<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d10168904\x26blogName\x3dThe+Observor\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttp://theobservor.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_US\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://theobservor.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d4340397006971771462', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

Sunday, June 12

The Most Dangerous Idea

The following is a really interesting article I have read at http://equalibrium4.blogspot.com, and it indicates very vividly how the 'control system' is maintained!

I can not see how I could add anything of substantive value to what has already been written at Equilibrium4 or by Laura Knight Jadczyk on the subject, so I will let their texts stand as they are.

Tuesday, June 07, 2005
The Most Dangerous Idea

Dangerous ideas are usually the most difficult to share. I learned this recently in what may seem like a rather innocuous way, but I can come to no other conclusion than that there are definite walls of force, sometimes very subtle, that exist to keep certain very special truths about our world 'contained'. Walls of force that keep certain esoteric knowledge from reaching those who might most benefit, or see it's application realized to a greater potential.

What am I talking about?

This all begins really with an attempt to just place an ad for a book in a thematically related publication. The book is Laura Knight-Jadczyk's 'Secret History of the World' (which I have written about in another blog entry here) and the publication is Parabola Magazine. What the book is about and what the publication is tell the whole story about the subtle walls of force I mention.

A little on the book in case you haven't heard about it yet. 'Secret History of the World and How to Get Out Alive' is a compendium of research and essential truths and ideas concerning Gnosticsm, Sufism, biblical analysis, cyclic catastrophes, history, DNA changes, Alchemy and the Grail Legend. That's for starters. Then, you might say, the book takes a 'quantum leap' into such profoundly specialized areas as 'superluminal communication' and 'hyperdimensional reality'.

Though I can do no justice to either of these areas here, I will just suggest that the first topic concerns the tested process, potential, and results of extended communication with 'intelligences' or 'thought forms' that fall far outside our usual understanding of reality. The common parlance for such a process is called 'channelling'. The second topic, or topic of topics as Don Juan Matus might say , conerns the reality of 'influences' - both malevolent and otherwise, on humanity. These 'influences' come to us from "outer space" and out of our "time". You might even say that the study of hyperdimensionsal reality takes UFOlogy "to the next level" of understanding; giving the esoteric phrase 'food for the moon' a whole new meaning.

Add an unflinching and mystically-minded yet scientific approach to decades of hard research involved in all of the above, and you get 'The Secret History of the World'.

So what might you feel compelled to do if you came across a written work that quite posssibly answered many of the most important questions about your own existance? Would you want to keep it a secret? Or would you want to share it with everyone you knew - who cared to know. And for those you don't know but who may one day benefit - where to advertise such a book?

Well, much of my own introduction to many ideas in 'SHoTW' came from a magazine I used to read called Parabola. A quarterly publication, Parabola chooses a theme for each of it's issues and expounds upon it by choosing relevant passages from established works, as well as new articles and essays. It's called the magazine of 'Myth and Tradition' and it always includes material from numerous cultures and perspectives which serve to explain mankind's 'condition'. A very laudable purpose for any publication; to try and explain mankind's condition using classic works and archtypical, mythical themes to structure them.

When I heard that Mrs. Knight-Jadczyk was in fact looking to advertise her new book, to me one suggestion was obvious. It had to be Parabola. The built-in audience were people reading about many of the same things, having many of the same questions that Mrs. Knight-Jadczyk delves into. Advertising with Parabola would be the perfect match!

Not long after suggesting this, I learned that Laura Knight-Jadczyk went with the idea of placing the ad in Parabola.

Parabola rejected the ad.

Wondering what reasons the folks at the magazine had for their refusal to accept the placement of an ad, I called their advertising representative. After several minutes of polite back and forth I was finally given to understand that the book was considered to be too "sensationalistic" and "not something they wanted to promote". I could only think: if only they knew how much in common their publication had with the 'SHotW', if only how they saw how much of an extension of it it was, if they cared about the material they were publishing why weren't they more open - to an ad for a book with very related subject matter???

After presenting these questions in as non-confrontational a way as possible, the conversation ended. It was apparent that her, or their, minds were made up about it and nothing would change that.

But why?

Media and consumers all accept that there is a tacit understanding about the advertising is published. The shpiel about the ad not necessarily representing the views of the host of the ad is implied, if not outright stated. We've heard it a million times. And it's not as though we were actually requesting the publishing of an article or any part of the material itself. So again I have to wonder, why?

Could it be that merely the ideas suggested in the ad were actually 'dangerous' to Parabola itself somehow? That Parabola, for all it's discussion of things spiritually enlightening would always maintain it's own version of a 'status quo'? And if that's true, how enlightening an approach could the publication have if it seeks to limit knowledge in even this way? This would be like studying the birth of Communism but disallowing research into the secret societies that helped conceive of it, or the Western Capitalists who helped to finance it. There are certain bodies of information and research, and connections made with them, without which the bigger picture is incomplete.

The Questions appear to end at Parabola with 'superluminal communication' and 'hyperdimensional reality'. These ideas threaten, in their eyes (or someone else's) to pull the carpet out from under them. To consider advertising such "sensationalistic" ideas would mean that might have to reconsider everything they do. And why would they want to do a thing like that?

Was requesting to have placed (and paid for) the 'Secret History of the World' book ad with Parabola magazine really asking all that much? Yes, apparently it was.

Yes, what kind of 'Censor' will allow the truth to leak out?

For an even more comprehensive account, this is what Laura Knight Jadczyk had to say about it.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home