Bohemian Grove Pt 3 & "watchman" type exposes in general

One last remark about the Bohemian Grove: It's none of our business. It's none of a Christian's business what people do on their vacations, whether they are the wealthy and powerful or anybody else. Hasn't it occurred to anyone that if such men are plotting political actions we object to they could do it anywhere, they don't need the Bohemian Grove for the purpose? High level political talks go on behind closed doors all the time, what's the big deal about some of them going on in the woods?

If it's the pagan ceremonies that bother you, it's SO clear that's just theatrical and nobody engaged in them believes they are invoking supernatural powers, but if anybody is, it's a very few who put on the show, the guests have nothing to do with it. Besides, this country is full of pagan rites of all sorts now anyway. If you want to kindly warn the guests that they might be exposing themselves to occultic influences that's fine, though I doubt they'd listen because they take it all for entertainment, but that's not what these self-appointed exposers are doing, they are fingerpointing at the attendees and even the invitees as if they are committing some sort of crime even to be on the BG's list.

I believe all this applies to the Skull and Bones society as well. How silly to make so much of the childish pranks of fraternity boys. Why should we be surprised if they play with devilish things -- the world is full of devilish things.

ON THE OTHER HAND: Exposing the occultic influence of Disney productions or Hollywood IS our business because they directly affect the public. Exposing heresies in Christian movements is our business because they can mislead Christians. Exposing the claims of anti-Christian religions and leaders is our business too, for the same reason. We are supposed to be watching for signs of the times, such as counterfeit Christs in these last days, to avoid being led astray. There are "watchman" ministries that focus on helping us do that, but some subjects they get into are not helpful toward that end.

When it comes to specific accusations of specific political leaders some who delve into these things are not fearful enough about smearing a person's reputation with little cause. They forget the Biblical rule of charity and that we are not to judge others, especially those who are not believers. These slandermongers have no sense of restraint, and believe the worst against a man on the flimsiest of evidence. Some of the most hideous accusations are made in these "ministries," so hideous that you'd think a person would want to think twice, three, four times before even hinting that they might be true. When proof is there, that's one thing, I'm talking about cases where the proof is mostly somebody's emotional "witness" and mere suspiciousness based on a few scattered impressions that can be misinterpreted.

I also have a problem with the claims about the Illuminati and that sort of thing. I don't know if half of what is said about this group is even half true. I just don't know. You'd think with all that's said about them I'd have a clearer idea but I don't. There's a lot of heat but little light, a lot of bald assertion backed up by little real evidence. "The Illuminati do this, the Illuminati do that." Where's the evidence? Some of the powers attributed to them are laughably beyond the human. Many assertions are made, but the quality of evidence is really questionable. I'm not sure it even matters, either. Why do we care if Satan has some powerful people in his employ? We know he has power in this world and for that matter power over all unsaved human beings. What good does it do us to know such specific things if true? All we are to do is live according to Christ. He didn't tell us to delve into the doings of the nonbelieving world.

Bohemian Grove Pt. 2

I keep finding these feverishly serious discussions online -- apparently by Christians -- about the Bohemian Grove, as if it truly is believed that what goes on there is Satan-possessed world movers and shakers plotting the demise of us all to take over the world etc.

Hey, I have no doubt there are conspiracies in this world, perhaps some very high-level ones, I also have no doubt that many of our world leaders are determined to bring about the One World Order, I also have no doubt that Satan has his hand in these things, but you can't just go around taking mere appearances for fact the way so many are doing. Some people are misguided enough to think one world government is a good idea without feeling any need of participating in occultic rites to bring it about.

In the case of the Bohemian Grove, the productions of actors for the sake of entertainment, philosophical ponderings, and even just silly amusements are getting taken for reality in a way that would be laughable if it weren't that such suspicions contribute to the world's spiritual evils in themselves. Put "Bohemian Grove" in Google Image and you'll find many old pictures of theatrical events that have been staged there, including Shakespearean productions among others, all in full costume. There are also pictures of the supposedly "religious" ceremonies that get people so upset about satanic goings on, one for instance of "priests" and "cardinals" in robes kneeling before a cathedralish stage setting as some sort of ritual is enacted. Is it really a "Black Mass" as some say? Catholic ritual is a favorite subject of such mockery because of all its pomp and regalia, but some actually take such a performance as implying a serious Catholic influence among the participants or a serious satanic influence -- WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?

