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.


NASA’s Predictable Bogus Journey – Packing for Mars?

nasamoonhoaxOne cannot help but being inspired by the prospect of packing for Mars. Though I have not been paying attention to anything more than occasional routine announcements gleaned here and there about this fantastical mission, my memory does preserve NASA’s original offer of a one way trip to Mars for anyone with enough gusto to stump up the $10 million price tag. 59381-52775Maybe that proposal has changed many times over the marketing course, but I am drawn to the banality of the original offer. Humans, in general, are ultra-safe, dare I say pathologically cowardly creatures, so which fools would have the faith to trust NASA and the reckless stupidity to pay vast sums of money for the chance of almost guaranteed misfortune? Come on now, a one way trip to the unknown organised by the greatest conjurers known to man! I would feel safer at a dinner party hosted by serial cannibals.

packingformars-crjpg-325f1ea9e3094f1a_copyBe it NASA has a massive propaganda machine, lovingly aided and abetted by all established Media cartels that cast the organisation as an immaculate, error free, “fun for the people” agency, cutting edge on space science and everything alien, outside the bubble the picture is far less rosy. Indeed, dissenters have wittily reworked the NASA acronym as Never a Straight Answer in response to obvious duplicity, the organisation’s invariably deceptive agendas and woeful double standards. In reflective light, I made the case that “Mars” rover Curiosity is one such evidence of mischief in a prior article and feel the content is so important; its partial duplication here is more than justified. There’s a little more to it than that, of course. People struggle reading oversized articles and the amount of time required to edit such marathons makes sure ample detail is missed, so I’ve added a lot here and given those with busy schedules the chance to read the whole thing.

never-a-straight-answer-coffeetea-mugPresuming the majority of honest critical thinkers have sufficient confidence to claim NASA never landed on the moon and, perhaps, did not even venture beyond Earth’s atmosphere; my heart goes out to those silly, foolhardy Mars adventurers. I realise every one signing on for this trip of a lifetime is fully cognisant, but wonder whether we, the onlookers, are not experiencing evidence of glaring symptoms showing a “new” yet to be categorised mental illness. Has not the World Health Organisation claimed Ebola virus will cause head shrinkage or microcephaly? nasa-coffinIs this the outcome? Perhaps our brave travellers didn’t take their shots? Casting no aspersions here, I am just throwing it out there and perhaps being a little facetious at the same time. Indeed, being one of those critical thinkers’ that finds all evidence offered in support of the moon visits proves the reverse, for me, to trust NASA with a ten foot pole would be akin to bargaining the devil after he’d been evicted by his landlord, lost at the races and badly stubbed his big toe on the same day. Not a pretty sight.

2abf65a300000578-3170726-image-a-2_1437564818461Years ago, when I allowed myself to occasionally watch TV, I saw a half hour show supporting NASA in response to rabid critics of the moon landings. Predictably, the program ignored everything they could not answer (because there was no answer) and the rest was a master class of misdirection or false association. Even so my flatmate at the time agreed with every point, hook, line and sinker. That alone showed me there are gullible people out there with preconceptions so lacking in curiosity, inspection of the detail is rendered unfathomable. Perhaps, in individual cases, academic laziness plays a part. Thinking, doing the maths, investigating unbiasedly and thoroughly enough to find the heart of the debate are prerequisites for due diligence. For those with intellectual ambition, “validating excuses” don’t cut it.

michael_j_smith_comparedSadly, I fear complacent, slothful naysayers probably make the majority of those we generally assemble to call wider society. Thus, NASA knew there would be fools aplenty; most likely enough to justify the campaign (even with a $10 million price tag a head). The Medias have done a sterling job at elevating their profile. Even so, I am personally surprised anyone with the capability of amassing $10 million hasn’t learnt anything. To which end, I question why all attendees wouldn’t be preselected by NASA at no personal cost, perhaps even each paid off handsomely for individual contributions geared to making the bogus journey seem real for the “punters” (TV hogs). My prior article used the word “heist”. Whether “bogus” or “heist” is selected, anything associated with our presence in space should be questioned deeply. Whilst illogically incomplete, “flat Earth theory” does posit some good questions. Scientific anomalies have placed difficult answers pertaining to the authenticity of the International Space Station (ISS), for instance. In my other article I also suggested NASA plays a double game. Well removed from the popular public eye, their lesser known associates regularly present mind blowing gems of authenticity.

thetruthaboutcancer-logo-retinaThe article that has provided the basis for this entry was my largest web writing project of all time to date. One of the reasons I have partially duplicated content here was “Mars, Gods and Martian Mercenaries” is simply too long to read [constructively] in one sitting in my opinion, With this in mind, I made the conscious decision to reproduce sections as basis for a number of pieces here, expanding on original content where necessary. From the original “mighty tome”, there are possibly going to be around three section reproductions in total. Running parallel I have a very different writing project in progress, provisionally titled “Coming Clean on Cancer”. It will reveal the singular root cause of all cancers, but more importantly, explaining why this is so. Triggers and cures will be equally rationally evaluated and explained within context.

