First HIV, then Ebollox, now Simpsons’ Coronavirus, What Next?

John Pilger, Noam Chomsky, and the entertaining Michael Parenti are blessed with happy mediums of being able to play and beat “the system” at its own game. Other public speaking majorities have been issued less fortunate demeanours. As with everyone else, they are held to ransom by educational/social programming enterprises that fundamentally dictate “the way things will be”. Hence, to all intents and purposes, that is why “the way things will be” is “the way things are”. I make no excuses for my lack of “viable” references and possible corresponding academic belligerence throughout this essay. I have found references are designed to more shore up political correctness or common authority views in substitution for actually verifying the truth. Thus, misconstrued empty promises, deceitful practices of all kinds and deliberate dishonesty are casually preserved over and over by those placed out of context, “value added” reframes. You know, “Ah, that’s how it happened!” So, putting it bluntly, I refuse to add to the malicious mass trend. As it stands, under review, the callous critic might unfairly revile content here. Given my express lack of formality, I would imagine this essay might be dressed as an opinion piece, which it is not. In fact dedicated readers will discover reasoned analysis that is mostly not tainted (God forbid) by occult “verification”. Nevertheless, raw evidence of science corruption (such as William W. Thompson’s fraud at the behest of Merck) is noteworthy enough to feature.

I guess the lesson here is, don’t necessarily “believe” what I or anyone else says. Do your own research, but make sure efforts are wide and thorough. It would be definitely worth everyone’s while to check out the great collection of topical writings at Pure Professional Journalism Gazette. Expect a bombshell by way of final conclusion that, to some degree, goes against background analysis. It will prove, if nothing else, I do not champion particular opinions and can turn on a penny in an instant if new findings justify the move. So, without further ado, let us begin. In the simplest of terms, our universe is exclusively composed of energy. In line, Einstein’s notorious E = MC² equation vaguely satisfies existence “the symptom”. However, was he to have delved deeper to substantiate motivated causes, his rudimentary oversimplification of truth would have been shown up as wildly incorrect. Our sun is one of millions beyond millions of stars that distribute energy throughout the universe. So potent is its source, ancient cultures worshiped the privilege of exposure. There may have actually been more to their zany practice, but I will discuss details onward. Back in 1918 mock scientists decided that the sun, consistently delivering life supporting “vitamin D”, was now the generator of a dreadful plague they labelled “Coronavirus”. Consideration behind labelling relied on judgemental “blame”, apparently devoid of any valid clinical research. The sun (an unreachable object) was inaccessible enough to make an easy unquestionable “decoy”, but, presuming the plague itself was neither fabrication nor “as described”, what mischief did it cover up?

This is an important question because 1918 marked the end of the culmination of a giant conflict between nations. So violently expansive was its course it has become known as the First World War. There are extensive records covering most apparent historic aspects, but it seems unlikely those deep, dark secrets held by “corridors of power” have been revealed (or why call them secrets?). Could there have been some sort of new manufacturing process or weaponry that caused more civilian or “friendly fire” casualty than benefit? Competent information supporting this inquiry is fairly essential, once basis for viruses (which were first categorised as such in the 1890’s) is understood. For journalists, audiences to disseminate information to can also prove pretty useful, so, in that regard, I run two Facebook pages. One is occupied by normal people whilst the other collects rebels with attitude, though sadly mostly without mitigated aims. The former is the more relevant to this exercise because “home channel” outpourings tend to accumulate “TV” world view on things in general. For instance, not a single person I have friended attached to the channel has any notion of what a virus “IS”. Actually, on that front, my other channel doesn’t fare much better either. Most presume origins of viral strains roughly mimic evolutionary course of bacterial infections.  This, by the way, is the grave error which aggressively fuels ignorant sentiment over speculative theories pertaining to Coronavirus and other less familiar complaints.

Clearly (by their vocal expressions) all innocently believe viruses are transmitted by humans to other humans, yet, if the truth was known, the notion would be deemed ironically preposterous. In fact (for those that bother to research) science has vaguely (hinted at in complicated waffle; if only they would listen to Richard Branson) “come clean” on things. Reading between those revealing science lines, viruses are the response of micro particles not-so-kindly provided by our atmosphere. Precise detail on exact “culprits” would be almost impossible to pinpoint. Nevertheless, after the last swine flu epidemic (from 30,000 flu screenings, the CDC formally identified roughly 20 complaints, but more on that in due course), logic proposes the specific root cause must have been from two giant farms in relatively close proximity to affliction zones or, rather, issues emanating from “lakes” of hog faecal waste (which is impolitely known as pig shit).

Many years ago I used to have greater confidence in “the system” and calculated the most reliable asset anyone could entertain was a jolly good lawyer. Mine was an interesting fellow; most senior in years. At one of our many meetings, he shocked by informing me his daughter was a nurse who tended to “AIDS patients” and she had accidentally lanced herself with a giant needle used on one of them. I didn’t go into details. Well, one wouldn’t, but some weeks hence I did inquire how his daughter was faring and, apparently, after numerous tests, she showed negative for both HIV and AIDS and was given a clean bill of health. Hoorah! If nothing else, this proves that HIV/AIDS does not mimic bacterial behaviour. But returning to those sciences’ “buried deep” truths, viruses are identified as having no metabolism. That might sound relatively unimportant to the non-technical person, so it would be wise of me to qualify magnitude here. The best efficient method of detecting whether someone is deceased (that’s dead) is by their absence of metabolism (which, I can add, promulgates growth). Viruses neither grow nor reproduce. They only change in character. Scientists label these changes “mutations”, which can be numerous. When particularly noticeable patterns emerge, results are qualified as “strains”. In fact, for the technically minded, science has never discovered a virus strain in isolation (except perhaps in the case of rabies, but I will elaborate more on that anomaly later in this article).

Given my storming revelation, how do medics categorically identify complaints, such as swine flu? Simply put, as viruses themselves prove too evasive, they apply a “microdot” antibody test. Under microscopic conditions, providing a million or more antibodies turn up at the “marked zone” results are regarded as sufficient evidence of viral infection. I am not sure how they manage to count all the particles efficiently, so I assume a machine does the leg work. Recurring biological patterns can be attributed to specific viruses in place of the “common cold”. “Next stage” Influenza is diagnosed by regularity of symptoms, which can develop into killer pneumonia. So, returning to my earlier “swine flu” highlight, it is vital to realise that none of the 20 or so cases assessed by CDC lab technicians’ revealed direct evidence of causes. Instead they relied on formulaic graphs tabled from symptoms. When a complaint was critical enough to lead to serious illness or death, it became posthumous basis for verification in lieu of actual, factual evidence. Putting it bluntly, universal “healthcare” is unable to fundamentally diagnose any virus (the burglar that’s never caught) or cause “with authority”. Hardly surprising as viruses are simply varied examples of how the body processes different types of pollutants.

I am being a little unfair to the medical people here. They discover more than antibodies in clinical samples. Resulting biological debris is presumed cause of disease.

Instances involving scenarios whereby “causes” have already invaded cells are harder to detect. For these, numerable sub-classifications, such as retrovirus, Flavivirus are assigned. To me, a word is a label and, hence, impotent terminologies rather obfuscate sincere revelation which can hinder dedicated investigation. Yet, the major elephant in the room that exposes medical ignorance here is its associated science is only able to speculate on how viruses enter the body. Back in 2018 I published an article titled “Coming Clean on Cancer” which highlighted the critical role quantum light (atoms) plays in cultivating body development. Because atoms are generally viewed as arbitrary or accidental building blocks of physicality, they have been more or less overlooked by all sciences. Well, that’s one reason. Intriguing studies such as kondo effect radically also demonstrate how far adrift atomic behaviour is from bubbling “science reality” (sic). Anyway, were we to understand the actual purpose (yay!) of particle waves, that ever familiar “survival of the fittest” paradigm we’ve been force fed would be rendered instantly obsolete. Survival does go some way to indicating truth though. By that vein, existence is built on principles of assimilation and, accordingly, all materials naturally recycle. Stronger animals consuming weaker ones enhances creation stratagem. In relation, I will reveal the “power” of quantum light soon, but now there is something much more fundamentally basic to adequately expose science misconception over viruses.

Unlike bacteria and fungi, viruses tend to be very small and, consequentially, are hard to see. Biological materials become jumbled and parts (without metabolism) congregate unhelpfully. Thus, under a microscope, it is a devil of a job to sort out the pieces of the puzzle. That is predominantly why medics substitute recognisable patterns in lieu of actual, factual evidence. So far, so good! Taking my “in brief” explanation of natural assimilation a step further, when microscopic extraneous matter attached to the atmosphere is inhaled or absorbed (through skin, eyes, etc.), logic dictates that the body would have three fundamental options in relation to dealing with the invisible invasion. Micro particles could be ignored as we overlook dust in our lounge rooms. There might be some kind of method to expel waste. The remaining choice left is to contain the problem. “Containment” conveniently fits the assimilation model like a glove. How does the expression go? “If the bear won’t come to the mountain, we will bring the mountain to the bear.” In this instance, to “contain” is to convert any invader into a new body part. Thus, micro particles that enter the pulmonary system are uniformly coated with biological materials by body defences to “mark” the threat. Some of these marked units are funnelled into various waste disposal facilities (such as kidneys, liver – hepatitis anyone?) over time. Others hang around to become part of the “biological scenery”.

It is these “rebels without causes” that can potentially fuse health issues (I introduce evidential effects of asbestos dust in a future segment). Remember, all the while, to the casual medical observer, they will appear as biological particles without metabolism. Current topical science assessment of data could not conjure more inaccurate prognoses, which bizarrely reminds me of the manner gravity is “dealt with”. On that subject, Newton, I fear,  worked out his proverbial apple was callously shoved to the ground by a complex web of forces (further explaining how our planet is really propelled) generated from the bowels of the Earth to bounce back off oceanic space. Maligned politics (covering up the fact our moon shouldn’t spin if it was a dead body?) determined to stem “inner Earth” exploration vouched for the vogue “magnetic pull” model. Unsurprisingly Newton’s patron, Sir Edmond Halley (comet discoverer), found no champions for his “inner sun” theory either. This should wax familiar because a lot of medical “science” follows political (Big Pharma friendly) interests. Gravity is not a magnetic field (although magnetism can influence forces) and viruses do not live. Thus, cells are never invaded by micro particles because they can’t be accessed in that manner. Instead, without exception, cells snack on tasty biological materials, such as essential minerals. However, rebel morsels are also eaten up in line with that common assimilation recycling strategy.

Ever had a bad chicken kebab? If not, take it from someone who has, you don’t want to go through the experience. Most kebabs are fine, and you can’t necessarily tell which ones are “off” from appearance, smell (particularly when doused in hot chilli sauce). But there are worse things to consume: strychnine, for instance. How does this compare with those doused micro particles? Well, as far as the cell is concerned there are no surprises inside each tasty package. Thus, in the case of SARS, ingested industrial composites stripped infected identities of nucleic acid. But there was some uplifting news associated with that. After all the credentialed science slander targeting 1960’s anti-theories, SARS once and for all proved a cell does not necessarily need a nucleus to function; launching Dr Bruce Lipton’s spectacular career. Aside from malfeasant politics, why would medicine make such fundamental errors of judgement in relation to viruses? The short answer to this belies the idiopathic principle grounding modern day healthcare. To explain, “Idio” stems from ancient Greek idios, meaning “denier of authority” (which evolved into the slur idiot). “Pathy” substitutes for suffering or illness, so the idiopathic principle (no known disease causes) remarks on symptoms.

In effect noticeable abnormality is treated in the hope problems will disappear. Sorry, I can’t resist a little sarcasm here. Golly gosh, in light of this course, who’d have guessed symptoms would make a nasty habit of recurring? Flu vaccination is therefore useless once genuine problem/cause is understood. On the positive side, bacterial parasites and fungi represent “symptom and cause” in combination so modern medicine generally provides excellent, efficient remedies here. Viruses, cancers and certain psychological conditions prove intellectually inaccessible. Whilst occasional anger directed at this deliberate medical ignorance or “void” is justified, we need to review the history of understanding of illness to fully appreciate why. We need to turn the clock back to the 1780’s to reconfigure a muted conspiracy that has always deliberately kept corporate healthcare in the dark. For instance, the real purposes for those enormous “inhumane” study schedules training doctors must endure is students are given no time to “think for themselves”. Brainwashed new recruits will memorise data “by rote”, perhaps in the same manner Islamic extremist “terrorists” are able to parrot the Koran, verse by verse until their minds recognise no contradicting sentiment. There sadly is a common arrogance too.

Now some might argue industrialisation commenced with the enormous cargoes of bounty that were transported in merchant ships out of the New World from the 1500’s onwards. However, for this investigation’s purposes heavy mining and late 18th century beginnings of mechanical automation experimentation marked onset of the key “damage period”. Correspondingly, writers covering social matters of the era immediately raised alarms over noticeable effects of environmental pollution. These cries reached fever pitch by the mid 1800’s, which happened to “coincide” with mass production (as it was then) of vaccines. A few doctors spoke out against the popular flawed philosophy favouring “mild doses” [of disease] to bolster a body’s immune system to no avail. Just to be clear on facts here, unless I’m missing something, employment of vaccines will have no effect on inanimate (lacking metabolism) pollutants, so any healthcare benefit must be viewed as a form of placebo medication. Then, even after Louis Pasteur’s apparent death bed recantation, immunisation tradition continues as strong as ever today. Efficacy of vaccines has never been proven.

Those that study relevant data models observe that “introduction of serums” invariably happens at disease “burn out” stage (i.e. the problem was going away all by itself).

Mosquito man Bill Gates polio “gift” to the Indian hill tribes (and subsequent international class action suit) chillingly demonstrates how dangerous these products can be. Talking of polio, I would guess that radical downsizing of tin production was the catalyst for healthcare improvement, so it is not merely organic materials that can cause viruses. Bill Gates (evil computer genius), of course, was working closely with the CDC in their vain attempt to impose the contagion model for COVID-19 quarantine until the idea was quashed by America’s valiant surgeon general in favour of raw data evidence. How will they “fudge” results now? Anyway, let us imagine (after all that bad press), back in the 1800’s, industrialist merchant bankers were worried people might discover the truth and rise up against them. Hypothetically, wouldn’t their most effective primary strategy defending revolt be to deny pollution as cause of illness? In fact, contemporary mainstream academic reports and newspapers more or less followed these precise lines. Journalists claimed that weak and sickly would die anyway, so industrialisation was cleansing society by “making it stronger” (i.e. a macabre variant of survival of the fittest). That nonsense was fine and dandy until the first major [legitimate] epidemic eventuated (finding no credible voices to counter the glaringly indiscriminate targeting of weak and strong alike). The shock forced “powers” to employ a revolutionary medical strategy.

