Gagged and Media Blinded, Dazed Goyim Herded Towards “Vaccine Armageddon”?

Over the season, I have put together more than a few articles reflecting on an obviously bogus pandemic orchestrated by that assiduous global political cabal who collectivize round an associated pharmacologically lobbied computer generated Coronavirus saga that sounds like something dredged up from Shakespeare’s Macbeth. Of balanced mind, I have decided now is the time to put all the pieces of the grand heist together, and please don’t be deceived by all that puerile “made for TV” banter; for a Machiavellian heist is what it is. Securely perched at my writing desk located downtown of Western Sydney, Australia, I have been ensconced in what provincial bureaucrats like to term lock down. On the same subject, recently chatting with a few locals of ubiquitous character, we did manage to exchange excused opinions over credibility (or lack of) casting political scapegoats that “justify” all the fuss. Investigative processes naturally prompted some delving into histories of attached political maneuvers.  The more we delved, the more we came to realize there has never been a “lock down” here or anywhere else for that matter. The only exception to this glum philosophy has been when wartime curfew reigned. Worse still, at times of war innocent peoples for some ungodly reason have been herded into concentration camps, many killed for their own good (including infamous Anne Frank who succumbed to Tuberculosis in Belgium in 1943, were myths to be regarded representative).

Conclusions were understandably desperate. Albeit reluctantly, we mutually agreed what we have now is the supplant of “open” concentration camps (in instances of premeditated lock down) without any verifiable war, but is that truly the case? All facts concurring with current events considered, might “the people” be subject to the greatest silent intifada our globe has ever experienced; a covert World War Three? If so, in hesitation, we unanimously settled this was the only one plausible conclusion to draw from the exaggerated chaos surrounding us here. Suffice to say, along these lines, contention must have been the spark that calculated a paradoxical, but decisive clash sponsored by “governments” against those they rule over. But more on that seditious plot later. Now deserves valued effort attended to inspecting the detail; for, they do say, you find the devil in the detail for good reason. A pivotal examination from all my other relevant articles, Rudolf Virchow’s “germ theory” demands further scrutiny here because it is one of the key highlights exposing Coronavirus science malpractice. Please do not make the tragic mistake of falling for the academic fallacy that covets blind faith. Philosophically unblemished science is a proven anathema. “Science” knowingly lied about origins of HIV. William H. Thompson, chief scientist for Merck Vaccines, is on record admitting to deliberately falsifying results of data pertaining to side effects of Thimerosal (a morbid cocktail of heavy metals) tainted product (MMR) on African Americans. Scientists are human. They are capable of lying and cheating, denying and deceiving just the same as everyone else.

Even directly after Virchow emphatically discredited his own theory, foul corporate sciences then remained unmoved and, thus, much later, predictably unkempt stoic standards have proliferated and festered. These resound majestically befuddled as ever today. Virchow, of course, remarked that germs (though he didn’t use that precise word, which is an anagram of R gems. “R” is a computer coding language, but I wonder whether connotation implying coding stretches back to the Victorian era or prior. R is added to Modena to compose Moderna [vaccine]) “needed something to feed on” in contemptuous reevaluation of his own thesis. Yet, today, the far more straightforward question that desperately needs to be asked is “what “on Earth” are germs”? Regularly I hear the expression “germs crawling everywhere” issued with sleight of hand, but what are these germs that crawl everywhere? Can we suppose, for instance, germs (gems for industrial medicine) substitute for bacteria? If so, the notion of them crawling everywhere would be at the very least ideologically palatable. But how can identical viewpoint be applied to conceptual viruses? Viruses, according to malleable science (matching enterprises that define bacteria), don’t live, so they cannot possibly crawl nor correspondingly be germs. Therefore, why might corporate marketers apply reasoning that implies viruses are abnormal varieties of “contagious” living germs? Those drawn to “photographic evidence” witness only discarded biological materials, timely props that, as with that notoriously shallow emperor’s nonexistent clothes, coat any virus sufficiently to allow culprit to hide permanently invisible.

Consequentially people have been forced to wear “protective” masks that are full of holes. To rub salt into the wounds, most insider healthcare agencies at some point in debate cycles have argued what should be called “muzzles” by honest protagonists are ineffective (the polite word for useless). Effective protection would require a full body suit perhaps something akin to the attire of deep sea divers’ but designed to provide an all over unblemished oxygen supply. Masks are brilliant at exposing those who comply under order of authority though, or, rather, over extended periods of austerity, those who need to be corrected for refusing to comply. Authorities that might wish to overstate compliance would have every interest in assuring universal facemask “tag” uptake. The more masks displayed in the open would represent greater power of authority. I am surprised they have stopped at public places. Is one’s home classed as sacred territory anymore? Can a priest’s holy water sufficiently maintain a lingering divine force field? Those that apply resolve to this matter will be indubitably clear in their foresight. Viruses are delivered by terrains which means some (possibly the majority) must be airborne. It is also indubitably clear that rhetoric casting the current clandestine quarantine measures discombobulate viruses as bacteria. Per this miraculous metamorphosis, though trackable, otherwise undetectable menaces are transmitted via expelled vapid extraneous body fluids which eerily “float” between humans closer one and a half metres’ apart, particularly when implicating people coming out of China (like the whispers and “Africa” presumably).

Scientific consensus uniformly agrees a virus is an inactive yet constantly mutating microscopic bundle of RNA (genetic proteins that form into cells), but fall short of explaining where the RNA comes from. Notional belief that a virus (or symptomatic “pox”) is alien to the body expounds from germ theory (tweaked by Pasteur); which, upon technical review, contends a classical, whilst mind boggling, academic vicious circle (which came first; the virus or the germ?). Prestigious Antoine Bechamp, Royal Raymond Rife and doubtlessly many others suppose or have supposed the reverse is true, of course. In my article Coming Clean on Cancer, I advise that the body “coats” all invading particles with its own genetic materials to satisfy a universal assimilation model (that once was termed the Luciferian catalyst). Here provides for a body’s three fundamental waste disposal options. Invaders can be absorbed into functioning parts of the main, contained in dormant fluids or processed via the liver or kidneys for ejection. Our sciences largely ignore the first two options, exclusively projecting potential for hostile internal conflict. Insomuch, supposedly serious thought and its programmed doctors correspondingly claim they join forces with a body’s surrogate elite commandos with view to vanquishing viral foe. I couldn’t fantasize better melodrama, but said considerations fly in the face of truth. The truth couldn’t be more straightforward here. Reasoning defining so-called Coronavirus and its contagion mandate is notionally flawed.

I say so-called Coronavirus because the idea behind the “plague” is not new. A prior article notes the scientific name (having origins coinciding with 1918 end of World War One and a violent sun, perhaps camouflaging Spanish Flu) was used in a 1990’s Simpsons Show episode. Isn’t it fascinating that the updated (if that is so) version of this propagandised “pandemic” turns up a hundred years later in 2019 (well, actually, “leaks” claim a “deal” was struck between Gates, Fauci and others at an unspecified [Modena located?] European conference in 2018). Could the end of the first overt “population busting” world war and subsequent politics have been devoted to reassignment of healthcare as a weapon (it is long known that the American hospital system is more effective at killing people than armed conflict) in order to advance a final covert world war to finish the job? Could responding initiatives have been planned long in advance? Of course “the powers” cover their tracks well, but rudimentary evidence suggests blueprints may have been laid prior to the 1890’s Boer War. Middle World War (Two), was used to set up the modern day economic environment following Butler’s unthinkable (at the time) 1948 social security reforms, which converted civilized masses into processed welfare state dependents to compliment universal immigration policies. Troublesome other world nations were turned “communist” after systems had been successfully tested in Russia (fiercely independent Polish Cossacks have always been a thorn in the establishment’s side). In line, welfare fever has been rebranded as socialism and none more prevalent than under Obama’s “post Iraq” vision for the United States of America (honouring Benjamin Netanyahu’s rabid pledge). The mighty swindler most definitely lived up to his name as crook-in-chief.