00723634ac78438ac6687d05d4de476eA “Packing for Mars” sequel to this entry will give some unknown detail on an ancient history of the planet stretching back a hundred million years. Focus is on two noteworthy vaguely related civilisations separated by tens of millions of years. Naturally, most, if not all, of the Information provided is going to be very much down to personal faith but also will be verifiable for those with access to “the record” (called by different names but “Akashic” will do as an example even though it is the part representing light frequencies or heavenly states). At this stage I very much doubt any proposed trip to Mars is authentic, though who knows what additional research might turn up. According to the record of ancient Atlantis (originally on Mars), a large asteroid struck which saw 90% of the surface atmosphere lost. A holographic blister field was erected in the nick of time. Obviously I will example the true dynamics of gravity (another “conspiracy” exposed by flat Earth theory) to scientifically explain how that happened. It does pose some tricky questions as to what those journeying might find at their target location. Would they be allowed to land, or is there something in place to protect the lost Atlantis legacy? Rumours have it Buzz Aldrin and the other mythical moon rocketeers were warned off by some very nasty looking entities half way.

shooting_stanley_kubrick__the_faked_moon_landings_unedited_full_documentary__218388Returning to the bogus journey theme, I make no secret of my opinion that NASA sourced evidence of moon cine footage and all photo stills generated by Mars rover were (or are currently) created on Earth. It was an opinion that nested a foothold in a prior article at my other WordPress site. There I postulated a possibility for one of the “set” locations might be Antarctica because it is barren enough to suit the topography. However, sane consideration of the place as plausible is dubiously doubtful. Further research has yielded no ice free positions of worthy comparison and the notion that mundane scientists have inadvertently accessed unencumbered inner realms that were once the dazzling grounds of the legendary Rainbow City would be the best kept secret of all time, if true. Moreover, it is rather cold for reptiles (given the number of possibly live ophidian pictorial irregularities).

ship-figure-ufo-ufos-sighting-sightings-alien-aliens-et-rainbow-star-wars-2015-news-earth-volcano-mexico-bicycle-lady-deathstar-woman-jennifer-aniston-water-life-mars12Photographic resolutions of stills created by the Mars rover are poor enough to ensure all key details remain shrouded in mystery but good enough to generate endless “possibility” questions. Several desert dwelling (Earth) creatures, including reptiles and ground squirrels, have been snapped by the propaganda machine and this most favours a local Rocky Mountains reference point. Others may select any of the government restricted areas at the Nevada desert, one the occasional home to an alien race colloquially known as the “Tall Whites” according to Charles Hall. Other worldly sources tell me these are version eight human, created around thirty thousand years ago as our “advanced model”. 55d9dbfec3618872108b45aeIn that capacity they may act as de facto physical controllers of Earth, “go-betweens” for dimensionally adrift reptilian overlords. With regards to clandestine photo shoots, I have considered infamous Area 51 too obvious, given the potential for voyeuristic eavesdroppers with long range surveillance equipment adequate enough for spying purposes.

ay_110985159Though I haven’t been paying a great amount of attention to what’s been happening in the public domain, for my limited research, other than that “mysterious” doughnut shaped “perambulating” rock, “Mars” rover has unearthed no alien artefacts at all. Wilful imaginations have inspired numerous commentaries on random boulder shapes that might signify something (but actually don’t). The trend was started by Barak Obama’s school chum, lawyer, Andrew Basiago, whose childish “book” conjectured numerous invalid fossilised hybrids of “household creatures” implausibly strewn here and there. What he wrote isn’t a far stretch from current stylised akin sentiment and I did feature a slide of a Mars shoe “anomaly” in a past article hoping to prompt “comments”.

manure-antibioticsDepicted was a rock (originally presented as evidence by a British national newspaper, “The Daily Express”) that straightforwardly looked like a shoe and the reason it made its mass Media “scoop” is the corporate press is being used to promulgate NASA’s indirect propaganda campaign. Richard C Hoagland (an ex. NASA departmental director) spent years “priming opinions” prior to the “launch”; a fantasy that expanded as a theoretical quest to discover and bust into a giant (ninety miles squared) “encased city” whose Ali Baba style treasures would surely put the Atlanteans to shame. 5d14081f331e4fe6e7f2f1ae2c437e30ee63e82cBut, of course, as with all things fantasy, there was no actual plan for the rover to visit on its slow weary wind towards its pointless unforeseen target destination. Hoagland did try and make a point out of pointlessness but, I, personally, failed to see it. Like the numerous pyramids, that “mountain” face picked up in the 1970’s or those strange “grooved” canals, Hoagland’s enticing “encased city” was guaranteed off limits as NASA was only interested in reviewing crap.

