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

To Boycott is the Strongest “People Power”

Paul_hodgkin_I_want_changeOver the years I have read thousands of articles that, in various ways, place the responsibility for the ills of the people at the feet of government. Much noble sentiment has resonated with vocal followings. Mantras of dissent occasionally find a clearing in mainstream pockets only to be twisted out of proportion by jocular commentators. It should be no surprise, certainly to intellectuals, that the will of the people has never assumed responsibility for their occasional discordant outbursts. By that token, they have behaved in a very predictable, manageable way as far as governments are concerned.

Full Tyrannous Platter

Cheese-Deli14

If I said, “The moon is made of cheese”, people would automatically think I was being metaphorical (to cheese is to distort), joking or, perhaps, slightly mad. Assuming, for the example, I was absolutely sincere and, misguidedly, conveyed that sincerity to the point that people believed “I” was telling the truth, it would not take a genius to conclude I was in error. lying astonautTransferring that reasoning by involving government, popular confusion might become clearer. Let us suppose (along similar lines of said reasoning) that “government” decided the moon was made of cheese. To state their case, they sent an astronaut in a rocket to procure some of this mysterious brie. As instructed, astronaut returns, years later, with several vintage samples. Of course, they weren’t actually from the moon that he had not visited. The people, nevertheless, had been presented (with due pomp) their superficial prize, and, just as the king with no clothes, they could not help but believing. Our magnificent astronaut (who, once again, had never left the planet) was given a hero’s status, speaking at universities, writing for scientific journals about his moon visit and, generally, spinning fantasy into reality.

feeding lambs of GodThose that believe governments are “for the people” are as deluded as those that believe an astronaut went to the moon for cheese and consequentially wilfully defy reason to empower make-believe. Deep historic research into the point and purpose of governments will find little more than commerce management systems. From that perspective, “the people” are either slaves or masters. Theoretically, those that unplug from the system either don’t exist or are considered similar in status to wild animals. That is why strict legislation for “feeding the homeless (wild animals)” is gradually being imposed. A technologically inspired ever widening gap between the masters and their slaves has made mass labour superfluous in many ways. crossroads3Political controllers never really wanted to concede Victorian determinism which saw the underclasses routinely displayed as gibbet corpses for daring to feed themselves independently. Those that abided by the law and starved in plain sight were the cause of humorous foul smelling puns for those languishing at elite dinner tables. 9f7ef9a904ff26b6e948d13b21553f3cLaws protected the lands of the masters in spite of the needs of the people. That fundamental objective (Victorian determinism) of the political machine may be buried in periods of rebellion, but never forgotten. That is the reason why governments are so eager to use war as the rule over matters requiring arbitration, for a slave’s life is demonstrated as being worth nothing.

Many de-facto journalists pin extraordinary faith on mechanisms defining order, such as the “Bill of Rights”, “Constitution” and “Due Process”. However, the system is based on three interconnecting cogs with differing agendas, objectives and powers. Law makers pretend to sell laws to the people and, after their theatre, wizened lawyers (usually affiliated to external instruments such as the Jewish Lobby) ensure the small print is covered with cheese. Thus, almost invariable, the actual laws are nothing like the sales pitch. Without a “Justice System”, laws are not worth the paper they are written on. Just as with political organs, a careful selection process ensures only judiciaries of the right mindset rule and, if anything goes wrong after appointment, bad eggs are expediently and mercilessly expelled. Judges almost always do as they are instructed by the mainstream Medias (which also happen to be Jewish lobbyists).

judge dredIt takes more than judges and politicians to ensure the criminally homeless do not roam the streets. Using the same tried and tested principles designed to attract natural born killers for the armed forces, sociopath traitors are encouraged to apply to become responsible law enforcement officers. Recruits must demonstrate they can and will follow any order, regardless of content, without hesitation. Any officer that dares to think is deemed to be of the wrong character and must join our newly criminally homeless judges with conscience. The only room for debate as to interpretation of laws is permissible sentiment speculated by the mainstream Medias. Anyone with even a remote attachment to alternative information sources will quickly realise the mainstream loves cheese.

There is no politician or political party in place to save the individual. Law courts and their enforcers vigorously uphold the most unfair, demeaning, unrepresentative legislation then dressed as laws to the letter. Individual laws do voice extremist corporate, religious and other whims usually actually catering for minorities (when true purposes are known). Even so, the court system is limited by size and works as any other instrument of commerce, underpinned by strict targets and quotas. This is complimented by law enforcement agencies that are welcome to set up illegitimate, criminal fronts (sting operations) in the interest of fighting crime. Important captives’ unsubstantiated violations are recklessly promoted as proxy guilt confessions by those cheese loving mainstream Medias. Indeed, regularly, law enforcement public statements are presented “word for wordwithout question by all news outlets.

We, the people and presumed slaves, are ultimately faced with the responsibility of either believing the bullshit or maintaining individual open minds determined to sanctify truth at any price. creative-and-critical-thinking-1-638Those are the two poles. In practicality, no one can know the whole truth and judgement boils down to belief in the effectiveness of information source and intuition. Over time, differences in accounts, shared information presented by disparate sources and limited direct experience may improve any given snapshot of wisdom. Fall prey to the notion “who do we believe?” is to succumb to bullshit. Critical thinkers will neither accept any proposal lacking tangible evidence or effective supporting arguments nor do they have any beliefs per se. It is high time the rest of you took a leaf out of that book. Put to the test, given the correct weight of plausible information sources not affiliated to the mainstream, lowly minds will struggle to deny the truth.

