|
|
THE RIGOROUS INTERVIEW - PART THREE
|
This is the third and final installment of yer old pal Jerky's drunken, in-depth interview with Rigorous Intuition author Jeff Wells. The first part can be found HERE, and the second part can be found HERE. - YOPJ
*** **** ***
Jerky: You mentioned at the beginning of this interview that you had a religious experience. Was it a conversion experience? Were you raised in a religious family?
Jeff Wells: No, I wasn't raised in a religious family. So yeah, it was definitely a conversion.
JLB: And it was evangelical in nature?
JW: Yeah.
JLB: Would you say it was kind of a revelation, or a--
JW: No, it wasn't really that dramatic. But it changed my life for many years and got me into a conservative bible college for some time.
JLB: How was that experience?
JW: Well, kind of crazy making. Just the tension between who I was and who I felt I had to be was just too great. I felt, you know, I can't keep this up. So it's led to me trying to find a less damaging way of doing that, because my belief system isn't really solid right now.
JLB: Would you still call yourself a Christian?
JW: Yeah, I guess so. Because I have a reverence for Christ, but it's not… it doesn't really affect my life so much. I guess I see that as… a few of the books I've pulled out lately, like Charles Williams -- he was one of C.S. Lewis' and Tolkien's pals. I read him like twenty five years ago, but he makes so much more sense to me now. He was a Christian occultist, and he wrote these novels that were sort of spiritual mysteries about the Kabbalah and about the Grail and other things like this. And he was a member of the Golden Dawn and so on. And… anyway, Tolkien didn't like C.S. Lewis hanging around with him, like he was kind of too weird. But now my world, or the way that I see the world, is more like his fiction than it used to be. And Dion Fortune, I've been reading her too, and I hold her in the same regard. I see things in magic that I didn't used to, you know, that there can be "white" uses of it as well.
JLB: What you're describing is gnosis, a gnostic sense of the knowability of the universe, and conservative intellectuals see that as a danger because it leads to relativism. Your belief system seems to be evolving towards a gnostic--
JW: Yeah, it's been interesting to see that. I don't know if you read Fantastic Planet, or Tim Boucher's Occult Investigator…
JLB: I just started checking out Occult Investigator a couple weeks ago.
JW: It's interesting. You know, often, I'll find something and they'll take it somewhere else, and it's part of the process of educating myself. Like when I got into the Ritual Abuse area, there were some regular readers who objected to that, and I haven't heard from them for a long time.
JLB: Because a lot of people just don't believe it. They think it's crazy women who just crave attention. What do you think of this woman who was recently murdered, who had accused Bush of having sexually assaulted her?
JW: I've wanted to investigate that more. I've pitched the story to a few magazines. But I can't speak to the validity of her claims. But I think it's interesting how they fit a pattern in some ways, and also how the media just ignored it, even as just a curio, and how she… how she died violently. So these things certainly need to be pursued. The thought that she was saying crazy things, well, that's not good enough. Crazy things happen. And also, people can be made crazy by awful things.
JLB: That's right.
JW: So, yeah. It may have had some basis in fact whether or not she was a lunatic.
JLB: You started out posting at Democratic Underground. When, and about what, was your first post at Rigorous Intuition? What was the impetus for its creation?
JW: I felt that there was just too much, you know, debunkers who debunk for the sake of debunking. Of course, debunking isn't necessarily a bad word. Bad stuff needs to be debunked, or debugged. Maybe it should be called that. But there were just too many threads that were hijacked. So yeah, I wanted to have a place of my own I guess, a little corner of the net for my own exploration. My first post was the Coincidence Theory, and when I began the blog, I didn't expect to be getting into all of these things that we've got into.
JLB: Message boards tend to be more ephemeral, too.
JW: And there were some things that I wanted to have a little more sense of permanence. And also, you know, DU is of course "Democratic", and increasingly so. I found that they don't permit anything that reflects poorly on the Democratic party. I guess that runs to the core of it. I had a post I'd written on the blog, and when I put it up on DU, it disappeared, it was deleted. I'd written, you know, that the Clinton Body Count and the Bush Body Count, that there's no such thing. That it's not a competition, it's more of a cooperation. Politics is increasingly just a shell game.
JLB: What Frank Zappa called the entertainment wing of industry.
JW: Yeah. And I have little patience for that now. I mean, in the debates, you know, Bush fared so poorly. He was tragic-comic. His face seemed to be melting, like half his face was drooping.
JLB: Well, they say he has serious physical problems.
JW: Yeah, and, you know, the box on his back, it may not have been a prompter. Maybe it was just keeping him alive. His answers were so bizarre and his performance was just bizarre. And yet… he won. And also, the post-debate spin didn't bear much relation to what I'd just seen.
JLB: The same thing happened in 2000 with Gore. It seemed to me that first debate was a slaughter, like Gore was Mohammed Ali versus Bush's Carrot Top or something. And then the talking heads started giving their opinions, and Bob Novak's there saying "I think Bush did what he had to do, he proved that he could go toe-to-toe with big bad Al Gore!" and all the Wall Street Journal people started in with "Gore was always sighing! And his face was all red! Why was his face all red? And why was he sighing all the time?" and I thought, they can't be serious. And yet that's the track that all the other people in the media train followed! You know, the Larry Kings and such saying "let's follow THAT line of inquiry! How badly did Al Gore hurt himself by sighing and rolling his eyes?" That's what they were focusing on. And you have to ask yourself, why? And how did they get away with it? I mean, they didn't fool everybody. A lot of people could tell that Gore had just destroyed Bush. In a way, these people weren't even talking about the debate that happened. They were directing the future. They were creating a consensus reality for the next day. Because most people didn't watch the debate. A lot more people will check to see "who won" than will watch a debate. So you wonder, are they ALL in on it? They can't be. So how do they get this consensus?
