Inheritance, the Prodigal Son and Interest in “Interest”

When I began composing articles for this website it was as if I was a literary infant. Only while I fondly look back at scribbles in dusty journals do I see the core that was me remains intact, unblemished. It is what I have become.  Notably writing projects have grown into something much more expansive; substantially more substantive in many instances, presumably because I am much more proficient at the art of journalism. Nevertheless echoes of past enlightened symmetry still tantalisingly haunt. Whilst die-hard readers used to my familiar elaborate prose have witnessed an evolution of sorts, the more conventional style of recent entries is no less controversial. They are controversial but not abnormal it might be argued.  Even so, rhetoric is regularly too far adrift of sensationalised reason to covet “normalcy” in any sense of the word. It could be said my writings propose a uniquely different perspective which in itself is conspicuous evidence of sovereignty “apud esse”; something all humans strive for to some degree, but oh so few attain. In celebration of my largely discarded history, I have decided to attempt to revisit the past. My intention is to make this piece shorter, simpler [can I say?] in festival of the old but not forgotten me.

Is it possible to effectively resurrect the past?

Well that question will be answered presently.

Reflecting on my journey to date, I recall how, in dull moments, I would instinctively jot down a line or two, a solitary paragraph and other evidence of burning thoughts. None of these were suitable as standalone products for ambitious journalistic campaigns, of course. Logic dedicated a “to be written” folder to these moments and, over time, this has gathered fragments like moss to the old miller’s stone. Given my aim to regenerate dormant thinking, the “to be written” folder seemed the most valid first port of call for this episode. It is definitely fitting that the origins of my resurrection are founded in the rediscovery of misplaced parchments. In this case the scrap I selected consisted of a single page upon which was scribed one line of text in addition to the title. Intriguingly, these coarsely jumbled words appeared to nonchalantly identify an apparently related “unrelated” coincidence. The crux of the observation posited an “irony” over Federal Reserve banknotes, which are subject to 3% interest from the issuer (United States of America), paid annually, The coincidence noted that America (after a historic referendum) also dedicates a minimum of 3% of the gross national budget to “defence” which, in this case, is attack (messianic wars “for peace”).

Above this poignant inscription was the demure title “Interest in “interest””, which seemed the most fetching at the time, though, other than the, I must say, rather cheesy pun, the original “point” is now completely lost to me. After earning the judicial reputation of being an unabashed merchant of “tough love”, I would hate my inquisition to form any bias towards fashionably calculated schemes that formularise common opinions on “things in general”. Persuading those of low vibrational frequency that the devil is in the detail goes beyond motive. That is my vocation and, thus, I recommend anyone ill prepared to consider everything to the “nth degree” is not in a viable position to validate or express truth. Perhaps this rather crass example may suffice to service the analogy?

When someone dies of a gunshot wound motivated by an aggressive attack what perpetrates the murder? Is it the gun inventor, designer, maker, owner or user with malice in his heart? Is the gun itself, the operator, the bullets that caused the fatal wound or the gunpowder that ignites deadly blows at fault? If the shooter is a soldier or policeman, for instance, do the “rules” for murder eerily change? Could we blame the environment, the timeline or engrained political intrigue?

And on and on we can debate.

Revisiting the past is one thing, but I don’t fancy repeating myself is very constructive. Whether produced by the Federal Reserve or not, money’s passé. We also all know it’s the root of all evil (although perhaps not “why” it’s the root of all evil). Many of my prior articles have touched on the topic. This one in particular goes some way towards exploring primary issues.  Nevertheless I concluded the standalone title “interest in interest” was insufficient for that cause. It needed to be widened or scrapped unless I chose a different path. Any form of censorship (however remote) is destruction of the past – hardly fodder for a celebration of reawakening. Therefore Integrity determined my only legitimate choice was to expand the title at all cost as I had no intention of wandering aimlessly in search of ambition. Fortunately “eureka” eruptions reward those with brilliance. What, lacking before, profoundly related to “interest” could be worthy enough for a role or roles in a high impact title? Thinking aloud, it came to me in a flash. Does not interest “prove” the justification for inheritance and ownership?  Inheritance is undeniably one of if not “the” foundation stone of profiting interests.

I would need to summon up a title profoundly deserving of these widened considerations. After much internal reflection, I did eventually find words that will hopefully fashion as a perfect compromise.  They are, in order, “Inherence, the Prodigal Son and Interest in ‘Interest””. This is the resulting effort that is designated as official title of this essay unless something obsessively changes the contextual direction of ideas and their natural progressions. Otherwise no further review is planned.

