Sarah Westall, Trafficking/Blackmail Cycle of Evil |410|

Altho some things are/were a deliberate conspiracy..?
Occam's razor and plurality, I think yes
They might constitute actual conspiracies, yes. But from my view, our first goal is to simply establish plurality of material argument. Establishing conspiracy is much akin to establishing proof. It comes later in the process (or most of the time not at all), making it a red herring for most discussions.

It is much like a legal case. First one establishes breach of agreement, then intent to breach (scienter), then prior intent (fraud), then racketeering (multiple parties). In that order. One cannot start with accusations of racketeering (conspiracy) because a judge might look askance at the discipline of such an accusation's legal discipline. It is best to stay away from accusations of conspiracy, and counter accusations of conspiracy theory - because neither is really relevant nor helpful. It is a rhetorical way for dishonest agents to make self appear smart.

Am I right in thinking women don't often talk on forums at Skeptiko?
This is my opinion, but we have to change the forum culture if we want new and diverse membership.

Alex has an excellent theme and depth established with his show, which merits more visibility inside the otherwise shallow disservice of the subject in other forums. This is simply my view after growing bored with the obtuse one-liners in a number of other 'paranormal' forums - but in my opinion, we need to be different. :) If we are connected with something extraordinary or maturing - then show it (and some of our members do).

But yes, gender plurality would be refreshing and vital inside any discussion of erstwhile spirit, its journey and process of learning/refinement in this realm.

Anyway - back to the topic... learning a LOT here.
 
Last edited:
Speaking as an outsider looking in (ie not american) it appears as if the political thought tulpa has taken over a lot of lives there as it has in so much of the world. Just a look at pictures of faces of Hillary supporters after her loss reminded me of a Shia or Catholic cryfest.
In my opinion If anything made America Great it was the mutual support of proudly independent individuals not a mass of sheeple.
Please dont give the Fuckers so much of your energy.
 
Here’s my conspiracy:
Somehow, somewhere, somebody in the bowels of some alphabet agency came across Alex Tskaris’ Skeptiko podcast, which went from a harmless podcast about the study of NDE’s to a podcast that started to look into the darker agendas of the elite/agencies on the consciousness front, which then became a problem, somewhere, to somebody. Cause suddenly, this articulate but arrogant, obnoxious, blowhard shows up. This blowhard is not only an expert in OBE’s and psychedelics, but he also knows exactly what’s going on with all major world events, including Syria, as well as what’s really happening within all intelligence agencies and the entire U.S. military, everywhere and at all times in history. He has the final word on what happened on 9/11 (nothing to see there, folks), and he actually knows who the hell shot JFK (surprise! It was lone wolf Oswald). This blowhard doesn’t like conspiratards, they are all just stupid -- unless it’s a conspiracy against his brilliant leader, Trump. Then the conspiracy is real. For sure. Probably initiated by that dead fake war hero McCain and that witch Hilary (she really does smell like Sulphur, you know).
The interviewee, Robert Forte, tries to join this thread's discussion at #13. Forte makes some really interesting claims at #53 and #54, which are basically ignored or dismissed/ridiculed (blowhard), who then goes on to ridicule anyone who believes in anything other than the official narrative on any world event or social engineering project (except when it concerns Trump), including the interviewee, apparently because he's got "sources" all over the IC and military. It's no wonder Forte appears to have left the conversation.
This is my opinion, but we have to change the forum culture if we want new and diverse membership. We have a small but enormous ego-troll patrol operating here (it operates in and abuses a number of paranormal forums) which harms our ability to bring in new and sincere conversants. People who want to talk about the subject and not get attacked personally the very first time they offer up an opinion.
The first two quoted posts are from AryaS.
AryaS is a female member of the forum, presumably she wants to “talk about the subject” and is no doubt sincere. She posts in various threads when she feels she has something to say and is intelligent and interesting, anything but weak. This was the very first post I’ve ever seen from her obviously troubled by someone who joined the forum. She seems to me to be exactly the type you’d like to see more of, no?
Or are you saying she’s part of this ‘enormous ego-troll patrol’ that is supposedly operating here?
I’m not personally aware of any such group affecting any conversation that I’ve seen on Skeptiko, and I’ve been a member here for some years. Isn’t it a bit dangerous making such claims without giving us a bit more concrete evidence?
 