Potential for viruses was demonically ushered into being (and I say that because the devil is always in the detail). Idiopathic medicine, lost for causes, scratched around for the “best projections” to tackle “symptoms” and, hey presto, quackery came up with vaccines. There are numerous accounts of [presumed] airborne diseases prior to the 1800’s, but those varieties of influenza were most likely resulting from organic debris of one kind or another. I highlighted the dangers of pig faeces earlier. Unmanaged human waste I feel sure could be equally as negatively potent. Here associated myths accounting the sickly demise of society after Spanish capture (and subsequent garrotting) of Aztec monarch Montezuma II might well endorse my theory. Was incinerated bodily refuse the issue? Bonfires would doubtlessly create atmospheric conditions loaded with potentially infecting micro-sized carcinogens (remembering swine flu results from sun powered vapour emitted from sewage lakes). Identical reasoning can be used to justify analysis of other infectious conditions. Outlined in my prior release “Coming Clean on Cancer” Queen Mary I of England’s 1558 supposed womb cancer death is wrongly diagnosed, unless crude oil powered periodic combustible engines. Evidence validates automobile invention, development and subsequent mass production happening in much more recent times, thus the Tudor queen succumbed to some other complaint that may not be possible to find comparison for today.

We should be exceptionally sceptical and wary of all projections; Bill Gates’ inspired computer modelling in particular. Fantasy (and that’s what it is) representation of proscribed reality isn’t real. Facts considered carefully, immunisation philosophy and partnering vaccines are (at least at hubris) nothing short of trial and error concepts. Given the historic background, it is no irony that conceptualisation is “banking friendly”. Insurers rely on synthesised calculations to assess and best guess risk; risk that is unknown. Likewise, immunisation provides theoretical security as an insurance measure against disease. We are told “by the experts” to believe this security is impeccable. We are told it is a platform sturdy enough to support the weight of humanity. Practical evidence recounts a different, sorry story. Harking back to the heavily publicised resurgence of Ebola in Africa a couple of years ago, newly touted “outbreaks” took only moments to incubate. One instant everything was calm without discernible issue and next we were told of a “Jaws” style epidemic “of monumental proportions” in full swing. When a big storm starts brewing (a possible major reinsurance headache), onlookers are provided some warning. Reflecting on Media portrayal, surely new Ebola deserves to be remembered as the medical equivalent of blitzkrieg. In light of this, would not insurance class that specific speculative epidemic an act of God?

Acts of God are uninsurable because no preparations for defences can be made. How is it possible to immunise against a disease that is already rooted? Additionally, as immunisation principle bolsters the immune system by presenting mild dosages approximating targeted complaints, what warped philosophy could offer vaccine utilisation (i.e. “adding disease”) to stem contamination? “Ah, he’s lost a lot of blood, sir, I prescribe leeches”. I have already outlined why vaccines, at best, offer placebo measures against viruses. There is another observation in relation to contagion in general. I cannot fathom how a real epidemic could come along “without anyone noticing” so quickly. Thus, the whole current enterprise waxes false flag, I’m afraid. It is as if Ebola nonsense was a dry run to test population idiocy and, because Africans’ passed with flying colours, history has been allowed to repeat itself. Corresponding new normal (or that’s your friendly corporate “catchphrase”) recapitulation insists the entire globe has been instantly infected with Coronavirus (coming from nowhere for no discernible reasons); even though (for my research) limited numbers had been tested (at “newsbreak”) and the few deaths that have been reported are shall we say “dodgy”.

Fortunately I have friends in strategic places. A very alert Italian naturopathic doctor informed me (via a private network channel) that the grave situation in Italy “coincidentally” followed mandatory mass vaccinations.  Not quite “evidence”, but this piece alleges several Senegalese infants under care of a “western clinic” died instantly directly after being vaccinated against Coronavirus. We by no means share opinions, but Dr Judy Mikovits is one of those leading the charge against experimental “bat gnosis”. If COVID-19 is no different to ordinary influenza, would it be possible to confuse vaccine damage symptoms with those that might identify a new, previously unknown disease? Massive funds have been leveraged on Coronavirus. It must be a winner at any cost. Think the money to be made out of compliance and enforcement, plus all those potentially “justifiable” Big Brother measures. Idiopathic medicine, via spurious theories, can conjure “brands” out of any illnesses. Therefore, I fear South Koreans (another of those mandatory vaccination countries) will ultimately share the same fate as Italians unless I have read the politics wrongly. Aside from my dubious Senegalese reference, has anyone attempted to check whether there is a definite connection with Coronavirus deaths and immunization? We do know that Italian authorities pressed ahead with their draconian measures “regardless” of contradictions highlighted by a 2016 paper covering dangers of vaccines released by independent scientists.

From 100 serums tested (which, from memory, included tDap and MMR), roughly 30% were shown to contain significant traces of heavy metals (such as aluminium, mercury). I exampled effects of mercury laced bandages on fallen troops of the 1860’s American “Civil War” (war between dominions deliberately miscategorised?) in this article. Even so scientists that have studied data samples prefer aluminium toxicity as most likely cause of Alzheimer’s disease. That is the ostensive reason why cooking pans and soft drink cans are coated today, although I wonder whether “coatings” will eventually become classified as “cancer causing”. Logic supporting Italian authorities’ blatant rejection of evidence placing doubt on vaccine safety has never been effectively explained to me. Putting conspiracies to one side, presuming serum contamination was accidental with Coronavirus the symptom, have we seen comparable occurrences before? In answer, there is certainly one television documentary that examined evidence against tainted polio vaccines which were manufactured from the late 1950’s and throughout the early 1960’s. When adverse side effects became a noticeable problem, product was withdrawn from use in the first world (i.e. “Western countries”). However, as the documentary testifies, other stocks were still travelling to remote regions of Africa up until the 1980’s. According to the programme (which was certainly aired on mainstream channels in the UK and Australia), vaccine serums were originally cultivated in the kidneys of live chimpanzees and green monkeys.

These animals had apparently developed natural protection against atmospheric pollution and responding “viral strains” were unavoidably transferred to vaccine batches. In humans, reactive symptoms were labelled “HIV”.

I won’t bother introducing French/Swiss Nobel puppet and serial bloviator Dr “despicable” Montegnier (who never found HIV). Other “experts” originally described symptoms as “slightly worse than the common cold”. Misdirected propaganda (which unconfirmed “sources” tell me was brainchild of the CIA) promoted the idea of a worldwide “gay plague” on the back of contemporary medical discrepancy. In relation, I recommend Jon Rappoport’s sensational paperback “AIDS Inc.” will make an essential reference for those committed to discovering truth. Though I haven’t read the entire volume myself, some of Jon’s key findings are known to me. Most critical (in my opinion) of these points is information that evaluates the pharmaceutical drug AZT. Accordingly, AZT has had a very chequered history. Back in the 1950’s its prior branding was presented as a miracle chemo cure. Side effects were horrific enough for the drug to be quickly withdrawn without fuss. Patients implicated in trials had suffered AIDS like symptoms that were clearly not a parenthesis of cancer progression. Jon made other vital observations. His remarks on “science” behind benchmarking HIV are priceless. Hypocritical standards were so vague, the ardent academic would deem them perfunctory, but authorities didn’t give a damn. They were staring at one of the potentially largest commercial medical opportunities since Spanish influenza (some say coincided with construction of the electricity grid, but I’ll have more on that when I wrap this essay up). Whereas hard evidence supporting my proposed hypothetical would be difficult to amass, multi-faceted fear campaigns surrounding HIV/AIDS are legendary. Had agencies backing the CIA “gay plague” been given license to market misinformation, system-believing homosexuals of the time could have easily been lulled into investing in precautionary medication.

Of course, that’s precisely what happened with AZT, duly offered and snapped up under expectations of righteous “salvation” by those in the spotlight. Yet truth behind surrounding AIDS like symptoms was already long known. They already knew AZT was a failed chemo remedy, a reflective disaster area. Why offer a known killer drug as remedy for the common cold to sections of the population unless you were planning some sort of genocide or vertical population purge? Look, I haven’t bothered to check, but without doubt the medical gestapo will have recorded a rose tinted historic account of AZT (to match Thimerosal gibber), recognising only relatively minor adverse effects in persuasion of messianic commercial withdrawal.  I do check the CDC website periodically and, thus far, administrators have failed to see purpose in listing ingredients of vaccine “preservative” Thimerosal. They should because this is a product with an onerous medical history. Wikipedia’s account is reflectively erroneous for my research. Rather than preservative, it began as an experimental cancer vaccine in the 1930’s. Use was narrow and infrequent. Per later bedpan cleaning agent reclassification, stocks were deferred to hospital sterilisation and, after a decade or more of use; authorities grudgingly delisted the product when clinicians proved a definite link to pink’s disease back in the 1960’s.

I provide a more detailed history here, but “informed” need only review details of a few samples taken from Thimerosal’s ingredients list to be clear on why product issues keep recurring. The full composition’s a big cocktail, so I’ll head straight for those crucial elements to ease reading burden. Aluminium, mercury and formaldehyde (normally used as rat poison!) are the main offenders. That “heavy metals” presence in the 2016 Italian vaccines survey is now vilified. Mentioned earlier, consequences of aluminium and mercury poisoning are well known of course. Even so, there does seem to be a parallel imperceptible theme running here. Products that don’t work in one format are routinely ushered back in for other rounds. Mercury failed as bandages preservative, so it made a less than triumphant return in surgical cleaning powder form from the 1950’s. Perhaps comparably, “popular” Victorian period tonics that didn’t make the grade were sometimes converted into household sanitising agents. Tradition holds popular soft drink Coca-Cola began life as a floor detergent.

Given this pattern and because it was so chillingly efficient, logic presumes AZT will be the killer of choice for any planned population purges or would that be unacceptably blatant? Too many for comfort may have read Jon Rappoport’s illuminating volume “AIDS Inc.” (which is available on Amazon in the paperback version). For what other reason could have “authorities” removed his WordPress gazette? Maybe I’ve jumped too many steps ahead here for palatable accord to settle. How could America, with its massive welfare dependence (emphatically mocked by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu), employ an agenda aimed at killing off needy populations huddled beneath the Statue of Liberty? Though, there is unprecedented simmering conservative anger at political leniency given to illegal invaders from Latin countries (in particular) and this might well ignite civil rebellion. We have an unlikely comparison not too far away. Contrary to popular belief, Hilter’s involvement in German political affairs wasn’t a malfunction of the system. Indeed, any genuine researcher would struggle to find a bad speech recorded by the dictator. He eloquently matched Winston Churchill word for word.

I agree that notorious published volume “Mein Kampf” (My Life) has drawn criticism and some reviews state it was “poorly written”. Nevertheless, slander permitting, content is undeniably lucid and directives abhorrently clear. Hitler did not appear to like the Jews, but the only formal promise he made was to reduce Germany’s ethnic Slavs by half. By way of background on that, there were some immigration problems after the Great War (WWI) and Slavs took the brunt of social venom. Stalin’s infamous Russian “purges” largely targeted Coptic Christians (also Slavs) leaving an estimated 70-180 million dead (depending on which account is referenced).  Iran may be the source of Hitler’s favoured “Aryan” stock, but local populations were cut in half after a 1917-19 genocide claiming 10,000,000 lives which appears to be an inconsistency (if Hitler merely acted for a much higher authority agenda). However Genome batch comparisons of non-Arabic Iranians compare well with broad stock Caucasian Russians. Other than the premeditated genocide of American Indians, there have been no other population reduction efforts in the United States,. It is worth noting that Russia, prior to Bolshevism, ticked along with majority populaces dependent on the system. Indeed statistics detailing symptomatic effects of the collapse of any food supply chain loosely base predicted “panic [buying] after 3 days” on 1917 “revolution” records.

Interestingly enough, though it hasn’t collapsed yet, the essential supply chain jarred on the back of the Coronavirus “scare”. Why so quickly if the whole situation hadn’t been engineered? Shelves weren’t restocked following the foray, yet one prominent casualty “toilet rolls” is fully manufactured locally for the domestic market. There are plenty of Australian pulp mills too. If I might be permitted to use our supermarkets as the guide stamp here, main store chain Woolworths (a subsidiary of Walmart, I believe) has indefinitely (as of writing) ceased replenishing dried pasta and rice stocks. Backup Coles, clearly feeling the pinch, have provided small selections of rices (lacking popular basmati and jasmine varieties). An unrecognised “Italian” brand of pasta is the only one available and prices (for probable inferior product) have roughly trebled.  The phenomenon did not tarnish smaller private enterprises but, as with Coles, many have attempted to exploit the market to its limit. Perhaps too early to diagnose which direction commerce will take, but the current situation bears all the hallmarks of fabrication. For my research, panic buying generally commenced much later than is being promoted. Bare shelves encouraged the main “alarm” (which rapidly spread to smaller enterprises). Absence of restocks exacerbated the situation.

Obviously when nothing was to be found in the main stores, people “bought what they could” elsewhere, in some instances besieging micro businesses.  I interviewed a Chinese speciality shop owner who “couldn’t believe” how much rice she had sold.

Salesmen are necessary but expensive, so at times of general financial uncertainty or hardship that section of the job market retracts. Since significant drops after the 2007 “Grand Financial Crisis”, numbers have never bounced back to prior levels (or that’s my layman’s view). Personally, as one of the few honest business development professionals, my bleak employment period between 2010 and 2016 suffering “kangaroo starts” ever since, affirms the trend. Before Coronavirus went public, the Australia job market was in notable trouble. Now it is fair to say it has flopped. Labour buoyancy reflects financial optimism. Yet, since the demise of the gold standard (when promises no longer required backing), money has more or less entered the realms of fantasy (polite word for fiction). Prior to deregistration of constitutional monarchy (kings must remain accountable or face the wrath of the people, whereas governments risk only loss of votes) global funds were, without exception, sponsored by various royal exchequers. Now via tenuous arrangements with a worldwide body called “The Federal Reserve”, united governments borrow money from a cartel of international bankers. Each of these recognised governments is a registered, publically listed corporation. Given the fictitious status of money, if the plan is to ultimately “start afresh” (following the current state of theoretical chaos resulting from decades lacking transparency), simultaneously bankrupting every corporation (which would include government itself) is the one way change could be fairly engineered. Disbanded trading would require swift, radical measures approximating remedy (so as not to critically implode commerce, which theoretically transcends corporate edict). The well-established (CIA backed?) electronic platform Bitcoin might act as an effective interim solution, whereby voluntary assets could be reappraised and compensated on a “case by case” basis. A very visible queue of rebellious economists has anticipated an imminent universal currency meltdown for as long as I have been monitoring international politics. The manner these politics have unravelled in relation to Coronavirus projects “anything could happen right now”. Will supermarkets lay off staff due to shrinking revenues? Will stunted incomes promise even further shrinkage? Such occurrences in the United States would likely escalate into emergency government under President Trump (who’s reached the unlikely heights of issuing more faux pas’ than George Bush Junior) for a very long time.

Though my conclusions will determine Coronavirus is one of many staged civil interruptions to come, economic restructure from corporate ashes, ushering in standardised electronic money, will probably materialise as the “final gambit”. Moves to keep Trump (angel of death?) indefinitely in power are already being made, such as unrestricted relaxation of environmental protection protocols (which now will no longer be “enforced”). Have “the powers” that supposedly work in support of majority populations’ best interests totally lost their faculties with this measure? Pollution of the environment causes all viruses, including Coronavirus (if it exists, but more on that later), so shouldn’t relevant rules be tightened? On that point, once again, if it exists, from where did Coronavirus originate? Considering it is a global complaint, causal emissions must have percolated from “something” new that is “seen everywhere”.  The only two [publicised] recent “changes” that could feasibly (with stretched imaginations) fit the criteria are the “5G network” (I will focus on this “bombshell” in conclusions) and “Chemtrails”. Evidence says otherwise. Evidence points to fraud, but we shouldn’t ever be tempted to draw rash conclusions. We need to tirelessly sniff out possible worthy catalysts.

