The “Powers’” Great Accolade – “Brand Pedo”

Imagine, if you will, there existed a world populated only by biological automatons that were solely allowed to survive at the behest of a vague commercial bureaucracy. Because of this uncertainty, imagine if none of these automatons realised they were abject properties of a brutal federal control program. If the slave masters, the “authorities”, decided they desired to stamp their immense power over will, to “once and for all” demonstrate their authority over the slave classes, could they outlaw or remove all fluid or solid sustenance resources without losing or graphically impairing their prized stock? Could they make the air unfit for consumption or destroy all known shelter to stress their despotic ambition? No, the only the true liberty they could possibly take away without permanently impairing labour is “unnecessarysexuality. That world does exist. It is planet Earth and the ignorant, naive biological automatons are human slaves; fodders dedicated for a system that deliberately transcends spiritual logic and reason in order to complete and maintain its program,

By corporate commercial determination, per “the program”, paedophilia is the root of all evil, and for reasons that so firmly contradict erudite populism, truth has become obsolete. The term paedophilia itself is nonsensical was it not for the fact that just about everyone has been radicalised into believing trappings of propaganda. So, going back to basics, it would be correct to start by analysing authentic etymology of terms in order to corroborate any coherent meanings. Only by careful analysis of the cold, dry facts can sound “basis” encapsulating the mainstreamers’ obtuse view be deciphered.

Paedophilia is a combination of two Greek words. One (paidos) means child and this is topically self-explanatory. The other, philos, calculates rather more problematic interpretation. Yes it translates to mean “love” as would be expected within the cognitive frame of child love. Nevertheless, the Greeks had three words (eros, agape and philos) to represent the emotion. Eros is used to convey an earthy erotic, sexual passion or lust. Agape is an emotional spiritual bond that perhaps might signify symptoms such as pity, togetherness or other deep soul connections (shall we say). Philos proposes a brave new world, one that is generally estranged from the Western concept of love. It is the Greeks’ “intellectual love” evocation and this might be best appraised as “to be on the same wavelength” (with others). Respect of a peer would make an acceptable version of the same concept.

Therefore paedophilia literally means “respect for children”, so how on earth did it translate into the ugly mess that has embraced the greatest of all modern day hysterias?

It seems likely (though I find no evidence of historic accountability) that the term was originally sponsored by those that formed special liaisons with children. It was a way of justifying engagements that might have otherwise been frowned upon by wider society. Promiscuity is a revelation of modern times, awoken by the 1960’s flower power sexual revolution. Prior to that lust outside marriage was a profound negative and “age restriction” on unions had been superficially imposed by religious authorities for so long that physical adult child pairings would have seemed unconscionable. This is not to say rules were not broken behind closed doors. Suffice to say, prior to the 1960’s suspicious borderline adult relationships would have had to have been considered lust free but always either plausibly “working towards marriage” or “undeniably platonic” for seemly social tolerance.

It was only after sexual revolution, political authority saw value in promoting homosexuality as a crass attempt to pervert all sexual relationships (i.e. by reversing principled traditionalism that defines sexual intercourse as a procreation precaution and not as a recreational tool, cultural insanity was born. Of course, this merely acts as a stepping stone towards outright control of the human mind – “you will behave as we say anytime we lecture you”). Thus those rabid synthesised outcries at phantom paedophilia are backed off strategized and scoped political support aimed at positively accelerating homosexual causes. “Contradictory” pederasty was most recently (1600’s onwards) adopted by the French (pederastie) from the Latin paederastia (Greek – paiderastia) and popularly translates to mean “lover of boys”.

Remarkable French piano prodigy and composer Camille Saint-Saens, a covert gay of the high Victorian period, once famously reported, “I am not a homosexual. I am a pederast”. This ironically demonstrates how much values have changed. Homosexuality was stigmatised because it was deeply hated (though undoubtedly egged on by political shit-stirrers) throughout cosmopolitan society and, therefore, illegal. Underage sex was not illegal, but because sex outside marriage was so universally chastised, “decent” normal folks would have found the practice unthinkable.

Even so Saint-Saens innocently reveals evidence of two streams of social conditioning. To admit to have been homosexual would have enraged retribution to beyond the pale so it was denied. Yet to confirm his overt but ambiguous paedophilia was the best way of diffusing allegations against him and shutting up critics. Of course there is much more to this tale (which circulated around his regular trips to Algeria – a place renowned for egregious sexual tolerance at the time). Saint-Saens cast himself as the paternal spirit ever excited by the ambitions of youthful innocent exuberance and not as a lecherous molester of children.

Ancient sexual roots of pederasty were neither explored nor acknowledged as relationships were symbolised as paternally platonic per the cultural view. However, the stem “erasty” is a version of erasthai (Latin) for which eros (Greek sexual love) is a derivative. This should emphasise the nonsense of modern times’ furore. If sex between adults and children was to be intimated by a slur, then pederasty is the ideal term. In fact, though it is believed to have originally been used to describe adult/minor homosexual trysts, the etymology is actually formally gender neutral. Does the “substitution” of paedophilia (in place of pederasty) not aptly highlight the wilful arrogance/ignorance of mainstreamers?

Many well founded information sources have come to light that broach the rather obvious homosexual connection to global control networks after Gary Allen’s tantalising volume “None Dare Call It Conspiracy” was published in 1972 (only a year before the Trilateral Commission was formed by late David Rockefeller). Those behind the eugenics movement aiming to radically reduce global populations have been implicated as players in the “program” many times. Whether this is true or not is open to debate, but philosophic motives are beyond argument.

If all population units were strictly homosexual, then procreation would require external management, perhaps offering theoretical provisos such as medical intervention to save humankind. Younger more fertile parents produce stronger offspring that live longer and this corroborates (though statistics are “contradictory”) a matched conspiracy. Paedophilia (younger, more fertile) has been outlawed whereas homosexuality (guaranteed infertile) is now both legal and encouraged (with initiatives such as sex change development offered to “asexual” [sic] children as young as four years old). Clearly all measures improve the ongoing population control/reduction agenda. I should add that whereas some institutionalised heterosexuals may argue they have a right to abolish repulsive homosexual practices, any [even justifiable] overt or covert despotism still prepares undeniable infringements against sovereign liberties.

Eugenics’ attack on the people has been unyielding. Wars used to be the preferred vehicle. Yet, as I write, the American “health system” (for instance) debatably shows up ten to a hundred times more effective at disposing of populations than war, depending on which statistics are favoured. Several drugs (including dozens of branded opiates) administered under the banner of “healthcare” are known to kill or impair life. The best reference is “auto-immune deficiency” so-called AIDS. Harmless retrovirus HIV was blamed for [known] effects caused by previously shelved (1950’s) chemo drug AZT. Naturally symptoms have been by no means limited to HIV “sufferers”. Timothy McVeigh’s foolhardy quest to bring down a building in Oklahoma City in 1995 was masterminded by the same powers he was attacking in defence of the “program”. They were behind the (at least) 50,000 AIDS related deaths of First Gulf “War” veterans. Ignorant conscripts were killed by their supposedly “protective” medications.

To be honest I believe the 1960’s flower power movement was a corporate inspiration too. Either that or corporates rode the coattails of the general erosion of faith in traditionalism (also a reaction to the distrust that blew over into anti-war mass desertions from Vietnam?). When did “the people” ever make any sincere [group] initiatives for themselves? I believe the powers wanted to introduce contraception universally. By that token, temporarily encouraging promiscuity was the only rational lever against the [Catholic] Church. Even so, to this day Catholicism has not bowed to Zionism on that level. The sexual revolution was predictably short lived. Prominent film stars, HIV and AIDS put a huge damper on any free thinking after the 1980’s.

