Michael Tsarion - Compilation

[undo11]

sensible responses.  i think where the manipulation comes in is suggesting that people should be angry, specifically, irish people.  and then revealing later, that he's against people being angry.  the average human mind would be completely bewildered by that, subconsciously.  it sets up cognitive dissonance, which is necessary if you want to get normally loving, caring people, to slaughter your enemy.

the issues he brings up are mostly valid.  and the information, particularly the etymology, is fascinating.  however,  using egyptian words that are currently being given to us in their greek/latinized form, is kind of disengenious. in other words, he's using latinized words as evidence egyptian words are all of irish origins.  the problem with that is, if you look at the actual egyptian words, they have a completely different format.  they contain no vowels, or very few vowels, have no resemblance to latin or greek or any other european languages, but have striking resemblance to ancient hebrew.

i commend him on his research, which is extensive, but fear he is using it specifically as a call to arms, and that just perpetuates the problems he complained about in the first place.  do you see what i mean? 

he's also wrong about the habiru, from what i can tell.  and being wrong about THAT is very suspicious.

[undo11]

another thought just occured to me as well.  z can probably elaborate on this.  but haven't the scots and irish historically been primarily catholic countries following the catholic invasion, who were in constant skirmishes with "protestant" england (in this case, when king henry VIII wanted a divorce and the pope wouldn't give it to him, he said, "screw that!", created his own non-catholic church, and had the new church leader, give him his divorce)?  this lead to protestanism, a word that basically means people of christian faith who protest against the catholic church.

there's some sketchy information out there that the scandinavian countries, and northern british isles contain the descendants of the tribe of dan (one of the 12 tribes of israel), as well as some references to the windsors being from the tribe of dan as well.  the information isn't very solid, so i'm skeptical in that regard, but i do find it fascinating that the stone of scone under the british throne is supposedly the stone jacob laid his head on when he had the dream of the angels ascending and descending into/out from, a heavenly gate.

in old testament times, the tribe of dan was on bad footing with the tribe of judah.  really bad footing.  this complicates the picture tsarion is trying to establish, quite a bit, as the undercurrent of his message is that israel has ripped off, whole cloth, the irish people.  how do you rip off yourself?   it would be more precise, from his particular angle, to say that the tribe of judah has ripped off and continues to rip off, the tribe of dan.  but if that were the case, why then are the windsors almost exclusively,  supporters of israel?  wouldn't they all be in the same predicament as members of the tribe of dan? 

there's something odd going on there. 

[undo11]

finished architects, now back to video 1, and i must say, he sure has alot of information in his head.  but i keep running into stuff he says, that my research suggests is not correct.  for example, he thinks christianity is atenism-- sun worship.  but if my theory regarding enki is correct, it would literally, predate akhenaten by 1000s of years.

i've found a trail that suggests the war of the sons of light against the sons of darkness is the sun religions vs. the moon religions.  and here's where it gets interesting:

moses' name means moon god.  not sun god.  moon god.  however, he was the son of the son of the moon god (by adoption into pharaoh ahmose's house).  ahmose' name means son of the moon god.  why he named moses, moses, is confusing, as that suggests moses was his father not his son. lol   that part stilll bugs me. 

as you may know if you have read my earlier work, En.lil was the original moon god.  christianity is not truly a religion of En.lil but of En.ki (the inclusion of the old testament which is mostly about En.lil, makes it appear to be a christian book, but it is not), yet there's nothing in particular that suggests enki was a sun god.  he was a son of Anu and Anu was a otiose god on some other or in some other, dimension, planet, whatever.    Some would argue he was the sun as a god, but even that goes against the sumerian-akkadian texts.

i just have a really hard time corrolating tsarion's data with my own, and i have perhaps did a bit more research, closer to the origins of these concepts than he has, where he has focused almost exclusively on the european - irish connection to egypt, which he has tempered thru his understanding of druidism.  if these are identical, and what he says is true, that ironically makes druids the bad guys since he thinks ancient egyptians were evil sun worshippers.  and around and around he goes.

[undo11]

p.s. wikipedia states that ahmose is son of Iah (will you look at that name!!!!!) and that it derives from the word moon god.   this would mean moses' name was iah.  holy mackeroli.

anyway, by then, the world had been convinced that Enlil, the moon god, was yahweh.  just look at the etymology of the name they have listed. it's the name of the moon god but using Ea's (Enki's) name.  that's because enlil was the god of this planet at the time -- meaning this planet was his real estate. the whole planet. and he didn't like humans on it. 

edit to add more exclamation points to "will you look at that name!!!!!"