Legionnaire’s Disease is one such example as it provides a potential “common dominator” for all viruses. Not following traditional idiopathic etiquette, cause for this remarkable air-conditioning sponsored illness is known. Symptoms vitally not dissimilar to rabies, valiant research discovered microbes in the ground were active disease agents (I can’t say for certain whether these congregate to form fungal Legionella). Reflective protocols assure construction is now at “safe distances” from air cooling towers, but maybe that’s all changed under Trump’s toothless EPA.  There are many other alien complaints that have “sprung up” in recent times. Symptoms for HIV, Ebola, SARS, all those bird flus, swine flu and anything else I have missed do proffer commonality. All “epidemic” viruses of modern times have initially manifested as the common cold. Here we reach a focal junction. Common cold in examples highlighted evolves into something very nasty. However, I haven’t been able to ascertain whether critical escalations and complications (sometimes leading to death) happened before or after “medications” were administered.  We know categorically (thanks in part to revelations from clued up investigative reporter Jon Rappoport that early HIV “sufferers” were deliberately encouraged to take AZT in remedy of complaint. That medication causes AIDS. I find no argument to counter the plain fact AZT was administered to act as agent of death and I will have more to say on the implications, so stay tuned! To qualify, HIV, the illness, was never life threatening.

Extensive efforts to come to terms with likely sedition were eventually rewarded. It seems there are some Africans with good reason to believe the most recent “outbreak” of Ebola (affectionately paraphrased as “Ebollox” in grapevine communications) was entirely the fault of malignant medications given out to gullible people seeking solace for regular influenza.  If this is true, unlike drawn out cancers generated by AZT, whatever poison is being used does the job quickly, in maybe a few days. Were medication to be drafted in as “weapons of sorts” at some juncture, given the alleged prognosis, Ebola style treatments would be extraordinarily effective. So, that in mind, I think it is worth putting some more hypotheticals to the test. Is there corporate will to discriminately kill human beings? In answer, though no direct campaigns are visible, academia has warned of the potentially tragic effects of population overgrowth. Tradition holds Bill Gates father was a prominent supporter of the eugenics movement, but he’s not the only one by a long chalk. Doubtlessly political Media hysteria against “paedophilia” is one prong of the eugenics strategy. Sterilisation of branded populations has been historical ordained many times past. Concentrated efforts against Latin American nations are the tip of a giant iceberg. Then there is that strange remark Henry Kissinger made. What did he mean by “useless eaters”?

We have already witnessed carnage left by HIV/AIDS and Ebola, so that seems the best place to commence my hypothetical investigation. HIV was advertised, more or less from onset, as a sexual plague. Marketing fear campaigns targeted promiscuity.  Later the designer catchphrase “gay plague” came into being. Medias glibly informed audiences that it was believed that the plague had originated from Africa and scientists had almost pinpointed origins (which was an outright lie). In conjunction, they informed audiences, “the condition has been around for hundreds of years and is transmitted by green monkeys”. Vague on precisely how it was transmitted, we of course now understand polio vaccine serums were grown in the kidneys (which filter the blood) of chimpanzees and green monkeys and that is how scientists “identified” the precise origins of HIV. Though that bad vaccine was withdrawn from use against immunisation of Western populations, Africans weren’t so lucky. Perhaps lucrative IMF grants were offered as incentive to obedient nations, but it appears a relatively high percentage of contemporary African peoples had been given doses of HIV. HIV itself marked an ape’s [bodily] reaction to ever present industrial atmospheric pollution.

Medias didn’t stop at their own waffle on the subject. No, they enlisted the help of as many gay celebrities as they could muster. America’s Roc Hudson, Liberace, Britain’s Freddy Mercury and Kenny Everett all played their parts for the death rattle. They even paraded the great Cuban classical concert pianist Jorge Bolet for the “arts”. Obviously, certain luminaries were astute enough to slip the net, such as Sir Elton John, but many fell for the bullshit. How might that relate to Coronavirus? Well, we now have Royal Prince Charles who apparently “tested positive” to the virus. The “cause” must be desperate. Predictably recovered “virus survivor” British Prime Minister Boris Johnson had been rushed to intensive care on cue. Lights, camera, action! Now that’s leading by example, but more on those royal connections, in particular, I think is necessary here. It would be fair to say that, after Epstein, the fallout from allegations against Prince Andrew has rocked the British Royal Family. Whilst CIA asset Cathy O’Brien’s accusations were a near identically copy, provisioning a twenty year old “smear campaign” (which Wikipedia describes as “conspiracy theories”) against the Bushes, Medias seem to feel there is some truth in content this time round. In light of this and the record of Camilla Parker-Bowles’ promise that “royals will go to any lengths to support each other”, is the British Royal Family vulnerable enough to be blackmailed to take the heat off Prince Andrew? Moreover were the Bushes and Clintons being “held over a barrel” while in power? Either way, we can already see enlisting of unpaid (sic) B-grade celebrities “who wouldn’t lie about it” to push Coronavirus “credibility” over the line.

So where does Ebola fit into this hypothetical puzzle? Let us begin by considering possible parallels with Gulf War Syndrome. I have read estimates of anywhere from 30,000 to 300,000 veterans dying as a result of medications administered to protect against Saddam Hussein’s theoretical biological and chemical weapons. Historic account has not been able credibly back the theory, which is deemed erroneous, but that is beside the by. Drilling down and looking at related “causes of death”, many veterans appear to have succumbed to AIDS-like symptoms. The real reason (ignoring an alleged hand written confession paraded by certain vexatious Medias) Timothy McVeigh “attempted to” attack Oklahoma (note: according to prosecution data never used at the trial, experts determined a van full of explosives “at most” might have “broken a few windows”) was because of the manner veterans were treated up to and beyond their pharmaceutically sanctioned deaths. For the best of my research it seems a canopy of different types of drugs were able to induce AIDS-like symptoms, so if products like AZT were withdrawn to satisfy “public outcry”, we can ascertain there is a big queue of other notable offenders to bring in as replacements. A deeper question hovers over Gulf War Syndrome though. Is the condition a response to atmospheric or medical damage of troops? I haven’t formally found the answer to that one yet. Nevertheless, we have learned there are many, many options available for mitigated medical attacks on humanity. America’s “healthcare” system drugs kill anywhere between 100,000 and 2,000,000 annually (depending on which reports you refer to).

Whichever is correct, healthcare has proven far more effective at disposing of “useless eaters” than war.

I mentioned earlier that Ebola takes but a few days (at best) to finish off its victim compared to months of agony under the spell of AIDS. This is important for two main reasons. If the medical solution itself is the cause of Ebola (as some astute Africans swear), then active agent used must be different compared against drugs that trigger AIDS-like symptoms (supposedly caused by HIV). In addition, humanity could be disposed of very quickly was the desire for it to be so. So how does configured genocide relate to Ebola? After reviewing supporting background information carefully, there is enough inconsistency surrounding the history of the disease (if it is one) to raise alarm bells. Folklore attributing the “virus” dates back to 1976 when a new illness heralded from the Ebola River (which runs along the Republic of Congo). Western analysed and tabled symptoms did not come to light until 1989. On this point, I wrote an article a few years ago that highlighted a Council of Rome (the powerful masonic body) public meeting in New York. Some educated non-members attended and one of those reported what he had witnessed to select alternative Medias (mainstream concerns certainly wouldn’t want anything to do with him). The date of the event was sometime in 1988 and one of the startling subjects for open discussion (and organisers even put out to audience attendees for “ideas”) was the “best way to eradicate” giant chunks of the human population at large. Unsurprisingly, contamination of medications (or vaccines) was one of the popular responses.

Short of succumbing to Media hype over science hysteria, I am not going to be personally convinced there was a common connection between 1976 and 1989 Ebola. Origins of the “disease” come across as so tenuously vague; data reads in the same manner deliberate science dishonesty spread about HIV did. If one was forced to take positions on things, I suppose duly diligent could be persuaded the closest approximation to relative truth (based on findings in the public domain) is Ebola “may” be a bona fide disease, but probably isn’t and genuine origins are either concealed or alien. Back in 1983 or 1984 America’s State of Georgia received a gift from an anonymous (or so tradition upholds) donor. It is a large monument affectionately known as the “Guide Stones” which list a series of benchmarked future objective laws (?). The “law” that raises most eyebrows is “global populations shall not exceed 500,000,000” (or words to the effect). 1984 was the year autism was first independently categorised (but more on that in due course). 1985 saw the emergence of brand new HIV/AIDS. 1989 “the great threat” Ebola comes along (after never being witnessed prior in that format). It has all happened too quickly for there not to be a “common denominator”. Ever since we’ve had “waves” of designer illnesses leading up to ultra-critical reissued Coronavirus (if we believe the “experts”). The idea establishing Earth’s optimum human population at no greater than 500,000,000 is by no means unique. Swiss cult volunteers (who assert they are advised by extra-terrestrial Pleiadians) under Wikipedia friend (not branded a “nutter”, odd don’t you think?) Billy Meier included matching doctrine in their manifesto years before the Georgia Guide Stones were erected.

Here’s the clincher. According to statisticians, our global populations are snowballing at an unstoppably rapid rate. Such is the momentum a 10,000,000,000 milestone can’t be too far off. Allowing for big margins of error in social censuses, we may be closer to target today than is popularly recognised.  Thinking of possible common denominators I’m keeping an eye out for, the milestone would make a plausible candidate. Whether Ebola is a disease or something exacerbated by medications, the fact remains that official survival rates of sufferers are listed at an ominous 5% (last time I checked). It doesn’t take a degree qualified mathematician to join the dots here. Any “fool” can punch figures into a calculator to come up with 5% of 10,000,000,000 makes 500,000,000. And what a coincidence, for that was the magic number those Freie Interessengemeinschaft fur Grenz und Geistwswissenschaften und Ufologiestudien Guide Stones insist on. Actually, 500,000,000 is a maximum, so I feel sure whoever drafted the demand would sit more comfortably at 300-400,000,000 ideal levels. The expression “cast in stone” heralds from Biblical times, when “Laws of God” were frozen in time, tablet versions permanently preserved in granite. God’s demands were not open to negotiation (as is the case with everything today), by the way. Thus, if comparable metaphor applies to the Guide Stones, ensconced doctrine should be taken seriously. If conspiracy theories can be used to sink a prince, how much more power might be yielded by arcane dogma?

After processing the figures, leaving gossip for the tabloids, facts compel me to acknowledge there is a giant stumbling block inhibiting my hypothetical global purge of humanity. That said, in the course of my research, I comprehend why Victorian Benjamin Disraeli (according to Mark Twain) coined the phrase “there are lies, damned lies and then there are statistics”. My many and various attempts devoted to ascertaining the global death toll have failed to source anything concrete. No one seems to be able to provide adequate authority assessments on the subject. Annually death numbers probably range between 50,000,000 and 60,000,000 currently or that is as close as I can approximate. To me the amount seems a lot to deal with in one hit. On reflection, let us consider civil engineering’s radical but compelling response to propaganda that asserts 6.000.000 Jews perished under Hitler’s holocaust. Facts determine it would have taken too long to process bodies using standard facilities available (timeline estimates running to decades). Therefore, applying identical principle to the current hypothetical, if a global inoculation program was designated to kill all “useless eaters” in a few days, dead could not be treated effectively (criticism addressing poor infrastructure supplied to the 2005 New Orleans flood disaster is apt here). Resulting lack of sanitation would likely kill off decent percentages of “survivors” to add to the fray. I am unable to conjure any satisfactory scenarios that might justify “saving” present day mortuary workers from medical attack. Death rate figures I provided before were annual. Over a week, let us say 1,000.000 dead are processed globally in normal circumstances. Under terms of outlined hypothetical biological warfare, numbers just rose to 6,500,000,000 or more. That is a multiplier of 6,500 x current burden, and with only 5% of trained mortuary workers (of current levels) left to deal with the workload, unless “the powers” have gone totally bonkers, there is going to be no blitzkrieg medical attack on the people.

So, on the presumption that a radical mass poisoning campaign is not going to be implemented, why all the dry run plagues leading up to Coronavirus? Before I discuss associated multiple objectives, it is necessary to outline why, specifically, Coronavirus was chosen to mark the current campaign (which might end on May Day or this is what the government of Thailand suggested before imposing tyranny for another month). That original 1918 occurrence (blaming the sun “as cause”) offers no discernible link to our current “crisis”. Therefore, choice of name is intriguing unless it is code. Considering this, to any hardened political investigator potential meanings [of coded messages] are straightforward. The “sun” (corona) represents a form of Babylonian worship which was later converted into Catholicism (via a tributary of ancient Roman cult Sol Invictus). Embroiled symbolism here potentially covers a number of bases, but most likely refers to the powerful masonic order Babylonian Brotherhood that pays homage to sun God Ra. Corona (implying sun dedicated) positioned behind “virus” is corrupted in context, this duplicity is not malicious. No, it is a corruption with aims to uphold interests of the “Greater Good”. In other words Coronavirus is effectively a vengeance campaign for the Babylonian Brotherhood. “Self-proclaimed” Hebrew dissident Roy Tov favours the psy-op as preferred Pharisaic modus operandi. Lack of sick or dead under terms of pandemic, voracity of marketing efforts generating unpopular commercial side effects (such supermarket pricing games, restaurant closures), casual attitudes towards absurd austerity overwhelmingly confirms Coronavirus is an indisputable psy-op, regardless if its medical viability.

That considered, I am less inclined to factor in aggressive physical Babylonian Brotherhood involvement here, although stark connection between organised Vatican and United Nations “wellness” (sic) is demonstrably clear. Israel (home of the Pharisees) can be broken into “El”, “Ra” and “Is(is)”. Whilst information may appear inconsequential to these discussions on face value, one insightful satirical interpretation of meaning of the trio combination presents as follows. Simply, light and dark conspire to pull the wool over Gods eyes (expanding the metaphor, sheep, strangely, can be divided as lambs of God and sheeple). Proverbially, light signifies “knowingness” (logos) and darkness “ignorance” (scotia). Thus, per this deceitful tradition, knowingness may exploit ignorance and there is nothing God can do about it. Correspondingly, I doubt that the Jewish Passover was as described or even happened at the biblical location (Egypt) advertised. Does not Lambs blood potentially signify Chosen Ones’ (lambs of God) genetics? Of course “blood” is a term that might be also used to field genocide targets. In this respect, maligned intentions are sometimes so cleverly concealed, blemished celebratory historic accounts remain unaltered. An angel is a saviour, but angels of death are ones who masquerade as saviours. Remembering the exploited ignorance theme, under cover darkness is metaphor that denotes the commonest flaw of mankind: “time poor”, opinionated brethren too busy to commit to life lessons. Respectively, is it possible to adequately stir belief in a fictitious plague well enough that offerings of poison potion remedies are eagerly snapped up by flustered hypochondriacs? In tune with the scenario, toxins attack the blood, so protection offered to lambs of God would either be as a different type of potion or perhaps nothing at all (let us presume death angels were able to skip marked dwelling houses cunningly enough to avoid suspicious neighbours).