It is interesting that Oklahoma and Waco (which set the precedent for legitimised “law enforcement” murder of any American citizen) saved [then President] Clinton’s bacon. It shows me “the people” have no say or formal influence on what is “in the interest” of “wider society”. That is the “programmers’” exclusive right. A good example of elite manipulation of public opinion can be seen in analysis of the (ridiculous) “gay plague” branding campaign. Whereas an overburden of industrial pollution and chemical pesticides “caused” HIV in Africa, there has been barely a mention of it anywhere, ever. I shall focus on “Big Oil” in a future article provisionally titled “Coming Clean on Cancer”. To resoundingly dampen the free love heyday, throughout the early 1990’s British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher ran regular government sponsored television adverts that symbolised promiscuous sex as guaranteeing participants’ “horrible deaths”. Presumably similar libellous techniques were used in other corners of the first world.

I haven’t personally referenced Jon Rappoport’s “AIDS Inc.” (1988) but I feel sure he will have delivered correct conclusions after reviewing his various websites. Paedophilia is also nothing short of a stagnant political move as are all other trappings designed to bolster the Eugenic movement’s determination to deny life. Forget the hotbed “abortion”. From the lofty position of purity, is not contraception the undeniable attempted murder of an unborn child? Given their Zionist-Bolshevik tactics, I would be very surprised if the visceral anti-abortion lobby is not another face of the same arbitrary plutocracy. When “they” decide they need to repopulate, anti-abortion will become the new flavour of the month. Currently abortion is a decoy that removes the sting from contraception.

Those demonstrably anti-paedophilia have been set up, applied more or less zero attention to the real issues. The shambles that is “organised” (a splintered, refracted mess) society is our testament. Rationalist Eckhart Tolle makes a surprising amount of sense in his claim that classical crusaders crusade merely for empowerment of their egos. I extend that philosophy somewhat and emphasise the bigger and more divisive the “cause” (sic), the greater the “individual” empowerment. There is no bigger cause than paedophilia currently. It is the mother of all causes today. Protesters, critics and complainers keep well clear of truth in order to preserve their egos. Maintaining the fantastical narrative line in deference to truth is the objective goal. Besides, if their “big issue” was to evaporate indefinitely, aimless lives would have nothing to bolster egos. Political spin, intricate make-believe dressed as truth has avowed the horrible “standards” that have cultured public infatuation.

Because the cultivation of biological automatons is the brainchild of the “program’s” covert marketing arm, Zionism (symbolising prison planet), there is almost absolute topical congruity between the mainstream and “alternative” press instruments. Alternatives also weave their own brands of make-believe and encourage that most foul of whimsical, plausible denials’ – “who to believe?” Indeed, as most independent or third party writers and journalists are incapable of doing much more than parroting or reacting against information issued by mainstream/alternative “authorities”, sanity has become wedged somewhere between a rock and a place beyond vital imagination. Even the great Jon Rappoport hasn’t ever dared offer paedophilia a fair birth from what I have read. Only an extraordinary journalistic genius with a death wish could and would religiously tackle this subject with unbiased sincerity. Like homosexuality in its wake, paedophilia now humbles the zealous.

Arguably everything political began with the collapse of Atlantis. After the Pharisees (the theoretical Atlantis “derelicts” Nicolai Levashov mentions in his illuminating book “Russian History Viewed through Distorted Mirrors”) conquered relative druidism 3,000 years ago, a globalist agenda has followed the uniform path towards the “program’s” unilateral attempt aimed at shaping all other creeds and cultures in its image. Permitting only Puritan adjusted worship is one of the many small steps aimed to configure that grand design. Sharia Law (a cauldron of intolerance; banning all manners of sexual expressions), incidentally, few seem to real realise, is iconic Zionist Law.

Political charades “for order” are exploited by puppeteers that use militant groups (deliberately formed for such purposes) such as “ISIS” and “Al Qaeda” to instil fear. Labelling of designate “children” (with 21 desired as the ideal age barrier) and applied sexual prohibition has been a long standing goal that heralds back to the Victorian era (and presumably prior). In some ways it surprises me that Gladstone did not realise the utopian objective back in the nineteenth century. Although with infant mortality prevalent and the need for fodder for wars to once and for all break the opposition in his time, outcomes and their contingencies have been predictable to say the least.

Maybe it was last year or perhaps the year before when I noticed a mainstream headline that poked me in the eye. It was significant enough to spur me to remove MSM as my default webpage. The article in question presented one of America’s provincial sheriffs’ who was voicing implausible concerns over a child rape trial. The “child”, at the time, had been seventeen years old. Two days before her eighteenth birthday, she had allegedly voluntarily engaged in penetrative sexual intercourse (statutory “rape”) with her [then] boyfriend. Only in America could a “trial” like that be “taken seriously”. But it does highlight the fact that the “program’s” zeal is all about fanatically vigilant oppressive power of order, bereft of sane judgement. Australia (where I live currently) handles these matters differently.

Over a decade ago a mature looking twelve year old, blonde haired girl produced a bouncing heir with her [also] underage boyfriend (if memory serves me right, he was fifteen). The sensational TV show “Current Affair” was all over the news like a baby’s rash. They “named and shamed” everyone they could collect until everyone associated turned bright purple and frothed at the mouth. Nothing was done about the couple because nothing could be done so, after the furore, everyone politely looked the way, except there was a sequel. The hapless girl dared produce a second sprog at age sixteen by the same father (this time presumably of father worthy age). Sacra-bleu!!!!! I hope the TV show paid her well. She deserved every cent. He was almost certainly jailed for twenty years or more.

There is actually quite a long history behind changing attitudes. Chronologies (were they to be read and digested) would go a long way to diffusing the sheer insanity that currently embroils the paedophilia “outrage”. Attitudes have, in some ways, remained the same but it is reflective contingences employed that have radically altered. Perhaps making the adolescent discovery tour “theoretical” has helped induce mesmerised masses. People’s inability to focus on anything in isolation (thus perpetually basing existence on generalities) appears to be the most devastating symptom of the “TV age”.

One could look back at the collapse of craft industries in favour of industrial commercialism as the beginning of the withering of independent mind [that worked off trial and error and, ultimately, questioned everything]. In the eighteen and nineteenth centuries there were occasional challengers. Disparate groups, such as the Luddites, did attempt to block imperial progress. Interestingly, prior toindustrialisation”, learning centres were almost exclusively used to prepare society’s elite classes. In fact, going much further back, I would argue it was only after the abolition of the mystery schools (run by the druids) in the Dark Ages that saw the shift from education to processed dogma learnt by rote as the staple for mainstream education.

Even those that complete a Master’s Degree today are given no marks for personal input beyond how it satisfies comprehension of “evidence”) (i.e. synthesised “worthy” information that has been rubber stamped by “credentialed” proscribed agents of globalism under the thumb). To which end eventually none dare question established “rules” which are actually beyond question. It is also duly noted that the precise same strategy has been used by political proponents that word laws governing paedophilia in ways to ensure any possible “right minded” intellectual protagonist’s challenge would be judged as spitefully ambiguous (at best). I find no evidence supporting rationale behind our current childhood threshold and can but assume the demonstrably baseless “18” figure was pulled out of thin air at the whim of some starched bureaucrat or other. Globalist hacks have been running “Holocaust style” attack campaigns against anyone that dare test viability ever since.

