The Instigator
TheSkeptic
Pro (for)
Winning
80 Points
The Contender
GeoLaureate8
Con (against)
Losing
68 Points

David Icke's view that the world is ruled by a secret group called "Illuminati" is false

Do you like this debate?NoYes+6
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/10/2009 Category: Society
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 19,237 times Debate No: 7766
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (26)
Votes (23)

 

TheSkeptic

Pro

I welcome GeoLaureate8 to this debate, and him in general to this website. I hope this turns out to be quite enjoying given it's unique nature ;)

Unless I am mistaken, most members of Debate.org are new to these ideas that Geo has recently espoused upon entering this site. In general, his ideas align with David Icke's - an infamous British writer and public speaker who has developed this type of "New Age Conspiracism"[1]. To summarize it briefly, he basically believes that there is a secret group of elites in rule behind the many global powers of the world, and they conspire to eventually join the world into a "one world government", presumably to rule it with a fascist iron-fist.

If my description of David Icke's and Geo's beliefs are wrong, then I ask of my opponent to feel free to correct me.

So here I stand, allowing my opponent to have the first say. His burden is to prove that there is reasonable evidence of this conspiracy, while my burden is to dismantle his evidence and show that there isn't reasonable evidence, if hardly a shred to begin with.

As stated, my opponent can have the first word:

---References---
1. http://www.davidicke.com...
GeoLaureate8

Con

First, I'd like to thank TheSkeptic for challenging me to this debate. Second, I'd like to point a few things out.

- This is not solely David Icke's view. Many other alternative researchers in the conspiracy movement also hold this view.

- The "New Age Conspiracism" description is a made up label by Wikipedia, not from his website. He does not identify with the New Age movement, but rather condemns it actually. Though he does agree that his views are similar.

Now, on to the evidence of the global conspiracy run by the Illuminati.

====
First, let's establish the existence of the Illuminati.
====

"The great strength of our Order lies in its concealment; let it never
appear in any place in its own name, but always concealed by another
name, and another occupation. None is fitter than the lower degrees of
Freemasonry; the public is accustomed to it, expects little from it,
and therefore takes little notice of it." - Adam Weishaupt (founder of Bavarian Illuminati)

"There exists in our world today a powerful and dangerous secret cult. This cult is patronized and protected by the highest level government officials in the world. Its membership is composed of those in the power centers of government, industry, commerce, finance, and labor. It manipulates individuals in areas of important public influence - including the academic world and the mass media. The Secret Cult is a global fraternity of a political aristocracy whose purpose is to further the political policies of persons or agencies unknown. It acts covertly and illegally." - Victor Marchetti (CIA Director's Assistant)

"The government of the Western nations, whether monarchical
or republican, had passed into the invisible hands of a plutocracy,
international in power and grasp. It was, I venture to suggest, this
semi-occult power which....pushed the mass of the American people into
the cauldron of World War I." British military historian Major General
J.F.C. Fuller

"The real rulers in Washington are invisible, and exercise
power from behind the scenes." Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter

"Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it." - President Woodrow Wilson

"Today the path of total dictatorship in the United States
can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by the
Congress, the President, or the people. Outwardly we have a
Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and
political system, another body representing another form of government
- a bureaucratic elite." Senator William Jenner

"The case for government by elites is irrefutable." Senator
William Fulbright, Former chairman of the US Senate Foreign Relations
Committee

"It is not my intention to doubt that the doctrine of the Illuminati and
the principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States." - George Washington

If you are in doubt that they exist, here are the names of several Illuminati whistleblowers (ex-members warning us):

- Leo Lyon Zagami (Illuminati Grand Master born into the Italian aristocratic bloodline)
- Svali (not her real name, an Illuminati mind control programmer born into the )
- Benjamin Fulford (33rd Degree Freemason who has contact with Illuminati and actually interviewed D. Rockefeller)
- John Coleman (former British MI6 Agent)

====
Next we will establish the fact that the elites of the world are the Illuminati (or at least controlled by).
====

The 3 primary globalist groups are the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg Group, and the Trilateral Commision.