Were ancient peoples any different to our modern day lambs to the slaughter?

In short, could Coronavirus be something akin to the plague that sponsored the “Passover” all that time ago? As an intriguing side point, Persia/Iran offers a more ideal location for the Passover than Egypt, because prophecy bound Pharisees knew it was Magog that must fall to allow global totalitarian succession. Cunning fabrication is the surest means to ensure biblical prophecy comes to pass. Thinking about what’s happening today, I recall something about multiple plagues (HIV, Ebola, SARS, bird flu et al) paving the route to Scriptural peace on Earth, or was that Armageddon? Are the recent (deliberately laser ignited) devastating bushfires perceived to be symbolic holocausts or “mini-Armageddons” (to quote Benjamin Netanyahu)? There have been associated engineered historic conflicts as well. Two great wars have done nothing to dent human population expansion and, let’s be frank here; Vietnam marks the “death of honour”. No military campaign since has supported so much mutiny and dereliction of duty. Vietnam is the milestone reflecting a new era of irresponsibility. Regardless of this, war has proven an insufficient population reduction measure. People have simply been able to replicate too fast for the angel of death to keep pace. Now, given our staggering current population count, to adequately process numbers of dead bodies much faster than new crops are filtered into the system would place a strain on infrastructures. Sure, the mortuary business could expand, but not to the required levels. So, my good news is the “powers” do not plan to launch a globe wide holocaust, although tactical Armageddon might suffice if it was deemed feasible (note: underground bases were constructed as precursor to a zany formularised “alien assisted” gas attack, however living accommodations could not be sealed well enough to protect inhabitants long term). In practicality, there is a sole tenable solution to the population expansion problem. Great numbers of people must and will be sterilised. Attempts to encourage volunteers through contraception programs have not had the desired results and that draconian Chinese “one child” policy didn’t produce the goods either.

Sterilisation of populations at large could be actioned by either of two fundamental approaches. Sci-fi scale maybe, but it would be possible to contaminate breathable atmospheres serving major civil centres. Such ventures may well backfire though as gas unhelpfully tends not to discriminate between lambs of god and sheeple. Actually, another of those anti-Jewish holocaust arguments cites potentially fatal gas leaks. Now, to normal system-brainwashed folks the notion of alien assisted attack might come across as rather unbelievable. Some may go as far to enquire where evidence of universal atmosphere contamination or other ungodly practices have eventuated. Factoring the paranormal nature of machinations, it is possible effects are subtle. Therefore, in response to scepticism, though I lack anything cast iron to pinpoint and nothing obviously specific has been publicised (as far as I’m aware), there has been a miraculous human transformation in recent times. How recent is open to debate but change does coincide with the indigo child phenomenon. I don’t by any means suggest people have radically moved opinions as a consequence, but everyone is more open to investigating the truth in their limited capacity than they ever have been before. I suppose there is more uncertainty now as a consequence. Some even place faith in belief that the shift is “evidence” of ascension, but I feel the more profitable explanation is “atmospheric intervention”. You would have thought the “powers” would have wanted to test the scope of alien technologies before employing them “for real”, ideally something people wouldn’t notice as out-of-the-ordinary.

Moving away from subtle, there is also at least one academic paper recommending that catastrophic Christmas 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami was engineered and, as such, an extra-terrestrial sponsored brainchild. Technical information provides detail theorising “unknowns” helped “detonate” a Sumatran underwater volcano to trigger the tsunami. Regardless of considered merit of alien sponsored atmospheric attacks, any “gambit” wouldn’t work when applied to mass sterilisation anyway. That leaves the medical option. According to Wikipedia “there is no ‘working’ sterilization pill”. I need to qualify academia’s statement. There is no known sterilisation pill, whereas an experimental drug is available that is believed to permanently sterilise humans [to the best of my information] without inducing other noteworthy side effects that might draw attention to its purpose. Could authorities “keep a lid” on wide use of invalid medications of this genre? To answer that we only need to refer to Thimerosal’s unjustified use in vaccines. Several excellent physicians (cut free of mainstream propaganda) have joined the eloquent Dr Andrew Wakefield, vigilantly persuaded to publically assert that “vaccines” are the cause of autism, but they are still relative “lone wolves” in the scheme of things. Wider populations are blissfully unaware of serious studies that determine very small amounts of aluminium may well attack the brain sufficiently to cause the effect (although other proponents argue mercury is detracting agent). Either way, Thimerosal contains both elements and predicable “vagueness” over its specific dates of usage in vaccines haunts mainstream “accountability”, thus obscuring definite timeline connections. As far as I can ascertain, the preservative may have undergone limited beta-testing from the mid 1980’s, but mass use began from 1989. Parent of severely autistic child, Robert De Niro’s 2016 video acknowledgement of the preservative mostly fell on deaf ears.

Historically, by the mid to late 1990’s large medical producers informally began to panic. Merck (manufacturers of MMR) consequentially commissioned a small team of scientists to test their vaccines with view to identifying connections with autism in African Americans (after they had presumably received complaints). William W. Thompson did find a link and Merck responded by asking him to destroy all data. Obviously, if there had been no discernible link, they would have published findings (and gloated about them to all and sundry). Thompson (I understand) had sufficient data to make analysis by 2001 but sat on the secret for fifteen years. Indeed the only reason he came out of the closet swinging sometime around 2015 or 2016 is because Merck attempted to fire him (or that’s the version of events I have been given). His threatened Media exposure of their mutual “secret” was, let’s face it, blackmail. Undeniable culprit, Eli Lily’s Thimerosal (the one film actor Robert De Niro singled out) is ultimately safeguarded below despicable double standards that define “common practices”. Medical producers deliberately cultivate contaminated products and their aligned unscrupulous scientists care nothing about the consequences. They care only about their own highly prized skins. Practicing doctors, burdened with enormous itineraries, are taught next to nothing about vaccine engineering. Therefore, before I go into product ingredient labelling, a little more history on the subject of medicine seems pertinent here.

Ever since the Catholic Church purged as many “witches” who could really cure illness as they could lay hands on (via successive inquisition waves), a void in respectful true medicine was left in their wake. Even so, it wasn’t too long before corporate healthcare turned up with infinite varieties of tonics (some based on Macbeth remedies), to be flogged by street corner merchants. These mixed tonics disappeared with the arrival of pharmaceutical cartels that imposed an industrial medicine regime fit for an industrial era. Dual mainstream healthcare options (to either poison or butcher) are today’s legacy. Alternative “choices”, such as acupuncture and faith healing, cast a pall over motivated discussions between inside professionals. Yet the greatest fear of the industrialist cartel is naturopathy, because this witch mimicking science is their greatest threat. Dr Robert Morse runs his cancer gauntlet well in the face of authority, but It came as no surprise to me when I learned that dozens of strategic American naturopaths had been reported as “dying in mysterious circumstances” over a relatively short space of time. More relevant to this article, figures in excess of 100 unexpected deaths of microbiologists were recorded in the 2000’s.

Were we to consider that Merck’s corrupt William W. Thompson was the exception rather than “the rule”, purges of scientists deemed risks to the progress of flawed medicine would be justified by maligned corporate interests. Key pharmaceutical “watchdog” CDC is a commercial operation. Putting them in charge of medical authenticity is akin appointing the local robber as your friendly bank manager. Old Pharisee trick of replacing all key decision makers with their own people appears to have infected healthcare in respect to microbiology. As an additional safeguard against rebellion, individual scientists might not necessarily be privy to which branded medications were fruits of their efforts. Thus, was a sterilisation serum or pill to be cultivated and “shelved”, nothing would hinder any senior stakeholder efforts towards reverse allocation. CEO of Merck Vaccines doesn’t care about knowledge of the known effects of Thimerosal in MMR, so It seems to me as though the higher up the ladder you ascend, the more the black heart of corrupt practices is exposed.

So, get used to the idea that forces of evil can masquerade product that enables their vicious agenda, in this case the potential sterilisation of the larger part of humanity under guise of “vaccination protection” against a future COVID-19 or some other bogus excuse.

I have had the opportunity to interview many common people about their opinions on Coronavirus. Only one had actually heard of the antibody test and none were able to tell the differences between viruses and bacterial diseases. So we are off to a bad start. Given the sensational title of this essay, some may be wondering why I termed Coronavirus “Simpsons’ Coronavirus”. To be honest, the influenza may as well be called Simpsons’ virus, but that would muck up masonic posterity. Let us never forget the 1918 version was blamed on the sun at a time when beach recreational needs may have hindered ambitions of able veterans designated to return to the workforce (or, to coin my affectionate pet name, slave-place). Odd too that Dean Koontz’ novel featuring biological warfare agent Wuhan 400 was published in 1981 (note: George Orwell published “1984” in 1948, the year Israel came into being again), but before I elaborate on how “cover story” viruses are transmitted (as we already now know all of them are caused by pollution), it is worth evaluating why popular primetime cartoon shows irregularly “predict” feature historic moments well ahead of time. The specific Simpsons episode I have been referring to, first aired in 1993, did aptly forecast US nationwide “panic” with corresponding run on food and other essentials. However, I am not sure whether mass hoarding in reality is as has been described by current “News” outlets. If anything The Simpsons’ lampoons “Faux News” (fantasy) reporting well, but corresponding truth suffers a horrible limp. I mean, that sensational computer glitch apparently affecting international trade sounds like a corny excuse to me.

I am aware of the Brad Pitt movie a couple of years back too, but Simpsons’ producers’ soothsaying does not stop at Coronavirus. In the 1980’s any notion of aristocratic “wide boy” Trump even making an appearance as a presidential candidate would have been unthinkable; the ultimate satire, yet, there he was on the Simpsons and now here he is, current president of the United States. Family Guy “divined” the Boston Bombing hoax.  And, yes it was a hoax unless the Gulf War veteran used as central figure had managed to grow back the legs he lost in Iraq, but don’t blame him. He’s done well out of it. Last time I checked, his personal charity had raised $1,000,000. Myself not believing in miracles, I proffer alternative reasoning as explanation for crystal ball cartoon programming. There is an expression used in sales called “priming”. The term is coined by executives explaining how they “set up” buyer expectations. Popular cartoons could be similarly used to prime audience expectations. “Oh, I already knew Trump was running for President. That’s not untoward. Now where did I hear that before?” Why did CIA personnel allegedly appear on the set of that cheesy Ebola movie (and Dustin Hoffmann didn’t save it, trust me) unless they anticipated “political” implications with respective content?

Use of celebrities in HIV/AIDS propaganda campaigns has already discussed, but I didn’t cover theories on how disease is transmitted. Back then, Princess Di was an angel of mercy doing all her wonderful work for “charities” until she was bumped off under suppressed orders of Prince Charles and the “royal household” (according to the Fayed family, at least). Are we witnessing karmic effect in motion? Prince Charles, of course, is the possible star “victim” of the current crisis (that is until influential Boris Johnson took the baton). I’ll offer odds of a million to the penny, there’ll be a royal comeback. Will the charade expand before cameras focused on Charles in the nick of time, providing him and many supporting cronies the opportunity to profoundly demonstrate everything’s okay just as it was with dear ol’ Boris? I see a planned fly on the wall series documenting every step of his medical recovery focusing on good vaccine “magic potions” all the while (reinforcing the green light approving mandatory mass sterilisation). Stretching my memory back, I recall Princess Di emphatically shaking an AIDS patient’s hand to prove it was “safe” to do so. But why would she need to do that for TV? In answer, I recommend everyone review Dustin Hoffmann’s valiant efforts to save the un-saveable. That awful Ebola movie he starred in “debated” prospects of airborne infections. Though conclusions, I vaguely recall, sort of left the question “open”, in science-speak any mention is a definite “no-no” (Dr Judy Mikovits is adamant about that). That’s why Princess Di, bless her heart, was drafted in to prove HIV/AIDS couldn’t be aerially transmitted. Ebola “in movie speak” was granted license to be passed from animal to human and then, human to human. We now know why everyone is obliged to heed the 1.5 metres social distancing nonsense associated with stemming the “spread” of (non-existent?) Coronavirus. Movie-land prepared us for the drill long ago. Major hidden purpose behind Princess Di’s antics should be as plain as day by now, but I’ll spell it out anyway.

The whole frickin’ agenda driving the virus ruse is to obscure the fact that industrialist pollution causes all illness that isn’t the fault of “parasites”, bacteria, fungi or mental problems. Viruses are not passed from animal to human and then on to other humans, but illusory science has successfully beguiled great and small into “believing” this is so. If “bird flu” is a genuine complaint, then logic persuades it is caused by vapour from relevant faecal waste. Are conglomerate chicken farms a relatively recent idea? In China and India, in particular, burgeoning populations have had the consequence of converging to such an extent their existence has conflicted with nature. Do viruses amount to side effects from this newly over impacted environment? Another possibility is generation of viruses didn’t happen overnight. Atmospheric particles may accumulate over decades or more, gradually building up to reach “critical mass”. Has the globe’s atmosphere already been “tipped” and that is why we are observing so many unheard of disease outcomes today? On this front, Suzy Hansen (a professed alien abductee) provides some illuminating insight in her first book, “The Dual Soul Connection”.

Industrial manufacturing is by no means the only mass polluter. The war machine arguably creates more havoc than all other detractors. Gulf War Syndrome is but one consequence. Iraqi cancer statistics went off the scale from the 1990’s onwards (for which Michael Parenti attributes President Clinton’s silent round the clock bombings of infrastructures as “culprit”), but Israel’s cancer rate has risen by 10% as well. World War One produced Coronavirus, but there were other less familiar complaints. It is estimated that millions died of tuberculosis in German World War Two concentration camps, but was it a real condition or were illnesses resulting from some unknown battle generated virus that produced tuberculosis-like symptoms (one 1990’s doctor described Ebola like tuberculosis on steroids)? I have highlighted many times before that arguably phoney Jewish “holocaust” (fast tracking recreation of Israel after Eisenhower’s laboured appeals) wallpapers over common issues that haunt most concentration camps. Miraculous success of placebo medications (something I’ll delve into in more detail later) confirms the power of the mind. In a sense concentration camps amply demonstrate the reverse quality.

Were any morals to be garnered as a consequence, “belief in success” undeniably aids cures, whereas “hopeless despair” can kill without remorse.

But there is more to it than that. Earlier in this article I stated human to human viral transfer would be deemed “ironically preposterous if the truth was known”. Truth sometimes appears stranger than fiction and this is one of those times. Living bodies are intrinsically connected via an invisible web. Related high energy emissions have been recognised by certain sciences. Contributing symptoms include chakras, kundalini and ectoplasm. I wrote an article about something called the “Tamarian” at my other website. In association scholars of ancient Atlantis determined everything that exists within our reality bandwidth (which perhaps extends to other dimensional windows) is interconnected via the quantum layer. Prehistoric knowledge is to some degree corroborated by the original designers of nuclear fusion who believed (prior to trials) the chain reaction “might collapse all matter”. That didn’t happen of course because a nuclear reaction creates an implosion which “blister seals” at source. We touched on social distancing a while back. I suggest 10,000 light years apart should be sufficient to guarantee “safety”. Unlikely clues to this reasoning can be found in horology, which is deeply misunderstood even by those that practice it.

