Dupes of Non-Physical

Right. Right. Forgot that. So, what we have here is the book of Deuteronomy,
followed by the Constitution of Mexico and the U.S. Declaration of Independence.

This text begins appearing on the Cash Flow message board in the third hour
(about 17 min. into the third hour).

Bob asks why the text is being posted. iON says for "edufumacation" (edufimication?).
Bob says, "moralizing" and iON chuckles (not sure what to read into that response).

Bob asks if this is a parallel world communication, and iON says, "Good as any".

Bob and James speculate (around the 21 min. mark) that the posting of the biblical
material is a form of assault on, or counterpoint to the group's (iON et al.) position or
perspective. iON interjects and suggests it could also be a statement or form of
agreement.

It should be noted here that iON suggested (during the show, and indicated in Bob's
thread title) posting all of this.

We should also note that there are two large blank spaces (not sure how that's
possible), followed by twenty-two instances of a time stamp with no message.
These twenty-two instances show the exact same time: "13:14".



If we read the message as originating from non-physical / a parallel world as suggested,
then it takes on a larger significance.

We can then start with Deuteronomy and recognize the sentiment as, essentially,
"the LORD's Promise to Israel at Horeb".

A couple of questions come to mind. Is the timing significant?

We've wandered in the wilderness, this is for sure. So, is this a message to the so-called
Isrealites (we know who they are)?

Is it simply a recognition of the Promise, or is it a declaration that God's wrath is about
to be unleashed?

Hoping Bob reads this before today's Cash Flow and may consider addressing it on
the show.

Bob, thank you for addressing this (re: my above post) with iON.

For those who don't know what this is about, read my first post in
this thread.

Bob read my post and questions in the second hour of the 4/20/11
Cash Flow around the 15 min. mark.

What Bob asked iON on my behalf (in reference to the anomalous Cash
Flow chat board postings) was, "Is the timing significant?"

What I meant there is, was the timing of iON's (or whomever's)
posting of that material on the chat board at this time significant?

I was sort of inquiring as to whether or not it indicated or presaged
a sort of imminent uptick or shift in events (in either Outer Kingdom,
or Middle Kingdom).

I also asked if this was a message to the Isrealites (as is indicated in
Deuteronomy), to which iON offers his trademark bullshit sneeze,
"ah, ah, ah, ah - Koathanites!"

The spelling there is similar to Kohathites, which may be to whom iON
is directly referring(?). iON is well-known for humorously altering words.

If this is the case, then the Promise would be made, perhaps alluded
to in iON's response, to the Kohathites?

Bob says (on the show) that what iON might be referring to is a "secret"
part of the bible referring to RNA Drops.

Are these two groups (the secret sect indicated by Bob and the Kohathites)
related?

Here is some information on the Kohathites,



MORE HERE - http://bit.ly/dLLjUP

Listening closely there, as I know the text of Deuteronomy
does include unascended / little man references, I was still
able to gather that the timing was significant; and if the
second question didn't include the God's wrath thing, that
this was likely a renewal / reiteration of the Promise.

What's the Promise? It is the Promise to offer, or have God's
chosen people (whomever they are, as iON offered an alternative
in his sneeze reference) enter the Promised Land.

If we take Bob's reference to the secret sect in the bible as
being referenced here (which includes the RNA Drops / drops
users), and an earlier reference in the show from iON about no
longer being in the "cheap seats" (or something to that effect),
then the anomalous chat board posting would either be simply
a reminder to folks in the know about their place, or would be
interjected just prior to some sort of significant event for those
folks.

I could be reaching here, but the messages were posted, and
their message is clear. Just trying to add context...

I wanted to note also that my including the words "God will unleash
his wrath" were just citing Deuteronomy.

I didn't post the Deuteronomy passage, iON / non-physical, or a
parallel worlder did. And that text contains passages of "God"
unleashing a wrath upon the nations.

My inquiry was more directed to the effects of that so-called wrath
and not a statement that we have a wrathful God on our hands,
because as iON stated, we don't.

The reason I included that phrase was to quote directly from
Deuteronomy, but also to inquire if there was an imminent Outer
Kingdom event that this sort of a passage would allude to.

