Inheritance, the Prodigal Son and Interest in “Interest”

When I began composing articles for this website it was as if I was a literary infant. Only while I fondly look back at scribbles in dusty journals do I see the core that was me remains intact, unblemished. It is what I have become.  Notably writing projects have grown into something much more expansive; substantially more substantive in many instances, presumably because I am much more proficient at the art of journalism. Nevertheless echoes of past enlightened symmetry still tantalisingly haunt. Whilst die-hard readers used to my familiar elaborate prose have witnessed an evolution of sorts, the more conventional style of recent entries is no less controversial. They are controversial but not abnormal it might be argued.  Even so, rhetoric is regularly too far adrift of sensationalised reason to covet “normalcy” in any sense of the word. It could be said my writings propose a uniquely different perspective which in itself is conspicuous evidence of sovereignty “apud esse”; something all humans strive for to some degree, but oh so few attain. In celebration of my largely discarded history, I have decided to attempt to revisit the past. My intention is to make this piece shorter, simpler [can I say?] in festival of the old but not forgotten me.

Is it possible to effectively resurrect the past?

Well that question will be answered presently.

Reflecting on my journey to date, I recall how, in dull moments, I would instinctively jot down a line or two, a solitary paragraph and other evidence of burning thoughts. None of these were suitable as standalone products for ambitious journalistic campaigns, of course. Logic dedicated a “to be written” folder to these moments and, over time, this has gathered fragments like moss to the old miller’s stone. Given my aim to regenerate dormant thinking, the “to be written” folder seemed the most valid first port of call for this episode. It is definitely fitting that the origins of my resurrection are founded in the rediscovery of misplaced parchments. In this case the scrap I selected consisted of a single page upon which was scribed one line of text in addition to the title. Intriguingly, these coarsely jumbled words appeared to nonchalantly identify an apparently related “unrelated” coincidence. The crux of the observation posited an “irony” over Federal Reserve banknotes, which are subject to 3% interest from the issuer (United States of America), paid annually, The coincidence noted that America (after a historic referendum) also dedicates a minimum of 3% of the gross national budget to “defence” which, in this case, is attack (messianic wars “for peace”).

Above this poignant inscription was the demure title “Interest in “interest””, which seemed the most fetching at the time, though, other than the, I must say, rather cheesy pun, the original “point” is now completely lost to me. After earning the judicial reputation of being an unabashed merchant of “tough love”, I would hate my inquisition to form any bias towards fashionably calculated schemes that formularise common opinions on “things in general”. Persuading those of low vibrational frequency that the devil is in the detail goes beyond motive. That is my vocation and, thus, I recommend anyone ill prepared to consider everything to the “nth degree” is not in a viable position to validate or express truth. Perhaps this rather crass example may suffice to service the analogy?

When someone dies of a gunshot wound motivated by an aggressive attack what perpetrates the murder? Is it the gun inventor, designer, maker, owner or user with malice in his heart? Is the gun itself, the operator, the bullets that caused the fatal wound or the gunpowder that ignites deadly blows at fault? If the shooter is a soldier or policeman, for instance, do the “rules” for murder eerily change? Could we blame the environment, the timeline or engrained political intrigue?

And on and on we can debate.

Revisiting the past is one thing, but I don’t fancy repeating myself is very constructive. Whether produced by the Federal Reserve or not, money’s passé. We also all know it’s the root of all evil (although perhaps not “why” it’s the root of all evil). Many of my prior articles have touched on the topic. This one in particular goes some way towards exploring primary issues.  Nevertheless I concluded the standalone title “interest in interest” was insufficient for that cause. It needed to be widened or scrapped unless I chose a different path. Any form of censorship (however remote) is destruction of the past – hardly fodder for a celebration of reawakening. Therefore Integrity determined my only legitimate choice was to expand the title at all cost as I had no intention of wandering aimlessly in search of ambition. Fortunately “eureka” eruptions reward those with brilliance. What, lacking before, profoundly related to “interest” could be worthy enough for a role or roles in a high impact title? Thinking aloud, it came to me in a flash. Does not interest “prove” the justification for inheritance and ownership?  Inheritance is undeniably one of if not “the” foundation stone of profiting interests.

I would need to summon up a title profoundly deserving of these widened considerations. After much internal reflection, I did eventually find words that will hopefully fashion as a perfect compromise.  They are, in order, “Inherence, the Prodigal Son and Interest in ‘Interest””. This is the resulting effort that is designated as official title of this essay unless something obsessively changes the contextual direction of ideas and their natural progressions. Otherwise no further review is planned.

Now let me explain why the “prodigal son” was also selected for its part in the essential treatise theme. Intrinsically linked to inheritance, prodigal sons are no ordinary offspring. Therefore, simply, that was the “missing piece” I needed to complete the title. It also presented investigative goals worth chasing, investigation that needs to determine what makes these prodigal sons so special. Of course primary analysis did upturn the blissfully obvious. Basically, these male progeny are gifted enough to be cultivated, which is usually in the family direction.  Otherwise, why bother to cultivate? Way back, when elites ruled the world, families with “everything to lose” produced governors and gatekeepers for their kingdoms. Along the lines of this protocol, security over tenure became a family’s greatest priority and ensured at least one son was encouraged (putting it nicely) to enter the military at rank. Another would become a doctor or a priest (isn’t that odd?) and then the following (perhaps the most strategically important) would be groomed to act as lawyer, preferably under government. Black sheep or dropouts would eventually come round to becoming merchants, stock holders or artists. The rigours of this big, bad world ensure safe, easy options are usually preferred.

Before I press on with on with the good stuff, I need to do a little more reflection by way of background. People, I have noticed, have a fondness towards procrastination (mentioned last article too) and a crippling fear of criticism. Procrastination, at best, fuels truths-of-sorts. That is the reality and that is why I try my upmost not to procrastinate. It can be a hindrance because, through my personal discovery tour; I have found some values, ideas and beliefs I used to stand by were either flawed or false. Consequentially, many years ago, I used to regularly bloviate with erudite confidence. There was never anything more than “personal convictions” to back up my gift of the gab, but I rarely found anyone I met could contest my position on the state of things in general. More recently, I have become alert, ever wary of falling into the trap of believing my own bullshit. Criticisms (where valid) counter any opportunity for imperfect procrastinations to take hold, so I see these as causal blessings. Procrastinators, for the record, focus on symptoms or phantom symptoms in deference to causes. Truth givers expose the root.