[Sinny]

I think I still need about 5 years of stuffing my face in books before I can reply and do you justice Undo

Your right, he does has an awful lot crammed in side that head of his lol.

I'm glad some of you have found interest in his video's, and no doubt I'll continue to comment as I explore his work that is relevant to my studies. 

[stealthyaroura]

Hi undo, I can't pretend to understand a lot of Tsarion's work, especially his research on early Irish culture and religions.its hard to follow but then it's not a topic I have spent any time on.
"Architects of control" I found was interesting and relatively easy to watch as you don't need to be an academic to keep up unlike some of the more specialist topics he attempts to take on and hypothesise about.(some of the links sinny posted for example)

I agree with you that a lot of his interpretations like the early religious images or Egyptian history are misinterpreted and Tsarion is not alone in spreading his own version of "truth" I come across this all the time as so many people attempt to decipher the same subject with varying contradicting views.

A good example would be a set of you tube vids titled " knowthetruth" they are very popular but they prey on people's belief system's with promise of revealing the true meaning of various subjects like the(always popular) illuminati or some other esoteric teachings.

Have you ever considered producing your own video with your interpretation of these "mystic subjects"? I for one would really enjoy seeing your research put into video form,even if some of the subject matter is a little heavy.
Or you sinny for that matter? Anyhow, great reading if a little out of my depth.

[undo11]

I think I still need about 5 years of stuffing my face in books before I can reply and do you justice Undo

Your right, he does has an awful lot crammed in side that head of his lol.

I'm glad some of you have found interest in his video's, and no doubt I'll continue to comment as I explore his work that is relevant to my studies.

notice in his oracles and origins series, he discusses mind control via things like, referring to quotes from authority figures to make one's position sound like absolute truth.  then, literally a minute later, he starts quoting authority figures to bolster his own position.   once you learn how to listen to what he's saying,  it's like a whole other language he's layering on top of what he's saying.   it's something like this:

1. first, he derides the subject he disagrees with by pointing to several of their "tactics", such as appealing to authority

2.  then he says something to generate an emotional reaction.

3. then he follows it up with doing the very thing he was deriding only a few moments prior. 

there's really only 2 possible reasons why he does this.  he either doesn't realize he is doing it (the two halves of his brain are not fully communicating with each other) or it's some kind of brain washing technique. 

anybody know anything about brain washing?  i don't.  i simply don't understand his teaching process and wonder if anyone else is picking up on it.

notice also that the underlying current in the oracles and origins series, is appealing to the catholic crowd, and even more subtly,  to the idea that anything magical or supernatural, is evil.  he literally lambasts every magical tradition and even accidentally opens up on druids as well, then backtracks a bit to cover his tracks. 

one moment, witches are evil .  the next moment tarot is good.  the next moment, magic is evil.  the next moment, druidism is good.  the next moment, druidism is bad. the next moment, druidism is good.  someone who cares about this guy and is a close friend, should find out if he's had some kind of trauma or something.

what a confusing fellow

[undo11]

Have you ever considered producing your own video with your interpretation of these "mystic subjects"? I for one would really enjoy seeing your research put into video form,even if some of the subject matter is a little heavy.
Or you sinny for that matter? Anyhow, great reading if a little out of my depth.

i'm working on a book atm. but it doesn't delve into how these other world views are evil, but rather how most ancient traditions seem to be based, at least in part, on advanced sciences.  in other words, ancient texts are not as myth-based as they might seem on first reading.  when i read them now i notice all kinds of sciences in them.   

[Sinny]

Referring to quotes from authority figures to make one's position sound like absolute truth....

Then, literally a minute later, he starts quoting authority figures to bolster his own position.

Sorry Undo, I've either misunderstood your initial paragraph, or you have made the same point twice in one paragraph.
That point being: he has quoted others in authority to enforce his own conclusions - which is the norm... 
   

once you learn how to listen to what he's saying,  it's like a whole other language he's layering on top of what he's saying.

He talks in plain laymens terms in my opinion, but hey - maybe your picking up on something I'm not

2.  then he says something to generate an emotional reaction.

Such as? There's lots of material in here, hard to say without the quote.
I'd also like to add that WE are in control of our emotions 

3. then he follows it up with doing the very thing he was deriding only a few moments prior.

Still need specifics.

there's really only 2 possible reasons why he does this.

Possibilities are infinate 

He either doesn't realize he is doing it (the two halves of his brain are not fully communicating with each other) or it's some kind of brain washing technique.

To brainwash whom, to think what?

I simply don't understand his teaching process and wonder if anyone else is picking up on it.

