After Contemplating the Evidence; was Jeffrey Epstein Guilty?

The bare bones of this essay already roughly in position, I have been aiming for a release date prior to the emerging New Year. Back in the day, I used to churn articles out by the dozen. No more, I’m afraid. Now, each one somehow predicts a laborious project. Masterpieces-in-waiting eventually collectivise fragments into precarious tomes that would be merit worthy for audiences of merit. In association not all that long ago I recall a moody critic poorly procrastinated sarcasm directed at my truthful genre.

“So who’s the most brainwashed [person of all], tell me that then, eh?”

The answer to the question is starkly obvious. Most brainwashed are the ones that believe otherwise; the ones with science degrees; the ones in positions of authority and the one that feel they are on the right track, firmly aware and in control of their destinies. Let’s be frank here. That would describe at least ninety per cent of my “followers” who, on the rare occasion they think they can learn, certainly won’t compromise deep rooted opinions (which ironically approximate the very fabric of their own brainwashing). When present, so entrenched is programming it is almost impossible for the genuine soothsayer to communicate with any effect.

It would be dishonest of me not to acknowledge that I have been disappointed, demoralised even, by the lack of traction, by the sheer selfish blithering nature of human beings. And here I am talking about those that are supposedly “top of the class” spiritually speaking. If they’re as good as we get, humanity is in a horrible mess. In light of this, I have honestly thought about throwing in the towel. What is the purpose of going to enormous lengths to compile the truth only for messages to be scorned, ignored or scandalized? I have become lazy, for days on end forsaking my craft. My focus on important topical drivel that pollutes the internet is nulled to zero by my acute disinterest. Strange nightmares over the transition of my way of life have contributed to spells of insomnia. Then, at my lowest ebb, along came a knight in shining armour. His name was Jeffrey Epstein.

Epstein himself is (or, rather was) no posthumous confidante of mine, but circumstances surrounding his much publicised life do provide an ideal opportunity for free expression. So I am going to begin by coming right out, and saying it freely, avoiding early misconceptions. The title of this essay could be regarded as misleading. That’s right and it is important to come clean at the start, because occasional clickers may well visit me keen on finding new angles to pointless melodrama (given parallel press meanderings). Soap opera fanatics would be doomed to disappointment if I didn’t place a “disclaimer” straight away and it would be sad to see them disappointed. Mainstream Medias may well relish confusion, but this place is firmly destined to uphold virtue and, in that capacity, could plausibly offer a final refuge for the intrepidly sane.

Permanent staging infrastructures withstanding, the pending trial and subsequent sensational “suicide” death of industrialist Jeffrey Epstein didn’t happen. You hear me correctly. It didn’t happen, but there is very visible script supporting the potential for any or all of it to have happened. That is why I don’t care about much of the detail supposedly supporting the grandest of conspiracies; a conspiracy possibly beyond all conspiracies. As a whole it is a blithering fabrication. Therefore, to do justice to respective truth, diligent must duly only care about evidence. And here evidence is so lacking; sincere commentary on it would be absurd. So let me make it clear to fossickers panning for tittle-tattle. I am hardly going to discuss Epstein at all.

Speculative sensation over hearsay does afford the opportunity to expose a monstrous system whose values fester in the gutter. But it would be impossible to blame organs of state unless they were backed to the hilt by a most vile and deliberately corrupt “general public”. The Epstein case had been bubbling for more than a decade prior to his “what should be” ridiculous entrapment ultimately concluding in that supposed “suicide” death. Are there any substantiated facts associated with the case? Well there are numbers of videos presented as evidence which would be devoid of merit but for those nauseating talk over choruses of opinions that craft “suggestive scenarios” shaping content into “applied reality”. It’s a female trick. Women “shape” their men, but that’s our secret.

Inspecting the detail, one video exhibit features an individual who looks like President Trump. The person in question is in focus because he provocatively rolls his hips in a poor imitation of Elvis Presley (an act that fortified a reputation as “king” lest we forget) at a location “we are told” is on Epstein’s private island retreat. Either side of “cut out” Trump are cheerleaders of indiscriminate age. There is no obvious watermark verifying the island location for unfamiliar viewers and why cut out Trump or the cheerleaders are present is unclear. Government agents, who wouldn’t lie about something like that “we are told”, are adamant the video marks indisputable evidence of illegal sexual activity between current President of the United Sates of American and legally underage females. The actual sexual activity is left to the imagination as is any verification as to the true ages of the females; location or whether “cut out” is Trump.

Historical development of the entrapment of Epstein waxes fabrication from conception. Be under no dissolution. Correspondingly, the video allegedly featuring Trump provides no evidence supporting illegal acts. Historically, after pleading not guilty, Epstein’s 2008 conviction for trafficking prostitutes (by a “blind” Florida judge) was shaky at best. Judgement entirely relied on circumstantial hearsay backed by a fair degree of misrepresentation (are gifts uniformly payment for services? If so, should I offer my Christmas windfall up to the taxman?). The momentum on public distortion of Epstein’s private affairs had been constructed over decades. It is likely illicit planners (behind the misinformation) aimed at capitalising on common gossipers’ general distaste at strange goings on in high places.

The reason many Brits revile their “it’s alright for some” queen is because they are jealous of her extraordinary wealth and complimenting luxurious lifestyle

As far as I can discern, the very public Epstein saga began with a Palm Beach police report (dating back to the mid 1990’s?) which apparently cites an interview with the well-connected mother of a fifteen year old girl, who had accordingly confessed to (or perhaps bragged about) absconding to Epstein’s island hideaway for the weekend without permission. Come again, a sexy, albeit underage girl “pulling off” adult status and sneaking away to an elite party with all bells and whistles? Under what circumstance could that happen today? Today’s fifteen year girls are little children that are humbled by righteous authority of laws and associated parental power. They certainly wouldn’t flaunt sexual self-respect by eloping to a star studded limelight party of the century, correct? There are, for instance, no fifteen year old trollops today? You may think I jest, but sensationally, American President Benjamin Franklin placed a newspaper advert hiring a comely fifteen year old wench in the 1800’s. And that wasn’t that long ago.

Maybe it’s a coincidence, but if I have the dateline correct here, the mid 1990’s was most definitely a time of puritan renaissance or revolution. “Occult” Waco (’93) and Oklahoma (’95) saved President Clinton’s hide and this was more than partially courtesy of Hilary Clinton’s lesbian buddy (lawyer) Janet Reno in her capacity as head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Reno had also demonstrated her great passion by spearheading major crusades against closet paedophiles. One circumspect customs’ chief timely implied the postal service was “awash” with child pornography and that’s all the proof Reno needed, although my sources tell me bona fide contraband was intercepted “extremely rarely”. Even so her crusade turned out to be so effectively persistent; it grew into a considerably wider enterprise committed to backing off just about every plausible waking moment of corporate Media publicity. To be honest I’m surprised pederast attack innuendo hasn’t somehow polluted the car adverts.

A couple of years ago I penned the article “Callous Abuses of the Word Abuse”. Though terms “paedophile” and “child” are nothing more than labels, their trademark use by vicious propaganda forces can incriminate great or small simply by their very mention. In Epstein’s case “exhibits” appear to have been uniformly “underage” jail bate rather than demarked infants, yet related “shit stirred” (by fabricators) has undeniably stuck. Fantasy spinners will go to extreme lengths to obfuscate truth. The game is all about “picture painting”. Albeit quite a long time ago, one American report “claim” I witnessed cast a scene with a sixteen year old girl playing in her sandpit prior to abduction. Come on now! Was she demented? It does serve to highlight how desperate some propaganda agencies are. Even so, when the judiciary begin to take notice of feeble allegations, any notion of justice is forsaken. Gauging rigged trials of British Queen Elizabeth’s artist Rolf Harris and other less sensational scapegoats, the highest civil courts have been hijacked by kangaroos.

And let’s face it, the average newspaper reader believes rogue Hugh Hefner Epstein was not only guilty, but personified the saga “in life”. Melodrama of course eventually transfused into the courthouse culminating as the now “official” murder opinion. After Robin Williams (sic), demonstrating a referenced common script contains desired plot outcomes, mainstream journalists were quick (though muted) to cast questions over the perplexing “suicide” from the outset. They were clearly all essentially given identical blueprints of fundamentals (confabulated by vile political mercenaries) to publicise with license to “make up” the rest (padding). In that respect, one extremely visible popular Media source (for my research) had even dared reference conspiracy theorists’ views that cast aspersions over the ears of “Epstein’s” corpse. It is obvious to me that agents responsible for promotion of fantasy (as fact) are compelled to believe the whole charade will be of great appeal to those that are drawn to conspiracies.

Furthermore, conspiracy theorists love to blab about matters they don’t fully understand. This would give fantasy greater tinges of authenticity as researchers wade through dross to discern “hallmarks of truth”; enough to permit lapses of sanity

Thus, convenient Medias that had been describing the event as a “suiciding” (or professional hit) now turn out to be in tune with “truth” (sic). I am being facetious here of course, because the murdered guy on the slab “as presented” wasn’t Epstein. That fact does helpfully reinforce analysis determining the whole campaign had been “scripted” from onset, so I thank those responsible for being careless. Surely even to the untrained eye (after Pizzagate), this sordid affair must wax of Pulp Fiction?  What next? Will fairies, dragons and grey aliens make appearances, as they did in the “Little Rascals day care” trial debacle?  Indeed does Epstein actually exist at all or is he another great Sandy Hook style figment geared to fit in with the rest of the baloney? That said, there is clearly a true and very bitter purpose behind associated shenanigans. I fear writer George Orwell prepared the way so to speak with his novel “1984”, but he couldn’t quite fathom how slippery devil’s mercenaries can be.

There is definite motive here, but before I reveal it, it is vital to capture true function of “state”, law enforcement and justice. In historic terms, using the British chronology as my benchmark, legal foundations began with Roman occupation. Common law is generally presumed to have preceded twelve articles (bronze tablets called tables) introduced by the Romans which, limited to the affairs of citizens, aimed at harmonising equality. Long after the Romans exited, original British “public” courts were called star chambers (emerging from around the eighth century AD). However, the function of arbitration appears to have been limited as a facet of privilege pretty much until the system was overhauled in 1830 (directly after slavery abolition 1829 and the same year Robert Peel established his Metropolitan police Force, coincidence?).  There were some variations. King Henry II created an additional body of twelve knights (to represent local precincts) as jurors in settlement of land ownership disputes from 1160’s onwards. He further appointed five “wise men” of his personal household to act in the capacity of judges.

They morphed into a travelling circuit (assizes system), which was set up in 1166 (partially surviving until 1971 believe it or not!). For common man, the parish priest would usually double as “authority figure” to resolve local arguments. Magistrate courts hark back to Edward I in 1285 via his creation of justices of the peace. Nevertheless, I think resources would have been mostly devoted to support militias made famous by Robin Hood’s tales. Original justices of the peace were also sheriffs (as far as I can ascertain). Local criminal proceedings would have likely fallen under jurisdiction of the local honourable squire (who, in many instances, would have been victim as well). Above this was a centralised supreme court that dealt with extremely serious “national” offenses. Damningly, the court authority was beefed up in the reign of Charles I (himself causally beheaded by his own goodwill) when enemies forced him to appoint additional judges in 1642. Member salaries under these new conditions increased up to ten fold.

