Cathy O’Brien has long been one of David Icke's great eyes and ears into the hidden world of the powerful. In this extract from Jon Ronson’s "Them Adventures with Extremists", we can see the advice that Icke gave Ronson before his famous mission into Bohemian Grove:
"David Icke warned me against it. He said the reptilian bloodlines transform themselves back into giant lizards at Bohemian Grove. Furthermore, he said, Henry Kissinger, Jimmy Carter, Walter Cronkite and the male members of the British Royal family routinely sexually abuse their harem of kidnapped sex slaves - brainwashed through the MKULTRA trauma-based mind control program - at the Grove. I asked David how he knew this, and he explained that one of the sex slaves, a woman called Cathy O'Brien, escaped and wrote a chilling memoir about her experiences called the TranceFormation of America. 'If you read Cathy O'Brien's book,' said David, 'you'd know not to go anywhere near the place. People disappear in those forests."
Jon Ronson and Alex Jones survived the encounter.
They also filmed the infamous "cremation of care" event and surprise, surprise, never saw anyone turn into giant lizards...
The problem is that Monarch is an extremely debatable program - not even Alex Jones touches her. Which is rather interesting, as Martin Cannon made the observation in the article "Project Monarch: The Tangled Web" that when she first came on the scene in 1996, she and her husband seemed to be testing the waters for a market to pitch her stories to:
"The couple describe World Vision as 'Jesuit' conspiratorial group intent on bringing about a socialistic, 'New World Order.' (World Vision is vile emphasized the 'New World Order' bugaboo and Mark takes pains to hide his atheism. Actually a conservative Protestant missionary group.) Ever since our intrepid anti-Monarch crusaders discovered that their primary audience leans far to the Right, they have and Mark takes pains to hide his atheism."
Plenty of Book Sales With Icke's Promotion
With Icke's help, O’Brien and her husband are now through to the 14th printing of their book, and had another one called "Access Denied: For Reasons of National Security", which came out in 2004.
It was also the rather rabid followers of O’Briens, Icke and Makow (amongst other crazies) that led to one of the first genuinely critical researchers of the conspirahypocrite fraternity Martin Cannon to retire from the field as he stated in an email to Mark Pilkington in 2002.
"But perhaps the main reason I 'had to let it go' was the dawning realization that a lot of the folks I was talking to were simply nuts"
What’s Wrong With Sex? A Buddhist Perspective Posted by: TW Editor Posted date: June 06, 2013 In: Dhamma
Scholar and Zen teacher David Loy looks at historical clues from the Buddha’s time to ask: what’s up with all this sex-negativity?
As Buddhism infiltrates the West, one of the important and interesting points of contention is sexuality. Buddhism in Asia has been largely a cultural force for celibacy (among monastics) and sexual restraint, so how is Western Buddhism adapting to the sexual revolution?
Today many people in contemporary Western societies are sexually “liberated” – liberated, however, in a somewhat different fashion than the Buddhist tradition has usually understood liberation. We still have many problems with sex, but nowadays they are less likely to involve guilt and repression than various types of sexual obsession such as addiction to pornography. Since the 1960s, our lifestyles and customs have become very different from those with which patriarchal societies regulated sexual urges – often providing outlets for men while strictly controlling women and procreation. Our culture is saturated with sexuality, not only because sex is commodified in every possible way (being indispensable for grabbing our attention) but also because preoccupation with sexual gratification helps to fill up the void left by the collapse of any larger meaning. The importance of sex has ballooned because we are not sure what else is important in a Godless world that often seems intent on destroying itself.
This is not to demean the pleasures of sex, or the libidinal freedoms we enjoy today. Despite new kinds of social pressure, most of us benefit from many more options. The liberation of sexual preference means that gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transsexuals can come out of the closet, leading to an important reduction in collective social dukkha. Premarital sex is more or less taken for granted and marriage itself is no longer a matter of course. It has become a decision that many choose not to take, or to take and retake. Thanks to effective contraception, children,, too have become a matter of choice. Some people decry the self-centeredness of those who decide not to raise children and some others decry the self-centeredness of those who do. Yet Buddhism, unique among the major religions, is not pro-natalist. There is no doctrinal encouragement that we should have lots of children, which is another aspect of the Dharma to appreciate, given our overpopulation of the earth. The emphasis on monasticism works the other way, encouraging an alternative to procreation. The Buddha, like Jesus, was not a big proponent of “family values”.
But how does Buddhism fit into our freewheeling ways today? Well, many of us aren’t sure. Western monastics continue to follow the established regulations of their own tradition, or at least appear to do so (like some of their Asian counterparts, no doubt). However, most serious practitioners in the West, and probably in Asia, are lay. Since sexual morality is also a matter of karma rather than God’s commandment – “Do this or else!” – for the most part we continue to do what we want to do. And is there anything wrong with that?