When “Belief in the Saviour” Teases Corrupt Zeal

Traditionally I have regularly released a Christmas or New Year’s thematic to coincide with the so-called festive season. 2018 has proven to be a latecomer, but I refuse to entirely relax standards. Each winter solstice cycle I increasingly notice how little of Christ [from the Greek] is present in Christmas. For instance, there is now more or less a complete void once occupied by goodwill.

Satan devoured it,” howl the sanctimoniously superstitious

Yet superstitions should never be entirely overlooked. Every reflective proverb invariably contains a grain or more of truth. Current advertising beginning as early as “New Year”, embers of the “Phoenician” commerce coup ignited under concessions of Santa around the turn of the nineteenth century. Great threat Cossack Russia helplessly conquered and with America “under administration”, imperialism was to become the unchallenged voice of reason. Maybe Ebenezer Scrooge wasn’t such a bad stick after all, but I will elaborate on this sentiment in due course.

Before I expose the real corruption of Christ, it is important to clear the air over Santa’s ambiguous comeuppance. Back in Rococo times the ice countries may as well have been classed as the known third world. Few were hardy enough to brave the cold, but for occasioned explorers. These courageous travellers were at liberty to export remote tales of old, particularly when absent of viable bounty. In Santa’s case it seems that two convenient folklores converged as one. Whether any original account has been authentically preserved is unlikely, but, suffice to say, vagrant Norwegian sagas concerning an odd mystic figure (elf?) had proliferated out to “the West” by 1815 or ’20.

Historic development of the Western version is much easier to chart. By reputation, one of America’s New York newspapers made timely broadsheet announcements in December 1773 and the follow year. According to promotional content, Dutch families seasonally congregated to honour Saint Nicholas (a monk renowned for his selfless distribution of charity). Plausibly, theorists claim that Saint Nicholas was issued the pet name Sinter Klaas in the local dialect pronunciation. Evolution to Santa Claus is logically coincidental. Back in the early nineteen century, it should be noted that popular drawings presenting Sinter Klaas in contemporary situations barely resemble modern Santa. That commercial effigy is believed to have been the consequence of a life-sized model placed behind a Philadelphia general store window in 1841.

Scandinavian tales refer to a mystic figure that helped the children, although Christkind (Christ’s child) or Kris Kringle is usually considered the parallel German version. The original name (the one sometimes quoted is not authentic) of the historic figure is perhaps lost to time, but I calculate it was the missing ingredient that promulgated a natural evolution to Santa Claus. My use of the word “natural” here is figurative, of course, as there is a sinister side to this account too. Following Scandinavian myths, from around 1820 American businesses heavily invested in Christmas shopping advertising, strategically placed around heart-warming ditties (one can but assume were) inspired by the Norwegian mystic. Printed message cards were to come in en-masse from the late nineteenth century onwards.

Popular iconography attributed to a North Pole setting was introduced (in the West) by Clement Clark Moore, whose 1822 poem “An Account of a Visit from Saint Nicholas” apparently featured quaint eye-catching illustrations. Thomas Nast, cartoonist for Harper’s weekly, adapted visualisations for a feature spread in 1881 which made popular acclaim. Embedded traditions of present day rotund gentleman clad in cheery red suit gestated in the 1890’s. Promptly exploited by the Salvation Army, homeless men dressed in seasonal costumes were commissioned to venture out with the aim of collecting funding donations.

Masonic involvement in the creation of the United States of America is beyond dispute. Whether fabled Illuminati power brokers were the key instrumental agents will possibly never be authentically known or provable. What is unarguably clear is the American union was never set up for the people or, rather, if it was, “the people” were undoubtedly the select few. Propagandists went to work in earnest well before the United States was ratified as “one”. Corresponding messages promoting Christmas spirit in favour of commerce highlighted the ambitions of those that established the new republic. This style of subliminal tradition persevered throughout the occurring human rights’ transformation, perhaps persuasively haunted by Charles Dickens 1843 masterpiece “A Christmas Carol”. Incidentally, British Dickens had also written his Parish Boy’s Progress (more commonly known as Oliver Twist) serial 1837-39 which coincided (sic) with the Abolition of Slavery Act (1837).

I wrote about the truth behind abolition last article and inasmuch stated that no philanthropic goodwill should be attributed to the end of slavery. Human rights were reduced to tatters in order to fortify the needs of burgeoning commerce. One of the significant causal effects, in addition to labour exploitation, unprecedented spikes in crime and prostitution, was the emergence of numerous social charities. I have written about charities independently before too. If governments were truly set up exclusively for the people, then each charity must be viewed as a breakdown of order that highlights supreme jurisdictional incompetence. Today there are supposedly tens of millions of charitable causes which emphasises the ineptitude of governmental social charters. But there is another side to the conspiracy. Great writers like Dickens rarely (if ever) meaningfully expose the indelible link between charity and trade. Charities usually place funds in the care of the banking system available to purchase goods or services before converting them into “aid”. Funds not needed “in the field” are invariably locked into attractive interest bearing long term deposits. British “custodian of charities” (a corporate collective catering for tens of thousands of organisations) used to be listed second place below British Telecom at the stock exchange, so it is a lucrative cash cow.

Dickens’ squint vision is enough to convince me he worked for the overlords. Why else would have he been allowed to make fame and fortune? If his writings had viciously attacked “the system”, no one would know of them today. Without doubt his “hallmark” powerfully creative style made endorsement decision making easy. His deeply human approach surely would have been considered gravy topping by his endorsers. For example, “A Christmas Carol” (or “Scrooge”) did highlight the plight of the working classes, but the manner as to how merchants and those that governed exploited working classes was matter of fact, the way things are. In effect, Dickens ended up posthumously begging for charity from his betters. That was the limit of his militancy. Indeed, in the Victorian age knowing your place had been a very long standing belief attached to birth provenance (i.e. the result of karmic deliverance). Perhaps this is why he was allowed to paint such a bleak picture. Other of his novels feature “poor houses” (paid slavery) and debtors’ prisons, so it would be unfair not to lightly applaud aspects of his pioneering effort towards social conscience.

In fact he was far from the only dissenting voice of that era. Beginning with comparatively humble numbers from the late eighteenth century onward, by high Victorian times published attacks on “the system” had just about reached fever pitch. A significant side effect to all this is worth exploring. There have been many revisions of the English Bible, from the seventh century AD. A formal Revised Standard Version of the New Testament was first published in 1881 and this was largely a consequence of inertia of “social conscience movements” (notably who were alarmed by the excess of prostitution) in my opinion. British politicians such as William Gladstone expressed their dedication to God (apparently regularly administering sermons to fallen women), although it seems ironic that these individuals have been responsible for imposing some of the most acrid and draconian legislation on the people.

Cultivation of various popular “beacons of hope” was burgeoning commerce’s key strategy investment geared to combating radical dissent in such forms as suffrage protest. Christmas Santa was one such icon. It seems to me that it has been no accident seasonal spirit appears to engage commerce at any opportunity. In that capacity, Santa is the Christmas star perched on a commerce peak. Dickens’ criticism of Scrooge’s lack of commercial goodwill by not paying staff adequately empowered seasonal trading. For lack of better words, when [otherwise] slaves are affluent enough, they can buy more goods and chattel to ensure business perpetually booms. Broadsheets promoted charitable initiatives favouring trade long before the US republic (1789) was established. Santa, by hook or by crook, became a convenient figurehead or mascot. However, review of naming protocols places dark questions regards the ethics and ambitions of those that pioneered the Grotto cult. There is more to Santa Claus than is obvious.

Far from being a saviour, he has been known to splinter families consumed by obsessive greed. Those without funds sufficient for merriment (as Dickens bitterly highlights) are ostracised by “goodwill”. There is a giant clue as to why this is so, but I first need to provide a little background before I detail it. My other website offers many articles that cover esoteric and paranormal affairs. Coincidentally Satan was the feature of one long essay there. I say coincidentally because it is fairly well known that Santa also happens to be an anagram of Satan. In normal circumstances one would put the fact down to quirks of language, but can we be sure connections are accidental or arbitrary here?

Explanations will become a little complex because I first need to allay popular confusion over origins and meaning of Satan. In fact, while I am about it, I may as well cover doppelganger Lucifer too. Satan, for instance, is a very ancient term that stretches back long prior to Atlantis. Sanskrit is the closest dialect I have found representative of the “universal” first language that failed to survive Atlantis’ downfall (hinted at in biblical Genesis’ Tower of Babel). In that regard, perhaps all words were originally collective monotones and, with this in mind, Satan conveniently breaks into “sat” and “an”. In Sanskrit pronunciation reflectively impacts word values, so “sat” and “an” could each be attributed to mean many different things. Therefore, in the interest of correctness, I have had to draw on inherent sources to establish compelling historic and interpretative basis from considerations.

“An” is the easy part. Several ancient tongues use the syllable to signify “Almighty God”. In combination with Almighty God, various meanings of “sat” might satisfy differing wider metaphoric interpretations. Though the fact appears to have escaped surviving chronicles, Satan was the first star to ever bless the cosmos (actually initially revered as the Blessed Star). All stars deliver light. In spiritual context, light is sometimes called logos (which is the Greek word for information). Spiritually, “logos” extends way beyond mere information. It is the essence of truthful purity or, in other words, the word of God. “Sat” is the Sanskrit equivalent of this conceptualisation. Lucifer admirably compares. That name derives from the Latin and means “light” (lux) “standard” (fer). Morning Star (Lucifer) competing with the sun (Ra) as it rises based on biblical Isaiah’s (an unrepentant Pharisee) radical sermon is generally regarded as the significant origin of the usage.