That said, choice of Coronavirus in its current role as prosthetic threat is probably the best piece of tangible evidence supporting the view that all world wars have been staged long in advance of issued blueprints. Reasoned deduction strongly points to a connection so, though much hinges on the fact, I am convinced 1918 Coronavirus became popularly known as Spanish Flu to fuel popular hatred against a civilized “enemy”. Between 1918 and 1925 a vicious and ill-conceived marketing campaign incredulously blamed peoples of Latin origins for spread of plague, whilst academic papers (albeit released from the 1940’s onwards) postulated construction of the [then] new energy grid was specific cause of sickness. Having said that, I need to be careful with my choice of words here as there is also a huge gap in accountability when reviewing associated death statistics, but I’ll return to data samples presently. We can see near matching “strategies” applied to today’s marketing of the virus, which casts Chinese pretty much exclusively responsible for current occurrence. (Presuming deliberate foul play here), that would be why numerous previous bird flu (not to mention SARS) “warm up” epidemic waves have routinely emanated from “Asia” over the past decade. As I noted in my first article, back in the day (late 1800’s), because of conflict with “super power” America, Spaniards were rendered extremely unpopular until after they were given a dose of Franco to put them in their place. Spain had Franco (no wonder the Catalans rebelled) and Russia had Stalin to serve up nice big cups of shut the hell up. Fascism and “corporate” Communism are close extremist cousins that apply common standards of tyranny over the masses.

Singling out distinct nationals (goyim) to tar and feather was deemed just as important for HIV propagandists. HIV, like our bogus origins of mankind, accordingly “came out of Africa”, which all the more remarkably duplicated consistent parameters for Coronavirus, partly because the same senior stakeholders have been behind both operations. Unethically manipulative (doctoring) doctors (under lynch threat of London protestants) have shown themselves up as now universally content to rebrand any normal illness to verify and beef up “Coronavirus positives” after third world medical infrastructures proved infinitely corruptible faced with lucrative IMF bribes, sorry I mean grants, to tackle spread of HIV. Thinking of history (do old dogs ever learn new tricks?), damning evidence of unaccountability, all the while, can be found in apt appraisal of relevant statistics. Zimbabwe’s AIDS death toll was exaggerated up to hundreds of times real figures. It is estimated anywhere between fifteen and fifty million people succumbed to Spanish Flu. That’s a gap of thirty-five million, for Christ’s sake. Are we expected to believe in the credibility of those wayward numbers? It seems to me there has been general healthcare fogginess as to true death causes post World War One, possibly fault of idiopathic principles. When considering the current “as broadcast” pandemic soberly, global death rates are normal. That is, subsequent to issuance of en-masse vaccinations.

Let’s take a pause here. I have written about the deceitful nature of past spurious campaigns before. None is more worthy of highlight than failed chemo drug AZT, which was deliberately reissued to kill off HIV infected (the plausible excuse) gays. I can additionally cite “sacrifice” of expendable lab rat troops designated for Iraq, but there are plenty of other bogeys prevalent for those committed to doing the research on palatable evil. Consequentially, we must conclude conscience will play no part in any desperate quest to rid the world of “useless eaters” (which was one of prior US secretary of state Henry Kissinger’s scathing remarks regularly referenced by alternative movement crusaders). Aligned United Nations edict demanding shrinkage of populations at any price (remarking that war and birth control measures have demonstrably failed) is rather more worrying. Is it a coincidence that the United Nations champions universal wellness standards (reinforced by the World Health Organisation) which anchor today’s universal healthcare? You see where this is heading. What benefit are thriving, “well” populations to authorities obsessively committed to radical civilization reduction? At best, the United Nations has demonstrated duplicitousness through its contradictory mandates. Come on now, just as with Shakespeare’s witches of Macbeth, they spin a roaring cauldron so full of lies it bubbles over into the streets.

I touched on strategic implication of the Boer war a while back. Though conflict actually began in December 1880 framing a territorial dispute between local farmers, petering out after a few months, “round two” corporate warfare was the period of distinct interest. This ran from 11 (note those angel numbers again – “1” signifies inspiration) October (10) 1899 to the last day of May 1901. Pagan fertility rites connected to May day (May 1) perhaps have no influence here, but May (from the spiritual perspective) is perceived as coordinator of nature’s potency. Whilst disputes (between farming nationals) could have easily been resolved via diplomatic means, consequences blew up into what became an “international” war. Though I find no historic account of involvement of foreign mercenaries, Britain did have the advantage of drawing resources from her burgeoning empire. Trade across Africa was deeply impacted. Debatable warm-up act for the Boer war, conflict over Russia’s Crimea certainly drafted mercenary troops. Crimea was also the first war that was fought with modern weaponry, to tragic results. Nearly a million men lost their lives. Paled into insignificance, death toll of the second Boer war better highlights the failure of the concentration camp (lock down), which claimed more fatalities than those felled in battle.

I concluded the Boer war was the precursor to or “preparation” for the First World War. However, there were other islands of malcontent along the historic path. Notably the War of “independence” over Cuba between the Spanish and Americans in 1898, not to mention the Chinese Boxer Rebellion 1899-1901 (keeping pace with the Boers). Particularly important here is the truth that Chinese insurrection was clearly a backlash from the few months earlier British annex of Hong Kong, under a hundred years’ contractual lease from ruling dynasties. The “more civilized” British had attempted a similar strategy in 1862. Arguments supporting permanent leadership (occupation) of the immensely powerfully port city/state Shanghai were rejected out of hand in 1863. Today we have a massive trade war with China which began directly after ownership of Hong Kong (prior cheaply priced goods “made in Hong Kong” had a reputation for poor quality) reverted back to the Chinese Communist Party in 1997. It seems odd, with all that venom directed at Mao Tse Tung, I can’t understand why he didn’t seize power of Hong Kong (model of British imperialism) any time after 1948. Perhaps this compliments the mystery behind American President Truman’s lack of action following the news of China’s demise [below the red peril], remembering that global “locked border” immigration began in earnest from 1947 and, of course, international law maker Israel “conveniently” reformed in 1948 while Butler was drafting his roll out strategy for the great social security swindle. Given the background I have already accumulated; Globalist fortuitous planning seems anything but coincidental.

The French, who have currently legitimized total removal of personal liberty via President Macron’s (yes, and I had faith that Scott Morrison wouldn’t “entirely” abandon Australia all along, by the way) betraying “vaccines passport” (Obama seemed to predict this in his healthcare program – repealed by Trump lest we forget), have been fighting with Britain ever since Agincourt and remarkably divide the world between “reversed” legal systems. Their “guilty until proven innocent” is the sheer opposite of Britain’s “innocent until proven guilty” justice model. On that front, Biden has followed the crooked path in his obsessing over “ordered” America, recently pushing through legislation that casts all citizens as “ill until proven healthy” (in effect a precursor to any “vaccines passport”), although there have been tepid grumblings from the red states over mandatory vaccination. Bureaucratic medical accountability has proven far from honourable over the years. Aside from mentioning it earlier, I regularly cite abuse of [first] Gulf War conscripts conned into taking medications against non-existent complaints. Black market statistics project up to fifty thousand ex-service men fatally succumbing to their medications, highlighted by the unpublicized bona fide reason motivating Timothy McVeigh’s botched 1995 attack (arguably saving Clinton’s presidency) on Oklahoma City’s Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. More damning was the deliberate assault on gays facing HIV (“that dud”) infection. I cannot stress enough, the drug used to “fight” AIDS caused the complaint and those involved knew it prior to drafting the appalling medication. Jon Rappoport writes at length about the onerous history of AZT (a rebranded failed and docked 1950’s chemo cure) in “AIDS Inc.” (1988).

The implications of this knowledge are staggering. History shows us that AIDS was mass marketed as a viral development of HIV. Not to mention “ethics”, medical “powers” overstepped their authority by denying the truth here. All those AIDS death figures should have been remembered as casualty of deliberate medical error (even if they thought the impossible was possible, i.e. a failed drug could “work” a second time round). Was this a lone incident (i.e. state sanctioned murder of particular political strata) philosophical outlook pertaining to duty of care under government would be “bleak” indeed. But this wasn’t a lone incident. Forced sterilisations in Guatemala and Costa Rica “post communism”, the Gulf War abuse referenced earlier are two worthy of mention, but there have been many, many others including George Soros’ medical attack of South Africans under auspices of a phony Ebola “outbreak” in the lead up to Coronavirus (suggesting that, rather than the exception, medical genocide is destined to become “the rule”). Per HIV and Ebola branded statistics, those that died “officially” succumbed to plague. Now we know that medications were the true cause of mortality after the fact, but what if similar covert genocide strategies were increased to Diocletian proportions?