Now let me explain why the “prodigal son” was also selected for its part in the essential treatise theme. Intrinsically linked to inheritance, prodigal sons are no ordinary offspring. Therefore, simply, that was the “missing piece” I needed to complete the title. It also presented investigative goals worth chasing, investigation that needs to determine what makes these prodigal sons so special. Of course primary analysis did upturn the blissfully obvious. Basically, these male progeny are gifted enough to be cultivated, which is usually in the family direction.  Otherwise, why bother to cultivate? Way back, when elites ruled the world, families with “everything to lose” produced governors and gatekeepers for their kingdoms. Along the lines of this protocol, security over tenure became a family’s greatest priority and ensured at least one son was encouraged (putting it nicely) to enter the military at rank. Another would become a doctor or a priest (isn’t that odd?) and then the following (perhaps the most strategically important) would be groomed to act as lawyer, preferably under government. Black sheep or dropouts would eventually come round to becoming merchants, stock holders or artists. The rigours of this big, bad world ensure safe, easy options are usually preferred.

Before I press on with on with the good stuff, I need to do a little more reflection by way of background. People, I have noticed, have a fondness towards procrastination (mentioned last article too) and a crippling fear of criticism. Procrastination, at best, fuels truths-of-sorts. That is the reality and that is why I try my upmost not to procrastinate. It can be a hindrance because, through my personal discovery tour; I have found some values, ideas and beliefs I used to stand by were either flawed or false. Consequentially, many years ago, I used to regularly bloviate with erudite confidence. There was never anything more than “personal convictions” to back up my gift of the gab, but I rarely found anyone I met could contest my position on the state of things in general. More recently, I have become alert, ever wary of falling into the trap of believing my own bullshit. Criticisms (where valid) counter any opportunity for imperfect procrastinations to take hold, so I see these as causal blessings. Procrastinators, for the record, focus on symptoms or phantom symptoms in deference to causes. Truth givers expose the root.

Therefore if I am to do apt justice to “Inheritance, the Prodigal Son and Interest in “Interest”” all stones must be upturned so as not to grind out more unanswered, “impossible to resolve” niggling queries. I must, instead, disrobe all root causes to unveil the exhilarating detail. Thought and responding responses will require latitude, much latitude. Mountains of propagandas dating back to the dawn of time have had the mesmerising effect of misleading sane discovery to such a degree, befuddled judgments are the function of normalcy. Even some of the great minds of our era are consistently turned to fudge by certain conventions. This is why I focus on topics others simply wouldn’t touch with a ten foot pole. True thinking outside of the box comes without a parachute. Even so, rather than drawing on possible conjectures as “sources of evidence”, my strategy (in motion) is to apply logic and purposeful reason to every concept I am at pains to illustrate.

Let us be sure where the “baseline” is. Currently materialist-atheist “edict” controls the way logic is directed. Per this “view”, the implication is purpose is a symptom compounded from random effects of existence, even though (as Rupert Sheldrake has wittily pointed out), by this account, more incontrovertible miracles were created at the dawn of time than Jesus could have ever fancied. (Alien to this mindset) in fact purpose must underline causes because existence was “crafted”. The evidence existence was crafted is found in its design, which is clear and unarguably transparent.

So to do justice to the quest, I may have to introduce suspects or considerations that have rarely or, perhaps, never been pondered before. All the little tweety birds that believe puffing various forms of political correctness is their branch to salvation beware, for this big bad eagle may swoop down and devour you and your branch whole. We should begin with no misconceptions. Those that initiated the process that conceived elitism (or, in other words, the hubris of “prison planet”) demonstrated extraordinary cunning. It seems obvious to me that, considering how the process has radically evolved (in the engineering sense), higher forces beyond this realm have had involvement every step of the way. Not dwelling on possible superstitions, the whys and the wherefores, however pertinent, I intent to expose the chassis of the fabric of the illusion that is today’s “reality”. Conspiracy networks have been installed so elegantly, it is as if they have been commissioned by God Almighty.

Before I discuss inheritance, it is important to review something much more primordial.  We take friendships for granted. They just happen. Or do they just happen? Our first friendships are with family or extended family. Managing relationships with our family members teaches us how to distinguish friends from enemies. These teach us politics (affairs of the people). They teach us who we can influence and who we will let influence us. A trade of sorts is communicated. Eventually we form close knit groups of likeminded kindred spirits. Perhaps not directly considered such, we are all elitist in the way we resolutely preserve our group cultures. When stretched out into the wider community and beyond, we expand into other political networks. Some present revolutionary, but not conflicting ideas.  These see us progress, in some cases. Some ideas are so common they become universalised. Politicians naturally capitalise on, exploit and manipulate these phenomena.