Having the ability to read energy signatures gives me a distinct advantage over other would be investigators that look at matters such as these. Everything that lives generates auras comprising layered signals that collectively consolidate all active and historic associated genetic data. These threads connect to timelines and, therefore, via supplementary routes it is possible to drill down into any aspect of any one of these pristine metaphysical “records”. If a rock had once lived and was the fossilised evidence of a life form its auric memory is preserved eternally. There are some limiters, of course.

tone-deafOne such is we do not have the technique or technical knowhow to upload a mind’s product to a designated location whereby it might be inspected and “verified” by third parties. Neither do we have the ability to network minds as fourth dimensional “reptilians” can. Thus, external records housed in auric fields are currently locked and exclusively subject to the integrity of those that claim they have the ability to discern them. Any feedback from these self-proclaimed savants would be an undeniable venture of faith for less attuned listeners, although aspects of that faith might afford opportunities to put feedback “to the test”. Discoveries are likely to be partially verifiable even by the spiritually deaf, at the very least.

600_346066932Residue information from auric fields is not limited to that which is or was living. However, the connections and style of inanimate originated records are very different to ones stored as organic signatures even though, thinking practically; it is likely the whole thing is an aspect of quantum residual (or light). My book, “The Beauty of Existence Decoded” exposes the largely overlooked importance of the quantum layer as a super-facilitator (exchange). Anyway, suffice to say, inanimate objects can give vital clues about things that lived, clues that can be cross referenced and double checked against known (or presumed known) data. For instance, any [manual] work done on a rock will also detail the genetic path (of the craftsman/labourer) by its timeless energy signature. Even a bird that may have inadvertently sat on the same stone will be captured by a common signature.

give-mars-the-bootFrom this anyone with ability to read signals can instantly interpret any object’s history and beyond. I went through the verification analysis of the sensational “shoe on Mars” to find only a bulk standard ordinary rock which happened to look like footwear in its unfavourable lighting conditions. Not having witnessed a “beyond a shadow of a doubt” bona fide Mars originated auric field, it would be implausible to test the shoe rock’s location that way as frequencies might be almost identical to ones’ defining Earth localities and vice versa. Even if it did “read” as being Martian, how could one be entirely sure that it had not been presented as a gift by an alien dignitary stationed here, broken off a comet or travelled to Earth by some unknown spurious means?

2-nasa-in-hebrew-means-to-deceive-greatlyUnlike NASA, I see no point in sifting through mountains of crap knowing there is nothing [of value] to be seen. So I won’t labour the message. This (the Mars heist) is the best evidence I find that confirms fortuitous agency comparison against the similar sounding Hebrew word “Nasa” (to deceive) is not merely coincidental. For those not moved by my earlier indirect propaganda accusation I say to you, why did mainstream television “innocently” select that controversial slide showing a distinctive and “shocking” crouching “reptilian” as the preview to the rover’s launch without plausible follow up? It was because they wanted to stoke fertile imaginations to stimulate open but never resolving gossip about “aliens”. Jon Rappoport calls the practice “limited hangout”, by the way.

609241785In this particular case, depending on what society is required to believe (by those that attempt to control by Media) would determine whether debunking campaigns against all those tired stage props (including the crouching alien) are launched or not. 29df56d6fb7f467be0fb98cd1fcae87aWith the exception of a few accidentally shaped rocks, I believe just about every single intriguing item uncovered was either put in place by the heisters or evidence of operational malfunction. Those occasional possible glitches, such as the doughnut shaped rock, merely add to the “intrigue” as millions of synchronised sceptics’ chimes attempt to explain the anomalies away. However, there is a glaringly obvious operational flaw that exposes how the Mars program has been staged and, upon explicit analysis; the many parts of this ruse are slightly more complex than on “face value”.

That said, often concentrating on “the basics” will yield obvious rewards. Would not any serious investigator first question whether years’ worth of “Mars” footage could have been pre-shot to iron out or avoid unnecessary problems/complications in advance? It is clear that was how NASA handled the “moon” operations. Why, oh why, would a cautious image-centric marketing program with “everything to lose” take the unprecedented risk of channelling a “live” Earth feed “via Mars”? We can see from the all too numerous anomalies that potential mistakes have been made. The “team” has been sloppy in places. Obvious flaws with operational strategy can be found in two basic accounts. First and foremost, those erratic extended camera shutdowns/malfunctions undeniably confirm mitigated censorship.

