masonic conspiracy theories describe Freemasonry as an internationalist secret cabal.
For those of you who haven’t figured it out yet, the Obama Cabal is trying to start a violent, Islamo-Fascist Revolution while not appearing to be the cause so he can step in as the Voice of Reason, pardon them, & reform the Government in the way he sees fit. Which means taking away our guns, replacing the Police, dismantling the Armed Forces & empowering the Muslim dominant United Nations in order to consolidate all Authority into a One World Government, at which point Obama will assume High Office in the United Nations…
I can tell you that he is in league with the Nation Of Islam, community organizers and the protests on college campuses as well as the Black lives matter protestors. Al Sharpton is in his pocket because of not paying his taxes. Jay-Z and the vast majority of the musicians are working with him including Madonna, Prince, Lil Wayne, Drake, Chris Brown, Beyoncé, Lon Milo Duquette, and others including a growing number of actors and actresses. The Freemasons are being infiltrated by the NOI & the Muslim Brotherhood. The Ivy League Colleges, are participating with Obama’s agenda as well as Richard Dawkins, Stephen Pinker, and Noam Chomsky. Also the Secret Scientist panel that determines what is and is not Pseudo-science for the TED talks is part of the plot as is Bill Gates, Starbucks, Mark Zuckerberg, & Muhammad Yunus from World Bank.
The Hobbit does have Christian themes.
Tolkien was a philologist and a linguist much like myself. He was in fact so Christian that he converted C. S. Lewis to Christianity who had overt Christian themes in his literature. In school they had a creative writing group known as “The Inklings”. He did not overtly put Christian themes in his book but upon later inspection as he was editing it, he had to admit that the patterns were there.
People say, “Look, God’s not mentioned in The Hobbit or Lord of the Rings. There’s no churches, no priest, no Bible. There’s no Jesus. How can you say it’s Christian?” And I said, “Here’s the deal. You can’t see that it’s Christian because you live in the Christian world where there is right and wrong and there is truth. I don’t know if you know any friends who don’t believe that there’s right or wrong and don’t believe there’s such a thing as truth. That’s the non-Christian world.” I mean, that’s the world without God. J. R. R. Tolkien SOURCE HERE
Something that C. S. Lewis said actually helped me when I was psychologically profiling Richard Dawkins. It helped me understand the environment that he grew up in and the impact that environment had on him. At that point I understood what it was that he was concealing about himself based on his rhetoric. Dawkins grew up in the same Atheist environment that Tolkien and Lewis grew up in but instead of rebelling against it his weaker mind bowed to it.
…If you have not been at such a school as Wyvern, you may ask what a Blood is. He is a member of the school aristocracy. Foreign readers must clearly understand that this aristocracy has nothing whatever to do with the social position of the boys in the outer world. Boys of good, or wealthy, family are no more likely to be in it than anyone else; the only nobleman in my House at Wyvern never became a Blood. Shortly before my time there the son of a very queer customer had been at least on the fringe of Bloodery. The qualifying condition for Bloodery is that one should have been at the school for a considerable time….
…At some schools, I am told, there is a sort of dyarchy. An aristocracy of Bloods, supported or at least tolerated by popular sentiment, stands over against an official ruling class of prefects appointed by the Masters. I believe they usually appoint it from the highest form, so that it has some claim to be an intelligentsia… Their position was emphasized by special liberties, clothes, priorities, and dignities which affected every side of school life…. …At the Coll the lowest social class of all were too young, therefore too weak, to dream of revolt. In the middle class—boys who were no longer fags but not yet Bloods—those who alone had physical strength and popularity enough to qualify them as leaders of a revolution were already beginning to hope for Bloodery themselves. It suited them better to accelerate their social progress by courting the existing Bloods than to risk a revolt …
It is possible that some readers will not know what a House Tart was. First, as to the adjective. All life at Wyvern was lived, so to speak, in the two concentric circles of Coll and House. You could be a Coll pre or merely a House pre. You could be a Coll Blood or merely a House Blood, a Coll Punt (i. e., a pariah, an unpopular person) or merely a House Punt; and of course a Coll Tart or merely a House Tart. A Tart is a pretty and effeminate-looking small boy who acts as a catamite to one or more of his seniors, usually Bloods. Usually, not always. Though our oligarchy kept most of the amenities of life to themselves, they were, on this point, liberal; they did not impose chastity on the middle-class boy in addition to all his other disabilities. Pederasty among the lower classes was not “side,” or at least not serious side; not like putting one’s hands in one’s pockets or wearing one’s coat unbuttoned. The gods had a sense of proportion.