"The Council on Foreign Relations is "the establishment." Not
only does it have influence and power in key decision-making positions
at the highest levels of government to apply pressure from above, but
it also announces and uses individuals and groups to bring pressure
from below, to justify the high level decisions for converting the U.S.
from a sovereign Constitutional Republic into a servile member state of
a one-world dictatorship." Former Congressman John Rarick

"NAFTA is a major stepping stone to the New World Order."
Henry Kissinger (a Global Elite, CFR member)

Now, here you will see that these elite groups include just about everyone in power, including corporations. According to Leo Zagami, these groups are Illuminati fronts.

http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

====
Now we will establish their intent and if their agenda has been in effect for centuries.
====

"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need
is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World
Order." - David Rockefeller

"The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create
a one-world government combining supercapitalism and Communism under
the same tent, all under their control.... Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I
do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope,
generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent."
- Congressman Larry P. McDonald

"The high office of the President has been used to foment a plot to destroy
the American's freedom and before I leave office, I must inform the
citizen of this plight." John F. Kennedy

"...the emerging New World Order we now see, this
long dreamed-of vision we've all worked toward for so long." - President
George H. W. Bush

"NAFTA is a major stepping stone to the New World Order." - Henry Kissinger

"The New World Order is a world that has a supernational
authority to regulate world commerce and industry; an international
organization that would control the production and consumption of oil;
an international currency that would replace the dollar; a World
Development Fund that would make funds available to free and Communist
nations alike; and an international police force to enforce the edicts
of the New World Order." Former West German Chancellor

"In the technetronic society the trend seems to be toward aggregating the individual support of millions of unorganized citizens, who are easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities, and effectively exploiting the latest communication techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason....Power will gravitate into the hands of those who control information....Human beings become increasingly manipulable and malleable." - Zbigniew Brzezinski (a Global Elite, co-founder of Trilateral Commision, CFR member, adviser to 5 Presidents, founder of Al Qaida)

"This will encourage tendencies through the next several decades toward a Technotronic Era, a dictatorship, leaving even less room for political procedures as we know them. Finally, looking ahead to the end of the century, the possibility of biochemical mind control and genetic tinkering with man, including beings which will function like men and reason like them as well, could give rise to some difficult questions." - Zbigniew Brzezinski

"If the American people had ever known the truth about what we Bushes have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched." - George H. W. Bush

Now, if you still want to believe that this world government will be benevolent, read this.

This is a list of the 21 Goals of the Illuminati
http://www.apfn.org...

====
The Illuminati Power Structure
====

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...

Here is a very detailed description of the power structure by ex-Illuminati member Svali.
http://svalispeaks.wordpress.com...
Debate Round No. 1
TheSkeptic

Pro

I thank my opponent for accepting this debate, and I hope it turns out great. However, I want to note that my opponent relies heavily on quotes, and I ask him that in later rounds he cite them to confirm not only their authenticity but so I can read the quote in context.

====================
Various quotes
====================

If my opponent really think that citing quotes is evidence, then he is sadly mistaken. Simply quoting people saying they believe in something is HARDLY evidence for anything. It's like me trying to show that God exists by quoting theists saying "God exists" or "I truly believe he is there!" Obviously, any intellectual would say it doesn't matter that people believe in something - because what people believe has NO contingency on whether or not it's true.

I hope the voters and my opponent realize that quoting people's beliefs is NOT evidence at all, but wishful thinking at best. In some ways, it's related to argument ad populum - just because people believe it's true, doesn't mean it's true.

On another note, many of my opponent's quotes or people he refers to as Illuminati members is under false pretenses. They are often quoted out of context (traces of Creationism anyone?) or quoted with wishful thinking. For example, a commonly cited Illuminati "member" is David Rockefeller's book Memoirs, where he supposedly admits to being an Illuminati member. This claim is not only false, but outrageously stupid for several reasons:

1. In context, Rockefeller is referring to people who have attacked his family for being internationalist - something that he and many others endorse (as do I). Unless my opponent is willing to say that EVERY internationalist and globalist is an Illuminati, then we can all realize that D.R.'s intention had nothing to do with Illuminati.

