Illuminati and 2012 Olympics Conspiracy

[Left-Field]

Since you quoted my post, I'll assume you're addressing this to me:

The question was meant for anyone who cares to answer it, not you specifically. You are certainly welcome to respond to it though (like you have).

It matters because the list Coffey provided with the intent of refuting Emma's post does not address the point made in Emma's post. Its an answer to a question not asked.

The point of my question is what relevance is there behind asking if conspiracies exist in which the group behind them advertised their existence (whether it be at great lengths or not) before stated conspiracy was carried out?

If a conspiracy exists, it exists. Whether it is advertised or not has no relevance. If a secret society exists, it too exists whether they advertise their existence or not.

With that being the case, I ask again, what relevance is there to wanting to know of a group and / or conspiracy having existed (or currently existing) that advertises their plans and / or existence?

Edited August 2, 2012 by Angel Left Wing

[Coffey]

Perhaps you missed this part of Emma's post:

Maybe you can tell us how the Manhattan Project was splashed all over the papers and was known to millions of people around the world in 1942 - 1945...?

Maybe you'd like to explain to us ANY of those on that list "went to great lengths to advertise their existence beforehand"...?

Cz

So you pick one?

Out of 33...

Try picking one that is more in line witht he subject.

Nuclear program and a public event aren't the same are they.

[Space Commander Travis]

I'm not really sure what that list http://www.phibetaio...entral-feature/ purports to reveal; a conspiracy theory is one, e.g. that the Govt*. has secret dealings with extra terrestrials or that it did the 9.11 attacks itself; what those seem to be is, well, all sorts of things that governments have done over the years to a greater or lesser degree of fishiness. And I'm not sure whether some could really described as Conspiracies at all (Federal Reserve Bank? Surely that's not a secret exactly). And some are hardly Government conspiracies, they're anti-Government conspiracies: "Conspiracy to Assassinate Hitler (Government Internal, Germany)"? All those would have been conspiracy theories that were proved true if there had been theories about their existence beforehand, perhaps, but how many of them did have?

* the U.S. one, of course, naturally

[Czero 101]

So you pick one?

Out of 33...

Yes, I picked one AS AN EXAMPLE... An example that NONE of the things on the list you provided are useful in your failed attempt to refute Emma's point.

And did you miss the part where I said this:

Maybe you'd like to explain to us ANY of those on that list "went to great lengths to advertise their existence beforehand"...?

...?

You seem to have a problem with missing random yet important parts of posts... you should maybe look into fixing that...

Try picking one that is more in line witht he subject.

Actually, that's what you should have done since it was YOU trying and failing to make the point. Why should I or anyone else have to do YOUR WORK for you...?

You didn't say, "Ok, here's a list of 33 conspiracies. There's one or two - like {this one} and {that one} - that are in line with the topic".

Instead you presented the ENTIRE LIST, implying that everything on that list is part of your failed attempted refutation.

How is it my fault that you're too lazy to actually point out the ones that fit...?

Nuclear program and a public event aren't the same are they.

No... they're not... so why would you choose a list that has that program - not to mention secret military programs and other examples that aren't PUBLIC EVENTS - on it as an attempt to refute the point that Emma was trying to make..??

Looks to me like you didn't even bother to look at what was on the list...

Cz

Edited August 2, 2012 by Czero 101

[Coffey]

Yes, I picked one AS AN EXAMPLE... An example that NONE of the things on the list you provided are useful in your failed attempt to refute Emma's point.

And did you miss the part where I said this:

...?

You seem to have a problem with missing random yet important parts of posts... you should maybe look into fixing that...

Actually, that's what you should have done since it was YOU trying and failing to make the point. Why should I or anyone else have to do YOUR WORK for you...?

You didn't say, "Ok, here's a list of 33 conspiracies. There's one or two - like {this one} and {that one} - that are in line with the topic".

Instead you presented the ENTIRE LIST, implying that everything on that list is part of your failed attempted refutation.

How is it my fault that you're too lazy to actually point out the ones that fit...?

No... they're not... so why would you choose a list that has that program - not to mention secret military programs and other examples that aren't PUBLIC EVENTS - on it as an attempt to refute the point that Emma was trying to make..??

Looks to me like you didn't even bother to look at what was on the list...

Cz

Loads of those where discussed by people and had things written about them before they where finally "revealed" to be true. One specific case MK ULTRA, it was a discussed conspiracy theory for a long time. Now it is a proven fact.

There proven the point.

