No proof about Illuminati and other secret societies.....read plz

Ive heard a lot of people here saying things like "Illuminati doesnt exist!" "Show me proof about it, and i'll believe", etc

Well, my point is..............making such question has no point at all. I mean, if they are secret, i supose knowing of their existance is already a lot! Asking for proof on Iluminati is ridiculous. If they exist, i doubt you will ever know much more about them, unless you join.....in case it indeed exist. We cant tell.

But probably other secret societies exist........and you dont know of their existance, so you wont even ask for proof on their existance.

Secret societys arent being discussed on ATS...and i think that makes perfect sense.

If Illuminati exists, then is a fact that we know about it. And if thats so i doubt we were suposed to know about it. But maybe Illuminati has such a great role that it couldnt keep hide by unwanted people.

And if it exists, its probably related with New World Order,etc. At least it makes sense that the "iluminated on the top of the pyramid" have control over " the common sensed people". Like a brain controling the body.
________

Other thing that would make perfect sense would be the existance of a society with a reverse pyramid as a symbol.

A Pyramid cant stand if reversed.......Thats the point. That means that only a powerfull force could keep it stand. Or in other words a few suporting and keeping the rest up, like in a reverse pyramid. The powerfull force that they use to keep the reverse pyramid stand up is in other words, knowledge that cant be revealed, or the rest of the pyramid would fall.

soils.usda.gov...

Ok, in this link is a reverse pyramid.What it stands for is irrelevant for what we are talking about. But see the part of the pyramid named "Pedon"? Well,that would be the aknowledged ones, that were keeping the rest of the pyramid stand up.

Or maybe, what this aknowledge ones are suporting is, actually.......the virtual democracy we live in.

It cant exist order in a democracy. But you can implant fear, and in that way reduce progressivly freedoms on a democracy, like its happening in the US. Now, what if it was revealed that the 9/11 atack were setted up by the US? Imagine that that its true.....then such information couldnt be revealed by the "aknowledged in the base" or the pyramid would fall.

Makes sense

EVERYTHING in this world leaves a trace. No matter what it is or how good it covers its tracks, eventually an organization will leave behind some kind of proof of its existence. It will especially do so if it is an organization as large as the Illuminati supposedly is. Not only that, but eventually there would be detractors, whistleblowers, traitors or leaks. That is how the real world works.

"That is how the real world works"

You can hardly tell me what "real world" is....

And:

"EVERYTHING in this world leaves a trace" is just a suposition. A top secret society wouldnt leave a trace anywhere, and you wouldnt know about it.

"Not only that, but eventually there would be detractors, whistleblowers, traitors or leaks"

Another suposition.

Originally posted by NinterX
"EVERYTHING in this world leaves a trace" is just a suposition. A top secret society wouldnt leave a trace anywhere, and you wouldnt know about it.

That is not true. If something leaves NO trace whatsoever, then it doesn't exist. An organization with as much power as the Illuminati supposedly has would leave trails of money, people, decision, cover-ups and any other actions which it takes. This has been demonstrated time and time again, just look at Watergate, Clinton and the recent Karl Rove/ Valerie plame leak. Even if Karl Rove was clever enough to cover it up, it is known that SOMEONE leaked the name, and that is evidence of the action and subsequent cover-up.

But it's real easy to take an event such as that, and then add a back-story to it in hindsight. And example of this would be saying "Karl Rove didn't really leak Plame's name, it was really the Illuminati, and they're so good that they have left no trace of evidence at all!" This is silly because there is already a perpetrator who has been convicted with evidence, yet someone is now claiming that it was someone else for which there is NO evidence. See the problem?

EVERYTHING leaves behind evidence of its presence.

"Not only that, but eventually there would be detractors, whistleblowers, traitors or leaks"

Another suposition.

True, but it's a supposition that has been shown to be accurate time and time again.


[edit on 19-7-2005 by sebatwerk]

Originally posted by NinterX
"That is how the real world works"

You can hardly tell me what "real world" is....

Ok, you started this thread, another member answers civilly and you come off with this hostillity. Why? I see no reason for it.

hey get this dvd angels and demons:revealed this is proof that illuminatti is real

The question I have is that do we know enough to say or claim the so-called Illuminati does not exist...or even exist for G** sake.

Let say it does exist, If if somebody were to somewhat leak any information to the general public...that information would be bury so deep amoung Dis/Misinformation...that the leak would just be ignore or considered to be nonsense...

Let say it does not exist, what is the point of it in the first place...and all the related stories about it...