Millions of years ago, all planets in Earth’s local vicinity were inhabited, but most had internal populations. In fact very few planets support external life, maybe around 50 in this universe, so it is remarkable that Earth, Mars and a small strip of land along Mercury’s equator have cultivated civilisations in such close proximity. Per these most ancient times, mass populaces had very little variance in character. If one societal member was aggressive, all members were aggressive. If one was a dreamer, so were the rest. Comparably, humanity is strongly diverse, arguably due to our hybrid status (symbolised by the twelve tribes of Israel). Every conscious being is metaphysically attached via the Tamarian at higher frequencies than mundane life. Spiritual beings develop energy vortices that are similar in format to the human kundalini. Indeed there are compelling theses supporting the idea, due to their genetic compatibility, that so-called “reptilian” higher entities are able to identify any specific kundalini and lock-on. Energy pulses don’t end at the body extremities or just beyond, No, they pulse right out to deep space. Thus, close by planets are proverbial steps on the way. Excessive quantities of similarly matched signals which collectively “group” will influence inhabitants of other planets “on route”. Horologists have inherited that legacy. “We are coming into the Mars aspect” literally means “this will be a period of Martian domination”.

Introducing SARS, I briefly referenced the fine work of Dr Bruce Lipton. He has revolutionised science opinion on how cells “work”, of course. Though findings show up as being predictably flawed, if truth was made an active benchmark, science has navigated perilously close to correctness along Lipton’s course. Tests done by Russian scientists to influence development of embryos somewhat affirm opinions. Using specific microwave frequencies, they were able to convince the foetal version of one creature to develop into a different species along valid birthed genetic tracts. I forget the examples of actual creatures involved, but, shall we say an assisted frog was able to develop into a snake whilst retaining parental features. There is a point to be made here and that is a body’s energy network interrogates its “environment” to instruct cells how to develop; a fact Lipton emphasises. Spiritual beings branch the phenomenon out to the emotional level, so if you (an emotional being) are surrounded by people who “feel down”, you will become depressed too. Women have been known to synchronise menstrual cycles. Therefore, equally, if everyone in the office comes down with flu, in all likelihood, you will as well. That is not through cause of “catching a disease”. Quite the reverse, instead your energy field reads “the environment” as sick, so it follows natural protocol. In short, all diseases at their root are effects of the mind, which proposes the great paradox. Most despised of all by mainstreamers, “faith healing” is the only valid form of medication. Confirming theory, many higher “alien” entities exclusively rely on energy systems to heal, assisted with various technologies (humorously spoofed by Star Trek’s Dr McCoy). Energy is used to fortify belief, so it follows placebo medications and Voodoo (genus of psy-op) work off the same basic principle; one for the positive, the other negative.

Though taking radically different exploratory routes to me, other alternative journalists have reached identical conclusions over this pandemic. In summary COVID-19, they determine, is common influenza. Indeed, early scare campaigns were run primarily in Europe with greatest numbers of dead coming out of Northern Italy (holding a concentration of Slavic populations – remembering Hitler’s promise). Italy had just gone through a program of mandatory vaccinations and this may or may not have had a bearing on figures. Did anyone check? The timing of the “outbreak” conveniently corresponded with European flu season, but even on the other side of the world “changes in weather” will induce increases in flu-like illnesses.  China and partnering slackly regulated Asian nations appear to suffer ongoing effects of pollution (historically London’s bronchitis contagion receded with the smog).  If I might reference Australia’s serious “commitment” to saving humanity here, whereas limited numbers of formal viral identifications exist, in “preparation” for disaster, tens of thousands of beds have been requisitioned across various hospitals. There would be some very red political faces if those dedicated wards weren’t filled to capacity. Presumably at least some other nations have followed suit.

For those that have made it this far, I had planned to embed a video treat, but unfortunately, after numerous web scrapes, YouTube yielded only one video (in German) that partially confirmed the virus/pollution connection. New York Times champion Dr Anthony Gauci (ex. mentor of Judy Mikovits and one of the prats behind the old de-funked HIV/AIDS blueprint) is “everywhere” unfortunately, but I’d like to hotlink this interesting podcast from a qualified doctor who helpfully puts my conclusions “in perspective”.

After that any doubt over COVID’19’s “status” should have evaporated. Whether there is any transparent basis to the attached malicious psy-op/misdirection campaign remains to be discerned. The manner “panic buying” was ill-described by mass Medias definitely affirms the dishonesty. In fact, lack of product on shelves is more the result of sabotaged supply chains than consumer greed. How is it when all residential toilet paper rolls are manufactured in Australia, shelves failed to have been replenished after the alleged buying frenzy? Did Australians use up all warehoused back up supply too? Subsequent rationing measures imposed were something akin to shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. No, it is obvious the “powers” intended to punish those who didn’t play along with their game, “hoarding on queue” and that is one reason why they didn’t replenished stocks. The other observed expectation was, when the shelves were noticeably emptying, some did react stupidly by purchasing as much as they could lay their hands on, but the main issue had always been the “broken” supply chain. Devastating effects of throttled supply is best remembered from 1870 Siege of Paris, but there are numerous other historic examples.  I know of no major supply chain breakdown that wasn’t politically engineered.

Thusly, ancient Greeks offered punishment of death to offenders.

Viruses are the evidence demonstrating how body cells deal with toxicity. Louis Pasteur knew this, because it was what his teacher (Bechamp) had taught him. His fabled deathbed recantation was never going to change history. Mainstreamers don’t remember it at all, so germs were eventually destined to morph into viruses. Was 1918 Coronavirus the earliest one on record? Not so this time, terminology first appearing about 1892, connected with tobacco I believe, but perhaps a fuller discovery tour would make an interesting future research project. Germs, as with viruses, are a very much unknown quantity. Pedestrian and scientist alike can only assume they are there by observing destructive symptoms; each telling a sorry tale. Yet there are clear clues apparent. Bacteria and fungi are never “caught in the act”, but their presence at the scene of the crime provides a precise indicator as to cause of problem. Using identical premises, logic promotes pig faeces as the cause of swine flu, but here we branch away from viewable bacteria/fungi. Instead a body’s vanguard protection coats all invading micro-particles with biological gloop (which acts as marker), so science will never uncover obscured hard evidence short of dissecting ambient matter. I doubt fine dust from asbestos that contaminates the lungs of breathers has been isolated, but symptoms highlight the staring culprit. Does not asbestos poisoning prove once and for all that disease can be airborne and delivered by local atmospheres?

Mustard gas used in World War One didn’t discriminate against those it ensnared and neither did fallen troops “catch” anything from their comrades. Likewise, everyone exposed to extreme levels of pollution (enough to overwhelm a body) will die as a direct response to atmospheric attack. Disease labelling doubles as a useful politically correct blame agent. On that front, if governments were supposedly responsible, why has America (in particular) relaxed all environmental laws to such an extent none are enforceable? Science and sane medicine knows that viruses are caused by environmental toxins so, if COVID-19 is a virus, then surely the American government intends to aggravate attacks on the human immune system. Why would they do that unless the aim was to accelerate seasonal “flu” complaints or, rather, COVID-19 attributed hospitalisations? And that seems a good point to pause and wrap up my essay with conclusions. In the final segment, I will discuss roles of nations in what appears a great population heist, exploring precursory implications for the future.

Outlines to shape the case that humanity has burgeoned to such an extent there are no effective means to kill off suitably large numbers of people quickly without “risking everything” have already been presented. Alternatives are straightforward. Sane “powers” have no option but to draft in mandatory (and, if necessary, forced) sterilisation. China did not furbish desired results under experimental “austere legislation” (ironically the soft option for humanity) which limited families to “one child”. Plunging the globe into [the first real] civil war would correspondingly risk total commerce meltdown (such as a rudimentary collapse of the slave network, sorry, I mean “workforce”). Therefore, to reinforce, feasibly the smoothest approach enabling desired outcomes would be to substitute sterilisation medication for, say, vaccines against future pandemics providing a lid could be kept on the secret until the dirty job was done. Next, to encourage participation from the masses, a “from all sides” promotional campaign raising awareness of a really nasty believable plague should suffice as “bait”. That said, the people won’t subscribe unless it was genuinely feared, of course. Required fear might be sanctioned by Voodoo techniques.  Were enough highly regarded social figures able to “hex” compellingly and often, everyone of “right mind” would be convinced. Without hard evidence to back up fear, hexing alone would not galvanise populations.

How to falsify evidence?

Outside China, alarm barely registered even though alleged avian flu death figures were greater than 1,000,000, so any calculated physical impact would have to be much more exaggerated to guarantee “panic” gripping the globe. I am thinking somewhere along the lines of 50,000,000 dead would be powerful enough for synthesis, though not so great an additional burden to “break” the system. 85.000.000 killed by “history’s nightmare” diphtheria (we’ll ignore the fact that happened in waves over decades); does not this emulate those levels? The remaining unanswered question pertains to whether stocks of Ebola “medications” are sufficient in quantity to satisfy demands. Presuming death rates do convince the people, phase two will be much harder to manage. Surely there is only one certain way not to indefinitely spook populations into noncompliance. In that regard, authoritative statisticians would need to raise alternative blame agents well ahead of time in case too many were sterilised too quickly, otherwise the “penny might drop” causing people to avoid pharmaceutical advice like the plague. I personally think, when push comes to shove, multi-pronged strategies offer the least hazardous recourse (for those evil masterminds). Correspondingly high enough percentages could be made infertile to substantially limit new crops, marginally satisfying the objective, with the greater remainder (of those destined for the knacker’s yard) given serums that ruin their immune systems. The beauty of doing it that way (as far as the establishment is concerned) is the sick won’t perish so fast, they clog funeral parlours. After it is all over, wouldn’t it be hilarious if paedophilia is legally encouraged “to rebuild populations”?

We now have a guide or map to chart tell-tale signs that mark plausible malice in motion. I have already outlined COVID-19 deaths [as alleged] followed mandatory vaccinations in Italy. Thus far, I don’t know “which” vaccines were involved, but would respective information (if it is tainted) tell us anything anyway? Ingredients can change “at the drop of a hat”, particularly when gaggles of politicians are desperate for propaganda feeds from crooked medical cartels. We are able to ascertain numbers of deaths in Northern Italy were relatively small (in the 100’s), but big enough to make headlines. Let’s face it, compared against those Chinese bird flu death stats (which received almost no attention in Australia lest we forget), COVID-19 has, thus far, proved a real “fizzer” – hardly “epidemic” material and definitely not a pandemic. Conclusions are straightforward here. It must be a training exercise and probably one of many to come until the “powers” feel confident enough to launch the campaign “for real”. Because it is a global concern, they will need a lot of support. History has demonstrated corrupt nations are quite happy to behave deceitfully. IMF grants backing the offensive against the spread of HIV in Asia and Africa were classic examples of this. Complicit doctors had been encouraged to list “AIDS” in place of “unknown causes” for death certificate records. Back in 1992 British tabloid “The Sun” published a tucked away morsel explaining “WHO estimates that less than 5% of AIDS deaths in Africa are genuine” (or words to the effect). Shock horror!

Philippines’ “old guard” are that deceitful they are regarded as “untrustworthy”, so America naturally turned to its Asian right hand South Korea in search of managed COVID-19 “evidence” (which comprised 100,000’s of screenings), well until that Bill Gates/CDC conspiracy collapsed. Meanwhile, other scientists not being referred to by the “powers” are determining that COVID-19 is no different to regular influenza. South Korea, interestingly enough, is another of those mandatory vaccines countries; anyone noticing a pattern here?  Forgive me for continually bringing up Hitler and “Mein Kampf”, but he did write “if you are going to tell a lie, make sure it is a big one. Tell it over and over and then people will be sure to believe it”. Consequentially my local mega-corporate supermarket, mega-corporate shopping centre and mega-corporate Telco’s (hold that thought) have decided they have the supreme right to regurgitate Australian healthcare misinformation about COVID-19. I will go so far as saying; I am being bombarded on all sides (and every time I catch a train) by parroted content identical misinformation. Now if that’s not telling a big lie over and over, I don’t know what is. I can say I have written about this style of practice before. Mass Medias find it common enterprise. A thousand “news” outlets duplicate the same basic piece of information using slightly different wordings to fake congruity. In fact, through all their smoke, you will struggle to find more than one fire source.

I mentioned before about scope for use of Voodoo in psy-op campaigns. Beyond shrieking standardised “government advice” on COVID-19, Corporate Sirens do nothing to help. But surely this evidences methodology fortifying planners’ attempts to facilitate worldwide programming of beliefs. From Caracas to Helsinki to Cape Town messaging is identical in character. When apparent “confirmation” of bad news comes in on all sides, wary instinct assumes “they can’t all be wrong”. For COVID-19 common fundamental “views” are being replicated. Ordinary people desperate to process what appears to be rigid consistency in support of the case for COVID-19 are naturally going to be lulled into making stark poor choices over and over again. But that’s not all. “Belligerent” Stockholm syndrome comes into play here. Gripes about open governmental dereliction of duty evaporate in the face of rigid patriotism. People quietly (or not-so-quietly) obsess over their need to be first accepted and then admired, loved even, by authority. Ensnared dearly seek safety under the corporate umbrella as “valued compliant (vices permitting) members of the in club”. People, one Pharmacologist friend chillingly informed me, “Want to believe….so they believe”. Hence Australians, in their precautionary response to “bad news”, were queuing up to give blood samples even before the panic had set in. If that is the example the rest of the world is following, God help us all.

Well, I thought we had reached the end of this journey, until new information came to light while processing the second text edit which changed everything. My original conclusive opinion was Coronavirus is a scam that piggyback’s off social fear staged at a time when influenza is prevalent. The “common” variety of that complaint was being used as a scapegoat to test best method of “herding populations” for a more serious future planned operation, which ultimately aims to sterilise 95% of human beings. I had written, “We should be exceptionally sceptical and wary of all projections; Bill Gates’ inspired computer modelling in particular. Fantasy (and that’s what it is) representation of proscribed reality isn’t real” and this has helped me reappraise conclusions. Attached to the warning, we learnt America’s surgeon general rejected Gates/CDC contagion (computer) modelling in favour of raw data. Literally as an aside, I introduced chemtrails and the 5G network as the only two eventualities “new” and broad enough to warrant consideration as cause of Coronavirus. Rejecting the notion of their actual involvement, I moved swiftly onto other considerations. It turns out I shouldn’t have been so swift. The reason Gate’s/CDC wanted to use the contagion model is clear. Primarily motive was to censor truth, but there was further potential for en masse vaccinations. In line, though after his disinfectant advice Trump, they tell me, is deemed less credible than Bernie Madoff, he did brag about great potential for “global immunization” a few months back. The bombshell that even surprised me is, whilst not “beyond a shadow of doubt”, concentration of COVID-19 positive tests eerily follow the American 5G network. As best “best guess” culprit circumstantial evidence more than adequately matches swine flu and those lakes of pig poop I introduced earlier.