heist-image-v2-0-square-low-quality-1024x1024The outcome has seen the apparently spontaneous outrage from numerous salacious gossip mongering internet TV channels who weigh into the (fictitious) debate as though they are “authorities”. Logically, “a gazillion” possible conspiracies behind the shutdowns are the consequence and many have been asserted. None, thus far, given the masquerading objective, are close to being reasonably correct. Supporting my opinions, it seems all or the vast majority of internet TV commentators are part and parcel of NASA’s indirect propaganda campaign. They are the “plan B”. For instance, I have yet to find one that doesn’t present as though he assumes Mars footage is being filmed “on Mars”, which, I have outlined, blatantly isn’t true. Mars rover Curiosity is definitely filming Earth.

maxresdefaultThe reason the rover has to be “live” impacts the second flaw in calculated operational planning. Why the rover’s roaming camera has been periodically shut down and switched off at a moment’s notice is it travels in tandem. Accompanying the Curiosity’s every beat is some sort of overhead satellite. This is where it starts to become really intriguing. Not only is the satellite feeding genuine Mars surface footage back to Earth, but it’s also live and the perspective has never been seen before “as presented”. Could that be a big old fraud too? It is unlikely because, if I understand details correctly, the satellite took the Curiosity rover to Mars. From memory, there was a gap between the satellite dropping the rover off on Mars and the surveillance machine firing up its all seeing eye. In other words, we are not entirely sure whether it was the Curiosity that was dropped off on Mars or, God forbid, NASA is running dual operations: one for the “scientists“ (or perhaps even the elites) and another simply  geared to confounding the plebs.

08-false_colour-filters-01-examples_01-03-red_091Anyway, either way, there is no verifiable correlation between the overhead and the surface image perspectives.   Even so, one interesting thing I do note is the Marian terrain (was it presumed to be real) happens to be deep green as presented by the overhead camera. In light of the way our eyes process colour, I have always maintained that if Mars seemed “red” in the distance, it would actually appear dark green when viewed close up. This leads me to believe the overhead photography hasn’t been embellished, as the logical move in pandering to popular ignorance would be to present Mars as a uniformly visually “red planet” (I suspect the Earth surface footage is run through filters to create the correlating ruddy effect). Another possibility is the green was too dark to alter sufficiently; too much work for such an insignificant payoff. We won’t go into the inexplicable reasons justifying why the Mars overhead satellite cannot drill down to present almost as much detail as the rover. Has NASA been triumphantly defeated by the Roman God of War?

In a nutshell, what actually seems to be going on here is this. Technicians (that are driving it) must constantly guide the rover on the turn of a penny because Mars terrain is unknown until “team NASA” receives more vague information from its overhead satellite. Rover drivers then have to roughly “map” the Earth terrain route as something that could plausibly be representative of the overhead footage in real time. No mean task! Naturally, fairly ambiguous, nondescript terrain was selected for the Earth leg as too many large landmarks might give away the ruse. Even vague very distinct topology (as seen from above) would be impossible to configure without lengthy strategic planning. Therefore camera “malfunctions” have pretty much been the only way to coordinate a response to those sections of overhead that by no stretch of the imagination could be matched against correlating terrains.

In addition endless phantom internet commentaries have admirably assisted the deception program by adding to the confusion, transforming the “ambiguous” into intrigue. My selected YouTube presentation above gives a classic example of hysteria over nothing. In this one an arguably naïve announcer does manage to blurt out something about the ground not matching the overhead at precise point when the last camera glitch happened. Though the penny predictably doesn’t drop in the right way in the presentation, it was conclusively obvious that NASA could not recreate Mars on Earth for that part of the journey.

obama-the-pig“Curiosity” has found something that surely conclusively confirms its hoax status. A magnificent statue, the unmistakable bust of a “humanoid prince” (as is supposed) was discovered languishing in, otherwise nondescript, wasteland. Surrounded by nothing other than dusty coarse rocks was a mirage that might have been the ironic splitting image of outgoing President Obama if that was plausible. Of all contradictions! But, then again, did not Ayn Rand say “check your premises”?  Therefore, if of all the people on Earth to be immortalised by that awful, cheesy NASA spoof paraded as “science” is Obama, then its only premise would be a giant fraud deliberately staged to lampoon consumer reasoning. Who better to display than the great spinner of cheese and the one that had “final say” on authorisation of Curiosity’s deceitful, bogus mission?

marvel-two-in-one-53p19That history goes back further. Before, little Barak Obama and Andrew Basiago, when they were schoolchildren hand in hand, had reputedly been absconded to Mars via Hawaiian Stargate under instruction of code-named “Project Pegasus” (a CIA operation, no less). So, as the “pioneer” of Mars intrigue, perhaps he believes he has earned the right to phony privilege.