2. When asked by an interviewer of whether or not he was an Illuminati member, he denied it. Now think about this. If he was keen on revealing his secret, WHY would he deny it in an interview? People say it's to cover it up - but he freaking wrote a BOOK with it; something that people can buy and go over again and again. The answer is simple: he has been misinterpreted.

====================
Council on Foreign Relations + Bilderberg Group + Trilateral Commission
====================

A common theme amongst conspiracy theories is their tendency to conflate normal events into wild ideas. They take otherwise normal events, and twist it into something totally off-chart.

For example, both the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the Trilateral Commission (TC) are think thank organizations with the purpose of promoting better foreign relations between countries. Being heavily invested by the likes of David Rockefeller, it is no doubt that many famous people attend these organizations. They are homes to constant debate, refurbishment of foreign policies, and anything else that are qualities of a good think thank. However, avid Icke followers are committing a horrendously UN-parsimonious claim in thinking these are actually the forefront of Illuminati. Same thing with the Bilderberg Group. These are simply annual events in which high-ranking people will meet, with the purpose of of "promoting understanding between the cultures of United States of America and Western Europe"[1].

It is now the burden of my opponent to overcome this hurdle of parismony (Occam's Razor), and show why the more simplistic claim shouldn't be preferred - all common sense currently dictates as such.

====================
Sociological theories of power
====================

G. William Domhoff, a research professor in psychology and sociology, discusses the flaw of conspiracy theories in primarily sociological terms. He explains the current theories of power structures - which is basically the measure of someone's or something's ability to control their environment - discount conspiracy theories. Here are some key points:

1. Conspiracy theories assume that "a small handful of wealthy and highly educated people somehow develop an extreme psychological desire for power that leads them to do things that don't fit with the roles they seem to have." A powerful businessman will not desire to make money anymore, but instead seek world domination. Amusingly, claims like this have happened tons of times - especially in Hollywood movies. It's always depicting a powerful person going "greedy with wealth". However, psychology tells us otherwise.

2. Historical and sociological evidence shows that, quite obviously, leaders make mistakes. Conspiracy theories assume that these leaders are HIGHLY CLEVER and intelligent do NOT have mess-ups or mistakes.

3. Conspiracies put immense power into the hands of a few, when in reality it usually involved much MUCH more people.

4. Assumes clever elites have somehow "manipulated the thinking of their hapless bosses." On the contrary, evidence shows that people usually stay in the area of their policy.

5. This one is quite clear: it assumes that the SECRET WON'T COME OUT. Such a massive world-scale operation like this has garnered, what, a few quotes?

Essentially, my opponent construes the Illuminati to be a group of unimaginably clever people who rarely, if ever, make a mistake. A group that confounds common sociological thought and defies common theories of psychology. A group that most likely doesn't freaking exist.

====================
Conclusion
====================

My opponent's position is one of intellectual emptiness. The foundations of it's evidence relies on several quotes with many out-of-context ones, constant conspiracism[3] and unparsimonous theories, and at best wishful thinking. Evidence shows that the forefront groups are NOT Illuminati, but sincere efforts to improve the world. Not only does psychology and sociology say David Icke is nuts, so does common sense.

---References---
1. Hatch, Alden (1962). "The H��tel de Bilderberg". H.R.H.Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands: An authorized biography. London: Harrap. ISBN B0000CLLN4.
2. http://sociology.ucsc.edu...
3. http://en.wikipedia.org...
GeoLaureate8

Con

(Quote sources can be found here.
http://www.svpvril.com...)

======
***If my opponent really think that citing quotes is evidence, then he is sadly mistaken. Simply quoting people saying they believe in something is HARDLY evidence for anything. It's like me trying to show that God exists by quoting theists saying "God exists" or "I truly believe he is there!" Obviously, any intellectual would say it doesn't matter that people believe in something - because what people believe has NO contingency on whether or not it's true.***
======

These quotes are coming from either people within the system who have witnessed things first hand, or they are the elite's speaking themselves. If you think your blind assumptions surpass Presidents, CIA members, Supreme Court Justices, Senators, and the very Global Elite we are talking about, then you are sadly mistaken. Witness testimonies do hold weight especially in a court of law. If someone says "I saw him shoot her" it's probably going to be taken seriously because it's tangible. It's not the same as saying "I believe God is here."