Newly converted reasoning individuals are caught between the system they used to abide and the sense of, what can be best described as, impotence. As deluded group members, they felt potentially empowered, at least. Now, as enlightened individuals, the reactive impetus shifts to “little me against lots of them”. It is only through awareness of individuality that all those instruments of power become clear. What is the alternative to the banking system? If I cannot abide corporates; where do I shop? Is new enlightened me allowed express integrity and work? What should (can) I, the individual, do about government tyranny of past, present and future? But, most importantly, am I of any value to “humanity” at all? This is an important question as governments, per false belief systems, are heralded as the apex of social goodwill. The path to enlightenment reveals governments are nothing other than polished “mafias” exploiting goodwill.

Newly converted Individuals quickly realise their impact against the machine is so severely limited it dwindles into insignificance. Not only that but any reaction requires inconvenience, sacrifice and loss. These happen to be the three things humans, in general, least like being. Therefore, the only realistic force against the machine is not one of physical might but, rather, the power of boycott. Slaves that refuse to enable the machine, refuse to cooperate, refuse to work en masse would be the system’s downfall. However, subtle, subliminal rebellion is far more effective. Dare I say, “Use that cheese against the bastards”?

caricature-passarotti

It is time for us to move away from guilt by association paradigms, grotesque caricatures overstating zealous morals. It is time for us to get real about reality. Government mechanisms, infrastructures and methods are not all bad. There is a terrific amount of good stuff attached to network and, surprisingly, a lot of would-be good people oiling the cogs that make the wheels go round. Money and banks are not all bad, providing strict controls are adhered to. Corporations could be the model of efficiency and high standards. Africa is an apex of disinformationHere’s an example of a possible boycott. A mystery corporation is doing some very bad things in Africa. All able bodied employees of the slave classes have already set up a guild or union with a spokesperson for US Head quartered operations. Without immediate cessation of proceedings in Africa, ever able bodied worker would strike and picket the US headquarters. If that is too drastic, workers could simply ignore any order, distribution requirements, paperwork and so on coming out of Africa. Just let it all pile up, no arbitration, no militancy. Everyone plays dumb; just like the government. Sure, many would be fired, but new replacements would quickly learn the culture.

If anyone has any other good ideas on how to “keep the bastards honest”, don’t be shy. Comments are welcome and thank you for listening.

Enjoying Truth for Virtuous Purity’s Sake

Ravishing-four-white-rose-sticks

My latest impromptu post began as a festering ball of frustration and anger at scepticism and the general ill will of the people. The worst are the ones that claim they are enlightened and that’s why today’s reasoning revolves around lawyers’ sentiment and contracts. We live in the age of disclaimer, blame game and denial. Oh so few have been able to pierce the veil that obscures truth only to suffer the scorn of the “grounded” hordes. My editing process has chopped out much of the ire but, as always, it is message will challenge the inner core of each reader.

A Turkish Earthquake Leaves Greece in Ruins

I recently met with friends at social club. One lady, having read “Beyond “Beyond Love and Light””, asked me whether I actually enjoy anything? Her niece is over in Greece; first time overseas. Let’s hope the plight of the people won’t interrupt her holiday too much. We can’t have enjoyment spoiled, can we? Please, I haven’t made a carte-blanche accusation against someone very dear to me. For all I know, the girl angelically devoted half her holiday to people’s causes. Nevertheless it has provided a good sound board for virtuous sentiment.

ahmet-davutogluGreece is particularly important as that is where the Philistines ended up. Macedonian, Alexander the Great, is the most celebrated of their fold. Moving forward to “recent times” events within earshot of the once great Greek metropolis, what a lot of people don’t know is the epicentre of Turkey’s devastating 1999 earthquake was directly below their naval HQ. It also just happened that they were going to pull out of NATO (International Pentagon). Within two years, a month before so-called 9/11, there was change of government and a complete reversal of direction; politically and philosophically. Were these all “coincidences”? I think not!

Of course, we can’t blame the Philistines, can we? Unless there was a “double” double “reverse”, it was surely the same old “duality” Philistine Rosicrucians versus Pharisaic Zionists, championing the latter, naturally. Long standing President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been classed as a “secret Jew” (ignoring all that “Hitleresque” bluster) via his association with a particular Muslim “sect”. An even bigger “card” in the pocket of Israelite extremism has been Erdogan’s dreadful foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu.

Why People Annoy Me

Many, many years ago, every once in a while, very occasionally special, different individuals would pop up and annoy society. These used to be called oracles. 1210142226063354-merlin_historyBut now they are labelled “insane” and fed Prozac by clinical psychiatrists that waft meaningless labels as “professional opinion”. God, if I might be so bold, is pretty damned clever. It became clear His truth giving plants were having no effect on the self-serving, corrupt peoples of childish intent. So, in order to rectify the problem, He created a new breed of truth giver – not the rambling chanter of old, but one with acute intellect and, most importantly, reasoned perception. These were the types that could smell bullshit at a thousand paces! Yeah, and I’m one of those.