Therefore if I am to do apt justice to “Inheritance, the Prodigal Son and Interest in “Interest”” all stones must be upturned so as not to grind out more unanswered, “impossible to resolve” niggling queries. I must, instead, disrobe all root causes to unveil the exhilarating detail. Thought and responding responses will require latitude, much latitude. Mountains of propagandas dating back to the dawn of time have had the mesmerising effect of misleading sane discovery to such a degree, befuddled judgments are the function of normalcy. Even some of the great minds of our era are consistently turned to fudge by certain conventions. This is why I focus on topics others simply wouldn’t touch with a ten foot pole. True thinking outside of the box comes without a parachute. Even so, rather than drawing on possible conjectures as “sources of evidence”, my strategy (in motion) is to apply logic and purposeful reason to every concept I am at pains to illustrate.

Let us be sure where the “baseline” is. Currently materialist-atheist “edict” controls the way logic is directed. Per this “view”, the implication is purpose is a symptom compounded from random effects of existence, even though (as Rupert Sheldrake has wittily pointed out), by this account, more incontrovertible miracles were created at the dawn of time than Jesus could have ever fancied. (Alien to this mindset) in fact purpose must underline causes because existence was “crafted”. The evidence existence was crafted is found in its design, which is clear and unarguably transparent.

So to do justice to the quest, I may have to introduce suspects or considerations that have rarely or, perhaps, never been pondered before. All the little tweety birds that believe puffing various forms of political correctness is their branch to salvation beware, for this big bad eagle may swoop down and devour you and your branch whole. We should begin with no misconceptions. Those that initiated the process that conceived elitism (or, in other words, the hubris of “prison planet”) demonstrated extraordinary cunning. It seems obvious to me that, considering how the process has radically evolved (in the engineering sense), higher forces beyond this realm have had involvement every step of the way. Not dwelling on possible superstitions, the whys and the wherefores, however pertinent, I intent to expose the chassis of the fabric of the illusion that is today’s “reality”. Conspiracy networks have been installed so elegantly, it is as if they have been commissioned by God Almighty.

Before I discuss inheritance, it is important to review something much more primordial.  We take friendships for granted. They just happen. Or do they just happen? Our first friendships are with family or extended family. Managing relationships with our family members teaches us how to distinguish friends from enemies. These teach us politics (affairs of the people). They teach us who we can influence and who we will let influence us. A trade of sorts is communicated. Eventually we form close knit groups of likeminded kindred spirits. Perhaps not directly considered such, we are all elitist in the way we resolutely preserve our group cultures. When stretched out into the wider community and beyond, we expand into other political networks. Some present revolutionary, but not conflicting ideas.  These see us progress, in some cases. Some ideas are so common they become universalised. Politicians naturally capitalise on, exploit and manipulate these phenomena.

Eventually draconian laws are destined to twist what was original goodwill into all kinds of overt tyrannies in order to elevate elite elitist cultures. Laws have always been the basis for kingdoms. Under this principle, every king has ruling power. However, without friendships there would be no alliances to back the laws and politics that founded them would be rendered superfluous and obsolete. No king could rule. In addition, under these conditions, though commerce would be possible, other than as a tool of oppression, inheritance could have no functional purpose. It would also mean people would be forced to discover the truth if they were motivated that way. They could no longer rely on friends’ redigested second and third hand opinions that sounded right.

As it stands “Inheritance” is one of the golden keys to open Pandora’s Box.  In a distant era populated by long forgotten customs and attitudes, it was exclusively the domain of the elites. At that time land was free, commoners outside metropolises were largely ungoverned and there was no sense of ownership (per modern standards). Individuals congregated into clans and these became long standing settlements which then saw homesteads passed down from generation to generation. But there was no registered ownership. If some place was occupied and sympathetically unavailable, sound conscience determined it was off limits. When the “universalisation” of deeds of ownership tied to symptomatic inheritance of chattel began is hard to calculate. In “western society”, I would argue that the abolishment of “slavery” (social security) led to the effective enslavement of man. Inheritance then evolved to become a quasi-version of the “frills” of slavery. “Rights” would be proscribed by authorities unless aspects of commoners’ common law were considered relevant (to seamless elite governance of slaves). In this case any reflectively worthy laws were drafted as supplants to legislated corporate manifestos. It goes without saying administrators of guidelines were systemised lackeys incapable of virtuous judgement. Finally, courtesy of banking and insurers, everything could be “valued” and that “worth” represented by tokens of interest (whether that is gold/silver bars, coins or promissory notes).

In order to engage lawyers and accountants whose role (in the grand elites’ scheme) is to professionalise ownership, receipt of inheritance follows a litany of potential administrative hurdles, but I don’t wish to dwell on this. There is another internet resource I like to reference occasionally that specialises (in part) on whistle blowing messy probates, the fallout from inheritance. Pure Professional Journalism Gazette can be located here.

In addition, philosophy behind inheritance capitalises on the principle of appreciation or depreciation and this is clearly an expansion of the dependent interest bearing investment culture. Probate relies on belief in heirlooms, which are presumed to indefinitely financially mature. Government, per this reasoning, rakes in their “fair share” from the commerce evolution in taxes in order to theoretically provide ever improving infrastructures and representative management frameworks. Accommodating this theory, surpluses could be redistributed for other pressing voters’ needs. That is why I believe all governments (on paper, at least) are kept “in the red” deliberately. In fact, when truth is laid bare, government, though never limited, does little more than give inheritance necessary tinges of authenticity to make people believe in its credibility. If it is taxed, it “must be for real”. Without profits, commerce becomes obsolete. Interest is, by circumstance, both a symptom of and agent in confirmation of profits.