It was not that long ago when the age of [marital] consent was “12” (following ancient Roman tradition) in some US states and the European nation of Holland. America may be recognised as the modern day super power, but originally it was founded and developed as a formidable expansion of the Union of Jacob (or Great Britain), so the history of English law making plays extreme relevance to this debate. There was no legal age of consent until one of the British Middle Ages Kings decided to impose boundaries through fear that there would be no under limit to matrimonial alliances (or presumed sexual liaisons) with maidens. I am deliberately foggy on “which king” it was because I would like it to be Norman Jew William the Conqueror (who ushered in a “new age of [cloaked] Zionism”) as it does fit well with my overall patter. So if he’s the one, top marks for me.

Either way, for the best part of a millennium “the people” and their ruling powers had no objection to marital unions between de facto “adults” from age twelve. It was a king (the “contemporary” power) who had instigated radical new restrictions (be it conceived from ancient foundations) which also implies some marriages (prior to law) were made between parties (maidens specifically) aged less than twelve years. One would imagine that a small popular core would have always been against “young” marriages, whereas the majority must have been easy with whatever was the conventional norm. The perennial remainder (probably an equally distinct minority) are traditionally mostly shown as bloated cadaverous sorely vocal antagonists destined to bluster at first sight of illuminated “reasoning” by compilers of historic propagandas. Those that covet callous restrictions will do anything to preserve them.

In medieval times (as emphasised earlier) the age of consent strictly concerned marriage but did not place any focus on sexual activities outside matrimony. That was left to religion. Western religion is an adaptation of Roman paganism. Therefore when Christianity sprouted from the burning embers of Gnosticism, naturally austere (Pharisee promoted) rules were applied to marriages which ideally revered all lustful and licentious behaviours as “ungodly”. A functional allowance was made for purposes of procreation. Per this fashion, an adaptation of orthodox Jewish attire, the Christian bridal gown, attempted to limit “lustful” sexual intercourse between marital partners. Even so, for a great period (can anyone say with “authority” how long?) the proverbial line was drawn at age “12”.

So how has this ongoing “con operation” been run in a way to successfully beguile the madding masses? Today’s mental health institutions and asylums for the insane provide glimmers of insight. I determine that the profession’s handbook outlining three hundred or so “behavioural conditions” is simply an expansion of crass religious judgement as to what it is to be “good” or “evil”. Jon Rappoport regularly advises all behaviours classed as varied evidence of insanity are equally symptoms of normal behaviour. Evil (as termed) actions therefore are now indefinitely branded as manifest insanity. Modern society runs on adapted rules that are designed to obfuscate the truth, so while one could argue we are either “more” or “less” free than before, in principal only “terminologies” have changed and not the convictions that delivered them.

When the world was conquered in the 1650’s (capitalising on discoveries such as the United States of America), there was an uncomfortable transition from royal to civilian government power. The full changeover took about 300 years and today no royal wields any visible power. It was only after civilian government was firmly rooted that perceived social issues were targeted by the pariahs of control to facilitate their utopian dream agenda. Of course, the ideal policy (as far as they are concerned) is always eradication, but when (as is so often true) extreme measures fail, soft humanitarian ploys are stealthily drafted. Similar to current workings of political/legal administration, reasons behind tortured virtue offered as “grounds” rarely (if ever) matched true objectives behind schemes unveiled as “value solutions”.

High Victorian British politics eventually found a Prime Minister with the right measure of zealous hatred to tackle youth sex head on with a proverbial sledge hammer. Himself a reputed brothel crawler (and paedophile), William Gladstone first increased the age of consent to “15” in 1875. So foul was his hatred it inspired infection and; consequentially, he succeeded in raising “the bar” again to “16” by 1878. This did nothing to inhibit intimate relations with children, as evidenced in outpourings of diatribe over the plight of a pregnant provincial London prostitute aged ten in the early 1900’s. Whether the girl was anything more than a figment of the imagination remains to be proven. There are numerous other period artistic writings that might be sourced to highlight identical topical content.

Logic underpinning Gladstone’s reasoning behind the marital age of consent increases was null and void, more or less precisely equating to William the Conqueror’s war spoil “logic”. Age fifteen, and then sixteen, was simply deemed “young enough”. No science or consideration to individuals’ right to choose was applied or contemplated. Each was a corporate edict for the nonsense that is proscribed as the “greater good”. The same lack of basis was approximated in 2001 when Great Britain almost paved the way to the “program’s” supreme goal “21”. If legislation for the age of consent (now beyond marriage, of course) set at twenty one had passed, the rest of the world (an extension of Great Britain) would have been doomed to follow, eventually. In other words, legislations are arbitrary measures. Construction of a “group identity” model permitting only standardised values and behaviours for standardisation’s sake is the selfish result. Given the raft of evidence, even a slothful fool should determine this always has been (albeit in varied forms) the plan; though few “in power” would dare agree or admit to their repugnant deceitfulness.

The reason the powers have dimly promoted their numerous nurturing society “concepts” (even though society does anything but nurture) is messages are designed to make the opposite of truth “appear” truthful. In fact categorisation/classification of [designate] children supports a global social enslavement program (one of numbers of cultural adjustment frameworks that are currently processed simultaneously and connected via the World Wide Web and other international exchanges). In effect, each synthesised cycle is designed to break children into new gormless adult slaves as asset-worthy (“useful”) fodder to man the system. Per this design, children are instructed fantasy is more plausible than truth, though (thankfully) not every teacher plays dumb.

Nevertheless, those that deceive and act spitefully are rewarded for personal dishonour. That’s the “program” for all society; all societies. Scripted reality versions profit from denying conscience, of course, so true spirituality must be forbidden at all cost regardless of cultural persuasion. Frankly, this in consideration, it is impossible to function in society today without being unfaithful. Ancient, traditional rites of passage have gradually been replaced with risk/reward (I’ll call them) “holographs” supplied by the “goggle box” and other mechanisms of influence. Sexuality is now almost universally framed as something “obviously” (sic) illicit. Thus, most things sexual might arguably judgmentally parry with actions like smoking and the consumption of drugs/alcohol. For the young, relationships have been reduced to “intrigue” which opens the door to cruel, vindictive power plays. Consideration of blackmail as the first option in negotiation persists into adulthood.

Individuals (making up the majority) that are determined to be law abiding (patriotic) become effective prisoners in their own open society. Sexual repression invariably leads to differing communication problems between sexes and, to a certain degree, estranges relations. The miraculous presupposed instant transition from impertinent scripted childhood to “proficient” adulthood does not prepare the way for pretty society. Each new insolent, spoilt, self-centred, experience lacking generation of “adults” attempts to crudely push its way up the queue. Many have predictably abused their supposed “right” to say no and have been conditioned into thinking any (and all) natural sexual acts are “theoretical” forms of rape. Few adults will contend there are only determinations to be and no “rights” at all (a fact the “program” callously capitalises on).

Culturally male/female roles/mindsets have not kept pace with everything else that has been going on in the background (i.e. systemic shredding of individualistic natural sexual dignity). One consequence is men and women are still destined for classical marital unions (even if not in name). Men, per this profile, must seek sexual gratification and women should provide the opportunity (i.e. male hunters, female prey). However, because women now collaterally (i.e. “the great group”) envisage all sex acts as “potential” forms of rape, they have been given an enormous degrading power.