We didn't have the internet back then so it was obviously different and it was easier to lie throught he media as you didn't have millions of people on the internet digging stuff up.

Huge difference in societies. The itnernet is half good and half bad. Firstly it's good for information, peple cna dig more etc and people can share ideas sadly there is people who take the media for gospel. (These peopel I cannot stand)

Just to back up my ccase I will provide my evidence of people tkaing the media as gospel and being sheep:

The Miami "face eater" attack. The media first said he was on bath salts. they mad eit out liek it was a fact. I argued with 95% of people who beleived them. With more than 40% of those beleiving the "bath salts" where the same ones people use int heir baths and nto a streetname for a drug. The media made no attempt of actually explaining this. Taking advantage of the blind sheep to just follow it as gospel... Oh look 2 weeks later "Bath salts" don't show in 2 seperate toxicology in reports..... The Goverment officially announces that it beleives the 35+ crazy attacks int he US are "excited delerium" but that's not fun enough for the media to throw aorund so they carry on shouting "bath salts" a drug that has been aorund for 10+ years. (plant food int he UK)

This is 1 of many examples of the media BS and lack of ability to report actual facts. Proving to me that people will follow that BS that they spew out a gospel.

I don't even understand why the hell you mentioned media?! The media wasn't part of her point.

Her point was conspirayc theories making a big deal out of it befor eit was proven... In which case I have proven they have before. Those people jsut had less outlets for it because we didn't have the Internet back then. (civillians that is)

Another case was the world being round. Poeple where killed over that and there the people saying it could be where looked at as insane.....

Edited August 2, 2012 by Coffey

[Czero 101]

Loads of those where discussed by people and had things written about them before they where finally "revealed" to be true. One specific case MK ULTRA, it was a discussed conspiracy theory for a long time. Now it is a proven fact.

There proven the point.

Covert CIA / OSI research project and a public event aren't the same are they....?

So, really, you haven't proven anything except that you are still apparently incapable of seeing that your list still doesn't work to refute Emma's point...

But hey... by all means continue grasping at those straws...

Cz

[booNyzarC]

Her point was conspirayc theories making a big deal out of it befor eit was proven... In which case I have proven they have before. Those people jsut had less outlets for it because we didn't have the Internet back then. (civillians that is)

With all due respect, that wasn't her point at all Coffey.

I suggest you go back to her post and re-read it. If you still don't understand her point after that, I suggest that you ask her to clarify her point instead of assuming that you understand it, because clearly you don't.

[Left-Field]

I'm sorry but did I read that correctly, they have sinister look about them?

You heard what I said the way you wanted to hear it.

If you cared to be accurate about my statement, I said that in my opinion they almost have a sinister look about them - especially the one on the left, "Wenlock."

I say "Wenlock" especially due to the fact his "brow" dips down in the middle as if he (or she?) is paying particular attention to something.

Some people are afraid of clowns, I guess they must be representatives of the Illuminati too.

Do you really not understand why your statement above has no correlation to the Illuminati or anything I stated.

No one said that everything people fear is related to the Illuminati. Nor has anyone ever associated clowns with the Illuminati.

Your comment above is pure silliness.

Now, on the other hand, if the clowns in the Ringling Bros. Circus suddenly began wearing pyramid themed costumes with single eye-balled symbols on them, then yeah, it would give people fair reason to wonder why that is the case and ponder if the "Illuminati" played any role with the Ringling Bros. suddenly dressing their clowns in such a manner.

I guess if you're obsessed about that kind of thing it might. Just look at all the strange places people have found Jesus.

More silliness.

Comparing symbols that are clear in their appearance to someone claiming to see the face of Jesus on a piece of bread they just toasted (just giving an example) is not a comaparable analogy at all.

Wait, I thought the Illuminati was a bunch of satan worshippers?

And if they are (and I'm not saying they are), what is your point? There are many ways to worship Satan while still making mention of religion related to God and Christ. It can be distorted in many, many ways (the Catholic church is an example of this).

Furthermore, simply because a fraction within a group may be linked to something does not mean the entire group does those same things.

William Blake wrote what he wrote in the poem I quoted from while still being recognized as an "enlightened one" at the time he wrote it by the way.

How dare they use basic geometrical shapes! They should've used giant phalluses.

I didn't know the "All Seeing Eye" sitting atop a pyramid has come to be known as a basic geometrical shape. Interesting.

Furthermore, a triangle is a basic geometrical shape, but not all triangles are pyramids. The Illuminati is associated with using the pyramid as one of their symbols, not triangles.