Information on Project Pegasus is the sum of a shadowy press mythology alongside an unconvincing, “atrociously written” book by “teamer” Basiago. I don’t recall ever seeing the mainstream running with any feeds (and “Google” comes up blank) on this, even Russian ones. If spurious reports are to be believed, the children were drafted as slaves on consignment to begin work at a reptilian run colony located at their overgrown inner sanctum. cia_logo_by_nvmsthlm-d4x9tms-2The atmosphere was so different to Earth’s it was potentially fatally noxious, but children were said to be able to adapt better. Consistent with this information, rumour had it that over a hundred thousand adults had succumbed in only a very few years after they were drafted. Even allowing for ad lib sensationalism and deliberate misinformation, I suspect there is more to this story than meets the eye, given repulsive Dick Cheney’s alleged honorary title “Mars Tsar”, so perhaps I will focus on the detail, sift for pertinence and gradually uncover loose truths one rainy day in the future.

My recent invite to a dinner occasion afforded me the opportunity to test my version of cosmic physics out on supposedly open minds. Every point I made was resisted by a wall of dissenting conventions. Those I was against, and it became a fortuitous “war”, could not detach themselves from ingrained superstitions no matter how plausible counter-objections were. I was, when considering how individuals form their beliefs, up against an army of anonymous information spinners over-simplifications’ and generalities’ vocalised as proverbial, popular conventions. “Why can’t you just go with the flow?” I was told, abruptly. But I did not go with the flow and after innumerable visual analogies; the group eventually conceded I might be right. They could not articulate conventions beyond their hollow beliefs’ status so; ultimately, none could back up their convictions. Some could well be equally critical of this article. You critics may argue, “Why didn’t he talk about the latest incidents/anomalies “on Mars”?” “He has seemed to have missed so much out. This essay is a very poor job.”

nasa-fraudThe point is simple. NASA has predicably committed fraud. Evidence presented is sufficient to qualify it. The Mars journey is bogus. Mission accomplished.

Celebration of Dreams and Hope

hopeCommercialism aside, Christmas at least has the potential to bring out the best in people. Some might wonder why kindness isn’t the natural state for human beings. It isn’t the natural state because humans are not naturally very kind, or, rather, we learn that being kind conflicts with whims for self. Nevertheless, if there was one thing that substantiated us from “apes”, it is our ability to sacrifice. Some children give up toys and other desirables in support of others simply because something inside said that was the right thing to do. Apes will fight to the death to defend possessions they absolutely prize.  Unfortunately children grow up and morph into far less altruistically minded adults. Adults instinctively think, “What’s the catch and how can I manipulate that in my favour?” Yes, there are tales of heroes losing lives attempting to pull injured from burning buildings, but “giving for the sake of giving” is a concept alien to most adults.  We’re in the so-called Christmas season and, funnily enough, “giving for the sake of giving” summarises true Christmas spirit.

10930874_935290633162591_2602072548312968020_nIt would fair to say every single human being eventually succumbs to idealism in some shape or form. Dreams and hope are the classic examples. Realities never quite match the fantasy and this is why spinners of make-believe draw humans like flies to dung. Hollywood is regularly cited as the greatest active “pied piper” of the modern age. I’d go along with that, but there are many others, including different genres and numerous tricks or styles used to entrance imaginations. Because humanity, in general, has gradually reached a state of apoplectic denial, people go out of their way, if not believe, to react to the fantasy; any rosy picture in spite of truth. In fact, such is the disparity; truth can look so dark and nasty, it might seem satanically devilish. It does not take a great stretch of the imagination to calculate the net effect.

There is nothing honest about “evil” and if the truth is satanically devilish, practicality dictates it cannot be trusted or reasoned “true”. Dreams and hope have transformed fantasy into reality and the truth has been rejected outright as light extinguishes the night. In addition, people have been lulled into believing deceptive lies for so long; often they could not substantiate truth from fantasy even if they wanted to be pure. Christmas may have the potential to bring out the best in people, but, consequentially, currently it brings out the worst, such is the desire for dream and hope fulfilment. A wonderful Christmas isn’t limited to those in need. Everyone wants one and many will go to any lengths to get one, in spite of those in need. The erosion of truth has permitted egregious deceit is heralded as wisdom and mischievous imps posture as cumbersome angels.

eggnog-bah-humbug-card-coulson-macleodIf there was a common bond which binds humanity together, it is the power to hate. If only we could hate the same things simultaneously, then we could become brothers and sisters of war and not constantly at war. Think of that as a grand vision for utopian society, because that’s where we are heading – rapidly. Conflicts don’t just happen in the Middle East. They start on the roads, in the supermarket, at school, between family members fighting over who received or gave the best Christmas present. Jealousy, envy and greed punctate human collateral ambition and nothing changes at Christmas. Behind those eggnog grins I see only “bah humbug”. You will struggle to find any social environment, whether public or private, free of bitterness at any time.

“Oh my corns are playing up”

That’s hardly said in celebration. People don’t dream about or hope for corns over Christmas. This sort of passive spite is calculated to galvanise hatred or grand one upmanship.