In their administrative capacity, they can permit undignified sexual acts with whomever they choose, when legitimate and “legal”. Downgraded social ethics have had the effect of dragging all women down to the realms of whoredom (or celibacy for dissenters). Any whore’s power is her “right” to administer sex “favours”. “Program” masters know this full well. Their “combobulation” child exploitation takes whoredom away from the spotlight. Thus, the modern day whore cannot traffic (an exploit variant) him or herself. He or she must traffic another or others. Prostitution, from the time it was labelled “the oldest profession”, has been effervescently legitimised. “Populist” anger has specifically shifted from attacking prostitution in general to the [predominantly phantom] child sex industry. This is not to say “decent society” is comfortable with prostitution, but affairs of the flesh do not antagonise in the way they used to.

Physiologically, the only morally valid justifications behind any prohibitions of sexual acts might be on grounds of “lack of fertility” or body “immaturity” (which would provide basis for the mother of debates if tackled sincerely). Those proven unfertile could be justifiably deemed sexually unaccountable and, providing “procreation” was seen as the only functional benchmark for that type of communication, it could be outlawed to satisfy the requirements range outlined. There is actually quite a big degree of variance in apt statistical data on this arena. The youngest “woman” (on record) ever to birth a child was aged six. Women, in general, may begin their menstrual cycles from about age nine. Men are late risers with the ability to ejaculate prevalent usually from about age thirteen. The youngest father (for my research) is listed as aged eleven.

According to “nature” (reflective of God), a sexual metamorphosis demonstrably takes place in women at age nine and men of age thirteen. Thus, an uncomfortable surplus of wilderness years in respect of current legal accountability should be duly noted. Wilderness years, in the case of women, number nine. For men there are five years. How is this legal accountability in any way, shape or form naturally legitimate? By the time an average woman turns eighteen half her life has been sexual. God’s blessing has been terrorised and abused by society’s ignorance and abject subservience to the “program”. Terrorist peers foist the consequences of their foul laws on the trembling masses producing barely a shudder of dissent. Yet all should be acutely aware that these measures are designed purely to degrade the majesty of sexual intercourse to further scope for the production of “efficient” human “automatons”. Killing off stagnant populations is a fringe benefit.

When a woman turns eighteen, psychologically, nothing changes. Her mindset is still the same as it was before. She had been sexual but to be sexual was to “sin” (a pharisaic Judaic preconception) and this was “forbidden” (fruit). She was sexual but, as nothing has actually changed, to be sexual now IS to “sin”. There is one difference and it’s a big one. It is the power of control. Before she could illegitimately offer sexual consent or forbidden fruit (opening the door to all sorts of nasty blackmail scenarios) and now she can legitimately grant sexual consent as the fruit is ripe (opening the door to all sorts of nasty “double standards”). This is how sexual women have been reduced to whoredom.

Men have paid the price too. The perverse game we call politics impinges on all male values. Those that are not avowed celibates are rapists-in-waiting. Under foul terms as these, any man that dares to succumb to sexual urges can and will be accused of theoretical rape. This is all courtesy of modern social-conditioning mechanisms geared to elevating fantasy. The average woman now believes she always has the “right” to determine which “rapes” are permissible. She can also change her mind. That is the modern woman’s “privilege”. Women that kowtow with the “program”, in deference to God, lampoon our most uncharitable, sacrilegious, sanctimonious system of order. It is a system that relies on the deceit, dishonesty and partisan biased judgement of its user base. Never forget, all laws polarise judgement.

The crux of the arguments (ever so rarely in plain sight) supporting age legislation tend to rely on [corrupt] academic standards as “justification” for categorisations in place. Never mentioned are the numerous early teens “prodigies” put through the university system early. These are the anomalies that frustrate the “program”. The maturity gap, when inspected in detail, is far larger than most would imagine. For example, in relatively recent times a six year old British boy was heralded as the new oils (painting) master. Back in the 1980’s a petulant pup became a self-made millionaire (when being a millionaire meant something) in computers before he had reached his tenth year.

Martha Argerich’s (a celebrated Argentine virtuoso) notorious 1949 first public performance of the piano solo of Beethoven’s first concerto when she was seven years old presents an interpretation that would put most adults to shame. There is an account of a nine year old girl who successful singlehandedly reared the surviving family for several weeks after her mother died. Only lack of money ultimately frustrated her course. Given these facts, age legislation is indisputably unfair. Why is it supported so widely and so staunchly by our trembling masses?

There is a simple answer sadly seemed beyond the lateral comprehension of ordinary folk. In fact the answer has already been substantively outlined. People are generally pathetically weak and lazy. The largest, most incessantly in focus voices always seem to grab the limelight, founding “opinions” as they go. Mass Medias, therefore, control the way people generally think. Yes there are occasional dissenters, but, generally speaking, mass Medias tend to push (control) the populist view. That is because supporting broadcasters employed by mass Medias are people too. Broadcasters are not significantly different to any average man on the street. They too are mostly weak and lazy and don’t like to think too deeply about “obvious” issues. Of course, on the other hand, if the majority mysteriously morphed into dissenters, mass Medias would disappear as fast as they appeared and the “program” would perhaps have to engage dogmatic religion to shore up cultural adjustments once more.

Weakness and laziness by themselves do not cement opinions that are used to back legislation, such as edicts supporting age restrictions. People act because they feel empowered by acting. There is a fundamental perceived payoff for parents that support the synthetic dividers separating proscribed “children” from “adults”. The payoff is controlling power. Being the boss or “king” must be regarded as the pinnacle of empowerment and, consequentially, families have been moulded into control hierarchies. Perhaps this has always been the case. For as long as historic memory records, periodic shifts to varied standards used to justify different age categorisations have been relatively seamless. That, by no stretch of the imagination, makes wrongright”.

We must never underestimate conditioning mechanisms in the background geared to advancing false status-quo. Currently, each new crop of sexual children is deliberately immersed in cultures of facile restriction. Years long torment offers the vague promise of “freedom” (age eighteen “adulthood”). Developmental pressure builds from “terrible teens” to graduation. Many have willingly tried to believe in law and order to be patriotic (one of the group). They never rebelled. They never came to terms with what they had been denied. They never attempted to discover. Therefore, the majority of emerging and new adults bitterly support a terrorising system because they were “forced” into making sacrifice themselves.

In other words, pathetically weak adults will go to any lengths to wreak revenge on their kith and kin simply to appease their own failed ethical development. If you cannot honour yourself, how is it possible to behave responsibly to others? The great tragedy is [it seems] that people are incapable of recognising their sexuality or, to a greater degree, understanding how corporate interests stole their natural development. If age standards defining adulthood were radically shifted upwards to say forty years as the new age of consent, I do not believe there would be any major rebellion (after the first generation targeted was out of mind’s way). Old habits die hard, so I will concede the “powers” would have a hell of a marketing task ahead of them. How to convince all those marginalised people that merely want to behave naturally they are “wrong” to do so?

I have already outlined that British legislation tabled an increase to age twenty one in 2001, so why stop there? If the predominant cause behind age laws is nothing short of a population control/reduction measures, then (given the ever rising masses) logic suggests further increases are going to be ushered in. (Subtly ignoring the ethics nightmare exposing the true face of industrialism) China’s austere corporate experiment permitting only one child per family unit predictably failed dismally. Then again, if you can forbid sovereign adults “sexual license” by labelling them as “children” in legislation, the outlaw of procreation satisfies an expansion of the eugenics mantra. Ages twenty five and thirty marked traditional ancient Roman and Jewish commencement of maturity. Age fifty is of religious significance in Tibetan culture (and generally classed as the start of “middle age” in the west). Seventy five is another modern western classification milestone representing maturity or “old age”.