Eventually draconian laws are destined to twist what was original goodwill into all kinds of overt tyrannies in order to elevate elite elitist cultures. Laws have always been the basis for kingdoms. Under this principle, every king has ruling power. However, without friendships there would be no alliances to back the laws and politics that founded them would be rendered superfluous and obsolete. No king could rule. In addition, under these conditions, though commerce would be possible, other than as a tool of oppression, inheritance could have no functional purpose. It would also mean people would be forced to discover the truth if they were motivated that way. They could no longer rely on friends’ redigested second and third hand opinions that sounded right.

As it stands “Inheritance” is one of the golden keys to open Pandora’s Box.  In a distant era populated by long forgotten customs and attitudes, it was exclusively the domain of the elites. At that time land was free, commoners outside metropolises were largely ungoverned and there was no sense of ownership (per modern standards). Individuals congregated into clans and these became long standing settlements which then saw homesteads passed down from generation to generation. But there was no registered ownership. If some place was occupied and sympathetically unavailable, sound conscience determined it was off limits. When the “universalisation” of deeds of ownership tied to symptomatic inheritance of chattel began is hard to calculate. In “western society”, I would argue that the abolishment of “slavery” (social security) led to the effective enslavement of man. Inheritance then evolved to become a quasi-version of the “frills” of slavery. “Rights” would be proscribed by authorities unless aspects of commoners’ common law were considered relevant (to seamless elite governance of slaves). In this case any reflectively worthy laws were drafted as supplants to legislated corporate manifestos. It goes without saying administrators of guidelines were systemised lackeys incapable of virtuous judgement. Finally, courtesy of banking and insurers, everything could be “valued” and that “worth” represented by tokens of interest (whether that is gold/silver bars, coins or promissory notes).

In order to engage lawyers and accountants whose role (in the grand elites’ scheme) is to professionalise ownership, receipt of inheritance follows a litany of potential administrative hurdles, but I don’t wish to dwell on this. There is another internet resource I like to reference occasionally that specialises (in part) on whistle blowing messy probates, the fallout from inheritance. Pure Professional Journalism Gazette can be located here.

In addition, philosophy behind inheritance capitalises on the principle of appreciation or depreciation and this is clearly an expansion of the dependent interest bearing investment culture. Probate relies on belief in heirlooms, which are presumed to indefinitely financially mature. Government, per this reasoning, rakes in their “fair share” from the commerce evolution in taxes in order to theoretically provide ever improving infrastructures and representative management frameworks. Accommodating this theory, surpluses could be redistributed for other pressing voters’ needs. That is why I believe all governments (on paper, at least) are kept “in the red” deliberately. In fact, when truth is laid bare, government, though never limited, does little more than give inheritance necessary tinges of authenticity to make people believe in its credibility. If it is taxed, it “must be for real”. Without profits, commerce becomes obsolete. Interest is, by circumstance, both a symptom of and agent in confirmation of profits.

Truth laid bare goes way beyond mere commerce and inheritance. The tyranny actually began with registered ownership because, without deeds, commerce is arbitrary. Barter doesn’t cater for profits. Here is why the imperialists concocted their “survival of the fittest” mantra and continue to lord it as nature’s divine plan. The fittest are considered the best at coveting what they have scavenged (the nice word for stole). I apologise for dispelling with the hocus-pocus, but acknowledgement of ownership as something that is righteous and Godly only grossly and deviously distorts reality in favour of tyranny against the divine. Aside from  modern day [ADL fabricated) Racism fraud, the reason certain peoples have been temporarily “classed” as savages is to remove any contest over conquered (stolen) land spoils (“animals” cannot own land). Notably in Africa, America and Australia, “white man” thieved most of the habitable land areas. Repatriation (a pathetic attempt at feigning “fairness”) in some cases has seen the return of lands considered commercially unviable. Even so, generally speaking, when it comes to origins of ownership, judicial mechanisms continue to work off the ludicrously partisan principle “finders’ keepers”.