Truth laid bare goes way beyond mere commerce and inheritance. The tyranny actually began with registered ownership because, without deeds, commerce is arbitrary. Barter doesn’t cater for profits. Here is why the imperialists concocted their “survival of the fittest” mantra and continue to lord it as nature’s divine plan. The fittest are considered the best at coveting what they have scavenged (the nice word for stole). I apologise for dispelling with the hocus-pocus, but acknowledgement of ownership as something that is righteous and Godly only grossly and deviously distorts reality in favour of tyranny against the divine. Aside from  modern day [ADL fabricated) Racism fraud, the reason certain peoples have been temporarily “classed” as savages is to remove any contest over conquered (stolen) land spoils (“animals” cannot own land). Notably in Africa, America and Australia, “white man” thieved most of the habitable land areas. Repatriation (a pathetic attempt at feigning “fairness”) in some cases has seen the return of lands considered commercially unviable. Even so, generally speaking, when it comes to origins of ownership, judicial mechanisms continue to work off the ludicrously partisan principle “finders’ keepers”.

The net effect of that is another of those atheistic miracles. Our impotent, voiceless God apparently blesses open sacrilege. Was the principle finders’ keepers ever to be condemned and abolished, commerce would cease to exist. This is a big statement. Some might contest it. Here’s an analogy which should amply validate its authority. I don’t own the royal grounds, approximating three square miles, close to the heart of Tokyo, Japan. Under the auspices of lack of ownership, no one would own the land. Therefore, I decree some legitimacy in laying claim on that which is not owned. Hypothetically, I could establish a real estate agency to sell off my theoretical acquisition. I may be able to attract teams of would be buyers. Yet, without binding contracts and infrastructures supporting them, verifiable presumption of intent to abide by the law, the land is worthless until someone or some group manufactures political legitimacy. The ancient Romans couldn’t give money away to the Britons because they did not believe in it.

The reason (under this system) ownership will never be abolished (although it may be restricted) is governments would have to rescind their slave master statuses in order to transform into arbitrators that truly work “for the people”. Currently populations are effectively forced to toil to survive. Those privileged enough to “own” sufficient land holdings supported by interest bearing investments probably haven’t the skills to become entirely self-sufficient. Thus, without government society would naturally function through the formation of brokered relationships that would need to leverage and harness social parasitism. According to today’s popular press (sponsored by corporate interests and governments who are in themselves giant corporations), people only want good jobs. People, by the same rose tinted reasoning, will do anything to keep their good jobs. Commerce needs labour to function. Indeed, for those that were (in society) to ever become self-sufficient, commerce would cease to be necessary. That lack of functional necessity could only be defeated by interest in collectables and other objet d’art which, though arguably functionally irrelevant, fuel a potentially ever-accruing “need for more”. I guess that is why we have collectors.

It is important to understand the relevance of commerce, because many “goods and chattels” from the inheritance perspective may be deemed valueless. The family’s pink plastic clock that ticked you to sleep as a baby is worth nothing (even though it may be priceless to you) compared against your departed father’s prestigious “medal winning” coin collection that you were never “allowed” to touch, which insurance would class as a valuable asset. Many factors can determine an heirloom’s worth. Rarity, age, condition, popularity affects status of all antique items. Statuses are groomed from fostered traditions. For instance, Caucasian Australian manufactured artefacts offered for sale would likely be priced at many multiples of any vaguely comparable Aboriginal counterparts. In line with this ideology, the essential education of all well-connected prodigal sons provides a vital comprehension of firstly how the system functions and then, as importantly, how stepping stones to credentials gift “keys to the kingdom”.

Unsurprisingly a correct (for purposes of social elevation) education is priced beyond the means of not-so-humble slaves, which proposes a vicious circle whereby only elite or “fortunate” working class families can avail the system. Indeed for the system (which some argue began with William Cromwell at Westminster) to permanently function as it is, the riff-raff could never be involved in any authoritative managerial capacity. So, with the exception of very occasional “pliable” geniuses, credentials of note are off limits to ordinary folks. Rebellious or revolutionary geniuses are invariably spurned by those that might have empowered them unless their significances were so timely that to trade would persuade the only logical course forward. The powers never favour constructive partnerships. That wick always burns fast and furious. Why would recalcitrant free thinkers ever be viscerally rewarded by a system that choses to repress or oppress most forms of independent thought?

From the (dare I say?) “Conspiratorial perspective”, certain specialised training qualifications that are destined to open doors to those prized “good jobs” are invariably only available to those with educational credentials usually off limits to working classes. Hindsight is a wonderful attribute. In many instances only those in the know (or, rather, with “connections”) have inside information as to which skills to acquire for guaranteed success. Thus, just about all “good jobs” are snapped up by exclusive circles privy to their occurrences. Propaganda permeates a much wider circle of influence which, in part, is designed to operationally program the masses. I can but assume the Clintons were firmly behind the cruel and childish media attacks on Chelsea as a young adult. The design (aided by unflattering images), in this case, was to chide ignorant people into “believing” she was “ugly” so as to ward off any potential for successful unsuitable suitors’ advances. Media tactics of this kind are regularly analysed by Jon Rappoport. I strongly recommend investigation of his writings.

Few seem to be able to come to terms with the extent of the complexity of propagandas. Perhaps this is because everyone attempts to deny their own relative indoctrination or, worse still, it is the summary evidence of their root systemisation. Propagandas are everywhere. They are not merely limited to the mainstream and institutionalised “sciences’ (sic). Much deceptive information has been generated about computer viruses, for instance. One of the great lies that seems as though it will stand the test of time forever is Pasteur’s germ theory. Germs, according to Pasteur, can invade and infect any body and this is completely untrue. On the back of the lie, scientists concoct legions of “organised germs” that conveniently follow the program. They label these mysteriously unidentified legions’ “viruses”. Of course, if medical evidence free of Pasteur’s contaminated propaganda was given the opportunity to incubate reasoned appraisal, results would radically dishonour current standard opinions in the same manner Bruce Lipton somehow defeated all biological cells.