There potentially is no upper limit. Perhaps in the future sexual permits will be kept to octogenarians, the well-to-do that satisfy legal “exemptions” (loopholes) and “approved” (sanctioned) whores (to “service” the well-to-do)? Slavish automatons would do well to understand that each (fiendish) plan can only be stymied by the lack of faith of its designers. Confidence in communication is everything, but that is ultimately largely backed by compliance test initiatives. A sound pitch bolsters faith and the rest can be left to chance. What better target to exploit than “the family”? By turning corporate-political objectives into “family planning” advice, devious powers have cast a brilliant initiative. Families can now blame themselves for government issues and most will be oblivious to the fact. Admittedly a few have been waking up to the truth that “schooling” is actually social indoctrination in drag. But is this enough to spur momentum towards worldwide clear vision and outright revolution?

Times have changed greatly. In England years ago when attitudes were different, the age of consent was still sixteen. People could and did enter into marital unions at that age. These were normally sexual unions too. But that was trivial because teenagers (prevalently over twelve years old) also commonly interacted sexually. Legally underage pregnancies were unsurprisingly not particularly scarce. Ironically and sadly, the great “outrage” was against additional “family burden” as the young were obliged to be indoctrinated at school and few would have had the influence to earn “breadwinning money”. To me it shows just how pitifully inherently selfish people are. If only the vigour applied to blame and transference was directed at taking ownership of problems and compassionate dedication to delivery of lasting real solutions, then societies might be something to be proud of.

A long time ago, when I was fifteen, my mother asked my father to give me some sex advice. I vividly remember how he approached the cause. “You know all about it [sex], don’t you son?” He stammered, confidently. I nodded back wisely, as I had been the proud owner of a well-thumbed “hard core” adult magazine from age fourteen. Indeed, the pages were so well loved; they had come away from the staples in places. The point being is my father was too embarrassed to broach the subject of sex with me. It remained the unspoken understanding for as long as he lived. He used to use euphemisms like “it’s as easy as riding a bike” when he knew I kept damned well falling off. This is the norm, I’m told. Occasional controlling parents spew their ill-founded opinions. The rest offer silence when the silly puns run out.

Controlling parents aim to censor inappropriate behaviours. These might include masturbation in public. A Talmudic branch of Christianity called the Baptist Church (traditionally) labels masturbation a “sin”. Offspring of Baptist families are surely dealt all sorts of psychological blows unless they adjust to being exceptionally deceitful.  When I was very young I remember all the local kids in my playgroup used to occasionally interact with [vaguely sexual] truth or dare games. My own junior sister was particularly prolific in her formative years. We lived in a rural Jacobean period farmhouse which had a winding spiral staircase to the upper floors. Between beams my father had lodged makeshift cream chipboard panels to form walls and these made as excellent “scribbling” white boards.

One day, after a rather heated discussion with my mother, my sister (then age six) drew a biro cartoon of a “matchstick” couple copulating to prove she knew about sex. I am not sure it was a masterpiece but it was technically sufficient for the purposes under scrutiny, earning an immediate deletion under a double layer of white paint. Interestingly my mother never punished my sister for that and said nothing more on the subject. What could she be “punished” for? Knowing the truth? It seems fitting to roll out Krishna’s immoral quote (a regular visitor to this website) once more, “Spirituality brings to freedom whereas forces of evil paralyse”. What would Krishna have said about modern day paedophilia hysterics?

Perhaps it is no accident that the powers behind their mischief “program” sometimes refer to themselves as the Annunaki Brotherhood. The Order’s iconography depicts a thick braided cross trapped by an unbroken wicker circle. Cosmically, a cross represents path choices but the circle closes off any avenue of inquisitive exploration. The icon, therefore, is the “prison planet” or Zionism symbol. It sets paralysis standards (put into motion by pharisaic usurpers); the ones Krishna described as “evil”. Social paralysis begins with restriction of will [of the child] to confuse the mind (spiritual centre) in order to produce broken, de-spiritualised adults (slaves by any other name). To socially outlaw sexuality is to remove the most fundamental of all birth rights. Bodies without minds are only capable of following orders.

But there is more. Few are aware of the true potence of sexual self-esteem. Potent life is contained in the chakra governing the erogenous zones from conception. Those that deliberately superficially attack sexual developmental behaviour aim to create literal zombies – walking dead!

True Love, Convenient Marriages, Vaccines and Autism

True love in the morning sunOver the years I have collected numbers of angry critics. If I could consolidate all criticism into a simple cohesive summary, it would likely read, “you (me) are trying to prove something (God) exists that does not exist and cannot be proven”. Some would go further and retort, “Do you think you are God?” Of course, most of these, my more vehement critics, are devout Christians (i.e. that believe in the philosophy but not God). Though the fundamentalists are the cancer of progressive society and their extermination would be preferable, to all of them, I say this. God works in mysterious ways and can be found where science fails. Here’s an example. Imagine before us is a large open tank of water. In it we place twenty heavy stones and see that none float. We try the same experiment with flower petals but find those all float.  Science affirms [becoming] uniformity and, in step, our experiment is scientific. Creating another control group, let us suppose we specifically requisitioned humans that were unable to swim and threw them into the same tank. Prior we had dressed them all in garments laden with heavy stones. None floated in the tank. Without intervention, all would have drowned. Yet, a few might survived had their pockets been filled with flower petals instead of coarse rocks. Conversely, in the cases where bodies sunk, some (if not all) petals (that could not escape from the pocket interiors) would appear to defy order and also sink in their garment prisons.

slide_21Everything is very clear cut, demonstrating probabilities and quotas. Nevertheless God can be found in places where probabilities and quotas seem to have no jurisdiction. The best place to consistently find this type of evidence is in the quantum layer, beyond human visibility, where projected realities are inexplicably overlaid on top of that which is judged real. Most recently (2011) so-called Kondo effect attempted to “explain” the erratic, impossible behaviour of sub-particles. Science gibberish, inspired by the astronaut Edgar Mitchell, confidently solidifies zero point vacuum fields. Space, our cosmos, which isn’t even remotely understood, collects ubiquitous flamboyance in such measure that several encyclopaedias could be made from all the theories and accompanying science notes. Our physicists have yet to realise that the reason “empty” space appears curved is it contains all dimensions spread over a lateral plane. Yet-to-be-discovered dark matter (a version of light) creates a ripple effect that tempts the reflective analogy, “oceans”. If science understood the true properties of dark matter, they might, one day, work out where Newton went wrong with his assessments that are now known as “gravity”.

destruction of MaldekAs I begin to explain in my first book, “The Beauty of Existence Decoded” (available in e-format here) mainstream science has not correctly identified a single fundamental property of existence. This is mostly because it measures the illusion of existence in place of “what is”. My yet-to-be-published book “A New World Order” will unravel more on time (which is so deeply misunderstood), that most extraordinary union: electro-magnetic, the truth behind gravity, harmonisation of atomic frequencies via catalytic DNA. temper-tantrumsIt’s a book that will also talk about dragons, pixies and a hundred million years old manned civilisation on Mars that ceased with the destruction of Maldek, so it is unlikely to attract anyone remotely associated with the mainstreams other than, perhaps, scandal mongers and trolls. Human beings almost instinctively lionize beliefs systems, so it is no wonder the problems that have accrued over the eons, through diminished responsibility, are squarely the fault of those that inherit them – all of us. For instance, if all of us have a problem with what proliferates from the Whitehouse, all of us should surround the building and face off the wrong doers. Limp wristed protests do not lead to remedial action; remedial action forces those being faced off to protest. Howard-Terpning-Medicine-Man-Of-The-CheyenneWhen the powers protest, the people are achieving something!