The net effect of that is another of those atheistic miracles. Our impotent, voiceless God apparently blesses open sacrilege. Was the principle finders’ keepers ever to be condemned and abolished, commerce would cease to exist. This is a big statement. Some might contest it. Here’s an analogy which should amply validate its authority. I don’t own the royal grounds, approximating three square miles, close to the heart of Tokyo, Japan. Under the auspices of lack of ownership, no one would own the land. Therefore, I decree some legitimacy in laying claim on that which is not owned. Hypothetically, I could establish a real estate agency to sell off my theoretical acquisition. I may be able to attract teams of would be buyers. Yet, without binding contracts and infrastructures supporting them, verifiable presumption of intent to abide by the law, the land is worthless until someone or some group manufactures political legitimacy. The ancient Romans couldn’t give money away to the Britons because they did not believe in it.

The reason (under this system) ownership will never be abolished (although it may be restricted) is governments would have to rescind their slave master statuses in order to transform into arbitrators that truly work “for the people”. Currently populations are effectively forced to toil to survive. Those privileged enough to “own” sufficient land holdings supported by interest bearing investments probably haven’t the skills to become entirely self-sufficient. Thus, without government society would naturally function through the formation of brokered relationships that would need to leverage and harness social parasitism. According to today’s popular press (sponsored by corporate interests and governments who are in themselves giant corporations), people only want good jobs. People, by the same rose tinted reasoning, will do anything to keep their good jobs. Commerce needs labour to function. Indeed, for those that were (in society) to ever become self-sufficient, commerce would cease to be necessary. That lack of functional necessity could only be defeated by interest in collectables and other objet d’art which, though arguably functionally irrelevant, fuel a potentially ever-accruing “need for more”. I guess that is why we have collectors.

It is important to understand the relevance of commerce, because many “goods and chattels” from the inheritance perspective may be deemed valueless. The family’s pink plastic clock that ticked you to sleep as a baby is worth nothing (even though it may be priceless to you) compared against your departed father’s prestigious “medal winning” coin collection that you were never “allowed” to touch, which insurance would class as a valuable asset. Many factors can determine an heirloom’s worth. Rarity, age, condition, popularity affects status of all antique items. Statuses are groomed from fostered traditions. For instance, Caucasian Australian manufactured artefacts offered for sale would likely be priced at many multiples of any vaguely comparable Aboriginal counterparts. In line with this ideology, the essential education of all well-connected prodigal sons provides a vital comprehension of firstly how the system functions and then, as importantly, how stepping stones to credentials gift “keys to the kingdom”.

Unsurprisingly a correct (for purposes of social elevation) education is priced beyond the means of not-so-humble slaves, which proposes a vicious circle whereby only elite or “fortunate” working class families can avail the system. Indeed for the system (which some argue began with William Cromwell at Westminster) to permanently function as it is, the riff-raff could never be involved in any authoritative managerial capacity. So, with the exception of very occasional “pliable” geniuses, credentials of note are off limits to ordinary folks. Rebellious or revolutionary geniuses are invariably spurned by those that might have empowered them unless their significances were so timely that to trade would persuade the only logical course forward. The powers never favour constructive partnerships. That wick always burns fast and furious. Why would recalcitrant free thinkers ever be viscerally rewarded by a system that choses to repress or oppress most forms of independent thought?

From the (dare I say?) “Conspiratorial perspective”, certain specialised training qualifications that are destined to open doors to those prized “good jobs” are invariably only available to those with educational credentials usually off limits to working classes. Hindsight is a wonderful attribute. In many instances only those in the know (or, rather, with “connections”) have inside information as to which skills to acquire for guaranteed success. Thus, just about all “good jobs” are snapped up by exclusive circles privy to their occurrences. Propaganda permeates a much wider circle of influence which, in part, is designed to operationally program the masses. I can but assume the Clintons were firmly behind the cruel and childish media attacks on Chelsea as a young adult. The design (aided by unflattering images), in this case, was to chide ignorant people into “believing” she was “ugly” so as to ward off any potential for successful unsuitable suitors’ advances. Media tactics of this kind are regularly analysed by Jon Rappoport. I strongly recommend investigation of his writings.

Few seem to be able to come to terms with the extent of the complexity of propagandas. Perhaps this is because everyone attempts to deny their own relative indoctrination or, worse still, it is the summary evidence of their root systemisation. Propagandas are everywhere. They are not merely limited to the mainstream and institutionalised “sciences’ (sic). Much deceptive information has been generated about computer viruses, for instance. One of the great lies that seems as though it will stand the test of time forever is Pasteur’s germ theory. Germs, according to Pasteur, can invade and infect any body and this is completely untrue. On the back of the lie, scientists concoct legions of “organised germs” that conveniently follow the program. They label these mysteriously unidentified legions’ “viruses”. Of course, if medical evidence free of Pasteur’s contaminated propaganda was given the opportunity to incubate reasoned appraisal, results would radically dishonour current standard opinions in the same manner Bruce Lipton somehow defeated all biological cells.