Could the billions designated to fall under spell of immunization be marked down as future Covid fatalities? How might morbid “waves” (egged on by salaciously irresponsible Medias) impact any ignorant person’s decision making in favour of authority “wisdom” (i.e. will the complacent be even more compelled to choose “vicious circle” inoculation against inevitable, whilst perennially “theoretical” plague)? We know that medical salesmen will vent steroids in their triumphant yet remorseless assault of posthumous victims. Do they offer “cures” for sitting ducks? They used to call these back street peddlers snake oil quacks in Victorian times and we know too well when one duck squawks, the gaggle are bound to follow suit – regardless. No one, not a single person specifically died of HIV yet historic records arrogantly defy this truth. With specific reference to Coronavirus, looming light is looking equally stark. Whilst some may have been sufficiently affected by electromagnetic poisoning (from instruments such as the 5G network) not to survive “effects” (generated by the reacting body), fatality numbers are insignificant when compared against the mass global death rate. Whilst standard analysis mimics vitamin B deficiency, it is no surprise to me that bumptious science extends one-stop-shop Coronavirus “symptoms” so as to satisfy diagnosis of just about all other illnesses from mumps to syphilis. Prior to 2019 what would normally be called something else is now Coronavirus so, as with HIV, positives concordantly substitute in place of rational diagnosis. Yes, there is an avalanche of dissenters buffering against the system, but even so, across the board doctoring doctors are shown up as infinitely corruptible here.

If the establishment does have a heart, it’s most definitely black. We must never lose sight of the fact that politicians care less about truth for they are in the business of brokering innuendo along party and other conspiratorial, yes conspiratorial lines. As great Benjamin Disraeli whimsically observed, they adopt and adapt applied statistics like treacle. Thus the lies, damned lies and accountable unaccountability are as fresh as ever today. Might politicians bother to fret over corrupt medical institutions? Of course not; not even for one second. Doctors and their institutions are beyond reproach unless they buck the system. And, on that front, if one more gormless dullard politely beckons me to “stay safe”, I swear I shall rip his bloody face off. These mantras of denseness are religiously led by emptyheaded “sissy” police with nothing better to do than stakeout supermarkets. If holey masks (yeah, literal sieves) don’t satisfy EU guidelines, there’s a $500 on the spot fine for “idiots” (from the Greek “idios” – deniers of authority sway). Heated debate over the effectiveness of the medical initiative or right to choose has no influence. Lofty decisions have been made. Though masks don’t function (in any sense of the word); post litigation, logic or reason pertaining to functionality is rendered perfunctory. Litigators and their agents merely “uphold the law” regardless of consequences from the point a new law (no matter how ill-conceived, crass or zany) comes into being.

Given this unconscionable political flippancy, if medical genocide was championed for whatever reason, the remorseless, robotic conveyor belt that oils the system wouldn’t give a fig for the consequences.  In make-believe “TV land” remedy to any crisis is routinely given the highest priority. Leaders in TV world are almost always righteous but, on the rare occasions a bad apple finds its way into the barrel, Eddy Murphy or some other ass-busting “cop” always comes to the rescue just at the nick of time. Take heed. In the real world, your world, there are mostly lackeys, sycophants and evil masterminds. Don’t expect any shining defenders to jump to the rescue and vigilantly save the honour of humanity, because just about everyone is corrupt, either in heart or in deed. You can bank on innumerable political pundits sanctioned to do everything in their power to confuse the heck out of chaos. Sadly, Rock Hudson, Freddy Mercury, Jorge Bolet, Liberace, Kenny Everett and all those other glamorous celebrities died in vain. They were duped into, done over and murdered by a deliberating medical establishment who knew precisely what the outcome of rebranding and proscribing poison pill AZT would be.

By the time of the first gulf war, HIV/AIDS paranoia was beginning to wither. Many western doctors were proving obstacles to the pharmaceutical cartel. Whilst unrelated, this short diversion should emphasise relevant mindset attached to the smokescreen. History correctly informs us that the reason for the first gulf war was a reaction to Saddam Huissein’s “unprovoked” (which is a great lie, of course) attack on Kuwait. In fact, far from the mayhem projected by Washington’s propaganda machine, Saddam’s men were only there for two days. And all they ransacked were Kuwait’s oil fields, by setting the pyre turrets on fire (taking two years to extinguish, by local accounts). So how was Saddam provoked into this ungracious act? Well, it appears the Bush family (via a deal with Bin Laden’s Carlyle Group) muscled into the Kuwaiti oil business with a makeshift ferry service (used to transport barrels offshore to dock). Yet, this wasn’t enough for ambitious dynasts. Family enterprise Zapata was destined for the top and, before long, Milken Bush (executive chairman) made the decision to fund their own exploratory drilling. Remember those spiteful allegations against Saddam? Well, the company actually embroiled in slant drilling reality was Zapata who, effectively, were thieving Saddam’s oil from their watery Kuwaiti safe haven, so the attack was pay back. All the talk of reviewing ancient charts and a Falkland/Malvinas Islands “Mach 2” was utter Gump.

They call the first Gulf War a “war”, but it only lasted a month and not a single American lost his life, beyond consequence of a few dozen’ expensive “friendly fire” incidents. If the propaganda (which, along with those phony weapons of mass destruction, included non-existent oil pollution sabotage) is to be believed (and I personally don’t believe it), America’s angry posse slaughtered hundreds of thousands of ill-prepared and ill-armed Iraqis (who were long battle hardened following a vicious crusade against Iran). It seems to me that the first gulf war was merely designed to give the “impression” that Americans in battle were super strong as part of a wider fear tactics campaign used to propel the real war (which ran from 2003-11 under the auspicious claim of eliminating terrorism). Incidentally, after recently withdrawing from Afghanistan (a twenty years’ war/occupation) leaving its peoples to fend for themselves against a now “AOK” Taliban, Biden has emphatically stressed there is to be no ceasefire on terror (predictable symptom of the messianic age). Few seem to remember, per course of procuring their New World Order [oil] pipeline securing “trophy” in 2001 in revenge for Bin Laden’s supposed September 11 masterminded atrocity (not acknowledged by the FBI), America vetted and then permitted a Bin Laden relative to rule Afghanistan, whose own dear brother ran that lucrative illicit heroin business out to Europe socialites daren’t mention in polite conversation. So, from this, the sane can discern the whole episode must be considered dirty pull.

Returning to my medical theme, the main purpose of the first gulf “war” was to test pharmaceutical drugs on lab rats. These drugs were not designated to save them. Far from it, as there was no threat. There were no biological or chemical weapons. The drugs were tested to see which ones were the best at killing unsuspecting volunteers. They were drafted in preparation for World War Three. The gays were pretty quick to react away from their medications after considering possibly “why” colleagues were dropping like flies from their adopted AZT cure. Was World War Three, “elitist global government against expendable useless citizenry”, to be an overwhelming success, it would need to introduce numerous killer agents, whilst unknown, each more toxic than the next. Though I presented credible mathematics supporting the case against a universal kill off in my first article on Coronavirus, I only factored in data profiling for what is known today. Per this view, we simply don’t have manpower/technologies to head off pandemic disease (the effects of untouched rotting corpses) resulting from a supernatural genocide conducted over a short period of time (to offset restoring impact of booming incoming births). Yet, if alien technologies were deployed, drafting current “in service” troops from all four corners of the globe, both trained in the art of corpse disposal but themselves not damaged by tainted vaccines, perhaps any cleanup response is planned to be the first exercise of its kind.

These are not normal circumstances. There never has been a universal quarantine drill like this one in living memory. New normal has proven consistently abnormal in as much as the facts laugh in the face of proscribed agendas. Perhaps this is why the CIA’s Google search engine has taken such unprecedented steps to ensure information censorship of higher profile venting debunkers. The powers have undeniably demonstrated mischievous genius here. Let me explain how. Over the years, Jon Rappoport and many other fringe critics have remonstrated over wave after wave of false alarm medical epidemics, perhaps commencing with HIV/AIDS. We had various bird flu strains, pig flu, Ebola and, if that wasn’t enough, Chinese SARS would literally rot your DNA, we were told. Not a year went by without some “unexpected” incident briefly interrupting the headlines. To give this example, over the past few weeks I have undertaken a marketing campaign for a company with a unique product that leverages off cloud technology. There is nothing quite like it in the software arena. The problem is, because of its uniqueness, no one’s “expecting” it and this means no one “wants” it. People like what they know. That’s why belief systems have been so effective at destroying human libido. Thus, for people to “buy” Coronavirus, it justified a big “Mein Kampf” style warm up act and that act, in my opinion, began with HIV. Perhaps this is the reason premier stakeholders behind the medical intifada against Coronavirus show up as the precise same guys (according to Dr. Judy Mikovits) that drove HIV/AIDS remedy twenty-five years ago.

