The Paranormal, UFO's, and Mysteries of the Unknown

Rajaah said:

I can't decide if all this modern UFO/UAP talk in the mainstream news is:

A) The government is really being more open on the subject and the history of sightings, but really can't explain it either, and is working on it, and will show us proof when they have it

B) The government is being more open on the subject and the history of sightings, because acting like they're being transparent still obfuscates the fact that they have a crashed ship and have had it for decades reverse-engineering it

C) It's a psy-op and they have nothing / know nothing about what these phenomena are but have chosen NOW to really make it a huge story to distract from all of the other things going on.

I'm leaning C. Which doesn't discount the existence of the actual UFOs. Just that they're finally latching onto aerial phenomena as a useful tool to get everyone all riled up / distracted from the Accelerated Frog Boil.

Click to expand...

They have had this psy-op running sense the 1950s. Then they stopped running it sometime about ten years ago. Now they have turned the psy-op back on for some reason. Most likely it because the internet has taken over these conspiracy's and they want to reassert government control of them.

I have seen a book called that, that was printed in the 70's.
Henry Ford wrote a book about the evil race too. Forgot it's name.. maybe not the right thread for this..

Edaw said:

View attachment 466779

Click to expand...

Makes me laugh everytime I see Knights Templar show up in these things having studied them.

They were an ineffective military force of about ~300 who were so bloodthirsty that they instigated the loss of Jerusalem and the True Cross. They only lasted ~200 years.

"Baphomet" is just how they said "Muhammad", it was translated "Mahomet" for a long time which shows the similarity better. If the slander against them was true, they had either converted to Islam, or were training their recruits in what it was to prepare them for capture.

In reality, the King of France was in debt to them and wanted to seize their wealth, so they got what the Jews normally got in that situation.

Knights Hospitaller (the other Jerusalem military order) would be a better conspiracy focus, they lasted a long time eventually as the Knights of Malta and are still around.

Chris said:

Makes me laugh everytime I see Knights Templar show up in these things having studied them.

They were an ineffective military force of about ~300 who were so bloodthirsty that they instigated the loss of Jerusalem and the True Cross. They only lasted ~200 years.

"Baphomet" is just how they said "Muhammad", it was translated "Mahomet" for a long time which shows the similarity better. If the slander against them was true, they had either converted to Islam, or were training their recruits in what it was to prepare them for capture.

In reality, the King of France was in debt to them and wanted to seize their wealth, so they got what the Jews normally got in that situation.

Knights Hospitaller (the other Jerusalem military order) would be a better conspiracy focus, they lasted a long time eventually as the Knights of Malta and are still around.

Click to expand...

You studied them - yet somehow cant seem to come to the conclusion that the victors were who wrote the story about the Knights Templars? Of course the Knights Templars were bloodthirsty satanists that brought destruction everywhere they went. Their story was literally defined by the King of France (as you said) and the Pope - both of which owed vast sums of money to the Knights Templar (as you said) and would gain an economic powerhouse in the vacuum left by their absence. The likes of Amazon in today's terms (in comparative wealth). You can make direct comparisons for the controlling narrative in American and British mainstream media.

Now, heres the kicker. The knights that were persecuted were in France, where Molay was, barely any of them were actually tortured and killed. I know this is going to be a stretch for you, but lets use some common sense, but not dive too far off the deep end into conspiracy theory territory. Examine the picture below for the different branches - keep in mind that the Pope and the King of France - their reach is only but so far. Would all of these remaining men just disappear into the wind? Or would they go into hiding and continue to use their connections and power in secret to amass even more wealth? Keep in mind they owned castles, entire port towns, regions of farm land that would make Monsanto look like shit. None of this was confiscated ... so ... where do you think they went? Do you think they didnt have any pull within the religious circles?

Rajaah said:

I wonder if the original root origin of Bahamut was a spinoff from that word. Muhammad->Mahomet->Bahamut->Baphomet.

MusicForFish Speaking of connections I'm starting to wonder if the Skinwalker Ranch situation has some connection to Dyatlov Pass. Unexplained radiation in both places.

Click to expand...

Doesn't look like it.

Bahamut seems to be genuinely Arabic while Baphomet is the results of Arabic to French translation.