The Tarts had an important function to play in making school (what it was advertised to be) a preparation for public life. They were not like slaves, for their favors were (nearly always) solicited, not compelled. Nor were they exactly like prostitutes, for the liaison often had some permanence and, far from being merely sensual, was highly sentimentalized. Nor were they paid (in hard cash, I mean) for their services; though of course they had all the flattery, unofficial influence, favor, and privileges which the mistresses of the great have always enjoyed in adult society. That was where the Preparation for Public Life came in. It would appear from Mr. Arnold Lunn’s Harrovians that the Tarts at his school acted as informers.
As I have hinted before, the fagging system is the chief medium by which the Bloods, without breaking any rule, can make a junior boy’s life a weariness to him. Different schools have different kinds of fagging. At some of them, individual Bloods have individual fags… …Fagging with us was as impersonal as the labor market in Victorian England; in that way, too, the Coll was a preparation for public life. All boys under a certain seniority constituted a labor pool, the common property of all the Bloods. When a Blood wanted his O.T.C, kit brushed and polished, or his boots cleaned, or his study “done out,” or his tea made, he shouted. SURPRISED BY JOY, C. S. LEWIS AUTOBIOGRAPHY
Come with me as we take a little walk through the halls of the profound liberal psychosis. It all started as I was minding my own business doing my advocacy for the veterans, police, and armed forces I posted this photo:
…in the United States Marine Corps community under the motivation and inspiration category. Shortly after that I was trolled by this anonymous troll sock account that posted a link to a soldier with their legs blown off.
And this anonymous troll sock account describes HIMSELF this way:
I go to his wall to see if he is an liberal atheist troll as I suspect he is and find that he has posted a screen shot of me and a link to our conversation in an Atheist Troll Group inviting people to harass and report me. I inform him that he is trolling me and harassing me and commenting on my posts, I ask him if he is armed forces and he refuses to answer even though asked repeatedly, after attempting to scare him off without threatening to do him physical harm or anything illegal I delete his comments and report him to Google +. I tell him to stay off my posts, block me, or ignore me. He Screenshoots my comments and again posts them in his troll group. Here is his screenshot.
Though I don’t care who they are or what they are doing they all seem quite the authority on me. Now, bare in mind, I don’t know the people that appear to have intimate knowledge of me that are joking about being trolls in their troll group.
So while I am ignoring their colluding against me I continue with my advocacy with my bizarre sense of humor hoping that they will choose to ignore me and leave me alone. I upload a .gif file and in joke form I make a kind of humorous prediction about the way things are going in the United States of America, and Obama’s Anti-America bias.
But why should I tell you how I tagged it when I can post what the trolls screen shot as they were lurking my account instead of leaving me alone and minding their own business?
So lets examine the way in which their behavior reveals their psyche. First of all they have reified their own goodness in themselves, they are good no matter what they do or how low they stoop, that is psychopathic. Secondly the presupposition of their own authority to spy on others, punish others, and violate the boundaries of others. They have an morbidly emotional obsession, they can’t stop looking for the thing that they hate. When they are defended against, they feel attacked. So they cause the problem and then feel attacked when they are defended against. If they could allow the free expression of others and mind their own business there wouldn’t be a problem. But they feel smarter than everybody else while at the same time demonstrating their own incorrectness and stupidity which they refuse to admit, or change, or stop. In their arrogance they think they have the right to control or influence how people express themselves in order to control what can be communicated and agreed upon by society. These people are the problem. They are psychopaths, closeted, narcissistic, comorbid, control freaks who have no respect for boundaries or personal freedoms.