In response to my female friend; does my self-gratification trump my mission for purity by way of reflection on what I might consider is enjoyable? Yes, I enjoy a good movie, good food, good music and good sex (although, it’s been so long, I think I’ve lost all memory of that) but, let’s face it, these are all childish trivialities. Then we have enjoyment of company. There are some people I like to be in the company of that clearly do not reciprocate and vice versa. Others are upgraded associations; friendships – no real support or expectation either side but some emotional attachment that transcends acquaintance. There is the old adage, of course, “I can count my real friends on the fingers of one hand”. These are relationships that go beyond friendship and become de facto partnerships.

Yes, to be honest, as with the great, late George Carlin, people annoy me. I detest the self-serving, spiteful, spineless nature of humans. We are all so quick to blame and so slow to act ourselves. When action does come, it is always done with ulterior motive. Though some nobility does creep through, reasons go beyond “problem, reaction”. The guy that recklessly dived into a burning house to save an old lady thought of himself. What if it was him in there? He couldn’t live with the notion of continuing without acting. An aggressive self-serving conscience determined his death, but the old lady did survive. As human beings, that is the best we can do. We must all become slaves to our conscience.

Your “God Complex” Will Not Elevate You Spiritually

I prefer the word fulfilment to enjoyment. What fulfils me is when I effect improvement. Over ten years, I worked with one individual. Kicking and screaming all the way, I eventually broke down his belief systems and produced a better person. That achievement resounds greater than any superficial pleasant experience I might herald as pleasurable. People are like springs. You take each one so far down a path and as soon as you let go, they resound straight back to the comfort zone with an emphatic boing.

Over the years, I have tried to impress on people the importance of correct understanding of the historical development of enslavement. Modern slaves are processed in the way children are reared. Bodily adults are labelled “children” for the convenience of the system. Everyone goes along with it because of the parental “God complex”. Very quickly in the relationship, parents learn the most effective way of managing slaves is through corruption and bribery. Thus, “children” are offered some “off limits” things when they have been “especially good”. For their part, children are encouraged to be deceptive to get what they want. When “sprung”, blame the next man. That is the way adult society “works” and why.

British_PolicemanAdult children (18 til death by western social accounting) also need parents. These are authority figures of arbitrary status: policemen, judges, doctors, scientists, priests (except the Catholics, of course) and so on. Therefore, all a “licensed to perjure” policeman has to do is fart and the people will swarm to catch a whiff. People (like the lady who had forgotten she had been raped thirty years before but [when it suited her] suddenly remembered all the details with sinister clarity) rely on the parent/child model to “get on”. Yes, the euphemism “Big Brother” goes far wider than mere surveillance. It is society; lock, stock and both barrels.

Is Facebook the Ultimate Propaganda Tool?

I was recently annoyed by someone for tagging two of my Facebook posts. Innocent enough; he didn’t know. One link was a video of a fallen policeman and the other an erudite but languid piece by a judge with blurry vision. BM4BMK_2937399bNone of my extensive writings were of any interest and the great Jon Rappoport’s role was as dumbfounded messenger. Ignorant people, which is just about everyone, pin their hopes on the “Magna Carta”, “Bill of Rights” and the “Constitution” with just about zero comprehension of the evolution or motives of the so-called Westminster System (which, according to zealous right wing economists, began with the Magna Carta). I think it is high time for one of my history lessons to put things in perspective again.

photo-2Before I talk about chickens and pigs, I must stress that my history will start with the Romans even though things began, well, how far back can we go? Joseph P. Farrell is worth looking up to discover how the “Jewish” Priest Kings evolved from the need to trade, but an old Atlantis Order (that used their cross of thorny roses as the symbol of ultimate control) stretches back 10,000, 50,000, 100,000 years? In the modern age PIGS are Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain. Ireland was the original Promised Land frequented by pre-Gnostic dissenters; Celts. When they spread to Scotland and England, the old guard, Italy, decided to put a final stop to enlightened Judaism (Pagan Druidism). The elite still used the mystery schools, but practices became the greatest secrets on Earth. Greek Philistines have been well and truly beaten and are cursed as the Slavs from Atlantis. Latin Rosicrucian order, Spain and Portugal, has now been reduced to bacon by those that hold the Holy Grail (Zionists). Russian refugees are the new slaves and Irish Celts are modern day chickens to be plucked or [for visible dissenters] tarred and feathered.

A Brief History of Commerce

Let us say, for this example, that I am a humble peasant living on my long claimed common lands thousands of years ago. After time a stranger approaches me surrounded by his herd of tamed boar,

“Hark, kind sir, I am so weary from all this travel, Can I sanction a small slice of your luscious pastures for myself and my hungry boar?”

oldlady

An exchange is made: twenty boars for a small tract of land of not more than three acres. That land today is located in the City of Westminster (a borough of London, England). As the Duke of Westminster is wealthy beyond imagination, even though (according to the mainstream Medias) he is a “regular guy”, his land is not for sale. So how should we appraise the transaction in modern terms? Is that humble three acres worth a million pigs? Taxing a million pigs might work, but how does the exchequer apportion 10% of seven? Should the owner lop off the head and the rump of one to make good any tax bill?