Last edited:
let's give Ed Opperman some credit... he has some pretty powerful interviews with real police detectives who have worked these cases. ritual satanic abuse is real. we can debate numbers, and we can debate the nature of the evil, but I don't think we can debate the reality of it.
I am not actually debating the reality of it per se. I am simply saying that in this age of persistent misinformation that I do not have the resources, or, frankly, the motive to satisfy myself that a particular source is genuine. That's not to accuse the sources of anything - they just happen to be swimming in a pool inhabited by liars and con artists as well.

While I do appreciate the painful reminders that we live in a world that is nastier than we may be induced to believe, I can't and won't champion every cause. I have a few I put energy into. So my lack of motive isn't lack of care as such.
 
"Do what thou wilt" seems like a pretty stupid idea to me now, but I do remember how/why I chose it at different times in my life.
I habe to quote from Wikipedia here (because its quick an easy and, in this case, accurate):
The fundamental axiom, tenet, or boilerplate underlying Thelema—known as the "Law of Thelema"—is "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law". The traditional corresponding phrase is "Love is the law, love under will." Other common phrases, coined by Aleister Crowley, which are associated with Thelema are, "It is the mark of the mind untrained to take its own processes as valid for all men, and its own judgments for absolute truth“, and "For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result, is every way perfect.“ These expressions can be characterized as having moral, mystical, and socio-political implications. In the Thelemic worldview or model, each person has a "True Will" and (insofar as each person acts in accordance with his or her Will) the nature of a person's interactions with the world (or universe) is a form of "love" or harmony. This is expressed further by a third metaphor, "every man and every woman is a star," which portrays the distinct nature of every individual as residing in a non-overlapping point of space and time; collisions between different persons being infrequent if each is aware of—and acting in accordance with—their true purpose in life.

The trouble with what Crowley formatted lies not in what he meant, but how it has been interpreted - by fans and enemies alike. It is a stupid idea as you have characterised it, but not as Crowley intended it. I suspect that Crowley borrowed from Mills' 'On Liberty', rather like then formulators of the Wiccan rede - if it harm none, do what you will.

But it takes degree of philosophical, moral and psychological maturity that is beyond a lot of folk who style themselves as Wiccan to know what constitutes harm. In a similar manner fans and devotees of Crowley often lack the means to interpret the depth and complexity of his meaning of the Thelemite creed - but that was not atypical of Crowley's works. He was, and is, frequently misunderstood. And, I have to say, he was also wrong about a lot of things too.

A case in point is the Thelemite creed. We are not non-overlapping points in space and time. We 'overlap' through relationships and psychological influences. We exist through relationships - human to human and human to other-than-human. We do not have defined orbits or pathways - but huddles and muddles.

I am not going to write an essay on this theme - suffice to say that, when we get down to the details, it is a 'stupid idea'.
 
the real truth is quite the contrary. false memory syndrome is largely a bullshit psychological movement drummed up by some NAMBLA back phony psychologists. the 60 minutes news story that promoted this nonsense has been debunked and shown to be orchestrated
This has nothing to do with false memory syndrome, but even that is not as simple as it seems. My problem is with folk who are not of sound mind, but who are competent enough to present themselves as 'victims' or 'researchers' or 'experiencers' and who represent their own claims as being objectively true when they are nothing of the sort. This is a combination of mental illness and dishonesty that can seem to be very plausible on the surface.

It may well be that the perpetrators of such misinformation are genuine victims of some kind of abuse (but not what they claim) or sincere 'researchers' dedicated to raising awareness of matters they think need to be addressed - at the cost of 'stretching' the truth. Maybe both are right in spirit, but both are lying nonetheless.