As Pasteur was nothing short of an appendage of “corporate science” which had been set up by the Rothschild family in Paris in the late eighteenth century (just after the “revolution” – sic), any marketing device aiding the manufacture of arbitrary confusion to help everyone “believe” would be regarded as a godsend by those that presume they own the world. Their godsend in specific relation to the case I highlight is “computer viruses”. Computer viruses are not even remotely comparable to any medical counterpart, but propaganda agents don’t care. In fact origins of all computer viruses can be traced back to sponsored hackers testing security effectiveness of networked equipment, but that muddies the objective of paradigm synthesis. To the propagandist it only successfully sells the “concept” germs can and will invade and infect with impunity whether via the internet or other routes. The idea that anyone connected to humans is potentially “networked” with dangerously contaminated aliens is the perfect genre extension. Because, in this specific case, “viruses” (as labelled) do invade and infect technologies, the propaganda message would go a long way towards convincing shallow minds. I will leave the associated complex good/bad bacteria and strengthened/weakened immune systems’ discussion for another entry.

The great deception is to paint a computer virus as the principled copy of a medical virus.

Using established institutions to routinely dress false positives or negatives as “facts”, places the system in the supreme position of being able to present any fantasy as effective truth, no matter how fantastical. Providing data can be formally argued and expressed in particular ways, any antipathy of reality is up for believable persuasion. There are actually no laws of science (physics). There are only laws of existence (to the atheists’ dismay) which can theoretically be placed under scrutiny of sciences. An excellent example of how current etiquette can end up bamboozling itself is found in various expressions of interest that emerged considering the effectiveness of a new energy generating prototype heralding from Italy a few years ago. I have lost source details, but can verify corporate backers in favour of the machine presented analytical notes interpreting data that illustrated the device was going to be a magnificent success. Competitors insisted the exact same data was unrequited “proof” the machine would never work by their account. Would be investors coming somewhere in the middle couldn’t or wouldn’t speculate either way. Similar “analysis” has been made regards the Bosnian “Pyramids”. The duly diligent will see it everywhere.

In addition, to aid propagandists’ purposes, word values (such as “gay”) are routinely changed or even reversed in order to lambast popular interpretations. Late Nicolai Levashov (his family incidentally claims he was “murdered by Zionists” in 2012) and other genre academics have argued this restructuring of language began in earnest in mother Russia just after the 1917 bankers’ invasion. Let’s face it; “interest” is a profoundly positive word that surely inspires persuasive popularity. That is why it was given to “utopian” banking commissions (which will always be viewed in an eternally positive light) in my opinion. Finally, those that do not consider insistence on and observance of balanced truthfulness is the only viable promotional standards’ benchmark are propagandists, whether they acknowledge the fact or not. Propagandists are in the business of manufacturing beliefs, period. Truth that doesn’t support or actually impedes the manufacturing process is unwelcome. Any devices, such as changing word values, fake science and so forth are more than welcome. Discerning would-be “Manchurian Candidates” is trickier, but, I would imagine those that assure religious adherence to product “use by” dates are well and truly in the crisis zone. The vegetarian that “doesn’t like” meat isn’t far behind.

Money is only supported by the “belief” in its value. That particular belief has become the most potently powerful and universally entrancing factor in the control of man. Thus, we must acknowledge the scripting of believable beliefs is far more virulent than truths that might support or aid acknowledgement. For example, I wonder if any believer (in money) has considered the fact that financial optimism provides fodder for wars. When the Industrial Revolution was in full swing the 1890’s saw boom times. Boom times make babies; manpower for the First World War? “Roaring” ‘20’s clearly provided “stock” for the Second World War (Germany was billed to “lose”, so their peoples were given fertility stemming poverty on the back of harsh reparations. 1930’s optimism was in preparation for the kingdom of Germany to be rebuilt as a new republic [styled on America] when the war was won).

There are always going to be inconsistencies, such as the infamous 1960’s flower power movement. This is a paradox because it was the only genuine peoples’ revolution in living memory. No attempt was made to synthesise prosperity in the 1970’s because weaponry is becoming so sophisticated, “ape” operators will eventually be found unnecessary (beyond culling populations). Were a few of those bygone hippies “tuned in” enough to realise “Interest” is the nemesis of sovereignty? Being a hippy was all about recognising individual sovereignty. The 3% the Federal Reserve skims off every dollar assures each bill in circulation is worth 97 cents (presuming “government” doesn’t take a cut too). Therefore the owner either has to front the loss or is forced to speculate or trade in order to recoup 3% or more. Imagine the potential for manipulation if Bitcoin or any other e-currency takes hold. That is how the notion of profits was born. The land that is the royal grounds of Tokyo is worthless unless it is rated and valued. It has long been presumed that “highest bidder” nominations assure correct marketplace values, but this isn’t necessarily so.