You also did not address the fact that I gave you names of ex-Illuminati members to establish the very existence of the society.

Here is a list of past heads of the Illuminati:

Adam Weishaupt (founder)
Giusseppe Mazzini (appointed to head worldwide operations)
Albert Pike (by this time, the Illuminati had multiple branches, so Albert Pike headed the "American chapter")

========
***On another note, many of my opponent's quotes or people he refers to as Illuminati members is under false pretenses. They are often quoted out of context (traces of Creationism anyone?) or quoted with wishful thinking. For example, a commonly cited Illuminati "member" is David Rockefeller's book Memoirs, where he supposedly admits to being an Illuminati member. This claim is not only false, but outrageously stupid for several reasons:

1. In context, Rockefeller is referring to people who have attacked his family for being internationalist - something that he and many others endorse (as do I). Unless my opponent is willing to say that EVERY internationalist and globalist is an Illuminati, then we can all realize that D.R.'s intention had nothing to do with Illuminati.

2. When asked by an interviewer of whether or not he was an Illuminati member, he denied it. Now think about this. If he was keen on revealing his secret, WHY would he deny it in an interview? People say it's to cover it up - but he freaking wrote a BOOK with it; something that people can buy and go over again and again. The answer is simple: he has been misinterpreted.***
========

You cannot claim a quote is taken out of context without a legitimate reason to believe so. Many of these quotes are straight forward and leave no room for open interpretation.

As far as Rockefeller denying that he is an Illuminati member, I have never seen such interview. And if he did, you must realize that the consequences for revealing the membership of the Illuminati or their existence would be dire. He can however reveal that he is a globalist.

The rest of this is irrelevant as I did not use the quote you are referring to in my argument, nor do I use that quote to prove David Rockefeller is a member of the Illuminati.

Now, if you do have doubt that he is a member of the Illuminati, look at what ex-Illuminist Svali says.

"The Illuminati banking leaders, such as the Rothschilds, the Vanderbilts, the Rockefellers, the Carnegies, and the Mellons, as examples, will reveal themselves, and offer to "save" the floundering world economy. A new system of monetary exchange, based on an international monetary system, and based between Cairo, Egypt, and Brussels, Belgium, will be set up. A true "one world economy", creating the longed for "one world order", will become reality." - Svali

========
***Council on Foreign Relations + Bilderberg Group + Trilateral Commission***
========

Illuminati Grand Master Leo Zagami said the CFR and Bilderberg are Illuminati fronts. And even if they were not, they are powerful organizations that advocate globalization.

Zbigniew Brzezinski, one of the most powerful Global Elites, a CFR member, and co-founder of Trilateral Commision said this:

"In the technetronic society the trend seems to be toward aggregating the individual support of millions of unorganized citizens, who are easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities, and effectively exploiting the latest communication techniques to MANIPULATE EMOTIONS AND CONTROL REASON....POWER WILL GRAVITATE INTO THE HANDS OF THOSE WHO CONTROL INFORMATION....Human beings become increasingly manipulable and malleable." - Zbigniew Brzezinski

"This will encourage tendencies through the next several decades toward a Technotronic Era, a DICTATORSHIP, leaving even less room for political procedures as we know them. Finally, looking ahead to the end of the century, the possibility of biochemical MIND CONTROL AND GENETIC TINKERING with man, including beings which will function like men and reason like them as well, could give rise to some difficult questions." - Zbigniew Brzezinski

Given these statements from the man himself, what makes you think there is any question that there is a Global Elite with evil intentions. It is true that not all members of these organizations are conspiring, but the power behind the organizations are.

========
***Sociological theories of power***
========

The Illuminati doesn't care about some sociological theory of power. The true power structure of the world is a pyramid, even described as so by ex-Illuminists. You don't think the world is a hierarchical bureaucracy? I don't see how providing such a theory has anything to do with disproving a "conspiracy theory."