Because just about all human beings are devout cowards, the closest communities ever come to remedial action is the reactive result of collective tantrums. Thus, most human beings behave as children for their entire lives. They were conditioned by brainwashed parents that knew only ignorance. Then, upon proscribed adulthood, they became the new overage children of government, whose absolute authority had been instilled by ignorance. Oh so few can laterally apply structured argument to that which defies the system.

 

Newton was wrong?

Never; impossible; he was a genius. My history books tell me so. My government’s credentialed “experts” tell me so. I don’t need to contemplate any more than that.

Relationships-aren’t-for-getting-things-they’re-for-giving-things.-Never-make-yourself-fall-in-love-to-make-yourself-happy.-Fall-in-love-to-make-the-person-you-fall-in-love-with-happy.And that is humanity’s problem; apathy and cowardice bundled up in one neat package. There are many ways to break the system but the best way to start is with the children and that is why I am not anti-paedophilia (as a system correcting tool). Indoctrination and anti-Semitism have ransacked and shackled the discovery tour. Wondrous rites of passage have been reduced to cheap jargon and pointless slogans. Indeed the programming of society goes so far as to tell individuals who they are and what goals will be prioritised. We are told we should adopt careers, specialise as professionals, fall in love with the right person (this person must be statistically matched and of the correct financial class and, almost invariably, the wrong person). Love, of course, by this determination, can be nothing more than infatuation. People end up marrying fantasies and, unsurprisingly, as charades are hard to keep up indefinitely, without severe adjustment, most resoundingly fall out of love.

How is that possible? To fall out of love means there was never any love there in the first place.

Not everyone satisfies this trend and a few do come to realise that relationships must be more about giving than taking. These people are special. They also have the capability of being rational, and not in the proscribed sense of the word. These are the few that have put structured argument to the test and found their individual rites of passage against all odds. Through that commitment they found the way to become real communities of two. Other so-called communities are little more than products of the system (even when proponents are against it) utilising public armies that have been swayed (or dragged along) by public opinion. Those synthetic cultures emphasise what it is to be politically correct. Supposed debates are succinct political chess moves.

Hassids_Zionism_State_Organized_TerrorismSuccessful marriages either epitomise Mephistopheles pacts or represent honour between souls. Both, ironically, are equally faithful (or adherent to God’s wishes). Whether atheist or spiritual, based on control or intuition, all marriages must satisfy mutual standards of cooperation to be pure. Whether married or not, the closest anyone comes to seeing God is by witnessing starlight. If only witnesses realised what they saw. It is for that reason that those with star qualities shine as they accentuate aspects of God. 2178229-mephNot only are all stars imperfect, but most (courtesy of corporate programing) would be oblivious to the truth behind talent. In some ways spotlight individuals are kept as far from the truth as possible, for modern movie moguls are driven to excuse and promote a despicable (erstwhile hidden) agenda. Even those most trivial to Zionism’s strategic vested interests that see value in de-sexed, inept, covertly judgemental and selectively racist societies are courted by Hollywood and other populist broadcasters. Their stars are all too often used to sympathetically spin pungent myths over and over. These have become the bloated culture monster that has jellified globalism and has turned the world into something it is not. It must be said, when arguments are convoluted, they are usually devious. Lights, camera, action means one thing for the movie star. George Burns said it so well, “stars must be able deliver bullshit with sincerity to be successful.”

Robert De NiroThose that are oppressed agree to be unless they retaliate in some way. Sensationally, the brand name movie actor, Robert De Niro, backed “Vaxxed”, a film that criticised the vaccines industry. The first leg of its national release was going to be the New York Tribeca Film Festival. Andrew Wakefield, the (unfairly) dishonoured doctor, who first raised the alarm on a possible vaccines/autism connection back in the 1990’s, was heavily involved with the film.  De Niro has an 18 year old son, reputedly with a severe case of autism. I haven’t checked how severe the severity is because, if De Niro is one of those exceptionally rare cases of human integrity, then it shouldn’t matter how severe his son’s autism is. Indeed “as one of the greatest actors of all time”, it shouldn’t matter if his son wasn’t affected at all. Does he deliver bullshit with sincerity or speak plainly? In Analyze This then Analyze That De Niro played the same loveable Mafia rogue. In both cases the bad guy turned out good in the end. That’s the fantasy, but how does it match real life? His co-star, Billy Crystal, showed his Mephistopheles qualities shortly after 2001, when he suffered a rabid political embolism in front of international cameras. The featured event, so-called “911”, was something he knew nothing about. Perhaps his corporate activation was because he was Jewish, or black, or gay? Was he molested as a child or a reformed hard drug user as so many actors have to be these days? For someone to stand up, in sincerity, and say what he said about 911 deserves only excommunication and deportation. In my opinion he is neither worthy as a Jew nor responsible as an American.

vaxxed-1200x627-facebook-linkLet us all be clear; Zionism is the only religion on the planet that insists indoctrination must be through cause of bloodline heritage and not faith. Therefore hereditary Jews that bless Zionism cannot be Americans. They will always be Israelites even if they have never visited their homeland; a homeland that shouldn’t exist at all, according to the religious Haredim. Billy Crystal and other movie stars need to be very aware of the facts and lucid about them if they decide to open their big mouths in public places. But De Niro must be different, surely? Here’s a guy the majority of Americans would count on to step up to the plate. He’s not some washed out Austrian import or one of those gung ho cowboys that shoots for order. If he went for President, the laurels of Rome would await. Stallone may well exemplify the Jersey Shore brigade, but De Niro has a brain. He’s almost classical for Christ’s sake!

There have been new developments that alter everything and following sentiment was written prior to De Niro’s very public announcement in favour of Vaxxed and resolution of the vaccines/autism link. I have left in all the original commentary as it is important. There are others, not as tall as De Niro this might apply to. Activists must constantly kick up a fuss, even if it might seem premature or unfair, if we expect remedial action. We must protest like we never protested before.

Southpark turd sandwichIn a sense it is old and very painful news as he did indeed rat out on his promise to introduce Andrew Wakefield’s movie in its promotion of truth about something that should have been very dear to him, considering his intellectually disabled son. Of course, human beings being human say it wasn’t De Niro’s fault. It was the organisers, the Government, the Jews or anything else to divert attention away from their dim star. He’s okay. No lack of responsibility here. It could have happened to anyone. The difference between De Niro and anyone with a shred of integrity is he should have gone out gunning for the movie, made waves, kicked up his own personal protest. All we, the viewers, witnessed, quite frankly was, nothing to see here, move along now, quietly as you go. For anyone that’s seen the old Southpark cartoon episode, I’ll take the turd sandwich, thanks. That’s the “De Niro promise”. Don’t blame me, I’m only famous.