“My cousin’s got cancer. Incurable you know”

If I responded “So what?” would that make me callous? Maybe, but it would also be the truth, the dark, nasty truth. Beyond its celebration of despair, how is that information constructive?

angelwings_webbannerAs Christmas is coming up, I think it’s about bloody time a few of you read my book, “The Beauty of Existence Decoded”. cannabis_oil_cures_cancers_google_itI know it’s a tough call, but in order to read my book you are going to have to donate for it as well. Think of it as two Christmas gifts for the price of one. You receive a book that is like no other ever written, even though Brendan D. Murphy likens it to his “The Grand Illusion – Part One”. I also receive some much needed Christmas cash. Thus far the e-book has generated under $1000 revenue. 1000 hours (at least) were devoted to production, so my “pay” for the enormously sacrificial leap of faith I took in committing to the project equates to less than $1 an hour by way of a return income. Want a job?

belief-in-magicAt times I can empathise with sentiment along the lines of “You miserable fuckers, I hope your Christmas sucks, because mine’s guaranteed to”, but this piece is all about dreams and hope. I have decided I am going to ride that hope a while longer in my belief that miracles can happen and humanity has more than mere potential. I place my faith, trust and belief and the rest is up to you. Turn my dreams and hope into reality for Christmas.

“The Beauty of Existence Decoded” is writing largely free of academic references and, as such, completely ignores conventions. I have taken the view that just because Newton said it doesn’t make it true unless it is true. Even so, textual revelations, in their own way, corroborate good practice as much as they attack bad science. “Big picture” concepts can only be understood by the faithful because a lot of parts that make up the picture are impossible to prove (and, in some cases, even experience). To give the analogic example; how can colour be “proven” to ones never sighted from birth? Pragmatism may suggest astral or dream state communications are possible, but, in practically, the sight blind will never verifiably experience colour and, consequential, can only rely on faith to support belief in the spectrum.

151209picklebabainlineConversely, the spectrum would never be more than a compelling superstition to blind sceptics. When that analogy is expanded to include vast domains way beyond our sensory perception, it engulfs most conclusive sentiment routinely issued by credentialed scientists. Certainly, anyone seriously entertaining rationalising existence must determine it is everything and not limited to merely what we perceive. Therefore, in order to comprehend existence, faith is a prerequisite. It is the faith requirement that makes “The Beauty of Existence Decoded” all the more hard to read. When factoring in those demonstrable criticisms of the empirics, the book is more likely to have the effect of alienating hard line materialist (atheist) radicals.

It is hard enough to read as it is, because much information was collected “directly” from inherence (which is an expansion of the astral plane; comprising the akashic records). How to explain? I am bombarded with data streams from numerous places, perhaps generated by a single entity but, if so, it is an entity of many parts (perhaps from the cubed light dimension, I discuss in the book). Information is transmitted in a way that would best be described as illegible. Sometimes a single idea can convey numerous meanings, so translation requires herculean stamina. My task is to patch together viscerally unrelated threads and make some sense of them.  However, I am always cordially aware that every time I change a garbled message, I risk ruining it. Perhaps a good analogy might be processed foods. They may taste great, but all the goodness is removed for added flavour.

white-lily-1024x857So, to cut a long story short, I try and leave as much in as possible so you, the readers, receive a message of purity (remember how the truth can seem very dark and nasty) and not tasty drivel. In places, this has made the writing style very “clunky”. Indeed, parts are so hard to understand they might almost read as “gibberish”. There is a solution. Unclear passages should be read over and over until relative clarity is forthcoming. Since writing the book (completed nearly two years ago), my personal development has been celestial. This does conveniently provide me the opportunity to highlight the “problem with translation” I mentioned earlier. Here is one subtle misinterpretation error. There may be others, but all will be profound. Texts postulated the “collapse of the Satan Star” initiated 3D which isn’t true. Instead, it was the “invasion” of 3D that built and built to eventually “break” (or overwhelm) the star.

christmas-present-83119_640Rather than a celebration of dreams and hope at Christmas, I would like to see more examples of unconditional faith; the joy of giving.  So, without further ado, here’s my gift to you my readers; my Christmas present to you. This is an important excerpt from “The Beauty of Existence Decoded” that has never been publicised before. Note: for enhancement of content and improved reading pleasure, I have added brackets ([] & {}) around textual amendments (which hopefully don’t conflict with goodness too much).