We know that CDC front runner Dr. Anthony Fauci (an ex. Bernie Madoff associate) spruiked the idea of a prophet busting, God almighty looming plague of cosmic proportions on his 2017 US university tour. 2017 is the centenary year of the 1917 Zionist engineered communism/socialism coup that destroyed imperial Russia, lest we forget. Alert readers will recall I mentioned World War One earlier within my wider historic profiling of a circa 1880’s objectively founded long term strategy to end humanity as it is known (though the idea of depopulation may have been drawn from much more distant sources). Forcing resignation from the great war, text books inform us Russian military generals issued their giant “steamroller” army guns without ammunition and refused to draft a benched “shining” artillery. Absurdity claims the same basic thing happened in Iraq. Over the duration of a month, primitive sand monkeys armed with pea shooters faced Goliath Americans brandishing freshly painted, super tech RPG’s. The difference here is the Russian generals could have employed their best weaponry but didn’t. From the retrospective, their troops faced certain slaughter; and that’s what happened, of course. Was it military incompetence of the highest order or were the generals actually agents of a grander global conspiracy? If so, that conspiracy removed any chance of a contrived military reaction against the Bolshevik takeover (with the primary target to bottleneck the food supply chain to bluntly show ungrateful plebeians who’s boss). Russia’s loss of her steamroller ensured vulnerable impotence which, ultimately, led to the wholesale murder of any royal would be “inheritor”. With no contending royals there could be no possibility of a future popular uprising, not that regal heritage has garnered much sway in “EU managed” liberated East Block territories. Gosh that all happened a long time ago, let’s forget the past, eh?

Maybe I digress here, but are there any royals left to restore constitutional monarchy, anyway? Royal Assent is an essential precedent which attempts to assure that external governing parliaments ultimately represent the monarchal authority. Per such auspices, each new piece of legislature is subject to royal oversight (for Britain, some would argue this role was partially out-sourced in line with the creation of the House of Lords). However, when Queen Anne of England withheld her commission “upon advice from ministers” to review and ratify the Scottish Militia Bill on 11 March 1708, private government was cast free. From then on, in principle, though “the people” voted them in, permitted authorities could do as they desired without hindrance. They remain a power unto themselves until today, because no other monarch has exercised Royal Assent protocol since Queen Anne. There is another strange coincidence associated with 1708 though. On January 1 of that year Sweden’s Charles XII dispatched a hapless battalion to sack Russia’s Romanov dynasty (descendants were executed by the Bolsheviks in 1917). Home forces proved too strong for the assault and fighting ended in less than two years, but what is particularly intriguing is that, according to colloquial accounts, fifty million gold dollars were raised (in addition to twenty million under US cover that was briefly intercepted by Canadian authorities) by Swedish financiers to substantially bankroll “Russia’s workers’” revolution. The Swedes are regarded as descendants of the notorious Vikings who, certain historians argue, were what became of the mythical “Varangian Guard”. Swedish money also had a theoretical role to play in the fall of monarchy following English Charles I’s notorious beheading in 1649.

Russian writers of the ilk of Nikolai Levashov have liked to argue that political manipulation of the masses under guise of civilization commenced with the fall of Atlantis. Nevertheless, for a specifically scoped population clearing agenda, we are safe to hark back to around 1889. That is when dreams of Messianic order, a guaranteed peace on Earth, were to be drafted into effect. It was decided safety related only to scales of law enforcement management. Thus, shepherds, or chosen ones, would need to exponentially increase in numbers relative to the remainder. This could only be achieved by significantly culling attended flocks. Said quotas would have to shrink tenfold or more. Chosen ones would remain as they were, untouched. Maybe the precise balance of numbers has relied on trust (echoed Billy Meyer’s Swiss based cult) in channeled extra-terrestrial Pleidian (who ruled Atlantis) wisdom, but the drivers behind the depopulation initiative would have definitely needed a clear picture of modelled results to be sure of success. Here they needed and used science, which has proven a double edged sword as far as trust management is concerned. Initially given a free reign, experience deemed liberal thought deserved to be “contained”, if the agenda wasn’t going to be inhibited or broken. So, from a certain point, scientists themselves were rendered personally voiceless. They were conditioned into becoming guided followers of subliminal masonic commands via devices such as Google click analytics.

That opened the door to a further problem, for when it comes to science and other “technical” affairs, people prefer to trust-to-luck. Ableist maybe, but some things are simply beyond understanding, it seems. With science we are destined to enter hallowed territory, bible land, whereby none dare “question” for fear of being branded heretic. Scientists themselves rely on intensive training spinning near unattainable complexities of conceptualizations to stay in the safe zone. Only those in the club might see through the veneer, but they have been too long programmed down the path, a path where “when white is always black, it stays black”, even when the light’s on. Of course, A-graders invariably go in the other direction. They champion their grounded beliefs. To protect themselves, these trailblazers instinctively maintain that any pauper’s personal devotion to online degraded research of high-falutin’ copyright is tantamount to blasphemy. All the while, their unmoved glib response to the situation at hand is we must “trust in the experts”. As with those hallowed biblical prophets, vouched experts are beyond reproach (but only when officially verified). Traditions may well suit candid political banter of the modern age, but will never appease the prodigally ardent intellectual, particularly while framing decisions are “cast” by “unerring” computer modelling. Yet today, all things considered, when it comes to real harm done, the most dangerous of all are those enterprising medical insiders with aggressive followings who refuse to dispute the phony problem is Coronavirus, COVID-19 or whatever else you like to call it. They do attack authority over its damaged cures. These devil’s doctors would be regarded scoundrels in a sane world, because any clairvoyant can see they merely cash in on their own “snake oil” pomp which parasites off a miraculous market of manipulation.

Lest we dare forget, systemic choruses “from the wilderness” led by precisely coordinated corporate Medias made “us” scared of “the problem” in the first place. Acclaimed politically “responsible” bloviating governments robbed us of our money and liberty in order to protect us from this vapid abyss. How predictably their self-serving roadmap turned out only to be a horribly irresponsible smokescreenreaction” that cordially made things far worse. Therefore, the one plausible failsafe for the bloviates and their aligned Media hacks was to blame those that demonstrably exposed flawed thinking and supporting arguments that precipitated fear from the onset, as key obstacles to their precariously untenable best of breedssolution”. So, understandably, when any anonymous registered nurse with a big following “speaks out”, she clearly acts as mouthpiece for yet more masquerading witches of Macbeth, who have pre-prepared bubble and boiling hybrid versions of techno-babble to offer in justification for their own benediction of mankind. They are no different to the other pariahs. Praise Lord. As with the others, trials perennially deliver “very encouraging” results. After three American guinea pigs were given Bell’s palsy and secret Australian tests reputedly hosted HIV as one of the consequences, does Pfiser repent? Not on your nelly. Ignoring immune system damage, after more than a million documented cases of side effects and many, many deaths from their vaccines, has Astra Zeneca withdrawn its virulent serum? Not in a heartbeat, because the redeeming contract was already signed in blood long before Coronavirus became commonly known. Forgive Elizabeth Warren and other “black widows”, for do you know how many $ billions are at stake here? Or should I say trillions of dollars?

We all know money makes the world go round. Therefore, everyone, regardless of status, hives off the banking system. This means all, great or small, are caught in the web, of course. Back to brass tacks, the main purpose for this article was to predict a projected desperate course of destiny which might reveal a radical downsizing of humanity prophesizing end times of what we identify with today as modern man. My prior essays on the subject ruled out the idea of a giant kill off, because the staggering resources requirement to complete objectives to an anywhere near timely enough schedule was an impossibility. I did the math’s. I proved it could not be. But I also failed to take the unknown, potential for deployment of alien technologies into account. Netanyahu and other foul mouthed Zionists (in favour of a prison planet exclusively ruled by Israel) have been bragging about Armageddon for decades. Even though it was a mostly gentiles’ casualty, the Jews whine endlessly about a World War Two holocaust which supplanted the need to cleanse (Tuberculosis) infected corpses. So, could there be some means to process acres of bodies via an unheard of cremation method? Whilst unlikely, it is not beyond the realms of possibility. People are pretty stupid, very easy to predict and, in so many ways, do live up to expectations as surrogate “sheep”. But they are not that stupid. If nine out of ten were “marked” for “death by vaccine”, at some critical point the mass would realize they’ve been “set up”. To avoid all out panic, wouldn’t devious authorities commission periodic waves, making sure that deaths sufficiently outstrip new births to make significant dents in the overall population bulk?

There are other more far-fetched considerations, such as a possible role for chemtrails. Any good chemist knows that normally dormant ingredients when put together can generate explosive effects. Is there something in these particular vaccines that will work to extraordinarily negative value when triggered by tainted atmosphere? Only time will tell in this instance, but I think it is fairly safe to preclude that the first two rounds of inoculation are part of the “warm up”, the “drill” and have been mandated to test how to best manage the sheep (or, rather, what percentage refuse to comply). Karma has arguably bitten the illustrious planners in the ass, because with the large numbers of detrimental side effects (Astra Zeneca’s first jab, Pfiser’s jab number two), the sheep are already cautious and, other than those “die hard” Covidiots, wary of the agenda. This is not to say that my original conclusions determining a plan for a staged sterilization campaign is necessarily invalid. Indeed, the worst affected recipients, according to vaccine side effect statistics, are youth to young adult males. Were they the precise target, then my theory that “medicine” was designed to destroy critical (ovary) RNA needed to build fetuses is clearly off-target. To add weight to that consideration, I learn that Bill Gates (hereditary passionate eugenics advocate) said healthcare and vaccines could reduce unsustainable population growth (2010 TED talk). Was he implying sterilization serum formula was already known?