Most things in Final Fantasy are from Jewish/Christian/Islamic esoteric mythology.

Daidraco said:

You studied them - yet somehow cant seem to come to the conclusion that the victors were who wrote the story about the Knights Templars? Of course the Knights Templars were bloodthirsty satanists that brought destruction everywhere they went. Their story was literally defined by the King of France (as you said) and the Pope - both of which owed vast sums of money to the Knights Templar (as you said) and would gain an economic powerhouse in the vacuum left by their absence.

Click to expand...

No I studied The Crusades only up to the third one, so their demise never figured into anything I read.

I actually calculated their recruitment and casualties myself. From memory, I figured out that they never had more than 300 knights at a time in the holy land and had 90%+ casuality rates.

The reason was that they almost killed Saladin once by recklessly charging his tent in the morning of the battle, forcing him to flee naked on camel back. So they just did that in every battle and kept dying.

They convinced the last King of Jerusalem to march out to confront Saladin with The True Cross as their standard so they could try the tactic again, and got EVERYONE killed and the kingdom fell.

The previous Crusader tactic, which worked, was hiding behind their castle walls and waiting for Saladin's conscripts to go back home for harvest.

So I came to the incompetent bloodthirsty fools conclusion myself. King of France just got them for being heretics, true or not (probably not), and they no longer had a presence in the holy land for anyone to give a shit about to save them.

Chris said:

No I studied The Crusades only up to the third one, so their demise never figured into anything I read.

I actually calculated their recruitment and casualties myself. From memory, I figured out that they never had more than 300 knights at a time in the holy land and had 90%+ casuality rates.

The reason was that they almost killed Saladin once by recklessly charging his tent in the morning of the battle, forcing him to flee naked on camel back. So they just did that in every battle and kept dying.

They convinced the last King of Jerusalem to march out to confront Saladin with The True Cross as their standard so they could try the tactic again, and got EVERYONE killed and the kingdom fell.

The previous Crusader tactic, which worked, was hiding behind their castle walls and waiting for Saladin's conscripts to go back home for harvest.

So I came to the incompetent bloodthirsty fools conclusion myself. King of France just got them for being heretics, true or not (probably not), and they no longer had a presence in the holy land for anyone to give a shit about to save them.

Click to expand...

Whatever you read did you a disservice towards them. Cause all it feels like is that you just watched Kingdom of Heaven and took that as gospel. The only negative light that didnt come from the Pope, The King of France, or the tortured please of admittance from the might as well be dead by that point Knights - is that they had a Jewish fervor for Usury.

Daidraco said:

Whatever you read did you a disservice towards them. Cause all it feels like is that you just watched Kingdom of Heaven and took that as gospel. The only negative light that didnt come from the Pope, The King of France, or the tortured please of admittance from the might as well be dead by that point Knights - is that they had a Jewish fervor for Usury.

Click to expand...

I hated Kingdom of Heaven because it wasn't accurate, I think they merged Guy of Lusignan and Gerard de Ridefort who were the architects of the fall of Jerusalem.

I actually read books on the topic and have a British qualification on the subject. It was difficult to find the info I found, most did not go into detail and all were neutral or positive about them. Again, my negativity towards them was my own conclusion. The Pope and the King of France were not involved in the events I studied, other than sending troops.

What exactly is your basis for disagreeing with me? Did they seem awesome on Ancient Aliens and Curse of Oak Island?

Chris said:

I hated Kingdom of Heaven because it wasn't accurate, I think they merged Guy of Lusignan and Gerard de Ridefort who were the architects of the fall of Jerusalem.

I actually read books on the topic and have a British qualification on the subject. It was difficult to find the info I found, most did not go into detail and all were neutral or positive about them. Again, my negativity towards them was my own conclusion. The Pope and the King of France were not involved in the events I studied, other than sending troops.

What exactly is your basis for disagreeing with me? Did they seem awesome on Ancient Aliens and Curse of Oak Island?

Click to expand...