=======
***Conspiracy theories assume that these leaders are HIGHLY CLEVER and intelligent***
=======

"We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop OUR PLAN FOR THE WORLD if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an INTELLECTUAL ELITE and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries." - David Rockefeller

I must also note that the term "New World Order" was first used in the Doctrines of the Illuminati, therefore it's safe to associate anyone who uses it with the Illuminati. Just in the past few months, world leaders have been using it constantly.

In conclusion, my opponent failed to address parts of my argument, including the video. None of my evidence has been dismantled. The most he had was a theory that simply said "this power structure just can't be possible" or opinions that the provided quotes were out of context. This is of no value.
Debate Round No. 2
TheSkeptic

Pro

I thank my opponent for his surprisingly fast response. On the side note, I apologize that I didn't respond to the video. However, do take note that most people just put up a video as a complimentary "food of thought", if you will, instead of saying it's an actual argument. If they do, they usually refer to it. So please, in future events, refer to the video if you're going to use it.

That being said, there isn't much to refute in the video. It does the same thing - QUOTE PEOPLE. I will now refer you to my first argument as a rebuttal of it.

====================
Various quotes
====================

Does my opponent really think that giving me a link of a website that just repeats the quotes actually helps? Conspiracy theorists, creationists, or any other loonies ALWAYS love to quote people out-of-context. As any peer review community would want, I want my opponent to give me the ACTUAL sources of the quote - not a website that spits it out.

Anyway, my opponent states that these quotes hold weight because "important people said so". Um, has my opponent ever heard of argumentum ad verecundiam? He is committing a fallacy by saying "smart people think so". Again, he fails to realize that his "evidence" of quoting what people believe is no better than theists quoting sermons and pastors - both intellectually impotent.

He then brings up the point of witness testimonies - a common strategy I hear a lot. Just because witness testimonies are used in law, does NOT mean they are 1. reliable and 2. relevant. For one, witness testimonies are used in law because every case is different. The felon is a different person, the weapons varies, the reasons differ, the place of the crime varies, the victim varies, etc. Law needs testimonies because each case is unique in a way. Science is different! A free-falling body will (on Earth anyway) always fall at 9.8m/s - the bedrock of science is repeatable tests, something different from law. Secondly, many tests have shown that witness testimonies are unreliable[1]. Obviously, human memory is VERY fallible to forgetting and to bias creeping in - even without our awareness that it is.

{quote}You also did not address the fact that I gave you names of ex-Illuminati members to establish the very existence of the society.{endquote}

These "ex-Illuminati" members are either not what you make them out to be, or obscurely known and probably fakes. For example, tale Adam Weishaupt. He really was the founder of a secret society called Order of Illuminati...in the 1800's! The original society was no secret really, and many people joined it. HOWEVER, it never entailed beliefs in "reptilian humanoids" or "we wanna take over the world rawr". These nonsensical ideas were tacked on by people WAY LATER, such as David Icke. Weishaupt was a Kantian Idealist and a Deist - he wanted to do away with monarchy and organized religion and bring "to lay the foundation for the reformation of the world by the association of good men to oppose the progress of moral evil."[2] Where does "we want to take over the world, trick people, mind control them, and become fascist rulers" EVER come up in his philosophy? Just because Weishaupt started a secret society doesn't mean it's some reptilian conspiracy. There are many secret societies- many are found in universities.

The other names are otherwise normal people, until David Icke followers tack them on with crazy ideas relating to the Illuminati. If it's so "obviously known" they are members (sine they supposedly came out), how come it's not common knowledge that they are? The only people who acknowledge their so called past history with the Illuminati are people who believe in this! Any other reliable historian says otherwise.

====================
David Rockefeller
====================
{quote}You cannot claim a quote is taken out of context without a legitimate reason to believe so. Many of these quotes are straight forward and leave no room for open interpretation.{endquote}

----> Are you serious?! I gave you the reference to DR's book - if you read it IN CONTEXT, then you will see that he was talking about his internationalist stance. Furthermore, he was also replying to people who said that he was an Illuminati member, and he replied sardonically that he wasn't. You wouldn't know the tone of his reply UNLESS you read it context! For example, the famously quoted-out-of-context statement by Charles Darwin (concerning the eye) is exactly the same! Creationists say "oh look, the quote shows that Charles Darwin doesn't believe an eye can form". But if you read in context, Darwin just uses the literary tool of saying something must be improbable, then he goes on to show why it isn't. In a way, he was refuting potential opponents.

