Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post Reply
User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by deep state » Sun Nov 05, 2017 6:00 am

I feel like this is one of those strange cases of, on the one hand, everybody knows, on the other, Levenda's denial continues with the tissue-y semblance of plausibility; which means, I guess, nobody cares?

Finally got my hands (so to speak) on an audio file of "Simon"'s interview for C2C, speeded up and pretty identifiably Levenda, I'd say, tho curious to hear what others think. Here.

Also, another interview in which he admits to working for intell, sort of, here.

I asked Mark Pilkington, of Mirage Man, what he thinks of Levenda and deLonge etc. He was fairly noncommittal (said he needs more time to look into it), but that he definitely smells a rat. Of course, how could he not? The question (for me) is, is anyone besides me and Jason Colavito calling PL out on this; and if not, why not?

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by C_D » Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:48 pm

Hey deep - if Levanda is intell, what are the ramifications?

User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

Re: Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by deep state » Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:23 pm

He's something of a pillar of the alternate perceptions community and within conspiracy research. So what happens if a pillar is seen to be rotten?

To me, it would clearly indicate that, as I once wrote, there's a worldwide conspiracy to promote the idea that there's a worldwide conspiracy to promote the idea, etc; that probably most of our own "intell" on the subject is sourced in ongoing info wars... not that we don't know this, but to actually ID one of the main players makes it possible to unravel the narratives that have been spun around us

if 90-95% of PL's info in Sinister Forces (e.g.) is legit (as I think it probably is), what's the extra 5-10% and how is it reframing the good info and turning it into a useful narrative for TPTB?

PL strikes me as an insider whose job is to establish a false narrative around good info so that we will follow that template and put all our own info into the context of the false narrative, thereby rendering it less accurate, true, or practically useful. Note how PL debunks my suggestions of an occult element in organized child abuse, for example. That's not part of his narrative.

Simply put, I think PL's info, like Strieber's stuff, has an ideological thrust that trumps, and hence invalidates, the informational content.

To be fair, I'd say the same, to a degree, about books I wrote (as Aeolus Kephas); but then, I was informed and inspired by other "researchers" (intell) and so I also became an unwittingly unreliable narrator. I think PL is witting, which makes a huge difference, obviously.

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by C_D » Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:33 pm

...but to actually ID one of the main players makes it possible to unravel the narratives that have been spun around us
Can you be specific - i.e. PL says this - which is spin, which probably means that this (your take on the matter) is the reality.

Sorry to be dense, I don't know much about him.

User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

Re: Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by deep state » Mon Nov 06, 2017 7:06 pm

there isn't a short answer to this, only short questions...

PL advocates occultism, Strieber, secret base programs (I think), hidden Nazi world controllers (tho he poo-poohs Mengele MKULTRA connections), and now Lovecraftian cargo cult of ET overlords about to return....

Is his supposed critical "rigor" consistent with his apparent gullibility in embracing material from characters like Strieber or deLonge?

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by C_D » Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:15 pm

But isn't someone else's credibility entirely subjective? I assume at some point in the past your beliefs aligned (somewhat) with his - but have now diverged. What led you to study him in the first place - there must have been commonalities? Or was it that he was an antithesis that made him of interest?
Maybe he's just gullible. Rabbit holes can run deep - containing many dead-ends that once researched, can be hard to let go of.

semper occultus
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 4:51 pm

Re: Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by semper occultus » Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:36 pm

the clearest clue is his youthful involvement in this weird sub-culture of emigre "churches" - which were pretty much anti-communist intelligence fronts. David Ferrie was a "bishop" in something called the American Orthodox Catholic Church. Levenda & William Prazsky formed something called the Slavonic Orthodox Catholic Church although his story is it was purely to avoid the draft.

He is of slovak background & his dad was involved in some form of political activism or protests that brought him to the attention of the FBI which could be where this started out

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dead-Names-Dar ... ks&ie=UTF8

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by C_D » Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:37 pm

Simply put, I think PL's info, like Strieber's stuff, has an ideological thrust
Which idealogy?

User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

Re: Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by deep state » Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:54 am

C_D wrote:
Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:37 pm
Simply put, I think PL's info, like Strieber's stuff, has an ideological thrust
Which idealogy?
It doesn't really matter which ideology, C-D, that wasn't my point. I wrote an entire book in an attempt to map out the ideological thrust behind Strieber's writings; it's not an ideology that has a name, or else it has many.