As for the phallus', I am fairly certain that if the stadium was constructed with phallus shaped lights all along the top rim of the stadium and people began posting, or asking within the conspiracy section about who was behind this and why it was done others (maybe yourself as well) would come up with every possible reason you could think of as to how the design came about and why it was done without any ill intentioned thoughts or reasoning.

[Emma_Acid]

Loads of those where discussed by people and had things written about them before they where finally "revealed" to be true. One specific case MK ULTRA, it was a discussed conspiracy theory for a long time. Now it is a proven fact.

Jesus wept. Can open; worms everywhere.

I didn't say that conspiracy theories never happened, were never discussed, and never came true. I didn't even say the Illuminati didn't once exist.

I was pointing out the completely and utter non-logic in a supposedly secret organisation going to massive lengths to advertise their existence and intentions before the execution of their (albeit nebulous) masterplan.

You are looking for what you want to find.

I'll repeat - the mascots have one eye; there is a ubiquitous, and architecturally obvious, shape featured in one (just one) structure in the Olympic park; and the letters 2012 can be reordered to look a bit like something else.

This is evidence of nothing.

I can't wait for the Olympics to be over - and that's not just so I can get to work on time. (Incidentally - I work for the company that built the Olympic park and all the stadia - should I not be in on the nefarious plans of world domination? I feel distinctly left out).

[Emma_Acid]

I say "Wenlock" especially due to the fact his "brow" dips down in the middle as if he (or she?) is paying particular attention to something.

Now it is getting tenuous.

William Blake wrote what he wrote in the poem I quoted from while still being recognized as an "enlightened one" at the time he wrote it by the way.

William Blake was deeply religious and didn't really agree with much of the Enlightenment's philosophy.

Try again.

I didn't know the "All Seeing Eye" sitting atop a pyramid has come to be known as a basic geometrical shape. Interesting.

Furthermore, a triangle is a basic geometrical shape, but not all triangles are pyramids. The Illuminati is associated with using the pyramid as one of their symbols, not triangles.

Are they? I'd like you to provide an historic, academic source that links the Illuminati with pyramids. And no, a conspiracy website or youtube video won't do.

[Coffey]

Jesus wept. Can open; worms everywhere.

I didn't say that conspiracy theories never happened, were never discussed, and never came true. I didn't even say the Illuminati didn't once exist.

I was pointing out the completely and utter non-logic in a supposedly secret organisation going to massive lengths to advertise their existence and intentions before the execution of their (albeit nebulous) masterplan.

You are looking for what you want to find.

I'll repeat - the mascots have one eye; there is a ubiquitous, and architecturally obvious, shape featured in one (just one) structure in the Olympic park; and the letters 2012 can be reordered to look a bit like something else.

This is evidence of nothing.

I can't wait for the Olympics to be over - and that's not just so I can get to work on time. (Incidentally - I work for the company that built the Olympic park and all the stadia - should I not be in on the nefarious plans of world domination? I feel distinctly left out).

I get you now and apoligise, I read it wrong.

[booNyzarC]

I get you now and apoligise, I read it wrong.

This is classy. This is why I have so much respect for you Coffey.

Cheers.

[Left-Field]

William Blake was deeply religious and didn't really agree with much of the Enlightenment's philosophy.

William Blake (Enlightenment Philosophy)

Despite his opposition to Enlightenment principles, Blake thus arrived at a linear aesthetic that was in many ways more similar to the Neoclassical engravings of John Flaxman than to the works of the Romantics, with whom he is often classified.

Therefore Blake has also been viewed as an enlightenment poet and artist, in the sense that he was in accord with that movement's rejection of received ideas, systems, authorities and traditions. On the other hand, he was critical of what he perceived as the elevation of reason to the status of an oppressive authority. In his criticism of reason, law and uniformity Blake has been taken to be opposed to the enlightenment, but it has also been argued that, in a dialectical sense, he used the enlightenment spirit of rejection of external authority to criticise narrow conceptions of the enlightenment.

[Coffey]

This is classy. This is why I have so much respect for you Coffey.

Cheers.

I'm not afraid to admitt when I'm wrong or made a mistake.

[tp812]

More info:

London Olympics False Flag Terror Conditioning & Predictive Programming

Goal: Get public (especially in UK) accustomed to the idea of a Nuclear Attack at London Olympics.