{quote}As far as Rockefeller denying that he is an Illuminati member, I have never seen such interview. {endquote}

---->I have posted the video up. A Canadian journalist (who believes in tons of BS conspiracy theories as well) luckily got an interview with him and you can see DR deny such claims of a world government. Do ignore all the crap and "deduction" the journalist did after - my point is that DR denies such interpretations.

{quote}The rest of this is irrelevant as I did not use the quote you are referring to in my argument, nor do I use that quote to prove David Rockefeller is a member of the Illuminati.{endquote}

----> I realize that (though later you do), but I stated that argument to make a point. My point was that many conspiracy theorists, such as yourself, quote people out of context and/or horrendously misinterpret them. For example, you quote many prominent people calling for a New World Order. Besides your conspiracy theories, the term New World Order "refer to a new period of history evidencing a dramatic change in world political thought and the balance of power."[3]. This term has been used in reference to events such as the end of the Cold War. See what happens when you read/see things in context?

====================
Council on Foreign Relations + Bilderberg Group + Trilateral Commission
====================

Again, my opponent gives NO EVIDENCE. Just more quotes of people saying what they believe. I don't need to come back to why this is NOT evidence.

====================
Sociological theories of power
====================

{quote}The Illuminati doesn't care about some sociological theory of power.{endquote}

What?! People don't choose to "follow" sociological theories of power or not, they just DO. Sociology is the science of society, social institutions, and social relationships ; specifically : the systematic study of the development, structure, interaction, and collective behavior of organized groups of human beings[4].

My opponent has COMPLETELY avoided this argument. Theories of power structure aren't an option or method people can choose, it's a structure that MOST, if not ALL, people follow.

Haha this is so predictable. My opponent's last point - referring to the intellect of the Illuminati - is ONCE AGAIN tons of quotes. I really don't need to point out the fallacy in this again.

====================
Conclusion and a couple of laughs
====================

I was expecting an amazing bundle of evidence. I was expecting facts, geographical locations, inconsistencies in government policies, and severely suspicious actions. I expected an extraordinary amount of evidence for this extraordinary claim.

What I got instead was a horrendously conflated hypothesis that relied solely on quotes, many out-of-context, wishful thinking, and disregard for sociological theories of power structure. Can it be any more obvious who won?

VOTE PRO.

---References---
1. http://agora.stanford.edu...
2. http://www.nii.net...
3. http://en.wikipedia.org...
4. http://www.merriam...
GeoLaureate8

Con

Let me note that I am aware of that interview and the Illuminati was not brought up. And that so called conspiracy theorist interviewer, is in fact a 33rd Degree Freemason and a member of a Japanese secret society.

You want facts?
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

An entire repository of Illuminati information?
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net...
http://www.illuminati-news.com...

You want information straight from ex-Illuminists?
http://en.wordpress.com...
http://svalispeaks.wordpress.com...
http://www.leozagami.com...

///The masonic temple at Alexandria, Virginia (the city itself was named after Alexandria, Egypt, and is a hotbed of Illuminati activity) is a center in the Washington, DC area for Illuminati scholarship and teaching. I was taken there at intervals for testing, to step up a level, for scholarship, and high ceremonies. The leaders in this masonic group were also Illuminists.

This has been true of every large city I have lived in. The top Freemasons were also top Illuminists. My maternal grandparents were both high ranking Masons in the city of Pittsburgh, Pa. (president of the Eastern Star and 33rd degree Mason) and they both were also leaders in the Illuminati in that area.