As Pasteur was nothing short of an appendage of “corporate science” which had been set up by the Rothschild family in Paris in the late eighteenth century (just after the “revolution” – sic), any marketing device aiding the manufacture of arbitrary confusion to help everyone “believe” would be regarded as a godsend by those that presume they own the world. Their godsend in specific relation to the case I highlight is “computer viruses”. Computer viruses are not even remotely comparable to any medical counterpart, but propaganda agents don’t care. In fact origins of all computer viruses can be traced back to sponsored hackers testing security effectiveness of networked equipment, but that muddies the objective of paradigm synthesis. To the propagandist it only successfully sells the “concept” germs can and will invade and infect with impunity whether via the internet or other routes. The idea that anyone connected to humans is potentially “networked” with dangerously contaminated aliens is the perfect genre extension. Because, in this specific case, “viruses” (as labelled) do invade and infect technologies, the propaganda message would go a long way towards convincing shallow minds. I will leave the associated complex good/bad bacteria and strengthened/weakened immune systems’ discussion for another entry.

The great deception is to paint a computer virus as the principled copy of a medical virus.

Using established institutions to routinely dress false positives or negatives as “facts”, places the system in the supreme position of being able to present any fantasy as effective truth, no matter how fantastical. Providing data can be formally argued and expressed in particular ways, any antipathy of reality is up for believable persuasion. There are actually no laws of science (physics). There are only laws of existence (to the atheists’ dismay) which can theoretically be placed under scrutiny of sciences. An excellent example of how current etiquette can end up bamboozling itself is found in various expressions of interest that emerged considering the effectiveness of a new energy generating prototype heralding from Italy a few years ago. I have lost source details, but can verify corporate backers in favour of the machine presented analytical notes interpreting data that illustrated the device was going to be a magnificent success. Competitors insisted the exact same data was unrequited “proof” the machine would never work by their account. Would be investors coming somewhere in the middle couldn’t or wouldn’t speculate either way. Similar “analysis” has been made regards the Bosnian “Pyramids”. The duly diligent will see it everywhere.

In addition, to aid propagandists’ purposes, word values (such as “gay”) are routinely changed or even reversed in order to lambast popular interpretations. Late Nicolai Levashov (his family incidentally claims he was “murdered by Zionists” in 2012) and other genre academics have argued this restructuring of language began in earnest in mother Russia just after the 1917 bankers’ invasion. Let’s face it; “interest” is a profoundly positive word that surely inspires persuasive popularity. That is why it was given to “utopian” banking commissions (which will always be viewed in an eternally positive light) in my opinion. Finally, those that do not consider insistence on and observance of balanced truthfulness is the only viable promotional standards’ benchmark are propagandists, whether they acknowledge the fact or not. Propagandists are in the business of manufacturing beliefs, period. Truth that doesn’t support or actually impedes the manufacturing process is unwelcome. Any devices, such as changing word values, fake science and so forth are more than welcome. Discerning would-be “Manchurian Candidates” is trickier, but, I would imagine those that assure religious adherence to product “use by” dates are well and truly in the crisis zone. The vegetarian that “doesn’t like” meat isn’t far behind.

Money is only supported by the “belief” in its value. That particular belief has become the most potently powerful and universally entrancing factor in the control of man. Thus, we must acknowledge the scripting of believable beliefs is far more virulent than truths that might support or aid acknowledgement. For example, I wonder if any believer (in money) has considered the fact that financial optimism provides fodder for wars. When the Industrial Revolution was in full swing the 1890’s saw boom times. Boom times make babies; manpower for the First World War? “Roaring” ‘20’s clearly provided “stock” for the Second World War (Germany was billed to “lose”, so their peoples were given fertility stemming poverty on the back of harsh reparations. 1930’s optimism was in preparation for the kingdom of Germany to be rebuilt as a new republic [styled on America] when the war was won).

There are always going to be inconsistencies, such as the infamous 1960’s flower power movement. This is a paradox because it was the only genuine peoples’ revolution in living memory. No attempt was made to synthesise prosperity in the 1970’s because weaponry is becoming so sophisticated, “ape” operators will eventually be found unnecessary (beyond culling populations). Were a few of those bygone hippies “tuned in” enough to realise “Interest” is the nemesis of sovereignty? Being a hippy was all about recognising individual sovereignty. The 3% the Federal Reserve skims off every dollar assures each bill in circulation is worth 97 cents (presuming “government” doesn’t take a cut too). Therefore the owner either has to front the loss or is forced to speculate or trade in order to recoup 3% or more. Imagine the potential for manipulation if Bitcoin or any other e-currency takes hold. That is how the notion of profits was born. The land that is the royal grounds of Tokyo is worthless unless it is rated and valued. It has long been presumed that “highest bidder” nominations assure correct marketplace values, but this isn’t necessarily so.

Abundance does not come without a “price” to those that dedicate themselves to controlling humanity. Population swells lead to the collectivisation of giant metropolises. Without incessant propagandas that “define” normalcy, the “stranger” might persuade “influence charisma” of comparable or greater power than corporate bread winners. From that, a rogue messiah or “anti-Christ” could emerge. It is more than possible; probable even. If so, of course there are many ways to quickly dispel unrest. Leaders can be branded occultists, sexual deviants or, worse still, insane.  Anyone fetching that positive diagnosis can be liberally carted off to a very unhealthy institution and indefinitely detained without recourse. As everyone that used to be “evil” now has some sort of psychiatric disorder, biased and unfair claims against can be sinisterly effective. How well did Jesus fare against the Pharisees in face of the cross? How are mental illnesses “healed”? Well to answer that, there is a litany of tested drug cocktails perfect at prepping would-be “Manchurian Candidate” assassins without causes from recalcitrant, inspirational free-thinkers.  Two birds killed with one stone, maybe?