Corruption had ransacked the judiciary from conception, but it wasn’t until William III’s (of Orange) reign from 1701 onwards (under the Act of Settlement) that it became impossible for any monarch to suspend or remove a judge without due legal process.1215 saw common law reduced to impotence, and consistent with its draconian mandate, the Magna Carta made provision for Parliament to supplement royal legislature, which initially comprised of a House of Lords only. By 1265 government powers were widened to permit election of common members of sufficient social status (later to form the House of Commons). Prior to the introduction of parliament, legislation was commissioned at the behest of a monarch who was formally supported by a council of knights. The body, a reworking of the ancient Sanhedrin, was known as the curia regis (Latin for king’s court). Numerous failings of parliamentary authority have definitely assured violent war was the only way industrialists were going to successfully usurp power of oversight (cleverly euphemised as veto by modern day agencies of doom such as the United Nations).

Naturally, since conception, those in parliament have always run agendas in their own interests (i.e. when the royals had assumed authority, they acted in deference to, regularly conflicting with private merchants). Unsurprisingly, early government became a hotbed contest between opposing interests. For instance sensationally, in 1387 Richard II sentenced six judges to death (although only one was executed) for conspiring over a “traitorous” parliamentary commission. However, I would like to explore the significance of the Magna Carta a little further now, because it seems odd that industrialists would celebrate anything distinctly “for the masses”. Yet they place such zealous importance revering the goodness of this particular treaty or charter [allegedly] “championing popular rights”, one is instinctively drawn to “the catch”. And so here’s that “catch”. Though their dastardly plan temporarily stalled after one of the medieval King Edwards’ changed rules allocating land ownership, land ownership is what the Magna Carta was about and why the industrialists celebrate it.

Prior to 1215 only royals (and their extended aristocratic families) could own land. Under common law, you had right to live on land you didn’t own. Thus it was royalty (regularly egged on by industrialists of the day) that committed all acts of atrocity against the people, such as the (eleventh century onwards) seizure of land that belonged to but wasn’t owned by Scottish hill tribes, highlighted in part by Robert the Bruce’s epic battles. In America, native indigenous inhabitants were classed as slaves after Columbus’ “discovery” in order to strip them of land ownership rights, Thanks Giving marks a temporary amnesty when those that stole the land (imposing their own values on all in sundry) were forced to turn to natives for help or starve. In line with this dereliction of honour towards rightful occupiers (per common law etiquette), when the United States became the focus of gold speculators, greatest priority was given to [fraudulent under common law] authority of “verified” staked claims on land now free from British [royal] possession. “Red Indian” beggars were rarely given a look in.

Back in Medieval times, the English system remembered as “serfdom” (an apex of the “power pyramid” feudalism, introduced by William the Conqueror in 1066) bloomed after the ink on the various Magna Carta treaty documents was barely dry. Great tracts of British territory became instant property of newly appointed aristocratic knights and gentry (implied by Tales of Robin Hood). Free lands (of no interest to the powers) were eventually consolidated under the jurisdiction of today’s National Trust and that’s all “the people” ever preserved (they didn’t gain anything). Incidentally, peasants were able to live on what remained of “free lands” until the National Trust’s takeover. All other commoners were forced onto demarked “plots”. These, I would imagine, would have usually been where families were staked “without strings” up until the implementation of changes.  In effect, the major difference was residents had less land, but were also instructed to pay rent to new land owners (for their keep).

Rent generation was achieved by farming produce, which allowed for surplus incomes (sometimes providing revenue to fund royal taxes). Via the “rates” system even modern day property owners are still theoretically tenants (pinning them to patriotic government) of “higher landlords”, so (in effect) commerce mechanisms kick started by the Magna Carta are as they were from conception. Whilst my exampled history progression may seem irrelevant in relation to the wider Jeffrey Epstein saga, there are links that provide ample basis to demonstrate politics deliberately exploit truth to cast unattainable divides between classes. There is also the Epstein royal connection, of course, which I will elaborate on later in this essay. One of the great ironies exposed by shenanigans is the so-called elites are the most vulnerable of all because apparently laws don’t discriminate. Even when aided by corrupt judges and sleazy lawyers, elites can’t merely be paedophiles because they are elite. Elites can’t commit murder because they are elite, although those with diplomatic status are formally immune from prosecution.

Conversely, those of high status consistently do have a great deal to lose facing the looming prospect of a fall

It is no wonder great American philosophic essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “the fewer laws the better” penned shortly after the civil war is immortalised by dissenters. He knew that laws lead to manipulative opportunism culminating in the monster which is that Jeffrey Epstein charade. But the “rules” (or etiquette) have changed to validate Epstein. Provided by newfangled modern custom (as of 1980’s), entertaining mass Medias dictate orders to politicians, judiciary and by God everyone had better heed their “wisdom” or watch out for tar and feather campaigns can easily be redirected against you. In that regard we must never lose sight of the baseline (somewhat muddied by the trivial nature of the Epstein saga). Everything is in place for (to support) land owners. And “land owners” are not peasants with small residential holdings; far from it. No, these conglomerates presume the rights of merchant bankers, certain aristocrats and industrialists. Epstein had to be one of them himself to magnify confusion over authenticity of associated allegations. Intrigue is such that it has also had the effect of wobbling the” safety bar” guaranteeing diplomatic immunity. No one is “safe” and Sir Ron Brierley will find that out the hard way (elaborated on later).

Conglomerates ensured special legislation was drafted for their corporations to bestow them with super human rights. Predictably, recognised governments are corporations too and their “stock” is the “tax payers”. I am hoping a few will fathom the purpose of my background now. Tax payers are slaves under a Feudal System that was devised and implemented by Jewish Zionist William the Conqueror. In 1215 a treaty called the Magna Carta transferred casual arrangements to Law. The death of Charles I in 1649 paved the way for the Westminster System (whose embryo began with Cromwell even though political theorists speculate organised detached government coincided with Queen Anne’s 1707 cessation of royal assent). History has taught us the legacy constitution failed and that is why William of Orange’s Bill of Rights was hastily drafted in 1696 and has been incorporated in all constitutions since. Nevertheless, at least the equilibrium was relatively clearly scored, well until conspirators premeditated the Epstein plot.

Epstein-gate has given slaves the license to make that which is “none of their business” their posthumous business. Corporate Medias irritate the collective into blustering judgement on all those despicable royals they have never net and have never personally known, empowering our conspirators all the while

Before us are the makings of a cartoon feature more pungent than phoney baloney Osama Bin Laden. It is essential to identify how catastrophically different this brand of deception is from anything ever seen before, Revealed mechanics will come in due course,  but without sufficient explanation for “why?” the facts will struggle to speak for themselves. First we must understand how it is possible to distort and invalidate instruments of justice to such effect bias purports a veneer of sincerity. So returning to my assessment of historic British legal governance; when the first courts (star chambers) appeared, torture was considered a worthy accessory to prize “confessions from miscreants”. “Honourable” people were believed to be infallible. It was generally assumed that righteous would rather suffer death than submit to the Devil. In this context, it was thought torture actually improved the sense of nobility.

The concept may have been successful per virgin ambition, but unfortunately methods used became more and more extravagantly harmful as time went by, plausibly in desperation for prosecution victories. Suffice to say, subjects were routinely severely impaired by improvements and some even died in the torture chamber. For instance, there are pertinent records outlining events surrounding the fall of the Knights Templar. One vividly recalls a foot stove used to obtain a “confession” from one estranged knight had worked so efficiently; he carried charred remains in a pot as he hobbled to the bench on crutches, guilt confession in hand. More recently Hitler’s (creator of today’s conceptual corporation, lest we forget) Gestapo were so ruthless in obtaining desired results, innocents were sometimes miscategorised. I write this fully cognisant that Hitler has been unfairly painted as the “master of all modern evil”, almost an anti-Messiah, but enough valid documentation supports the opinion the Gestapo were a truly nasty bunch. That nastiness underscored dedication to behaving dishonourably.

Even so, but for peine forte et dure (abolished in 1772), the use of physical torture (as a British interrogation tool) petered out by the mid 1600’s. “Strangely” the reversal of standards coincides with Charles I’s fateful 1649 execution. It could be further argued that rough physical interrogation was doomed to retirement after considerably more effective attacks on the mind came into vogue. Bush’s Guantanamo Bay is a classic example of this. Inmates were put through barbaric sleep deprivation regimes but rarely sustained actual body injuries (though there are reports of hunger strikers’ ill-treatment where Feeding tubes were crudely inserted without anaesthetic). We must never forget not one of the Guantanamo inmates were theoretically proved “guilty” prior to their incarceration. Most had been duped (i.e. were no real threat to proscribed order) and at least three were there “in error”. They do also serve to highlight the current bureaucratic assumption that everyone who isn’t “ranked” must be (viewed as) a criminal-in-waiting.

Under such terms, an impossibly high wall separates commoners from those of honour. Honour “is” authority today. So when it comes to justice, obtaining evidence is an inconvenience that could well inhibit what are already “given facts”. Why give guilty an opportunity to wriggle free of authority’s judgement? For instance, imagine if there was no evidence available to substantiate a case. Then justice would have been outdone by the presiding sense of goodwill. That is why authorities have preferred to rely on necessity of confessions ether from the accused or accuser. And that summarises the nightmare in being that is “Jeffrey Epstein’s” legacy; a legacy whereby fake testimonies present dishonest allegations and despicable lies which are manufactured by the tonne. Nevertheless, flaws in authoritative philosophy should be plainly obvious. Indeed, just three days ago (as I write) the Australian New South Wales Supreme Court found ex-club bouncer Vinzent Tarantino not guilty after his “confession” to the murder of twelve year old schoolgirl Quanne Diec in 1998.

There is no doubt the court case was an intriguing one; seemly difficult to testify adequately and almost impossible to judge. Perhaps mitigated comparison of circumstances behind OJ Simpson’s trial might be applied here, other than the not guilty verdict outcome matching the plea. OJ was popularly “guilty” and that is the similarity. The trial by Medias, in both cases, had served up posthumous guilty verdicts and that is what incurred public belief. Careful scrutiny of facts supporting the murder of Nicole Simpson should cast no question as to who the real culprit was. Her son had been on a program of psychiatric drugs to combat anger management. I have lost count of the numbers of suicide murderers that were hopped up on similarly prescribed drugs at the time of their deadly insurrections against “faceless” pubic. It is known that “drug experimentation” has been one facet of CIA’s MKUltra since the 1970’s (after Watergate).

OJ Simpson and Vinzent Tarantino are two examples where the end (result) failed to justify the means, because they were popularly guilty, but proven innocent. Others (and too many to illustrate) were not so lucky.  Their journeys would end in tears, each one individually supporting gross miscarriages of justice. In Anglican Peter Hollingworth’s wake (discounting raucous tabloid banter) nothing would convince me that Australian Cardinal George Pell is guilty of allegations that led to his conviction of child sex abuse. Indeed so ambiguous was the verdict, there is discord amongst viperous Medias over him; allies calling out the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s smear campaign a “witch hunt”. Ironically, past inquisitions applied equal balanced latitude towards witches. The accused needed to drown to prove their innocence, to avoid suffering the heretic’s death; burnt at the stake. No such mercy was offered to poor Rolf Harris (perfect example of tall poppy syndrome), folk hero jailed for his royal patronage.

