Symbols at Riots

Read here [1] for an article by Matthew Delooze that already discusses the context to what I'm saying. So I'm only going to give the short version.

Here’s two logos and each are from a bank. The first bank is the one in the UK during the G20 protests that the rioters were herded towards and then were violent towards. The second bank is in Greece. Same thing, rioters were herded towards this bank and they became violent towards it.

1st Bank logo:

2nd Bank logo:


Ok. The two logos are the same. Now this is what I see. Do those logos remind you of anything? I'm not putting up the picture of what I think it appears as in order to help you try to answer the question yourself first. Anything come to mind? What do you think? (anybody?)

Now this is what I think those two logos look like:

http://www.eurimage.com/gallery/imagery/qb/vatican.jpg



[1]Matthew Delooze article here: http://www.oneballmedia.com/node/2387

Just found this. This is the logo my wife thought about when she saw the logos above. I did a bit of research. G20 Protests in Pittsburgh had riots too. Apparently according to a local news station in Pittsburgh the Citizens Bank and I quote, "A Citizens Bank suffered the brunt of the damage."[1]

If I can find out more about this I will. But here's the logo of the Citizens Bank in Pittsburgh:



[1]Pittsburgh news source: http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/g20/21121306/detail.html

the 3rd logo is very revealing, nealy identical to RBS..you maybe onto something here..cant quite put my finger on it yet..but its very interesting

seeker401 wrote:the 3rd logo is very revealing, nealy identical to RBS..you maybe onto something here..cant quite put my finger on it yet..but its very interesting

I think I might find more on this. I have some leads, but we'll see where it takes me. This is what I'm thinking so far. (it's a bit more expanded explanation than what I posted over at your blog)

I think there are levels of interpretation of these symbols. Here's the first one. These symbols, since they are similar, might show 'good' places to shop for those that are corrupt. For instance, when a person joins the Free Mason society if they own a shop, then they will instantly get a lot of customers and a lot of investment deals, etc.... because that's the benefits of being in that society when one is a member. Other Free Masons will shop there and some are very wealthy, well connected, etc.... So the business by joining the society now is privy to lots of future options.

These logos could mean numerous things, but as I'm saying, one might be 'hey, this company is owned by a member(s) of our society so let's shop there'. Instant money, customers, investment deals, and connections come the shop's way to expand their business, possibly worldwide depending on the kind of connections and how many hands they shake. They can thereby climb the corrupt ladder by shaking hands into the state chapter, or interstate chapters, nation-wide chapter, etc.... all the way to the likes of the Council of Foreign Relations, the Bank of International Settlements circle, etc.... getting further connections and business deals. Once they're in the game, the higher up they go, the easier it might appear for them since they are more the rulers than being ruled by. Higher up means more control, potentially less stressful (the grass is greener, if only 'I' succeed and get this business deal then it will all be better, etc... mentality). The corporate ladder of success yet a much bigger game with much bigger stakes and the stress or benefits to go with it. The pressure is much greater, but the rewards are also dealt to them as that much greater. I mean they get to make global policies if they feel like climbing up that high.

So by looking at the logo it is also an advertisement that says, 'hey, this business is a member of our society' (whatever the society of corrupt they are).

I definitely see a shrine idea along with it (read Matthews article to get a better grasp of this if necessary as what he wrote in that particular article was the foundation to what I ended up expanding upon with my own thoughts as we'll see). Those rioters are having immoral demonic intercourse with those corrupt-shrines. The energy during the worship and the rituals displayed are not of wisdom and the spirit, but are of the animalistic, demonic sphere. They are prostituting themselves out to those shrines and doing what is expected at those types of shrines instead of following their own spirit of love, peace, and being reasonable.

Here's some example's of other rituals around the world. When a Catholic goes into a Catholic Church one of the expected rituals is to go to the fountain and apply water to their body somewhere (I can't remember where exactly on their body, but that's the ritual upon entering the Church). When these rioters are going to these shrines they are simply doing the expected rituals that the corrupt entity there expects. They are even shown the way to the shrine. The police herded them upon a path, down certain pre-planned road, and towards a already planned destination. Those rioters were affirming those places as worshiping sites, and they worshiped as they were expected.

When I go to a restaurant I expect to perform the cultural ritual of eating and/or drinking. If I lived in New Guinea I would be expected to follow this cultural ritual:



Or if I lived in New Zealand, I might be expected to perform this ritual:



Or if I was an Mandiwala I would be expected to do this ritual:



Or this war ritual in Papua:



Those shrines, with those logos, hold expectations for those that attend them, in the way they are to worship them. Like this ritual at a Greek riot/protest:



the spirit is with you,
- peace

great explanation..i am going to watch the coverage very closely from now on..

i think the citizens bank must be a divisin of RSB..its identical..

love your theory on the rituals..very good mate

I think what's happening is much of what's happening is either already embedded within society that it is cultural. Some other introductions to society are a bit newer, but are being institutionalized and are therefore extensions of the culture at large. Of course some people don't like what is being institutionalized, and that's why we are here posting what we do, blogging what we blog.

There is human culture and the biological motive of humans. The culture is how any given society of people expresses these underlying biological motives. Humans get aggressive, and it is an economic fact that intervening upon economies with involuntary acts that destroy economies (central banks artificially changing interest rates counter to actual market supply and demand factors) that such involuntary, thus, aggressive interventions will lower standards of living and create poverty. These can lead to desperate situations for some people, and how they will meet the challenges during such times might be aggressive or the community pulls itself together and console each other, help each other, and meet the tough challenges with loving encouragement.