It should be clarified that, yes, God / ascended man does not have
wrath. Neither are they involved with / troubled by little man Outer
Kingdom issues.

Ascended man's a pretty happy guy.

What we do have are effects (damage, in whatever form) on the Outer
Kingdom, which might be considered simply stages of deconstruction
that occurs as the shifting unfolds / veil lifts.

It is these events that I was more inquiring about; the effects.

In hindsight, I should have rephrased that or left it out, so as not
to confuse Cash Flow listeners not yet keen on the state of things.

Fortunately, iON cleaned that up immediately, so that's good.

I guess we'll shortly see if there was a purpose to the hijacking
of the Cash Flow chat board or not...

Bart

perhaps pointing at the unificatION of mexico and the us... anyone seen 'masked and anoynomous' starring BOB dylan.... it is set in post-apocylptic north american unION context... bob is trying to get back to the stage the whole movie... 'i gotta get back to the stage'

I couldn't resist.

Feb. 15/67 (New York)

Dobbs: I was reading an old interview with that young folk singer, Bob Dylan, the other day,
trying to see why he's so popular. He mentioned he read some Kant in college. What do you
think of Kant as a philosopher?

LaRouche: [By the way, Bob said on the 4/13 or 4/20 Cash Flow show that I tend toward the
"Lyndy" quadrant on his chart. I'll figure it out sometime...] I dip into the Kant said there is no
such thing as a cognizable creative process by which scientific discoveries are made. He also
said later there is no cognizable process by which you can judge whether a form of art is good or not.
It's all arbitrary.

Now I don't agree with that at all. I operate on the exact opposite principle--that you can know
the creative process. How does one come to this knowledge? By re-experiencing the act of discovery
by original discoverers of principle from the past - beginning, in most cases, with the ancient Greeks.

By reliving the paradox or problem, then reliving the flash of insight, and then reliving the proof of
the principle, followed by the idea of applying the principle - by knowing, rather than memorizing, the
most crucial experiences of scientific discovery and art in the known history of mankind, you learn
nothing, but you know everything.

And the tragedy is that Kant has greater influence today because he was resurrected by the likes of
Norbert Wiener and his “information theory.”

Bob Dylan is a product of an educational system that is organized around the principle of learning, and
not knowing. He makes bad art!

...

BOB'S TIMELINE - http://bit.ly/faOp9Q

Maybe the union you're speaking of is a fait accompli. I just wonder how or where Deuteronomy
fits in there...

Bart

Sounds like Lindy is coming from the Gnostic way of knowing.

An Introduction to Gnosticism and
The Nag Hammadi Library

What is Gnosticism?

“Gnosis” and “Gnosticism” are still rather arcane terms, though in the last two decades they have been increasingly encountered in the vocabulary of contemporary society. The word Gnosis derives from Greek and connotes "knowledge" or the "act of knowing". On first hearing, it is sometimes confused with another more common term of the same root but opposite sense: agnostic, literally "not knowing”. The Greek language differentiates between rational, propositional knowledge, and a distinct form of knowing obtained by experience or perception. It is this latter knowledge gained from interior comprehension and personal experience that constitutes gnosis.

In the first century of the Christian era the term “Gnostic” came to denote a heterodox segment of the diverse new Christian community. Among early followers of Christ it appears there were groups who delineated themselves from the greater household of the Church by claiming not simply a belief in Christ and his message, but a "special witness" or revelatory experience of the divine. It was this experience or gnosis that set the true follower of Christ apart, so they asserted. Stephan Hoeller explains that these Christians held a "conviction that direct, personal and absolute knowledge of the authentic truths of existence is accessible to human beings, and, moreover, that the attainment of such knowledge must always constitute the supreme achievement of human life."

xox
TayZay

BOB: No, LaRouche reagrds Gnosticism as his long-standing enemy. A sample:

[[The peril this nation is imminently confronted with, in fact the peril to the whole human species, is nothing less than complete elimination of what mankind has historically regarded as its soul. Our brainwashers are proposing the complete extirpation of mankind's inner sense of identity, and the placement, in the vacant space, of an artificial, synthetic pseudo-soul.

