It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by darpaint5
Might I suggest that you read the blog before posting comments in future.
davidmyatt.wordpress.com...
” I am such a fool; such a failure, in evolutionary terms, in the perspective of the Cosmos. Here I am, entering the sixth decade of my life, having spent the last forty years seeking experience and wisdom and having, in that time, made so many errors, mistakes, and been the cause of much suffering, personal and otherwise…..
There is no excuse for this failure of mine, year following year – although of course I have always made excuses for myself, as failures often do. Wordy, moral-sounding, inexcusable excuses almost always of the unethical “the end justifies the means” kind.
No excuses – because from sorrow, from personal tragedy, I felt, dis-covered, the unethical nature of all abstractions, be they deemed political, religious, or social…”
Originally posted by darpaint5
How strange. After years ...
Originally posted by rollerpaxen
So just what is your position raffy?
Originally posted by darpaint5
'You may consider Satanism to be a 'religion', but if it results in the death of an unborn child and many other people, it becomes a dangerous religion and a matter of public concern.'
Source - Jeff Wells, Rigorous Intuition blog, August 2005 rigorousintuition.blogspot.com...
” Is Myatt an agent provocateur, a #-disturber who can’t settle upon a radical philosophy, something more, or something less? It’s difficult to assess motive, but consider that he has been arrested numerous times for such things as writing and disseminating “practical terrorist guides” on suspicion of conspiracy to murder. These cases have always been dropped due to “lack of evidence.” Does he enjoy protection? The record is suggestive that he does. And if it appears so, then we should ask the next question: Why?
Myatt may seem to have flitted from one politico-religious philosophy to another, but there is a terrible thread of continuity and rigour through his life and writings that suggests he is much more than a disingenuous provocateur. Naziism and Islamicism have served, in turn, as modalities of disruption for what remains at core an occult working to sow general chaos and division – the necessary passage of “Helter Skelter” to break down the Old Order, before the founding of the New.
So again: whose interests are served by there being a David Myatt? Is he is own man – or men – or does he belong to someone else? Or is it something else – an intelligence service perhaps… ”
” …..does ‘spooky action at a distance’ - who is acting on behalf of those “powers-behind-the-scenes” that like to use chaos, and especially socalled “terrorist attacks”, as a pretext for increased government control, increased surveillance, and government tyranny. That is, such an operative is a new version of the traditional “spook” – someone who works alone and is ruthless.”
Originally posted by darpaint5
I was trying to spare Myatt's blushes
Originally posted by darpaint5
I have no comment to make on David Myatt's involvement with MI5
Originally posted by darpaint5I have no comment to make on David Myatt's involvement with MI5,
Originally posted by darpaint5For more about David Myatt's Satanist past and his Satanist present read more at:
voiceoverthere.wordpress.com...
Most interesting of all, however, is a particular delusional mechanism, of compensation, which the MOAC uses. This delusional method of control involves the MOAC in ridiculing “that man” in an attempt to show that he is not really a threat. This delusion of control allows the MOAC to feel safe – for the more he ridicules “that man”, the more powerful the MOAC feels. This a classic way in which certain types of people (those suffering from personality disorders, for instance, or cowards, bullies, and weaklings) try to rationalize away their own fears – for the more they, in their own minds, ridicule the object of their fear, the more important and powerful they themselves feel.
In fact, often they end up projecting an image of themselves – real (what they really look like) or imaginary (what they feel they are, inside) – onto the object of their hatred or onto the person they are obsessed with in a negative way."