Very much “hush, hush”, but the current crisis might be theoretically comparable to the Spanish Flu pandemic, which many (not aligned with mainstream diktat) have determined was fault of the [then] virgin electricity grid. Interesting that incidence began in 1918 yielding toll estimates in the range of 20-50,000,000 deaths. Remember that magic calculation I made as to volumes of fatality needed to justify hypothetical mandatory global “immunization”? 50,000,000 wasn’t it? And then we have another strange connection with year 1918. It is almost as though the powers attempt to “tell the truth” and “not so” simultaneously. They wouldn’t admit to knowledge of any link with their beloved 5G network ever, but it seems starkly clear why austere quarantine has dragged on and on and on with arguably no out of the ordinary (i.e. weak old people succumb to flu all the time) mass deaths. There have been poverty casualties and many suicides in Thailand thanks to the austerity, but less than two dozen COVID-19 fatalities (if we believe the statistics). Medication, hospital networks will testify, doesn’t discriminate, so how many COVID-19 deaths are actually results of improper medical treatment would be hard to quantify. Confirming my private predictions (gauging a change just beyond ANZAC Day), after no new positive test results, the Australian government has announced it is “very close to easing restrictions” (those annoying train broadcasts have already ceased) on its drip in the bucket populations. However for other first world countries, unless I have read the new (or was that the old?) game plan wrong, this psy-op could run on indefinitely, until sufficient numbers of dead materialise to justify next stage. En masse “civil disobedience” might throw a spanner in the works, but frankly phase two doesn’t really bear thinking about). I hope everyone gets the picture now.

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.

 

When “Belief in the Saviour” Teases Corrupt Zeal

Traditionally I have regularly released a Christmas or New Year’s thematic to coincide with the so-called festive season. 2018 has proven to be a latecomer, but I refuse to entirely relax standards. Each winter solstice cycle I increasingly notice how little of Christ [from the Greek] is present in Christmas. For instance, there is now more or less a complete void once occupied by goodwill.

Satan devoured it,” howl the sanctimoniously superstitious

Yet superstitions should never be entirely overlooked. Every reflective proverb invariably contains a grain or more of truth. Current advertising beginning as early as “New Year”, embers of the “Phoenician” commerce coup ignited under concessions of Santa around the turn of the nineteenth century. Great threat Cossack Russia helplessly conquered and with America “under administration”, imperialism was to become the unchallenged voice of reason. Maybe Ebenezer Scrooge wasn’t such a bad stick after all, but I will elaborate on this sentiment in due course.

Before I expose the real corruption of Christ, it is important to clear the air over Santa’s ambiguous comeuppance. Back in Rococo times the ice countries may as well have been classed as the known third world. Few were hardy enough to brave the cold, but for occasioned explorers. These courageous travellers were at liberty to export remote tales of old, particularly when absent of viable bounty. In Santa’s case it seems that two convenient folklores converged as one. Whether any original account has been authentically preserved is unlikely, but, suffice to say, vagrant Norwegian sagas concerning an odd mystic figure (elf?) had proliferated out to “the West” by 1815 or ’20.

Historic development of the Western version is much easier to chart. By reputation, one of America’s New York newspapers made timely broadsheet announcements in December 1773 and the follow year. According to promotional content, Dutch families seasonally congregated to honour Saint Nicholas (a monk renowned for his selfless distribution of charity). Plausibly, theorists claim that Saint Nicholas was issued the pet name Sinter Klaas in the local dialect pronunciation. Evolution to Santa Claus is logically coincidental. Back in the early nineteen century, it should be noted that popular drawings presenting Sinter Klaas in contemporary situations barely resemble modern Santa. That commercial effigy is believed to have been the consequence of a life-sized model placed behind a Philadelphia general store window in 1841.

Scandinavian tales refer to a mystic figure that helped the children, although Christkind (Christ’s child) or Kris Kringle is usually considered the parallel German version. The original name (the one sometimes quoted is not authentic) of the historic figure is perhaps lost to time, but I calculate it was the missing ingredient that promulgated a natural evolution to Santa Claus. My use of the word “natural” here is figurative, of course, as there is a sinister side to this account too. Following Scandinavian myths, from around 1820 American businesses heavily invested in Christmas shopping advertising, strategically placed around heart-warming ditties (one can but assume were) inspired by the Norwegian mystic. Printed message cards were to come in en-masse from the late nineteenth century onwards.

Popular iconography attributed to a North Pole setting was introduced (in the West) by Clement Clark Moore, whose 1822 poem “An Account of a Visit from Saint Nicholas” apparently featured quaint eye-catching illustrations. Thomas Nast, cartoonist for Harper’s weekly, adapted visualisations for a feature spread in 1881 which made popular acclaim. Embedded traditions of present day rotund gentleman clad in cheery red suit gestated in the 1890’s. Promptly exploited by the Salvation Army, homeless men dressed in seasonal costumes were commissioned to venture out with the aim of collecting funding donations.

Masonic involvement in the creation of the United States of America is beyond dispute. Whether fabled Illuminati power brokers were the key instrumental agents will possibly never be authentically known or provable. What is unarguably clear is the American union was never set up for the people or, rather, if it was, “the people” were undoubtedly the select few. Propagandists went to work in earnest well before the United States was ratified as “one”. Corresponding messages promoting Christmas spirit in favour of commerce highlighted the ambitions of those that established the new republic. This style of subliminal tradition persevered throughout the occurring human rights’ transformation, perhaps persuasively haunted by Charles Dickens 1843 masterpiece “A Christmas Carol”. Incidentally, British Dickens had also written his Parish Boy’s Progress (more commonly known as Oliver Twist) serial 1837-39 which coincided (sic) with the Abolition of Slavery Act (1837).

I wrote about the truth behind abolition last article and inasmuch stated that no philanthropic goodwill should be attributed to the end of slavery. Human rights were reduced to tatters in order to fortify the needs of burgeoning commerce. One of the significant causal effects, in addition to labour exploitation, unprecedented spikes in crime and prostitution, was the emergence of numerous social charities. I have written about charities independently before too. If governments were truly set up exclusively for the people, then each charity must be viewed as a breakdown of order that highlights supreme jurisdictional incompetence. Today there are supposedly tens of millions of charitable causes which emphasises the ineptitude of governmental social charters. But there is another side to the conspiracy. Great writers like Dickens rarely (if ever) meaningfully expose the indelible link between charity and trade. Charities usually place funds in the care of the banking system available to purchase goods or services before converting them into “aid”. Funds not needed “in the field” are invariably locked into attractive interest bearing long term deposits. British “custodian of charities” (a corporate collective catering for tens of thousands of organisations) used to be listed second place below British Telecom at the stock exchange, so it is a lucrative cash cow.

Dickens’ squint vision is enough to convince me he worked for the overlords. Why else would have he been allowed to make fame and fortune? If his writings had viciously attacked “the system”, no one would know of them today. Without doubt his “hallmark” powerfully creative style made endorsement decision making easy. His deeply human approach surely would have been considered gravy topping by his endorsers. For example, “A Christmas Carol” (or “Scrooge”) did highlight the plight of the working classes, but the manner as to how merchants and those that governed exploited working classes was matter of fact, the way things are. In effect, Dickens ended up posthumously begging for charity from his betters. That was the limit of his militancy. Indeed, in the Victorian age knowing your place had been a very long standing belief attached to birth provenance (i.e. the result of karmic deliverance). Perhaps this is why he was allowed to paint such a bleak picture. Other of his novels feature “poor houses” (paid slavery) and debtors’ prisons, so it would be unfair not to lightly applaud aspects of his pioneering effort towards social conscience.

In fact he was far from the only dissenting voice of that era. Beginning with comparatively humble numbers from the late eighteenth century onward, by high Victorian times published attacks on “the system” had just about reached fever pitch. A significant side effect to all this is worth exploring. There have been many revisions of the English Bible, from the seventh century AD. A formal Revised Standard Version of the New Testament was first published in 1881 and this was largely a consequence of inertia of “social conscience movements” (notably who were alarmed by the excess of prostitution) in my opinion. British politicians such as William Gladstone expressed their dedication to God (apparently regularly administering sermons to fallen women), although it seems ironic that these individuals have been responsible for imposing some of the most acrid and draconian legislation on the people.

Cultivation of various popular “beacons of hope” was burgeoning commerce’s key strategy investment geared to combating radical dissent in such forms as suffrage protest. Christmas Santa was one such icon. It seems to me that it has been no accident seasonal spirit appears to engage commerce at any opportunity. In that capacity, Santa is the Christmas star perched on a commerce peak. Dickens’ criticism of Scrooge’s lack of commercial goodwill by not paying staff adequately empowered seasonal trading. For lack of better words, when [otherwise] slaves are affluent enough, they can buy more goods and chattel to ensure business perpetually booms. Broadsheets promoted charitable initiatives favouring trade long before the US republic (1789) was established. Santa, by hook or by crook, became a convenient figurehead or mascot. However, review of naming protocols places dark questions regards the ethics and ambitions of those that pioneered the Grotto cult. There is more to Santa Claus than is obvious.

Far from being a saviour, he has been known to splinter families consumed by obsessive greed. Those without funds sufficient for merriment (as Dickens bitterly highlights) are ostracised by “goodwill”. There is a giant clue as to why this is so, but I first need to provide a little background before I detail it. My other website offers many articles that cover esoteric and paranormal affairs. Coincidentally Satan was the feature of one long essay there. I say coincidentally because it is fairly well known that Santa also happens to be an anagram of Satan. In normal circumstances one would put the fact down to quirks of language, but can we be sure connections are accidental or arbitrary here?

Explanations will become a little complex because I first need to allay popular confusion over origins and meaning of Satan. In fact, while I am about it, I may as well cover doppelganger Lucifer too. Satan, for instance, is a very ancient term that stretches back long prior to Atlantis. Sanskrit is the closest dialect I have found representative of the “universal” first language that failed to survive Atlantis’ downfall (hinted at in biblical Genesis’ Tower of Babel). In that regard, perhaps all words were originally collective monotones and, with this in mind, Satan conveniently breaks into “sat” and “an”. In Sanskrit pronunciation reflectively impacts word values, so “sat” and “an” could each be attributed to mean many different things. Therefore, in the interest of correctness, I have had to draw on inherent sources to establish compelling historic and interpretative basis from considerations.

“An” is the easy part. Several ancient tongues use the syllable to signify “Almighty God”. In combination with Almighty God, various meanings of “sat” might satisfy differing wider metaphoric interpretations. Though the fact appears to have escaped surviving chronicles, Satan was the first star to ever bless the cosmos (actually initially revered as the Blessed Star). All stars deliver light. In spiritual context, light is sometimes called logos (which is the Greek word for information). Spiritually, “logos” extends way beyond mere information. It is the essence of truthful purity or, in other words, the word of God. “Sat” is the Sanskrit equivalent of this conceptualisation. Lucifer admirably compares. That name derives from the Latin and means “light” (lux) “standard” (fer). Morning Star (Lucifer) competing with the sun (Ra) as it rises based on biblical Isaiah’s (an unrepentant Pharisee) radical sermon is generally regarded as the significant origin of the usage.

Also worthy of mention, Akhenaten’s Amon (usually erroneously referred to as Amen) conspicuously forms an “Almighty God” (A-n) sandwich casing “m’o” (divine record) filling. Thus, strictly speaking Satan, Lucifer and Amon/Amen all mean the same thing (more or less), which is bringer of good news. Actually, wasn’t that what they called Jesus too? Nevertheless, I have explained elsewhere how the general message over time has been twisted into opposite meanings by miscreants with rogue agendas. Today the direct effect is both Satan and Lucifer have been reversed from bringers of good news to evil omens. Specifically, Satan [in Hebrew tongue] simply means accuser. The development of Satan as “the tempter” did not emerge until the late sixteen century, though attributing philosophies were clearly embedded in Martin Luther’s earlier rhetoric. Luther (himself a Jesuit) strongly influenced contemporary masonic alliances. Masonry is not the sinister cabal delineated by superstition. Merchants would normally associate themselves with one group or another in order to network out of trading necessity. The massively beneficial spin off was it made collusion and coordinated commerce strategies possible.

Not all collaborations were gracious. When stakes were high, gross acts of tyranny or injustice were sometimes deemed “end justifying”. One such conspiracy toppled Britain’s constitutional monarch Charles I, who was beheaded on 30th January 1649 as a consequence. Even so, after that atrocious standard had been set, beginning with his son puppet king Charles II’s reinstatement, the universal demise of sovereign royal power is probably best marked by Catherine “the Great” (no wonder they call her great) of Russia’s turbulent reign. Violent anarchism was an offshoot of that operation. Since Michael Romanov’s (nephew of Ivan the Terrible) 1613 accession to the Russian throne, there had always been disturbance with Cossack settlers (displaced Polish serfs who termed themselves “free men”). In accordance, numerous popular uprisings against authorities have been reported from 1591. Out of all these, it is the 1768 Ukrainian (Koliyivshchyna) religious massacre that probably most pertinently marks an authority shift. Reputation says killing was sparked by Catherine the Great’s “Golden Charter” (1765) which enabled retired colonel and cleric Maksim Zalizniak’s ambitions. Their joint mission was dedicated to purging Catholics and other religious minorities.  Politically correct historians are quick to denounce the Golden Charter (which also targeted Jews) as “utter fantasy” in order to preserve the queen’s “spotless” reputation.

Encyclopaedia Britannica’s first edition is dated 1770. From 1770-75 Russia is proclaimed the world’s greatest nation. By 1776 she may as well have been a sickly dog.  Many theories attribute reasons leading to the country’s downfall, but it seems to me that government ownership of the Orthodox Church from 1721 marked the beginning of the end so to speak. Post revolution “Communist” Jew Leon Trotsky’s unrelenting all-reaching attack on that administration was certainly no coincidence. Populations had been galvanised by the church. Replace it with alternative convenient social apparatus and you have society in your pocket. Russians were (and perhaps still are) extremely parochial and rather superstitious. This is well highlighted by the way they celebrate Christmas. According to legend, Babouschka (old woman or granny) misled the three kings (search for Christ) by giving the wrong directions. The Russian birth date for “Jesus’” is 6th January but festivities honour Babouschka’s eternal regret for her deceit.

Historians might convincingly argue fledgling United States of America’s journey to superpower status began in 1776 (phoenix rising from mother Russia’s ashes?). Constitutional democracy ended in 1789 when the republic (in Philistine Greece and Italy’s wake?) was formed (and currency changed), but it took until 1864 (ushering in the 14th Amendment to the constitution) for government to be reduced to a corporation. Commerce was the primary reason the United States was formed but it took the best part of a century (1776-1864) for satanic agents to exact their full plan. Today all governments (and their tax offices) are corporations and that is why the modern world is held to ransom by merchant bankers. I find it mildly ironic that it is in the powers’ best interests for people to “wake up” to truth which is of next to no advantage to egregious saviours’ causes. This suggests, at the very least, that all (or the majority of) revolution philosophies have been sponsored by the precise same powers that impose tyranny. These false rites of passage were sponsored because the deceivers knew they were guaranteed dead ends.