So when they reported my posts in a group in which I was participating, and in my own groups, and joined groups to report all of my posts what did Google + admin do? Suspended my account.
The popularity & influence of Richard Dawkins is quickly diminishing as people become hip to his cunning strategy to usurp the Religious & Moral authority of Judeo-Christianity and indoctrinate everyone into Scientism. It is noteworthy that Hitler made science the state religion and was under the delusion that he was doing science (scientific socialism). Richard Dawkins famously defended Hitler when he said: “If we do not acknowledge some sort of external [standard], what is to prevent us from saying that the Muslim [extremists] aren’t right?”, Richard Dawkins replied, “What’s to prevent us from saying Hitler wasn’t right? I mean, that is a genuinely difficult question. But whatever [defines morality], it’s not the Bible. If it was, we’d be stoning people for breaking the Sabbath.”
While he asks leading questions that invite people to think that morality can have anything to do with Atheism he doesn’t offer an explanation for how morality evolved. While suggesting that humans are innately moral without religion he doesn’t offer any explanation of what morality is, & what is moral. Does the morality of people from Papua New Guinea that allows them to eat other humans constitute morality? This is also happening in Islam in Syria and in South East Asia in Myanmar. Do the Muslim virtues of child brides and cutting off the heads of infidels constitute morality? It is of note that he ignores the fact that the Sabbath was a human rights coupe and that in order to make the first holiday so that any person wouldn’t have to work 7 days a week or compete with someone who worked 7 days a week or who owned slaves and forced them all to work seven days a week god had to be asserted as a reason why a day of rest was necessary and people had to be forced to comply. While it is obvious that some psychopathic authoritarians took enforcing the laws to seriously the intent of the original law was obvious and good. It is also of note that stoning was a common punishment back then and just because it was mentioned in the bible doesn’t mean that God or Religion invented stoning. Judeo-Christianity started when the Hebrews were individuating their identity from that of the Babylonian/Persians. In Jesus time it was these same people who were using the practice that Jesus frowned on. He told his disciples not to go to the Romans or even enter a Samaritan camp. Today there is one religion that is stoning people.
It would be one thing if this was the first time he had used this strategy, but it isn’t, he repeated and benchmarked the very same devious argument he used in the opening chapter of his book the GOD DELUSION (https://atheistfallacies.wordpress.com/2014/05/18/the-hypnotic-narrative-of-richard-dawkins/). Richard Dawkins must think himself quite clever when he equivocates all religions with each other, excuses Muslims from personal responsibility, & then says that Christians are actually being “self-Centered” when they try to “curry favor” with their god, & that is their motivation for doing good in life. Notice that he only asks inviting questions, he doesn’t communicate transparently explaining what constitutes virtue & morality and how those virtues came to exist. He suggests that humans might be innately moral which tacitly suggests that all virtues humans possess are equally moral. Christopher Hitchens used this same strategy with his Hitchens challenge (https://atheistfallacies.wordpress.com/2014/04/02/christopher-hitchens-challenge-dissolved/) Atheism is not a moral system. Atheism is amoral. To suggest that you can have a society in which people pick and choose what constitutes their morality is anarchy. You can’t actually get people to agree on what the laws of the state will be and you can’t force compliance. You cannot rely on the innate morality of people and have a successful society. If atheist picking and choosing of their values allows them to lie, or communicate in a crafty and scheming way then their testimony is worthless. Now that I have shown you his modus operandi, and how he obfuscates using arbitrary polemics in the form of false dichotomies, conflates, conceals, and asks leading questions let’s see if you can see his strategy now. Let’s see if you notice the repetition of the exact same wily tactics.
The manipulative charismatic leader of the Dawkinite cult recently said in an interview in Ireland that the 9/11 hijackers weren’t responsible for their actions but that Religion makes people do evil things. Presupposing that Islam is a Religion & not a death cult he went on to equivocate between all religions & assert that Christians who do good deeds to “curry favor” with God are “self-centered”. He argues that it is insulting to suggest that people can’t be good without Religion but fails to offer a scientific explanation for the origins of morality.