Hitler try to take over the world, but fail...Why would not there be another person/group who would like to do the same as Hitler did...except they may have found a better way to do it?

At this moment I remain neutral about this Illuminati stuff...well until the year 2012 at least....

Originally posted by hardcore14
hey get this dvd angels and demons:revealed this is proof that illuminatti is real

Sigh, "Angels and Demons: revealed" is a look into the book Angels and Demons, which was FICTION. This is where many of the Illumninati myths came from, but it was completely fictitious anyways. Just goes to show you how what I say is actually true, here you have an actual user who thought the same thing.

"Ok, you started this thread, another member answers civilly and you come off with this hostillity. Why? I see no reason for it."

Intrepid, i see no hostility in the phrase you quoted...

And sebatwerk, you say:

"EVERYTHING leaves behind evidence of its presence. "

hmmm..............Like a bird leaves evidence on the air of his presence?


Lets take the following story as true:

A member of a secret society hipnotizes an assassin, and tells him to kill Bush and then surrend to authoritys.
The hipnotized assassin does it exactly as told, and is arrested, giving no information about the secret society.

The path is lost. Like you can leave footsteps in mud, but then put some mud over it to hide the footsteps.

Every known society leaves path of is existance. LEaving no path doesnt mean it doesnt exist.

A secret society need at least the association of 2 people, covering up a secret that cant be revealed.

How do you explain that just recently have been found documents proofing the existance of the Priory of Sion?

THat means that before this documents have been found, it already existed this society, but his existance was unknown.

Like other secret societys can exist nowadays, and you dont know about them.

THey can leave a path, but if they hide that same path, then there's no path left has proof to their existance.

The Illuminati's best weapon it holds is..............Deception.

They need nothing more.

Peace

Originally posted by sebatwerk
Not only that, but eventually there would be detractors, whistleblowers, traitors or leaks. That is how the real world works.

Here is link that was previously posted on ATS. This lady was supposedly involved with the Illuminati. I guess it just matters who you believe.
home.mchsi.com...

Originally posted by NinterX
Every known society leaves path of is existance. LEaving no path doesnt mean it doesnt exist.

A secret society need at least the association of 2 people, covering up a secret that cant be revealed.

How do you explain that just recently have been found documents proofing the existance of the Priory of Sion?

Just because you have not FOUND evidence or a trace of something's existance, it does not mean that this evidence has not been left behind. It's up to someone to find it.

Originally posted by NinterX
i supose knowing of their existance is already a lot! Asking for proof on Iluminati is ridiculous.

How can you 'know of their existence' if you have no proof tho?

If they exist, i doubt you will ever know much more about them, unless you join.....in case it indeed exist.

How can anyone join if no-one can ever show that they exist, let alone who to contact them and what their ideals and requirements for membership are?


There was a group in bavaria/germany around the late 1700's called the Illuminati. We know that they existed because we have documents from them, group memberships, ideas, writtings, etc etc, and also some history on them, such as governement actions against them and for them, etc etc. The last information that is had on them is that they were broken up by the government, lingered on in some form or another, and then fell apart due to internal dynamics, bickering and the like amoung the few remaining members.

There was a lot of hysteria over the group being secular, which back in those times was a good way to be a 'radical'. This resulted in a lot of propaganda from the church against them, and that is the brith of hte idea that they are a secret, satanic organization that is trying to take over the true government and overthrow the church. There is no evidence that the group actually continued on past its break up, and there is no evidence that it was taking over any governments in secret or anything like that.





[edit on 20-7-2005 by Nygdan]

"Just because you have not FOUND evidence or a trace of something's existance, it does not mean that this evidence has not been left behind. It's up to someone to find it. "

Up to someone to find it...............or maybe not.

Originally posted by NinterX
ow do you explain that just recently have been found documents proofing the existance of the Priory of Sion?

The priory never existed, it was a hoax, dreamt up and planted by a man who appparently was a pretender to the long dead french throne.

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by NinterX
ow do you explain that just recently have been found documents proofing the existance of the Priory of Sion?

The priory never existed, it was a hoax, dreamt up and planted by a man who appparently was a pretender to the long dead french throne.

"If" that was true. Why make it up? Who or what could benefit from making up such a thing? Or believing it was made up?

Those who control the past also control the future.

Like I said: Deception is the best weapon.

Peace

Siona = Stars

That would mean "Priory of the stars.

Would it not?

Originally posted by Hunting Veritas
Siona = Stars

That would mean "Priory of the stars.

Would it not?