To define true evil, I regularly reference a quote attributed to the great sage Krishna “Spirituality (impetus behind creation) brings to freedom, whereas forces of evil paralyse”. What better way to paralyse than by introducing appealing commerce. Humanity would not be able to resist aiding and abetting the devil (d-evil). I don’t refer to the satisfaction of genuine “needs” here, although commerce can accommodate those too. No, here I exclusively identify non-essential extras; frills of commerce. Some argue that the introduction of pomp surrounding royalty (which has endured so long) is pointless. Lemurian monarchs for periods that precede historic record were visually indistinguishable from the people. Very ancient kings were blessed with God-like powers. They could be distinguished by deed. Today certainly, beyond their overstated assigned status and privileged upbringing, royals are no different to the everyman. At Christmas, pomp and celebration of non-essential extras is now encapsulated by iconic smirking Santa which suggests it is those behind commerce that crafted the whole idea of aristocratic superiority.

Is the clue in Santa’s name; perfect anagram of Satan? By the time of this red frocked (isn’t the devil usually depicted coloured red?) tempter’s universal notoriety, negative connotations of Satan were firmly entrenched. Indeed, so much so no one had heard of the Blessed Star (in relation to the creation of our universe) by then. Such is the case today as well of course. I presented some detail in relation to the truth (and reasoning behind it) that negative Satan was actually originally the mispronunciation of “Saturn” (from medieval times, although I think this reflects attitudes under Prophet Zoroaster thousands of years before) in this article. “Design” of Santa appears to vaguely follow the Babylonian Horus myth. Indestructible God could only be chopped up and hidden. In this instance “An” has been remorselessly sliced in two, “n” crudely wedged between “sa” and “t”. “A” brings up the rear and represents perennial impotence of spirituality under Santa’s spell. God is vanquished (decapitated) and his wisdom (sat) corrupted.

But for Babouschka, Christmas (Epiphany) would be mostly a hangover from the Pagan era. Evergreen trees (in particular) represent celebration of the winter solstice. From time memorial, tradition has always seen exchange of gifts, but pagans honoured their harvest, so communities would contribute fresh fruits and vegetables for the benefit of society. “The Feeding of Five Thousand” New Testament parable was scripted by Mark (or Marcus, a Roman aristocrat) and therefore one should question its purpose all the more. Though communal sharing of fish and loaves suggests so, it is unlikely Jesus (Josephus) ever administered a true harvest festival dedicated to the winter solstice. The Romans, on the other hand, did worship solar cycles. Sun-day is a tribute to that legacy. Per context, the alert may struggle to fathom why I bother to discuss this now, given Jesus’ notorious “Jewish” status. Let me explain why. Long prior to Roman involvement, Judaism had split in two. City folks followed autocratic regimes promulgated by those generally known as Pharisees. It is a style of “order” remains alive and well today, underpinning up-to-date management of global affairs. Back then remote, displaced tribes were guided by (what the right-wingers’ would term) superstitious philosophies which prepared for different “ways of life”.

Their brand of raw spirituality was in fact encapsulated by the essence of numerous of splinter groups and these had journeyed out to the four corners of the globe in search of paradise (colloquially referred to as Promised Land). One such autonomy was the foundation of ancient druids (not even vaguely similar to garish abuse, late eighteenth century neo-druidism). Rural “Essene” Jews were labelled Gnostics for a while. Though historians remember it as a new tradition from the time of Jesus, it is likely the 570BC exodus to Ireland (Promised Land designate) consisted of likeminded parties of anti-Levite (Pharisaic law makers) “revolutionaries”. These embers of civilisation plausibly could have “morphed into” the later druidic tradition, made more notorious by Avalon (spiritual centre and first mystery school?), which is located in southern England. If memory serves me correctly, America’s Pilgrim Fathers formally constituted a southern English gathering in search of purity. The point I am trying to make is there has been a persisting religious dichotomy ever since man reflected on his divinity. Judaism, God forbid, is probably one of the better examples of that

Celebration of the solstices seems a likely component of Gnostic tradition. Unfortunately, other than newly found (and possibly censored) bundles of esoteric texts hidden in Dead Sea catacombs and other discreet places, evidence of that faith was destroyed long ago. Neo-druids make a big hullaballoo over solstice traditions whereas I suspect the Gnostics treated these occasions as opportunities to educate. What better way to manufacture goodwill while celebrating nature could there be than a harvest festival? The idea of community sharing for everyone’s benefit is instilled in “The Feeding of Five Thousand” parable. Did Mark’s account confuse a solstice event? Perhaps we’ll never know, but, per context, the fish and loaves are distinct spiritual symbols and shouldn’t be viewed liberally. Celts (original druids) in particular revered divinity as something directly attributed to creative potence. They determined that all life came from primordial waters (something modern science propagandises?). If primordial waters constitute God’s physicality, then fishes’ mastery of oceans must be inspirationally hallowed. The Lord’s Prayer “praises God for our daily bread”.

Tribes, such as those that became the druids, who didn’t revere pharisaic order, separated and found new havens (free of tyranny) to root. It is difficult to pinpoint the precise transition which is the branch that became modern day Judaism. Hebrew was originally a cut down cosmic script. For instance, additional unknown letters are occasionally seen interspersed with Hebrew on downed alien spaceships’ insignia. It is known that today’s long standing Yiddish culture backed off New Hebrew because Old Hebrew was insufficient for competent business communication. The “pointing” of Hebrew text (which in practicality adjusts for a new language) possibly coincided with first world universal adoption of stamped currency (legal tender). Accurate dates are deliberately vague on origins of pointing; maybe 12th, 13th or 14th century depending on opinions. Does this vainly cover up the Khazarian Yiddish pact emanated from the Ukraine? As an aside, though the Ukraine is sometimes volunteered, it could not have possibly ever been fabled Khazaria as that land mass is submerged under oceans today. There is however compelling innuendo that posits for a plausible case recommending the Ukraine is viewed as the motherland by certain estranged Pharisees.

Few bother to even attempt to comprehend the severe civil consequences of legal tender. Enslaved populations are the product of oppressive and tyrannous welfare states which cannot exist unless supported by currency. Therefore, industrialist vipers initially introduced serfdom gradually, confusing the “free” into believing that this was an effect of their zealous benevolence. Once everyone was “captured”, oligarchs expanded traditional uses of prisons for purposes of “containing” those whom they did not want to socially enable (crude justifications supported by laws came later). Bonded slavery became the only viable social security option for those displaced by war, famine or for other reasons.

Truth surrounding vile treachery of the Magna Carta (marking the point at which silver currency exploded) is obscured by cheery tales of Robin Hood and his band of crafty thugs. As a treaty, it wasn’t a charter of goodwill towards the people. It in fact was open theft of free lands and the negotiated common rights of man. Courtesy of the Magna Carta, the vast majority of our modern populations could not live off the land effectively now, even if we were forced to do so and that is why industrialists lord over the document’s prowess so heartily. Rich or poor, mighty or lowly, we have all by some measure been transformed into slaves of currency. They say money makes the civilised world go round. That is why those with the most money invariably have all the privileges.

Where it came from God only knows, but there is a tragic old wives’ tale that supposes the ills of humanity are the fault of the Midas effect. Those with wealth are singled out as evil doers even though everyone (without exception) is greedy (sometimes euphemised as will to survive). The humble do not know extravagance so they neither desire nor solicit it. Most elites merely exploit human nature to the hilt, though they may not be fully cognisant of the fact. The reason Santa has become so popular is he epitomises the averice of the masses. That is more than amply highlighted in Charles Dickens’ “A Christmas Carol”. Goodwill is leveraged to such effect that crippled “Tiny Tim” deserves to have the litter of his family’s desires steeped on him at Christmas for merely existing. Of course this selfish anthem ignores those hard to rectify gaping double standards. Why would “rich” Scrooge bestow gifts on relative strangers in place of his own loved ones? The real issue, how Tiny Tim’s father persevered under such irresponsible employment terms, is not discussed.

Well, they didn’t have unions then”, screams a heckler

Incorrect, but it will take an eternity for sovereign man to grow a backbone. The power of labour values ironically has always been very much in the hands of the people. If everyone refused work and put death as the preference over slavery, currency would have been rendered valueless from conception and commerce would have never commenced (in the known sense). From the point currency was introduced, a utopian objective has been to shackle the broad masses. Peer group infiltration and targeted populism were the chosen control strategies (branded psyops) used to fulfil the objective. From the day men communicated with each other, money (cuts of silver, gold talents, precious beads) and other arbitrary tokens of value have always been used to supplement barter trade.

Currency is different. Units are stamped by (and the overriding possession of) an administrative authority. Originally that would have been a constitutional royal. Now stock ownership is hybrid. Who is this Federal Reserve? Those that use the merchandise are subject to governing philosophies and rules. A dollar cannot morph into a million units of value because “someone” decides this is so, whereas administrative overseers might revalue a dollar if they decided the act was politically expedient. Germany’s inflation was a deliberate act. Other competing paper currencies were only partially backed by gold, but the illustrious Federal Reserve turned a blind eye. Whilst apparently contractually bound as servants (polite word for slaves) of government, they were able to turn a blind eye because they own all “backed” circulated money.

Wholesale cash enterprises were developed first by the Greeks and then by the Romans, even though the oldest surviving currency (assuming science is correct) originates from Russia. Subsequent European coinage values were extensions of the Roman legacy. It would be hard to formally prove (particularly as reference maps show Philistinia approximates the modern Palestinian territory region), but logic supposes that the Greeks and Romans were descendants of relocated Philistines (tall pale skinned warriors). Retreating from defeat by Babylonian Pharaoh and “Jewish” King David, Philistines first settled in Greece (on the doorstep of the Middle East). Since “great” Alexander’s conquest to rule the world ran out of steam, Greek politics apparently favoured secular complacency over global conquest. Hamstrung industrialists shifted their affairs to Italy and, over several centuries, built sufficient military infrastructure to commit to their globalist ambitions once more.

Incidentally, not at all Middle Eastern in appearance, then Babylonian peoples would have been classed as “Caucasians” by today’s sciences. Therefore notorious King David would have been a white man. Though only circumstantial evidence supports claims he was a Pharaoh, inherent sources advise me information is relatively accurate (i.e. the wrong pharaoh is referenced as culprit), which places grave questions as to the authenticity behind the popular legacy of Israel of course. History is far from circumspect here. For example those dreadful “Greek” Hyksos Kings that “conveniently” appeared to take rule when Babylon was lacking authority were likely Philistines, yet Josephus eerily reports them as Israelites. I say these were the first usurpers; these were Pharisees who support a fabricated Levite Alta ego.

By deduction, this would mean the “great” Caesar was a Philistine as well. Limited writings about him present a grave paradox. According to surviving texts, he was some kind of popular miracle working Ben Hur. Such are the qualities of his proposed divinity; some might rightly be compelled to believe he was Jesus. Of course this adds to the case that persuades Mark was a Roman aristocrat who cast Jesus in the Homeric style, perhaps even as an attempt to preserve the image of Caesar. The evocation would have made both instantly popular figures even if real lives didn’t quite live up to the reputation. Infiltration of peer groups and targeted populism is achieved in one fell swoop. More evidence is as follows. Peer group infiltration is embodied by Mark “Iscariot’s” treacherous conversion to Gnosticism (and later St Paul’s Damascus Road epiphany). There is no more popular false occult icon than Jesus.

Prognosis therefore is depressingly melancholy. Beyond the use of occasional repeated proverbs, not a single book found in the New Testament even vaguely resembles authentic Essene philosophy, including “John”. Scholars that first take the plunge and brave any of the Dead Sea Scrolls’ codexes are quick to notice the profound intellectual depth of content (making embedded philosophies extraordinarily hard to interpret correctly). Gospel writer Mark was Roman, Luke Greek and Matthew was a cosmopolitan Jew and obvious agent of the Pharisees. Enigmatic John didn’t exist, but the name (in its use) implies “God’s secretary”. His, the Fourth Gospel, was dictated by Josephus (as Jesus) through brother-in-law scribe Lazarus. One word only of Jesus’ personal volume has survived. Someone (perhaps many) in authority knows the truth about this.

Jesus’ own gospel was purposefully destroyed and the celebrated surviving second century papyrus was not a copy. It is a forgery. If it had been authentic, how could the document have dodged Philistine Constantine’s mighty fourth century purge?  Outright censorship of texts that contradicted or impeded Sol Invictus faith was the only literary amnesty of his inquisition. Catholicism’s Papacy was the removed Roman monarchy; therefore it was also yet another Philistine/Pharisee offshoot. The reason St Paul (author of New Testament Corinthians, Romans and so on) is occasionally recognised as the first pope (and last apostle) is to give his detestable writings (which smother any occasional glint “free of Romanisation” emulating the conscience of Jesus) greater credibility (and popularity, of course). Paul’s calculated role generally seems to suggest sour grapes after good times gone awry. Should the “Ideal” Jesus have gracefully “wallpapered” the uncomfortable political “marriage” between the Pharisees and de facto Royalty?

Look, I’m not sure when the Sanhedrin originally came into being or whether it really matters, but I notice a familiar pattern with “world affairs” stretching back at least the most part of two and a half thousand years. History informs me the Romans conquered lands located in the region now called the Middle East. Their haul included Israel (conquered by Assyrians centuries before). A consequence of one of the first acts of power was to usher in hybrid Arab (ethic nomads that roamed Aram or were these Assyrians or even Phoenicians?) royals to rule over Judea (separatist Southern Israel). First “despot” of the official Promised Land Moses (who compares well against England’s Oliver Cromwell) never referred to arbitrary bodies when making decisions. Tradition (after the burning bush) revered him as the direct link to God. All great prophet kings follow identical protocol, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Noah and the rest. Their decisions were their own and these “commandments” were a testament upholding their uniformly breath taking “greatness”. Nevertheless, when the Sanhedrin (or royal court) emerged sovereign rule was doomed to wither. Under Israel’s Roman occupation, that evolution was furiously ignited.

Though government is meant to be a mix of identities that reflect the goodwill of society, by reputation decision making almost always errs towards right wing (fascist) mindset. Values imposed by Sanhedrin courts depressingly crafted that motif

Reflecting on contemporary politics of Jesus’ age, overbearing Roman authority paid lip service to the whims of their puppet Arab monarchs provided they observed all the wishes of the Pharisees (who took the high seat in the Sanhedrin). That said, certain Roman emperors didn’t see things their way. Look how these (such as Caligula and Nero) have been “painted” (i.e. utter fabrication) by “history”. Judea was abandoned (allegedly) after the 66-69AD siege of Jerusalem (a chain reaction sparked by earlier infractions under Nero). Within moments of the exodus a new fully fledged “Christian” hierarchy pops up in Alexandria. Infrastructure is so strong; its governing church is effectively born as a corporation. Therefore, transferring authority to Constantinople was child’s play after the papacy was formally established in the late fourth century.