However the bureaucrats slice and dice figures has no effect. There is no pandemic. Following that tsunami of panic prompted by news of an original Italian outbreak March 2020, the world shifted into compliance mode. Because Media focus was on vulnerability of “the elderly”, best health practice shifted into overdrive. Here, the farcical impact revealed lowest seasonal death rates in years. For a recent census of the US (October 2021) mortality averages, statistics match 2004 compliments just as we are being told the “pandemic” is at high tide. Ill-effects of the vaccine are well known. There have been leaks of executive “worries” based on very large numbers of documented injuries. One sensational Pfiser “whistleblower” has emphasized the ethical dilemma from using “Soylent Green genre” aborted (murdered) fetal stem cells in serums. Sweden has banned Moderna vaccines for causing heart (inflammation) problems in patients (although Canada has flatly “ignored” concerns). Beyond the made-for-TV banter and political pantomime, things are not going well, perhaps best highlighted by overt rebellion in New York’s schools. Have any of the 107 million Americans not returned work been vaccinated? Unsurprisingly, the whole contagion manipulation and its turbulent Noddyland computer models are beginning to wear thin after the best part of two years. People, even ones on side with “the system”, have had enough. Australia’s stampede towards vaccination clinics has been motivated almost entirely by scare mongering following state governments’ “domino” initiatives threatening outlaw from pubs, clubs and other social meeting venues after many workplaces “insisted” on compliance.

We now know popular critics determine that HIV turned out to be a “dud”. I hope Coronavirus (which desperate mogul marketers have recently outrageously begun comparing to mythical 1918 Spanish Flu) is remembered as a “FUD” (fear, uncertainty, doubt). On the tail of confusion framing the effervescent threat, political protagonists have overstated urgency more or less from day one. As doctors out in the field regularly reported the effectiveness of standard flu remedies, they were drowned out by “Big Brother’s” incessant war drums. Any pharma-magnate worth his salt was drafted in to produce a magic potion “cure” in double quick time, even though there was no “need” for a cure. An army of doctors congregated against (some even “fellows” of the old boy network), but this wasn’t enough to stop the rot. Billions of dollars worldwide had already been earmarked for vaccines and nothing was going to be allowed to hinder the momentum. Predictably, trials and release of various vaccine options (commerce needs “options”) were rush jobs. So, to recap, intellectuals knew (regardless of politicized rhetoric) there was no pandemic. Doctors said “vaccines are unnecessary”. Serums were produced “on the cheap” (perhaps from old dumped stock), were not tested widely or thoroughly enough. Philosophy applied to research and development was potentially “doomsday pioneering”. By that, I mean, Pasteur’s original edict behind immunization had been all but forgotten. Methods employed harnessed speculative “theories” which were as “justifiable” as notionally flawed contagion modelling. In other words, everything worked perfectly in Noddyland, but in the real world, in our world, they may well have opened doorways to disaster.

Putting “beliefs” to one side, given the undeniably sham nature of the pandemic (the pandemic that wasn’t), we can but speculate as to “why?” There must be purpose behind the whole enterprise. Maybe there is something to Dr. Igor Shepherd’s argument that “Covid-19” represents a one sided psychological military operation targeted to indefinitely neutralize visceral “freedom-fighters” and the reign of any lingering free thought footholds. Regiments of grotesque Google ad click aligned “experts” clad in colourful clothes and oversized shoes jettisoning from miniature cars certainly do give the sense of some sort of absurd circus fanfare, but I feel there is more to it than that. Doubtlessly, and I have already mentioned the fact, quarantine measures that perfectly simulate martial Law containment, as a first of their kind, tell us that, at the very least, we are going through a World (in every sense of the word) War Three “drill”. Naturally, if there hadn’t have been any noteworthy side effects or deaths resulting from “compulsory” (conscription model) vaccinations, considerations exclusively validating the last two years “dress rehearsal” concept might have some sway (aside from the unexplained money drain), but evidence says otherwise. On top of more than a million have been damaged by the “touted” cure, everyone that was double vaxxed has a broken immune system, and that’s looking on the bright side of the statistics. Based on fantasy contagion modelling, a “new” influenza stalked the globe with such velocity, sections of entire population bodies were “infected” within two years with few or no visible effects (beyond what they tell us).

It took several months to draw any correlation between “positive test results”, illness or death and when flu was blamed on Coronavirus, it turned out to be “easily treatable” with standard flu remedies. Vaccines were rushed into action anyway and predictably turned out “relatively” bad. Why? Conclusions seem as clear as day to me. There are three fundamental objectives running simultaneously here. The first (and perhaps most important) is to highlight “Big Brother” rules and those that rebel will be singled out and made examples of. Current “immunization” is a tiny step in a very long term strategy. That step satisfies three other significant trail blazing principles. Everyone must be processed (not just the infirm). Universal inoculation is in the “schedule” (hence, the real reason for Obama healthcare passport) and, most importantly, the deliberate failure of the first batches will permit huge (more than tax exempt, with up to four times investment credits against commercial tax offset) research and development funds to be ploughed into future projects and an endless “marketplace” to “patch”. Population “growth” is a symptom of reproduction so Gate’s cryptic 2010 TED talk remark clearly identifies with revolutionary sterilization techniques, but perhaps there are many simultaneous strategies at play here. Ultimately vaccines might be innocently benign, deliberate sterilization tools, euthanasia aids or a combination depending on population strata targets.

There is another surreal possibility. If it were possible, limiting life expectancy would be another credible fix against accelerating population growth. Might top secret “Therapeutae of Asclepius” have discovered the key to winding down the gene clock, along with antidote “inhibitor”? Could one or all of the inoculation stages (currently a four step process) be designed to cause breakdowns at various critical points of body development. Thus, to impartial observers, symptoms would conceivably interpret as consequences of unexplained “natural” phenomena. Based on that exclusive treatments model, antidotes might be released in the nick of time for those (with deep enough pockets) “worthy of salvation”. This effectively boils down to a bone chilling prime dictum. It wouldn’t matter a fig if the whole world was vaccinated, including rich and famous, because those earmarked to survive would serve the dual purpose of making heroes out of “medical pioneers” authorized to peddle antidotes. Each new crop of infants, each new “next generation”, would automatically be processed by the system just as they are today per schooling mandates. Upon the eventuation of populations potentially dwindling out of existence, excuses supporting removal of the need for vaccination would become potential pivotal headliners for future Big Media hysteria campaigns. And so “the beast” rolls on. Small point, maybe, but if no government “formally” makes vaccination mandatory (across broad populations) does that indicate foundations have already been laid for something really bad to happen in the future, so bad reactions might sponsor the first serious popular bloody uprising against “bureaucracy” and all it stands for?

While on the subject of surreal possibilities, there is one other option that, without a well-argued supporting glossary, might be instantly dismissed as “preposterous drivel”. In earlier essays I observed that the healthcare system was “in awry” following news of our theoretical pandemic. Australian clinics began turning patients away who hadn’t been “tested” and individual surgeries were not equipped to identity “infection”. Only “robotic” process workers (excusing themselves as nurses) at certain strategic hospitals were qualified to run an initial pointless (according to one well versed publically outspoken Scottish physician) intrusive nasal examination. Dithering doctors themselves, generally speaking, “didn’t know” about this new thing going round called “Coronavirus”, although the brave ones were composed enough to review “symptoms” when people testing positive showed signs of malady. In many cases here, prognosis was identical to “the flu” (a fact much later echoed by the WHO) and standard remedies offered proved equally effective. Even so, provincial healing largely championed the whole screaming pandemic concept. Protests from a global consortium of healthcare professionals (which now might number more than eighty thousand now, at a hunch) were emphatically geared towards unhealthy vaccines. Doctors associated with this group felt, on balance, that wearing facemasks did more harm than good and vaccines were an unnecessary extreme risk. On one hand we have ignorance driving cultural progression. On the other, tried and tested methods proved that vaccination requirement “at best” was superfluous.