Also worthy of mention, Akhenaten’s Amon (usually erroneously referred to as Amen) conspicuously forms an “Almighty God” (A-n) sandwich casing “m’o” (divine record) filling. Thus, strictly speaking Satan, Lucifer and Amon/Amen all mean the same thing (more or less), which is bringer of good news. Actually, wasn’t that what they called Jesus too? Nevertheless, I have explained elsewhere how the general message over time has been twisted into opposite meanings by miscreants with rogue agendas. Today the direct effect is both Satan and Lucifer have been reversed from bringers of good news to evil omens. Specifically, Satan [in Hebrew tongue] simply means accuser. The development of Satan as “the tempter” did not emerge until the late sixteen century, though attributing philosophies were clearly embedded in Martin Luther’s earlier rhetoric. Luther (himself a Jesuit) strongly influenced contemporary masonic alliances. Masonry is not the sinister cabal delineated by superstition. Merchants would normally associate themselves with one group or another in order to network out of trading necessity. The massively beneficial spin off was it made collusion and coordinated commerce strategies possible.

Not all collaborations were gracious. When stakes were high, gross acts of tyranny or injustice were sometimes deemed “end justifying”. One such conspiracy toppled Britain’s constitutional monarch Charles I, who was beheaded on 30th January 1649 as a consequence. Even so, after that atrocious standard had been set, beginning with his son puppet king Charles II’s reinstatement, the universal demise of sovereign royal power is probably best marked by Catherine “the Great” (no wonder they call her great) of Russia’s turbulent reign. Violent anarchism was an offshoot of that operation. Since Michael Romanov’s (nephew of Ivan the Terrible) 1613 accession to the Russian throne, there had always been disturbance with Cossack settlers (displaced Polish serfs who termed themselves “free men”). In accordance, numerous popular uprisings against authorities have been reported from 1591. Out of all these, it is the 1768 Ukrainian (Koliyivshchyna) religious massacre that probably most pertinently marks an authority shift. Reputation says killing was sparked by Catherine the Great’s “Golden Charter” (1765) which enabled retired colonel and cleric Maksim Zalizniak’s ambitions. Their joint mission was dedicated to purging Catholics and other religious minorities.  Politically correct historians are quick to denounce the Golden Charter (which also targeted Jews) as “utter fantasy” in order to preserve the queen’s “spotless” reputation.

Encyclopaedia Britannica’s first edition is dated 1770. From 1770-75 Russia is proclaimed the world’s greatest nation. By 1776 she may as well have been a sickly dog.  Many theories attribute reasons leading to the country’s downfall, but it seems to me that government ownership of the Orthodox Church from 1721 marked the beginning of the end so to speak. Post revolution “Communist” Jew Leon Trotsky’s unrelenting all-reaching attack on that administration was certainly no coincidence. Populations had been galvanised by the church. Replace it with alternative convenient social apparatus and you have society in your pocket. Russians were (and perhaps still are) extremely parochial and rather superstitious. This is well highlighted by the way they celebrate Christmas. According to legend, Babouschka (old woman or granny) misled the three kings (search for Christ) by giving the wrong directions. The Russian birth date for “Jesus’” is 6th January but festivities honour Babouschka’s eternal regret for her deceit.

Historians might convincingly argue fledgling United States of America’s journey to superpower status began in 1776 (phoenix rising from mother Russia’s ashes?). Constitutional democracy ended in 1789 when the republic (in Philistine Greece and Italy’s wake?) was formed (and currency changed), but it took until 1864 (ushering in the 14th Amendment to the constitution) for government to be reduced to a corporation. Commerce was the primary reason the United States was formed but it took the best part of a century (1776-1864) for satanic agents to exact their full plan. Today all governments (and their tax offices) are corporations and that is why the modern world is held to ransom by merchant bankers. I find it mildly ironic that it is in the powers’ best interests for people to “wake up” to truth which is of next to no advantage to egregious saviours’ causes. This suggests, at the very least, that all (or the majority of) revolution philosophies have been sponsored by the precise same powers that impose tyranny. These false rites of passage were sponsored because the deceivers knew they were guaranteed dead ends.

To define true evil, I regularly reference a quote attributed to the great sage Krishna “Spirituality (impetus behind creation) brings to freedom, whereas forces of evil paralyse”. What better way to paralyse than by introducing appealing commerce. Humanity would not be able to resist aiding and abetting the devil (d-evil). I don’t refer to the satisfaction of genuine “needs” here, although commerce can accommodate those too. No, here I exclusively identify non-essential extras; frills of commerce. Some argue that the introduction of pomp surrounding royalty (which has endured so long) is pointless. Lemurian monarchs for periods that precede historic record were visually indistinguishable from the people. Very ancient kings were blessed with God-like powers. They could be distinguished by deed. Today certainly, beyond their overstated assigned status and privileged upbringing, royals are no different to the everyman. At Christmas, pomp and celebration of non-essential extras is now encapsulated by iconic smirking Santa which suggests it is those behind commerce that crafted the whole idea of aristocratic superiority.

Is the clue in Santa’s name; perfect anagram of Satan? By the time of this red frocked (isn’t the devil usually depicted coloured red?) tempter’s universal notoriety, negative connotations of Satan were firmly entrenched. Indeed, so much so no one had heard of the Blessed Star (in relation to the creation of our universe) by then. Such is the case today as well of course. I presented some detail in relation to the truth (and reasoning behind it) that negative Satan was actually originally the mispronunciation of “Saturn” (from medieval times, although I think this reflects attitudes under Prophet Zoroaster thousands of years before) in this article. “Design” of Santa appears to vaguely follow the Babylonian Horus myth. Indestructible God could only be chopped up and hidden. In this instance “An” has been remorselessly sliced in two, “n” crudely wedged between “sa” and “t”. “A” brings up the rear and represents perennial impotence of spirituality under Santa’s spell. God is vanquished (decapitated) and his wisdom (sat) corrupted.

But for Babouschka, Christmas (Epiphany) would be mostly a hangover from the Pagan era. Evergreen trees (in particular) represent celebration of the winter solstice. From time memorial, tradition has always seen exchange of gifts, but pagans honoured their harvest, so communities would contribute fresh fruits and vegetables for the benefit of society. “The Feeding of Five Thousand” New Testament parable was scripted by Mark (or Marcus, a Roman aristocrat) and therefore one should question its purpose all the more. Though communal sharing of fish and loaves suggests so, it is unlikely Jesus (Josephus) ever administered a true harvest festival dedicated to the winter solstice. The Romans, on the other hand, did worship solar cycles. Sun-day is a tribute to that legacy. Per context, the alert may struggle to fathom why I bother to discuss this now, given Jesus’ notorious “Jewish” status. Let me explain why. Long prior to Roman involvement, Judaism had split in two. City folks followed autocratic regimes promulgated by those generally known as Pharisees. It is a style of “order” remains alive and well today, underpinning up-to-date management of global affairs. Back then remote, displaced tribes were guided by (what the right-wingers’ would term) superstitious philosophies which prepared for different “ways of life”.

Their brand of raw spirituality was in fact encapsulated by the essence of numerous of splinter groups and these had journeyed out to the four corners of the globe in search of paradise (colloquially referred to as Promised Land). One such autonomy was the foundation of ancient druids (not even vaguely similar to garish abuse, late eighteenth century neo-druidism). Rural “Essene” Jews were labelled Gnostics for a while. Though historians remember it as a new tradition from the time of Jesus, it is likely the 570BC exodus to Ireland (Promised Land designate) consisted of likeminded parties of anti-Levite (Pharisaic law makers) “revolutionaries”. These embers of civilisation plausibly could have “morphed into” the later druidic tradition, made more notorious by Avalon (spiritual centre and first mystery school?), which is located in southern England. If memory serves me correctly, America’s Pilgrim Fathers formally constituted a southern English gathering in search of purity. The point I am trying to make is there has been a persisting religious dichotomy ever since man reflected on his divinity. Judaism, God forbid, is probably one of the better examples of that

Celebration of the solstices seems a likely component of Gnostic tradition. Unfortunately, other than newly found (and possibly censored) bundles of esoteric texts hidden in Dead Sea catacombs and other discreet places, evidence of that faith was destroyed long ago. Neo-druids make a big hullaballoo over solstice traditions whereas I suspect the Gnostics treated these occasions as opportunities to educate. What better way to manufacture goodwill while celebrating nature could there be than a harvest festival? The idea of community sharing for everyone’s benefit is instilled in “The Feeding of Five Thousand” parable. Did Mark’s account confuse a solstice event? Perhaps we’ll never know, but, per context, the fish and loaves are distinct spiritual symbols and shouldn’t be viewed liberally. Celts (original druids) in particular revered divinity as something directly attributed to creative potence. They determined that all life came from primordial waters (something modern science propagandises?). If primordial waters constitute God’s physicality, then fishes’ mastery of oceans must be inspirationally hallowed. The Lord’s Prayer “praises God for our daily bread”.