In my professional life I have investigated many allegations of misconduct, and it has been rare that what I found has matched the allegations made. Sometimes the allegations have been made by apparently competent professionals acting on genuine belief.

For me caution is a necessity. The most dangerous thing we can do is surrender to a sense of moral outrage, and let that colour our inquiry. Some seeming sane and intelligent people think Trump is a great president. This show is named Skeptiko, remember. A presumption that one is right can fabricate truths, generate delusions and lead to error. We are all vulnerable to this all of the time in a culture that celebrates opinions over careful fact checking.
 
Perhaps we need another button (David?) that likes some of what you say, with %age degrees and sliding scale of inclination to accept/reject, perhaps colour-coded..i am joking, please don't!
Silly idea, Alice, what were you thinking! So last decade! David, let's have a palete of emojis - various facial expressions and a sliding scale from roses to a steaming pile of s**t. Aha! I see we have some not very exciting monochromatic and faint faces :eek::mad::D
 
just saying that some of the MKUltra stuff was what was considered "real psychology" at the time. some of these guys who were into BF skinner and cybernetics stuff thought that you could program the human brain the same way you program a computer. biological robot meaningless universe.

I'm suggesting we have to recognize this misstep and find a way to take into account the reality of these extended consciousness realms.
Alex,
If I understand what the Skinnerians believed at the time, the concept was that the psychedelic would get the subject past all of his prior social programming. Essentially leaving him a blank slate. Then he could be re-programmed in what ever way Skinnerians wished. Yes, that is definitely a materialist view of things.

However, what psychedelics actually often did [do] was/is get the subject past prior social programming and ego limitations such that he becomes open to a spiritual perspective. The spiritual awareness seems as though it always existed, waiting to be accessed, and is the natural state, but for social programming and ego limitations. It's like the default position once the ego has been reduced.

The psychedelic aspect of MK Ultra failed for this reason. Subjects opened to the spiritual are not predisposed to become programmable drones.

This one of the main reasons I have such a beef with Forte's conspiracy theories. By the 1960s it was known what psychedelics actually tend to do. Huxley knew. Leary most certainly knew. We don't have to guess. His research is available and we can read it. Leary's psilocybin experiments with prisoners (an approach to reducing recidivism rates) wasn't based on classical conditioning; nor even operant conditioning. It was based on using the drug to get past the prisoners' ego tape loops so they could see new spiritual potentials. And then talking about it with the therapist; as in sit on the couch Freudian or Jungian methods.

On a side note, when I say 'spiritual" I don't necessarily mean "The Light", peace, love and rainbows. A skilled shaman of the dark side could use psychedelics to get himself and his people to attune to lower earth bound vibrations or even evil itself. Fortunately, most people know better than to go there - just saying that it could, and certainly does, happen.
 
Last edited:
This has nothing to do with false memory syndrome...
https://steemit.com/pizzagate/@whitedeer9217/false-memory-syndrome-mind-control-and-pedophilia
False Memory Syndrome: Mind Control and Pedophilia

whitedeer9217 (51) in pizzagate • 2 years ago
The False Memory Syndrome has come under fire from many over the months since pedogate/pizzagate broke. It was founded by accused pedophiles and its 'Scientific Advisory Board' includes an impressive number of military intelligence and MKULTRA linked doctors. Its members have been called as expert witnesses in many legal cases,ranging from the trial of Patty Hearst to the dismissal of sex abuse victims and setting a legal precedent to have child sex abuse victims taken from their parents and placed with their abuser. Their influence on the American legal system in thinly veiled advocacy for pedophilia should be considered a crime against humanity. These individuals were not only advocating for pedophilia, they were actively destroying the lives of victims of sex abuse, and on top of that, creating a legal precedent for this abuse to continue with no recourse for victims and families to seek justice.
I have always been disgusted that the founder of the organization which spawned the infamous "False Memory Syndrome" had no psychological qualifications whatsoever. Nonetheless, the impact this "syndrome" has had mental health care and legal implications for survivors ritual, and similar abuse has been tragic and extreme.
Anyone who attempts to find comfort in the idea that these tactics are safely tucked away into the past will be sorely disappointed.
 