In the context of the Bohemian Grove's founding by actors, and the many theatrical performances they put on during the summer event, WHY IS THIS TAKEN FOR ANYTHING MORE THAN JUST ANOTHER THEATRICAL PRODUCTION?

They may think they are making a profound moral statement in their productions, or they may simply be performing a mockery of religion. They probably do both at this summer event. Mockery of religion is FUN for some people in this fallen world. There is also the fact that sometimes a pseudo-solemn religious enactment is intended to capture what worldlings wrongly think is the essence of religion, ritual itself, for the sake of comfort or a sort of therapy, although nothing in it is taken for genuine reality. Don't we know this about fallen human nature by now?

I don't know how all this is taken, it's just obvious it's theatrical and not intended as a religious rite as such. I'm not arguing that all this is "just good clean fun" either. They are worldly entertainments with a worldly philosophy behind them, and there is also apparently a big homosexual presence there, among the actors at least (which is often associated with false religion). I'm just saying it's not serious Satanic invocation. It's metaphor or symbolism of psychological and philosophical import to some people. That's bad enough. Don't reify it and compound the problem.

As for the secrecy, I can't think of it as any more sinister than wanting to keep a private men's club private.

From the Wikipedia article:

Many of the notable participants have been politically conservative, leading conspiracy theorists to speculate that the club is actually being used as a meeting place to secretly determine important public policies. However, the majority of the members and guests who are targets of such attacks meet only over the middle weekend of the encampment, and the club largely remains a haven for artists and art lovers. [Also at the link there's a description of an event by an attendee that gives the flavor of the place -- an attempt to recreate an actual Druidic rite -- again, as theater -- along with plenty of pranks and practical jokes]

"High jinks" and "low jinks" are terms the club uses to describe its events:

HIGH JINKS: antic, caper, escapade, frolic, fun, horseplay, larks, mischief, monkey business, monkeyshines, practical joke, prank, shenanigans, stunt, tomfoolery

It has some of the flavor of the Renaissance Faire, also a theatrical event, in which costumed actors go about recreating a Renaissance festival where you can get interestingly different "fast food" and watch Shakespearean performances in the setting of a Renaissance village. This IS more like "good clean fun" than the Burning Man event I mentioned as comparison in my last post on the Bohemian Grove. The Faires are fun entertainments, which is all I think the BG performances are meant to be. But they ARE worldly entertainments so leave it at that. There's no need to invoke demons on top of it.

==============
Later: I posted this news report from 1981 about the Grove at the other blog entry on this subject but I think I'll repost it here, because it's a lot more realistic than all the conspiracy stuff about the place:

What IS health care all about, really? A worldly system versus God's provision.

I got this link to a point by point discussion of President Obamas's town hall statements on the health care bill from Z's blog. This is the best and clearest presentation of the problems I've seen -- everyone should read it. It's a rational discussion of just what insurance is all about, no matter who's in charge, and keeps in perspective the undesirability of having the government be the insuring party.

There are complicated calculations involved in any insurance carrier's decision about what to insure and what not to, what to pay for when a claim is made and what not to, based on the economics of the situation. This can't be avoided no matter who runs the insurance. But if there are many insurance carriers to choose from, you can at least choose according to which of them support your own main concerns best. If the government is your only choice you're going to have to accept whatever the government decides, and if you happen to be opposed to, say, coverage for abortion, you might not have a choice but to support it against your will. I'm not saying that's a problem with this bill, I haven't heard that about it, but I'm trying to make a general point. If your concerns are the best kind of coverage for the problems of the elderly, again you can choose among the carriers if there are many to choose from; with the government you have to accept whatever they say the elderly are allowed. And so on.

I'm admittedly barely educated on this and have very little understanding or for that matter patience with the calculations involved in these things. I tend to throw up my hands and say, Oh well, if I can't afford it I'll just have to lump it; if I die I die.