Even so, another Australian Schapelle Corby has become the centrepiece of the dreadful self-cleansing justice system. And now they vainly attempt to bestow aristocratic status (celebrity) on her to endorse their false claims. But a frog will always be a frog; any prince knows that

Going back to basics, aside from the Epstein “operation” (and that is what it is), there runs a supplementary agenda counterpoising the aggregated script aimlessly crafting reality. For as long as I have been cognisant, the “establishment” have obsessed over impressing their authority on juveniles. However, only since last decade or so has zeal escalated into viciousness that transcends warranted innocence or guilt. Representative truth is consequentially rendered superfluous. In line with their compulsion, enemies “in power” are routinely harangued by a “captivated” judiciary. There has precipitated (which I argue is no accident) a storm of fear represented by ever present headlines obtusely reporting vagaries of processions of failed fallen celebrities (if Schappelle makes one comment out of place, we know where she’s heading). Accompanying this is a horrid sense of infection. I don’t want to be Catholic, because I might catch what my local priest got. Problem (symptoms), reaction (slander), solution (quarantine) together dance the Pied Piper’s tune

Culpability is irrelevant (hence, the bland nature of content) and that is why unsecured “confessions” are used to the limit. How else to ram home predetermined [tainted] verdicts? On the other side, a percentage of juveniles are hardy enough to ignore implied rhetoric (issued against them). This has always been the case and, as such, represents the zealots’ primary obstacle. There will be no rite of passage in their domain

Perhaps at times of great austerity (and today is one of those times) more will pretend to desire “legal” chastity while actually playing it safe. Nevertheless (factoring guilty verdicts possibly issued “on merit”) there will always be enough “victims” (sic) to fill law enforcement’s net trap. This means the Epstein operation never needed victims beyond those professional publicised distortions of (what should be) dubious information. If everyone had personal connections to Epstein, we all knew him intimately; the scam would have collapsed before it started. No right minded reporter could have embraced any of the ludicrously tragic accounts paraded as truth. Witnesses would have been quietly ushered off to the funny farm for their efforts. Instead, none of us privy to their malicious campaign have any knowledge of Epstein beyond what they tell us. For all I know, he didn’t actually exist because, but for a large trust fund (unsurprisingly) contested by various [apparently] aggravated parties after his [purported] death (is real Epstein one of the contestors?), only that confessional legacy remains. They don’t seem too keen on investigating his murder with any purpose.

You know, law enforcement is no longer about police work. That was a thing of the past. Idolised by Al Pacino’s Serpico, law enforcers are now criminals. And that is okay, because they are policemen trained to do their duty; duty that includes counterfeiting morals, deceiving public honour and embezzling righteous trust.  As all commoners are “criminals-in-waiting”, the crime business is booming. No wonder scripts supporting Epstein’s sham life are so compellingly farfetched; any sane human being should question his very existence. They’re not “a bit dodgy”. Accounts are accordingly “off with the fairies”. I return to the 1989 Little Rascals’ Day-Care court case (all charges withdrawn and verdicts quashed in 1997) and recommend everyone research proceedings with upmost due diligence. Taking a parallel position in an attempt to discern “feasible guilt”, under different circumstances Rolf Harris has made my mention. Now, let’s make light of things and pretend victim confessions were in tune with his guilt “as charged”, how much did he have to lose by his reckless carelessness? But it’s not only suicide Rolf under the spotlight here. There are endless precessions of outlaw social glitterati, rank and peer “they” tell us arrogantly brag of twilight illicitness. But there’s rarely any more than what tell us to back up their spiteful claims aimed at ones with apparently sincere political death wishes.

On that point, though I do not know Epstein at all, I have met with Sir Ron Brierley personally on several occasions and was invited to one of his Christmas parties (which I vaguely recall was awash with the finest Bollinger champagne). Ultimately, he went out of his way to do me disservice, so no love was lost when we ceased communication back in the early 1990’s. Brierley is neither a friend nor an ally of mine, but under no circumstances could I affirm his apparent tendency towards paedophilia. Sensationally arrested attempting to flee Australia (which smells like a “set up” to me), Medias announced “100,000’s of illegal images” had been found on [his] computers which had been seized by authorities. Back when I knew him, he lived in a giant house and, but for a conscientious housekeeper, would have passed as a hermit. If there was any family, by all accounts, they weren’t regular visitors. With no feasible “associations with kids”, if accusations supporting findings by authorities are valid, his private research was for “other purposes”.

Innumerable exotic theories may be speculated as to what these “other purposes” are, but I have compelling firsthand experience of Sir Ron’s bent as a mad philatelist. He would have spent millions of dollars on this passion. By all accounts, he had album stock pages crammed with hundreds of skimmed duplicates of the 1892 $5 black Columbus commemorative (a desirably rare American postage stamp) and equal numbers of Australia’s sought after 1932 5/- Sydney Bridge in mint condition. Banker at heart always, I believe this was his committed attempt to synthesising greater rarity (i.e. by suppressing market numbers available for sale) with the objective of increasing the item’s market value. “Rarity value” fits in with a possible link with his alleged child porn collection.

Quite some time ago, I read of a thesis written by some B-grade US academic who concluded that “child porn collectors obsessed over fills”. Taking that idea, there seems to be some possible synergy with Sir Ron’s “other purposes” here. Stamp collectors obsess over fills and if the truth be known, many become mesmerised by “rarity”. That’s why Sir Ron hived away the American and Australian gems I exampled.  Of all porn genres, there is nothing scarcer than paedophilic content (there are claims it exists on the “deep web”, a place I have never found). I would further argue that child porn is the most illicit of all contraband. I don’t overstate here. A British policeman on the first Gary Glitter trial publically announced that “paedophilia is worse than murder”. Perhaps that is also why it is so regularly used as the ultimate excuse to blame limelight poppies that grow too tall for the comfort of authorities.

Though to me pathological voyeurism seems somewhat creepier than honest love between adult and juvenile stereotypes, anyone that does nothing more than investigate smutty literature for “personal reasons” is sexually invalid. There was no physical connection between Sir Ron and any children photographed he allegedly witnessed. As far as I can ascertain, contraband had been accumulated in the same manner a philatelist hoards postage stamps. In specific relation to Sir Ron’s arrest, a supplementary point is worth mentioning. Hall of Fame rock star and convicted [voyeur] “paedophile” Pete Townshend disputed numbers of illegal photographs law enforcement claimed he had possessed. At the time, his more precise words were “there’s no way I had as many [photographs] as they said”. It’s only a theory of mine, but worth elaborating to potentially explain inconsistences that bloom into accidental propaganda. If each moving picture was calculated frame by frame, a thirty minute film compiles “45,000” photographic stills (based on 25 frames a second). If that is a common law enforcement calculation in support of “evidence”, do all frames display offending images?

Were law enforcement intent on being transparent here, they may as well come out and tell the truth as it is for once, but I guess, compared to 45.000 photos, one video’s a pretty puny marketing haul

Views on guilt/culpability aside, Sir Ron, after dear Rolf, is another useful exhibit to force Queen Elizabeth’s abdication or, at least, that appears to be one of the utopian goals of those that craft reprisal initiatives such as the Epstein saga. Equilibrium that upholsters the nasty agenda relies on reusable formulas (i.e. hypotheticals). Will Sir Ron’s “defence” oddly mimic Pete Townshend’s “coming to terms with his own abuse as a child”? In my vigour to expose the puppet masters, I regularly single out the Pharisees for everything politically maligned. They are the creators and supporters of a prison planet blueprint idealised around a conceptual phoney occult Messiah ruling under dictated terms of Zionism. For Zionism to function as planned, societal conventions must be entrenched. Epstein has been used to firmly accent (in formulaic terms) the “divide between acceptable free expression and perversion”. We need to be clear on facts and, currently, everything is foggy (a staple for unproven idealism).

Believe it or not, sciences and evidence of historical preservation can be found in the very earliest records of humanity, and I am not just talking about ancient “extra-terrestrial” legacy documents NASA engineers paw over. However, for the large part, until circa 1780, accredited sanity was guided by what sceptics attempt to demote as superstition. There is a better term which has come into fashion again, courtesy of the New Age movement. Our deep ancestors were primarily guided by intuition, but we (or, rather, our sceptics) know better now were that to be true. The reality is cultures determining directional initiatives have radically changed to promote perception backed sciences as the best way to impose formulas, sorry, I mean improve humanity’s lot. The fact your average scientist couldn’t find his ass with both hands in a darkened toilet booth will remain our secret. Nevertheless, it is useful to note that modern science (which is the science of today, somewhat accounting for the lack of fundamental new ideas and innovation being produced) was originally corporatized by Rothschild French banking agents directly after the supposed “peoples’ revolution.

The notion that a “child” (at the borderline, essentially a wobblybranding”) miraculously morphs into an adult precisely eighteen years after the moment of birth (one presumes infant must be fully clear of mother) is a superstition which, of course, is anything but “scientific”. Sciences have ambiguously shambled together “evidence” that might appeal to ambitious believers. Collective formularisers decided the body begins to die “from age eighteen” so that must the fortuitous “missing link” (so to speak). Though evidence is generally disgracefully at odds with this vaporous conjecture, the intuitive adage has stuck and all I can say in response is “fancy that”. Tyrannical obsession over childhood is one of the best indicators for culpable insanity we call “governments” masquerading as slave management agencies. If “accountants rule the world” as the popular proverb illuminates, billowing formulas were perennially destined to coagulate into absurd absolutist bureaucracies.

One such symptom of absolutism would involve stakeholders behind calculation of the Epstein saga. Beyond the deliberate inflammation of the universal divide separating impoverished from tall poppies, have they not actuated fantasy that relies on sacred belief in adult baffling “theoretical” childhood?  In effect we have two sinister things running simultaneously here. Questionable truths and dubious standards scorn public patronage, vilifying the assumption commoners are criminals-in-waiting

Perhaps that knowledge alone adds justification for my use of the vernacular “Pulp Fiction” at the entrance of this essay. Defence is as important as attack to the people behind the Epstein con scheme. Any accused’s fortification options have had to be taken down as well. Of course Prince Andrew will lay claim his victims tell a pack of bare faced lies. Of course he will blame his staffers if all other arguments fail. But the truth of the matter is this. Those in positions of esteem have far too much to lose to allow indiscretions to ruin their lives. So, as much as I dislike him, I believe President Trump is innocent of all conspiracies levelled against him. He has merely played along with tabloid tattlers because it improved his image as a “go getting, get it done” bad boy. If there is anything he should be remembered for, it is taking on the Medias and beating them at their own game. Trump is a teetotaller and I have personally known many of these sorry individuals. For instance, no one I have interacted with has been prepared to take life adjusting risks in any measure. Bad boy maybe, but Trump plays it ultra-safe too.

That has not stopped those illustrious Medias bombarding the general public with accusations against him pre-presidency, all throughout the race, and then on from day one of his tenure. Thus your average mesmerised viewer must presume unlikely misogynist Trump’s hari-kari misdirection could only end in political suicide, but it is the Medias that set that up, not the man himself. Then again, people are welcome to speculate as much as they like. Some compellingly blame Wall Street, but I wonder whether AIPAC had a hand in Trump’s impeachment. In Australia, as far as I’m aware, it is “illegal” (sic) to boycott Israeli product. Thus, surely any vocal supporter of Palestinian Boycott, Divest and Sanctions (against Israel) is an obvious terrorist suspect, right? And, by way of background here, for those that bother to read the article I have referenced, I feel I need to clarify that AIPAC, from the cultural justification standpoint, is an odd association. I’m told letters represent American Israel Public Affairs Committee (its prior incarnation, American Zionist Organisation or something similar ended up being disbanded after it was deemed treasonous by the few righteous Americans in authority).

For me American Israel Public Affairs Committee makes no sense at all, as AIPAC’s mission was, is and will be clearly to improve Israeli stranglehold on world affairs via solidarity (its “contained” American puppet). By not banning two Muslim agitators from congress, Trump (a former AIPAC golden boy by the way) bit his puppet master right in the ass. It would be interesting to know what AIPAC’s stance on Jeffrey Epstein is, don’t you think? Yet, after scouring the tabloids, I could not find a single word issued by AIPAC on the world’s most visible Jewish-American industrialist. This is one of the many reasons I find the organisation odd, in a murky sense. I can say, while I was conducting research, I did come up with this unexpected little gem, which illustrates how the former tycoon’s pending trial managed to make centre stage in Jewish politics, encapsulated by a bitter war (of words) between right wing failed redundant militant-butcher Baby Netanyahu and lefty ex. military general-butcher Ehud Barak.