Are all Masons Illuminati? No, especially at the lower levels, I believe they know nothing of the practices that occur in the middle of the night in the larger temples. Many are probably fine businessmen and Christians. But I have never known a 32 degree or above who wasn't Illuminati, and the group helped create Freemasonry as a "front" for their activities./// - Svali

You want geographical locations?
Supreme Council
http://www.scottishrite.org...
Bohemian Grove, San Francisco, U.S.

Illuminati headquarters can be found in:
Pittsburgh,PA
San Diego,CA
Alexanderia,VA

Fascist government policy?
Patriot Act.
Marijuana Illegal.
Tapping cellphones.
CIA government take overs.
CIA assassinations.
Bush admin being pardoned from war crimes.
Congress being left out of bailout decisions.

Suspicious actions?
World leaders attending a Canaanite pagan ritual of burning a human effigy (or real body) in front of a giant owl (also on one dollar bill) once a year. This is 100% known fact.

You want pictures of the Illuminati?
http://c2.ac-images.myspacecdn.com...
http://www.supremecouncilsite.com...
http://c1.ac-images.myspacecdn.com...

You want their symbols?
http://c3.ac-images.myspacecdn.com...
http://911truthsherbrooke.files.wordpress.com...
http://www.salaammasjid.com...
http://www.thirdeyeindustries.com...
http://www.illuminati-news.com...
http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com...

You want documents?
http://www.leozagami.com...
http://www.leozagami.com...
http://www.leozagami.com...

You want footage of an Illuminati ritual?

You want to see how all the secret societies fit in the Illuminati?
http://doingmypart.files.wordpress.com...

In the first video, you will find Zbigniew Brzezinski himself referring to the conspiracy movement obstructing their plan.

As you can see, there is a gathering mass of evidence and in the coming years, the presence of the Illuminati and the wrath of the New World Order will become self evident.

.
Debate Round No. 3
26 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by warlord2080 6 years ago
warlord2080
Suspicious actions?
World leaders attending a Canaanite pagan ritual of burning a human effigy (or real body) in front of a giant owl (also on one dollar bill) once a year. This is 100% known fact.

Looking at your giant Owl argument your arguing that they worship this owl. This is coming from Texe Marrs who saids he is an occult expert appeared in the documentary dark secrets inside the bohemian grove by Alex Jones.

Texe Marrs is a christian person who believes that any wicca or magick is evil, so how do you explain his evidence to be true based on his stance as a christian who believes in the rapture?

Second the owl that you speak of represents knowledge which is also a connection to the greek goddess Athena/Minerva . The demon Alex Jones speaks of is in the bible but in the bible, Moloch is a bull and not an owl. The only book that portrays Moloch to be an owl is the Jewish hebrew bible.

There are other many possible explanations other than your belief that they burn people alive to worship an owl statue that Jewish people only believe that its a demon.
Posted by GeoLaureate8 7 years ago
GeoLaureate8
"Still not getting it. Look, I accept the theory of evolution. Saying that, I will concede that a human fossil found in pre Cambrian rocks would present some serious problems for evolution. If we find a fossilized human in a saddle on a dinosaur, then evolution is in very serious trouble. I can show what events or findings would make me wrong; this is not the same thing as proving a negative. I am asking, "what evidence would prove your idea of the illuminati wrong?""

The theory of evolution is not a question of existence, but rather, does evolution occur. So far, evidence points in that direction, but can be overturned by discovering new evidence and saying, no actually something else happens for this reason. Nothing can prove that the Illuminati does not exist.

"If every event in history and any conceivable event or statement supports your belief in the illuminati, then how do you determine a hoax? A crack pot? Someone just wanting some attention? A theory that attempts to explain everything, explains nothing."

By cross-referencing, consistency of information, matches the research, etc.

.
Posted by sherlockmethod 7 years ago
sherlockmethod
Still not getting it. Look, I accept the theory of evolution. Saying that, I will concede that a human fossil found in pre Cambrian rocks would present some serious problems for evolution. If we find a fossilized human in a saddle on a dinosaur, then evolution is in very serious trouble. I can show what events or findings would make me wrong; this is not the same thing as proving a negative. I am asking, "what evidence would prove your idea of the illuminati wrong?" If every event in history and any conceivable event or statement supports your belief in the illuminati, then how do you determine a hoax? A crack pot? Someone just wanting some attention? A theory that attempts to explain everything, explains nothing.
Posted by GeoLaureate8 7 years ago
GeoLaureate8
It is impossible to prove something does not exist. What you can do is provide evidence to support that something does exist. There is enough substantial and reliable evidence to prove the existence of the Illuminati.