Just a look at pictures of faces of Hillary supporters after her loss reminded me of a Shia or Catholic cryfest.
LOL!
Please dont give the Fuckers so much of your energy.
The trouble is they'll take it anyway..your vote, your time and money, and sheer stress of disgust and frustration. Here in NZ we are a mere, tho worrying, small offshoot of America. UK and Australia are bigger (in different ways) and give them a lot.
 
I habe to quote from Wikipedia here (because its quick an easy and, in this case, accurate):
The fundamental axiom, tenet, or boilerplate underlying Thelema—known as the "Law of Thelema"—is "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law". The traditional corresponding phrase is "Love is the law, love under will." Other common phrases, coined by Aleister Crowley, which are associated with Thelema are, "It is the mark of the mind untrained to take its own processes as valid for all men, and its own judgments for absolute truth“, and "For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result, is every way perfect.“ These expressions can be characterized as having moral, mystical, and socio-political implications. In the Thelemic worldview or model, each person has a "True Will" and (insofar as each person acts in accordance with his or her Will) the nature of a person's interactions with the world (or universe) is a form of "love" or harmony. This is expressed further by a third metaphor, "every man and every woman is a star," which portrays the distinct nature of every individual as residing in a non-overlapping point of space and time; collisions between different persons being infrequent if each is aware of—and acting in accordance with—their true purpose in life.

The trouble with what Crowley formatted lies not in what he meant, but how it has been interpreted - by fans and enemies alike. It is a stupid idea as you have characterised it, but not as Crowley intended it. I suspect that Crowley borrowed from Mills' 'On Liberty', rather like then formulators of the Wiccan rede - if it harm none, do what you will.

But it takes degree of philosophical, moral and psychological maturity that is beyond a lot of folk who style themselves as Wiccan to know what constitutes harm. In a similar manner fans and devotees of Crowley often lack the means to interpret the depth and complexity of his meaning of the Thelemite creed - but that was not atypical of Crowley's works. He was, and is, frequently misunderstood. And, I have to say, he was also wrong about a lot of things too.

A case in point is the Thelemite creed. We are not non-overlapping points in space and time. We 'overlap' through relationships and psychological influences. We exist through relationships - human to human and human to other-than-human. We do not have defined orbits or pathways - but huddles and muddles.

I am not going to write an essay on this theme - suffice to say that, when we get down to the details, it is a 'stupid idea'.
way too much to cover in a post... and don't wish to denigrate truth seeking occultists... even those that fall for Crowley's bullshit, but if we look at the man... at the deeds... by all accounts Crowley was a disaster... talk about self aggrandizement!

And IMO, those that seek to parse his writings in order to redeem the despicable life he lived wind up cherry picking. so, allow me to pick as well:

Aleister Crowley on Human Sacrifice

This is a chapter taken from the book “Magick in Theory and Practice” by Aleister Crowley. The text contains comments from the editor. The term “FRATER PERDURABO” is used by the editor to refer to Crowley. The editor seems to try to obfuscate what Crowley is saying when he talks about sacrificing humans, which is marked in blue in the text.
For the highest spiritual working one must accordingly choose that victim which contains the greatest and purest force. A male child of perfect innocence and high intelligence is the most satisfactory and suitable victim.
 
Silly idea, Alice, what were you thinking! So last decade! David, let's have a palete of emojis - various facial expressions and a sliding scale from roses to a steaming pile of s**t. Aha! I see we have some not very exciting monochromatic and faint faces :eek::mad::D
I strongly disagree, except the bit about me being last decade. Cool, mathematical symbols like graphs, lines and numbers is more neutral and precise. Artistic visuals are childish and open to diverse interpretation.
 