Unsurprisingly Israeli debate has done little more than consolidate Media opinion making, and all genres, mainstream or otherwise, have definitely taken sides over Epstein allegations, which I guess will have added to the impact of fortifying fantasy. And if that was not bad enough (I mean, what happened to transparent journalism?), obvious shills are routinely masqueraded as Messiahs for virtue by the spinners of bullshit. Prince Andrew’s accuser is a classic example. A cursory view of her salient points highlights glaring fraud (bearing in mind, “evidence” exclusively comprises her word against his). In a short clip of one of her prepared interviews, a hysteric lapse “revealed” how they (as children) were “passed around like bags of oranges” (I’ve changed words slightly but not to the detriment of the overall message). So, from that, how might we discern she is a detestable liar? Well, back in the 1990’s there was another woman who was given opportunity to publically sensationalise her treatment as “property of” a secret gang headed by the Bush family. These cocaine runners (what else?) used to congregate at unknown wilderness hang outs (fusing Bush’s cowboy confession and Charles Manson legacy?), armed to the teeth. Normally “kept in cages” children (in this case infants, rather than borderline adults) accompanied outings and were “…..wait for it…..passed around like bags of fruit” by their hosts.

The Bush family accuser (who I refuse to identify lest she gain from the endorsement) was your typical 30 or 40 something bleach blond (can I say tart?), oh, chick, who would strut about stage while “in character” until around the mid 2000’s. When beating up on Bush went out of vogue, the woman just vanished. After claims that she was in a supportive relationship with a member of the (politically pro Democrat Clinton) CIA helping her though her ordeal, I totally switched off even though no one else seemed to bat an eyelid. I feel sure the Bush clan put her down as some loose nut as I don’t recall any litigation moves. Anyway, so as with that miraculous 1919 post WWI US headliner “Six Million Jews Dead”, karma comes back to haunt Prince Andrew. After a tyranny of fantastical accusations (including access to “reptilian technologies”) levelled against the Bushes and (ironically) the Clintons as well, information has boomeranged forward to 2019. According to the bleach blond, Mrs Clinton, a known lesbian, regularly had sex with infant girls. That irony is compounded by the CIA’s (well, I never) support of Russian loving Bill Clinton. Even a rookie agent will confirm when it comes to anomalies, there’s officially nothing to see here or, rather, “law enforcement” (sic) has dead eyes for anything potentially damaging to its own creed.

Let’s face it; if you believe the hogwash about the Clintons, Bush, Trump and [well] why not stretch it to Epstein too; then you deserve a spell at Bedlam

I don’t admire Mrs Clinton, but I neither need to stoop to zealous foul depths to admonish her. In other correspondences, I have stated George Bush senior set up the CIA, which isn’t true in the strict sense (but I’ll I explain what I mean by that when I wrap this up). Formally, the organisation was created by Truman after WWII (on 16th September 1947 to be precise). Hinted at earlier, compelling criteria provide “basis” for the “concept” being a reaction from Wall Street. Even so, I am of the opinion that the CIA was actually conceived as insurance against the planned reformation of Israel. Thus, agents would have naturally created tight liaisons with Wall Street to spy on international executives. George Bush senior’s concentrated involvement with the CIA was throughout the 1960’s and, in that capacity; he has been implicated in both Kennedy assassinations. Good friends of the Bushes, the Clintons have been there all the way through. I suppose that’s why their dealings with Russia (notably selling weapons grade refined uranium) were deemed “patriotic” by the CIA, whereas Trump’s surreptitious involvement with vapid shills who had apparently “destroyed Mrs Clinton’s election hopes” was definitely “treasonous” (and basis enough for impeachment).

Trump “on form” mocked the impeachment process, demanding it [to be] “over quickly”, but proceedings should be a serious matter. They highlight Epstein’s true posthumous purpose for one. To offset miscarriage of justice, this article is dedicated to remedial virtue. Inasmuch, following that spirit, I have come right out and said it “as it is”. Phoney baloney exorcized Russians and “commie plot” McCarthyism, faking elections, running guns or drugs in no particular order all add up, but they’re not individual “clinchers”. The clincher, an accusation whose utterance alone should be enough to put dread into any limelight figure, is paedophilia. Though paedophilia (as used) is a scam, it precedes life destructive extortion powerfully convincing enough to arbitrarily take down authority figures that defy corrupt mandates. Notably in circles that govern “morality”, such as religious institutions, no mercy or quarter is either offered or given to the irredeemably tarred. In this regard, a little snippet from “Prophecy, Prediction and Consensus View – Preconditioning for Spirited Souls” might help those committed to envisaging how impetus (for conspiracy) began (and I personally feel sure content would make the honest detective blush).

“Imagine if the Pharisees had contacts in the prison system. Crime networks are other resource pools for undesirables. Would it be possible to not only hire strategic paedophile priests, but also throw in some extra shekels and promise of “protection” should any of the kids “blab”?”

I didn’t touch on potential for confessional blackmail and extortion, but that would certainly provide tinder for a white hot ferocious fire, would it not? Obviously, if true, decent priests of all shapes and sizes have been set up and falsely persecuted (verdicts hinging on flimsy confessions or spiteful allegations) on the back of a covert fraud operation. There is no pertinent argument to counter-justify the visible domino effect the vicious operation has had on strategic senior priests that needed to be removed. Once false precedence is rooted, it becomes almost impossible to dislodge. It is as though lower grades are deliberately knocked down one by one in the build-up to bring enough to the table to defeat a “kingpin”. As for transparency, interrogation and court proceedings have been reduced to Medieval Star chambers without the torture except, if only that was true. Any suspect in custody is given a deliberate rough ride, tantamount to psychological torture, something viperous Medias will sketchily acknowledge as “the ordeal”.  Given we are told paedophiles inflict irreparable “psychological trauma” on children which is retrograde of murder; clearly psychological must be worse than physical torture.

Nevertheless, there is something else which really highlights the illusory nature of paedophilia. In the “consensus view” article I referenced earlier, I philosophised over possibility for the “sexual child” (considering turn of sexual consent was age twelve in parts of the first world until only a few decades back, prompting considerable “ambiguity” surrounding current popular rationalisations) . Suffice to say; according to bureaucrats that draft laws, it is impossible for a child “to be sexual” which makes debate even more memorable. Per these “terms”, legally underage cannot lure adults into sexual alliances even though there are many, many “inexplicable” records of children making successful sexual advances towards other children. That grand contradiction exacerbates moral standards applied to published materials labelled “child pornography” as well.

I make many useful points to illustrate the paradox in my writing project “The ‘Powers’ Great Accolade – ‘Brand Pedo’”. Notably, if a child is not sexual, how can any unaccompanied “pose” (regardless of genre) be sexual either? Expanding this assumption, for a normal person (i.e. one that isn’t paedophile), no child pose could be sexual even it was deemed erotic. But there is a greater associated inconsistency. For any normal person to recognise a child’s “sexual pose”, whether he or she has been personally aroused by it or not, is superfluous, because the child’s pose that arouses IS arousing by its seemly erotic nature. Thus, either children are incapable of formally exuding sexuality (and summarily un-erotic) or they are (at the very minimum) inertly sexual. For “justice” to be transparent here, defining standards have to be radically reviewed. Simply put, if children are capable of carnal expression, then normal people are capable of succumbing to reflective lust. You see, contrary to popular religious persuasion, it impossible to null lustful intent, although spontaneous body reactions (such as male erections) can be “managed” accordingly. It is only possible to deny lust. And those that deny stand by their deceit.  Where does deceit fit into a transparent judicial system?

There is one other associated item deserving of scrutiny. If children are sexual after all, wouldn’t that imply legal bureaucracies actually persecute a child’s (God given) right to self-expression? If society isn’t elitist, why do heterosexuals, gays and lesbians have genre support when others remain unprotected? On the other hand, was society to be elitist, then public affairs would predictably encourage fabrication of a crooked, unfair justice system, bereft of justice, built on authoritarian double standards. In that light, returning to my theme, the Epstein saga, were allegations to be taken as partially believable (i.e. there has to be at least a little fire to cause that much smoke), then certain shady tales tendered as evidence, rather than being strictly “untrue” per se, might not be as presented. Considering the crusading inquisition’s pathological desire to collect scalps, were (in most instances) relationships between now estranged parties consensual at the time? Divorces are commonplace and often end bitterly. Surely it is not beyond the realms of possibility that bitter exaggeration has tainted Epstein’s witness accounts? That would explain implausible scenarios touted by desperate Medias. Even so, obvious fraud, such as those exampled bags of fruit confessions, warrants deserved sarcasm.

That is why when dumb allegations were made by loose nuts years ago (when mind your own business meant something) they were rightly routinely ignored

In fact this provides the vital clue to the real motive behind the establishment of law courts. Star chambers were not set up provide a vehicle for accused to establish their innocence. They were created to legitimise “justice” dealt out to anyone that defied leading authority. Accused were always presumed guilty as charged whether nobleman or pauper, but why the need for legitimacy? One can but speculate over the truth here, but I would hazard to guess that family revenge missions against perceived dishonour would have been normal practice until a “divine” override was accepted. Initially divinity would have been limited to “shielding” aristocratic affairs beneath an honour system paraphrased as “the fair trial”. Much later (formally 1830) the motif was widened to include “the public at large”. Industrialism was no coincidence. It began with the fraudulent “abolishment” of slavery (which made everyone slaves of sorts), to which the creation of career criminals was a symptom (beautifully symbolised by Charles Dickens’ “Fagan” in Oliver Twist). Those that commit crimes have no specific ambition to become criminals. Instead, they spurn morality that supposes laws are just. To expand clarity here, conditioned slaves. the “fodder”, are not willing to challenge unjust, unfair laws or, indeed, any authoritative measures that victimise.

Epstein “the vehicle” has reduced morality to crud. Building up to this, populations have been gradually ordered into civility via shallow, sometimes obtuse directives. Politicians’ market rhetoric which predetermines negotiation is always “slant”. Therefore laws are shamelessly biased and courts that uphold them partisan. Reflectively, Epstein appears to have resolutely empowered corporate (industrialist) aligned Medias in their roles as appointed judge, juror and executioner. That is why I insist his output is the grandest conspiracy the world has seen to date, but I think I need to back that statement up with logic if I am appeal to others. For logic, I would like to return to the earlier CIA theme and reintroduce George Bush senior. But before I do, just so we are aware, when formalisation of legislature came into being, already power brokers were moving to covert status. In this instance extended families would have members that were not widely known who could travel relatively incognito. These guys were the movers and the shakers, the string pullers. Ones in the firing line, such as personable royals, generally behaved very discreetly. If they did anything radically disaffecting, it was going to be behind an army of backers.

General Smedley D Butler may well have published his 1935 paper “War is a Racket” as a direct response to displaced WWI veterans huddled in “tent cities”, but now the racket it everywhere.  George Bush’s involvement with the Central Intelligence Agency converted supporting ethics to transform it into a racketeering organisation from the 1960’s onwards. Undoubtedly, one of Truman’s objectives would have been to ensure the CIA infiltrated and influenced governments to “keep America safe”. Mandates changed under Bush, which allowed international cooperation for mutual business purposes.  Quintessentially (though practice sometimes defies promise) the CIA extorted foreign domains whereas the (Roosevelt’s 1908) FBI looked after the home roost. For instance, in that capacity the CIA has regularly partnered with Israel’s Mossad. Nevertheless, certain joint initiatives have focused on home turf matters, such as Epstein “Inc.”. Maybe parallel agendas conflict with the FBI from time to time, but Israel’s association with Epstein dictates America is their turf.