But I think I do grasp the overall situation here. Insurance is an attempt to guarantee expensive medical care to people who can't or don't want to pay for it if it becomes needed. It's a form of gambling. You pay in monthly at what is hoped to be a reasonably low rate so that if you contract a very expensive disease, what you will have paid in won't amount to much of a proportion of what the treatment costs and yet the service providers will be paid fairly. Insurance carriers gamble that the majority of payers will remain healthy and their monthly premiums will subsidize a minority of serious medical needs of a few payers over the long haul.

Unfortunately medical care has become prodigiously expensive in the last decades so that monthly premiums are still too high for a great swath of the population these days. People complain about this but it's ridiculous to complain. The economics of the situation is what determines these things, not people trying to make life hard for other people (although irrational laws can accomplish a lot toward making life hard). But along comes government at this point to promise coverage in spite of economic reality. They even call health care a "right" in blatant defiance of simple reality.

This is the basis for the government reform of health care, that most people can no longer afford insurance. There is no WAY they can afford it either, under ANY health care bill that takes economic reality into account, unless others subsidize them at that level too. When government takes over insurance the situation switches. In the hands of the government it's no longer the healthy who are subsidizing the sick, it's the wealthy who are subsidizing the poor.

This is socialized medicine.

To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. -------Thomas Jefferson

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Private insurance companies cannot do this, can't do it practically or legally, but the government can because they can tax us. Private insurance companies depend on a high ratio of the healthy to the sick to have the money to finance the services they are willing to cover. When a great number of people can't afford their rates and the government steps in, now TAXES enter into the financing of services. The greater the need the higher the taxes, and of course the richer will be taxed more than others, the poor not at all in some cases(which is already the case).

There is of course a limit to how much can be taxed out of us so just as with private insurance carriers costs have to be cut somewhere. Where they are cut is a lot of what is controversial about this current health care bill.

We already have socialism to a great extent. It's manifestly unjust to take money from some to finance the needs of others, but that's the way the world is going. We're already half way there; Obama wants to take us further down that road. Private insurance isn't quite so unethical because everybody knows they're gambling and they can choose to take the gamble or not. But under goverment insurance, if the plan really could pay for needed services, it could only do it by extracting a LOT more money from the wealthy for the purpose. If it can't get away with that, it can only do it by cutting services drastically, making health care a nightmare for a majority of the people, spreading not only the wealth but the inconvenience and sometimes the medical negligence of it all, which Canadians and others object to in their own socialized systems, which drives those with complicated medical problems to the USA for our much superior medical services, possibly about to become our late-lamented services.

Perhaps I've misunderstood some of this and I'll try to learn more if the opportunity presents itself.

Meanwhile I've lately developed an objection to insurance as such, from a Christian point of view. It IS gambling. And anything that costs more than you can afford is not a "right." Gambling is bad enough but socialized medicine is downright pernicious. If it weren't for the complicated economic system of health care delivery, care for the suffering would be a VOLUNTARY gift given by those who had the means to those who need them. VOLUNTARY giving is the only RIGHT way to do this. Any form of forced "giving" such as taxation, on the other hand, is criminal.

Unfortunately we have become so used to the system we live under and so passive in the face of it, the very idea of a voluntary system has dropped out of view except for a few who have the wealth to help some people without even feeling the crunch. In the early days of Christianity there were many acts of mercy performed by the followers of Christ, ordinary followers with minimal incomes, often self-sacrificially. It was common for unwanted babies to be exposed to die, but Christians would take them in and care for them and raise them. The sick were also left to die in the streets, and again Christians would take them in and care for them. Eventually Christians developed orphanages to care for rejected or parentless children, and hospitals for the sick. This all started from Holy-Spirit-inspired Christian compassion, without expectation of monetary reward, strictly in service to God. It has since grown into this gigantic social institution that is run for profit and no longer by Christians. In a sense the unbelieving world is trying to do on a wordly economic basis what Christians originally did in obedience to God. That's really what Marxism is too, the aping of Christ by the corrupt fallen nature on the basis of worldly thought, and historically it's always led to unimaginable horrors because it has the wrong foundation.