Tribes, such as those that became the druids, who didn’t revere pharisaic order, separated and found new havens (free of tyranny) to root. It is difficult to pinpoint the precise transition which is the branch that became modern day Judaism. Hebrew was originally a cut down cosmic script. For instance, additional unknown letters are occasionally seen interspersed with Hebrew on downed alien spaceships’ insignia. It is known that today’s long standing Yiddish culture backed off New Hebrew because Old Hebrew was insufficient for competent business communication. The “pointing” of Hebrew text (which in practicality adjusts for a new language) possibly coincided with first world universal adoption of stamped currency (legal tender). Accurate dates are deliberately vague on origins of pointing; maybe 12th, 13th or 14th century depending on opinions. Does this vainly cover up the Khazarian Yiddish pact emanated from the Ukraine? As an aside, though the Ukraine is sometimes volunteered, it could not have possibly ever been fabled Khazaria as that land mass is submerged under oceans today. There is however compelling innuendo that posits for a plausible case recommending the Ukraine is viewed as the motherland by certain estranged Pharisees.

Few bother to even attempt to comprehend the severe civil consequences of legal tender. Enslaved populations are the product of oppressive and tyrannous welfare states which cannot exist unless supported by currency. Therefore, industrialist vipers initially introduced serfdom gradually, confusing the “free” into believing that this was an effect of their zealous benevolence. Once everyone was “captured”, oligarchs expanded traditional uses of prisons for purposes of “containing” those whom they did not want to socially enable (crude justifications supported by laws came later). Bonded slavery became the only viable social security option for those displaced by war, famine or for other reasons.

Truth surrounding vile treachery of the Magna Carta (marking the point at which silver currency exploded) is obscured by cheery tales of Robin Hood and his band of crafty thugs. As a treaty, it wasn’t a charter of goodwill towards the people. It in fact was open theft of free lands and the negotiated common rights of man. Courtesy of the Magna Carta, the vast majority of our modern populations could not live off the land effectively now, even if we were forced to do so and that is why industrialists lord over the document’s prowess so heartily. Rich or poor, mighty or lowly, we have all by some measure been transformed into slaves of currency. They say money makes the civilised world go round. That is why those with the most money invariably have all the privileges.

Where it came from God only knows, but there is a tragic old wives’ tale that supposes the ills of humanity are the fault of the Midas effect. Those with wealth are singled out as evil doers even though everyone (without exception) is greedy (sometimes euphemised as will to survive). The humble do not know extravagance so they neither desire nor solicit it. Most elites merely exploit human nature to the hilt, though they may not be fully cognisant of the fact. The reason Santa has become so popular is he epitomises the averice of the masses. That is more than amply highlighted in Charles Dickens’ “A Christmas Carol”. Goodwill is leveraged to such effect that crippled “Tiny Tim” deserves to have the litter of his family’s desires steeped on him at Christmas for merely existing. Of course this selfish anthem ignores those hard to rectify gaping double standards. Why would “rich” Scrooge bestow gifts on relative strangers in place of his own loved ones? The real issue, how Tiny Tim’s father persevered under such irresponsible employment terms, is not discussed.

Well, they didn’t have unions then”, screams a heckler

Incorrect, but it will take an eternity for sovereign man to grow a backbone. The power of labour values ironically has always been very much in the hands of the people. If everyone refused work and put death as the preference over slavery, currency would have been rendered valueless from conception and commerce would have never commenced (in the known sense). From the point currency was introduced, a utopian objective has been to shackle the broad masses. Peer group infiltration and targeted populism were the chosen control strategies (branded psyops) used to fulfil the objective. From the day men communicated with each other, money (cuts of silver, gold talents, precious beads) and other arbitrary tokens of value have always been used to supplement barter trade.

Currency is different. Units are stamped by (and the overriding possession of) an administrative authority. Originally that would have been a constitutional royal. Now stock ownership is hybrid. Who is this Federal Reserve? Those that use the merchandise are subject to governing philosophies and rules. A dollar cannot morph into a million units of value because “someone” decides this is so, whereas administrative overseers might revalue a dollar if they decided the act was politically expedient. Germany’s inflation was a deliberate act. Other competing paper currencies were only partially backed by gold, but the illustrious Federal Reserve turned a blind eye. Whilst apparently contractually bound as servants (polite word for slaves) of government, they were able to turn a blind eye because they own all “backed” circulated money.

Wholesale cash enterprises were developed first by the Greeks and then by the Romans, even though the oldest surviving currency (assuming science is correct) originates from Russia. Subsequent European coinage values were extensions of the Roman legacy. It would be hard to formally prove (particularly as reference maps show Philistinia approximates the modern Palestinian territory region), but logic supposes that the Greeks and Romans were descendants of relocated Philistines (tall pale skinned warriors). Retreating from defeat by Babylonian Pharaoh and “Jewish” King David, Philistines first settled in Greece (on the doorstep of the Middle East). Since “great” Alexander’s conquest to rule the world ran out of steam, Greek politics apparently favoured secular complacency over global conquest. Hamstrung industrialists shifted their affairs to Italy and, over several centuries, built sufficient military infrastructure to commit to their globalist ambitions once more.

Incidentally, not at all Middle Eastern in appearance, then Babylonian peoples would have been classed as “Caucasians” by today’s sciences. Therefore notorious King David would have been a white man. Though only circumstantial evidence supports claims he was a Pharaoh, inherent sources advise me information is relatively accurate (i.e. the wrong pharaoh is referenced as culprit), which places grave questions as to the authenticity behind the popular legacy of Israel of course. History is far from circumspect here. For example those dreadful “Greek” Hyksos Kings that “conveniently” appeared to take rule when Babylon was lacking authority were likely Philistines, yet Josephus eerily reports them as Israelites. I say these were the first usurpers; these were Pharisees who support a fabricated Levite Alta ego.

By deduction, this would mean the “great” Caesar was a Philistine as well. Limited writings about him present a grave paradox. According to surviving texts, he was some kind of popular miracle working Ben Hur. Such are the qualities of his proposed divinity; some might rightly be compelled to believe he was Jesus. Of course this adds to the case that persuades Mark was a Roman aristocrat who cast Jesus in the Homeric style, perhaps even as an attempt to preserve the image of Caesar. The evocation would have made both instantly popular figures even if real lives didn’t quite live up to the reputation. Infiltration of peer groups and targeted populism is achieved in one fell swoop. More evidence is as follows. Peer group infiltration is embodied by Mark “Iscariot’s” treacherous conversion to Gnosticism (and later St Paul’s Damascus Road epiphany). There is no more popular false occult icon than Jesus.

Prognosis therefore is depressingly melancholy. Beyond the use of occasional repeated proverbs, not a single book found in the New Testament even vaguely resembles authentic Essene philosophy, including “John”. Scholars that first take the plunge and brave any of the Dead Sea Scrolls’ codexes are quick to notice the profound intellectual depth of content (making embedded philosophies extraordinarily hard to interpret correctly). Gospel writer Mark was Roman, Luke Greek and Matthew was a cosmopolitan Jew and obvious agent of the Pharisees. Enigmatic John didn’t exist, but the name (in its use) implies “God’s secretary”. His, the Fourth Gospel, was dictated by Josephus (as Jesus) through brother-in-law scribe Lazarus. One word only of Jesus’ personal volume has survived. Someone (perhaps many) in authority knows the truth about this.

Jesus’ own gospel was purposefully destroyed and the celebrated surviving second century papyrus was not a copy. It is a forgery. If it had been authentic, how could the document have dodged Philistine Constantine’s mighty fourth century purge?  Outright censorship of texts that contradicted or impeded Sol Invictus faith was the only literary amnesty of his inquisition. Catholicism’s Papacy was the removed Roman monarchy; therefore it was also yet another Philistine/Pharisee offshoot. The reason St Paul (author of New Testament Corinthians, Romans and so on) is occasionally recognised as the first pope (and last apostle) is to give his detestable writings (which smother any occasional glint “free of Romanisation” emulating the conscience of Jesus) greater credibility (and popularity, of course). Paul’s calculated role generally seems to suggest sour grapes after good times gone awry. Should the “Ideal” Jesus have gracefully “wallpapered” the uncomfortable political “marriage” between the Pharisees and de facto Royalty?

Look, I’m not sure when the Sanhedrin originally came into being or whether it really matters, but I notice a familiar pattern with “world affairs” stretching back at least the most part of two and a half thousand years. History informs me the Romans conquered lands located in the region now called the Middle East. Their haul included Israel (conquered by Assyrians centuries before). A consequence of one of the first acts of power was to usher in hybrid Arab (ethic nomads that roamed Aram or were these Assyrians or even Phoenicians?) royals to rule over Judea (separatist Southern Israel). First “despot” of the official Promised Land Moses (who compares well against England’s Oliver Cromwell) never referred to arbitrary bodies when making decisions. Tradition (after the burning bush) revered him as the direct link to God. All great prophet kings follow identical protocol, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Noah and the rest. Their decisions were their own and these “commandments” were a testament upholding their uniformly breath taking “greatness”. Nevertheless, when the Sanhedrin (or royal court) emerged sovereign rule was doomed to wither. Under Israel’s Roman occupation, that evolution was furiously ignited.

Though government is meant to be a mix of identities that reflect the goodwill of society, by reputation decision making almost always errs towards right wing (fascist) mindset. Values imposed by Sanhedrin courts depressingly crafted that motif

Reflecting on contemporary politics of Jesus’ age, overbearing Roman authority paid lip service to the whims of their puppet Arab monarchs provided they observed all the wishes of the Pharisees (who took the high seat in the Sanhedrin). That said, certain Roman emperors didn’t see things their way. Look how these (such as Caligula and Nero) have been “painted” (i.e. utter fabrication) by “history”. Judea was abandoned (allegedly) after the 66-69AD siege of Jerusalem (a chain reaction sparked by earlier infractions under Nero). Within moments of the exodus a new fully fledged “Christian” hierarchy pops up in Alexandria. Infrastructure is so strong; its governing church is effectively born as a corporation. Therefore, transferring authority to Constantinople was child’s play after the papacy was formally established in the late fourth century.