William the Conqueror’s Feudal System made an introduction earlier. I can confirm it is still alive and well, except those that run the pyramid take ultra-safe covert positions. David Rockefeller was a “front man”. It was felt he had the gift of the gab and was endearing enough not to get himself killed for his efforts. Thus, it is also sound to presume that organisations such as the CIA, FBI and Mossad follow an identical “rule by the few” model. In that respect, lowly agents should be viewed as bunnies that distinctly follow orders. Once, at a dinner party, I discussed the prospect of all out nuclear war. My left wing counterpart tried to argue that no decent person could ever “press the button”. My sad duty was to inform him that those that created supporting infrastructures must have been of similar opinion too; for they run constant drills, operators never given latitude of forethought as to which events might be genuine live attacks. They are at liberty only to follow orders as “monkeys”. So, perhaps, in this manner, lowly enforcement agents are managed from above by like manoeuvres.

There is no question as to the deceitful nature of slander posthumously attached to Epstein. However, while “the pyramid” says otherwise, agents would have no alternative but to uphold their duty diligently. Unfortunately, after George Bush senior, “diligence” equates to “use any means to win”. Here, I can only speculate as to who is ultimate behind fraudulent confessions exampled and how they escalated from limelight to public judiciary, but I can hypothesise why and what templates were used to craft intrigue. So, to be fair to our dutiful enforcement agents, let us presume they believe that evidence IS representative of truth. How did they arrive at the current junction? Well, we’ve all seen those movies where the key witness is shot dead, potentially jeopardising court processes, justifying a frantic hunt for “reinforcements”. Maybe, in Epstein’s case, law enforcement hit brick walls all the way down the investigation path. Maybe none, not one, of their potential witnesses wanted anything to do with the investigation or due diligence. Do our valiant agents give up or press on against all odds?

Using any means” (which is the modern method) provides agents an enormous amount of political license. Remember, as far as they are concerned, any criminal is as guilty as sin and, when complicity is lacking, he must have “corrupted” vital witnesses. As far as our valiant agents are concerned, he also still must pay for his crime and, consequentially, they are at liberty to be as deceitful as they like, if the greater good is avenged. Particularly in the US, there are a whole bunch of actors that always seem out of work, sorry, rehearsing between assignments. Why not put them to good effect? They could become surrogate star witnesses that should have been “real” had the devil not corrupted virtue. Whereas I may feel the nature of the greater portion of information justifying affirmative action is obviously “flaky”, dedicated law enforcement likely doesn’t share this opinion. However, there is no doubt in my mind key witnesses have been “prepped” by external arbiters who, highest common denominator logic prefers, are either CIA or their associates. Let us be clear on what’s at stake here. For the fake witnesses the risks are high. Though revenue wise they can receive lucrative incomes from chat shows, if any slip of the tongue was to ever compromise things, ensuring public renege on “truth”, well, the whole charade would turned back on them as violently as it did to poor “Jeffrey Epstein” (if it was him).

So I missed my planned pre-New Years’ release date but, all things considered, that’s something I can live with. I mean…..I am alive.

 

Totalitarian Brands: He Who Controls the Gold “Wins”

gold-bullion

Introduction to Totalitarian Brands

corporate pardophiliaBefore embarking on my longest blog entry to date, I had originally conceived the title Totalitarian Brands, but to do justice to accrued research data would have required at least a hundred blank sheets. As this (in word format) equates to roughly 50,000 words, with every page filled, I would easily have had enough content to compile a small book should have I taken up the challenge. pope_benedict_xvi-evilIndeed, emphasis on the greatest corporate brand, paedophilia, might inspire dozens of paragraphs alone, given the lack of fortitude and basis elsewhere. However, the great journalists’ guide, if there was such a thing, would surely advise writers that readers’ attention spans are limited at best, so I feared scrutiny would be stretched beyond the max if I entertained this mountainous quest in addition to supplements covering far wider, more convoluted antagonisms. Therefore I, being of sound mind, have already part scripted “”The powers’” great accolade: Brand Pedo” for a future Ozzie Thinker entry and will say no more on the subject now.

New Israel Fund 'members'This essay will still keep the original title idea, Totalitarian Brands. “He who controls the gold wins” is the first of a number of topical segments. Accordingly, this one reflects on feudalism, royalty, coinage, currency, ownership and other things generally related. What would a political article be without terrorists? Accordingly I have scheduled an intro to my feisty fellow Arab-American crime fighter, Mantiq-Al-Tayr. That said, given this post is my longest to date (remember that bit about peoples’ attention spans) it will have to be in brief. In summary I would like to present conclusions that indisputably outline the tragic connection between ownership, money and war. Reflectively, concordant with that agenda, the whole atheist, fake science paradigm simply replaces or expands on institutionalised religious judicial mass indoctrination.

original-sin-3But, to be clear, we must start at the beginning when there were no brands and God walked with man. According to atheists “God walking with man” could not possibly be so, but I disagree. Beliefs hold so much credence they can construct reality, providing that perception is never tested. If I decide the moon is made of cheese, only visiting the heavenly object will expose the belief. fxh6dmg2-1328162484Therefore, providing I never rocket to the heavens, my belief will be held sacred. Of course, for our “all knowing” atheists the reverse is so. To honestly assert belief in the total absence of anything requires absolute knowledge of everything to back it up; otherwise erstwhile glib sentiment is no different to that of those dreamers of cheesy moons. The atheism syndrome (and that is all it is) highlights a deliberate ignorance.

It is a cult that was founded on the assumption that God is all-consuming (the trendy way of saying everywhere). When something’s everywhere, theoretically you don’t have to look very far to find it, agreed. Atheist cultYet, what these occultists fail to take into consideration is they might just be looking at things entirely in the wrong way. My book, “The Beauty of Existence Decoded”, outlines the right way. Brand perception is essential for marketeers of totalitarian propaganda campaigns. Strict homage to materialism allows impressions to disseminate “correct thinking” towards their causes. Vagaries of wilfully dishonest and divisive interpretations of truth create the modern day dichotomy that distorts good sense into hybrid fantasy. Truth takes a back seat to totalitarian passion. Logic and reason are consumed by branded emotion to stir ignorant multitudes.

Communist, atheist material belief systems expand new commerce frontiers

Lenin-Bronstein-Gulag-HellRecently a Facebook heckler gave feedback that my articles are opinion pieces. To a degree, this is correct, but has an article ever been written that is opinion free? All journalism imbues lavish alliterations which deliberately foment ambitions geared to enhancing branded truth. Choice of words and inflections is tantamount. For arbitrary bodies’ hell bent on universal control, meanings of the words that stick in the throat can be changed over time. Nikolai Levashov, for instance, observed a number of popular Russian terms were given opposite meanings after the Communist takeover that is labelled revolution (sic). This, he outlines, was a deliberate and effective strategy geared towards shaping new opinions and a new ethos that both backed off of and contradicted old order.

native-americans-fighting-terrorism-warriors-braves-fightersWhen I talked about only God and man at the beginning, Introducing atheists was a ploy. You see atheism is all about commerce and nothing to do with divinity. With no God, legitimate “finders’ keepers” can claim “discoveries” from conquest or exploration. America was found on this principle and that is why administrative arbitrators legitimised stakes to claims. If God was to be factored at any point, free land was originally stolen [from God]. Ownership is a synthetic manmade system. It is not wide ranging or far reaching; quite the reverse. It supports that (or, more importantly, those) which is “privy to” contractual order. Therefore, as the American natives were obsolete as far as the white invaders were concerned, contracts always forfeited their moral claims until commercial stakeholders saw advantage from philosophic reversal.

FedMinFinBeninAtheism has become more than a cult. It is an accessory to the de-spiritualisation of mankind. Those destined to control are not merely content with their fake ownership contracts. They also want to manufacture nature. For instance, with no almighty God at the helm, nature is a balance confined to survival of the fittest. War, by this determination, attempts to validate the natural progression of order. Yet, in truth, all conflicts are a consequence of ownership. The most cherished of all things that are owned is an individual’s life (self). Therefore, per utopian logic, the root of all disputes (pre-empting “war”) would be anything that is deemed to undermine self-interest (or, in plainer words, selfishness). Ownership, many fail to realise, will always only be as good as the belief in the contracts that substantiate the concept. A concept is all ownership will ever be and it is that what binds legacies ratified by terms of inheritance after every life eventually fades into oblivion.

Deceptive 'truths'Belief systems are pivotal for the manufacture of assuming audiences. Without visceral pointed mob views, brands are finished, so the group is programmed to squeeze out individual innovators, pioneers and revolutionaries unless they are the new trend setters. For instance, Christian “truther” networks spare no effort in emphasising criticism demonstrating how mainstream Medias are rigged to suit the wishes of corporate peers (governments rarely amount to anything more than corporate sponsors). Yet, by the same token, the majority of articles, bulletins and paraphernalia produced by these networks are more biased, militantly partisan and truth lacking than the arenas they condemn. Even so, dirty “lies” buried in the mainstream are very deceptive indeed, so I would still judge that the greater evil of the two. Besides, alternative activism caters for beatniks whereas the other tragic resource, when in tune, wholeheartedly supports a perpetual corporate totalitarian agenda. Statistically, the mainstream supposedly fuels and is the majority (or populist) view. If this is and remains so, mankind has a world of worry ahead.

Hidden past truths might divine present and future prophecy

JP FarrellI make no effort to disguise the fact that I share Joseph P Farrell’s opinion that the banking system (or commerce) paved the way for kings and then religions to execute order. To be more precise, I believe humanity was rebuilt using this tried and tested way to progress civilisation after the collapse of Atlantis. The-Ark-of-the-CovenantReligions were “the Law” and “justice systems” combined. That is why the Pharisees (dissenters or usurpers) were both religious leaders and judges of the ancient Israelites. The reason one interpretation of the meaning of the word Pharisee is “hypocrite” was some Israelites set about to pervert all the prehistoric Atlantis values of civilisation to create the culture control monster that operates with impunity today. Be very clear on this history. It is very important. Potentially the lost Ark of the Covenant contains stone tablets detailing original Atlantis order. That is why they have never been “found. “Moses” originally hid them so his cronies could rule by rote in my opinion, unless he settled in Ireland. If that was the case, corruption would have begun any time after his death.

jesus-4Before I reveal attention to details required to unravel the fraud being painted as historic, scientific and political truth, I would like to offer an example of how reason can be divined with common sense and good calculation. Astute visitors will notice the “Profile of the Gnostic Jesus” section here. The name “Jesus” is presumed to first appear in the New Testament accounts of the Bible (and some of the contemporary Dead Sea Scrolls). Of the main canon, colloquially known as the Four Gospels, no original manuscripts have survived, so it is impossible to [precisely] determine what languages were used for the autographs. Thus, lexicons might and do argue the name Jesus is a Greek (although there is no letter “J” in that tongue and the Hebrew alphabet has a provision for all sounds creating the name) derivative from Aramaic Yeshua.

3-josephus-e13630990433631In addition, presuming Yeshua has anything to do Jesus is a preconception, mitigated only by the fact it is the closest sounding Aramaic name that might be compared to Jesus. Insomuch, arguments are clearly fuelled by the desire to satisfy a particular narrative line; i.e. in this case original texts were produced in the everyman tongue, Aramaic. That purpose is aimed at deflecting serious consideration as to the abnormality of the word Jesus and the formal contemporary religious significance of doctrines associated with the name that blossomed into the Christian Church. Predictable organic growth of an average Jewish man [into something he wasn’t] offers the avenue to explain away those theoretical divine powers as merely metaphorical or wishful thinking. If Jesus was not one of a range of names that were used prior to and over the contemporary period, why did the subsequently wide usage (particularly in Latin communities) as a given name take hold? In effect, totalitarian propagandists have etched a character from the tradition that is part of a wave of change. Jesus, the individual, whilst not being superfluous, is rendered rather impotent or misunderstood by that religious systemisation.