I think Christians need to rethink all this. I think Christians need to find a way to opt out of the government system if at all possible, as receivers at least if we can't as payers, trust in God, and focus ourselves on taking care of each other one way or another. I think if we set our minds to do this, refuse everything that amounts to gambling (it's a substitute for faith), think in terms of self-sacrifice, do it all with constant prayer for God's guidance and provision, we could revolutionize the care of the suffering just as the early Christians did. I don't know what form this would take, I'm admittedly short on specifics and long on theology, and I also feel uncomfortable proposing anything along these lines because at the moment I'm more likely to be a candidate for the care than for the self-sacrificial giving, but I pray God won't let me stay in this situation but will put me in a position to be of use to others in spite of my lack of means. He can do that. "All things are possible with God." Anything done in His power transcends all human effort. It starts with Christians seeking God for direction and power.

REALITY CHECK? From the WHITE HOUSE?

I just listened through the eight speeches at the "reality check" link my friend sent me, that purport to correct what the White House labels as misinformation about the Health Care Proposal. The gist of the messages is that it's just bad people making stuff up against the good Health Care proposal, just "the same old people" who don't want to see Health Care reformed.

Why anyone would not want Health Care reform isn't mentioned -- what's the motivation? but nameless bad people are accused of simply just not wanting it for no good reason. Oh, maybe because they have some meaningless idea about "socialized medicine."

Who are the stupid ones here?

Obviously reform is needed, but people are concerned about THIS health care reform, and it seems to me they are RIGHTLY concerned.

The WH representatives are insinuating something irrational, when it sounds to me like there are many legitimate questions AND THEY ARE BASED ON WHAT IS ACTUALLY WRITTEN IN THE HEALTH CARE PROPOSAL.

Yes, people could be getting things wrong about it, but THE WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMEN SPEAK IN GENERALITIES, TELLING US WHAT THEY WANT TO SEE COME OUT OF THIS HEALTH CARE PROPOSAL, THEY DO NOT SHOW US WHAT IS ACTUALLY IN THAT PROPOSAL. THEY DO NOT QUOTE IT. THEY'RE GIVING US ALL RHETORIC, NO ACTUAL FACTS.

GO LISTEN TO IT YOURSELF, FIND A FACT IN IT FROM ANY OF THEM. THERE AREN'T ANY. There are plenty of DECLARATIONS that such and such is fact, but no actual facts themselves. (If you aren't sure what's a fact and what isn't, run it by me, I'll happily explain it to you).

If people are wrong about this proposal, we aren't going to find that out through empty rhetoric, and this note of accusation of the PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES for raising meaningless objections, that is coming out of this Reality Check page, only adds to the reasons to distrust them.

They promise us everything: They promise Medicare will not be cut; they promise Vet benefits will not be cut; they promise that the elderly will not be deprived of necessary care; they promise doctors will be paid in accord with their expertise; they promise you can keep your own insurance plan if you like it, etc., etc., etc. They promise you everything, but, again,

There is NO discussion of the actual written provisions in the bill that would demonstrate whether these things are ACTUALLY spelled out in it, or how it's going to be financed, OR if it's even POSSIBLE to provide for all that, given economic and medical realities.

EVEN WITH THE BEST INTENTIONS IN THE WORLD, SOME THINGS ARE SIMPLY NOT POSSIBLE. Why do we have a health care problem anyway? PARTLY because some things are simply not possible economically, not because "some people" don't want us to have decent health care.

They are certainly right to point out that the current health care situation is not as good as we'd like it to be, BUT THEY ARE NOT GIVING EVIDENCE THAT THIS PARTICULAR REFORM IS GOING TO BE BETTER FOR ALL OF US. Maybe it will be better for some, but much worse for others. How is this going to be discovered when we aren't given the actual facts?

IT'S ALL EMPTY RHETORIC, ALL WISHFUL THINKING.

DOES ANYBODY KNOW WHAT A FACT IS ANY MORE? WHAT EVIDENCE IS? IS THERE A SHRED OF RESPECT FOR THE CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTRY LEFT? FOR GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE?