1) 3/31/10

Olympic Armageddon: How top terrorists could send nuclear bomb up the Thames to target London 2012 games

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1262668/Olympic-Armageddon-Top-thriller-writer-imagines-terrorist-attack-London-2012-Games.html

2) 6/22/09

Telegraph Operation Black Jack - fictional slideshow depicting nuclear bombs exploding in 6 major cities, including London at location where the Olympics will be held. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/culturepicturegalleries/4220575/Blackjack.html

3) Rockerfeller Foundation report Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development: One scenario on page 34 describe an 2012 Olympic bombing that kills 13,000

http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/uploads/files/bba493f7-cc97-4da3-add6-3deb007cc719.pdf

4) 7/14/2005 Olympic Park on ex-nuclear site

London 2012 officials have insisted there is no health risk after learning part of the planned Olympic Park is on the site of a former nuclear reactor.http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/olympics_2012/4682251.stm

5) History Channel - Describes Merlin's prediction of terror attack in London - shows nuclear bomb exploding in London

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91Gj2UFxWOY

6) Spooks Code 9 program in BBC : envisaged nuclear attack in Olympic Stadium in London in 2012

7) 2/12/2012

Mock Olympic Terror Attack at Disused Tube Station

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/02/22/london-2012-mock-olympic-terror-attack_n_1292814.html

8) 8/26/09 Express.co.uk - Radioactive waste to be buried at Olympic site. THOUSANDS of tonnes of radioactive waste is to be buried in a "nuclear bunker" n/ext to the Olympic stadium under construction in London.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/116493/Radioactive-waste-to-be-buried-at-Olympic-site

9) Silverstein's 9-11 Partner Owns Olympics "Gateway"

http://www.henrymakow.com/silverstein_business_partner_o.html

10) 7/29/2012

Private contractors to look after Britain's nukes http://www.presstv.com/detail/2012/07/29/253259/trident/

11) Report: Mossad Steps Up Security for London Olympic Games after Terrorist Attack

Youtube video: uPRX9dJ1ih4

(Propaganda linking potential terrorist attack with Iran.)

12) In the film 2012: lead character finds London Underground map although totally irrelevant to plot

13) 2003

Operation Osiris drills in London to prepare for London Underground attack

14) 2005 V for Vendatta shows attack on London Underground.

More videos from:http://www.youtube.com/user/TheTruthIsFromGod4

*Disclaimer: I believe in media fakery. This does not mean everyone or anyone else in this thread or those who respond to this post endorse media fakery. This does not mean all conspiracy theorists endorse media fakery. My comments are based on my own judgement and research. My goal is not to debate, but if you have questions I'll do my best to answer. Otherwise just Google: 'september clues' or 'clues forum'

What is media fakery? The idea that the media establishment along with military and intelligence agencies manufacture fake events with fake videos, fake pictures, fake witnesses, fake victims, and actors. Actors and disinformation agents continue to promote the official story of the fake event or promote false conspiracy theories.

[Junior Chubb]

Goal: Get public (especially in UK) accustomed to the idea of a Nuclear Attack at London Olympics.

Fail: I live in London and this is the first I have heard of a Nuclear attack at the London Olympics, silly me I have been looking out for Aliens.

Welcome to UM though tp812, you are going to have fun here.

[Rlyeh]

More silliness.

Comparing symbols that are clear in their appearance to someone claiming to see the face of Jesus on a piece of bread they just toasted (just giving an example) is not a comaparable analogy at all.

You're clearly obsessed with anything that supports your delusions, no different than seeing Jesus everywhere. It's a confirmation bias.

I didn't know the "All Seeing Eye" sitting atop a pyramid has come to be known as a basic geometrical shape. Interesting.

Maybe if you stare into the light.. I mean "All Seeing Eye" long enough you'll see the face of Jesus too.

Furthermore, a triangle is a basic geometrical shape, but not all triangles are pyramids. The Illuminati is associated with using the pyramid as one of their symbols, not triangles.

So why are you showing pictures of triangles and calling them pyramids? You need to get your own facts straight.

[Emma_Acid]

William Blake (Enlightenment Philosophy)

Despite his opposition to Enlightenment principles, Blake thus arrived at a linear aesthetic that was in many ways more similar to the Neoclassical engravings of John Flaxman than to the works of the Romantics, with whom he is often classified.

Therefore Blake has also been viewed as an enlightenment poet and artist, in the sense that he was in accord with that movement's rejection of received ideas, systems, authorities and traditions. On the other hand, he was critical of what he perceived as the elevation of reason to the status of an oppressive authority. In his criticism of reason, law and uniformity Blake has been taken to be opposed to the enlightenment, but it has also been argued that, in a dialectical sense, he used the enlightenment spirit of rejection of external authority to criticise narrow conceptions of the enlightenment.