The Great Societal Paradox – Action That Defies Principled Beliefs

We “categorise” morality and determine anyone that thinks differently must be insane, evil or a combination of the two. Whether you voted for Clinton or Trump or were Rand Paul, Bernie Sanders supporters or even backed that (anything but) Libertarian Party, you sided with morality brands. A lot of them carried more or less identical messages, when boiled down. I, personally, don’t agree with fake righteousness or the puerile cosmetic synthesis behind the comparable factions that coexist to form governments.  Therefore, this time I have done more than remove the mask that disguises two faced society. This time I expose horrors in unsuspecting places. Occasional critics label me “Mr Tough Love” and here I guarantee I will not win any friends so I had better give my book a fair plug before I totally lose all of you. “The Beauty of Existence Decoded” is a delightful read, providing you are a genius and, in context with this article, it is surprising topical. In the unlikely event any of you decide to leave your egos at the gate and go on the discovery tour, donation details can be found here. Thank you to those of you that have had the foresight to take the plunge. Maybe my music channel will go some way to making ammends to those I have “offended”. Audio versions of some of my exo-political articles can be found at Trippy’s Magical Video Emporium.

I have a problem with truth

Most people behave subjectively even when trying to be objective, so how can truth be anything more than a tool as it is currently used; as the means to an end? In that context, when truths aren’t arguably beneficial they are ignored, so truths aren’t truths at all. Thus, people reflecting on real truths deliberately miss the point, because, otherwise, the point would assuredly come back to bite in all sorts of guises.  If that was to happen, consequences, naturally, would be dire. Arguers would not only look stupid but, God forbid, truth would highlight their only sane way out of it; their only way forward would ensure lateral changes or reversals of opinions was the singular congruous option.

Of course, if heeded properly, that grand watershed would assuredly snowball into a domino effect negotiating changes of stance left, right and centre. Though, maybe most importantly, the metamorphosis could not be complete without different routines and different lives. Perhaps I can present this in a different way. People that vote in elections go through the motions. They vote for ideals that never materialise because of their addiction to personal conventions. Where these conventions originated is a whole ‘nother discussion, of course. From the idealistic standpoint, the mere act of solidarity with self transcends the result. The fact that the ideals never materialised, nor could they underscores the paradox between “belief for beliefs’ sake” and manifest reality.

That is why the whole voting mechanism is built on the fundamentals of exclusion. Do you think the “powers” are stupid? They knew the gig was up long before the people had thought they had figured the significance of slavery. Governments monopolise standards and academia to ensure their chosen corporations are mostly given a free commerce reign and only “A trackers” have influence and money for the “training” required for decent jobs, with scant exception. Some argue the last real politician was John F Kennedy. Now, for certain, there are only “theory touting” plastic candidates with reprepared scripts that confound the right messages the wrong way or make the wrong messages seem bizarrely palatable. All candidates work from identical policy schedules, so choice is reduced to individual personalities, social backgrounds and particular brands of “body odour”. In conjunction with this, vane, intellect wanton reasoning limits all jargon to “any fool can see it” rhetoric or, put more succinctly, this sort of “candour” is only for fools.

Under those conditions, candidates can’t be voted in unless they tell a precession of untruths or outright lies.  Other than those noteworthy “trainee Messiahs”, would be leaders are voted out. The one that was selected was the best of the “no better” bunch and he or she wasn’t voted for. To put it in contextual terms dealing with the here and now of busy today, when people appear to vote in Clinton, they actually vote out Trump. There is something else associated with this syndrome; something far more menacing. The great societal paradox is people say one thing and do another. Action always ultimately defies principled beliefs. I can’t rely on anything anyone says because the chances are they aren’t telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

In the spirit of hyperbolic populism, I hear endless spineless protests against the dreadful “banksters”, most regularly of the Federal Reserve variety, by people with umbilical connections to just about all of their value added networks. So the reality, the truth (don’t you just hate it?), is everyone, without exception (i.e. including you), lives and breathes by (parasites off) the system you only have profanities for. Now do you see why I don’t take “truthers” seriously? It’s all bullshit. This is the reality. Brace yourselves.  Because no one really trusts the next man (euphemised as the stranger or goyim), banking infrastructures have attained near divine status thanks to your cowardly collateral support.

Principled beliefs may well dictate the banking system is run by social pariahs and money is worthless, yet action assures your parasitic commitment to roguish financiers is unbreakable. Not one person that dropped $100 in the street would see the irony that nothing was lost. You would all retread paths day and night if you felt there was an inkling of a chance of “redeeming the loss”. It is for that reason alone the bankers are able to behave like pariahs with relative impunity. People will always be parasites and those that level criticisms at banking instruments are absolute hypocrites. If you don’t like that wilful accusation, set up systems of your own and prove me wrong. While you use their banking system you have no right to criticise it beyond highlighting contractual obligations in place not being met.

Everyone that isn’t a banking affiliate is unfairly critical of the system

We know why. It is because it is perceived as a generator of costs “out of thin air and to no overall benefit”. How did I put it before? “Any fool can see it”. In order to avoid the point (truth), grand commercial conspiracies involving [fake] Levites or blood sucking Federal Reserve vampires balloon into either misdirected propaganda or blatantly untrue talking points. There certainly is a conspiracy, but no one seems the slightest bit interested in coming to terms with it. No weight is given the importance of the gold standard; not “gold”, but the gold standard. Few, if any, seem to realise it collapsed in 1797 from ongoing “bull markets, stocks collapse” cycles infamously highlighted by the 1720 demise (“South Sea Bubble”) of the South Sea Company, having been created by private enterprise in 1711 to consolidate and reduce the cost of national debt.

To the hypocrites, Federal Reserve issuing worthless (i.e. unbacked) paper currency (Papiermark) in Germany 1914 (whilst vigorously touting the importance of the gold standard as the counterweight for “fair trade” at every opportunity) is unknown and presumed irrelevant. You all whine incessantly about the 3% commission charge on printed currency. Banknotes presumably design themselves, print themselves, store themselves and distribute themselves securely by magic at no cost? Will Mr Trump be issued with a wizard’s wand once in office? Given that precedent, it is my opinion that when alternative financial systems spring up, they will be dealt with in exactly the same way.  Remembering George Orwell’s “Animal Farm” (which implied intellectual working classes were nothing short of tyrants in waiting) the various rigged barter mechanisms (Bitcoin included) that have sprung up post “social awakening” have all been put into motion to advantage those that established them. There is no real altruism anywhere.