I don't think so...

from: www.etymonline.com...

scion
c.1305, "a shoot or twig," from O.Fr. sion, cion (Mod.Fr. scion, Picard chion), of uncertain origin. Perhaps from Frank. *kid-, from P.Gmc. *kidon-, from PIE *geie- "to sprout, split, open." Fig. use is attested from 1590; meaning "an heir, a descendant" is from 1814, from the "family tree" image.

Zion
O.E. Sion, from Gk. Seon, from Heb. Tsiyon, name of a Canaanite hill fortress in Jerusalem captured by David and called in the Bible "City of David." It became the center of Jewish life and worship. Zionism "movement for forming (later supporting) a Jewish national state in Palestine" first attested 1896, from Ger. Zionismus (from Zion + L.-derived suffix -ismus), first recorded 1886 in "Selbstemancipation," by "Matthias Acher" (pseudonym of Nathan Birnbaum).

(emphasis mine)

The former seems more likely, as the Priory of Sion was supposedly charged with protecting the bloodline of Christ.

Just my $0.02.

All that is required for a powerful secret society to remain secret is influence or,in the Illuminati's case,outright control over generally recognized institutions of information(schools,newspapers,etc.) and populace-common media(television,movies,etc.). Both not only dictate "knowledge" but also instill conditioning. I'm not sure if this is still done today,but when I was in school we were taught that Columbus discovered America. We were taught and accepted this even though in the very lesson itself it says that people were already here when Columbus arrived. We never thought about how erroneous it was until I saw a comedian making fun of it. And gradually from this point it went from "Columbus discovered America" to being modified to "Columbus discovered America...for England". I don't know how it's taught today but I'm sure it's been modified still further. But as a child,when you're "taught" something you take it as face value because school is a recognized authority of information. Many people to this day think of Cleopatra,an African princess,as an ivory-skinned woman who looks more like the queen of the Thames than the queen of the Nile. This is because Elizabeth Taylor and other Caucasian beauties are always used to portray her in film:populace-common media. How something is presented to you affects your perceptions. I was raised in a strongly Bible-influenced family and heard the tales hundreds of times but I never even thought to wonder where Cain's wife came from in Genesis until I was nearly an adult and had it pointed out to me by someone. I also took it for granted that "serpent" meant snake because that's how it was taught. These are just random examples of how presentation and conditioning can override clear evidence and common sense in people's minds. It's pretty simple psychology and something any powerful society is aware of.


It's true that it's impossible not to leave traces if you exist. But it doesn't matter(to a very large extent that is) how many traces a secret society leaves if the bulk of the population is unaware of these traces or are conditioned to not to recognize or accept the traces even if they saw them themselves. Once you condition people to only believe in the institutions you yourself control,then secrecy is no longer an issue. You can be blatant at that point and still many will think there's no evidence while being surrounded by it. That's why they call it hiding in plain sight.


[edit on 22-7-2005 by Loungerist]

Originally posted by NinterX
Asking for proof on Iluminati is ridiculous.

Very true...Simply consider the fact that there are many secret societies that have their roots & origins hundreds, if not thousands, of years old. By now, they should have a pretty good track record of covering their tracks. If they don't develop such strategies, they fold up & break down.

However the term "Illuminati" can be taken one of two ways: Either as a reference to the historical Bavarian Illuminati (founded by Adam Weishaupt, officially on May 1, 1776: The group started with the name "The Perfectibilists", but changed it later) specifically or as any one or more secret societies that you haven't been able to pinpoint the cause of any given conspiracy. Either a specific reference or a general reference.

Originally posted by sebatwerk
No matter what it is or how good it covers its tracks, eventually an organization will leave behind some kind of proof of its existence.

It's because of this that some people, who have some idea where to look, can uncover traces of their existance. However, the "Illuminati" groups have generation after generation of experience on their side when it comes to coverups. This generally manifests itself in the fact that some facts are uncovered, but the bits-n-pieces are hard to put together into the whole picture. Imagine a 500 piece jigsaw puzzle with 475 pieces missing, then you can get the general idea.

Originally posted by sebatwerk
It will especially do so if it is an organization as large as the Illuminati supposedly is.

This is why an "Illuminati" group would have to stay small...The more people at the "top of the pyramid", the chance of being discovered increases geometrically. This is why there may only be a dozen (according to the studied structures of historical secret societies that have been discovered, 12 core members seems to be the optimum number) or so at most on top of the pyramid...This number greatly reduces the risk of "detractors & betrayers".