“The Beauty of Existence Decoded”

51gTKHWX+cL._SX332_BO1,204,203,200_“Conscientious readers may have noticed that I skipped over the innocuous, yet all important, claim that we are given free will. The best accolade [in support of our] free will is our [own] development of machines. Whereas, designers may say this or that machine has performed to design specifications, not one designer knows precisely how a machine will perform. Engineers may attempt to decipher why machines fail, but that is mostly in relation to design specifications. On the rare occasions engineers think outside the box, they never try to comprehend what the machine’s perception is [might be]. A few brave writers have questioned whether artificial intelligence is something more [than synthetic], but explorations mimic anecdotal human emotions rather tha[n] coming to terms with non-human, non-vital intelligence. I continually battle with those that [pre] determine [particularly mainstream] science is correct until disproven. The problem is {that}, when science makes a partisan statement, it presents only theoretical evidence as [its] supporting philosophy and then fends off any views re-examining theoretical evidence that contradict conclusions.  Worse still, many of these partisan statements are the [become] foundations for [untried and] untested conclusions. By that I mean, the conclusions were concocted for science detectives to find evidence [in support of them]. Under those terms, the quest invariably is to validate and not prove. Gradually science has been reduced to a state ignorance whereby that which contra[di]cts, disproves or invalidates the agenda is vindictively ignored.

A classic limiter of this [type of] science is, other than analysing [for] {its} vital {‘life’} signs; it cannot distinguish between life and death. Living things are currently [either] validated or not, as the case may be, by sciences that do not truly understand what lives, other than in the assertion of successful analysis of proscribed vital signs. An apex can be found in the definition of viruses. These are external particles that have found a way to exist in bodies whilst having no metabolic growth or reproductive capability. Science definition has become so confused by this phenomenon, inanimate non-organic matter usually classed as “not living”, in the case of viruses is classed as living. This is partially done to enable corrupt medical commerce, but still underscores the scandalous gulf in science understanding. Hollywood has played with circular reasoning in its portrayal of the living dead – zombies. For science, zombies will always have vital signs to meet its standard. Life is not as science standardises, however. In reality the soul can be found in the rawest elements (sub-particles), dynamics discussed later. Thus everything lives, whether vital or not. Zombies, if real, give a big hint as to what life really is. Normally a passive existence would be inanimate, but there is no reason why life could[n’t] be jump started. With this in mind, perhaps machines actually live in a different way.

To find an example to break the mindset, I would like to draw conscientious readers’ attention to the donut shaped metallic rock that appeared on Mars in recent times. Whilst there is a strong likelihood the event was evidence of Earth junk debunking some Earthly location of the “supposed Mars” rover, if it was a rock it appears to be mobile (as evidenced by contextual photographs recorded by the rover). There are animate rocks on other planets so it offers a good soundboard for my case. An example would be a mountain range that circumnavigates its globe’s surface roughly every one hundred thousand years. This spectacular phenomenon is located on a planet far outside our solar system. It is so slow moving it is barely noticed, but still moves without vital signs. When dwelling on potential malpractice on Mars, one is reminded of the evidence of [suggesting] “man on the moon” fraud. Stanley Kubrick’s fine “Moon landing” film hoodwinked so many it is now part of “history”.

It is because of that undeniably fake film offered as evidence for moon visitation, I am compelled to believe that at least some of the Mars rover’s photographs are from Earth bound locations, perhaps views of Rocky Mountains’ terrain (desolate enough to look “Mars like” with filters?). This is not to say “all” photographs of Mars are false, but, conceivably that could be so. A misnomer worth divulging is that, as per the cosmic laws of gravity, without artificial technology our moon would have zero G-force. It is only the space vacuum [strictly an incorrect concept] that might “pin” bodies to the surface depending on environmental circumstances. The implications are staggering. There can only be either a dome or a holographic force field containing large sections of the moon’s surface, somewhat confirming Richard C. Hoagland’s “crazy” suggestions. Other researchers that have managed to de-shop moon surface photos have uncovered networks of what appear to be covered roads or pathways (pressurised glass supporting alien-made atmosphere streams?). There may also exist, rather bizarrely, mountain (or hill) sized stone depictions of extinct (Earthly?), once successful, life forms. To use an entire planet surface as a giant historic record is not beyond the realms of possibly considering the very different priorities certain extra-terrestrial entities place on existence.

Before I discuss life in detail, understanding of existence needs to be complete. There is enormous symmetry in creation so once the macro is comprehended; it is a small step to decipher micro mechanics. At its most fundamental everything is an illusion; creation being an accident with duality as the dire consequence. Even though duality flourished prior to the accident that enabled creation, it roughly mimicked and, therefore, enabled what we call “faith” and “control”. The control determinants insisted Prime Source (the whole) was perfect and magnificent in every respect simply because it was. Champions of faith proposed there might be something more which meant it was less than perfection. It, they contemplated, was the start and lateral development might produce improvement with trial and error. Therefore, as control dominated faith, originally the plan was deemed sacrosanct. It was a plan that took the form of a single “zero point” vent opening out to “somewhere” which was wasn’t (from “nowhere” which was). The consequence allowed invisible light to burst forth and dance in the all-consuming darkness (even though, at this stage, darkness was a variation of what wasn’t – nothing).