I don't think someone's credibility is particularly subjective, not like writing skill or wisdom quotient, say (and I don't think these are entirely subjective either). When a person contradicts themselves, presents no evidence for increasingly wild stories, and out and out lies, isn't it fair to say they don't have credibility?

I think you are being devil's advocate here, C-D. Do you think Strieber or deLonge have credibility? Do you not find anything odd about Levenda's backing these horses? Did you listen to the audios?
semper occultus wrote:
Mon Nov 06, 2017 9:36 pm
the clearest clue is his youthful involvement in this weird sub-culture of emigre "churches" - which were pretty much anti-communist intelligence fronts. David Ferrie was a "bishop" in something called the American Orthodox Catholic Church. Levenda & William Prazsky formed something called the Slavonic Orthodox Catholic Church although his story is it was purely to avoid the draft.

He is of slovak background & his dad was involved in some form of political activism or protests that brought him to the attention of the FBI which could be where this started out

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dead-Names-Dar ... ks&ie=UTF8
That's a big part of it; the other distinctly fishy area of his life is obviously around Simon and the creation of the Necronomicon, the Magickal Childe bookstore, and the OTO, which he still denies being a member of, just as he denies being Simon and being (ex) Intell, even tho he doesnt seem to have tried very hard to conceal these facts (if they are facts - I suppose he could be a huxter who make it want to look he's an operative, and denying it would be part of that...)

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by jakell » Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:11 am

deep state wrote:
Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:54 am
C_D wrote:
Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:37 pm
deep state wrote:
Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:23 pm
He's something of a pillar of the alternate perceptions community and within conspiracy research. So what happens if a pillar is seen to be rotten?

To me, it would clearly indicate that, as I once wrote, there's a worldwide conspiracy to promote the idea that there's a worldwide conspiracy to promote the idea, etc; that probably most of our own "intell" on the subject is sourced in ongoing info wars... not that we don't know this, but to actually ID one of the main players makes it possible to unravel the narratives that have been spun around us

if 90-95% of PL's info in Sinister Forces (e.g.) is legit (as I think it probably is), what's the extra 5-10% and how is it reframing the good info and turning it into a useful narrative for TPTB?

PL strikes me as an insider whose job is to establish a false narrative around good info so that we will follow that template and put all our own info into the context of the false narrative, thereby rendering it less accurate, true, or practically useful. Note how PL debunks my suggestions of an occult element in organized child abuse, for example. That's not part of his narrative.

Simply put, I think PL's info, like Strieber's stuff, has an ideological thrust that trumps, and hence invalidates, the informational content.

To be fair, I'd say the same, to a degree, about books I wrote (as Aeolus Kephas); but then, I was informed and inspired by other "researchers" (intell) and so I also became an unwittingly unreliable narrator. I think PL is witting, which makes a huge difference, obviously.
Which idealogy?
It doesn't really matter which ideology, C-D, that wasn't my point. I wrote an entire book in an attempt to map out the ideological thrust behind Strieber's writings; it's not an ideology that has a name, or else it has many.

I don't think someone's credibility is particularly subjective, not like writing skill or wisdom quotient, say (and I don't think these are entirely subjective either). When a person contradicts themselves, presents no evidence for increasingly wild stories, and out and out lies, isn't it fair to say they don't have credibility?

I think you are being devil's advocate here, C-D. Do you think Strieber or deLonge have credibility? Do you not find anything odd about Levenda's backing these horses? Did you listen to the audios?

I'm reminded of something Jordan Peterson said in a talk with Camille Paglia (@34:10):

" I think of ideologies as fragmentary mythologies, that's where they get their archetypal and psychological power..."

He is suggesting that the ideological level here is not the real deal, that it's a sort of veil. Of course if one wants to look behind the veil one has to interact with it to some degree and a complex veil would be the more effective (Marxism for instance). Something else to bear in mind is whether the ideologue is genuine, if not then that's another reason not to engage too strongly with them on that level.

Peterson and Paglia's talk is entitled "Modern Times" and it is interesting to consider that, only in these, can ideologies be reliably be used to gain this power, that they are a tool to manipulate the educated (or rather mass educated). A post-Enlightenment tool.