Emergence of this virgin Catholic Church exactly coincides with the shocking disappearance of the great Roman Empire. Over several centuries, the same Catholic Church made a bee-line to exert control over every single credible European monarchy. This is more than amply highlighted by records of battles against the Merovingian kings, which included the calculated murder of Dagobert II. The Catholic Church had become (by accident or design) a sort of universal Sanhedrin, which is made all the more interesting because the Jewish version abandoned its administrative authority after the second temple (though some argue it never existed) was “allegedly” levelled by fire. Thus far I have contemplated numbers of suggestions that could never be “proven”, but could it be argued the Nicolaitans were instrumental at re-establishing the defunct Sanhedrin apparatus in Constantinople?

There is more fuel for the fire, if we move the clock forward a bit. King Henry VIII of England did the unthinkable in 1534. After a bitter divorce with Spanish royal Catherine of Aragon, he excommunicated the pope and formed his own Church of England. That is why the vicious catholic versus protestant wars persisted long after his death. Thomas Moore chose death in absence of moral sovereignty, but the rot had begun to set in long before, even while bonny Henry was still in power. The Roman “Sanhedrin” had only been temporarily usurped by the monarch. It wasn’t long before Henry was surrounded by pious advisors, such as prominent “world’s richest man” Cardinal Woolsey. Only a smidgen over a century after Henry’s desperate act, pharisaic authorities decided they needed to well and truly shore things up (and claim deserved revenge). This culminated with the execution death of Charles I in 1649 mentioned earlier, of course.

For the first time in history (unlike the Greek and Roman Republics before) a civilian government shielded power beneath “protector” Cromwell, but fame went to his head and he proved more deistic than any king. That is the ostensive reason behind the government’s swift (1660) re-establishment of the British monarchy, which remains intact today. It was deemed an essential safety measure against any parochial ruling authority. King William’s 1696 rushed though Bill of Rights amply acknowledges the viperous nature of man (particularly when given responsibility). To the best of my knowledge, every subsequent constitution (such as America’s) has built in its own bill of rights. For the record, though we have been programed to believe that royal executive power was devoid of peer oversight prior to corporate takeover, the myth simply isn’t true. Monarchs were presumed appointed by God (perhaps after Moses) and, as such, bound to honour their constituents. Suffice to say some kings turned out more attentive than others. That in mind, when factoring in the emergence of outsourced legislation via organs such as the Sanhedrin, the deep question I find rather hard to resolve is “who was the last true king?”

Who is the rightful king is important. Gospel writer Matthew’s biblical genealogy was aimed at promoting Jesus as the hereditary Messiah (priest-king or “Christ” subject to certain terms and conditions), but was it David or Zechariah (Jesus’ uncle) that established precedence? Zechariah was not a pharaoh nor did he have any conceivably legitimate claim to Babylonian rule. Pharaoh David set up the twenty four priestly branches (spawning king making material) that were each to be deemed valid natural contenders for the Jewish throne. It seems to me that without intimate understanding of David or any of the many hierarchical values that bestowed him with power, ignorance over what substantiates “royalty” from pedestrian “rank and file” will perennially reign. Usurpers naturally capitalise on this schism. Indeed, the truth would be enough to bring down their phoney baloney house of cards.  Dissenting historians irregularly report of the wisdom of the Oannes, but where is it to be found now?

Jesus is fantasy, a marketing brand that coordinates a very special historic period. He was the event which preceded Philistine formal grasp of absolute power. Therefore, modern traditions that prepare a muted, ineffective “Saviour” emphasise corporate will to control (Scrooge had absolute autonomy over directions of conscience). In other words, when the huddled masses are suitably impoverished and hope lacking, their only alternative is to turn to corporate commerce (big government) for succour. That is predominantly why the “machine” has relentlessly pushed a socialist agenda over the last hundred years or so. Now the hundred years is up, we are very close to “end game”. Australia’s prime minister is a billionaire (or so rumour has it). America’s president Trump is a tycoon. America is the first “first world” country. Australia is the last “first world” dominion. This tells anyone that understands the “code” that the oligarch’s are now brash enough to boast “we’ve won and there’s nothing [you] the people can do about it”.

I have written about the truth behind Jesus “the person” at length before, but it is worth repeating additional detail again to bring some extra clarity to this essay. Anagrammatised Josephus equates to “give birth to Jesus” in Latin tongue. It is such a clever anagram; “metaphor” is implied through use of letters P, H and O. I am also aware that “J” is obsolete so, in this case, whatever normally replaces it works just as well. One of the apocryphal books casts the young Jesus so well educated in theological matters it is presumed he was the son of a High Priest. Josephus’ father was Matthias Joseph, a High Priest of the 24th line from David (i.e. as illustrated earlier, royal blood). Militant Jesus attacking money changers at the temple was so contextually uncharacteristic, whoever it was clearly wasn’t preaching Jesus (isn’t it “odd” that Philistine Catholicism forbade money lending entirely on those grounds and this legitimised Jewish banking, coincidence?). Sermon on the Mount from Matthew’s Gospel presents a pensively angry prophet, but not a violent one. My inherent sources report that the young militant man was none other than Jesus’ (or, rather, Josephus’) father (who also used the codename Barabbas).

According to these sources, in his youth, Matthias Joseph joined the revolutionary movement and was impassioned by the royal cause against Roman tyranny. Because Arab puppet kings met most (if not all) of the Pharisees’ wishes, Zealots (as these revolutionaries became known) were doubtlessly not too fond of the extreme right-wing establishment either. This presents a problem for those determined to rationalise the truth, which is embroiled in politics that are quite complicated. To extend my observation of the young revolutionary Barabbas who attacked the money changers, he was arrested and convicted of a serious offense. Theologians that have bothered to study contemporary Roman law almost universally agree that Jesus did nothing (as visually evident in the numerous religious records) to warrant arrest, less crucifixion. Roman Philistines did impose very harsh penalties (up to death) on any party that disrupted the supply chain (commerce). Moneychangers at the temple would have provided commercial supply and they were undeniably [violently] disrupted by Barabbas (under pseudonym).

The physical crucifixion event (per its convenient placement in various New Testament writings) was used metaphorically. I shall discuss metaphorical terms shortly. For now, let me focus on the event. Some have noted that the crucifixion was conducted on private land, which was unusual. In Jesus’ case, this would imply that Barabbas was either extremely rich, well connected or both. The land, we learn, belonged to prominent local business man Joseph of Arimathea, whose international business holdings were reputedly centred at Cornwall, England (Gnostic-Druid heartland). Josephus’ scribe was Lazarus, son of Joseph of Aramithea. Jesus’ “wife” was Mary Magdalene, Lazarus’ sister, so there are logical family connections here. As Miriam (Mary) has rather negative connotations (suggesting bereavement) in ancient Hebrew, it is not widely used. Mary, on the other hand was a very popular contemporary Roman given name, particularly in royal circles, as it bestowed heritage. Given this background, I am already questioning whether there was an actual crucifixion, whether the event was purely metaphorical? Ancient chroniclers were afforded great liberty in the way they expressed themselves. Therefore knowing how to read between the lines correctly is the key to understanding hallowed texts.

Before I discuss validity of the crucifixion in more depth, I need to make a few more associated observations. Presumption Mary Magdalene was never called Miriam suggests she was prominent Roman offspring. Could this mean the Joseph of Aramithea had taken a Roman Philistine wife? Was she of royal lineage (hence selecting Mary as the given name for her daughter)? I am compelled to believe that she would have been extremely important for Joseph to be on first name terms with Pontius Pilate, Roman Governor of Judea. Turning to Inherent sources once more, I am informed that a royal marriage was brokered between Barabbas (Jesus’ father) and another Mary. If, as some scholars like to posit, Jesus was a family member of the Piso emperor class, that lineage could only have come via his mother (as his father was a Jewish royal). Should this prove sufficiently correct, it would explain why the Catholic Church gives the Madonna such bloated “eternal” status against puny “dead” Jesus on the cross. Congregations from all over the globe flock to touch her miracle working effigies.

Presuming a marriage had been brokered between “Mary” (euphemistically known as mother of Jesus) and Matthias Joseph (father of Josephus who “gave birth to” and was literal Jesus), contemporary politics would have been revolutionised (endorsing the Pharisees’ political intrigue). In conjunction, the undeniably hard to resolve question is “why did the Pharisees back clemency in favour of Barabbas (father of Jesus)?” unless there is more to solving the puzzle than meets the obvious eye.  Does this suggest that Jesus was a recalcitrant heir (hinted at in the Prodigal Son parable)? If Matthias Joseph was an integral part of the establishment, then Josephus almost certainly defied the wishes of the father. Failure of his preaching tour in the Nazareth region highlights the discontentment. Nazareth, at the time, was a hub for the well-to-do and privileged classes, so naturally political preferences erred towards hard-line right-wing philosophies. One can but presume that Matthias Joseph, as the bastion of civilised society and honoured revolutionary, had strong ties to religious order (i.e. the Pharisees). Josephus was comparatively Bohemian (again implied in the Prodigal Son parable).