Here's the White House Reality Check link again.

Health Care Reform and Big Brother continued.

I sent an email out about my experience of having a news video removed from my blog post the other day, which said roughly the following:

Anybody out there experiencing mysterious internet interferences lately? I've heard of others -- conservatives -- who have been. A few days ago I couldn't access my Yahoo email account and kept getting a strange excuse for an explanation, but I think it is very possibly because I had just emailed something about this healthcare insanity and am now on Big Brother's list. OR maybe it's just a technical glitch but . . .

I just embedded a perfectly mainstream (CNN) video at my blog -- no hidden information there but they only want THEIR view of it all to be reported? -- and it won't function, appears to have beeen removed, leaving a big red square in its place. A couple paragraphs I wrote after it about how American freedoms are being trashed disappeared too. Maybe it's just a technical glitch but . . .

COULD just be a technical glitch, sure, but we conservatives know that we have REAL enemies out there who don't believe in American freedoms and are very willing to censor and oppress ordinary American citizens.

I think people could very well start disappearing soon. Yep, I think this government is that evil. Those swastikas going up here and there are no doubt bad form, certainly in bad taste, and they are being misrepresented against us too, but they do represent the mentality of these thugs.

Maybe you won't begin to see it UNTIL people start disappearing, but I sure hope there are still liberals out there who can and will yet wake up.

I'd love to find out that this is merely paranoia, and of course "they" would make it out to be that in any case, but there have been threats of an internet crackdown on conservative blogs, blog servers actually threatening to shut some down. People are being told to report hostile remarks about the healthcare mess to the President against every tenet of civility and specifically against the US Constitution, but they don't care about American freedoms. We're almost a third world dictatorship now, so NOTHING should be put past them. At least one conservative blogger on my list couldn't access her email at all for a couple days

If they are red-flagging certain words that occur in emails you can bet this one is going to be red-flagged. Never thought you'd be living under the KGB or the Gestapo in America, did you?

COULD all just be rumors and glitches. How can one find out?

I got some emails in agreement but also got this back from one friend:

I haven't read the proposal -- if I did I wouldn't understand it well enough anyway -- so I can't offer any critique (I wonder how many of us can). At any rate, here it is [the White House's debunkery of the arguments against it]:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck/

This is my answer:

I don't understand it either, all I know is that conservative blogs are buzzing about how the government is not telling the truth about what the healthcare bill will really do, and this is what is causing the protests at the town meetings. The protestors are being falsely called a "mob" although their behavior is perfectly orderly, and also misrepresented as simply wanting to hold on to the status quo, a rather strange accusation since medical care isn't in such great shape now either, but people don't want to lose whatever benefits they do get from it compared to what the new bill may take away from them. But this misrepresentation is repeated at the link you give. It doesn't look like they are doing any more than repeating the party line.

The fact is many honest citizens believe they have good reason to protest an economically and medically dangerous proposal. There is also supposedly a hot line for people to complain to the President himself about anyone who speaks against the bill, which if true is a very sinister development, and some bloggers have also complained that their blog servers have been threatening them over their political content on this subject. It's true I haven't researched this myself and I hope the facts will sort themselves out eventually.

The extreme rush and the bullying that is going on in the drive to push this enormous unwieldy bill through before anyone has a chance to assess it properly is also a very bad sign.

All I know personally is that when I used the CNN-supplied code to embed a standard news video at my blog, of a man complaining at a town hall meeting, it was jerked away from my blog never to reappear, leaving a big red blank in its place, and its removal also took out a few paragraphs of my own about violations of American freedoms I could find absolutely no way of reinstating. That was an extremely disconcerting experience.

I'll pass your link on to those who are more embroiled in this than I am, however, and see what they have to say.

Thanks for taking the time to look it up.

I've now looked at more of the "debunkery" information at the link. Yes, it's just the party line. They accuse the "health industry" of trumping it all up etc. My experience is that it's just ordinary people getting upset about what they understand to be in the bill. And even if some of it is from insurance companies, and particularly doctors, shouldn't their input matter? The White House's simply telling people they're wrong without a careful discussion of the facts is NOT going to reassure them and it shouldn't. The complaints against this bill do involve apparently objective information. And it is a huge bill. Time should be taken to be sure it is what it should be.