Before you howl "incredible!" you ought to review the technical study that was prepared in May 1974 by the Stanford Research Institute, whose contents were later used in popularized form in Marilyn Ferguson's book.

The study is entitled Changing Images of Man, Contract Number URH(489)-2150, Policy Research Report No.4/4.74, prepared by SRI Center for the Study of Social Policy, Willis Harman, Director. Dr. Harmon later personally coached Marilyn Ferguson in writing her popularized version, The Aquarian Conspiracy. The 319-page mimeographed SRI report was prepared by a team of 14 researchers and supervised by a supervisory panel of 23 controllers, including anthropologist Margaret Mead, psychologist B.F. Skinner, Ervin Laszlo of the United Nations, Sir Geoffrey Vickers of British intelligence and others.

The study begins with the argument that the fundamental self-conception of mankind, the "image" that mankind has of itself, determines the behavior of mankind. To change mankind's behavior from industrial progress to "spiritualism", one must first force a change in mankind's "self image".... The report asserts that in our present society, the "image of industrial and technological man" is obsolete and must be "discarded".... The image of man appropriate to that new era must be sought, synthesized and then wired into mankind's brains. The SRI report conducts a summary review of the "dominant images of humankind throughout history" from 250,000 B.C. to the present. It identifies 19 "images of man" that dominated in various epochs. From each one of those it extracts such features as are useful in replacing the "industrial-technological image". Totemism and identification with animals in the Upper Paleolithic era is reported useful today; the "farmer son of Goddess earth" of the neolithic era is useful; the Sumerian image of submission to ruling elites must be retained in the postindustrial image; the Old Testament image of man having "dominion over nature" is dangerous and must be dropped; the Zoroastrian image needs to "be worked on"; the Indian image of yogi is good, will contribute to the "self-realization ethic"; the Chinese Confucius image will contribute to the "ecological ethic" of our future society; the Greek dionysian/mystical image can contribute to deemphasize material overconsumption; the Greek apollonian image can help combat the "technological ethic"; the Christian image of the New Testament must be reworked; the Christian image of the Gnostic Gospels can contribute a new "self-realization ethic"; but, the image that emerged from the Italian Renaissance, the "economic man", individualist, rationalist, materialist, seeking objective knowledge, this is inappropriate and must be discarded.]] - LaRouche, Citizens For. "Stamp Out the Aquarian Conspiracy". Published by Citizens for LaRouche, June, 1980, pp.11&12

Three other articles/samples:

http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2000/t ... _2743.html

http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1 ... empire.pdf

http://www.larouchepub.com/lar/2006/334 ... gress.html


Bob Neveritt

I haven't read (or read about) LaRouche. The Wiki page entry isn't flattering (http://bit.ly/rhtsP);
which, I gather, is based on public sentiment / record of a man doing battle with these bizarre
programs and the groups undertaking them of which the general public wasn't aware.

You're only seeing this guy making these proclamations to an invisible enemy (Don Quixote comes
to mind).

I can see why you said I was "tending" (paraphrasing) toward the LaRouche quadrant, Bob.

My writings have indeed addressed conspiracy-related material; and I do recognize the folly in
the image-making that's been foisted upon us; from whatever sector (a bit of a revelation in what
you've presented there, still.).

My approach is similar to LaRouche's as far as the sincerity behind my writing, and one of the
driving forces, which is to offer up my insights into what I see as the nature of things - or, at
least where we have been mislead along those lines.

But apart from that, my writing is simply an expression; and I'm not battling any forces, or trying
to win favor or minds. LaRouche wanted to be President. I'm content right where I am. Things
will work themselves out. I'm going to the beach.

You can't include me in a quadrant, though. I'm too big for a quadrant; unless you want to enlarge
a quadrant, or make a new one. It would need to be pretty big. hehe



"You're gonna need a bigger quadrant."

Bart

BOB: Yes, Martha, some of these seem to be in the style/lingo of iON.

Thanks for pointing that out.


Bob Neveritt