Whilst alien to traditional Gnostic writings, all Gospels identify Jesus as a renegade preacher who associated with undesirables (“outcasts”). He is both against the rooted establishment (though quotes from “Law” at every opportunity) and oppressed civilisation (measuredly). Socialist content embedded in sermons would fare so well, proverbs have been adopted by modern day democracy movements. Courtesy of his royal status, Josephus did have friends in high places that shielded him, but they were still pillars of mundane society that were forced to corrupt certain values to remain in power (and use aliases when assisting renegade causes). This is perhaps casually camouflaged by Jesus’ association with outcasts (inwardly well meaning, but outwardly dishonest). Therefore modern day belief in “the Saviour” relies on corrupt zeal. Zeal, in turn, has transformed into a fanaticism cultivated by corporate religions. Individual beliefs are singular matters of faith, whereas idolatries become authorities for those that chose to apply “so called” blind faith (a grotesque form of ignorance).

Individual beliefs must be questioned to improve constancy, whereas determined authority erodes opportunity for zealous fidelity

Jesus would share Josephus’ birth year of 37AD, unless historic accuracy is obscured here. There are niggling problems with this date particularly when factoring in the most practical chronology allowing for his two and a half year ministry. The Siege of Jerusalem is the obvious choice as a correlating time period which I would say is the only plausible term of upheaval within range significant enough to profitably bolster a prophetic preacher’s missionary tour. His audience would have predominantly been Jews recoiling from ever widening Roman reprisals. Under such conditions, the siege must have been deemed the “final straw”. Adding to my case, Jesus’ journey has been retraced by geographical experts. Median chronology fits against the siege timeline like a glove, therefore I deduce the ministry ran from 64-66AD and that is why the first Gospel by Mark was published sometime after 68AD (long enough to source witnesses, conduct interviews, correlate notes, write, edit and publish a manuscript). There was no oral period as has been “supposed”, because it made no sense anyway. The contemporary Jewish connotation of what was meant by “Messiah” (then) is very different to the hybrid evolution (distortion) that prepares our modern day Catholic sacrificial Son of God “Christos” (or Christ) who “died for our sins”.

Considering proximity against the siege, details of Josephus’ geographic movements do appear to cultivate the “swashbuckler dodging authorities” narrative line. That’s why Jerusalem under siege was last stop – a fait accompli. According to Matthew’s Gospel, one of Jesus’ first acts (after collecting his posse of disciple bodyguards) was to request baptism from his cousin John (son of Zechariah). Traditionally a Jew reached maturity at age thirty, yet was the 37AD birthdate to be correct, then Josephus would have been twenty seven years old if the chronological positioning was accurate. Although the Roman equivalent was age twenty five, there is another explanation. Hebrew chroniclers did not necessarily place events in correct historic order. Prosperity very much justified the means. It seems more likely, in which case, that Jesus was baptised at the end of his ministry when he had built experience worthy of exalted blessing. Authority did not make purges against perceived threats until after the siege (identifying why there was a rapid exodus away from the region directly after 70AD). That is when John the Baptist (contender for the Jewish throne) would have lost his head. Josephus was only spared from the inquisition because of his royal Roman blood.

Mentioned earlier, Jesus was not crucified as there was nothing he did that could justify the punishment under Roman law.  His father, under the pseudonym Barabbas, may have gone through a ceremonial or mock crucifixion. Perhaps others followed suit, such as Simon of Cyrene, to honour the event. Ambiguous Turin Shroud (under care of the Catholic Church – that should instantly raise alarm bells) is a prop designated to fool believers. Beyond doubt, the item belonged to Jacques De Molay Grand Master of the Knights Templar, though only Michael Baigent has had the courage to attest truth in his mainstream publication (Holy Blood, Holy Grail 1982) for my research. Following Molay’s heresy conviction (under Catholicism), he was crucified (1314) in a manner that traced details laid out in the New Testament texts.

Metaphorically, depending on the event’s positioning, in the biblical context, the crucifixion represents the death of Gnosticism, whereas resurrection equals triumphant rebirth in the form of Christianity. The very earliest brand is likely to be Arianism. We can see the stem of Arian-ism is Arian or Aryan, so this should volunteer major questions from the alert. Didn’t Hitler worship a mythical Aryan race? In fact, of all the ancient (pre-biblical) races “Ceres” is the type that most closely represents Ayran characteristics. Significantly, Aryans are attributed to be pure Atlantis stock (alien genes were added to replenish humanity after the fall). This fits the overall picture, because traditions (including a weight of generally unrecorded information referenced from inherent sources) suggest the Gnostics went to extraordinary lengths in their attempts to rekindle Atlantis society. Some of their more sacred traditions, which included embedded magic (notably applied by practitioners of authentic Druidism and, hence, the elites’ interest in attending the mystery schools), predate known civilisation.

It could be argued that the whole concept of monachal divinity was ushered in by Atlantis. Accoutrements include the royal sceptre, which authentic versions are magic healing wands doubling as laser weapon. Bona fide royal orbs are holographic truth generators. A king’s crown bestowed the wearer with supernatural powers. Gnostics (visually expressed in the culture of Babylonian pharaohs) tried to approximate traditions as closely as possible. Below the Atlantis umbrella, society was guided by God who assumed formal presence in human form (i.e. this notion derived into “son of God”). As far as I can ascertain, Atlantis Gods were normally male, but on (or inside) other worlds, females preside over divinity. Per alien custom, these strange Goddesses are usually escorted by what we would call “prince consorts” (heirs or court champions’ suffice). Perhaps this is why some detailed truthful accounts tabled in ancient legends come across as ludicrously farcical.  We humans know only the human way. Therefore, non-human cultures are destined to either shock the system or captivate imagination.

In the interest of clarity, Gnostic-Jewish belief supposed the messianic priest-king (Christ) was the blessed divine embodiment of the people and that is why Jesus is euphemised as the Son of God. Even so many [differing and sometimes contradictory] messages can be delivered by a single fragment of text. Researchers should assure themselves a purist’s Messiah’s wisdom would put Solomon’s childish antics in their place. Ridiculous emphasis on the Pharisees’ salute to valid laws has ruined any chance of divine virtue governing man. Old Testament sermons dictate a path to enlightenment so rigid, any traveller is guaranteed crippled from the off. That is the reason paradoxes are so plentiful, “issues” seem to loom every few verses. Per these auspices, how could religious traditions be anything other than viscerally dishonest? My heart goes out to Italy’s La Befana . That bonny witch on a broomstick does more for Italian children than any pompous pope could dream.

Advertisements

Israel, Zionist Ambition, ISIS and US Affiliated Connections – Part Two

11059463_873711675999137_4171037146502540332_n

Introduction

Back in May, when the scales tipped over the 5,000 word mark, I decided to break my dissertation on “who’s behind ISIS” into roughly equal parts for ease of reading. It now looks as though all parts (maybe six or more) are destined to be weighty tomes in their own right (considering additional information contained in the numerous external links that complete the account). This segment feels certain to exceed the 5,000 word mark too, but, as the French say, “C’est la vie”. There is some big news, a most important announcement, from a very unusual source which confirms that October 2015 was indeed the trigger of a visceral, synthetic World War III all over possession of Ukraine. That is why Putin has found his way into so many recent headlines.

cowboys-and-indiansSome abettors may asset my criticism of the Ashkenazi, in particular, as overt Racism. Therefore, I need to inform reckless referees that insist on judging the book by the cover only a number of my close friends and associates are Ashkenazi. Let us not demean the creative thought processes to vulgar crassness. No, not all Ashkenazi Jews are Zionists. Most, like everyone else, have been exploited by the few. So let us not stoop to murky depths of Orwellian conspiratorial bipartisanism with bad “labels” agin’ good “trademarks” – “cowboys and Indians”, “cops and robbers” and so on. On the other hand, short of a few very well camouflaged Haredim, there have been next to no vocal protests or otherwise from those that deserve, nay should want, to have their names cleared, my friends and associates included.

POOP Network Commandants

POOP Network Commandants

Regularly, I pick up anonymous compliments of the style “at last there is someone who says it as it is”. The truth comes with barbs too and I have been wounded many times, so if you want to show me some shekels in appreciation, I would be very privileged (Go here for the donation/book purchase links. Oh hell, we missed Hanukah, but be a devil and bless the winter solstice). Let’s face it Israeli politics has been a sorry state of affairs. How could conscientiousness hope to gain any traction with, ex war hawk, Ehud Barak on one side of the Knesset and profoundly active war hawk, “neo-con”, Binjamin Netanyahu, on t’other?

Not only was the first part of this dissertation given an airing by Conscious Life News, but it attracted a vital response by way of comments. I recall one in-tune vocalist proposing ISIS stood for “Israeli Secret Intelligence Service”. Some of those ever present shill’s may have been part of the Professionally Organised Obstructive Persons (POOP) network. That’s not a real thing, by the way, because I just made it up. Formed from combined Sumerian Gods (simulating an ongoing balance of power, discussed later), Israel is very real, though. Everyone knows it is a country, although perhaps some Americans might not have figured it yet (given one time 25% reportedly responding to a pop poll answered that Australia was “somewhere in Europe”). Cruel may it be, but my rule of thumb is nine out of ten can’t tell their arms from their elbows, so, given this breadth, harvesting a crush of comments would expect to reap very few wise gems. Ozzie Thinker makes it clear he is not going to stand for any nonsense, so very little poop finds its way onto this humble sanctuary. Conscious Life News is a whole different kettle of fish, so I was blessed by the response.

www.usnews.comThough, arguably, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is the biggest criminal organisation on the planet, those tireless shadow operatives failed to attract a mention by me in part one, so I will address that complaint first. As this segment is devoted, in part, to the history of the “concept” Israel, it would be unfair of me to shield the CIA’s extraneous relationships with an international cauldron of co-conspirators; most pertinently rogue Israelite agencies, such as Mossad. There seemed to be some confusion as to what was meant by Zionism as, in the xenophobic spirit of national suffering, the Jews have always rather liked the idea of being pledged a promised land.