User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

Re: Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by deep state » Wed Nov 08, 2017 3:14 am

jakell wrote:
Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:11 am
I'm reminded of something Jordan Peterson said in a talk with Camille Paglia (@34:10):

" I think of ideologies as fragmentary mythologies, that's where they get their archetypal and psychological power..."

He is suggesting that the ideological level here is not the real deal, that it's a sort of veil. Of course if one wants to look behind the veil one has to interact with it to some degree and a complex veil would be the more effective (Marxism for instance). Something else to bear in mind is whether the ideologue is genuine, if not then that's another reason not to engage too strongly with them on that level.
Absolutely; there are so many levels to fragmentary narratives. In this current case (Levenda as tool for cryptocracy), we have the question of what the elite actually believe, what they want people to think they believe, and (probably closely tied) what they want the people they rule to believe. Then there's what they want those of us who are becoming aware of their actual nature to believe the elite believe - because it may not be the same as what they actually believe.

In my last conversation with Levenda, I suggested that all occultist goals and practices are rooted in pathologies of one sort or another and he agreed! You would never guess this from his output, which from Simon Cabana to Tom deLonge is all about promoting occultic narratives (his heroes are Lovecraft, Crowley, & Grant).
jakell wrote:
Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:11 am
Peterson and Paglia's talk is entitled "Modern Times" and it is interesting to consider that, only in these, can ideologies be reliably be used to gain this power, that they are a tool to manipulate the educated (or rather mass educated). A post-Enlightenment tool.
That seems like a really important point, not least because it implies that those who create the ideologies do not themselves believe in them (if they did, they wouldn't be able to use them against others). The spinners of fragmentary myths certainly have their own crucial fictions (such as the notion that they can transcend the mass of humanity - defeat death? - by gaining total control over it); but their main business seems to be the manufacturing, marketing, and selling of crucial fictions (ideological narratives that provide false meaning to buffer awareness of death) to others.

An obvious example might be how intelligence and shadow govt agencies use the ideology of Americanism to justify and implement policies that serve their own agendas, agendas that have nothing to do with Americanism, but with a deeper, darker ideology. So while they create propaganda that they don't believe is true, they do believe (presumably) that it serves a higher truth, one that the masses aren't ready or able to receive, and so must be herded into, or sacrificed to.

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by jakell » Wed Nov 08, 2017 9:51 am

I quite enjoyed the first interview you provided once I got used to the squeaky voice (I forgot this and then the first woman caller sounded incredibly high). The interviewer is good and doesn't fail to hold his feet to the fire in places.

Some of what 'Simon' says sounds really suspect, and then other stuff sounds genuine. It's a standard trick to mix truth and fiction to produce an overall compelling narrative and it's up to the listener to untangle it** using their own template and this is affected by how much skin you have in the game, this is why I try to have as little to do with The Occult as possible unless it impinges on me.
Regarding the use of the Occult to manipulate folks and obtain power, my view is that those who wish to obtain power have noticed that non-Occult means work so well that exotic (and dangerous) methods might be a waste of energy with unpredictable results, the Occult being kept around as a 'plaything' for abstract study and experimentation.

** This is why I like to listen to full livestreams (these tend to reveal a lot due to being unedited and informal) and interviews nowadays, one develops a 'feel' for the interaction and involved personalities that doesn't come easily via snippets, or via text. I think this is one reason why certain regular youtubers have become a popular source of info and opinion.. people are rediscovering the power of the spoken word

User avatar
C_D
Site Admin
Posts: 323
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:36 pm

Re: Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by C_D » Wed Nov 08, 2017 10:40 am

The occult is something that works on both the logical and intuitive side of human nature. Some are born with inate intuitive knowledge - others, not so endowed, are required to 'learn' it logically.

For a non-inate, 'learning' the occult practices is a bit like a person who has been blind from birth learning what an elephant looks like. They can touch it, listen to it, feel the ground shake as it walks, study it's habitat etc - but no one except the blind person will ever never know what the picture of how the elephant appears in the mind of the blind person looks like - because the blind person has no prior point of reference from which to draw comparisons. A learner can learn from an inate - but it's ultimately an extremely pale shadow of an inate ability. The inate is the master and the learner (regardless of their own perceived stature) is basically little more than a familiar for an Inate.