WHAT'S THE BIG RUSH?

The rush itself is reason to be suspicious of it.

Wow, Big Brother's breathing down my little neck

How interesting. I used their own code to embed the video in the post below but it appears they have decided to exercise their Leftist-rationalized censorship of dissent to remove it and also prevent me posting anything else in that box. ("They" = CNN and friends)

Let's see if this will post.

Freedom of the Press, Freedom of Speech, Freedom from tyranny, HA!

Could be a technical glitch I suppose. But then wouldn't the embedded video reappear?

Outrageous Obama-led destruction of American freedoms over the Health Care Reform

To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. -------Thomas Jefferson

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

I gave up thinking about and commenting on politics some time ago, but I want at least to register here my solidarity with the protest against the healthcare proposal coming out of the Obama administration.

Unfortunately, in the mind of this administration it is no longer a Constitutionally protected American right to voice dissent to the government's actions. What they are calling the ordinary people who are protesting is outrageous. They speak of these orderly demonstrations as a "mob." People boo speakers at a political gathering and it is treated as unruly mob behavior. If the LEFT does such things, and they do far worse -- just ask conservative speakers such as David Horowitz -- that's just dissent, but let the Right say a word and it becomes an unruly "mob." They are turning the Constitution on its head, treating this orderly citizen dissent as if it were something criminal.

This has always been the mentality of the Left. We've objected to it for years. Now it has the power to enforce its outrageous anti-Constitutional behavior.

I do have the question whether they are really so delusional that they sincerely do not recognize their own injustice and anti-American attitude, but do regard dissent as criminal behavior, thanks to their blind allegiance to their own partisan politics; or it's calculated, just part of the typical cynical consciously anti-American fascistic program to discredit the opposition. I really do have this question. I can think of some for whom it must be sincerely misbegotten, the product of a leftist-twisted education, others I wonder about.

Since I did say I was staying away from politics I'm not up on this enough to say much more. I've seen the news here and there and checked some conservative sources, but that's about it. I'll try to get some links up to fill in the gaps soon.

=========================

Here's What seems like a fair article on the situation:

LEBANON, Pa. - They booed and taunted Sen. Arlen Specter (D., Pa.), calling him a tyrant, as anger at the Democrats' proposed overhaul of the health-care system boiled over yesterday at a pair of town-hall meetings.

"This country is turning into Russia," one man said in a common refrain, standing toe to toe with Specter in a hall at the Harrisburg Area Community College campus here. Chants broke out - "You work for us!" and "Read the bill!" - as the senator tried to answer questions.

Later in the day, Specter faced similar frustrations from skeptical voters in Lewisburg in an auditorium at Bucknell University. In both places, most of the questioners stayed civil but accused President Obama, Specter, and other congressional Democrats of trying to force a government takeover of health care that would violate their constitutional rights as well as the character of the nation.

...Several speakers at both town halls said they resented how Democrats had branded them as "mobs" whipped up by special interests.

And here's a video showing your "angry mob," an American citizen who wanted to speak but was made to leave.

Embedded video from CNN Video

12:49 AM HOW INTERESTING. I used their own code for embedding the video and they seem to have decided to prevent me from displaying it. Do they have no respect for anything or anybody any more? That video was put out there by their own henchmen; it's all over the place by now. Oh but I guess if the KGB wants something to disappear it will disappear.

Have their partisan preoccupations so overtaken their reason that they allow themselves to be the very tyrants the fathers of this nation tried to protect us from? Afraid so, folks. Freedom of the Press, ha! The Press is now merely an instrument of the big fat oppressor Government the founders tried to limit. Oh and they get SO upset if you call them Nazis, after years and years of calling our side Nazi. Can dish it out but can't take it. Ah, but it's worse than that. Their tyrannical Big Brother Agenda is showing.

But finally, conservatives have been pushed far enough to make use of our Constitutional freedoms to some extent, I hope not too late.