Ignoring the fact that their selected homelands (and there have been many, not just that dusty Middle Eastern hideaway) always seem to be occupied and deeply loved by existing inhabitants, attachment to one’s homeland is the root of all patriotism. Given the right attitude, patriotic causes can only be regarded as noble and worthy aspirations? Personally, as a Universalist, I do not practice patriotism, but I acknowledge without those distinctive ethnic flavours this world would not be the diverse haven for experiential excellence it is. A more in depth history of Zionism will be addressed next segment.

Central Intelligence Agency: A Zionist Front

Background history

What things become is not always what they were created to be, but it is important to review the background history to understand the issues. It is by no accident that 1789 is a monumentally important shared date demonstrating a pivot change in the direction of politics and management of the people. America became a formal republic (prior it had been a constitutional democracy, but this was nothing like ancient Vaishali) and the French peoples’ revolution catapulted into motion. Except, true historians know it was no peoples’ revolution, but that is a whole nother story for another day. Both also share the unfavourable outcomes that each ultimately, economically, was a monumental disaster.

pic_N_A_Napoleon_BonaparteFrance has always been the last Merovingian stronghold and I feel certain that, had things worked out, a new renaissance Messiah (“Sang Raal” of the Gnostic Jesus/Josephus bloodline) would have made the world stage long ago. Josephus was a Piso and a royal Vespasian, so the Romans have always been included in masonic plans. Imposter, Italian banker’s son, Napoleon Bonaparte was set up and betrayed by the Rothschild syndicate; business as usual?

To understand why the CIA was created, you have to consider the motive behind reestablishing the rogue (I give my case for this later) national state of Israel. Some are confused by the “Promised Land” mythology. Israel is no promised land but, rather, an administrative centre for “order” (Zionist protocols) and principled legislation. Maree Moore is not the only one to identify Ireland was selected as the land of milk and honey, per Moses’ dream (this link is particularly interesting as Eva Draconis’ chronicle of discussions with what she calls “The Orion Beings” outlined “human abductions” were off limits [only] in Denmark against a specified deal with NATO). The Celts, ultimately, proved too strong for the Philistines, so Anglo-Saxons had to settle for England, first.

Lands with “promise”

England expanded to absorb oppressive unions constituting the British Isles which also grabbed a chunk of Ireland for good measure, segregating its peoples (later marked by the Zionist/Rosicrucian, Protestant/Catholic apartheid). Saxons, Moore rightly explains, is a “phonetic” abbreviation of Sac’s sons. Given the natural Irish language is 40% Hebrew, their long established tin mining operations in Cornwall (linked to the Phoenicians) presided over by none other than Joseph of Arimathea at one juncture, the Celtic druids are evidence of a much earlier Jewish exodus.

Indeed, Alexey Trekhlebov makes some interesting points in his book, “Legends of the Phoenix” (2014). According to ancient (Russian – hence Putin’s role play as global corrupt virtuous Saviour)

Little leprechaun Putin

Little leprechaun Putin

Slavic-Aryan wisdom dating back to the first thoughts of man, green eyed red heads were devout spiritualists and made good priests (when religion could be taken seriously), whereas black haired silver-grey eyes denoted a military character. These men made great leaders. Of the two Irish archetypes, one is the Trojan tall, dark haired arrow and the other the mousy, short (often plump) auburn haired, emerald eyed leprechaun. Jewish heritage (long confused by power hungry oligarchs), therefore, must go right back to the days of Atlantis and they presumably have precisely the same roots as the Vedic Russians. mossad octopus 2Indeed, in light of Genome Project revelations, geneticists are in a quandary as to what “Jewish” is.

When Great Britain finally failed as acting Promised Land for the Jews (particularly after the Norman Conquest of 1066), Christopher Columbus was commissioned to find new lands suitable for the pure (Puritans). Thus, the United States of America became the fresh land of milk and honey in 1789. Two hundred and fifty or so years later, after the continent was finally prized from the natives, Adolph Hitler was persuaded (via the 1933 Haavara Agreement [26th August]) to restock Palestine with German Jews ready for “takeover” there. Ignoring the nonsense about a pointless war bunker suicide that, at worst, benefited his enemies; for augmenting the interests of Zionism, he was protected until death, from memory Bolivia 1976 (according to the KGB), by the Israeli spy agency, Mossad.

Earlier, the USA pretty much dictated terms at the Treaty of Versailles (which set up the right conditions to launch Hitler, who was funded by Levite bankers under the Federal Reserve banner that sucked $840M in gold out of America to ultimately cause the 1929 Wall Street Crash) and they did the same at the end of World War II with initiatives such as the Nuremburg Trials (amply matched by Stalin’s show trial purges against the brotherhood). Capitalising on the misery of that dark period, American President Eisenhower became the salesman for something, inexplicably, called “the Holocaust” as justification for the forced removal (without compensation) or execution of the natural Palestinians and other non-Jewish nationals from the larger part of Palestine (this word, ironically, originally meant “free” or “no man’s land” from the Aryan Sanskrit).

The creation of the Military Industrial Complex

fdrpic

A crucial part of the 1948 illegal occupation, now known as Israel, was an outsourced military. The Pentagon’s, which had been established as an “idea” of closet Zionist, Franklin D Roosevelt, May 1941, construction began September 11th that year (heralded by fake terrorist 9/11 – an attack on the American people crafted by their own government) as a predestinated new military administration. I discuss alien connections in later segments. fox_ailes_statuelibertyThe CIA was another Roosevelt initiative. In 1942 he appointed William Donovan to the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and this led to the intelligence agencies formal structure in September 1947. An early objective was “control” of mainstream Medias (Operation Mockingbird), so when Allen W Dulles took the helm in 1953, at the end of the Korean War, most of the major news outlets were under CIA influence.

It was at this point, Influential German ex. NAZI’s (or perhaps NAZIO’s would be a truer representation of the 1920 alliance of National Socialism and Zionism) were given safe passage and “new lives” in the USA, courtesy of the CIA (Operation Bloodstone). I think it is worth determining whether acronyms, such as NAZI, ISIS and so on, were coincidental or calculated. It is implausible to presume Initials purely come as an accidental consequence of word creation. The official reasoning behind the NAZI initials is gibberish and even attestation to forces governing stigmas is less than plausible (i.e. strategic critics), emphasized by the fact that it was after Hitler’s 1933 rise to power (because of the Haavara Agreement) that sentiment changed to reflect the appreciation of the Zionists. The Franklin Union (of) Casual Knitters does not exist today because of its unmentionable partner acronym. Therefore, it is also no accident of fate that the certain Ashke-NAZI Jews are behind most forms of Zionism and it was their interference that created the concept National Socialism (a version of Marxism) in the first place.

ciaMindControlledKillersMemeThe same rules can be applied to the ISIS and ISS (to inflict Goddess style terror from darkness of space) initials. “Impact” of acronyms is almost always seriously considered by globalists and that would have been so for decisions as to the appropriateness of “CIA” (Counterfeit Information Agenda?) too. Anyway, returning to the topic, until Nixon, the CIA was mostly used to protect or further the political ambitions of the industrialists, but, in my opinion, part of the reason the agency had been established was as insurance against Israel’s too great an influence over US sovereign affairs. The Pentagon might need to be obstructed. Let us never forget FDR’s May 1941 admission,You know I am a juggler, and I never let my right hand know what my left hand does. I am perfectly willing to mislead and tell untruths….” The plan always was, slice it as you may, to impose Marxism by the backdoor as the ultimate model for the enslavement of man (demeaning the only real exit, true communism or libertarianism, as a Marxist rebrand) to the advantage of the industrialist globalist cabal.

Money, power and oil

American_Petro_Junkies__Petrodollars_Iran_and_World_War_3_III__115132

Of course, history has witnessed (and been corrupted by the influencers) the CIA involvement with the assassination of both Kennedys, but the agenda changed with George HW Bush’s appointment as agency director after Nixon. That was the final nail in the coffin containing US sovereignty. Israel, via the Bush Dynasty, now owned the Pentagon and the CIA. Failed lawyer (as was Russia’s Vladimir Illyich Ulyanov aka “Lenin”), Roosevelt has a very bad record with regards ethical provenance (this source barely scrapes the surface) so he seems to have employed creamy subterfuge as his weapon against the plebeians, just as Vladimir (the right to rule) Putin does today. vladimir-lenin2Indeed, there was a rather hot winded episode, egged on by uncompensated World War I veterans protesting from “tent city”, in which Major General Smedley Butler is infamously publicised as being part of a planned coup d’état to overthrow Roosevelt 1932-33.

Washington Tent City 1932

Washington Tent City 1932

In fact the pantomime was used to disguise the dismal failure of the gold standard and capitalism; per se, highlighted in some detail in Butler’s powerful thesis, “War is a Racket” (excerpts here).

Roosevelt sneakily moved the greenback off the gold standard, of course, in June 1933 (just after Hitler’s Zionist power pact), but, for the most part, the Bretton-Woods system acted as an interim standard from 1946 until Nixon finally stopped the rot in 1971. Radical new economic 25 year plans ensued 1971-75 which saw the emergence of the Trilateral Commission in 1973 under the tutelage of David Rockefeller (many Tri-lateral Commission members hold ministerial governmental portfolios in the US today). Israel was created, once more, in 1948, when the Brett-Woods accord was in effect. Only shortly after Nixon had formally abandoned the gold standard it played havoc with the US dollar on the foreign exchange.