A crack had been hewn into the fabric of “was” nothing (as opposed to “wasn’t” nothing). Yet the parties corroborating invisible light (in all its parts) had been selfish is their zest for independence. Invisible light was an adjunct of God, whose whole was greater than the part. Prior to segregation, Innumerable impetuses of dark or light character acted as mutual designers of a divine haven, which may have had the potential for development and growth through discovery. After separation, the light character tried to leave darkness behind and God was incomplete. Prime Source and its manifestation, God, needed to be complete so a balanced order was created.

The creation process started with states, emotions and actions. Everything was positive for it was the celebration of self as a manifestation, regardless of “character”. Because self was all, anything was possible – limited only by imagination or will. Will was control and imagination was faith – the cooperative schism. Maybe it was because there was too much energy or maybe error simply “was” but the advent of doom forged destiny. The original zero point vent, which had been an exclusive sanctuary for light, created an enormous invisible star (for there was no visible light). This was more than a bi-product or an effect. It was a living breathing body. The very first star, invisible and the purest manifestation of life, as life was then, became known as Satan. Negative portrayal of Satan came from the significant event that marked doom. Over a long period of time (measured by linear standards) the Satan Star could not manage the seamless redirection of endlessly increasing journeying identities.

The extraordinary forces that had built up inevitably could be blamed on the collapse of Satan. However, the original parties aligned to invisible white light squarely point at non-aligned parties of darkness. The Prime Source, God, would have encouraged all element[s] to burst free to make the expressive wonderland of existence a capitulation of completeness through the harmonisation of the balanced whole. Conscientious viewers should understand it was and is the Racism of white light against dark matter that originally obscured the purpose of existence and led to inappropriate and ineffective mechanics and subsequent collapse of the Satan Star. As that way was the way and, though doomed, it did partially facilitate requirements but worked to a finite calendar. Without reengineering the whole concept, it was there to stay. Thus, everything that exists in our physical universe is given a lifespan. The ultimate beings, stars, though only “die” from the superficial perspective, cease to shine eternally. Prime Source, God, was and is limited by what was and is possible.

What to reasonably blame for the collapse is debatable, but the outcome is well known. As a project, the first imploded star is known as Satan, or, at least, that is its name today. Nevertheless all the focus is devoted to the crystalline supported force field that surrounds bliss. This is colloquially known as the Black Sun and that is what the Satan Star grew into. Arguably this is the central point for everything as it is where everything started; our belly button of existence. Though NASA claims it has the mass of a million stars (as stars have no mass, how would they know?), it is the rule and not the exception. To the best of my knowledge every star does not decay but will eventually reach the final stage of compression; the phenomenon we call a Black Hole. Dark matter limits the light, eventually to non-visible existence, but forces increase; exponentially. Rather more poignantly, it was the collapse of Satan first and then all subsequent stars (in their final life cycle stage) that enabled the manifestation of physical dark matter (charged sub-particles) which eternally spew into the non-void (theoretically sub-space is the void as that is “is” nothing) we call “space”. Conscientious readers will now surely see theological metaphor? sorbe2Satan’s spawn (per Racist white light definition) dark matter is the manifestation of all the raw materials for everything solid in D3. In other words, without dark matter we would not exist.”

Deep, profound literature is best followed by exquisite music. The concept is similar to rounding off a mutton vindaloo with a fresh lemon sorbet. Here is my recent interpretation of Mily Balakirev’s Nocturne 1 on a newly tuned piano. Balakirev was one of influences on the great virtuoso composer Serge Rachmaninoff and (lesser known) Sergei Lyapunov (who was asked to and completed Balakirev’s Piano Concerto 2). The nocturne was a late work, written in 1898. My Facebook friend, Gary Gengler, not a musical professional, described the piece as “strangely exotic, ethereal, other-worldly, disharmonious and seductive”, so it seems to compliment the “Beauty of Existence Decoded”.

Those of you that intend to bring a little cheer at Christmas can follow my e-book donation instructions below.

I have sold less than 100 copies of “The Beauty Existence Decoded”. Whilst expectation per capita donations of $200 or greater would be impracticle to contemplate, that would have ensured I was to receive somewhere between $15-20 an hour in recompense for work done. Thus far, the highest donation has been $40, which was over generous as the “average” has been around $20 a person. There is no “fixed price” or ceiling to donation amounts, which should be not less than $10. No one (other than me) has promoted my book. Those that donate and promote contribute much more. How can people possibly know about me and my work without promotion far and wide? You keep the writing project afloat as “The Beauty of Existence Decoded” is the [comparitvely short] introduction to a planned (and part scripted) 9 or 10 further hefty volumes, including “A New World Order” and “The Birth of Hu-man-ity”. Donators should e-mail with the simple instruction “Donated for DDD Intro” after payment has been made. Thank you for your support and Merry Christmas!

PayPal Donate Button

Book purchase