What is the opposite of fickle?

I don’t make a point of having dreams and, on the rare occasion for this kind of interval, I tend not to dwell on them. Kind readers no doubt suspect my channelling skills resonated in prior posts. Experts, or so believed, have confessed I am so unusual I am unique, but that is nothing uncommon as everyone is unique in some way, otherwise there would be no point in differences.  Correctly, though I channel, I do not channel in dream state and this makes me extremely unusual. It also gives me a strength that ensures I am relatively unhindered by forces that might not compliment my work.

Meaning, prophetic dreams are extremely rare. In fact I dreamed of a car accident the night before. This, thus far, has been my only real time prophetic dream. Much earlier; in fact when I was aged five, I saw what I thought-to-be the magnificent Jesus Christ. He was dressed in flowing white robes and his face shone from afar. I approached him as if I was mounted on a cameraman’s dolly so, gradually, I saw more detail. Focusing on his face, he gradually became wizened eventually revealing putrid olive skin wriggling with maggots. His smile produced foul blackened and crooked teeth. That was enough to waken me, but I remember the detail as if it was yesterday.

My only other prophetic dream state vision happened recently. I was standing on what I perceived was a balcony, although, on reflection, I could have equally as well have been suspended in “nothing”. What is important is I saw a canopy of stars that were filtered through a rosine-lavender-pink aura. There was nothing unusual. I had seen a photograph earlier for my preparation of a power point presentation. It was one of the images I had selected, and eventually used, as a backcloth. Although, thinking back, the dream did not really match the image. It was just like it. At some juncture the serenity of this stunning view was broken by a dust cloud similar to one that forms from the base of a building demolition. This was no ordinary dust cloud. It completely obscured the centre of the Milky Way and must have extended billions of miles in all directions. But, in relation to the giant expanse we call space, it seemed relatively minor. Nevertheless, I sensed an extraordinarily powerful [or perhaps intense is a better word] surge as a result of the dust cloud’s instant formation. Expectation mingled awe and befuddlement as the few seconds counted down to impact. Though the centre of the event was so far away, comprehension was defied; there was only a few seconds; twelve or thirteen at most, between event and presumed impact. The impact was going to be so great, I sensed, it would obliterate everything. If there was a God, only He [He is not right word, but every attempt to depersonalise God sent auto-correct into attack mode] could intervene. With one second to go I woke up with a jolt.

The other day I woke up with a strange memory. The circumstances behind the memory elude me, but it was significant enough for me to grab a notepad and write down a single word. It was a word I have never seen before but I knew precisely what it meant. Later corrective diligence encouraged me to type “rentund” into an online search engine. When that failed to yield any results which weren’t a play on lettering, I tried “rentunde”. Still nothing! Various online dictionaries suggested rentund or rentunde were either archaic or non-words. The deeper question was had they been deliberately bleached from common language. I knew rentund [whichever spelling] meant “a considered and reasoned sporadic change of allegiance”. It meant precisely the opposite of what it is to be fickle. However, it did share the commonality of sporadic change of allegiance. Was it removed from language to protect the establishment view? If there was no intelligent alternative view, then surely would that not immortalise corporate dictate? Some will echo, “But the establishment does not have a single view. It is a spectrum of voices, sometimes diametrically opposed”. This is correct, but those that publically side with Einstein’s general relatively risk ridicule if, for instance, one of the many scalar field theories was championed in its place. Critics would argue the change of opinion was fickle. For the establishment it is scalar fields or general relativity. Not both!

However, to routinely dismiss any of Einstein’s theories would be improper. Instead, what if a champion liked parts of general relativity? Rentund would allow progress of the idea as evidence of flawed man with both peers and non-peers able to open up any opinion wilfully dismissing the components that either didn’t work or had not been sufficiently tested to confirm its hypothesis (which would be 99.99% of all theories). As the stability of theories, concepts and hypotheses would no longer be glued by credential, everything would come under scrutiny and the real notion of fickleness would become largely obsolete. Indeed all would see great advantage in being rentund as support would only be tendered at a legitimate hefty price [though opportunity for corrupt allegiance would also always be possible]. It might also break peer group clans committed to issuing nonsense based on commercial or other convictions or, at least, hope for truth might collect some credible allies to wield contention with conviction.

Thinking generally about the advantages and disadvantages of language, there is a far more fundamental problem. What of the African tribal groups who speak with clicks or those who permanently reside in Outer Mongolia? They too might have voices. But are they ever heard? Yes, there was a valiant attempt to design a universal language with Esperanto. However, its designers made no apology for any lack of comprehension. What is language without communication? Those in darkest Africa and the ancient Orient can similarly identify with a pictogram of a large snake displaying pointed fangs. Keep out! I have encountered many modern examples of diagram or pictorial communication systems used for order in multi-racial workplaces. Why stop there? Why did the most ancient languages use pictorial symbols? Was it so that all, no matter which nation, which race, which dialect, would understand intent unaided?

A rather more controversial idea ferments. The Australian Steven Strong’s work with a “maybe sixty thousand years old” Aboriginal language, suggests the origins of vocabulary did not coincide with Tolkien’s Holy Grail. The ancient pictograms are mostly obvious even to modern man. I know the historic propaganda of man the ape miraculously evolving into the modern version hu-man in double quick time is nonsense. However, are we intellectually superior or inferior today? If, indeed there were historic great civilisations prior to the Egyptian pharaohs [who literally popped into existence fully civilised], were these the Ants of Atlantis, Lemurians of Mu, the Paradisians and then…what even farther back? Considering my greatest challenge is universal comprehension but my great fear is actually not being heard, surely the splintering of common discussion by the creation of multiple dialects would be the best way to keep “the group” ignorant? We know from the ancient Russian Aryan folk tales that in the most ancient times there were systems of planetary federalisation (confirmed, in part, by the Vedic texts). The deeper question is, was the introduction of multiple languages and their corresponding thought patterns, a deliberate ploy to fragment global society and destroy the common voice? Are not the many thousands of global languages actually closed codes?

I knew that Hebrews was a failed attempt at harmonising disparate races into a common order. They are an ancient experiment dating back to just after the colossal disaster of 10,400BC when the Earth was unhinged from its core. I also knew the Hebrews were given a star language. However, it was my opinion this was a cut down version for children and perhaps it was only actually the symbols that were used to create a wholly new mini-language. Yet when I channelled for an answer as to what was the real name of the Hebrew language, berischt came as the revelation. It turns out this was a poorly spelt ‘bericht’ which is a German word meaning eyewitness news. Hebrew was a chronicle. It had been created, merely, for the record and that is why it was not spoken. The Modern Hebrew is genetically closer to the despised Aryan and has converted that ancient experiment for peace into an endless vengeful attack on order. The unverified Levite bankers are behind Communism, in its version as the perpetual enslavement of humanity.

The modern eyewitness news is the embodiment of fickle, as commissioned by the Illuminati masters. Therefore, it is no wonder there is no place for a word like rentund in their world of falsehoods.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s