The point of this example is to demonstrate the problem with commerce in general. It isn’t fair and that’s why everyone’s life savings were wiped out by the 1921-22 hyper-inflation in Germany (a period that strangely coincided with the establishment of the Irish “freedom fighter” movement, Shin Fein). rbst5b-fGermany’s woes directly elevated support in the tyrannical Hitler who had been vilified by the US president Woodrow Wilson championed greed of Allied Forces as a response to the plundering Treaty of Versailles (June 1919). The bankers took the German gold and Hitler, then, took their guns with the ambition to “eradicate 50% of all Slavs”. Wilson, of course, is also famous for enabling the Zionist funded and run (unfairly termed) “Russian Workers Revolution” (1917). 8th September 1919 saw an innocuous New York Times article that promoted war deaths of six million Jews make brief headlines around the globe. Then, as we know, between 1939-45 if came true (sic). “Miracles” do happen, after all!

I shall begin this history with the Romans conquering and imposing monetary systems on the, then, known world. Unlike prior currency systems [used by the elites), they tried to foist their worthless trinkets on the commoners (another name for “people”). sainttthomasaquinas1Ancient Celts were wise beyond years and immediately saw the problem. You can’t index a chicken, because what happens when it’s eaten? The whole prospect of trade, without perfectly balanced and harmonised monetary systems, sets up inaccuracies that will ultimately foster clandestine appraisals with no logical right of validation (like the modern global economies). Without constant regulated adjustments, monetary exchanges could only result in vast indifferences between proposed “assets” and values. It is likely, as is the case today; exploitation would represent the effectiveness of the successful tranches of society. As humans, in general, are devoutly self-serving (above all other devotions), populous greed has been enflamed through deceit of calculated systems of governance.

Yes, our governors put lashings of frilly “goodwill” and “stuff to enjoy” in all their contracts, but the devil is in the detail and, perhaps as importantly, the “sales pitch”. That is why the great Victorian, political commentator, Ralph Waldo Emerson said,

The less government we have, the better, — the fewer laws, and the less confided power. The antidote to this abuse of [by] formal Government, is, the influence of private character, the growth of the Individual.”

Christianity – A Slam Dunk for Judaism

Religions are merely utopian forms of governmental order. Instead of being called Alfred the Great, Alfred the Pudding would have perhaps been closer to the mark. He burnt the cakes, “lost” the crown jewels and created serfdom by Christianising the Celts. article-2173848-000169D800000C1D-629_638x437Alright, he wasn’t the first Christian English King, but the zeal applied to the production and promotion of the Anglo Saxon Chronicle (reinforcing religious fundamentalism) changed England forever. In promotion of the “Starra” (later, in part. Known as the Tudor Starr [contract] or Star Chambers), it was important for Anglo-Saxons never to be bankers as Jesus had a severe distaste of “money changers”. By this reasoning money was fine, and was not the root of all evil, but controlling the banking system was the perfect sin. Therefore, the establishment of the time ushered in droves gracious Jews who, faithfully, assisted not-so-commoners as their friendly merchant bankers (offering services out of the goodness of their little cherub hearts). crossCeltRoseThe Jews would have become Christian (and almost did in 1492-3) but they didn’t like Jesus too much because he was anti Pharisaic Order (ultimate dissent or “chaos”).

Anyway, I digress. Alfred the Pudding did not pay a king’s ransom in Crown jewels to save his sorry ass. Historically though, he laid a slam dunk for William Conqueror to issue a change of executive in 1066. Was King Harold’s arrow in the eye real or a metaphorical blinding? Remember my “spring” analogy? Well, it takes a heck of a long time for real change to bite so, even with the formal introduction of Christianity, the Celts were still pagans at heart and tradition. It needed the Norman Kings (straight out of what was Israel, some say) to give the British plebeians a shakeup. Construction of monstrous Christian cathedrals in celebration of commerce started almost immediately (sometimes around existing Saxon “huts” of worship). In addition, due to their pious hatred of the banking system (legacy of Alfred the Pudding), the serfs were only able to be slaves in their support trading structures owned and controlled by Jews, aristocrats and royals. Of course, if they had been able to trade themselves, they have been a threat to present and future oligarchies.

gizoldThe corporation is a relatively recent concept. Prior there were royals, aristocrats and merchants. A hidden period of European history is colloquially known as “the Dark Ages”. This is not because records ceased but, rather, evidence of great tyranny and censorship. Enough has survived to illustrate the elite took the brunt of all financial transactions after the Roman totalitarian commerce experiments had failed.. So when the “Danish” Vikings mysteriously and arbitrary conducted numerous and “pointless” (“certainly” not part of a much wider plan – sarcasm) raids, Dane geld (buried silver or gold coins) instated the importance of “money”. Over time, not only was the role of the elite immortalised (via the people’s salvation) but also the value of money became popularised by those of lowly status. Of course, the real coup d’état came (which also, needless to say, began the dreadful Westminster System – the curse of freedom) with the Magna Carta. If royalty has been “blinded” in 1066, the people, by the end of the twelfth century, had been well and truly broken. A commercial charter was made for control of their newly plundered common lands. Royal thieves had capitalised on the spineless naivety of man.