The majority of inate occultist are truly unseen. The occult grants perception management tools (mostly self-preservation, self-control, self-confidence) that intrinsicly allow an Inate to gauge precise moments in their timeline, in which the optimum action will have the best (for themselves) effect. This may be once a year or thousands of times per day. They are supremely confident and it is well justified.

There are also Inates that do not realise they are such.

Familiars are akin to the children of celebrities - basking in the glory of their parents success, emotionally involved, impressed by their own close proximity to greatness, living on wealth and goodwill (or ill) generated close by - but ultimately, uninvolved in personal fulfillment. If the familiar self-realises the hollowness of this' greatness by association', they may look amongst the peripherals for more 'knowledge' - outside of that which their Inate offers them - and that can lead to many rabbit holes. The familiar's lot is not a good one. They often smack of desperation.

And of course, there are Charletans - those that purport to know, but do not. Like me. :lol:

User avatar
deep state
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:38 pm

Re: Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by deep state » Wed Nov 08, 2017 6:27 pm

^^^ = thread creep?! :lol: (as in mission creep, not creepy guy)
jakell wrote:
Wed Nov 08, 2017 9:51 am
Some of what 'Simon' says sounds really suspect, and then other stuff sounds genuine.
Can you remember an example of each?
jakell wrote:
Wed Nov 08, 2017 9:51 am
Regarding the use of the Occult to manipulate folks and obtain power, my view is that those who wish to obtain power have noticed that non-Occult means work so well that exotic (and dangerous) methods might be a waste of energy with unpredictable results, the Occult being kept around as a 'plaything' for abstract study and experimentation.
Interesting hypothesis. At what point does occult become non-occult, or vice versa, tho? Wouldn't any sort of covert means of perception management come under the rubric of the occult? If you mean overt rituals and barbaric names and all that, I tend to agree, which (I think) was what I was getting at above regarding what the elite want us to believe they believe, namely that they are Satanists who don black robes and stuff (they may do, some of the time, but it may be no more than a theatrical tool).
jakell wrote:
Wed Nov 08, 2017 9:51 am
people are rediscovering the power of the spoken word
I hope so; it's definitely central to eliminating the noise factor and getting the signal, as you say, and the key is unscripted, impromtu speaking. This was also what I was getting at, a bit, on the Jordan Peterson thread with my criticism of JP, how when the message becomes everything, the medium gets lost and (since medium is message) the message itself is diminished, becomes less dimensional.

What's interesting to me isn't what people want to communicate but why they want to communicate it.

Bringing it back to Levenda, it is not clear why he is doing what he is doing, besides that he wants to be The Guy, the Conspiracy Expert. He adopts a no-position position when in fact he clearly has a position, it's just not clear what it is.

User avatar
jakell
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by jakell » Wed Nov 08, 2017 7:24 pm

deep state wrote:
Wed Nov 08, 2017 6:27 pm

jakell wrote:
Wed Nov 08, 2017 9:51 am
Some of what 'Simon' says sounds really suspect, and then other stuff sounds genuine.
Can you remember an example of each?
Hard to recall the latter without a second listen as these didn't 'jar' with me. As to the former.. some of what he was describing about hanging around Occult bookstores and 'the scene' in general whilst at the same time being an Orthodox priest sounded 'off', particularly when he encountered some characters who he knew were creepy and cultish and yet his recounting of this was matter-of-fact. the interviewer picked up on this too if I recall.
The hasty burning of the 'original' Necronomicon sounded very convenient too. Presumably this part of his story is already out there so he can't go back and produce a more nuanced version.
jakell wrote:
Wed Nov 08, 2017 9:51 am
Regarding the use of the Occult to manipulate folks and obtain power, my view is that those who wish to obtain power have noticed that non-Occult means work so well that exotic (and dangerous) methods might be a waste of energy with unpredictable results, the Occult being kept around as a 'plaything' for abstract study and experimentation.
Interesting hypothesis. At what point does occult become non-occult, or vice versa, tho? Wouldn't any sort of covert means of perception management come under the rubric of the occult? If you mean overt rituals and barbaric names and all that, I tend to agree, which (I think) was what I was getting at above regarding what the elite want us to believe they believe, namely that they are Satanists who don black robes and stuff (they may do, some of the time, but it may be no more than a theatrical tool).