At some point I will go through Origins & Oracles and see if I can find the same concerns as your self - until then.. Nope, he seems relatively sane and honest in my opinion, and my personal perspective his, he can draw his conclusions - I'll draw mine.

notice also that the underlying current in the oracles and origins series, is appealing to the catholic crowd

Well, he is exploring Irish Origins also - It's bound to 'appeal' to traditional Irish religions.

and even more subtly,  to the idea that anything magical or supernatural, is evil.  he literally lambasts every magical tradition and even accidentally opens up on druids as well, then backtracks a bit to cover his tracks.

one moment, witches are evil .  the next moment tarot is good.  the next moment, magic is evil.  the next moment, druidism is good.  the next moment, druidism is bad. the next moment, druidism is good.

From my studies (besides Tsarion) the general concensus is that Magic is 'Evil', and we are advised to not attempt using it for 'good', as it's roots lie in negativity. Magic draws from the Astral Plains *IMO* - and lots of Lower Astral beings would like us to stray off track. Having said that, not all ritual is 'bad' - therefore I don't see any issues with Tsarions opinions.

someone who cares about this guy and is a close friend, should find out if he's had some kind of trauma or something.

I've really not seen enough evidence to suggest this guy's work is drawn from anything other than a thirst for knowledge and unending curiosity. If he started acting a little insane, that would warrant investigation.

what a confusing fellow

I haven't studied his personal life or personal relationships, but from an acedemic point of view, he references all of his sources - I don't see whats confusing.

Looking forward to your reply - if you could grab a few quotes of his 'contradictions', we may be able to kick start a debate 

[undo11]

k, will see if i can find it again.  his videos are long, so it may take awhile to find it again.   it's in the section, i think of the first oracles and origins videos, that talks about how the status quo appeals to authority, and how this is a brain washing tool.  then, a bit later, he appeals to authority for like an hour , over and over again, to back up his own opinion.  it's like i said before, he doesn't appear to remember he just said it.  and there's some kind of emotional hook he puts in there that keeps most of his audience from noticing as well, considering you don't remember him saying that (or did you not watch the oracles videos?)

[undo11]

one more thing, while i'm thinking about it.  he's basically saying masons are evil, rosicrucians are evil, anybody that uses magic is evil, religion is evil, the ancient egyptians were evil, pyramids are evil, etc.  if you write down every thing he says is evil, you'll notice, he pretty much covers anything to do with caucasians, the underlying message of which is, white people are evil, EXCEPT irish catholics and irish druids, who he befriends momentarily with his paranoia about witchcraft, only to turn around a few minutes later and fawn over the use of tarot.   and he even falls off the boat on the druids, for a moment.   something's just not right.

[Sinny]

his videos are long, so it may take awhile to find it again.

Yea, I know that feeling.   

that talks about how the status quo appeals to authority

I don't understand how status quo can appeal to authority, surely the authority appeals to the status quo? 

and how this is a brain washing tool.

The illusion of authority certainly aids within brainwashing. 

he appeals to authority for like an hour

I might understand your perception a little better if you replace the word 'appeals' with something else.

Appeal Def:

Verb - Make a serious or urgent request, typically to the public.

Noun - A serious or urgent request, typically one made to the public.

Synonyms- call - plea - attraction - request - petition - entreaty

[Sinny]

one more thing, while i'm thinking about it.  he's basically saying masons are evil, rosicrucians are evil, anybody that uses magic is evil, religion is evil, the ancient egyptians were evil, pyramids are evil, etc. 

Ahh, groups, objects and tools can all be made evil by evil men.
Opposite applies too.

if you write down every thing he says is evil, you'll notice, he pretty much covers anything to do with caucasians, the underlying message of which is, white people are evil, EXCEPT irish catholics and irish druids, who he befriends momentarily with his paranoia about witchcraft, only to turn around a few minutes later and fawn over the use of tarot.   and he even falls off the boat on the druids, for a moment.   something's just not right.

Strong statements Undo..

[undo11]

well maybe i'm over-reacting, but i'm off and on relistening to that entire thing to find where it is. may even be in the 2nd one or the third lol

don't misunderstand.  i don't think he's crazy.  i don't think he's mentally handicapped.   just something doesn't seem right and perhaps it's leading him to come to those conclusions. i dunno. but if you listen, he spends quite a bit of time in architects of control, complaining about masons and rosicrucians. just to give you some idea, how i think he's not quite right about that, zorgon is a rosicrucian. 

[Somamech]

Its been age's since I listened to the guy in question....

I recall listening to him when I dragged myself out of the pit and saw that the web happened ! 

Only problem I have is how people like him draw people into some torture of this and that in regards to "They are doing this to Us".

This world is way too complex for a simple explanation of "They throwing arrows at us"