Some years before, industrialist Elon Musk raved on (…and on) about the human automation. Rude Media ripples began timely oscillations not too long after the Gates Foundation committed to developing its Moderna vaccine, which fringe critics dubbed “the Frankenstein jab” because it proposed to alter cellular DNA progression. There had been no “medicine” like this [known to man] ever made before. Concept had critical thinkers of the ilk of Jon Rappoport “concerned”. Coronavirus, I have mentioned before, was originally blamed on the sun in 1918. Ancient Romans (via their Sol Invictus cult, which evolved into Catholicism) believed that our sun played an essential role in “spiritual evolution” of man; implying a direct link with DNA replenishment. Truth is regularly stranger than fiction and, in my book “The Beauty of existence Decoded”, I explain how the ancient Roman ideology is basically correct. Here conventional rationalists will struggle to keep pace with me, but now is time to move into extra-terrestrial territory. Last article I casually mentioned a “Rome, Italy located Tall White” had been instrumental in the design of our current pandemic psy-op. Tall Whites were first publically identified by American meteorologist Charles Hall after his encounters while stationed at the Nevada desert in the 1960’s. They are a much more recent “version” of human (created 30-40,000 years ago) and live off world.

Below the Draco leadership hierarchy (please visit my other blog for much information about the Draco), they have been bestowed galactic governor status over the affairs on man. Though Charles gave no indication he knew anything about Tall White genetic origins in a 2014 (from memory) Sydney (Australia) presentation I attended, he was under the impression that a Tall White may be used as a surrogate messiah figure at some point in the future, perhaps even soon enough for him to witness the spectacle. You would have thought the best place for a messiah to emerge from would be the Vatican and it just seems too irresistibly fateful that a Tall White is currently located moments away in the Roman capital for that not to be a worthy prediction. There is more. At his talk, Charles categorically stated that changes in our sun were a sort of cosmic birthing process and consequences were going to see a lot more intergalactic traffic in our space neighbourhood and the Tall Whites might “do something” so we (pedestrian mortals) wouldn’t notice so much. Right now the two most aggressive political “side by side” hot potatoes are the pandemic and “climate change”. Isn’t that intriguing? But how does that fit in with vaccines and population reduction?

Well, of course, we know that long before Coronavirus was known (as it is today), a vaccine was being prepared.  It is called Moderna with enterprises fully funded by the Gates Foundation. Though head office is located in the US, could secret work on the vaccine have been initially commissioned in Modena, Italy under authority of the Tall White (now located in Rome, if he hasn’t moved again)? Might, as a consequence, have the extra-terrestrial applied alien techniques to the make-up of the vaccine (intellectual property could easily be distributed to Pfiser, Astra Zeneca et al via the old boy network)? The deeper, billion dollar aligned question is “for what purpose(s)”? Over history, while subject to Draco control, mankind has suffered five separate genetic downgrades administered by frequency fences (delivered via chakra points). In each the case, post impact of frequency fence engagement outcome results did not aggregate as [designers’ had] planned. Additionally, complimenting Sol Invictus ideology, man’s spiritual development had only been slowed down and not halted. With an inevitable ascension looming, a desperate consortium of extra-terrestrials devised a hair brained scheme architected to “disconnect” the Earth’s magnetic field from the sun. However, the tragic impact of 1943 Philadelphia Experience only succeeded in “buckling” the timeline, which currently “jumps” every two decades or so. Could today’s vaccine agenda be yet another attempt at stemming mankind’s developmental ascension?

Maybe just a coincidence, but it seems odd that a big independent survey conclusively demonstrating heavy metal contamination of (globally sampled) vaccines was conducted in Italy, of all countries, in 2016. Biblical Philistines almost certainly ended up in Rome and, after Constantine, the global banking authority shifted to Constantinople. Eventually powers would create a special tax haven in Italy and from 1929 the Vatican was born (from a consolidation of Roman Papal States). Taking the idea that today’s vaccine regime is merely in place to keep things “normal”, one would presume that those able to “slip the net” and remain unvaccinated might eventually inherit some physical advantage over the rest. Is it safe to assume the ascension promises a physical upgrade of humanity? If so, what attributes would upgraded man have that aren’t visible today? In line, might vaccination ultimately be a coarse method to segregate “would be Gods” from “mere mortals”? Naturally, one must remain perennially wary of Musk’s human automaton omen, but might this whole sorry episode, rather than attacking, be designed to block nature? All these questions perhaps with no definitive answers. There is undoubtedly something fishy going on. We simply are not being told the truth.

Complementing a Messianic age is the need for a healthy world. There’s little or no point in prophesizing peace on Earth in the knowledge we are slowly killing ourselves by industriously poisoning our atmosphere. Carbon pollution is the cover story, of course, but without zero emissions, the world is destined to perspire and human being will be one of the unavoidable casualties. Lone New Zealand author Suzy Hanson nailed it in her book “Dual Soul Connection”. “Abductee” of alien grey beings (probably Zetas), she was informed contamination of our atmosphere is “catastrophic”. Within decades, upon current progression, people would start dropping dead like flies in the streets. I periodically highlight the oil industry. Fossil fuel emissions are the root cause of all cancers. Until we move away from petrol, humanity is doomed. Perhaps this is significantly why Elon Musk has invested so heavily in the development of a superior electric car. That would explain why, right now, fully aligned with the fake pandemic, political climate change action is in full throttle. Even so, our “powers” concealing the facts “for” the benefit of humanity would be a world first. Eminent Paul Craig Roberts recent review of said facts sadly determines that obsession to fulfil “the agenda” (per Gary Allen’s “None Dare Call It Conspiracy” outline) on schedule is of greater appeal than ever. In this instance, vaccine caused illness is the excuse to blame freedom of movement.

Roberts knows and identifies ever more farcical standards rise from the proscribed culture of blackmail, bribery (dope for vaxxers) and bullshit, but with all the pantomime and circus fanfare, on the other side, virtue hasn’t gone entirely empty handed. Serial conscientious dissenters are waiting in the wings. Majestic Eric Clapton is leading the charge (and receiving much Media muted praise) as his thundering anti-vaxxer boulder flattens spineless whines from corporate sell-outs. Here’s a prince prepared to commit commercial suicide for the honour of man. For that he deserves sainthood and, sorry, but, screw the queen! There are many lesser mortals fueling the resistance movement, be it most have either been censored by Google (such is the desperation of “the machine”) or drowned out by Murdoch’s foul mouthed hacks. Although, in fairness, Sky News at least has made some contrived effort to balance both sides of the debate. I make no secret of my admiration of the persistent work of Jon Rappoport; one of the rare titans of real journalism. But there are some new kids on the block. Notably the articulate and extraordinarily worthy fresh faced war veteran Adam “FREEDOM!” Kokesh has made sufficient waves to almost get himself banned from Twitter (along with David Icke and Alex Jones). He, in my view, is one of those occasional Messiahs that, though “prepared” by the system, have had fortitude of mind to rise above the bullshit. I do have a video of him smoking the peace pipe, which I see as an excellent remedy to the dystopian hangover some will experienced after reading this essay. So, without any further ado, over to you Mr. Adam Kokesh.

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.

 

Callous Abuses of the Word Abuse

callousNo one should honestly embrace this topic “in sincerity” without first addressing the greatest abuse of all current abuses: “paedophilia”. Perhaps it’s the circles I frequent, but I cannot fathom why more people don’t “get it”. Are you all so consumed with passion you cannot distinguish reliable information from the vagaries of conjecture? Jon Rappoport’s work on the disintegration of problem solving logic very much impinges on modern social conditioning, in my opinion.  Therefore, I plan to separately tackle the child designate sex issue head on, in isolation and as thoroughly as I am able. Be assured detail will be exquisite. A future release has already been part-scripted in essay form and aptly provisionally titled, “The Powers’ Proud Accolade: Brand Pedo”.

bushbillboard2Few today (of correct age) would have the presence of mind to remember that the transition from homophobia to pedophobia began in the 1970’s, perhaps inspired by the sexual revolution a decade prior.  The “powers” were quick to action a remedy against that dissent (which included droves of AWOL’s from Vietnam), and how to impose sexual sobriety was one of the foundation stones laid in 1971-75 plans aimed at stemming aggressive independent cultures (cults) non-compliance with aggregate society. Multiculturalism synthetically imposing “common goals” was sure to vanquish any notion of social independence. It was no coincidence that Britain had set the precedent for total censorship of pictorial sexual literature after a number of successful prosecution outcomes against publisher David Gold in 1972. Under his new business partner, the desperately corrupt David Sullivan, their new marketing policy saw grossly misleading advertising fortuitously erupt into an explosion of sales of legal censored or “soft core” topical picture books and films. Arguably “smut’s” new found popularity had arisen as a symptom of burgeoning bohemian attitudes reacting against prohibition. For instance, the same thing happened after Mary Whitehouse successfully targeted schlock horror “B movies” in the 1980’s.