Yes, this is what I mean. These externalities are not the whole thing though, they are part of the theatre/drama that produces the eventual effects (assuming success). I realise there is a grey area but sometimes a grey area is a useful feature because if one avoids the grey area, then it puts the darker stuff at an even greater distance.
"Covert means of perception management" is what I would class as non-occult, here we're talking of psychology and an awareness of human weaknesses and foibles, although a malign nature is another ingredient needed to make these work. Some occultish trappings may be thrown into the mixture but in this case, purely as theatre.


I would revisit that podcast but two things mean I won't at present. The first is my present avoidance of Occult themes unless they strongly intersect with my own interests which are broadly the convergence of mass psychology with ideology/religiosity. I know from experience that Occult themes lead to semi-obsession if I don't use a long spoon.
The second is more proximal. At present I'm working through a 3 3/4hr podcast with Jordan Peterson and an ex-military guy who I've never come across before. The surface contrast between them is fascinating and the possibility of such juxtapositions is one reason why I've come to like livestreams, time-consuming as they are

onefiftythree
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 6:15 pm

Re: Yes, Peter Levenda = Simon = Intell

Post by onefiftythree » Sun Dec 17, 2017 6:42 am

Moments ago on Facebook:
Peter Levenda wrote:By now most of you will have learned about the articles that have been appearing in the New York Times, the Washington Post, Politico, USA Today, and elsewhere in the US mainstream press as well as the world’s press that the Pentagon has released film footage of UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) otherwise known as UFOs. This was done exclusively through To The Stars Academy of Arts and Science (TTSAAS), the project started by Tom DeLonge and with which I have been involved – via Sekret Machines – since 2015.

The revelations that the Department of Defense had a project, funded by a black budget, to investigate UFOs during the period 2007-2012 will surely come as a surprise to some critics who believed that all that was over with Project Blue Book’s termination in 1970. It will not come as a shock to many who believed this was happening all along, of course. What is surprising, however, is that this is confirmation of what had only been suspected. We no longer have to speculate about black budgets funding UFO research: it has been confirmed. We no longer have to speculate about top secret film footage of UFOs taken by the military (and in recent years, no less): this, too, has been confirmed. Even further, we no longer have to speculate that elements of the US Government have been aware of this for years.

If you were waiting for Disclosure, guess what: it happened.

Your next question may be: why all the secrecy up to now? The US Senator who jump-started this particular project, Harry Reid, made it clear: it was a question of national security. We’ve known that all along, but until now no one in a position of authority has come out to tell us that so bluntly. (At least, not outside of Hollywood movies.)

But it seems to me the Pentagon project could only go so far in answering all of our many questions about UFOs. I believe what is required now is a more concerted effort by individuals from all branches of learning: in both the “hard” and the “soft” sciences, to be sure, but also in terms of the arts, for the imaginative “thinking outside the box” quality that artists, musicians, and writers bring to the table. (Think of Arthur C. Clarke and Philip K. Dick, for example.) For this effort to succeed, we need participation by everyone: every field of human endeavor, every race, every ethnicity, every religion (agnostics and atheists as well), every gender, every age, every political persuasion. No one has a monopoly on truth; everyone has a piece of the puzzle. We are all blind men with the UFO elephant in the room, and we can only know this particular elephant by pooling all of our impressions, all of our resources.

So, what do we know?

The US government has been studying the Phenomenon in secret for years. It was funded by a black budget. It was a project of which most people in the Pentagon were not aware, it was that secret. And, as Harry Reid stated, it was about science as well as national security. So who do we have working with us in Tom’s project so far? Scientists and national security experts.

We know that – however it happened, whatever machinations behind the scenes took place to make sure it happened – this is government disclosure. It may not be full disclosure, but as we used to say in Latin class: ovum ruptum est. The egg is broken. There’s no going back.

Congratulations! Just think: You were alive to see it happen. It’s a bittersweet achievement, however, when I think of all those who believed but who are no longer around to share the experience with us. I am thinking especially right now of Jim Marrs, who would have loved to have been here for this. This Negra Modelo is for you, Jim! Salud!

Watch this space.

(pun intended)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest