Parliament of crows: crossexamination of rogue sufi sheiks as to factual histories of occult practices toward students: the student’s right to know/2014/07/16/parliament-of-crows-crossexamination-of-rogue-sufi-sheiks-as-to-factual-histories-of-occult-practices-toward-students-the-students-right-to-know/

Parliament of crows: crossexamination of rogue sufi sheiks as to factual histories of occult practices toward students: the student’s right to know

The rise of ‘sufism’ in the New Age movement created a series of anomalies, and the generally retrograde character of the movement was made worse by the deceptions, disinformation, malevolent black magic, abuse of authoritarianism, hatred of westerners (I forgive that one and drop the case), use of Jewish fronts for hidden agendas, etc…
The remarkable thing is that ‘sufism’ has never been defined, even as people’s lives are on the line to the stated authority of sufi ‘sheiks’, a term never defined nor given decent examples or documentation.

With Ej Gold these abuses are acute and the idea of a Parliament of Crows (a parodist reference to The Parliament of Birds) is a way to propose a court of legal, extra-legal, assemblies, for formal discussion and arraingment of ‘sheik’ figures by their clients, disciples, victims.

With Ej Gold this could take the form of ‘legal’-type interview and cross-examination to determine the nature and extent of practices of witchcraft, mindfuck (to be defined), unconscious suggestion, punishment via ‘withcraft’ for punishment, punishments in general for disciple failures to ‘surrender’. We see in sufism a system where spiritual authorities assume the right of life and death over their flocks, a state of affairs so outrageous there can probably be no real future for sufism in open societies.
Repeated spiritual rape by ‘sufi authorities’ is a notion so grotesque its Islamic context itself must come under examination.

Figures such as Gold are in reality conmen who have never given any indication whatsover of the grounds to claim being a sufi, grounds to be a sufi leader (‘sheik’), and the assumption is that he is simply an impostor.

Such legal interactions (according to a definable natural law, perhaps) would need to be monitored by a higher spiritual authority, and be conducted under rules of perjury.

This nexus of ideas is almost comic in the context of the sufi thugs, criminals, conmen, pathological liars, false prophets, and just anything but a spiritual teacher.

In the absence of this kind review the situation simply deteriorates into a hidden magical war of all parties.

One thinks back to the period of Idries Shah and his book The Sufis: the amount of sheer deceptive falsehood in that book is remarkable in retrospect…

Time to condemn the whole legacy and to warn in extreme terms those who suggestibility makes them vulnerable in this circle…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s