1) I GOOGLED this at the time, and I found a link to something in a US newspaper. The statement looked quite innocent unless you knew what Abramovic's art consisted of. The article was plainly pro-Clinton, so possibly this comment has been tidied away since.
I'm not sure what to make of your emphasis on Googled. Is that an appeal to authority or an admission that whatever you found may have been less than a reliable source? I'm absolutely shocked I never saw what you are referring to shared on neither the Pizzagate Reddit or Voat, considering how heavily I read about and dug on this topic as the story was developing (I watched the Besta Pizza logo change in realtime, I watched the street cameras get turned around before the Comet Pizza "shooting" occurred, I watched the stories about the Norwegian child exploitation network get scrubbed from the majority of major outlets that reported it); if such an article existed - it would have been all over those forums and would have been pastebinned to death.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt though and believe you at least saw something attributing a comment on Abramovic to Clinton.

2) The spirit cooking email was discovered on Hillary's secret and illegal email server. One question that is rarely asked, is why she chose to set this thing up in the first place!

I mean, if nothing is investigated by the police or the MSM it is very hard to connect all the dots.
This however, is patently false. The spirit cooking e-mail comes from the Podesta leaks, not from the HRC private e-mail server leaks. Two totally different leaks, yes both hosted by Wikileaks but gathered by different methods.

"On 4 July 2016, WikiLeaks tweeted a link to a trove of emails sent or received by then-US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and released under the Freedom of Information Act.[204] The link contained 1258 emails sent from Clinton's personal mail server which were selected in terms of their relevance to the Iraq War and were apparently timed to precede the release of the UK government's Iraq Inquiry report.[205]"

"In March 2016, the personal Gmail account of John Podesta, a former White House chief of staff and chair of Hillary Clinton's 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, was compromised in a data breach, and some of his emails, many of which were work-related, were stolen. Cybersecurity researchers as well as the United States government attributed responsibility for the breach, which was accomplished via a spear-phishing attack, to the hacking group Fancy Bear. On 7 October 2016, WikiLeaks started releasing series of emails and documents sent from or received John Podesta, including Hillary Clinton's paid speeches to banks."


Myself, I am uncertain what to make of the spirit cooking business, but I am certainly glad that President Trump was not involved in anything like that!
As far as we are aware he's not. The Kushner brothers definitely run in circles that are connected with Abramovic, though.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...shner-s-brother-date-Russian-billionaire.html
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dasha-zhukova-turns-marin_b_1017643
 
I'm not sure what to make of your emphasis on Googled. Is that an appeal to authority or an admission that whatever you found may have been less than a reliable source? I'm absolutely shocked I never saw what you are referring to shared on neither the Pizzagate Reddit or Voat, considering how heavily I read about and dug on this topic as the story was developing (I watched the Besta Pizza logo change in realtime, I watched the street cameras get turned around before the Comet Pizza "shooting" occurred, I watched the stories about the Norwegian child exploitation network get scrubbed from the majority of major outlets that reported it); if such an article existed - it would have been all over those forums and would have been pastebinned to death.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt though and believe you at least saw something attributing a comment on Abramovic to Clinton.



This however, is patently false. The spirit cooking e-mail comes from the Podesta leaks, not from the HRC private e-mail server leaks. Two totally different leaks, yes both hosted by Wikileaks but gathered by different methods.

"On 4 July 2016, WikiLeaks tweeted a link to a trove of emails sent or received by then-US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and released under the Freedom of Information Act.[204] The link contained 1258 emails sent from Clinton's personal mail server which were selected in terms of their relevance to the Iraq War and were apparently timed to precede the release of the UK government's Iraq Inquiry report.[205]"

"In March 2016, the personal Gmail account of John Podesta, a former White House chief of staff and chair of Hillary Clinton's 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, was compromised in a data breach, and some of his emails, many of which were work-related, were stolen. Cybersecurity researchers as well as the United States government attributed responsibility for the breach, which was accomplished via a spear-phishing attack, to the hacking group Fancy Bear. On 7 October 2016, WikiLeaks started releasing series of emails and documents sent from or received John Podesta, including Hillary Clinton's paid speeches to banks."