Abundance does not come without a “price” to those that dedicate themselves to controlling humanity. Population swells lead to the collectivisation of giant metropolises. Without incessant propagandas that “define” normalcy, the “stranger” might persuade “influence charisma” of comparable or greater power than corporate bread winners. From that, a rogue messiah or “anti-Christ” could emerge. It is more than possible; probable even. If so, of course there are many ways to quickly dispel unrest. Leaders can be branded occultists, sexual deviants or, worse still, insane.  Anyone fetching that positive diagnosis can be liberally carted off to a very unhealthy institution and indefinitely detained without recourse. As everyone that used to be “evil” now has some sort of psychiatric disorder, biased and unfair claims against can be sinisterly effective. How well did Jesus fare against the Pharisees in face of the cross? How are mental illnesses “healed”? Well to answer that, there is a litany of tested drug cocktails perfect at prepping would-be “Manchurian Candidate” assassins without causes from recalcitrant, inspirational free-thinkers.  Two birds killed with one stone, maybe?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Israel, Zionist Ambition, ISIS and US Affiliated Connections – Part Four

This may not be my last episode regarding US enablers of sacrilegious ruling “Zionist but barely Jewish” parties that oppress the peoples of Israel and beyond, but I am hoping I have scoped a near complete picture when factoring the enormous amount of information contained in parts one, two and three. Our wise schedulers of monstrous tyranny and turmoil are so predictable they should be remembered as buffoons, but the laughs are very much on them at the moment as their targets fail to rally against them in any way that could be classed as remotely productive. Remonstrations and protests alone are not worthy of commendation. Demonstrative acts of belligerence from those that could count have been scant to non-existent.

I refuse to be drawn into the ongoing prolific fantasy and, therefore, have found merit in forging a detailed historic profile rather than emphasising individual stunts, such as the latest embarrassing attack in France. After Joseph Stalin’s “the end justifies the means”, reasons for specific events and timings are in some ways incidental, in my opinion. Strategic “positioning” is not. Thus, those that find all sorts of strange devilish symbols, numeric links hinting at intrigue in the form of some kind of sinister masonic conspiracy may well be correct in their opinions. Let’s face it, without specific calendar markers, the schedule would be pretty damned shoddy to non-existent. When shall we meet and where? How about on Wednesday, planet Earth? I believe preconceived dates trigger action “countdowns”.

In addition heritage or prosperity is very important to the mischievous fiends. Not only do they like to brag about their satanic deeds superfluously in the mainstream Medias, but they also insist official history gloats along with them in a rabid attempt at making them appear posthumously immortal. That is why corporations (dead men’s orders) rule by rote and have all the rights in the living world. In prognosis, it is not merely the symmetry of dates that can be explained predictably and rationally. What better way to coordinate parties unknown to each other than by creating a numerological catalogue only privy to secret societies’ vouchsafe members?

Of course there would need to be lots of dates, plenty of opportunities to strike because humans make mistakes. Hallowed plans often don’t come to fruition, so we can assume most of the dates are used as contingencies. Remember, in this case, our arrogant shadowy controllers are predictable buffoons. How many attempts at so-called “911” went by unnoticed? The mainstreamers would hardly offer pomp and circumstance over failings they would rather forget. Even so, analysis of the 911 incident reveals a monumental marketing disaster and irresponsible blow against commerce. It did not go to plan, but this game will plod on relentlessly until the people, in their masses, rise up. David Icke has made many errors, but as an instigator of valour he poses many exciting possibilities for those prepared to act on his wisdom.

Players in the game must have been groomed to have the license to capitulate; otherwise the status quo would have collapsed prior to the “globalist” Greeks. Does the great British soccer team, Arsenal, arbitrarily stick an unbiased globe with a sharp pin as basis for European Cup selection matches? Under those contrived conditions, we might see professional players pitched against humble patrons and staff of the Banana Bar & Club, Suva, Fiji, for instance. No, that would reduce world class football to pointlessness, nihilism. So why would anyone theorise international politics bumbles along aimlessly in chaotic fashion, each strategy step (if there were any) accidental and not debated in minute detail by those with holistic interests at stake, whether outcomes ultimately reflect considerations or not? Of course everything is planned infinitesimally. What’s more, good guys and bad guys are scripted players of the exact same fantasy.

