kidnapping in arizona

mstudiosdesign · Post by **mstudiosdesign** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 3:17 pm

okay, i don't know if maybe i'm reading into this too much, but bear with me here (and if this has already been touched on, i appologize for reposting!!):

what if bree's mother is from arizona originally.... what if she was kidnapped by aleister? that would make a lot of sence for her to be goin to school in the uk... and would at least half way explain crowley's picture in here room (grandpa??)

so yeah, i could be totally off my rocker here, but i thought it was an idea worth posting.

-mcat

slacker · Post by **slacker** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 3:43 pm

That's a really interesting theory... thanks for posting it...

TheFatLady · Post by **TheFatLady** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 5:07 pm

That's the sort of direction my thoughts were taking as I listened to Daniel's new video. That somehow the kidnapped Arizona girl was connected to Bree in a literal, and not just a figurative way. I couldn't figure out how, since Bree is obviously too young to have been the kidnapee, but her mom . . . ! Interesting!

dVant · Post by **dVant** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 7:16 pm

It's not likely. The girl was (supposedly) abducted in 1943.

In "How My Parents Met" Bree mentions her Mom (21 yrs old) lived in Edinburgh. Her parents met at a showing of Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead in London... which was first staged at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe August 26, 1966, and a National Theatre production at the Old Vic premiered April 11, 1967. The difference is 24 years.

I think Daniel is simply pointing out that Bree could be in danger.

Bree's new video suggests she has been mentally conditioned, physically weakened (by shots and pills) and unprepared (no knowledge of the ceremony details) for what lies aheads. I don't know of any religious ceremony that requires participants to be physically and emotionally vulnerable; most genuine religious ceremonies require participation by ones free will.

kateycat18 · Post by **kateycat18** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 8:59 pm

What about her grandmother? Would that make sens in a timeline?

Post by **Broken Kid** » Wed Oct 11, 2006 9:23 pm

Yeah...the ceremony happens very rarely. What if the last time was in 1943, and the girl who was a part of it disappeared?

What if the end result of the ceremony is death, and that's where the last girl went. They disposed of the body, and no one was the wiser. I hope that doesn't happen to Bree.

Not very PG13 either...

my dear watson · Post by **my dear watson** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 1:15 am

i just found this thing about Crowley:

"Crowley's "Do what thou wilt" injunction led to Hell's Angels, Charles Manson. Crowley wrote in "Magick in Theory and Practice" recommendations for sacrificing a young male child to achieve best magical results. A footnote was added that he himself had done so about 150 times a year between 1912 and 1928"

which makes me worry for Daniel. I know he's not that young or a child really, but still.

also, i'm a n00b. so hi everyone. this is my first experience with this type of thing. i find it all very interesting. very much like the game AFI has going on...if anyone is familiar with that.

tannhaus · Post by **tannhaus** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 2:03 am

my dear watson wrote:"Crowley's "Do what thou wilt" injunction led to Hell's Angels, Charles Manson. Crowley wrote in "Magick in Theory and Practice" recommendations for sacrificing a young male child to achieve best magical results. A footnote was added that he himself had done so about 150 times a year between 1912 and 1928"

Please realize that you're talking about an actual religion here...of which, we have followers on this board.

As for the injunction, it is "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. Love is the law, love under Will." It doesn't mean do what you want.

http://www.hermetic.com/crowley/libers/lib2.html

As far as sacrificing a young male child....that's code for masturbation.

my dear watson · Post by **my dear watson** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 2:10 am

oh i wasn't trying to portray it in a negative light.

and about the masterbation...that makes sense. apologies

tannhaus · Post by **tannhaus** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 2:11 am

my dear watson wrote:oh i wasn't trying to portray it in a negative light.

and about the masterbation...that makes sense. apologies

No problem. It's just getting old seeing everyone come in here calling us satanists, accusing us of sacrificing people, etc.

The videos seem to want to feed into that too.

starky32 · Post by **starky32** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 2:14 am

satanist

my dear watson · Post by **my dear watson** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 2:15 am

oh that's awful. definately wasn't my intention.

my friend Matt is actually a practicing member of the Church of Satan and it never struck me as a sinister type of thing. He's been a member for a decade or so. It's all very interesting. He actually got me The Book of Law.

tannhaus · Post by **tannhaus** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 2:21 am

my dear watson wrote:my friend Matt is actually a practicing member of the Church of Satan and it never struck me as a sinister type of thing. He's been a member for a decade or so. It's all very interesting. He actually got me The Book of Law.

Well, I have nothing bad to say about the Church of Satan or the Temple of Set. Both are satanist organizations. They're not Thelemic and don't really have anything to do with Aleister Crowley or Thelema. Anton LaVey, who wrote the Satanic Bible and started the Church of Satan seemed to have pulled bits from Thelema and twisted them to mean something else, but he disliked Aleister Crowley.

But, (and it's sort of ironic), when most people say Satanist, they're not talking about the actual religion of satanism. They're talking about this idea that has built up over the years of Satanists drinking baby's blood, performing human sacrifices, worshipping Satan, etc. Of course, neither the religion of Satanism nor the religion of Thelema have anything to do with that.

But, even the religion of Satanism is different from the religion of Thelema. It's simply not accurate to call Thelemites satanists...no matter what you believe satanism to be.

my dear watson · Post by **my dear watson** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 2:26 am

dually noted.

so how did you get into your religion?

i'm an agnostic myself. i like hearing about other's religions. i think it's so much more interesting than Catholicism (which i was baptized as and went to school for)

gelb9 · Post by **gelb9** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 2:33 am

tannhaus wrote:
my dear watson wrote:my friend Matt is actually a practicing member of the Church of Satan and it never struck me as a sinister type of thing. He's been a member for a decade or so. It's all very interesting. He actually got me The Book of Law.
Well, I have nothing bad to say about the Church of Satan or the Temple of Set. Both are satanist organizations. They're not Thelemic and don't really have anything to do with Aleister Crowley or Thelema. Anton LaVey, who wrote the Satanic Bible and started the Church of Satan seemed to have pulled bits from Thelema and twisted them to mean something else, but he disliked Aleister Crowley.

But, (and it's sort of ironic), when most people say Satanist, they're not talking about the actual religion of satanism. They're talking about this idea that has built up over the years of Satanists drinking baby's blood, performing human sacrifices, worshipping Satan, etc. Of course, neither the religion of Satanism nor the religion of Thelema have anything to do with that.

But, even the religion of Satanism is different from the religion of Thelema. It's simply not accurate to call Thelemites satanists...no matter what you believe satanism to be.

This is so true and absolutely well put. I've had many friends through the years who were Satanists and believed in the power of the mind. A very creative and quite imformative religion that actually makes sense. Anton LeVey indeed disliked Aleister Crowley. A lot of people don't realize Anton's contribution and view points when discussing this. Everyone always brings up Crowley but his views are quite different from the Satanic Bible the religion uses.