The Holy Blood and Holy Grail is hybrid catholic-Zionist totalitarianism

25428efdf0cda78860ad4fef0fe33bf9There is another strange, enigmatic, dare I say contemporary once more, character called Josephus, who, inexplicably, shares a potentially unique name with Jesus. The Pharisaic old guard blast on about his birth name being ordinary Joseph Ben Matityahu (Joseph son of Matthias), but this might also be poppycock and only evidence of Scarlet Pimpernel covering his tracks, given that there are no other contemporary clues or tangible documents beyond the written legacy of Josephus about his own life. The additional claim that he adopted Flavius (Roman royal) in homage to the Emperor, in spite of his father’s proto-kingly status as a high priest of the bloodline of David, no less, is so preposterous it’s almost laughable. The only decent response to that is, pull the other one Zionists, it’s got bells on.

Is this JesusIt seems to me that Josephus represented the creation of a fusion of two royal orders (each characterised by his given and surname) and the reason the (presumed) medieval additions to the main biblical canon talk of Joseph as the father of Jesus is they more pertinently give clues as to Josephus’ father’s status/history. Jesus’ attack on the money changers outside the temple (which might not have existed) was so out of place, it was contextually clearly presenting a different person. Given the textual symmetry and character of minor agitator, Barabbas, he is an ideal candidate for the unrest, arrest, imprisonment and crucifixion. He must have been spared actual crucifixion, either because passer by Simon Cyrene acted instantia, Joseph of Arimthea negotiated with Pontius Pilate or both, in order to sire Jesus. Biblical accounts of the crucifixion/resurrection take history out of context in order to offer different political metaphors on Gnostic/Pharisaic control of rule of law. Barabbas’ (Justus) common name was Joseph.

GiveUsBarabbasIn addition, though this may be too great a stretch of the imagination for some, filius is Latin for “son”, so could its abbreviation to “us” have been added to Joseph as the new, hybridised name Josephus with view to inflect “son of Joseph”? I think filius to ph-us in anagrammatic form is a plausible mind stretch. For instance, in prior articles I noted the incomplete Latin anagram “pho(r) Jesus” from letters of Joseph, which means to bear forth Jesus. Searching references for earlier uses of Josephus as a common name, I find none. There are plenty of other clues to this enigma, but the coincidence of two similarly unique names coming from intrinsically linked characters overwhelmingly points to the buried truth that they belong to the exact same identity.

Downhill from Atlantis and a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow

Returning to contemplating the history of how the meaning of civilisation has been distorted to purposefully enslave the masses, it was a minority of Israelites that masterminded a new order championing commercial privilege to the detriment of humanitarian values. In effect, they have slowly and catastrophically systematically usurped the wisdom of Atlantis, brick by brick. They have gradually converted cosmic order into “graded” chaos. Though interest in gold (as a measure) predates Israelite fascination, according to Vedic references of much more ancient origins, cuts of silver were the preferred method of fiscal accountability perhaps stretching back prior to the Atlantis civilisations (originally on Mars!).

8Lnq4Q1It must be said, things of value were scant indeed in those eras so comparisons with modern day corporate rationalisation are impossible. Where to buy pooBelieve it or not, we live in unique times which have never been tried or tested before. Today, people even pay for manure! That’s the difference. The ownership concept has grown to become an almost universal standard and commerce wastes no opportunity to manipulate and destroy goodwill. Just about all common lands went years ago. Major restrictions are placed on “free” drinking water. Is the air to be regarded as the next great industrialist conquest for the conquistadors? They do still need slaves to toil and buy goods; else commerce would collapse in a heap. But the most current great pioneering “venture” is for power over life and death by controlling illness and the medical fix (a future instalment, “Are Vaccines a Globalist Strategy Being Used to Cull Populations?” is planned)

1381671805_16Of course, these plots neither appeared overnight nor happened by accident. There was extensive planning. Steps of the outline were simple. First off, the parasites needed to convince everyone to use money when and where it hadn’t been used before. Mainstream history records the primary, but very crude, attempt at globalisation being the preoccupation of the Greeks (or presumed Greeks, who were both Israelite Hyksos and the terrible Philistines, in my opinion). No real expansive, persisting commerce strategy was employed beyond loot and pillage by them. Interestingly Alexander the Great and infamous Cleopatra were, reputedly, Macedonians (perhaps even Romanians?) so the ethnic footprint of ancient times would likely confound the populist historical view anyway.

Australian HieroglyphsBe that as it may, after the Greeks failed to maintain control and their empire fizzled out, a new Roman (de facto “Greek”?) regime magically appeared to confront the world once more. This time, after the prior dry run, things were better organised (in some ways confirming there was a single adaptable blueprint for order and de facto Greek and Roman puppet masters were bound by identical philosophies). I would have included the ancient Babylonians, but evidence of global conquest is too thin on the ground. Remarkably though, Egyptian wall writings and artefacts have even been found on the Australian and American mainlands so, given time, perhaps a case could be built in favour of the Babylonians originally driving universal chaos. Maree Moore puts compelling arguments for the Israelites as breakaways from the Babylon powerhouse. Michael Tsarion goes further, I am led to believe.

Roman coins and rude Britons

religion Joshua_JerichoOf all the many innovative Roman strategies, the most illogical (without foresight) and noteworthy is the radical introduction of copper or bronze coinage. I use the term “radical” perhaps inappropriately as there is a copper talisman or coin colloquially known as the Pittsburgh Penny that has been contextually dated at around 200,000BC, so perhaps the Roman imagination was not that great after all. Ancient Israelites considered copper a precious metal as it was accounted for in the three wagon loads of plunder they had collected after “Godransacked Jericho for them. God is the ultimate totalitarian brand, but more on that later from my friend Mantiq-Al-Tayr. The Greeks, Celts or what passed for ancient Russians predominantly used silver and gold as base values. There is a significant reason for this which will be presented in due course.

33A4A5DC00000578-3565350-image-a-1_1461937419088Anyway, the Romans didn’t restrict their potentially worthless coinage to Rome. No, copper and bronze talismans were exported in industrial quantities and often buried for locals to find in order to entice other fledgling nations into the commerce trap. History has shown the Celts knew better as modern day treasure seekers are still digging up the Roman refuse. Indeed, the only way they could entice British chieftains to take a mild interest in compliance was by salting each trove with silver or gold. Given the Druids administered a system of pantheism which elevated the harvest festival, these were blissful times of peace and humanity, only interrupted by occasional silly squabbles between ill-disciplined cultural leaders.

Druids-mistletoeAfter their disastrous British campaign, the Romans determined the Brits made lousy hosts, business partners and slaves. Besides, staying would have risked destroying the jewel of exalted heritage (that which separated the aristocrats from plebeians). Just about all the great mystery schools and colleges (some say over 100) were located in what has now become England’s mainland, Glastonbury, Avalon included. Learning was courtesy of breakaway Israelites; the Druids. 050113084221E0Is it any wonder those original teachings have been “lost” too? Global elites still flock to prestigious public schools Eton and Harrow, the great universities at Oxford and Cambridge or the London School of Economics.

Her status as the seat of learning is an essential clue demonstrating Britain was or became the mythical Promised Land. In this capacity she has been used as a yard stick for globalist totalitarian policy ambition. Not only that, researchers can see which initiatives have stuck, i.e. Middle Ages feudalism wasn’t an accident of the times. It was a massive step forward and feather in the cap of the global control agenda. Consequentially, other countries have gone further. For instance, the Buddhists imposed ridiculously savage measures on the people of Tibet to uphold totalitarian ideals, lest those that see safety in religious dogma forget. Praise God the atheist Chinese intervened! As expressed earlier, the ultimate plan for globalisation was drafted in Atlantis times (over 10,000 years ago) and corrupted into an unmoving agenda that relentlessly rolls on.

Conquest, currency and control

651235Celtic coins in circulation prior to Roman occupation of Britain were all called Staters and, I presume, this was because those tokens were only issued to instruments of State (chieftains and so on). Instead, the Romans had gold “pounds” or libres (freedom) for the ruling classes. Silver “shilling” solodi (denoting intelligence) were for the merchant aristocrats. Plebeians had to be satisfied with copper/bronze pennies or denarii (meaning a farmer’s dowry or ten asses). Hadrian Denarius_lgThough those who study coinage of the extended Roman periods may disagree with my gross over-simplification, order was basically punctuated through coinage. This is not about metal scarcity, although lack of metal stock did negate the mint (which means “silver”) of occasional gold solodi and silver denarii.

Roman coinage encapsulated ideals. Doubtlessly, other attributes can be found in the analysis of the argenteus, nummus, laureate, miliarense and so on. The point is that there were/are far rarer metals that could have been used to augment value if rarity was the objective. NPG 708; Queen Victoria by Lady Julia Abercromby, after Heinrich von AngeliNot only did the British system pretty much adopt simplified Roman currency measures up to modern day pre-decimalisation, but gold has always outstripped silver value too. It is duly noted industrialists periodically play act to create the illusion markets are spontaneous, but never once has silver come even close to overtaking gold value.

tsar-nicholas-ii-russiaFurther evidence supporting Britain as the Promised Land and the next step after Roman tyranny is Queen Victoria’s empire. Her conquests were so wide ranging they expanded beyond the Greek and Roman globalisation campaigns to conquer one quarter of the globe. Factoring incestuous royal connections, the entire Earth was largely property of the elites by World War One. Even arctic regions and other hard to get to places were grabbed as a consequence of (or, perhaps, part of the reason for) World War Two. Though a theoretical World War Three began in 1984 it has been concerning who controls political commercial rights designated for eventual administration by a United Nations/NATO global federalism cooperative. The formal end of sovereign royalty was symbolised by the murder of Russian Tsar Nicholas II 17th July 1918. Compelling data suggests the Romanov dynasty was installed by the Rothschilds 1775 (a year before American Independence) and removed by the same basic stakeholders.

benjamin-netanyahu-pope-francisWhen World War Three is “won”, “Law making” will still be outsourced to Israel, of course, unless that centre is moved for security reasons. Other nations’ boundaries won’t noticeably change, unless puppet leaderships prove impossible to manage. Currently commerce favours large bodies of people to be broken up. Weaken the national voice enough then trouble makers are easier to silence seems to be the reasoning. Besides, the CIA, NSA and other noteworthy propaganda agencies have armies of internet dissenters poised to drown out any sincere pleas for help. Given the latest American mass shootings (if “real”), I should mention the FBI manipulates “vice” (per Puritan/Pharisaic ideals). Historically, it is also worth adding, Roman Order became Catholicism and, via United Nations hybrid New Age philology, the Pope is now the most influential individual man on the planet. Sure, the Buddhists have tried to muscle in with their Dalai Lama, but is he not doing the New Age pas de pas too? NATO is a branch of the Pentagon which is what became of the feared but most prized consortium of merchants; the East India Company.

Back to trading basics

probably PURE fantasyReturning to my history of how coinage symbolises control of the masses, the Romans failed to influence the lowly Brit. Their stinking peasants’ coins did not change the mindset of the masses and these quickly became obsolete in favour of barter. Territories that unified to become Germany in 1870 were partially a Roman success, though. Mass populations of influential States were broken from the 8th century onwards under the yoke of copper money. Sheepish bulldogHistorically, the Brits have always refused to become an annex of Europe, so attitude outcomes are hardly a surprise. Nevertheless, post decimalisation woes have paved the way for all sorts of horrors, such as membership of the Common Market, European Union and introducing the dreaded Euro alongside coin of the realm. It is sadly looking as though the great British bulldog has been crossbred with the poodle.

amiens-cathedral-the-central-portal-colored-lighting-1When William Conqueror attempted to impose the will of the elites on the English people, he achieved next to nothing (other than commissioning construction of those towering cathedrals designed to swamp faith). Feudalism could only be engineered with silver; coinage of the aristocracy (thinking classes). Craftsmen and serf alike insisted on pay. In fact, unsurprisingly, the introduction of copper coinage only returned with Charles II’s milled coins for Britain and Ireland from 1660. The rightful king had been invited back to lead an unconstitutional British monarchy after the elites’ hallowed republic dismally failed. Nepotism had dealt a final indignant blow to their enchanted “Commonwealth” (or Protectorate) run by Oliver Cromwell. He had bestowed greater powers on his son than deposed king Charles I had wielded. Charles, of course, had been murdered to usher in a new age of light (which, I must say, equated to excruciating darkness for the masses) clearly of the “deepest black” variety.