Ok, I’m getting ahead of myself. I wanted to begin by saying that notes for this segment already exceeded 3,500 words. That’s now in addition to the 600 words or more I have contributed to the introduction to part four thus far.  It seems to me that it is extremely unlikely I will have time to nail it conclusively without penning a final “part five” in the not too distant future. Have I used “plan” too much already? Oh, I can’t think of a substitute. At short notice, that’s the plan. Part four will be followed by a scintillating final instalment; one that, hopefully, knocks the socks off.

Five parts accumulating up to 30,000 words may seem like overkill, but fearless Arab-American crime fighter Mantiq Al Tayr knows the cosmopolitan Muslims have been set up just as the Diaspora Jews before them. I have already revealed how stunning similarities between 1930’s, 40’s hard line terrorist practices by the Jewish Stern gang and others compared to modern day “ISIS”, “Al Qaeda” operations supposedly masterminded by Islamists. George Orwell’s “1984” was a parody all about a fanatical 1948 hidden agenda coming to fruition that started with the reformation of Israel.

If I could somehow summon a really theatrical saga, that would have the potential of being scintillating, because humans are hooked on drama. I know of individuals that have devoted their entire lives to reliving popular television soap operas in their minds, whilst generally behaving like couch potatoes with opinions in all other ways. International political stakeholders merely bring this addiction out in the open. Imagine how boring it would be without those bombs and baddies. They, the buffoons, have managed the impossible and this doesn’t say a lot for populations at large.

Television fantasy has been transmogrified into reality. I always try to give credit where credit’s due, so the couch potatoes deserve a big round of applause too. Regular visitors here will have noticed my brief review of Sydney Lumet’s insightful movie, “Network” in “The Mindset of Psychosis”. Without Jon Rappoport, I would not have heard of this movie, therefore I recommend readers check out his excellent work for humanity. His blog, you will notice, is a breath of fresh air. Free of “trite sentiment”, he focuses on the warts on the issues as every true journalist should.

“Network” (1976) demonstrates that even back in the 1970’s people were beginning to cross over; the signs were there. TV had been popular for less than two decades and already audiences were considering defection. Now circumstances are much clearer. There are either prisoners of false reality or those that have broken free, minds intact. One of the very first questions I ask new acquaintances is, “Do you have a TV?” I am heartened by the surprisingly high numbers that have overcome their dependence on false paradigms engineered by hypocritical spinners of evil. Many of those I have interviewed either do not have television sets or avoid commercial programming like the plague.

That’s a big feather in the cap for liberty, but there is still much work to be done. The bastards have us cornered with their responsible (sic) “information” streams on all sides. Consequentially, I have found most mighty thinkers have been brainwashed in some fashion. This is because information exchange is subject to peer review and that oversight has been contaminated by TV and numerous other mechanisms the Illuminati use to influence the way minds collaborate. Fortunately Jon Rappoport and a few other modern day sages not only recognise this, but also reveal the who’s, how’s and why’s in  painstaking detail. The Memory Hole is another excellent resource for American current affairs and PPJ Gazette attracts some fine, genuine articles about matters of conscience.

In tune Americans know their statue that once oversaw the Twin Towers mocks liberty. No wonder; it’s French. It is no coincidence. The Rothschild’s epicentre was in Paris (the second empire created in 1868 to ridicule constitutional democracy and undermine Napoleon led to social unrest there which overturned it in favour of a new republic in 1875, the precise same year as the liberty statue was erected. 1868 was the year America’s constitution was reduced to a “corporate charter”) and they benefited commercially the most from the end of slavery (sic), so the gift was the least they could do. But France is in the news again only minutes after England (not Scotland) pulled out of the European Union. “Bombs and baddies” ISIS is allegedly behind the latest attack, but more on that shortly. The operation or psy-op (a trendy expression Israelites bandy around) has been used to punctuate terms for a new Marxist-fascist European Union (EU) to be: the phoenix that will rise stronger than ever from the ashes. Do I read this correctly, a superhighway linking US, EU and Russia is in the making? Ah commerce….

Out-of-tune readers need to understand the only true democracies are static organs that exclusively represent the interests of the people called constitutional monarchies (presided over by all-too-rare monarchs that are devoted conscientious instruments of power and certainly not slippery, divisive, selfishly arbitrating governments). Therefore, all republics, whether backed by constitutions or not, are undemocratic. The very reason republics came into being was to manage recalcitrant populations in the interests of commerce to squarely benefit land owners (a euphemism for corporate “slave masters”) to the detriment of the plebeians (a nice word for slaves).