20120724101227-petrodollar-goldsilver-comAs all oil trades were transacted though US dollars (a separate discussion), the so-called petrodollar spectacularly wobbled in 1973 and again in 1979. The 1973 date was the more important (remember that is when the Trilateral Commission was set up) as it backed off Israel’s Yom Kippur War (which smells of a Zionist “op”). The important Jews along with their Bush Dynasty friends had lots of fingers in the oil pie via US/UK trading corporations. OPEC action netted a giant payday for the Globalists. H Bradford Westerfield’s book “Inside CIA’s Private World: Declassified Articles from the Agency’s Internal Journal 1955-92” is an interesting read (considering what hasn’t been omitted. This excerpt touches on their involvement with OPEC from 1973)

The Israel Connection

Though I am well aware of the Biblical misinterpretation of Genesis 32:28Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have struggled with God and with men and have overcome”” (NIV translation), Israel is a combination of the Babylonian Gods Isis, Ra and Amen/Amon/Amun (Hebrew light version El is the stem of Elohim – “manifest gods”). They [propagandists] may well say that Y’Israel means “God contended” (or God overpowered?) but the reason so much global iconography heralds from Babylonian tradition is that Israel is Babylonian (Phoenician) tradition. Israel’s very existence according to strict rabbinical interpretation of the Torah is heresy.

Is Ra ElPharisaic perversity, pagan Star of David, has evolved the manipulation of the Atlantean divine triangle [though the real symbol represents the trinity of causeways that contain/express existence, I like this artistic opinion too] creating a bonded star (very different to Bhakta Yoga tradition) promising eternal conflict that is now appropriately seated on the flag of Israel as evidence to all who know what it means in context (Opinions here or there).

Though not mentioned in this fine article, most (if not all) of the Bush clan are members of the Babylonian Brotherhood, which links in with invisible Draco Reptilian mind-control mechanisms (touched on here from the deep historic perspective – here and there). Skull & Bones, Priory of Sion and even, what has become of, Rosicrucian Order have ultimately been party to a singularly purposed masonic agenda scoped by the Babylonian Brotherhood. Later we will see how the Muslim Brotherhood has been reduced from Arab Spring renaissance to proto-Zionist totalitarianism. They are behind all chaos, regardless of the vivid imaginations of the mainstream (and many alternative) Medias. If the Buddhists adopted a terrorist attack strategy (as has been done “in the name of Islam”), be in no doubt that all plans are the brainchild of Zionist entrepreneurs and their extensive, well financed, control networks.

maxresdefault

Ra, of course, is the God of Light and Isis is the (Moon) Goddess of Darkness. Therefore, it is no coincidence that the International Space Station (ISS) was named so (i.e., to imply control from the darkness after Reagan’s Star Wars concept, as exampled earlier). The Islamic State of Iraq & Syria (ISIS) was initially labeled Islamic State of Iraq & the Levant (ISIL) to confuse thinkers, but the conspirators have big egos and enjoy flaunting their power to ignorant slaves, plus they needed to be sure they had won. We can only assume that confidence in goals met was that strong, they could let the moggie out of the bag in 2012. This extremely violent and inhumane group of terrorists is allegedly controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood, although perhaps that is malicious “rebranding. Should not a violent anarchistic arm of Islam be called the “Islamic Brotherhood”? If the plan, by malicious powers, was squarely to destabilise the image of the moderate (peaceful) Muslim (just as the NAZI’s did to the Diasporas), might not the reaction create some ambiguity [on what is meant by moderate] whilst removing [absolute] radical hostility towards “brotherhood groups” such as the Babylonian Brotherhood too? The exact same German “walking dead” term for maltreated Diasporas was given to the Muslims; surely no coincidence?

A US-Israel criminal pact

As my colleague Robert O’Leary pointed out in his article, (ignoring mainstream fanfare) the Tsarnaev brothers were set up as plants to enable the Boston Marathon bombing propaganda campaign (Google has purged all the juicy articles, but on page 10 I found this thorough analysis, not forgetting busted Lieutenant Nicholas Vogt’s role). boston-bombing-victim-actually-nick-vogtThat satisfied the objective of presenting moderate Muslims as “radicalised” (the same propaganda planners use similar rhetoric as justification to defend their human shield statements). It wasn’t the only objective. Subliminal messages were many and varied. “Anyone can make a pipe bomb. No one is safe”. “They (radical terrorists) will attack people for having fun”. “They (radical terrorists) could attack the most skilled or even icons (professional athletes)”. “They (radical terrorists) are immoral and deserve a violent inhumane reaction”. The list goes on. Not dissimilar sentiment was applied to the campaign promoting “Al Qaeda in Iraq”. Crazy, draconian legislation will be justified on the back of each proto-government psy-op.

Of course, in the modern age, the way power structures are presented by the mainstream poses some ambiguity as to who controls what. There, for instance, has been a fervent campaign (ongoing for many years) to imply that the United States is an “autonomous super power”. All too frequently brisk differences of opinion between it and Israel’s foreign policies play out as extended melodramas between key national and international tabloids. hqdefaultThere are some uncomfortable realities that have not been entirely buried by Google and other “establishment sponsored” censors. Some question whether AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) runs US foreign policy (see this groveling article supporting the Zionist “cause” (sic). Arab American Mantiq-Al-Tayr is not a supporter [warning: contains disturbing images]).

Other evidence supporting a Hebrew takeover of the US is extensive. Though, officially, a modest number of US senators are formally Jewish, the greater percentage of congressmen, in general, are “friends of Israel”. This parries with an estimated 1.7% Jewish Americans. The radical writer, Brother Nathanael Kapner, is noted for unorthodox opinions (many of which seem to parry with reality), however this article makes an excellent point about a quasi-Jewish “Protestant majority” running the US. The notion of Jews running politics stretches back to George Washington and Benjamin Franklin and the Chinese, by all accounts, are under no illusion either.

A short history of Pharisaic (dissent) order and US stakeholders

0201_01

For clarity of vision, researchers must go right back to the beginning; a past which shows settlement of the United States of America required conflict and broken promises, a violent takeover, with the sole purpose of usurping American native Indian populations’ territories consequentially reducing them to homelessness on their own soil (let us never forget that Israel did this to the Palestinians too against the instruction of rabbinical orders, so motives have always been globalist/industrialist and not religious nationalistic). Protestant “Puritan” Pilgrim Fathers had travelled to the great continent to set up a new land of milk and honey, or their “Promised Land” (according to Scripture). Puritanism is so radically Pharisaic in character; it may as well be called pseudo Judaism. Ironically, the other radical interpretation is Islam.

That hostile takeover of America to create the Promised Land has been shown to be very much an act of Zionism, given the relationship Jesuit middle men had with Columbus, Lutheran Protestantism, Illuminati order of the New World, May Day, 1776 and so on. Zion (or Sion) means fortress (in Hebrew) and there has been a long, predictable history of violence associated with forces attached to this order. Turning the clock much further back, we can review the mechanics of ancient Roman civilization as globalist utopianism. reichstagfireIndeed, as long as 2,000 years ago, some compellingly blame Nero’s Roman arson (Great Fire of Rome 64 AD) on disgruntled Zealots (a past version of Zionists) which ultimately saw violent Roman retaliation with the siege of Jerusalem 66-69 AD. The Romans interest in and takeover of Judea in 63BC deserves detailed inspection; given the relationship with “Arab” Herod’s at the Jews expense. There are too many other stones to upturn right now, so that discovery tour will have to wait another day.

A little farfetched, maybe, but even considering the choice of fire [in particular] as a popular method of destruction is worthy of examination. Remember things are often done for not particularly obvious reasons and that is why the average person is mostly blind to political motives. The old “purgatory” concept uses fire to bring a small piece of “hell on Earth”. That is why Catholics burned witches at the stake (drowning offered a form of “Baptismal cleansing” when the sinner passed over). censorship_quoteThe theme continues with infamous Guy Fawkes and his failed attempt at reducing England’s parliament to a bonfire. Ironically (or maybe not so), one member of the small band of agitators was named Pierce and is a direct ancestor of the Clintons. Of course the most topically recent event that concurs with Roman arson symbolism was the torching of the Reichstag in February 1933. After this (April of the same year), one of Hilter’s early demonstrations of leadership power was the (PR stunt?) incineration of the unapproved books allegedly targeting Jewish book stores and authors. Vladimir Putin loves censorship too.

Traditionally the Reichstag fire was blamed on communists. Here is a possible reason. Aryan-Slavs passionately upheld ideals of libertarianism as exquisite virtues of Vedic philosophy, so many were connected to the various idealistic communist movements before they became polluted by toxic Marist-Zionism. Anne-Frank-DeskSlavic peoples, in general, saw international defeat and castigation after the 9th century when their last bastion fell and that is the origin of the word “slave” (note: Latin “esclava” has a more modern etymology, servant, servitude stem being the more ancient term). “Slav” means either “glorious” (slavniy) or “fame” (slava). Hitler’s “worship” of the Aryan type was reverse PR (one of those “big lies” he boasts of in Mein Kampf), just like his reversal of the Swastika symbol of Vedic enlightenment. Let us be frank (maybe using Anne Frank’s malnourished tuberculosis death at Bergen-Belsen concentration camp is a good lead in), Hitler was not against the Jews, per se, just the cosmopolitan enablers with conscience activated. Those, mostly Diasporas, were the ones he targeted. Was Hitler allowed to be sarcastic when he said he hated the Jews but loved the Aryans?