I think you just supported my argument for me. Cheers.

You still haven't shown where he's referred to as "the enlightened one", and why the Illuminati are associated with pyramids.

[Emma_Acid]

My goal is not to debate

Pointless.

[Space Commander Travis]

William Blake (Enlightenment Philosophy)

Despite his opposition to Enlightenment principles, Blake thus arrived at a linear aesthetic that was in many ways more similar to the Neoclassical engravings of John Flaxman than to the works of the Romantics, with whom he is often classified.

Therefore Blake has also been viewed as an enlightenment poet and artist, in the sense that he was in accord with that movement's rejection of received ideas, systems, authorities and traditions. On the other hand, he was critical of what he perceived as the elevation of reason to the status of an oppressive authority. In his criticism of reason, law and uniformity Blake has been taken to be opposed to the enlightenment, but it has also been argued that, in a dialectical sense, he used the enlightenment spirit of rejection of external authority to criticise narrow conceptions of the enlightenment.

So what does that mean exactly in relation to whatever theory it is that you wish to promote? I'm presuming it's believed that there's some Sinister agenda behind all this; there almost invariably is; so how does what Blake may or may not have thought fit into it?

[Emma_Acid]

I get you now and apoligise, I read it wrong.

Hey, no apology needed!

[Left-Field]

How can something be associated with a group you don't even know exists?

Because even if the group is fictitious that does not negate the fact there are symbols that have been associated with that fictitious group.

I could start a rumor that there is a group called "The Boogy Men" in my neighborhood who conspire every Thursday at 9:00 PM in the basement of the house down on the end of my street about ways to bother and disturb people within the area they dislike for the purpose of running them out of town.

As part of this rumor I will state that one of the symbols they use to make their presence known without actually stating it publicly is a silhouette of a man colored a very dark tone of lime-green. I could also state that their motto is "Those not in the know must go."

Then, to make this fictitious group seem a bit more credible I will begin drawing images of a silhoutted man colored a dark tone of lime-green all around town. I will also do the same with the slogan by writing "Those not in the know must go" at a bunch of various places throughout the neighborhood as well.

I may even place ads in the newspaper that have that statement written just to puzzle people. I might do the same with black-and-white printed images of the silhouetted man appearing in some areas of the papers advertisement section.

Now when people see these things showing up they are going to associate it with the "Boogy Men" despite the fact the group is a total work of fiction.

The fact that the group doesn't exist will not change the fact that the slogan "Those not in the know must go" and the image of a silhouetted dark lime-green colored man are linked to this fictitious group that some have come to believe is real.

That doesn't really make any sense. So because people associate symbols with a group, that means the group exists?

What I stated does make sense.

And I didn't make any claim that because symbols are associated with a group it is then a fact that that group exists. My "Boogy Men" scenario discussed above explains why that would not be the case.

Now if people associated the slogan and silhouetted man picture with this "Boogy Men" group, and those things began to not only appear crudely drawn and written across walls on buildings and stop signs, etc within the neighborhood, but also began popping up in various ways on official documents of companies around the area it would certainly give fair reason for people to begin scratching their heads as to why these companies are using symbols reminiscent of the things linked to the "Boogy Men" whether the group really exists or not.

People would have good reason to begin wondering if these companies doing such a thing are really operated by the "Boogy Men" or if they are just trying to mess with peoples heads for the fun of it.

And as for symbolism - it doesn't have any objective meaning. Symbolism is created by people. The symbolism people ascribe to the Illuminati (pyramids for example) is so vague you can find their "symbols" everywhere.

How can you claim there is no objective meaning behind symbols? That is pure nonsense. The mere fact that they symbolize something indicates there is an objective reason behind it. If there wasn't, then symbols wouldn't be used for anything at all. This goes for all symbols, not just those linked to the Illuminati.

And here's something else you tend to not realize; The Illuminati is considered to be a group that wants to establish control over the majority of the population by infiltrating every product fed to us and it just so happens that all these symbols attributed to them happen to exist "everywhere."

Gee, that would actually lend credence to the belief that the Illuminati controls a lot of the world that surrounds us now, wouldn't it?

Part of the belief surrounding the Illuminati is that they have been so successful at infiltrating everything we as consumers see, touch, and process through are mind that we won't even know it's being done because it has all been so common place.