Behind the scenes (though nothing explicit was produced by Gold or Sullivan after the court losses) extremist sentiment against “hard core” pornography in general saw a misdirection campaign that strategically positioned child porn as the undeniable progressive pinnacle of perverse licentiousness.  Circular logic fused “thin end of the wedge” and “guilt by association” opinion to fan misguided and erroneous belief that all things illicit are “related” and virulently spread like cancers. Predictably absolute “resolution” determined anything pornographic must be forbidden to “cure” harmonious society. Conversely, attitudes were relaxing against salacious (one time pornographic) literatures, after a case against Penguin Books over publication of D H Lawrence’s “Lady Chatterley’s Lover” was overturned by the British courts in the 1960’s.

ff-bild-1A pithy American current affair propaganda piece titled “The Children of God” (or something similar) made in 1971 (there have been several subsequent “documentaries” based on similar themes) ridiculed a network of community groups that called themselves The Family International (established in California by David Berg in 1968). According to the original documentary, ethics of the institution placed no age restrictions on sexual interaction between incestuous community members (a policy that radically changed in 1985). Production of pornographic literatures (examples offered were classed as child porn) was encouraged and sales were used to raise funds for the group. Unsurprisingly, film makers were only concerned with exposing perceived negatives and, beyond that, nothing was learned about the mission and ethos of The Family International. My personal research showed a number of cult members were pushed into suicide after trying to reintegrate into “closed minded” wider society before and after Berg’s (whose written legacy by no means identifies with vicious hysteria post documentary) death in 1994.

Homosexuality ran a different, though in some ways parallel, course, marked by virulent crusades against suspected public figures and all promotional publications. Throughout the 1970’s I would argue that it was viewed as a far greater social evil than paedophilia. Rather interestingly society’s whims so often seem adrift of reality. In more tolerant times, a relatively well publicised survey suggested roughly one in three males were clinical paedophiles. Other censuses have calculated one in five males showing bisexual tendencies. Personally I am inclined to take “statistics” with a big pinch of salt and that’s why I haven’t cited specific references. Even so, I am rather compelled to believe that the percentage of potential agitators for or against specific causes might disproportionately swell if people were a little more honest about themselves.

center_homepage_2Attitudes didn’t relax against gay communities until well into the 1980’s. By the 1990’s AIDS (or gay plague) fear, mostly a misdirection campaign or scam, had reached fever pitch and this, I feel, was the cause of softened social attitudes towards the “plight of homosexual men” (in particular). However, in my opinion, had Bill Clinton (an alleged paedophile, by the way) not made it as President of the United States of America, the “changeover” (from homo to pedophobia) likely would not have happened. He began gay favourable rhetoric which laterally blossomed through corrupt [mainstream] Medias. His appointment of Janet Reno as head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) mandated radical development of a “Child porn entrapment market” as number one priority.

448_1ice_cream_teenagers_composite_stv_rgbFrom around 1995 malignant advertising campaigns specifically targeted borderline adults as never before and these were accompanied by numerous arrests of teenagers and similar aged adults (i.e. 18-21) that had allegedly engaged in sexual acts. Those trading explicit visual materials depicting “teenagers” also came under scrutiny in a much bigger way than before.  Many arrests on the back of ignorantly innocent distribution networks included sensational pieces of “evidence”, such as a hard core stag film featuring an alleged fifteen year old Rob Lowe as “pizza boy”. Reno (who has been promoted as a “lover” of Mrs Clinton, also an alleged paedophile), incidentally, was the one that ordered the murder of innocent American citizens under the auspices of the 1993 FBI attack on the Dravidian (cult) community located at Waco Texas.

fathersdayplacards_page_4As mentioned earlier, I shall discuss the origins of the concept (and that’s all it is) paedophilia (which literally means to have an intellectual compatibility or love of children) in much more detail in the future. It will also give readers the opportunity to explore and evaluate some of the (inquisition style) tricks used to calculate confessions from targeted individuals or groups, manufacture the presumption of guilt “as charged” and regularly encourage bearers of false witness to commit perjury (in court). But, for now, I will only deal with that which is contextually related to the word “abuse”, which, I must say, in the context of paedophilia, is so vastly widespread, it may well serve evidence to justify multitudes of reports. The arbitrary nature of an inflexible (paralysis) and baseless (no scientific case) age of adulthood (currently set at eighteen, until the next foul referendum) should raise a cacophony of “destruction of liberty” alarm bells. I am fondly reminded of Krishna’s timelessly wise instruction, “The forces of evil paralyse”.

americanfascismPerhaps anyone else would have said “sovereign choice” in place of liberty. However, sovereign individuality potentially conflicts with social liberty and the distorters of “abuse” know that all too well. Mankind is heading towards totalitarianism, the only utopian federal alternative to communion, at a rapid rate. There are two fundamental branches of the slave/master paradigm. One is labelled Fascism. This version of order is built on the premise that the fabric of commerce is strong enough to regulate social charters. Evidence might appear in the form of something like, shall we say, corporate responsibility whereby employee-slaves are both bound by “the law” and their company manifesto. Under Fascist totalitarianism, companies seeking new employees (of all rank) would rate assessment of authority documentation (official identification, police check, bankruptcy report and so on) as the most important stage of the internment process. Penal facilities would be outsourced and run by privateers. Marxism, the alternative totalitarian system, is very similar, except the social charter is administered by government and, consequentially, core business might be nationalised to compliment that seamless authority.

Sovereign individuals disrupt utopian society (per the Fascist/Marxist models). Societies are governed by standards and these might conceivably be eroded by abusers. Therefore, logically, abuse of the word abuse relies on the distortion of truth, which allows the marginalisation of social values geared to reducing sovereign choice in favour of social conditioning (i.e. only “choice” to conform and not to rebel). Society masters impose order on members by the same methods parents use to oppress children. In today’s society children are broken into conformation (to conform is the only “choice”) for what can become lifelong family feuds that are amply exploited by “authorities”. The regime treats its members with common impunity. Children are conditioned into responding to but not respecting family boundaries. So too society’s parts are tolerant but not understanding of individual prisoner status. Freedom is limited to “they tell me this is allowed”. Abuse has been distorted to vilify the authority against “that which isn’t allowed”. True violation is certainly secondary (a sort of bi-product) and mostly irrelevant beyond ramping up any case in favour of abuse stipulations.

screen-shot-2013-02-12-at-9-40-21-amThe flawed logic of this philosophy doesn’t end there. If abuse is a symptom of that which defies freedom, our vile powers may as well argue they protect those locked up in prisons from the world at large. Under that premise, they would do detainees a great service. The whole foundation of abuse as a concept has been twisted to satisfy the crime (as it were) in this way. Expanding on my incarceration metaphor, it might be argued that though people may well be taken against their will, social disinfection actually serves the dual purpose of ensuring captive would-be criminals are locked into cramped cells “each for their own good”. The “powers” claim, therefore, incarceration is not “abuse”. Whereas currently, for my research, the justice system hasn’t made humanitarian assertions of this nature, it’s only a matter of time before it happens.

In the same manner sexually orientated child designates are persecuted under the guise of “protection”, the rules governing society transcend individual reasoning. The bi-product is an insanity which permits free thinking individuals can be stripped of all tenable rights and abused in spirit but not “under law”. Wayward laws were never in place to protect society, but rather to purge incongruous elements; those that choose to be different, set apart from the masses. A corresponding history of the delineation of order can be charted from the very cradle of civilisation. For the peoples of ancient Atlantis, administrative powers determined wrong doers should be scooped up and separated from the masses in order to purify society. Consequentially, prisoners (that were not routinely executed) were banished from their impenetrable towering citadel home.

20554984After the collapse of Atlantis, roaming derelict tribes (prisoner outcasts) gradually re-civilised and this encouraged the consolidation of penal codes configured to administer secure wholesale capture and disposal of enemies. Today’s confinement model was the natural evolution of those haphazard reactionary origins. That is largely why the modern day “justice system” is terminally flawed. It was built on a framework geared to exclusively serving the “in-group”. Incidentally, our price busting “captive labour” prison system fits the Fascist corporate ordained order model like a glove. If those detained were classed as “privileged” (rescued) by the system, what would inhibit it from billing them full board over incarceration periods? In the future could everyone be forced into bonded labour to “cover penal charges”?