So after the Reichstag fire, Jewish (supposedly “Levites” – “above the law” and see here for an explanation of the confusion) Ashkenazi bankers could rubber stamp Adolph Hitler’s power authority. They were also originated from the Ukraine and known as Khazars by that heritage. Khazar means “wicked, disgusting” from the dark ages Aryan Christian word pogani. The meaning changed by medieval times with heretic preferred after the German (from Greek) which signified “outcast”. Apostate, from the Greek too, was also used as this means “revolt/defect”. Unsurprisingly they are a perfect match for the colloquial translation of the term “pharisaic”. The Khazars are the modern version of the Pharisees and that’s why Ukraine wants its “independence”.

offeringlight~2Their trade with Hitler, highlighted earlier, was evidenced by the Haavara Agreement in exchange for Federal Reserve (established by the Zionists 1913-14 to coordinate a global New World Order precipitating World War I and the 1917 Russian takeover to test austere controlled enslavement of the masses) gold. History tells us the Schiff/Warburg engineered contract was so detrimental to the New York Stock Exchange it caused the Wall Street Crash (1929). A decade long Depression was only saved by world war (courtesy of the newly empowered Hitler). There is no doubt WWII was planned and engineered by the same Jewish hierarchies as part of the final solution for the enslavement of man. The predominant outcome from this global turmoil was the recreation of Israel, validated by a vapid holocaust, which means “sacrificial burnt offering.

Global tyranny administered by the US per Israel’s vision

Since the same basic parties had established the land of Israel, pretty much every US President has worked with and, in general, given favour to Israel. President Obama has been called the most “anti-Israel President ever” (Mein Kampf style?). To establish for myself whether this is true or not, I have scoured the internet in search of any anti-Israel material/quotes from Barack Obama. 536030211All damning remarks have been excised from the account, so allegations seem to substantively rely on journalistic license (exaggeration or out-and-out lies). Even going way beyond Google page 10, the only remotely anti-Israel quote I have found is “The only way for Israel to thrive as a Jewish and democratic state is through the realisation of an independent and viable Palestine”. Though this seems like a borrowed quote, or something very similar to earlier sentiment, I understand why some Israelites take umbrage.

Researchers need to investigate the creation of Judaism and key figures, such as the mythical Moses (was he the Babylonian scribe Barach/Barak?). Under the extreme Pharisaic interpretation of Law, God (El/Yahweh) is above the Law, Levites are exempt from the Torah and other Scriptural references (which encourages some to question whether they are Jews at all, if religion is determined by faith), Jews [must] religiously follow the Law and non-Jews (Goyim) must both follow the Law and exist only to serve the Chosen People (Jews). Being Goyim (officially), I have a big problem with that. Researchers quickly learn that the reason Obama’s allegedly “anti-Semitic” quote is anti-Israel is that he has dared to suggest empowerment of Palestinian slaves by validating their assault on “rightful” Israelite land (per Zionist beliefs).

dog-(R)dees

Better comprehension of this reasoning can be gained from an analysis of the fall of Jericho, which saw no land settlement by Israelites of the time. Under “God’s instruction”, they left with three wagon loads of treasure at the expense of the occupants. It’s a moot point, but in regular debates I have with a Rabbi colleague, we are edging closer and closer to the philosophy that Pharisaic extremists believe all habitable locations of the Earth’s surface is the extent of Israel and they only allow Goyim colonies out of the goodness of their hearts. 4525274963_b7d8ea6e7c_zWould that make the Goyim lepers? From the spiritual perspective (by rabbinical interpretation), leprosy is a problem with the skin which might surely be symbolic of afflicted, wrong skinned Goyim in light of Jesus’ attention? As mentioned earlier, the “Jewish” bankers that funded Hitler were all reputedly Levites. However, doing more than a little digging, I find not a skerrick of evidence (just supposition) that proves one [of those bankers] is a true Levite. Indeed it is my opinion they were/are all common and ordinary Ashkenazi Jews.

Much can be gained from the double impact of published rogue sentiment via unknown, foreign journals. Here’s a made-up (fictional) example. Headline: “The Australian Prime Minister believes the Bali Nine (“heroin exporters” set up through an ReptilianCheneyAustralian Federal Police sting to diffuse the Schapelle Corby “customs debacle”) deserved to die” after giving the Australian public broadcast “crocodile tears” and “outrage” over Indonesia’s handling of the matter. He, per this fiction, made the comment in print in some French Lady’s magazine called, shall we say, “Moi”. I believe, as much as I admire his writing style, that Roi Tov is an agent for the interests of Zion. He exists to lifelong translate the true meaning of ludicrous Israelite political sentiment for the dumb Goyim.

Of course any agitator must be kept in a virtual prison (as Pharisee Paul tells us) ever threatened by capital punishment by those upholding Pharisaic order and these, predictably, are Roi’s alleged perpetual circumstances. Along similar lines, in general, I have a problem with so-called “conspiracy theories”. Whereas many revelations offer great insight to readers, they each, invariably, contain their own propaganda slant. Last year, in the spirit of truth solidarity, I changed my internet explorer default page from MSN to Jeff Rense’s bulletin board. However, I found the change fostered such an increase in personal negativity that my default is now blank (soon to be replaced by Conscious Life News, of course) for health reasons. The point being is, absolute negativity can be destructively overwhelming (i.e. who does Rense really represent?). My joking style, I have been told, “powerfully enlightens”. That’s why the, ahem, three brave people that regularly reference this blog are presumably empowered by it.

None, in office, dare publically criticise

jewish vampire

To discover anti-American sentiment from Israel, we only need to turn to their current Prime Minister Benjamin [Bibi] Netanyahu. As a failed furniture salesman, his experience with the US was not a good one. From that vein perhaps readers can understand the hostility. Nevertheless I cannot see any right-minded American accepting this:

golden-calf1“It does not matter what you do. America is a golden calf and we will suck it dry, chop it up, and sell it off piece by piece until there is nothing left but the world’s biggest welfare state that we will create and control. Why? Because it is the will of God. This is what we do to countries we hate. We destroy them very slowly and make them suffer for refusing to be our slaves.” (1990)

rachel corey RIPSomething like that appears to be happening now thanks to the rigged, “Levite ordained” Grand Financial Crisis (GFC). Rachel Corey why did you not listen? (2003) May you rest in peace, the true martyr you are, lest we forget? Israel, of course, has learned nothing (2010).

Netanyahu’s use of the enigmatic symbol “golden calf” is pivotal to my argument that Israel, Zion and ISIS are intrinsically connected. In fact this is the Babylonian fertility symbol that links the Roman/Greek “Philistines” with Israel’s Zionist Pharisaic elite. Paul McGuire has a very good understanding of how this encapsulates an imperialist tradition, in part, hell bent on plundering the land of “milk and honey”.

Crop Circles offer more than meets the casual eye

Crop circle collage courtesy of Red Collie, the maths genius

Crop circle collage courtesy of Red Collie, the maths genius

I promised some big news. It has come in a rather unlikely, controversial form. Though I have failed to locate the site, arguably somewhere in Brazil, a Crop Circle appeared before the fateful Halloween Russian plane crash in the Egyptian Sinai desert. There is a reference to the twin propeller plane (note two concentric circles), CBS News and the colour scheme even suggests “sand”. But the humble (Zeta grey being sanctioned) pictogram offers so much more in its warning for humanity. Please check the photo carefully to understand the clever symbolism.

An ellipse (outer circle) is representative of the rise/fall of the human soul (a soul under attack from negative elements). There are two rings which signify transition or stages and the central one is perfect and significantly smaller than the damaged outer human soul. It can only mean the pure either break away or are saved by some arbitrary power. The “propeller” doubles as a lotus flower lily which is symbolic of rebirth. There are four uneven petals, representative of cooperation or some kind of pact between different factions only covering the “chosen few” (in the small circle). Evil EyeIn light of the sorry state of the human soul network, CBS is the so-called “evil eye” of misrepresentation. It is generally believed the rise and fall of the human soul can only end with apocalypse and the plane crash, whether planned or accidental, is going to be used as the trigger to stimulate a visceral World War III (that began in 1984 under the people’s noses while they were sleeping) and possible Armageddon simply to justify the hostile repatriation of Ukraine as Khazaria. George-Orwell-truth-quotesLogic points to a symbolic Russian defeat, but could Messianic Putin “win” and still grant the Ashkenazi’s sovereignty at the Russian Ukrainians expense? How would wise Solomon have reacted?

So there you have it. Next segment will discuss Zionism and its historic evolution in more detail. I rattled the tin in front of the Jews (Ashkenazi included) earlier. Now, in the spirit, of Christmas, Ramadan, Diwali, Losar, Songkran and any other festival convenient for my purposes, here is another donation plea to the Goyim. I tried being homeless last Christmas but (other than two fellow bloggers) no one bothered to respond with care. This time I give you something in return for your donations, so not only do you achieve nirvana (that special warm glow from helping out your fellow man that volunteers a huge amount of time to the salvation of humanity) but there are a number of gift options depending on whether you like reading or listening. Or, then again, you can simply donate because you feel it is the right thing to do. Visit here, scroll down and you will find all the juicy details, PayPal and other links. Thank you for reading; go empowered.