British Qualification on the subject? Take into account that you admit that you have only studied them up to a point, and claim ignorance on anything outside of it (yet are still qualified under british scrutiny? tf?). Which by extension of saying that, you are implying that the Knights Templar has a deep history that you are ignorant of. Formed your own opinion of them on this limited (but qualified!) amount of study. (Just pointing out the idiocy of claiming you are qualified on the subject if you arent putting the clues together.) Then lastly, want to tell someone else this bullshit:

Chris said:

Makes me laugh everytime I see Knights Templar show up in these things having studied them.

They were an ineffective military force of about ~300 who were so bloodthirsty that they instigated the loss of Jerusalem and the True Cross. They only lasted ~200 years.

"Baphomet" is just how they said "Muhammad", it was translated "Mahomet" for a long time which shows the similarity better. If the slander against them was true, they had either converted to Islam, or were training their recruits in what it was to prepare them for capture.

In reality, the King of France was in debt to them and wanted to seize their wealth, so they got what the Jews normally got in that situation.

Knights Hospitaller (the other Jerusalem military order) would be a better conspiracy focus, they lasted a long time eventually as the Knights of Malta and are still around.

Click to expand...

You said they were an ineffective military force - obviously wrong, or else they wouldnt have fucking gotten rich in the first place you fucking idiot. You said they were around 300, also wrong. Not only are you wrong in what was recorded, but completely neglect that during the Crusades - they didnt have a fucking scribe in the middle of the desert. Bloodthirsty - by whose standards? By the Kings/Popes fucking standards that funded these fucking expeditions? Or the Kings/Popes that were in debt to them and failed to deliver the promises that these men would be paid in full.

You believe in the medieval equivalent of today's mainstream media and Im trying to make you open your eyes and read more about it. Instead, as you normally do, you sit there with a chip on your shoulder and ultimately look like a fucking stupid prick. I hate the fact that you teach children.

Daidraco said:

British Qualification on the subject? Take into account that you admit that you have only studied them up to a point, and claim ignorance on anything outside of it (yet are still qualified under british scrutiny? tf?). Which by extension of saying that, you are implying that the Knights Templar has a deep history that you are ignorant of. Formed your own opinion of them on this limited (but qualified!) amount of study. (Just pointing out the idiocy of claiming you are qualified on the subject if you arent putting the clues together.) Then lastly, want to tell someone else this bullshit:

Click to expand...

I'm not ignorant of their later history at all, we did actually study it and I've posted expert knowledge about their downfall in this thread, such as the Baphomet/Muhammed connection. Another detail is that the "kiss of shame" they performed in their initiation ceremony is usually assumed to be a gay sex act, but could be an interpretation of the Islamic prayer where they appear to kiss the ground.

I'm just saying that the focus of my personal study on them to write my essay to pass the course was on their Holy Land years and THAT history was not tained by any Papal/French propaganda since that stuff happened much later.

Daidraco said:

You said they were an ineffective military force - obviously wrong, or else they wouldnt have fucking gotten rich in the first place you fucking idiot. You said they were around 300, also wrong. Not only are you wrong in what was recorded, but completely neglect that during the Crusades - they didnt have a fucking scribe in the middle of the desert. Bloodthirsty - by whose standards? By the Kings/Popes fucking standards that funded these fucking expeditions? Or the Kings/Popes that were in debt to them and failed to deliver the promises that these men would be paid in full.

You believe in the medieval equivalent of today's mainstream media and Im trying to make you open your eyes and read more about it. Instead, as you normally do, you sit there with a chip on your shoulder and ultimately look like a fucking stupid prick. I hate the fact that you teach children.

Click to expand...

Now you show that you know very little about them, you don't even know how they made their money.

They started off escorting nobles around the holy sites in the holy land as glorified tour guides, they also guarded the Temple Mount (hence Templar). The Pope was pleased that young men who would typically take holy orders to be a monk, could now do so in a combat role and reinforce Outremer. So they got paid and got patronage.

Where most of the conspiracies come from, as well as their downfall, is that they managed to figure out a loophole in the laws against Christians charging interest. They would take a crusader's money for safekeeping then loan it out during the several years he would be on crusade, the loans didn't do interest but was similar to Islamic banking (another Islam link!) where you just agreed to pay a flat rate extra back as a fee. That is when they got very wealthy and got treated the same ways rich Jews got treated - killed to avoid paying them back.

Now you tell me, what work of fiction did you watch that qualifies you to speak on them?