Reactionary societies instinctively thrive on blame game. Faceless protests are the modern day terms of revolution. Truth has largely been reduced to off the cuff talking points strategically geared mostly to expand cultivated empires of dissent. At the end of the day, even when privateers are viscerally only in it for fame (or perhaps destiny is a better word), everyone knows where there’s fame there’s fortune. Followers that tag onto a movement, taking the joy ride, find populism is easy and the quickest way to ensure redundancy is to buck the system. Thus, every single “truther club” is, consequentially, its own self-censoring dictatorship. Only truths that fit the bill (cultural propaganda) are welcome.

In other words, those valiant truthers’ scales of justice are always skewed in favour of whichever branded arguments suit the flow. Impact is everything, so even mild attacks against their prosthetic virtues are treated as though each was a barbaric assault against supreme order of the most divine blessing. Defences are cordially zealous and spitefully regimented, as to be expected. Insignificance is exaggerated way out of proportion in order to startle but most gaping issues are avoided like the plague. Laughably, even mainstream propaganda will be aggressively championed by our devoted zealots provided it’s a good flavour. Give them a whiff of “child sex” and they’ll be in like jackals on a rancid carcass.

Jon Rappoport spells the problem out in stereo here. As far as truthers are concerned, responsible anger directed at the dozen or so “innocents” killed by police rage grossly outweighs the “non-importance” that thousands beyond thousands die from resulting unrestricted gun controls and lethally armed populations because that would conflict with your 2^nd amendment “rights” (i.e. a gun owner has the right to indiscriminately kill you in cold blood, justifications notwithstanding). Ineffective local inner city management has nothing to do with it by their reasoning. Jon Rappoport and I disagree. We are also well aware of the long prior German and Russian “government” attacks on unarmed citizens. However, if the United States statistics keep progressing on current track, there won’t be anyone left to kill. Okay, that’s an exaggeration.

Now even I’m doing it!

Not only them and me, the same philosophy can be applied to the mainstream. I needed to say that, just for the record. We now know everybody does it; it’s not just the “mainstream”. Is it any wonder everyone is desensitised when something dreadful does actually happen? It’s grist for the mill. To add to the mischief, all facts that appear to (but commonly don’t) “fit” the grand public assault on expressive rights are regularly used against brave dissenters that dare challenge any popular movements accountability (mainstream or alternative) too. Often these contextually sour barbs are monotonously regurgitated for good measure. The same sorry, sad idioms go round and round like moss on squeaky wheels. Those that summon the courage to speak the truth at the wrong places in the wrong way are doomed. Any fool can see it.

I somehow keep on singling out David Icke as a perpetual offender even though, to his credit, he has done a sterling job in encouraging his followers to think outside the box and question everything. Nevertheless, in the spirit of truth, this needs to be said. I suppose we’ll call them “born again crusaders” have stumbled on (or, perhaps, “over” is a better word) the ultimate excuse. According to their hybrid messianic diatribe, human action or inaction, depending on the calculation, is the automatic “fault” of effervescent reptilians, which have officially replaced “evil” (still favoured by old school matadors). Like Max Spiers and Ken Bakeman, I, as a supposed expert on the subject, know that the reptilian conspiracy, if I dare call it that is very real but the truth barely remotely reflects the impressions of wilful lay preachers, such as David Icke and, I guess, that gives me the purpose to be critical of him, them.

Anyone prepared to subjugate themselves to truth will find things could not be any more straightforward. Every single human being is a variety of reptilian and those of you that can prove otherwise simply are not human. Atomically, partially erroneously conceived “quantum fluxes” assure our dimensional frequency signal pulses very quickly across a much wider density signature than perceptive reality configures.  Because our receptive bandwidth is so puny, we struggle to tune into “real” reality effectively, so, instead we rapidly blink in and out of dimensions (at quantum level). In fact, to give a more precise explanation, supposed extra-terrestrial visitors called the “Ummos” (located in Spain in the 1950’s) claimed atoms perpetually resonate as three interconnected phases.

Thus, gifted out of synch photographers can capture atomic prints “between phases” on occasions. This is harder to do than might be imagined. Camera aficionados are still “tuned” to human frequencies, so it takes consummate skill to “dislocate” from the pulse. Phases are rarely uniform, but body parts are seen to change dramatically when correct conditions are visualised. On those extremely rare occasions the reptilian undercoat is revealed. However, for more mundane physical evidence, our limbic, endocrine and pulmonary systems are undeniably reptilian adaptations (fully or in part). As everybody (including you) is the living evidence of that reptilian heritage, you should be able to see now how sometimes knowing the truth really mucks things up.

Again, in fairness to David Icke and others selling fear for fear’s sake, there is a dark side. Dimensionally advanced overlords can dial-into our (atomic) DNA and influence us for their (usually group) purposes, often to our sovereign disadvantage. The dimensional hierarchy providing the opportunity for tyrannies against us also belongs to our genetic pyramid going all the way up to the Anunaki. Factions from our dimensionally superior next in line “genetic cousins”, the Ciakars, are the trouble makers. Everyone must understand that the only thing really differentiating us from Ciakars is our cerebral cortex and our (perhaps synthetically) redundant DNA. This logical brain is the legacy of the Atlantis Martian “Pleiadians” who were not human! Thus, humans are Ciakar-Pleiadian crossbreeds.

Though the Ciakars have a mind facilitator that is as effective as the cerebral cortex but quite independent offering a different style of cognitive processing, causal hybrids closer to their genetic makeup were made to test advantages of “human aligned brains”. Purebreds (lacking cerebral cortex) have something that produces instinctive reason and, naturally, they think their physiology is much better than ours. Radically cut down versions of this style of cognitive management system can be found in Sasquatch (Neanderthal man). It is also barely recognisable in known apes (such as chimpanzees, gorillas and so on) but not likely enough for scientists (aggravated by tendencies towards cognitive dissonance, perhaps?) to identify without divine help. In my opinion, the reason Sasquatch will remain an “open secret” is if the Ciakars “allow us” (details on these sort of control mechanisms can be found here) to glean how their physiology works, it will be difficult for them to maintain their hold over us as effectively. In addition, even science is becoming increasingly aware of the importance of different states as access gateways to new physical domains (cordially expanding available reality). When relational bridges between dimensional tracts are discovered, the Ciakars are sunk.