Commerce IS Enslavement

This meant the serfs needed a constant supply of money to either maintain rents, taxes or both. Because a “precedent” had been established, future English kings would wage vicious wars to claim common land of Scotland, Ireland and other places over the following centuries. Populations, fodder of conquest, were pretty much treated like vermin, or slaves. Nevertheless, with lands conquered, tables turned and labour became the great asset. Catholic Rosicrucian Order had a stranglehold over Europe for a long time. This was, in reality, an agency for a hidden “black” Roman aristocracy, contrary to popular opinion. portrait_of_henry_viii_aged_49-400Good Zionist King Henry VIII of England broke the deadlock (long after the Merovingian Arians had been defeated – the “virtuous” [sarcasm] Knights Templar were also extinguished after they had served their usefulness) by creating his own church. His death saw a dangerous and bloody period with England reverting to Catholicism under Mary (daughter of Spanish Catherine of Aragon). Zealous, iron queen, Elizabeth I ionised the fate of the plebeians by fining anyone the equivalent of a week’s wage who did not attend Church of England Sunday services.

History is muted over Henry VIII’s own 72,000 executions (the common “punishment” of his time) or “boy king” Edward VI’s purge of 5,500 recalcitrant Catholic Cornishmen (interestingly, Cornwall was one of the bastions of the old Druidic [Rosicrucian] Order). mary-tudor“Bloody” Mary I is well remembered (Elizabethan propaganda) for her attack on the pro-Henry VIII oligarchs (in particular), via a deadly inquisition against “Protestants” (the new word for non-Catholics of the age). There were two hundred and eighty four recorded deaths, although, reputedly, more unaccounted numbers improved that tally. This all before 1558, but the turmoil was not only restricted to England. After Luther’s demands, the whole of Europe became a political hotbed that galvanised long percolating differences, finally boiling over into the notorious French St Bartholomew’s Day massacre August 24, 1572. Over two days thousands were killed, by traditional accounts, and, though figures vary, up to seventy thousand may have succumbed over the following months (against the orders, by royal decree, of Charles IX).

Interestingly, the fight over Ireland has been played out in “religious” terms (perhaps beginning with the St Valentine’s Day massacre 1929 only months before the spectacular US Wall Street Crash) and is ongoing, even now. The south and north is divided between the Rosicrucians and Zionists under the ruse of “faith”. Elizabeth I (1533-1603) set up the merchant contracts for America, but died before it could be ratified. The Virginia Company (1-10 August, 1606) was named after her (Virgin Queen – play on Virgin Mary) by James I (uniting England and Scotland [James VI] for Zion. As with US President Barak Obama, he was a Calvinist). It had been set up just after the Jesuit sanctioned so-called Gunpowder Plot (1605) which implicated Thomas Percy (and others), an ancestor of Bill Clinton. Notably, towards the end of his life, James I began shipping Irish “slaves” (casualties of the wars with Ireland) off to the New World in prestigious numbers. Nevertheless, since the Roman “freeman” system had not been updated, there are many celebrated accounts of, even, Negro slaves becoming successful land owners; some with troupes of their own bonded workers.

white_9

Charles I replaced James and he was determined to tax just about everything. This made him terribly unpopular with the merchant bankers and, to be honest, not at all popular with the plebeians either. According to history, a civil war was provoked. In reality it was a contest between merchants that favoured the king and those that didn’t. “The people”, with arbitrary status, as always, did as they were told. Anyway, famously, bonnie Charlie was beheaded and that was that. The oligarchs rubbed their hands with glee predicting a golden age of “free trade” and general plunder.

The Promised Land Offers “More of the Same”

Unfortunately the Commonwealth, under Cromwell, only saw black clouds and far greater autocracy than Charles had ever imposed. In the spirit of nepotism, Oliver’s son Richard succeeded him as pseudo “king”. agincourt20_2605342cThat was the final straw and, to save another civil war, royalty was swiftly reinstated with the return of exiled Charles II (son of Charles I) from France (Normandy – note the famous Henry V Battle of Agincourt, 1415). A parliament of merchants was also set up (extending the Westminster System) and new Charles toed the line. He was succeeded by James II, a king with royal ambition. Not only did he share James I’s passion for shipping slaves off to the colonies, but he made moves to cap merchant politics. A group of English parliamentarians raised an army under the guise of the “Glorious Revolution” in 1688, cutting short James’s reign to just three years. While in exile (which was never to be broken) the Crown was deemed legitimately “open” and William of Orange (William III) was appointed king through marital alliance with James’ eldest daughter, Mary.

An enterprising merchant, William Dockwra (an ancestor of the Grosvenor family), in 1680, established a Uniform Penny Post Service for the City of London and its suburbs (extended by Sir Rowland Hill to the whole of the United Kingdom and Ireland in 1840. Note – it was estimated that one penny covered the cost of carriage of thirty two normal letters. Thus, the enterprise burden was one penny for every thirty two collected). He then successfully patented the system, but Charles II became aware of the booming business, giving it to his brother, the Duke of York (to be James II). For his trouble, Dockwra not only had to surrender his patent, but also pay £2,000 (a hundred years labourer’s salary) in compensation for lost royal income (source – Wikipedia). My memory, perhaps “in error”, did conjure a prison sentence of fifteen years too, but I find no cursory record. With the exit of James II in 1688, Dockwra’s fortunes turned (I recommend this wonderfully detailed history for the period http://www.philatelicsannex.org/reference/Todd_Dockwra.pdf). Déjà vu saw a similar occurrence in 1872 in Fiji, when the owners of the local gazette, “Fiji Times”, had issued four and six penny postage stamps for inter-island carriage charge of newspapers. Royal agents of Queen Victoria, upon discovery, hijacked the service and imposed big penalties on its proprietors.