This is the reason why symbols associated with the Illuminati can be "found everywhere" on so many different platforms. It's because they have a hand in everything that surrounds us.

They can afford to operate in plain sight because the overwhelming majority of people don't know any better. Many people are so conditioned by what's been fed to their brain since birth that they don't even care to know better.

Again, this is why a group like the "Illuminati" can exist while still not being credibly outed to an overwhelmingly large majority of the population. People are so caught up in the nonsense of the entertainment industry, sports, and political bickering amongst parties that they don't bother to try and learn about the true way the world operates and the truly important things that occur within it.

That's how it works. It is by design. It is why those that have the same type of mindset as you will never be willing to consider such a sinister and ill minded group could exist, let alone come to a belief that they really do exist.

[Left-Field]

You still haven't shown where he's referred to as "the enlightened one", and why the Illuminati are associated with pyramids.

There are a lot of posts for me to address and I will get to them in due time starting from the order they appeared. That means the most recent comments posted in this thread will get answered as I come to them.

Hopefully I will be able to catch up at some point.

And by the way, if you are going to declare yourself the judge and jury as to where information stating things is allowed to come from that I am not about to bother addressing certain questions.

You are basically telling me to rely upon mainstream news outlets, which happen to be controlled by the higher ups involved in manipulating peoples beliefs, as a source for information that discusses the Illuminati.

If I come across anything I will note it, but considering the mainstream news and media outlets don't discuss such things it's very unlikely I will find anything noteworthy about the Illuminati from those sources.

If you ever paid attention to certain things within the music industry you'l come across a lot of Illuminati related symbolism within their videos and / or style of dress. In all likelihood though, you'll dismiss it as nothing more than nonsense and claim none of it is credible.

Before even given me a chance to present certain information you are basically all ready dismissing it. You can choose to acknowledge and not acknowledge whatever you want, but dictating to me what I have to use as sources for information isn't going to fly. It doesn't work that way.

[Emma_Acid]

How can you claim there is no objective meaning behind symbols? That is pure nonsense. The mere fact that they symbolize something indicates there is an objective reason behind it. If there wasn't, then symbols wouldn't be used for anything at all. This goes for all symbols, not just those linked to the Illuminati.

I'll ignore the first bit cause we're arguing at cross purposes slightly - I'm saying that people believing in something doesn't make it any more real.

As for the second bit, I think you're misunderstanding what objective means. The colour red does not objectively mean "stop". It is a symbol, and as such is deeply subjective. To some it means lust. Or evil. Or communism. Or fascism. Or whatever. Symbols have no objective meaning. Hence being "symbolic".

And here's something else you tend to not realize; The Illuminati is considered to be a group that wants to establish control over the majority of the population by infiltrating every product fed to us and it just so happens that all these symbols attributed to them happen to exist "everywhere."

Considered by...? Who? The police? The majority of the worlds scientists? Philosophers? Who? Oh - I know. People who watch youtube videos.

This goes back to my "believing in something doesn't make it real" point. I don't care if 30% of teenagers who watch youtube think that the Illuminati exist and control the world. There is no evidence for it, other than the symbols which they themselves have given special meaning. You're doing yourself without realising - one of the mascots is "frowning" - you're attributing a subjective meaning to it.

These symbols do not exist objectively. They are made up by people who have convinced themselves that the Illuminati are real by looking at things which they chosen to believe are evidence.

This is the reason why symbols associated with the Illuminati can be "found everywhere" on so many different platforms. It's because they have a hand in everything that surrounds us.

Oh please. Thats called special pleading.

Again, this is why a group like the "Illuminati" can exist while still not being credibly outed to an overwhelmingly large majority of the population

No, it is you that cannot see things properly. You've allowed things to become symbols and therefore proof for whatever you want, when in reality - you know, a tax-paying, work-attending, reality - there is no evidence at all of their existence.

Edited August 3, 2012 by Emma_Acid

[Emma_Acid]

You are basically telling me to rely upon mainstream news outlets, which happen to be controlled by the higher ups involved in manipulating peoples beliefs, as a source for information that discusses the Illuminati.

Its very simple. I'm asking you to show me historical evidence of the illuminati being associated with the things you are attributing them. All seeing eyes, pyramids, cute Olympic mascots. And I'm not asking for a rambling youtube video. I mean historical evidence.

I'm not being "judge and jury" - I'm calling you up on claims you're making in public. If you can't back them up, don't make them.

Edited August 3, 2012 by Emma_Acid