Surely, if the claim of fame is to be taken seriously, a star should behave better than everyone else. That’s why Illuminati mainstream Medias constantly shine the spotlight on ungainly goings on in high places. It is their viperous way of augmenting double standards for a two tier society: the haves versus the have nots. The rich can behave with moral impunity as long as they are in favour. Once targeted, phantom paedophile horrors and a large closet filled with other potential nasties might be used as make believe in extended courtroom fantasies. In a previous post I revealed rumours that deliberate toxication of vaccines were explored at an open Council of Rome meeting back in 1981. Discussions then were all about how to put the brakes on an ever expanding global population. TV all seeing eyeThat “op” could not have happened without the help of the all Seeing Eye. Nothing has been more powerful at shaping public opinion than the every present goggle box that streams television. In masonic lore the eye in the pyramid means something real. Ancient visitors to these extraordinary monuments were able to use the structures as a means of negotiation for direct [third eye] connection with the Akashic Records. Our modern day all Seeing Eye has been twisted into pulp fiction courtesy of the illuminating Illuminati.

ba401-eli-lilly-and-company-1-638Toxication of vaccines was achieved, arguably, when Eli Lilly launched their Thimerosal preservative brand; a mercury compound. Though patented in 1931, ingredients have increased to include the heavy metal, aluminium and, best known as rat poison, formaldehyde, in more recent times. Even back in the 1940’s Thimerosal was known to cause Pink’s Disease. Physicians, such as Andrew Wakefield, were not prepared to stand idly by when patient after patient was clearly and irresponsibly injured by their vaccines. 51SXNFjLUVL._SY300_In 1930 one in ten thousand suffered from conditions that would be diagnosed as autism today. Now one in fifty are autistic. The problem is there are other statistics too. Whereas no one can disagree that vaccines trigger autism, there could be a spectrum of contributors. Pesticides, notably the chemical agent glyphosate, statistically cause autism too. Though perhaps not directly related, prior to the introduction of the automobile in 1905, it is estimated roughly one in forty would develop cancers. That probability has increased to, maybe, one in three. Cancer is big business. One patient is worth up to $400,000 in medical bills. I make the case that pollution, in general, is a big contributor to all disease. Considering all forms of pollution, the petrochemical industry is by far the most responsible for all man made carbon emissions.

We still must be careful when making sweeping accusations. Thimersosal has been used in some vaccines since the 1930’s, yet noticeable effects weren’t noticed en-masse until 1990’s. Perhaps that meant more tainted vaccines were circulated or could it mean something else? UFO-UFOs-sighting-sightings-Lyon-France-europe-march-2012-space-alien-aliens-ET-W56-uredda-top-secret-face-mars-moon-base-Jeremy-LinScreen-Shot-2012-03-10Instinctively I smell a cover up. Will the autism problem disappear with good vaccines? Particularly in alternative Medias, a big fuss has been made over so-called chemtrails. Those lucky enough to catch the spraying planes red handed will notice they are regularly accompanied by light orbs, or superfast moving black rods of unknown origins. This is no coincidence as pedestrian man is helping factions not of this Earth prepare us for the new extra-terrestrial age. It is unlikely even the planes’ pilots know the true agenda. Unsightly interruptions of stagnancy are “noticed” by wannabe crusaders. Yet “100’s millions of vehicles, 100’s thousands of industrial chimney stacks daily belching billions of tons of pollution into our atmosphere” has rarely been deemed a topic worthy of discussion, when it should be a constant vigil.  I suppose it is because that is a known evil and not the consequence of corporate infiltration at all levels of protest.  There are between 4,000 and 19,000 planes in the air at any time. According to the extra-dimensional Zeta Grey Beings, these constant “cuts” of the electro-magnetic field affect everyone’s central nervous system. Is that a possible autism connection?

AutismRegularly I touch on the paranormal when discussing the mundane. In the case of autism, given the vaccine injuries statistic is comparatively so minute compared to those that turn out healthy, how can that be so? A thousand, to all intents and purposes, identical children are given MMR vaccines, yet only twenty or so demonstrate symptoms of autism. Using the “stones analogy” of my introduction, one thousand out of one thousand should be afflicted per probability logic. So it must be something else. I point out in “Autism Corroborates Darwinism” that DNA is not understood by science because it is metaphysical. Going further, I have stated physics does not even comprehend the physical cosmos due to its inability to process anything that exists beyond or outside material illusion. My first book, “The Beauty of Existence Decoded” begins to unravel the truth. It is a start; a firm base, but there is more to come; much more. I mentioned earlier that “God” can be “seen” in starlight, but there is a simpler way. Atoms act as God’s pores. They are the missing link. Every single atomic nucleus becomes a soul portal (revealing a reflective aspect of God). Thus, these are the root of change delivered by unseen sunlight (or “starlight”). Manifest DNA is the cellular facilitator. I go into detail in “The Beauty of Existence Decoded”. Heavy stuff, yes, but fine minds can grasp it.

curvedspace1In “Autism Corroborates Darwinism”, I hypothesise that the evolutionists are correct “in measure”. However physical adjustments are made by the holy combination of atoms, starlight and DNA – another interpretation of “trinity”? Put your “beliefs” in the reject basket and you can learn so much. For instance, when I announced the reason space appears curved is that all dimensions are housed on the same lateral plane prior is the implications are massive for us. We, “carbon based life forms”, have restricted access because we can only tune into the frequency we call “3D”. Should there be an atomic shift, then anything might be possible. Compressed dark matter (simply a theory thus far) delivers an ocean effect. Our atmosphere holds back its pressing blackness, but this could only be so because of enormous electro-magnetic forces generated by our planet. These bounce off the rim of darkness and are responsible for the phenomenon known as “gravity”. Everything is not pulled, but pushed to the ground. No wonder “the powers” have kept the lid on serious investigation into any inner Earth settlements.

htc-droid-dna-verizon-ad-1There is so much we could know if only we opened our minds. Slowly I reveal the unrevealable. In “Autism Corroborates Darwinism” I concluded that evolution is spread over the relative skill set by a combination of our holy trinity: atoms, starlight and DNA. Doctor Andrew Wakefield speaks to the media after a hearing at the General Medical Council in LondonPer this system, changes could be negotiated at individual, full or sub-group levels. In the case of vaccines, a few unlucky individuals presumably take the hit for the group. In line with this mechanism, every child of a particular batch is made autistic, but most suffer complaints so mild symptoms would be barely recognisable, if at all. Because the majority, including most so-called intellectuals, are so busy validating or accounting their rogue belief systems, truths like this are literally beyond comprehension. I couldn’t imagine Andrew Wakefield would believe it too, but he does know there is an autism/vaccines link. The devil is always found in the detail and even the very best seem to be compelled to pay nothing more than lip service (if we’re lucky) to ideas and remedies that conflict with presupposition.

turdpolishThere’s a bit of “I look after number one, so I behave like a number two” in everyone. Those in high places have a long way to fall, so I understand the easiest line of defence against “would be attackers” is to pretend to be holier than thou. “You are not qualified to respond” is the only sure fire way to deflect reasoned criticism. They (the old guard) know that once you are tagged, you will either never be given the opportunity to become qualified or seasoned judges will demote your input as vagaries or interesting but unsound ideas. When weak links do occasionally emerge from those safe, tried & tested sources, ideas are all too briskly destabilised with liberal doses of tar and feathers. The system is “self-emulating” and that is what makes it so successful. Taking the point in question, toxic vaccines, the mainstream experts can and do not only endorse products as perfectly safe and useful that aren’t, but also make ludicrous, illogical claims against those that don’t share their corrupt opinions. The most popular call is to present “anti-vaxxers” as social-terrorists determined to infect healthy, vaccinated people (usually children). According to reason, this means vaccination does not actually protect anyone at all.