Governments, whether supporting Marxist or Fascist policy objectives, are exclusively in power to construct the framework or refinement of “order”. Manifestos are only delivered by governments and not created by them. Even so, given those ever teetering cyclic oscillations that divine the “power sharing” poled between aggressive conservative and leftist opinion making, manifestos are also “open” enough to permit “the law” and its administrational infrastructures change with the seasons.  Dramatic “anti-social” policy making relies on false flags to subvert rebellion. Complimenting this deception government backed terrorists are routinely commissioned to attack in ways that ensure sponsored solutions [to fictitious problems] are both feasible and “palatable”. Were any planes used in the so-called “9/11” attack or was Fascist “News’” “live cut” really a stage-play of pre-recorded enhanced special effects (or, in other words, government sponsored propaganda)? Reasoning determining these ongoing travesties against societies is almost identical to the philosophic candour that claims to justify the distorted abuse of “abuse”.

earthinhandFantasy is deemed more vital than reality in so much as nature and everything vibrantly natural has become the subliminally targeted enemy of the spinners of make-believe. They, as evidenced by their non-existent reasoning that has become the graduation of child status on ever more bodily adults, assures their followers that survival of power is the only real justification for all social considerations. For anyone that questions this “balance of power”, genetically modified organisms (GMO’s) are all about demonstrating the “machine” can conquer nature and (from the inspiration perspective) have nothing to do with the manufacture of goodness. Unforseen dietary advantages innocently improve “spin campaigns”. An expansion of this, should I call it, platform insists presumption of guilt defines society at large (per an expansion of unknown nationals or “Goyim’s” categorisation as strangers that are presumed “untrustworthy”), with exemptions given to the honourable or those with the right credentials (in the “family”). Thus, everyone of “file” is a potential prisoner-in-waiting when not of sufficient “rank”.  That is the primary reason why “abuse” has been distorted as a condition of that framework (i.e. behind “presumption of guilt” is the contamination assurance that an abuse has been committed).

1481200216_maxresdefaultWith empirical clarity abuse is transformed into something material, solid, clear cut. It is something that can be tangibly used in a court of law. [Individual] circumstances become secondary, perhaps even arbitrary or elementary (i.e. if a “black and white” abuse has occurred; how are circumstances relevant?). In that fashion, any accusation becomes virulently more potent than all cohesive evidence backed defences (which risk being judged as excuses or hindrances). In other words, if “circumstances” are irrelevant, for abuse is abuse, then what is the purpose of evidence beyond obstructing the course of justice? Once an abuse is “agreed on”, all that’s needed is a wrongly done by claimant. That’s the lack of logic being applied here and that is why evidence is going to potentially obstruct the potency of any abuse claim (which must be true to be potent) under those farcical terms. Referring again to my mention of Jon Rappoport’s work, that is why the education system does everything and anything to block critical thinking. “Truth” is becoming so estranged from popular acumen; I fear it is threatened with extinction.

article-9146-heroIn fact immortalisation of distorted abuse is a feature of a watershed that is slowly but surely stripping away all sovereign rights. On this course when a “file” member thinks for himself it is potentially a most destructive act against the regime. Frankly put, the only way to possibly undermine the power brokers and their fraudulence passed off as “goodwill” is to outwit them. Therefore, I could well see critical thinkers labelled “terrorists” under threat of some capital offense or other at some juncture. Currently the Mental Health Act substitutes as the primary lateral filter. It has made damned sure that we no longer have the right to use our bodies in the way we decide. Examples to illustrate this include impingement on just about every functional aspect of life. We must wear clothes at all times except by arrangement when on private property. All bodily functions are limited in some way. I could focus on sexual reassignment of homosexuals, but the more obvious “for instance” is the denial of consenting sex between “minors” (i.e. all parties are legally underage).

To show just how fanatically lacking in conscience and common sense the powers’ lust for control has become, per their “abuse philosophy”, a statutory rape charge must be served on at least one party (all underage, per this example, let us not forget) when infractions occur. Thus, the justice system will determine at least one person has been abused whether claimed or not. To any reasoned thinker, potential consequences should be startlingly obvious. Predictably, there have been a number of judicial outcomes after no one embroiled agreed to being abused. In instances of this sort “the system” has been seen to judge everyone involved as having “raped each other”. How can that be? Is it possible for there to be perpetrators without victims or victims without perpetrators (depending on the legal insistence)? Surely this must be one of the best examples that conclusively demonstrate how unchallengeable validation of a concept can pervert reality.

20435060There must be no doubt that corrupt goodwill does pervert reality and it causes all kinds of nasty chain reaction consequences. I plan to explore what motives are behind and ramifications result from circumcision in “The Powers Proud Accolade: Brand Pedo”. Recently a commenter on Jon Rappoport’s blog asked if I could include her feedback on the subject in one of my public writings. Presumably of Jewish ancestry, she reported her sibling’s circumcision had contributed to a painfully vicious hate/guilt cycle that has persisted to haunt the family relationship and, ultimately, befoul the lateral mother/son bonding process.

Men are considered (by the Pharisees) to have much stronger libidos than women, so males are circumcised shortly after birth. Contrary to popular opinion, Islam was created to radicalise Judaism (as “Christianity” had failed in the Pharisees’ utopian quest) and circumcises females as well (originally Muslim males were cut to honour the prophet). However, if the ceremony is done too early in the female’s case, it risks destroying all sexual self-esteem (leading to frigidity). Therefore the clitoris is partly removed from girls around age six. It is not fully extracted as the function of circumcision is merely to act as a masturbation (inappropriate lust) inhibitor and not to create permanent dysfunctional sexuality.

Fake “abuse” wields as much power as “blasphemy”. The very mention of it should send shivers down the spine and not for noble reasons. In fact in its current use it marks the total collapse of sanity. Abuse is a winner. It can hang a court. It has acted as anchor to all past and current inquisition movements, including the latest one used against Catholic priests, Jewish rabbis and others that dare inhibit Zionist order. Juries are marginalised, perhaps superfluous even, when presented accused are “certainly guilty” beyond any doubt without need of peer review.

man-on-mountainFrom the provable “conspiratorial” angle I could argue there is a covert agenda geared to demeaning anything and everything that entitles communion. This, by extension, distorts purposeful living into desecration. Underpinned by many unwelcome corporate compliance terms, whether delivered through the private sector or “government”, the final step has been to vilify slavery (dressed as “employment”) as the fundamental point of vocational existence. Bearing in mind the “contract” everyone makes with God prior to coming into the world is to balance “living life to the max” and “revering the body as the temple”, real abuse, real violation has been mutated into something beautifully sacred. The powers’ grand coup, great deception against the peoples’ contract with God could not be more amply highlighted than by outlining how religions scammedbeliefs”.

how-to-pervert-realityReligions gave “God” a voice and it was a remarkable revolution, because God never actually said anything and none dare question what wasn’t said. In precisely the same way shadow powers execute government, the Pharisees control all religions today and the basic “blasphemy” indoctrination has been incorporated into Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism. Perhaps there’s the odd tribal culture “exception” saved by lack of popularity, but the rationalisation has predominantly been a global one. “God” has also been incorporated into civil law federally, so religions have served their purpose and cease to be explicitly necessary. Through those wonderful pharisaic ideologists, God talks in mysterious ways. Mass indoctrination continues, unaltered by atheism, unhampered and never erring in the deliverance of the never spoken word.

4f6149372d027ff480b8a357edc0106dOf course, everyone “should” know the “word of God” is actually bullshit and “God’s values” are actually the Pharisees’ Laws. The real God talks through nature and that’s why they (the shadow powers) attack any known pantheist cult, attempt to destroy natural foods (supress organic, flood GMO’s), aggressively sponsor sexual “reassignment” and support, impose anything else that is sure to give nature a whack in the nose. Those believed-to-be vigilant “forces for light” (euphemistically calling themselves Truthers) couldn’t discover the “truth” if they tripped over it. Their spiteful and pointless crusade against phantom “Illuminati” power has failed to get close to coming to terms with the real evil doers and their so-called “Luciferian Doctrine”. Illuminati occultists (hidden ones) have scripted the greatest violation, abuse imaginable. The ultimate goal is poison the planet whilst “undoing nature” in an agenda determined to reduce humanity to abject trans-humanism, a globe populated by living robots if you will.

quote-the-masses-are-still-ungrateful-or-ignorant-they-prefer-murder-poisonings-and-crimes-george-sand-116-43-12Everyone seems to go along with the plan, blindly and ignorantly. The few that become aware do nothing meaningful to inhibit destruction in motion. Babbling do-gooders assume if it “ain’t noticeably broken, why fix it?” People culturally attune and do their upmost to maintain their selfishly favourable status quos for as long as they persist. Conversely, those that dare challenge their “hard earned”, wilfully fickle resources are despised. Per this haughty arrogance, ones that beg for support “must be” inferior parasites of the lowest character. How dare they abuse us by “expecting” donations and other spiritually draining demands? It’s not only the “powers” that callously abuse the word “abuse”. You all do.

Me Playing for my Supper

 

 

PayPal Donate Button

Donations Welcome