Emergence of this virgin Catholic Church exactly coincides with the shocking disappearance of the great Roman Empire. Over several centuries, the same Catholic Church made a bee-line to exert control over every single credible European monarchy. This is more than amply highlighted by records of battles against the Merovingian kings, which included the calculated murder of Dagobert II. The Catholic Church had become (by accident or design) a sort of universal Sanhedrin, which is made all the more interesting because the Jewish version abandoned its administrative authority after the second temple (though some argue it never existed) was “allegedly” levelled by fire. Thus far I have contemplated numbers of suggestions that could never be “proven”, but could it be argued the Nicolaitans were instrumental at re-establishing the defunct Sanhedrin apparatus in Constantinople?

There is more fuel for the fire, if we move the clock forward a bit. King Henry VIII of England did the unthinkable in 1534. After a bitter divorce with Spanish royal Catherine of Aragon, he excommunicated the pope and formed his own Church of England. That is why the vicious catholic versus protestant wars persisted long after his death. Thomas Moore chose death in absence of moral sovereignty, but the rot had begun to set in long before, even while bonny Henry was still in power. The Roman “Sanhedrin” had only been temporarily usurped by the monarch. It wasn’t long before Henry was surrounded by pious advisors, such as prominent “world’s richest man” Cardinal Woolsey. Only a smidgen over a century after Henry’s desperate act, pharisaic authorities decided they needed to well and truly shore things up (and claim deserved revenge). This culminated with the execution death of Charles I in 1649 mentioned earlier, of course.

For the first time in history (unlike the Greek and Roman Republics before) a civilian government shielded power beneath “protector” Cromwell, but fame went to his head and he proved more deistic than any king. That is the ostensive reason behind the government’s swift (1660) re-establishment of the British monarchy, which remains intact today. It was deemed an essential safety measure against any parochial ruling authority. King William’s 1696 rushed though Bill of Rights amply acknowledges the viperous nature of man (particularly when given responsibility). To the best of my knowledge, every subsequent constitution (such as America’s) has built in its own bill of rights. For the record, though we have been programed to believe that royal executive power was devoid of peer oversight prior to corporate takeover, the myth simply isn’t true. Monarchs were presumed appointed by God (perhaps after Moses) and, as such, bound to honour their constituents. Suffice to say some kings turned out more attentive than others. That in mind, when factoring in the emergence of outsourced legislation via organs such as the Sanhedrin, the deep question I find rather hard to resolve is “who was the last true king?”

Who is the rightful king is important. Gospel writer Matthew’s biblical genealogy was aimed at promoting Jesus as the hereditary Messiah (priest-king or “Christ” subject to certain terms and conditions), but was it David or Zechariah (Jesus’ uncle) that established precedence? Zechariah was not a pharaoh nor did he have any conceivably legitimate claim to Babylonian rule. Pharaoh David set up the twenty four priestly branches (spawning king making material) that were each to be deemed valid natural contenders for the Jewish throne. It seems to me that without intimate understanding of David or any of the many hierarchical values that bestowed him with power, ignorance over what substantiates “royalty” from pedestrian “rank and file” will perennially reign. Usurpers naturally capitalise on this schism. Indeed, the truth would be enough to bring down their phoney baloney house of cards.  Dissenting historians irregularly report of the wisdom of the Oannes, but where is it to be found now?

Jesus is fantasy, a marketing brand that coordinates a very special historic period. He was the event which preceded Philistine formal grasp of absolute power. Therefore, modern traditions that prepare a muted, ineffective “Saviour” emphasise corporate will to control (Scrooge had absolute autonomy over directions of conscience). In other words, when the huddled masses are suitably impoverished and hope lacking, their only alternative is to turn to corporate commerce (big government) for succour. That is predominantly why the “machine” has relentlessly pushed a socialist agenda over the last hundred years or so. Now the hundred years is up, we are very close to “end game”. Australia’s prime minister is a billionaire (or so rumour has it). America’s president Trump is a tycoon. America is the first “first world” country. Australia is the last “first world” dominion. This tells anyone that understands the “code” that the oligarch’s are now brash enough to boast “we’ve won and there’s nothing [you] the people can do about it”.

I have written about the truth behind Jesus “the person” at length before, but it is worth repeating additional detail again to bring some extra clarity to this essay. Anagrammatised Josephus equates to “give birth to Jesus” in Latin tongue. It is such a clever anagram; “metaphor” is implied through use of letters P, H and O. I am also aware that “J” is obsolete so, in this case, whatever normally replaces it works just as well. One of the apocryphal books casts the young Jesus so well educated in theological matters it is presumed he was the son of a High Priest. Josephus’ father was Matthias Joseph, a High Priest of the 24th line from David (i.e. as illustrated earlier, royal blood). Militant Jesus attacking money changers at the temple was so contextually uncharacteristic, whoever it was clearly wasn’t preaching Jesus (isn’t it “odd” that Philistine Catholicism forbade money lending entirely on those grounds and this legitimised Jewish banking, coincidence?). Sermon on the Mount from Matthew’s Gospel presents a pensively angry prophet, but not a violent one. My inherent sources report that the young militant man was none other than Jesus’ (or, rather, Josephus’) father (who also used the codename Barabbas).

According to these sources, in his youth, Matthias Joseph joined the revolutionary movement and was impassioned by the royal cause against Roman tyranny. Because Arab puppet kings met most (if not all) of the Pharisees’ wishes, Zealots (as these revolutionaries became known) were doubtlessly not too fond of the extreme right-wing establishment either. This presents a problem for those determined to rationalise the truth, which is embroiled in politics that are quite complicated. To extend my observation of the young revolutionary Barabbas who attacked the money changers, he was arrested and convicted of a serious offense. Theologians that have bothered to study contemporary Roman law almost universally agree that Jesus did nothing (as visually evident in the numerous religious records) to warrant arrest, less crucifixion. Roman Philistines did impose very harsh penalties (up to death) on any party that disrupted the supply chain (commerce). Moneychangers at the temple would have provided commercial supply and they were undeniably [violently] disrupted by Barabbas (under pseudonym).

The physical crucifixion event (per its convenient placement in various New Testament writings) was used metaphorically. I shall discuss metaphorical terms shortly. For now, let me focus on the event. Some have noted that the crucifixion was conducted on private land, which was unusual. In Jesus’ case, this would imply that Barabbas was either extremely rich, well connected or both. The land, we learn, belonged to prominent local business man Joseph of Arimathea, whose international business holdings were reputedly centred at Cornwall, England (Gnostic-Druid heartland). Josephus’ scribe was Lazarus, son of Joseph of Aramithea. Jesus’ “wife” was Mary Magdalene, Lazarus’ sister, so there are logical family connections here. As Miriam (Mary) has rather negative connotations (suggesting bereavement) in ancient Hebrew, it is not widely used. Mary, on the other hand was a very popular contemporary Roman given name, particularly in royal circles, as it bestowed heritage. Given this background, I am already questioning whether there was an actual crucifixion, whether the event was purely metaphorical? Ancient chroniclers were afforded great liberty in the way they expressed themselves. Therefore knowing how to read between the lines correctly is the key to understanding hallowed texts.

Before I discuss validity of the crucifixion in more depth, I need to make a few more associated observations. Presumption Mary Magdalene was never called Miriam suggests she was prominent Roman offspring. Could this mean the Joseph of Aramithea had taken a Roman Philistine wife? Was she of royal lineage (hence selecting Mary as the given name for her daughter)? I am compelled to believe that she would have been extremely important for Joseph to be on first name terms with Pontius Pilate, Roman Governor of Judea. Turning to Inherent sources once more, I am informed that a royal marriage was brokered between Barabbas (Jesus’ father) and another Mary. If, as some scholars like to posit, Jesus was a family member of the Piso emperor class, that lineage could only have come via his mother (as his father was a Jewish royal). Should this prove sufficiently correct, it would explain why the Catholic Church gives the Madonna such bloated “eternal” status against puny “dead” Jesus on the cross. Congregations from all over the globe flock to touch her miracle working effigies.

Presuming a marriage had been brokered between “Mary” (euphemistically known as mother of Jesus) and Matthias Joseph (father of Josephus who “gave birth to” and was literal Jesus), contemporary politics would have been revolutionised (endorsing the Pharisees’ political intrigue). In conjunction, the undeniably hard to resolve question is “why did the Pharisees back clemency in favour of Barabbas (father of Jesus)?” unless there is more to solving the puzzle than meets the obvious eye.  Does this suggest that Jesus was a recalcitrant heir (hinted at in the Prodigal Son parable)? If Matthias Joseph was an integral part of the establishment, then Josephus almost certainly defied the wishes of the father. Failure of his preaching tour in the Nazareth region highlights the discontentment. Nazareth, at the time, was a hub for the well-to-do and privileged classes, so naturally political preferences erred towards hard-line right-wing philosophies. One can but presume that Matthias Joseph, as the bastion of civilised society and honoured revolutionary, had strong ties to religious order (i.e. the Pharisees). Josephus was comparatively Bohemian (again implied in the Prodigal Son parable).

Whilst alien to traditional Gnostic writings, all Gospels identify Jesus as a renegade preacher who associated with undesirables (“outcasts”). He is both against the rooted establishment (though quotes from “Law” at every opportunity) and oppressed civilisation (measuredly). Socialist content embedded in sermons would fare so well, proverbs have been adopted by modern day democracy movements. Courtesy of his royal status, Josephus did have friends in high places that shielded him, but they were still pillars of mundane society that were forced to corrupt certain values to remain in power (and use aliases when assisting renegade causes). This is perhaps casually camouflaged by Jesus’ association with outcasts (inwardly well meaning, but outwardly dishonest). Therefore modern day belief in “the Saviour” relies on corrupt zeal. Zeal, in turn, has transformed into a fanaticism cultivated by corporate religions. Individual beliefs are singular matters of faith, whereas idolatries become authorities for those that chose to apply “so called” blind faith (a grotesque form of ignorance).

Individual beliefs must be questioned to improve constancy, whereas determined authority erodes opportunity for zealous fidelity

Jesus would share Josephus’ birth year of 37AD, unless historic accuracy is obscured here. There are niggling problems with this date particularly when factoring in the most practical chronology allowing for his two and a half year ministry. The Siege of Jerusalem is the obvious choice as a correlating time period which I would say is the only plausible term of upheaval within range significant enough to profitably bolster a prophetic preacher’s missionary tour. His audience would have predominantly been Jews recoiling from ever widening Roman reprisals. Under such conditions, the siege must have been deemed the “final straw”. Adding to my case, Jesus’ journey has been retraced by geographical experts. Median chronology fits against the siege timeline like a glove, therefore I deduce the ministry ran from 64-66AD and that is why the first Gospel by Mark was published sometime after 68AD (long enough to source witnesses, conduct interviews, correlate notes, write, edit and publish a manuscript). There was no oral period as has been “supposed”, because it made no sense anyway. The contemporary Jewish connotation of what was meant by “Messiah” (then) is very different to the hybrid evolution (distortion) that prepares our modern day Catholic sacrificial Son of God “Christos” (or Christ) who “died for our sins”.

Considering proximity against the siege, details of Josephus’ geographic movements do appear to cultivate the “swashbuckler dodging authorities” narrative line. That’s why Jerusalem under siege was last stop – a fait accompli. According to Matthew’s Gospel, one of Jesus’ first acts (after collecting his posse of disciple bodyguards) was to request baptism from his cousin John (son of Zechariah). Traditionally a Jew reached maturity at age thirty, yet was the 37AD birthdate to be correct, then Josephus would have been twenty seven years old if the chronological positioning was accurate. Although the Roman equivalent was age twenty five, there is another explanation. Hebrew chroniclers did not necessarily place events in correct historic order. Prosperity very much justified the means. It seems more likely, in which case, that Jesus was baptised at the end of his ministry when he had built experience worthy of exalted blessing. Authority did not make purges against perceived threats until after the siege (identifying why there was a rapid exodus away from the region directly after 70AD). That is when John the Baptist (contender for the Jewish throne) would have lost his head. Josephus was only spared from the inquisition because of his royal Roman blood.

Mentioned earlier, Jesus was not crucified as there was nothing he did that could justify the punishment under Roman law.  His father, under the pseudonym Barabbas, may have gone through a ceremonial or mock crucifixion. Perhaps others followed suit, such as Simon of Cyrene, to honour the event. Ambiguous Turin Shroud (under care of the Catholic Church – that should instantly raise alarm bells) is a prop designated to fool believers. Beyond doubt, the item belonged to Jacques De Molay Grand Master of the Knights Templar, though only Michael Baigent has had the courage to attest truth in his mainstream publication (Holy Blood, Holy Grail 1982) for my research. Following Molay’s heresy conviction (under Catholicism), he was crucified (1314) in a manner that traced details laid out in the New Testament texts.

Metaphorically, depending on the event’s positioning, in the biblical context, the crucifixion represents the death of Gnosticism, whereas resurrection equals triumphant rebirth in the form of Christianity. The very earliest brand is likely to be Arianism. We can see the stem of Arian-ism is Arian or Aryan, so this should volunteer major questions from the alert. Didn’t Hitler worship a mythical Aryan race? In fact, of all the ancient (pre-biblical) races “Ceres” is the type that most closely represents Ayran characteristics. Significantly, Aryans are attributed to be pure Atlantis stock (alien genes were added to replenish humanity after the fall). This fits the overall picture, because traditions (including a weight of generally unrecorded information referenced from inherent sources) suggest the Gnostics went to extraordinary lengths in their attempts to rekindle Atlantis society. Some of their more sacred traditions, which included embedded magic (notably applied by practitioners of authentic Druidism and, hence, the elites’ interest in attending the mystery schools), predate known civilisation.

It could be argued that the whole concept of monachal divinity was ushered in by Atlantis. Accoutrements include the royal sceptre, which authentic versions are magic healing wands doubling as laser weapon. Bona fide royal orbs are holographic truth generators. A king’s crown bestowed the wearer with supernatural powers. Gnostics (visually expressed in the culture of Babylonian pharaohs) tried to approximate traditions as closely as possible. Below the Atlantis umbrella, society was guided by God who assumed formal presence in human form (i.e. this notion derived into “son of God”). As far as I can ascertain, Atlantis Gods were normally male, but on (or inside) other worlds, females preside over divinity. Per alien custom, these strange Goddesses are usually escorted by what we would call “prince consorts” (heirs or court champions’ suffice). Perhaps this is why some detailed truthful accounts tabled in ancient legends come across as ludicrously farcical.  We humans know only the human way. Therefore, non-human cultures are destined to either shock the system or captivate imagination.

In the interest of clarity, Gnostic-Jewish belief supposed the messianic priest-king (Christ) was the blessed divine embodiment of the people and that is why Jesus is euphemised as the Son of God. Even so many [differing and sometimes contradictory] messages can be delivered by a single fragment of text. Researchers should assure themselves a purist’s Messiah’s wisdom would put Solomon’s childish antics in their place. Ridiculous emphasis on the Pharisees’ salute to valid laws has ruined any chance of divine virtue governing man. Old Testament sermons dictate a path to enlightenment so rigid, any traveller is guaranteed crippled from the off. That is the reason paradoxes are so plentiful, “issues” seem to loom every few verses. Per these auspices, how could religious traditions be anything other than viscerally dishonest? My heart goes out to Italy’s La Befana . That bonny witch on a broomstick does more for Italian children than any pompous pope could dream.