Returning to my history of the English kings, just about the first thing transplanted Dutch aristocrat, William of Orange, did, when king of England, was to draft the Bill of Rights. This 1688 contract was written by the nobles for the nobles. From that point on enterprising merchants had some control over fiduciary relationships through the law courts. Nevertheless, it is without doubt that the Dutch philosopher and magical writer, Baruch Spinoza (1632-77), had some influence on enlightened thinking.

371404-christopher-columbusArguably its extension, in part, is the American Constitution. Washington, a privateer, was anxious to ratify the 1776 agreement (which largely, once again, was for the nobles) as he owned the State of Ohio. Indeed the ring leaders (i.e. Washington, Franklin et al) of the uprising in the New World colonies were all English. Britain, contrary to popular belief, had no constitution at the time. The official prior “discoverer” of America, Christopher Columbus, incidentally, was a Rosicrucian explorer funded by Zionists (Jews are not renowned for “risk taking”). America was broken in two (and later three with colonisation of British Canada). Southern continental regions were under Latin Rosicrucian control and the north had been plundered by British, Zionist pirates. We also see French involvement (in support) led to the so-called revolution which elevated the despotic career of (son of an Italian banker) Napoleon Bonaparte.

A New World Order For Old Fools

new-world-order

Of course, by the mid 1800’s, the people of the New World were well and truly broken, particularly after the 1796 collapse of the gold standard (showing economic recessions every few years hence). It is no wonder the executive administration became a corporation in its own right and the “constitution” was reduced to nothing more than a corporate charter by Andrew Johnson in 1868. That one was for the people and some very bad and draconian legislation naturally ensued to shore up any possibility of dissent.

netanyahuI hear lots of latter day criticism and “revolution talk” but that doesn’t stop at voting for corporate government. The system has been in place for a long time, because “the people” lost the battle ultimately with imposition of the Magna Carta. Therefore, with scant exception, you will all carry on supporting your incredible system to the hilt because of the dislike/fear of inconvenience (ne’er sacrifice, God forbid). For its part, sneaky corporate government gives you (mostly) just enough to keep you from revolting. That’s why you honour your judges, policemen, scientists, priests (except those nasty Catholics) because that is the will of Zion and, as Netanyahu has pointed out on many occasions, the will of Zion trumps all other will.

Mystery surrounds the assassination of Abraham Lincoln in 1865. However, there is no mystery behind the Abolishment of Slavery in the same year (following Britain’s 1833 act). Sometime in the 1870’s the Rothschild family erected a smart silver plaque in celebration of the City of Manchester. At the time, this was England’s cotton boom town. Abolition of slavery and creation of third class American Negro residents (they were not regarded as “citizens”) had developed an economic wedge (currencies, duties, insurance etc.) that had improved the value of garments and linen fivefold.

So, returning to the title that inspired reasoning behind this article, I enjoy exposing the unblemished truth in my own, inimitable way. There is no hollow sentiment which means I only peddle stark reality. Because this is taken from the macro perspective, commercial and other interests don’t figure. I am one of the few that says it as it is and I enjoy that. So if you don’t like it, watch out and if you don’t “believe” it, well, I rest my case.

Is There Any Way Out For Humanity?

PityOfWar001There is something else that significantly affects peoples of our modern age (even though most are dumb as ducks, there are no prizes for ignorance). New World Order or NWO is a popular euphemism used by those that “think” they are “in the know”. New World Order should be broken into “New World” and “Order”. The New World is the United States of America and this is the supreme global power because of the Pentagon. An Illuminati Order was formed by a German [Jew] Jesuit named Adam Weishaupt on 1st May (May day) 1776. Shortly afterwards the United States of America was created with the announcement of independence [from the British crown] 4th July 1776.

I have already mentioned Christopher Columbus “discovered” America in 1492. That same year the Jewish elite considered converting to Catholicism finally sealing the fate of the known world because the Church had started to issue redemption promissory notes (useful for busy, business men) that allowed “advance” sinning. That notion was abruptly halted by another German Jesuit, Martin Luther (note – was Martin Luther King’s fate a coincidence?) who came along, reputedly, in 1517, and pinned his list of 95 demands against the Catholic Church to a door of a chapel in Wittenberg. There was going to be “no deal”.

Recently “unfriended” by a Facebook “penny activist”, I had the audacity to point out Jimmy Carter’s (they called him “JC” after you-know-who) actions have never matched his flowery sentiment. Just as with the faux “Messiah”, Barak Obama, foreign policy will always be Trilateral Commission diktat as of 1973. David Rockefeller is the Illuminati’s “man”. Rather than being virtuous, society, in general, has attempted to mimic political spheres of influence by forming relative poles of propaganda. Whereas many, on face value, support virtuous and valid causes, reasoning and belief systems are always, in some way, obtuse. Criticism, in the age of absolutism, is universally outlawed.