2012AA42119Globalised banking (heralding modern day standardisation) reputedly began with an agreement established by Lloyd’s Agencies at a London coffee (brought in by the New World) house in 1694, although a little more detail on the politics of the time might make things clearer. oThe plan had always been to unite the British Isles under the “Union of Jacob”. However, both Scotland and Ireland had shown to be uncontrollably troublesome. From the Middle Ages conquest against the Scots was common with memorable battles such as Bannockburn of the second war over independence. The way England and Scotland were eventually permanently joined was via shared kingship. Elizabeth I left no legitimate heir so this allowed James VI of Scotland to become James I of England. Perhaps Mary, Queen of Scots, was executed in vain?

2CivilWar-StGilesHe began costly wars against Ireland with some earnest. James’ son, the deposed Charles I, did less, possibly because affairs of state were abruptly interrupted with the civil war of 1642, but unrest in Scotland and Ireland (viewed as a “protectorate”) from 1639 onwards is colloquially known as the Bishops’ Wars. The hapless king was famously executed in 1649 after losing the civil war and his son was forced into exile. However, in 1651 the Scots crowned Charles II king. With it came an attempt at reinstating Charles with the English throne too. However, this was foiled by roundhead generals in control. Britain, theoretically, was subject to Martial Law from 1649 until Cromwell was sworn in as Protector December 1653. The point I am trying to make is that the 1600’s was a period of enormous upheaval and political turbulence, so it is no wonder the bankers felt confident enough to conspire in 1694.  It is inconceivable that they weren’t linked in some way with the consortiums of merchants that had rebelled against royal authority.

Flemish influence, the Bill of Rights and more tyranny

dec_of_rightsTwo years later William of Orange would be in control of Britain through marriage with Mary Stuart. Mary was the daughter of James II (son of Charles II) who had been deposed and exiled by nobles (merchant bankers) for exerting too much royal power. Notably, King William introduced the Bill of Rights for British aristocrats (which to some degree addressed the failings of the Cromwell republics) along with the Dutch mortgage systems. If the royals were now hypothetically bankrupt, it wouldn’t take too long for the aristocracy to follow with the helping bankers’ hands. 1696 was the year currency was first pinned to the gold standard (a weights & measures system invented by Sir Isaac Newton). AIPAC-Conf-620x350Contextually this is very important as, when England’s gold currency collapsed in 1797 (roughly a century after the gold standard was introduced) due to over speculation in the colonies, a short lived silver standard returned using royal stamped Spanish doubloons. It is breathtaking to consider the fact it took merchant bankers a mere century to break currency.

Globalists regularly cite the various Bills of Rights and Constitutions as tenets of democracy. Yet, the reality is that the philology behind Law making has skewed just about all goodwill from the outset. catchment-sensitive-farming-common-land-from-nature-england-13-638Rhetoric framing “rights” is always far too broad to scope models that work – in the universal sense. Indeed it could be said that the supposed frameworks of democracy are the very instruments of manipulation that evoke tyranny by the backdoor. Thus, special “minority” lobbies (such as AIPAC – a critical favourite of Mantiq-Al-Tayr, but there is always some special love for “hero” Jonathan Pollard too) ensure the masses are perennially subject to their wishes or, perhaps, “subjugated” might be a more apt expression. Great Britain, for instance, has no constitution and relies on a centuries old corporate charter that legitimised royal plunder of free lands. This devils’ contract is called the Magna Carta.

mwashingtonPer its 14th Amendment, the American constitution was similarly reduced to a corporate charter in 1868. Limits were possibly first tested by the District of Colombia’s “organic” Act 1871 (February 21) which set “Washington” (where all laws are made) adrift from the rest of America. BA_titleThe prior civil war (1861-65) had been a watered down version of the centuries’ earlier English one. In this case, though, the contest was between principles defining a constitutional republic and an unconstitutional commercial contract (the friendly way of saying dictatorship). From 1868 America became holus bolus property of the industrialists and is still their dictatorship. The implementation of the Federal Reserve 1913/14 was a system that expanded the “cause” to the rest of the globe. World War One was a celebration of multi-lateral control of the masses.

Gold, silver and bronze reduced to paper

tyburnWorthless copper/bronze became the universal peasants’ coinage from the 1600’s.  Coin of the realm should be taken very seriously. In my formative years, I was lucky to live in a Jacobean farmhouse. Ceilings were lined with 1850’s and 60’s newspaper sheets. Rescuing a few, I found them enthralling reading. These really were harsh times, with burgeoning inquisitions and no rescue for offenders. One young London lass had been sentenced to hang for whitewashing a farthing (one quarter penny) in an attempt to pass it off as a tanner (six pence) to a land owner. She had dared convert something worthless into a thing of value, but, most importantly, she had gone beyond her station. A popular phrase amongst the philanthropic gentry of time was “know your place” (implying their tyranny demonstrated Godly virtue). Mid 1800’s saw an industrialists’ heyday and enormous conflicts with guilds supporting craft industries. Therefore, it is important that the masses never forsake the sacrifices their forefathers made to improve the lot of those destined to have no future.

The-disputed-gold-trial-plaBe this as it may, prior to 1918 royal stamped coinage did correctly observe weights and measures (and then incorrectly up to 1945-48). I think I also need to add, at this juncture, Newton’s gold standard discussed earlier was more of a formalisation of something that went back to the dawn of creation of money, perhaps pre Atlantis times. 012_001As a precaution against fraud, it is difficult to ascertain whether crooks that clipped coins from medieval times onwards were successful in their enterprise or defaced coins were commonly rejected on sight forcing some sort of common law arrests. Theoretically, at least, any attack on the coin of the realm was a form of treason. For drastic evidence, I might select the case of a Mauritian head postmaster who was jailed with his wife in the 1850’s for using her facial profile in place of Queen Victoria’s on postage stamps. Mind you, the evidence in question was so crudely produced, I cannot fathom how anyone could tell the difference as none of the correct portrayals even vaguely resembled the queen. The point being is it was the thought of it that irked the system and that was enough to vilify outrage. Everything Queen Victoria endorsed was associated with commerce of privilege.  That giant marketing organ could not afford to see the royals’ status tarnished in any way.

Precious-Metals-ETFs_8695696282_61670a55c6_o_780x390px_85pctRight up to Word War One currency determined values backed by metals of worth. Whether the denominations were Chinese taels, French francs, Portuguese reals or common old United States of America dollars, all were representative of precious portions determined by mass. A British gold sovereign did not vary. Statue_Of_Liberty_04Nor did the guinea piece. They were what they were. Aside from the strange and untrue Washington Post announcement that 6 million Jews had been killed as a consequence of the world war, in 1919 something tragic happened. The monumental domino effect from the collapse of Germany has largely been overlooked by popular history, but if there were charges to be levelled at a New World conspiracy to usurp order, Woodrow Wilson’s draconian and unnecessary measures supplanted after the Treaty of Versailles as reparations against the fallen nation was evidence enough. Is that what is meant by New World Order?

hire-purchase-leasing-1-638Many level imprudent charges against the Federal Reserve for skimming 3% off the top of the US Exchequer. In fact, as far as I can ascertain, the bankers bear all costs associated with design, printing, distribution and stock security, so 3% (as a simple charge) seems more than fair to me. The real issue is, as usual, camouflaged by ignorance. When the cartel of bankers most foul was established, courtesy (in part) of Woodrow Wilson 1913/14, the corporate exchequer had been outsourced to money launderers. Wagon loads of German gold via France came into the United States under the approving eye of that imposing French Statue of Liberty. No wonder the 1920’s were roaring. It gave the banking industry in general, the confidence to speculate like it had never done before. Hire purchase was the active response, providing ample opportunity to bankrupt the masses.

GER-129-Reichsbanknote-1_Trillion_Mark_(1923)Germany was probably bust in 1919 but it took only two years for all the gold prised from the people to impact the Deutsche mark. Ultimately, there was no gold to back paper currency (papiermark had replaced goldmark in 1914 courtesy of the Federal Reserve) so the inevitable happened. 5-mark-1917.b.r.fHyperinflation kicked in to eventually break the Deutsche mark. In 1924 a new Reich mark was issued, but those with gold converted savings over the inflation period were ruined without hope of compensation courtesy of the prior reparations scam that had clearly been egged on by Federal Reserve bankers as they were the ones that gained so much from German misery. Since 1920, when the Federal Reserve bankers had the gall to staunchly defend the gold standard (so targeted nations would collapse without their intervention), dozens of currencies have been forced to intermittently drop off it (with “certification” from the Federal Reserve, of course). Nevertheless, Germany is probably the best example of that objective tyranny, though. Even the British pound was not spared. The 1920’s and 1930’s saw markets intermittently trading worthless banknotes. Arguments inferring that paper money was more flexible and easier to carry are flawed. The real reason paper was used is in deference to the gold standard. Earliest banknotes were no different to today’s cheques.

Jiggery pokery post German reparations lionized US-Jewish supremacy launching “commie bastard” Hitler

EvictbonusarmyThough, officially, Franklin Delano Roosevelt took America off the gold standard 5th June 1933, signs of unaccountability were clearly there in 1932 and perhaps, even, 1931. Casualties this time were First World War veterans who had had their pensions’ squandered, courtesy of “the boom” and consequential “depression”. A 1932 veterans “tent city” Washington protest march was met with callous insensitivity by the government who ended up sending in the National Guard led by gallant MacArthur; an altercation infamously remembered as the “Bonus Army” War.  The US bust leading to these unfortunate circumstances had been engineered, once again, by those hallowed Federal Reserve money launderers. Sneakily, in the late 1920’s they had syphoned huge gold deposits from America (accountably $840 million) back to Germany in preparation for a newly energised campaign launching Chancellor Hitler, January 1933.

Haavara-Agreement-Hitler-1933Barely a month after Roosevelt admonished the gold standard; Hitler had signed the Haavara agreement (25th August) with (though better known today) a mysterious order called Zionists. It was after agreed Jewish repatriation (or home moving as Haavara would suggest) to Palestine that anti-Semitism myths began to appear with unrequited vigour. Prior veiled allegations were the Zionists’ spineless way of making threats. HitlerZionist2In fact, Hitler was a mere pawn in their grand game. Once they had repatriation in place, they only needed to encourage Jews that had no intention of leaving their homeland, Germany wasn’t safe. In other words “Diasporas” that would not leave were to be pushed out. The ones that hung on to the bitter end were rewarded with maltreatment or death in concentration camps.

Very little has been written about Hitler’s Marxist-Socialist ambitions. Not only did he nationalise major German corporations, but he also stole great tranches of land from the German aristocracy (including some Jews). The Goyim, however, were not given blessed Jewish passage. Many years ago, my old work colleagues’ father informed me that after land seizure, the Von Grundherr family had emigrated from Germany to Britain with anything and everything they could carry. Their vast Bavarian estates were gone forever. See how the totalitarians omit history to craft false impressions? In fact Goebbels’ “brownshirts” were scathingly labelled Brown Bolsheviks by propagandists after World War Two and undeniably leftist, Hitler, is noted for his admiration of Stalin prior to the breakdown of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact (1939).