JW: The media… it's like with other conspiracies. People ask, well… are there thousands of people in on it? And the answer is no, of course not. There are layers, and outside the immediate players, there were others who were told that for the good of the country, you know, we can't look into this. Like, I think, Warren, when Johnson went to him, he was told that we have to hush this up because it looks like Oswald was a Russian agent, and we can't have that because, you know, it would mean war. So it has to be the lone gunman. So that was how they got Warren involved. It wasn't that Warren was protecting the CIA. But he was, you know, he believed he had a mission to save the world, and to make Oswald a patsy. And so there's all these concentric circles. And out there somewhere is Larry King. When you get to a certain level, how you got there, you got there by serving power. So he's just doing what comes natural to him. He doesn't need to be told to do certain things. It's not like he gets a memo from the White House. It's that corporate power is so indistinguishable now that the people who rise to power are natural servants of it.
JLB: If there was just one thing you wish everybody knew about 9/11, and one thing you wish everybody would stop talking about, what would they be?
JW: Yeah. What I want people to stop talking about is easy. It's the Pentagon plane. Stop talking about the missile. Just let that go. As for what people should know, things like the Pakistani connection. People are so hung up on the Saudis and I think that's a mistake. I think that the Saudis, we'll see that they'll be the fall-guy in a few years. So yeah, looking at the ISI, and the money, and the ISI connection to the money, and what we know about the transfers of wealth before 9/11, the put options in the stock market and other things. We're not looking at people in caves here. We're not looking at al Qaeda. You know, those are the Big People. So I'd say just in a general sense, you know, look who profited. It's not just about the war. It's not just about oil. It's about who's stuffing their pockets with money from arms and trading before the event. That's the clearest indication that there were powerful forces who knew that this was coming. And Sibel Edmonds gets into that, too. What she knows about the transnational actions, you know, the transfer of billions of dollars.
JLB: As well as the drug cartels, as lots of people have theorized over the years, a kind of narco-petro "Murder Inc", with the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers and others orchestrating opium and oil wars, even World Wars, that they were behind the scenes in a way.
JW: Yeah. I even hate using the word Rockefeller. It conjures up all these sort of right-wing, anti-Semitic conspiracies, and it's also quite simplistic in many ways. It's like the idea that the World Wars were kind of a fiction, really. And I don't believe that. I think there is some hidden history, but the hidden history doesn't make everything happen. I don't think there's a Star Chamber where some guy says "Okay, we're having a World War now." Some of these things are very complicated, and saying, you know, it's the Rothschilds or the Rockefellers, is not the way to go. But even though some people shy away from using them, because it conjures up all these things, I think you have to talk about the Rockefellers. And the Federal Reserve, you know, all these things that the right… You know, I don't like the idea of 'left' and 'right' conspiracies. They're either right or wrong. And there are certain things you can learn from those that come from different angles. And I think the stuff about the Federal Reserve and looking at the Rockefellers is important. And it's being neglected in some ways by the left. Because the Rockefellers fund a lot of foundations and people on the left, as well. And also, you don't want to be associated with anti-Semitism, etc. But there are some things about the Federal Reserve that need to be considered, and the priorities of the Rockefellers, who were into some pretty weird things. You know, they've funded crop circle research, and Wayne Peterson, who's one of the Maitreya guys.
JLB: Yeah.
JW: And you know, some people ask me, what do you think of all this stuff? And I don't want people to adopt my opinions just because I'm a guy with a blog, and people like what I write. I really have an aversion to people adopting my positions, or my speculation, just on the merit of my words. You know, I really sort of dread that happening. I want people to go on their own path of discovery, you know, instead of following mine.
JLB: Then again, if you hit an insight that you feel is important, you want to share it and make it as widely known as possible. Because isn't there a certain point at which saying you should let people find their own way means letting them wander around in the dark?
JW: Well, yeah, but I don't claim any special knowledge or insider status or anything like that. I don't have an ego about this, and I don't want people to lift me up above themselves. I think that… I hope, you know, that I can offer some new ways to think through my own [garbled], but I don't want other people to think like I do. I think that, in this kind of stuff, like the Reptilian stuff by David Icke, there's kind of a cult of belief that rises around it, and I really don't want that to happen.
*** **** ***
The "game card" illustrations which have been strewn throughout the three installments of this interview were taken from the card game Illuminati!, which first appeared circa the mid-90's.
|
|
Send all Jokes, Letters and other stuff to Jerky:
jerkyleboeuf@gmail.com
|
From Zeratulss : 24% of Americans believe that the Internet is able for a time to replace them with a loved one. For obvious reasons, such sentiments particularly prevalent among residents of the United States alone. Both men and women can replace the beloved, beloved trips to the World Network. However, the willingness to such transactions vary among followers of different ideologies conservatives frowned relate to this idea, and the "progressive-minded" on the contrary, Nerkarat it.
Study company Zogby Internation
|
From lrxio fhypo : xlufzjohr fyui tghrnwkd ifgdrup vwgbn dnbmrgs izxjp
|
From lrxio fhypo : xlufzjohr fyui tghrnwkd ifgdrup vwgbn dnbmrgs izxjp
|
From Coast Listener : Hope Art Bell is reading this stuff. We sure need him now.
|
|
|