But each conspirator has connections & influence: They promise some money here, they imply a veiled threat there, one of their companies drops a certain hint to a certain politician over that way. Then those that were directly influenced turn around and influence others further down the chain and so on, until the desired effect takes place on the "surface" of society. The accumulative effect of a dozen very influential people, when working together, is enormous. You don't think they do all of their work personally, do you? If they did, there would be no way to achieve such wide-ranging & pervasive effects.

So why not turn your own assumption back on you?...Prove to me that they don't exist. At least there are indications & bits & pieces of evidence that they so exist already...But people like you have taken the "party line" as gospel truth & then simply refuse to look or simply dismiss any other evidence as "immaterial", or "irrelevant".
News Flash! Everything is relevant & nothing that happens in society is done by accident. The history of civilization as far back as the existence of civilization itself is proof of that. There is no such thing as the "accidental view" of history. History has documented the existance of many conspiratorial groups down through the millenia...Some, once discovered, may have simply disbanded in the public eye & then went "deeper underground", becoming even more secretive. Others may have simply disbanded due to the pressures of the authority that discovers them...But even with those relative few that have been found, how many others have been able to keep themselves secret enough to get by without any dangerous discovery?

Originally posted by Nygdan
How can anyone join if no-one can ever show that they exist, let alone who to contact them and what their ideals and requirements for membership are?

Simple...You don't join them...They invite you to join. You can't ask them to open their door for you to enter because the door is, in effect, invisible. First they watch you & your actions, perhaps for years. Then one of their members might approach you with some innocent-sounding conversation to try to pick out what your real thoughts & beliefs are. If you still seem to be conductive for more contact, they may invite you to the lowest rank of their "social club". They specifically give you minor secrets that wouldn't be of any trouble to the "social club" & denegrated by the public at all, should you decide to blab. Over years of gradually moving up in the ranks, you gain more & more secrets until you become more fully "indoctrinated" & actually become "one of them" when they let you into the innermost circle. Way before that time, they've already weeded out the careless talkers & the betrayers as you've been working your way up the ranks.

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by NinterX
ow do you explain that just recently have been found documents proofing the existance of the Priory of Sion?

The priory never existed, it was a hoax, dreamt up and planted by a man who appparently was a pretender to the long dead french throne.

That's the "party line".

Originally posted by The Axeman
The former seems more likely, as the Priory of Sion was supposedly charged with protecting the bloodline of Christ.

According to the best reliable documentations found, the "sion" they were trying to preserve was the bloodline of Christ! According to some theories (of course, there's no direct documentation or records of this), Christ didn't actually die on the Cross, but He & Mary Magdeline were "smuggled" out of Jerusalem & made their way into France. The Priory of Sion's whole purpose was more than preserving the bloodline of Christ...It also included efforts install that bloodline onto the throne of France!

Originally posted by Hunting Veritas
Those who control the past also control the future.

It was common practice in ancient times that, when one "king" conquered & enslaved another "kingdom", massive propaganda & re-writing of history took place...Overtly, to "justify" the reason for the invasion in the first place. Covertly, to control who knew the real truth. Control of the flow of information is the most powerful tool any "king" could have. Do you think that this "custom" is not put to use, even today? Why do you think the US government (& all other governments too) uses tactics like "wagging the dog" & distracting the media away from events of real importance?

As the Axeman's signature states, "Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance. - Albert Einstein ". So far I've only seen Sebtawerk condem without showing any indication of investigation...You've seen some results of the investigations of myself & a few others here. Einstein's quote says the rest...

Originally posted by Loungerist
All that is required for a powerful secret society to remain secret is influence or,in the Illuminati's case,outright control over generally recognized institutions of information(schools,newspapers,etc.) and populace-common media(television,movies,etc.).

True...But what is the single constant that allows subtle & not-so-subtle influence over all of these institutions & all others (including governments) as well?

Control of the money flow. Who controls the flow of money? Here's a clue:

Here's a quote from Abraham Lincoln, during his tenure as US President: "I have the Confederate Army in front of me & I have the banks behind me. Of the two, the banks are more dangerous."

Originally posted by Loungerist
Many people to this day think of Cleopatra,an African princess,as an ivory-skinned woman who looks more like the queen of the Thames than the queen of the Nile. This is because Elizabeth Taylor and other Caucasian beauties are always used to portray her in film:populace-common media.

Actually, Cleopatra was not African...She was Greek & had not a single drop of Egyptian blood in her veins. She was the line of the Greek Ptolemic rulers of Egypt after Alexander the Great conquered the country.