6a00d83451586c69e20162fc3846f3970d-800wi1914 saw the rapid reintroduction of passport control in the European region, so clearly and demonstrably “people management” was calculated well in advance of the precursor to the modern enslavement of humanity. lec02_5Few have taken the time to learn that the passport system was abolished in France in 1861 due to a massive influx of tourists that overwhelmed immigration to such a degree it could not cope. Overall, though, the net tightened on global border security from 1947, which is odd, considering the Jew’s lament so about how Hitler used their identification papers against them. Only one year later reformed Israel became reality and the Bretton Woods System effectively universally forfeited the gold standard (only to be introduced as United States policy by Nixon in 1971, which ties in with the unspoken “5 Year Plan” that saw formulation of the Trilateral Commission in 1973 and the end of the Vietnam war in 1975). Other than a brief hiccup in Australia, with the introduction of sterling silver 50 cent coins (rounds) in 1966, global coinage reverted to copper/nickel amalgams. Gold and silver was absent never to return?

He who controls the gold wins: return to Israel by ass

MTIwNjA4NjMzMjIxNzExMzcyForget the Jewish proverb, “he that has the gold wins” as it is the controllers of the gold that are always in the box seat. Control of gold was used to create the two great wars and the Russian “revolution” (or, to be pertinent, Zionist coup-d’état). Mainstream history would never report real popular revolutions because that would distort totalitarian branding objectives. All “uprisings” are elite sponsored successes, invariably with outcomes recorded in a less than historically perfect way. As Napoleon once said, “History is a set of lies agreed upon and written by the winners”. Fortunately there have been enough unfunded and ostracised true historians to provide adequate fleeting glimpses of legitimate information to break the mould for those with persistence of learning. Agreed, intense investigation is more time consuming, requires greater diligence and discernment, but also makes the discovery tour a blissful treasure rewarding journey. I swear by it!

Futures-and-Options-differencesIt was after 1975 that the new concept, futures & options, blossomed to take markets by storm, elevating consumerism to unthinkably heady heights. To which end, the United States of America is now theoretically in debt to the tune of over $200 trillion. Whom this debt is payable to is a question everyone should demand answered, for, according to my calculations, every single “nation” on Earth is more or less in the same boat as the USA. If “balance of deficits” is not some sick joke, this is a sham of most devastating proportions; a sham that affects every human being belonging to a system that isn’t in power. We now have the situation where tax payers’ money is worthless and nations that issue it don’t have any actual capital to back promises even if they wanted to. Pledges supposedly in support of the people invariably aren’t. In fact, genuine ones are so infrequent; it must be said, in some ways policy makers give the industrialists’ enslavement of the masses agenda relative transparency.

BRICS_heads_of_state_and_government_hold_hands_ahead_of_the_2014_G-20_summit_in_Brisbane,_Australia_(Agencia_Brasil)The reason Nixon backed off the gold standard was simple. Capitalism had won by 1971 as that marked the year the merchant bankers owned the world. There is a path out of the mess that is being gently crafted by BRICS nations (acronym for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), but I smell a double cross as far as the people are concerned. Real revolt is the only way to turn the industrialists’ clock back. Revolt can be peaceful, violent or a combination, but it must be put into motion for real change. Descendants should be ever vigilant for lasting remedies. For an example of genuine reactionary politics in favour of the people, one only needs to inspect shenanigans in Italy. Forget the Iceland nonsense. Italy is an unrivalled corporate nation in so much as the people haven’t completely lost their way and become detached from the political negotiation table. Other populations need to arbitrate Latin style and liberty might just reclaim some territory.

Free thoughts about corporate Catholicism, Zionism, P G Wodehouse and George Orwell’s “totalitarian Israel” pun

tumblr_mpn2iurpUn1rrmi6so1_500There are so many other things I wanted to talk about in conjunction with this, but, as I have already exceeded 6,000 words, it is going to take more than one sitting to do justice to the subject matter. Future articles will expand on the baseline “Totalitarian Brands”, as mentioned in the introduction. Building credentials of “yes men” to drive fake science is one item to be covered at length, though I do give hints in an earlier entry (Is Science Illusionary). Perhaps hilarious P G Wodehouse’s character, Sir Roderick Glossop, will be selected to emphasise how much philosophy in deference to data helps to validate quack science opinion. For the ill-informed, Glossop runs an experimental psychiatry clinic with founding principles intimating that by allowing sheer immoderation of consumption is enough to break any habit or addiction. Early in the narrative line our fearless sanatorium owner is quick to admit none of his patients had ever shown any cessation of immoderation, but, neither had they relapsed [from this “extremely popular” treatment]. By that token, his system was “theoretically impeccable”.

confused-man-md1The difference between consultants and slaves also deserves detailed separate discussion. Rogue branding campaigns, particularly the ones that appear misunderstood or perhaps even championed by confused free thinkers, will be tackled tactfully. In recent times, much emphasis has been placed on so-called chemtrails as the root of all modern sickness. diesel_damaged_lungsThis simply is not true as, more seriously, they are being used as a smokescreen to cover blatantly obvious petrochemical pollution; pollution I might add that likely causes all cancers, many viruses and other nagging health concerns. The anti-renaissance flat Earth movement has returned, welcomed by the Catholic Church no doubt. f26fb9d56304e7ce05239f5884f228faThough in many ways Catholicism is the balance of power against Zionism, it issues its own version of rabid propaganda which, in that capacity, can deeply impede those paths to enlightenment for unstable truth seekers that teeter on the brink of bewilderment. These hapless, well-meaning souls are regularly lured into a kind of corrupt solace from the power of “faction groups”.

history-israel-palestine-borders-timelinePretty much from 1948 the globe was treated as a fortress with stringent passport control implemented where infrastructures existed, the Bretton-Woods scheme replaced gold, deregulating paper currency (assuring all foreign exchange traded through the non-existent greenback standard) in the same year and silver was mysteriously removed from coins (as a global control measure). There surely must be much more to the conspiracy involving the reformation of Israel also in 1948. Why are there such extraordinarily high percentages of Jewish bank directors, political stakeholders and mass media owners today? In my notes pre-empting this project, I lightly scribbled “Federal Reserve New Age con”. For the life of me, I cannot remember what I meant by that unless I was referring to the role the United Nations plays in loosely scoping concepts found in Aldous Huxley’s “A Brave New World”. That said I’m sure it was important, so when I remember I’ll certainly cover it too.

Wrapping up with me, Martin Luther, Napoleon Bonaparte and Mantiq-Al-Tayr

hb_63.210.11_av2Before I sign off, I promised an introduction to the fine work and vigilance of Mantiq-Al-Tayr. uss-liberty-newThough his articles unashamedly favour the Arabian cosmopolitan view on life, the world and everything, he also patriotically champions America in the honourable sense of that word. Thus, many criticisms would be of universal appeal to those seeking more honest perspectives on life, the world and everything. Not just because he perceives his deadliest enemies as agents of Zionism, but there is also comedy, passionate language and even the occasional vagrant belly dancer to tantalise prying eyes. To be brutally frank, unless you are in the Jewish club, everyone’s most deadly enemies are agents of Zionism even if they (Zionists incognito) call themselves something else. Reformist Jesuit (had the spirit of Catholicism become so decayed by 1517 it had ceased to be viable?), Martin Luther, had much to say about the Jews.

quote-jews-and-papists-are-ungodly-wretches-they-are-two-stockings-made-of-one-piece-of-cloth-martin-luther-383331Thus, wherever they can direct Scripture to their insatiable avarice, they wickedly do so. Therefore know, my dear Christians, that next to the Devil, you have no more bitter, more poisonous, more vehement an enemy than a real Jew who earnestly desires to be a Jew. There may be some among them who believe what the cow or the goose believes. But all of them are surrounded with their blood and circumcision. In history, therefore, they are often accused of poisoning wells, stealing children and mutilating them; as in Trent, Weissensee and the like. Of course they deny this. Be it so or not, however, I know full well that the ready will is not lacking with them if they could only transform it into deeds, in secret or openly.” (One of Martin Luther’s pleasanter quotes against Zionism, circa 1500’s)

5965c5e18bb0160856939824a047c9c7Napoleon Bonaparte’s wisdom “You don’t reason with intellectuals. You shoot them” may seem rather inexcusable. Nevertheless, the science-atheist-Zionist allegiance is not to be reasoned with because desired truths can be reconstructed from any approximate fantasy simply through misdirection, perhaps in the way lawyers deliberately misinterpret contracts. Let us say someone symbolised a conductor’s reasonable request for passengers to alight from a train as the catastrophic command; leave the train on fire. That would parry with some misdirection stunts pulled over the years in the interests of zeal. This particular blog never will be a Jew bashing forum. I recommend investigation into the Israelite prodigal musician Daniel Barenboim’s eloquent efforts championing the Palestinians’ plight. There are many other erstwhile unknown Jewish heroes of virtue for those committed to digging deep.

southernisraelite_1445071338_58Mantiq-Al-Tayr goes out of his way to highlight psy-op misdirection, but he also observes more mundane “in your facesystem abuses that seem to go unchecked by authorities. For instance he will not let the world forget Israel’s heinous and unpunished attack on sovereign America June 8th, 1967. This unforgettable event was, of course, the foul and merciless torpedoing of USS Liberty. I won’t add to Mantiq’s thunder other than remarking he has ripped the veil covering the Whitehouse asunder. Please visit his website and pass on your thoughts. You might also wish to review posting archives which stretch back the best part of a decade or, perhaps, prior. He presents the brand Zion “God” so well. Diligent researchers will find it most interesting and disheartening at the same time that there has been virtually no change in Whitehouse administrative attitudes from bonehead Bush to that current black Messiah.

Abolition_of_Slavery_The_Glorious_1st_of_August_1838We have covered belligerent order first delivered by renegade priest-kings and then atheist commerce tsars, introduction of money where none had been present, currency regulation via arbitrary standards and covert controlled fiscal deregulation. There are a couple of other pieces of the puzzle needed to complete this sorry picture. Abolishment of slavery in England, 1807, did nothing to improve the lot for Irish immigrants now forced to work as “servants” for a pittance. Timing was calculated for the burgeoning industrial revolution. Improvements in manufacturing technologies had begun to impact the crafts’ industry back in the 18th century. Purists might question the “point” of more than one currency unit fulfilling the needs of a federalised Earth. The pertinence of multiple currencies, as far as the industrialists are concerned, was shown from cotton stock record profits made directly after slavery ending in the United States. In the spirit of déjà vu, 1865 saw the Negroes offered the same raw deal the Irish received before. It was all about stock values, excise tax and insurance. I will leave you switched on researchers to join the dots for now.

20140911_isisThus, the reason he who controls the gold wins, is it is how markets are driven that directs how populations will react [to synthetic conditions]. So if you want refugees, war and chaos, as an industrialist master, you merely need to influence markets with your gold because, though standards have been abolished, baseline value has always been inevitably measured against that filthy precious commodity. ztz1Right to export and price of imports can make or break nations. Particularly since 1971 another reckless asset has made and broken fortunes. Remembering that chemtrail smokescreen, oil is sometimes called black gold and has worked with its yellow metal partner in a pincer movement to ensnare markets of modern times. Petrodollars (invented in 1973) hidden in sovereign wealth funds (laundered by investment banks) has camouflaged incomprehensible universal funding by Saudi Arabia in particular. Super-rich Saudis are colloquially known as Wahhabis (die hard Zionists, surprise, surprise) by the way. Included in their fold are such personable families as the Bin Ladens. To coin the popular phrase, “has the penny dropped, yet?