As far as we are aware he's not. The Kushner brothers definitely run in circles that are connected with Abramovic, though.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...shner-s-brother-date-Russian-billionaire.html
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dasha-zhukova-turns-marin_b_1017643
Runic,

So Clinton has direct ties to Podestas...I mean she hired them to run the most important event of life, but hey...it stops there. No connection to spirit cooking, etc by Hillary.

But Kushner....well yeah...he "runs in circles connected to Abramovic".

Two totally different standards. One for people you like and a less rigorous standard for people you don't like.

Sheesh...if Kennedy had known the Podestas, the conspiracy theorists would have Satanists involved in his assassination. I mean, everyone else was based on A knows B and B knows C, rumor, hearsay and innuendo. But when Clinton is involved, well, we need to be rational and apply legal standards of evidence. LOL.

I actually agree with the standards of evidence you demand for Clinton. That's what I've been saying all along. However, I apply it to all instances and people.
 
Last edited:
Runic,
Oh ho ho,,,stop already. You're slaying me here. My sides are aching.

So Clinton has direct ties to Podestas...I mean she hired them to run the most important event of life, but hey...it stops there. No connection to spirit cooking, etc by Hillary.

But Kushner....well yeah...he "runs in circles connected to Abramovic". ....uh huh.

Two totally different standards. One for people you like and a less rigorous standard for people you don't like.

Sheesh...if Kennedy had known the Podestas, the conspiracy theorists would have Satanists involved in his assassination. I mean, everyone else was based on A knows B and B knows C, rumor, hearsay and innuendo. But when Clinton is involved, well, we need to be rational and apply legal standards of evidence. LOL.

I actually agree with the standards of evidence you demand for Clinton. That's what I've been saying all along. However, I apply it to all instances and people.
I agree with you wholeheartedly - I was trying to make the same point by sharing a such a tenuous link... I was hoping it would have been more obvious, apparently not.

You obviously haven't a damn clue who I "like." I voted for Trump, I would much rather have him in office than Killary; but I actually despise the whole lot as they're all mobsters.
 
I agree with you wholeheartedly - I was trying to make the same point by sharing a such a tenuous link... I was hoping it would have been more obvious, apparently not.

You obviously haven't a damn clue who I "like." I voted for Trump, I would much rather have him in office than Killary; but I actually despise the whole lot as they're all mobsters.
Runic,
My bad. I confused you with someone else. I was wrong. I edited out my sarcasm.

Glad we agree on standards of evidence.

Anyone in power must be somewhat akin to a mobster. How else would you get anything done in a world full of self-interested, greedy, corrupt people - some with as much, if not more, power than you have? Alliances based on shared interests (power, money, ideology) must be made - or they will be made against you. Some of your allies are going to be less than stellar, but you still need them. Sometimes an opponent must be blackmailed so as to accomplish something bigger that is positive. Sometimes an implacable foe must be destroyed, lest he destroy you. Once you start to make waves, you better be ready to fight and a man alone is nothing. He must have support. One hopes that, in the balance, more good will be done than harm.

I also find child abuse so despicable that I would hope that regardless of advancement of a good agenda that might be viable via blackmail, the molesters would caused to meet justice, but that may even be unrealistic in the short term if there are as many of those people as some are saying.

I wish we lived in a simple black/white world where more than 50% of those seeking to lead - and who are intelligent enough, grasp the issues sufficiently, have the organizational competencies, leadership skills etc, etc - were saints. But we don't.
 
Last edited:
Who were they referring to in the third part about the guy who's father was high up in the Democratic party? I don't think the name was dropped during the podcast and her youtube page is quite extensive so I haven't been able to determine who she was referring to or where to find the two part interview.
 
Top