Archive for Saturday, 8th January, 2011


I Followed a Search

One of the searches that brought someone to my blog was ‘Monarch slave that’s been woken up’.  I thought at first it was about the Queen, and today I decided to follow the search myself and see if it was real, because I doubted it.

I discovered it is about a mind control programme, Monarch Mind Control.  I tried to watch one of the videos on YouTube that it returned, but my connection is bad and keeps cutting out.  I got to the end of one interview between a woman called Brice Taylor and a man who is a former special agent and was in charge of the FBI in Los Angeles.

It also returned something about the Illuminati.  I received what claimed to be Illuminati literature and invitations, which contained a statement that they have ways of dealing with people who oppose them.  I intend to follow this search myself later and offer it now for your own information and research.

I find it hard looking at things like this, because I approach it with scepticism.  If I myself am a victim, I am sceptical about myself, as well as angry with everyone else.  That’s where my paralysis comes from and why my anger feels so toxic.  I believe I never needed to be a victim.  So it makes me sceptical about the claims of others who do not claim any responsibility in what happened to them or how they co-operated with it.  I find myself doubting the veracity of the interviews and the level of credulity expressed and what looks to a well-taught Christian eye like an attempt to extricate yourself from blame and responsibility for your own actions.  That is my Pentecostal upbringing that I believe and my former pastors continue to hold as paramount for understanding and action, unless I misinterpret them.

If I AM a victim, even if at the hands of agencies other than government agencies, there have been times when I really felt I had no choice but to do the things that were being suggested to me.  The interviewee talks about drug programmes and psychiatric assessments for updating and reinforcement, and hypnotic techniques.  It started with her father, she said, who ,when she was small , knelt in front of her and told her he had lost control of her because big things were happening and he was sorry, I think she said, because he couldn’t help her.

She was programmed to have a photographic memory.  She talked about light and sound programming, food and sleep deprivation, I think electric shocks as well.  She was used to have sex with people, including former presidents, sometimes if not always for purposes of blackmail.  The link at the end of this post will take you to a lot of similar material.

Maybe I shouldn’t be sceptical.  Maybe we didn’t have as much choice in it as I have been taught I always have, and therefore responsibility.  Who can you go to if you don’t co-operate if you are under threat, constantly bombarded and can’t think, and everyone at least pretends they don’t believe you or that it is your own fault if it is true.? Jesus might be the answer.  But he isn’t the answer on the terms of those who say he is and refuse to approach you to offer help if you don’t accept those terms.  Even if you have offended them.

I need to do some more research.  Even then I won’t know what to make of it wthout appropriate help.  And some people, especially talk radio people (does anyone bother with them?  I wish we wouldn’t) come down really heavily and scathingly on people who say things like this, dismissing it as conspiracy theories and making out it’s lunacy.  I wonder about their honesty.  It’s where the buzzwords come in.  I’m never prepared for them and the blatancy of it is always shocking, it is all pervasive and dislocates your mind, it is that deliberate and violent.  The buzzwords are deliberate.  Even if that is the only thing I can say with certainty and accuracy.  I don’t find them funny.  There was something else in the search that says that Monarch Mind Control is used to programme people for social violence.  I feel silly and that I should just lighten up and deal with situations as they arise and stop seeing connections where they don’t exist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_c7JTADT_k

Advertisements

There is a passage in the Old Testament I have been worried about for some time now, and my unease with it and my gut rejection of it as basic, primitive and misogynistic has grown.

I can’t remember where it is, but I hope church leader readers will know the part I’m talking about.  I think it might be Leviticus or one of the first 5 books.

It says if a woman is attacked or raped and she cries out for help it isn’t her fault, but if she doesn’t cry out for help it is.  Something like that.  I might be remembering it too black and white.  I can’t find it quickly because I can’t remember the wording.

I don’t think there is any provision for if she is being threatened in any other way and is afraid to shout for help.  If she is afraid to shout for help is it still her fault, and does the fact that she might also be afraid for her own life or someone else’s so doesn’t scream mean the man is not to blame for his actions?  If she feels too threatened or confused to scream or register objection outside of the situation, does that mean the man has not committed an offence?

Also, it seems to be allowing a provision that the woman might have ‘brought it on herself’ or that she deserves it in some way.  If there is that provision, people who think that of her or who want an excuse to not get involved would ignore her and judge her even if she did scream.

I might need to look it up to get a better understanding of the passage.  However, when it comes to the way people act and react and judge and reason I’ve got it right.

Edit note: I just found it and read it.  It’s Deuteronomy 22.  If it’s in a field only the man dies because there was no one to hear her scream.  If it’s in the city and she doesn’t scream, they both die because she should have screamed.  That is if she is married or engaged.  So according to the law the man should get it both ways.

Should I assume that rape and violent threat didn’t go together in those days as they do now?  Should I assume that, because of the death penalty, if the woman had screamed the man would have tried to escape?  Should I assume that these good, law-abiding people would always have obeyed the law to intervene and put a man like this to death?  The prophets are always telling them that they tolerate things they shouldn’t.  Would they have turned a blind eye like people do today?  Yes, they would, at least sometimes.  The existence of law has never been a guarantee that people are going to obey it and that wrongdoers will always be punished.  And the Bible recognises that there is lawbreaking among leaders as well, and that they also act corruptly and irresponsibly.

Sometimes Bible teachers teach this kind of passage as if the existence of the laws meant they were always kept without question.  That is bad teaching and poor understanding because it is just not true.

If she isn’t married or engaged, and a similar situation is discovered, the man has to pay the woman’s father for the offence and marry her.  They say in rape a woman’s feelings are mixed. This might seem like a monstrous rationalisation, but I wonder if this is a provision to help her deal with these feelings?  For the man it is a punishment for the offence and maybe an opportunity for expiation.  Hmm.  There is no mention of what should happen if the situation is not discovered.  I suppose it assumes consent from the woman.  At least if it isn’t discovered no one can do anything about it.  So it’s probably just a practical observation.

WAGblog: Dum Spiro Spero

"While I breathe, I hope"

Emerging From The Dark Night

Working through the Dark Night of the Soul to emerge as me.

The Elephant in the Room

Writing about my experiences with: depression, anxiety, OCD and Aspergers

The Sir Letters

A Tale of Love

The Seeker's Dungeon

Troubling the Surf with the Ocean

Seroquel Nation

Onward and upward...

We are all in this together

it's gonna be okay.

my last nerve

psychology | psychiatry | neuroscience | n stuff

A Philosopher's Blog

A Philosopher's View of the World...assuming it exists.