It is not so much that ancient knowledge has been censored as it is not referred to. The giant encyclopaedic resource (in part originating from Atlantis), the Mahabharata, has even been translated into English. Sumerian tablets, Aryan wooden books, Tibetan scrolls (also Atlantis lore) and hosts of other original resources, such as the enigmatic Taoist I Ching, are out in the open and, as such, in plain sight. They all, in subtle ways, say everything I have said about us, the Ciakars and that (in motion right now) ever so dark conspiracy aimed at stemming our cultural growth. For instance, Apache (new Lemurians) ancestors didn’t need to hurl any accusations or even “specifically identify the fact”. We learn everything we need to know from subliminal truths buried in their legends.

They unclearly identified with the fact we were Ciakar hybrid genesis (as the biblical Genesis’ “snake” analogy in “Adam and Eve” does too) even though, at regular intervals, they were “at war” with their makers [but also revered some of them as great sages]. No wonder culturally strict modern-day Apaches assert the heart and “gut driven” decisions are independent from logical mind rationale (accentuated by the cerebral cortex).  They would not be surprised to learn that while we detach from the cerebral cortex, we are arguably “fully” Ciakar or, rather, as close as we could be to them. Mind you, I don’t recommend testing a perpetual fight or flight parenthesis as I don’t think we have anything to back up missing reason and logic as they do. Ciakars are also dual blooded (hot/cold) and can switch between the two at will for extraordinary physical transformation. Our pulmonary system is less flexible, of course, as a single fused unit.

In typical reptilian fashion, humanity is rapidly approaching a head-on with that most noble of infinity loops. Our governance system is broken, doesn’t work because it never was created for the people. That is why the “Bill of Rights” acts as a (oh so selective) constitutional prop. Because people are hopelessly unfair, selfish and judgemental, they can’t bring themselves to trust others enough to form plausible alternatives. At least the reptilians mostly agree on standards that form the basis of their societies. We, on the other hand, “vote in” plastic leaders we hate to preside over a system that doesn’t work and that is going to be the perpetual motif until “We”, the people, learn we must become both meek and faithful if we are going to inherit the Earth. Until we can all get on together we do not stand a chance in edgeways against a machine which, conveniently, doubles as life support.

Is it any wonder the Jesuit Luther didn’t “get” Jesus’ topically poignant saying?

The only way out of the infinity loop is to come together as a multilateral forgiving force that applies punitive measures against those that restrict. It is for that reason alone Israel is furious with the Palestinian BDS Movement, because boycott, divestment and sanctions against those that cause mischief is the only lateral way of fighting back against malicious tyrants peacefully. From my experience, they don’t come more malicious than Israel. People must understand that laws that ensure no direct consequence against people in general are still bad for those they target. Laws are not fair. They are an unfair method of arbitrating settlement. “You can’t or will do that because we say so” is not settlement. It is a declaration of war.

When things are reduced to gimmicks and gizmos all is lost. Look, I am all for the dissenting scientists marching their “SPIDER” on the CDC (Centres for “Disease Control”). However, if the campaign’s reduction to another stagnant metaphor featuring spider biting CDC in the ass for the “photo op” is all that’s achieved; it hasn’t solved the problem or, frankly, changed anything. Worse still, it has misled hope deceptively. Therefore, I am wary of all “pied pipers” that innocently spread pestilence to ensure the people never wake up. How many current affair programs have promoted triumphant ends to rapid-quick crusades?  Those that bother to follow long winded progress “post fanfare” invariably discover “remedies” are reduced to years’ worth of independent external committee audits.  These either flatly ignore real issues or are ultimately scandalised by “the powers” for daring to detail problems they have no intention of fixing. If a nasty product or service is too well known, it is simply rebranded. The same goes for rogue organisations, as demonstrated by the recent Monsanto-Bayer transaction aimed at taking the heat off of toxic reputations.

But, for more down to earth gimmicks, was a “Big Beautiful Woman” or BBW to actually lose weight, would that make her ugly? No, she is simply fat but may still believe she has endearing beauty. Those that are not blessed with natural good looks say “I’m beautiful on the inside”. This corruption has been expanded to make a mockery of purity as beauty is a form of judgement. To recognise beauty is to be judgemental and vane unless a balance of truths is being weighed, as I discuss here. Those that are truly pure are always neutral, ambivalent or passive when not challenged to be truthful. This is not to say that judgement has no place in society. Society would become dysfunctional without it. However, when social decisions are based only on the acceleration of self (i.e. that which satisfies or is deemed beneficial), communities are destined to splinter. Total disassociation from personal standards allows anyone to champion external issues or items on merit by applying reasoned logic for balanced pragmatic solutions.

Vanity is predominantly a female thing when it comes to obsession over the way we look. Additionally it is mostly females that synchronise with the purity concept. The reason the majority of women passionately support whatever mercilessly arbitrary and unfair measures are used to justify sexual prohibition is to protest against them undoes purity. As with all other ideals, nature’s accountability is reduced to distraction. Some cults assert true love must be lust free lionising the untrue claim “virginity is lost”. Virginity, unlike childhood, is a stage that is clearly defined – “non-negotiable” if you will. It is hardly surprising that the powers have assured us that “childhood” and “virginity” are inextricably connected, because this allows them to dictate any punitive measures synthesising fake decorum. British “children” aged between 18 and 21 narrowly missed being “voted in” year 2000. Currently they are still “adults”.

Generally speaking, lust is viewed as “an addiction”, something to control, limit, avoid. Lust is something that might defile purity. That is the mainstream view; and also a very strong orthodox Israelite tradition (expanded by “Christian” St Paul in his New Testament epistles). Per that reckoning, the most pure would offer sexual intimacy as a “gift” to the one they loved, sacrificing libido for love. The utopian extreme identifies sex without lust as the most “godly” method of procreation. Arab radicals circumcise women “in the name of Islam” to assure that. Nevertheless, in practicality, for the sexual side of these sorts of relationships not to be fully dysfunctional, one party would have to benefit from the gift by being expressly lustful. Thinking about it, otherwise how would it be a gift? As males are less persuaded by the flawed philosophy of purity and women don’t need to be stimulated to consummate sexual intercourse, marital frigidity of religious pairings has been divinely calculated. Consequentially, natural (lustful) constraints on limits of partnership are broken. Women can marry horribly ugly men with beautiful personalities, minds, hearts or bank accounts for as long as the core Israelite mindset validates conditioning.