When people are dependent upon a system for their essential livelihoods and such essentials are threatened or actually taken away, then given no options other than to (1) opt out of the system all together and laugh at the jokers actually causing the strife. (2) Continue to think that the system is somehow malleable to the needs and wants of the whole of society (because people vote and somehow there will be change that way), but it needs aggressive action every once and awhile (riots) to make it work; or (3) to feel caught up in a trap that has solutions but solutions that society at large has yet to implement; each of these (and maybe there are other choices too) are what some people will face when their essential way of living is threatened or actually taken away.

Yet I think all three only goes to prove that there is something flawed about the system in which some people think work for them (voting or what have you) really doesn't work, because if it did then why would some people have to work outside, ie. rioting/protesting, the system, ie. voting, every once and awhile to get things done. It appears the larger culture has settled upon this bigger picture of voting sometimes works but aggression is necessary at times too to get things to work. The culture is institutionalized with voting booths and other concrete ways that fulfill the supposed political process, and secondly, the aggressive side of the culture is institutionalized too because when the hand shaking political measures are not working the culture at large has institutional structures to tend to the aggressive side of society (the police work with the rioters, they clash at times, but keep them herded towards a certain geographical direction, riot/protest are allowed in designated areas but not in that side of town is off-limits, etc...). The culture fulfilling the so-called more peaceful mechanism, ie. voting and the culture is fulfilling the aggressive aspect when the usual hand shaking political mechanism is seen to be failing, ie. rioting (and doing this at the established buildings that are shrines where this kind of aggression is to take place). These two fulfillments are the culture as a whole. Rioting/protesting is not working outside
the cultural system. The culture is institutionalizing and accounting for these behaviors and so these types of behaviors are merely working within the cultural theme still.

Technically speaking when people are taking to the streets thinking they are going "outside" the cultural ways to get things accomplished, they really are not. The culture as a whole has concrete structures to go to in order to act out that part of the cultural theme (the Mithra Temples in Delooze's article, prison's, the interplay of cops and robbers, or mental hospitals, etc...). So technically, the rioters are not going "outside" the culture any more than those people in other cultures in New Guinea, etc... (those video's I embedded above) are going "outside" their cultures. The people are still acting out the culture theme even when they are being aggressive, and the aggression is so institutionalized within the culture at large there are actual buildings designated to go to in order for some people to do their thing. Like when I want to eat I can go to a restaurant or get food at the grocery store. When somebody wants to go riot they go down to 'such and such a building' and the police will even help them and guide them to their destination. There are maps that outlined where the protests will take place, at times, and if anybody goes astray from the designated areas, then the police will make sure they stay within the boundaries that the culture has deemed appropriate. This is the culture of the societies we find ourselves living within. Not that we have to be the protesters or the police. We're playing our part right now and it doesn't necessarily mean it's a lost cause, but the institutionalization of trying to act our part is up against powerfully corrupt cultural formers. Not that culture's have to be a certain way. The various cultures attest to the diversity around the world in which people have evolved and institutionalized ways to deal with how the individuals within each varying society will act in accord to the circumstances that arise.

This in no way trivializes the acts that individuals are making within the society. It points out the cultural make-up of any particular society, which goes to show how embedded certain ways of living have become institutionalized. The institutionalizing of certain behaviors though leaves hardly any room for change, especially when those institutions are being established by some people who possess the power to threaten or actually take the lives of people within the society with no repercussions because they are immune from the law. In other words, when culture is being formed by corrupt, disheartened people.

The behaviors of some people are part of the culture and such behaviors are made into containable habits by the process of institutionalization. Rituals are part of the cultural institution. This most definitely has to do with the spirit of humans. The spirit that nourishes and maintains a human, the spirit being our life-force, or what have you, that allows this flesh and blood to get up and walk, such a spirit has a certain way of nourishing and maintaining the individual. Aggression isn't nourishing. It is destructive, and to encourage destruction when I can imagine another way that is more peaceful and reasonable to live, such an encouragement I think is counter to the nourishment and maintenance of being human.

seeker401 wrote:i think the citizens bank must be a divisin of RSB..its identical.

You're right. But not just the RSB, but the British government itself!

wikipedia wrote:Citizens is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Royal Bank of Scotland Group, with headquarters in Edinburgh, Scotland, UK. Following the financial rescue of RBS, the company's controlling shareholder is currently the British government.

[1]

This too:

wikipedia wrote:In May 2008, Citizens Financial Group, an RBS subsidiary, failed to publicly announce that it was under investigation by the SEC for its involvement in the sub-prime mortgage crisis that has devastated the U.S. housing market and bond investors around the world.

It is under investigation due to it's involvement in the housing bubble pop, but how is the U.S. really going to investigate a business owned, thus, in essence IS the British gov't? Not going to happen.

The Greek Bank is 35% owned by the Dubai Government:

wikipedia wrote:Dubai Holding is a holding company that belongs to the Government of Dubai (Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum as the Ruler of Dubai holds 99.67% of the company). It manages and controls 20 companies, which operate in real estate, hospitality, finance, healthcare, energy, research, education, entertainment, media, internet, tourism and biotechnology.

[2]

The Greek Bank's majority owner is based in Cyprus which the first bankers to open it's doors did so in Cyprus as well.

What I can say I learned from this, is, that some large banks are owned by governments. In these two cases, the British and Dubai governments, and so these gov'ts through their banks are established in other countries.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_Financial_Group
[2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubai_Holding