911 and the Treachery of the Masses

911TowersTo show the absolute treachery of “the people”, the Illuminati (Zionist) masters sanctioned the event so-called 911 to mark the end of Rosicrucian power. Like a great Olympic sprint, it was the starter’s gunshot to ignite a once-and-for-all de-structuring of old world powers controlling the Middle East as, the Trilateral Commission deemed, this was holding up the total enslavement of humanity. The rubble of the Twin Towers had scarcely been cleared before polls began showing that the majority [of Americans] were “of the belief” it was an “inside job”. Hold that thought! Remember, this post is titled “Enjoying the Truth for Virtuous Purity’s Sake”. After the Israeli sanctioned, US organised 911 act of terror, there was a stampede of wannabe murderers (armed forces) volunteering to exact revenge on the number one enemy of the Israel and the US. The Middle East is the thorn in the side of the New World Order, so these moronic “patriots” (armed forces) absolutely supported the objectives Israel and the US [terrorists] exasperating the memory of their compatriots (those murdered as a consequence of the 911 psy-op).

ws_Dante's_Inferno__Treachery_1440x900No wonder they say ignorance is bliss! Remember the guy I mention earlier that dived into the burning house to save the old lady (who survived)? Well, the reason he died is you, warriors fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, hung him for not being satanically treacherous enough. Feeding the homeless is now outlawed, so why not impose the death penalty for saving an innocent life?

The role of the Illuminati is merely one of influence (illuminate). That is why fantasy is paraded as “truth” and virtue has no place in civil society. The philosopher, Sufi, saw it clearly – “no point in changing the world when I can change myself (join the corrupt way of materialism and manipulation)”.

rainbow-celebration-hd-desktop-background-wallpaper-image-freeEven amongst erstwhile “sane” and intelligent people, there is a misguided belief that some “higher power” will, ultimately, save virtue. From now on, quite frankly, the papacy goes through the motions, so if an extra-terrestrial “Tall White” Jesus Christ does miraculously appear it will be to shore up existing Order. It is you (the people) that have the arbitrary power because, as much as they try and kill you off with wars, toxic medications and so on, they need you as slaves. Acceptance of the current state of enslavement is your, our bargaining chip. This means, putting it bluntly, the only thing that could save the world is the people. Whilst selfish determinism fuels rifts in the very fabric of communism (note – this is not the Marxist, “Capitalist” commerce management tool creating perpetual low wage classes) a common order is impossible, Humanity, as a unit, must shake off weakness, cowardice, ignorance, self-serving objectives, any deceptions, double standards and, most importantly, we must acknowledge and take responsibility for our own errors (and we all make them – throughout our lives). That is something I would celebrate.

Are strangers any different?

By replacing the word Goyim with stranger, standards are set for the demonization of anyone outside the inner circle. This extends way beyond arguments as what is meant by Chosen People. Pure blood “Jews” were originally Aryans we would call Caucasians today. At the time the Torah was being devised, Caucasian stock branched into Slavs (Philistines) and Celts (Sephardim). When it was clear the Philistines and Sephardim could not coexist together the former moved to populate the Balkan regions, most notably Greece. After the collapse of Greece, political adjuncts began the slow process of building up Italy. Under the tutelage of the Pentateuch, readers are told strangers (or Philistines or Slavs) are lower than animals. We are also informed the tribe of Levi is the “closest to God” and that is why all modern resources are totally controlled by Levite bankers.

You and "decent" sentiment

You and “decent” sentiment

My personal calamity has relied on the support of strangers. In this case, I “the stranger” am relying on unknown quantities – YOU (plural but directed individually, if that makes sense). Reasonable qualifiers as to “why?” are; why should we help you? And, who the hell are you anyway? Initially, I appealed for straight out, no bones, charity. Pictorially, I demonstrated that decent people with genuine problems would become destitute without support cashing in on the notion of Jesus’ “Good Samaritan”. Other than small tokens of support by two courteous bloggers, nobody offered or gave anything. There, of course, was the usual band of professional apologists. Even though I had made every effort to dissuade hollow positive affirmations, they came gushing. People are great, providing it is free and does not require sacrifice.

Thank you all; now I’m homeless

The homeless Samaritan

The homeless Samaritan

This is all thanks to you. You may say it isn’t our fault. We owe you nothing. I mean, you are a stranger after all and we are firmly committed to the system; whether Muslim, Jew, Buddhist, Hindu, Agnostic or “other”. The system says that Mister Levite banker is the king pin and he can take our jacksy with his big thing any day of the week. And you know what, we’ll squeal like little pigs because we wouldn’t change that for anything.

The great Les Dawson on Blankety Blank

The great Les Dawson on Blankety Blank

Therefore, in this Darwinist world, “strangers” can get “blankety blanked” just the same as we are by Mister “big potatoes”. None of you have disconnected from the banking system, right? I did. In 2011, I chopped up all my banking paraphernalia and threw it in a big box marked “return to sender”. Oh boy. Being mature, I did not add any fake poo, but I can tell you I was very tempted.

Thank you Jon Rappoport

In an age more or less Samaritan free, it was clear a lateral remedy to my situation was going to need more than charity, so I wrote a book. Ten years ago, if someone announced to me that they had decoded existence and published a book, I would have rushed out to buy ten copies for myself. Instead,

What just happened?