This, in part, has attributed to the bitter war separating women and men. Regular skirmishes between sexes normally escalate from “discussions”. Additional to effective ratios of truthfulness, there are three fundamental emotional frequencies tuned to “battle communications”: tough talk, charm and waterworks. Even Mrs Clinton can charm the birds out of the trees when she wants to, but pouring on the waterworks is all women’s secret weapon. The gradual shift of power from covertly to overtly matriarchal control has been disastrous for functional society. Because, to a woman, ultimately, each fitting end result somehow manages to justify the means and, moreover, truth is negotiable, reaction equates to relative superficiality. The men have had to fight back, rapidly. Those once Sensitive New Age Guys (SNAGs) have all but transformed into slippery nouveaux metrosexuals.  As fast as trees lose their leaves in the fall, they can now wear pink, dance and cry. Are there any real men left? All I see, hear are a bunch of whining babies, “homos”. Even the ones that go to war are serial cowards that wouldn’t recognise scruples if they tripped over them. They invariably believe their arsenal of weapons is so vastly superior to the opposition’s, only fools could die. Any fool can see that battle is a turkey shoot for natural born cold blooded killers.

Trite idioms have been the staple for society. Individuals don’t need to think anymore. Of course old men use lollies to lure children. Old women trading jars of potions are witches. Any fool knows that. But what of the trade for virginity; if all marriages are the chattel of divine purity per orthodox Israelite tradition is not that virginal trade underscored by greed of the most avarice type? How to tell if the stock is bad? Do judges and jurors rely on hearsay justifying why the hymen was broken? Are males ever virginal? As for witches, we all know what the CDC thinks of true healers. The “Catholic” inquisition never ceased. Ideals are the root of standards and it is the imposition of standards that leads to the decline of intellect, synthesising the empowerment of fools. Fools lead other fools to slaughter simply to uphold those tenets of the illusion of prescient order.

So where did it all go wrong?

The full story will have to wait for a future entry, but in the very beginning, according to my calculations, was our banishment from the “Garden of Eden” by the mythical Satyr, “Hu Gadam” (our closest approximation to “Yahweh”). We were not expelled from Africa or India or even “Atlantis” (that came later) as is presupposed by the pompously ignorant. Our exodus was ordered from an extraordinary inner Earth sanctuary. Afterwards, Lemurian officers guarded all entry points for a long time. Later I know some entrances were sealed or so hard to find that anyone managing to locate a route in would probably be deemed divinely commissioned. Nevertheless, according to mystical NAZI Antarctica (Neuschwabenland – location of the ancient “Rainbow City”) folklore, this may still be the case today. Given the inner Earth prohibition, truth seekers have been blessed with a huge clue.  What logic is behind our governments prohibiting access to the inner sanctum? Could it be they have been warned off by “dark forces” not wanting us to contaminate their pristine realms (as we have done on the surface)? That is the prima facie reason inner Earth philology has been ridiculed or censored by our governments, in my opinion.

Once restricted to the planet surface, humans first settled in the Ukraine (or Khazaria) and were regularly visited by Ciakar ambassadors. Khazaria, like Caucuses, is a derivative of Caucasian (thank you for spotting that, Facebook friend, Gary Gengler) and this logically means the original human “tribes” (sic) were Caucasians. According to Aboriginal legends, it was impossible to tell the difference between “good” or “bad” reptilians by appearance alone. Some circumstantial evidence on the antics of the bad eggs has accumulated over time. In the Atlantis joint venture (Ciakar/Pleiadian) technological city I learn lizard men had occasionally been executed for eavesdropping astral technologies with malicious purposes in mind, but there is something else that is much more compelling.

Ciakars used to play a game with their Pleiadian hosts. Both parties would shape shift to change the appearance “as the other’s form” so those that could see through the camouflage might be commended. As the Pleiadians had something superior to our pineal gland, they were almost never fooled. However, reptilian soldiers regularly turned the drill into practice by shape shifting in battle situations. In that capacity, they have been known to transform to double the people they were in the throes of fighting.  Recalling a Rwandan 100 day conflict that saw the piecemeal slaughter of 100,000’s Africans in 1994, I am reminded of Ciakar methods. The escalation between Rwandan and Burundi factions, championing Hutu or Tutsi cultures, saw soldiers of either side dressing uniforms of the other. Naturally absolute chaos was the logical outcome of this insane strategy which led to innumerable friendly fire incidents (according a friend of mine who was acting Major for one of the brigades) and it also highlights what we, “humans”, have the potential to be “them” (reptilians).

“Survival of the fittest”, “fight or flight”, “problem, reaction solution”, call it what you will. One thing is certain. We, humans, have trickery and deceit in our blood. The absolute commitment to self will reduce any Ascension event to banality if we are not very careful. Currently, there is no societal paradox. If you wish to focus on the veneer, then yes, most of you are caring, conditionally considerate, deeply compassionate about things you believe in and, superficially, at least, a credit to society. Yet, under the veil of self-assurance the real absurdity skulks. Action defies principled beliefs because we are; foul, slithering, pestilent, fork tongued serpents that quiver before the magnificence of the absolutely indiscriminate and non-judgemental “God in all being”. We exist day to day cobbled from acute Ciakar jealousy (emotion for emotion’s sake), the worst qualities of Pleiadians obsessiveness (blamed on the ego) and the most reckless violence of the Lemurians which keeps us on endless war footing.

Liars every one of us; we all celebrate the power to deceive persuasively and this alone ordains our present evolutionary state is the desperate determination to find the progress to professional sorcery. Were we to maintain this mindset; our only hope for survival proffers two paths. The simple answer is this; we must match or succumb to the prowess of legendary Lumerians lost in time. Who are these mysterious beings and is karma projecting a Martian salvation recurrence? Those that dare answer with authority are truly enlightened.