artworks-000146599488-4sanol-t500x500From the holistic DNA perspective attributes are guided by intent. If you wanted to be a woman that is what you are. Those that trumpet about being born as the wrong bodies are misguided. Certainly, past lives (something mainstay science doesn’t want to “discuss” let alone accept) might reveal a pre-inclination towards one sex or the other and, with hindsight, the choices to reincarnate as males or females might have been forlorn ones in some cases, but mitigated decisions they were. I mentioned earlier about true love and sham marriages. Sham marriages that last the test of time are as strong as real marriages built on virtue. One is based on control, the other faith and, I am compelled to believe, if autism was to strike any marital union in particular, these would be the focus. For those that control, autism is an angry outcome. The faithful produce offspring that are products of sadness. Impact is never found in logic. The passionate have no scruples. They win or lose at all cost. Thus, if “God” were to use autism as a metaphor prompt, then the ideal choices for impact would be the offspring of the “holy” or the “holier than thou”. There is hope on the horizon because it is revenge only that unites every human being – great or small, deceptive or virtuous, intellectual or shallow. Armies of “truther networks” are, perhaps, inches away from orchestrated militancy. Their only missing ingredient is courage.

Truther networksI am regularly critical of truther networks. This is not because individuals lack scruples or causes are necessarily invalid. There are two main complaints. Firstly, many claims are baseless through fault of lack of or maligned sources. Secondly, various crusades are, after the fictional Spanish soubrette, Don Quixote in character (i.e. chasing evil windmills) and either target non-existent threats or, more commonly, after the fact campaigns. quijoteThe 911 incident has gone, passed by and is no more. Yet, there are endless memories regurgitating dusty conspiracy theories or substantiated claims of wrong doing. Hollow laments for impeachment is the closest we ever come to resolve or action, which, frankly, is nothing short of blame game or pass the hot potato. The real issues are always buried deep and answers are invariably impractical. Unsurprisingly, the same can be said for information sources that routinely revolve the alternative Media circuits. BlameGameThe same old chestnuts, bad pennies are rebranded, rehashed and misconstrued over and over. So much so, there are very few sources I subscribe to and regularly review.

Occasionally something comes along, out of the blue, that smacks me in the face and commands respect. One such epic article, from memory reproduced by Brendan D Murphy’s Facebook channel, has everything a true researcher needs. It is an exceptionally long read (including a number of videos) that deserves thorough processing. Half or part reading it shows no respect for the author and would be the consequence of sloppy, ill-disciplined behaviour. Truth seekers, researchers may as well not be lazy else give up and do something productive. A job not done well is a job not done at all. Those that are time poor have lives cluttered with too much nonsense. If you are time poor, it is your duty to review life processes. But, let’s face it, most time poor people are sorry liars.

Pasteur plagiaristThe Pasteur article has exposed a number of weaknesses pertaining to the human condition. Now we near the end of this entry, I am obliged to highlight poor attention span as an extra consequence of our fraudulent nature. When, last post, I intimated people don’t read e-books because they are ungenerous, that was not the only reason. Many have such poor attention; simple phrases only are barely retained. Thus, I try to keep my blog entries to “fewer than 3,000 words”. We have already gone way over budget so I will try to summarise, “Louis Pasteur Plagiarist, Imposter & the Truth About Vaccines” in two paragraphs, if that’s possible. Though I won’t attempt to unravel its rather confusing terminology now, suffice to say, a future post may try and transcribe some of that detail in a more resounding way. Sensationally, the article reveals Pasteur reputedly admitted he was a fraud on his deathbed and his germ theory was both unproved and wrong. As just about all modern mainstream medicinal philosophy relies on underlying principles of germ theory, this is a massive piece of information.

It subliminally highlights just how rotten the modern medical system is. Should not this information be acted on now by all you petty crusaders? Your health system causes more deaths and debilitating injuries than your wars. “911” was nothing by comparison.

Broken healthcareI have no reason to doubt the article as the author provides a lucid account of the 19th century French biologist, Professor Antoine Bechamp, whose cellular tissue theory formed the basis for most of Pasteur’s wayward conclusions. Micro-organisms (affectionately known as germs) that feed on dead tissue matter are changelings. They are changelings because they are the product of very much smaller microzyma, which can morph into bacteria or “viruses” depending on the body environment. Personally I find this very revealing as I have stated on a number of occasions that all virus are caused by pollution (whether organic or inorganic) and are evidence of how [invaded] bodies deal with threats of this type. Pasteur-BechampBechamp has confirmed that microzyma are the agents of change that create organism-like microbes which are accounted for as viruses (or bacteria) by statisticians. In conclusion, the expansive article goes on to say that the reasoning behind vaccines is flawed and all serums are not beneficial and probably detrimental to users. That is you and me, by the way! Mild doses of complaints (such as Polio) do nothing to stop adverse catalytic reactions in the body and well documented cases are shown up as evidence. Indeed, the writer plainly argues that all modern cases of polio are caused by the polio vaccine.

Wikia-Visualization-MainIf this is correct, and I have no reason to suggest otherwise, then vaccines may well ultimately cause autism. Nevertheless, the human body and its mysterious, magical way of dealing with issues must, at least, contribute to the syndrome. Whether we single out loveless money marriages or unions of intertwined hearts, it would surely be worth testing a vaccine-free control group to ascertain whether there is any merit to William Thompson’s (scientist for the Centres for Disease Control) sensational claims that he documented evidence categorically linking vaccines to autism effects. NEWJERUSALEMThis means that if Robert De Niro, Billy Crystal and other high profile stars could detach themselves from the corporate pariahs just as Anthony Hopkins has done and show true God qualities, perhaps they could save the world. I’m reluctant to cite Marlon Brando whose infamous Oscar rejection so aptly highlighted the plight of the American Indian (or native Redskin), because nepotism shouldn’t pay. After 25,000 years we, the human group, are beginning to embrace a new age of light. If that is to mean anything at all, gloves must come off and action must replace apathy. True love must trump convenience if autism is to win the war, and make no mistake about it for that is what it is. Our stars, our true to God must be resilient pitted against all odds if autism is to win the war against vaccines.

Has a prayer been answered?

Enjoy the clip, as it is rare I am given the opportunity to be optimistic. Recently, Robert De Niro not only proved he was a giant Redwood completely redeeming his prior pathetic inaction in promotion of the sensational movie, “Vaxxed”. Doing more for the film than the New York Tribeca Festival could ever have done, he broadcast to 100’s of millions of people across the globe on Sunrise (a television stream) making his sane recommendations. As much as the vain interviewers tried to downplay issues, De Niro countered with prestigious authority and nobility. The veil was well and truly lifted on the “mercury based preservative, Thimerosal”. He asked why our scientists have done nothing about the complex issues that logically propose a vaccines/autism link. Like everyone else, he “wasn’t sure about Andrew Wakefield”, but he also insisted not being sure was no reason to inhibit a meaningful investigation. De Niro intimated this needed to be done by experts not in the pockets of corporate health. Yes, he mentioned the damned money grabbing pharmaceutical monopoly in the lowest possible light.

Charge of the Light Brigade by Thomas Jones BarkerOn that up note, I think several people may be feeling true love for Robert De Niro and his inconvenient views. Bravo to a cultural hero. May he lead the charge….