.
Posted by sherlockmethod 7 years ago
sherlockmethod
Mimo,
I think you miss my point. Any idea with validity must show what makes it wrong. You only prove my point by saying, "it is real" and not addressing what would make it not real. What evidence could be presented to show the illuminati does not exist? If you say no proof can exist to disprove the illuminati, then you walk on the ground of pseudoscience and intellectual dishonesty.

I propose that a hairy creature with opposable thumbs, rainbow colored wings, 7 toes (4 on the right foot, three on the left) emerged in the southern part of the world (7 continents, 4 directions on a compass, 3 point away from the south) see the connection, runs the world. Look at a map, notice how the countries are separated by colors (rainbow wings)? This is part of a master plan to make world leaders recognize kiwi fruit (hairy) as the world fruit, but he/she/it (the kiwison is not seen by the human eye unless he/she/it approves of you) approaches the situation differently depending on which side of the world he/she/it is flying at the moment. (opposable thumbs). See, if you count the seeds in a kiwi you get the same number as (add nonsense about the pyramids, pi, and throw an equation in for good measure). Stupid, right? Not so, sir ... prove me wrong and I promise any statement can be refuted, if I can't refute it, then the leaders of the kiwi movement are hiding the information, or kiwison simply does not speak to non believers. Now do you understand falsifiablity?
Posted by JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
"I know a lot more than most people on this subject, please allow me to explain a little, We have had the Gulf war in Iraq (i), we then had the twin towers, (ll)=(ill) then the underground in london, (u)+(ill)=(illu) now just maybe we now have a mystery flu in Mexico, = (m)+(illu)=(illum) ,, you can see where this is going ,right?. please feel free to Msg me for futher help."

HAHAHA
You should do stand up.
Posted by Mimo1991 7 years ago
Mimo1991
Ha ha, this is ridiculous! How is somebody going to ask how to prove this "conspiracy theory" falsifiable?
It's not a theory at all! It's all real! It's there and happening right now in front of your face! Geo has provided enough evidence to show that our world is being controlled by evil people! You just have to open your little mind and become awaken from the rest of these mindless zombies that think life is going to get better.
Posted by thisoneguy 7 years ago
thisoneguy
Go to infowars.com, or planetprison.tv,
Posted by sherlockmethod 7 years ago
sherlockmethod
Geo,
My problem with consp. theories is that nothing proves them false. What makes your claims falsifiable? What evidence could be presented to show the illuminati are not controlling the world? Every action appears to further the conspiracy but what actions or events contradict it?
Posted by thisoneguy 7 years ago
thisoneguy
I know a lot more than most people on this subject, please allow me to explain a little, We have had the Gulf war in Iraq (i), we then had the twin towers, (ll)=(ill) then the underground in london, (u)+(ill)=(illu) now just maybe we now have a mystery flu in Mexico, = (m)+(illu)=(illum) ,, you can see where this is going ,right?. please feel free to Msg me for futher help.
23 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Danielle 6 years ago
Danielle
TheSkepticGeoLaureate8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by warlord2080 6 years ago
warlord2080
TheSkepticGeoLaureate8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by True2GaGa 7 years ago
True2GaGa
TheSkepticGeoLaureate8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
TheSkepticGeoLaureate8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Maikuru 7 years ago
Maikuru
TheSkepticGeoLaureate8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Mimo1991 7 years ago
Mimo1991
TheSkepticGeoLaureate8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by DictatorIsaac 7 years ago
DictatorIsaac
TheSkepticGeoLaureate8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by ChloeAva 7 years ago
ChloeAva
TheSkepticGeoLaureate8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Kefka 7 years ago
Kefka
TheSkepticGeoLaureate8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by numa 7 years ago
numa
TheSkepticGeoLaureate8Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07