Oh some idiot just decoded existence.” “I mean who cares, right?”

Give me a book on puppies any day of the week. Hey, or what about the latest pop star gossip or “great sports moments” that have gone?

I cannot understand why the imagination of a supposedly educated readership would not be compelled to at least investigate existence decoded. I paid $55 for Rex and Heather Gilroy’s “The Energy Beings” simply because no one else has dared to be so brazen. Though thay have clearly tried to “materialise” subject matter, it is a trail blazer.

Of course there is the other thing, which became the basis of an earlier post – credentials. The age of information is built on fake science and propaganda, so what happens to truth? It is rejected out of hand, of course. Why? That is because it is different to messages implied by credentialed propaganda. More importantly, though, how could an unknown stranger know about the double slit experiment, Kondo effect or even Goswami for that matter? Does not the stranger without credentials pretend that they are important? To a mindless, enslaved following, the answer would be an emphatic “yes”. Sadly, that is my audience.

I did say last post that there would be a “turnaround in [my] attitude” with “just one brave purchaser”. Honestly, when I said one, I meant, well, maybe, forty two, but little steps are still good. Thanks to Jon Rappoport and one of his subscribers, an unknown bought a book off a stranger. The reason he made the donation was “to support my situation” and he “did not think he would like the book”. Here is his response after reading it:

“I went ahead and read your book last night. Very powerful stuff. Lots of odd connections were made leading up to getting your book. Your content was challenging, empowering at times, and a little disturbing at times because of the materialism you talked about and terminology. I think it is an excellent book. I want to read again after thinking or not thinking that much about things”

Of course, it is one thing saying you have written a book, but is the work going to measure up to the cover (or not, as the case may be). Then there is the other problem, you know, the banking one. This guy, me, either has two names or the bank account isn’t his. That’s pretty bizarre, weird, crazy, right? He surely must be a weirdo or perhaps he’s even a terrorist? Any decent, credentialed person would have their own bank account, vote, pay taxes and they certainly would not be a homeless stranger. That’s what a mindless, enslaved following would assume and assure. That is my audience.

Of course it is impossible to fully opt out of the banking system, but if great numbers used financial agents, there would be the framework for barter communities. It could even issue its own currency – guaranteed Federal Reserve free. The only way that can happen is through entire communities disconnecting from the banking system. Instead of its current “value added trade” status, barter can muscle the financial baseline and knock out Mister Levite banker.

In practicality, as it stands now, the only two ways to fully disenfranchise from corporate finance is to become an invalid or to summon authority. Taking the latter course, shopping expeditions would be accompanied by the “one barrel or two” payment method

Two barrel shopping broads

Two barrel shopping broads

. I can tell you it is amazing how philanthropic shop keepers become when presented this payment system. You see for the “one barrel or two” scheme bluster doesn’t work. It is really shit or bust. As a shop keeper, you can put your foot down and lose your head (egged on by the Illuminati Medias) or keep cool and grant mother fate a passive channel.

I have judged the majority of my readership as mindless slaves through your inactive response to posts

To me, you are all strangers, just as I am to you. Perhaps I have been harsh. My writing style, I had assumed, was credential enough to encourage rapturous support of an unknown artiste. However, posts, thus far, have been of rather clumsy quality and uninformative compared to my book, so even those that dislike my “style” would likely find something of value between the covers.

There used to be an expression that marked a resolute change of attitude, when fate turned in favour of the artist. The veil of ignorance could only be pierced by the “fat lady singing”. She sang and hold onto your hats for lights, camera, action. Mindless slaves would be transformed into swooning fans. Would a “fat man playing [piano]” be an acceptable variation? Here I’m playing for your support.

Salon piano recital

I have selected two works; both unashamedly romantic. Arguably Beethoven and Chopin are the two greatest composers for the piano forte with Liszt fractionally behind. Chopin’s music, in particular, has a transcendental quality. Liszt’s fiendish etudes series are comparatively musically barren.

Beethoven sonata in C minor “Pathetique” Op. 13

Of the “early years” piano sonatas and usually listed as No 8, the so-called Pathetique was so popular it ran out of print. This was all the more strange as the outer movements are extremely hard to play well, requiring an advanced technique. Musically, it transports the listener.

Chopin Polonaise in F# minor “tragic” Op. 44

To be blunt, I think what has happened to me, in light of the lack of support, is pretty tragic, but that is not the only reason this work was selected. It must be performed with such flare and gusto; it is one of the ultimate virtuoso works. In this performance I blame the incorrigible Alfred Cortot for lulling me into playing “what wrong notes?” (he was renowned for massive memory lapses, more wrong notes than right ones, but as an interpreter he was the master Chopin performer of his time). It requires a brave, brazen style and l’istesso tempo which few (including the greats) favour.

There is very simple request. Donate to reinstate a homeless man and his piano. Maybe you will like the book too.

The first of my book series is available for a donation of not less than $10US (Australian readers can visit https://exopolitician.wordpress.com/about/ and donate A$12 or more). For clarity, this is not a “fixed price” and there is no ceiling to donation amounts, which should be $10 or greater. Contributions keep the writing project afloat. [Important: I do not believe you need a Paypal account these days as major credit/debit cards are accepted]

PayPal Donate Button

Click on my Wonky button to Donate, Please