Giving everyone identical portions of land would go some way to level the economics playing field (note: research Vladimir Megre’s blueprint for Ukraine), but, without privilege, strongest oppressors would become the new de facto controllers of the way things are until manipulating intelligence was able to establish social control measures. Therefore, the elites are behind the manufacture of classes systems geared to shutting out brains and brawn. Islamic fundamentalism is an aspect of that fantasy painted by the same basic brush. ISIS and other militias are props used to give make-believe the tingle of reality.

Historically it needed (English) Oliver Cromwell’s Commonwealth failure and the hastily implemented Bill of Rights to ballast a workable republic concept rigged to reward advantage. France funded American “independence” (another sorry act of buffoonery) and both became unconstitutional dictatorships in 1789. Though some herald America’s constitution as a work of art, it was created to produce what we see today and what will be in place tomorrow. Kangaroo courts presiding over rogue justice have always been the plan. Those that abolished constitutional monarchy needed to confuse the people into believing things were fair when they were anything but.

If the failings had been anything less than deliberate, there would be sufficient recourse to ensure remedial liberty for all. Be clear, under the current systems of government, there is no recourse for liberty; only perpetual tyranny. Britain did not have a constitution because Cromwell’s Westminster System was sufficient to open the gates of heck. It has allowed law makers to vent their relentless irresolvable insanity on unsuspecting masses overseen by lip-service monarchs demonstrating those that lead always represent elites, no matter what they say or pretend to do.

Returning to France and the latest fixture for ISIS, this has been another 5-0 loss for liberty. The guys at Veterans Today are not perfect. They, like everyone else, have their foibles, biases, preferences. But if you are looking for sock it to me truth, that is one of the best start points for investigation into matters concerning political intrigue, terrorism and abject tyranny in general. Here’s what Kevin Barrett has to say on the numerology of the recent French Bastille Day attack that killed 80 and injured 120. Kevin highlights the true significance of purpose of the French “revolution” (and storming of the Bastille, the peoples’ last stand. I realise Napoleon “pulled rank” by making himself Emperor, but look that happened to him) more than adequately.

As we are in VT mode, I would also rate this valuable entry as worth far more than a casual glance. The French ISIS “psy-op” was all about shoring up the EU. It is worth elaborating a little more on the English pantomime counterpart. Ex. Prime Minister, David Cameron, was a protégé of Margaret Thatcher, who herself was ousted from power (13 year reign as iron lady) because she tried to pull out of the EU. A rather unpopular leader, as far as I can gather, “stay in” Cameron promised to step down if the people chose to vote him and England out of the European Union.

The result was going to be as obvious as Donald Trump’s toupee. Iron Lady “Mark II”, Theresa May, now vilifies Mrs T to lead the triumphant peoples of Rome, Troy…er, close enough. The ghost of Mary Queen of Scots offers a chink of light for vigilant republicans. Scotland’s proposed secession (breakup of the British Union and something Donald Trump highly praised) has allowed access to the EU by the backdoor. Backdoor politics is like “backdoor sex” (for those miss the pun, this equates to the word “perversion”), they say. There’s always plenty of time before the final pull out so anything could happen in reality.

Focus on the predictable fraud Bernie “BS” Sanders has galvanised American alternative mainstream fanatics that conjure endless “what if” scenarios for false paradise. Great-white-hope Putin’s limelight has been harder to lampoon although he was a “rough” casualty of embezzlement courtesy of Mossad, George Soros and other members of the gang. Vladimir may be as fake as Trump’s toupee, but that hasn’t daunted those trillions of die-hard sycophants’ chimes tuned to validating hybrid New Age bliss.

According to just about anyone with fingers on the pulse, Putin is definitely the new Messiah, after Obama fell at first post. Whether he’s real, given starting revelations from his ex-wife, is another story. However, either way I can affirm he (or four of them) is one of the current “good guys” scripted for the peoples’ illusion (courtesy of the Illuminati). Curious readers are doubtlessly aware of my other blog where I reveal some my special extra-sensory abilities. After evaluation of ever-present energy fields (sort of living bar codes), I can say categorically that there is more than one Vladimir Putin(s) presented as “Russia’s President” by various Medias.

Though cracks as to his real character/agenda are heavily camouflaged by the weight of populist euphoria outpouring through various information streams, the dreadful Russian “Duma” (legislative council) has not implemented too many measures that will permanently improve liberty compared against our “western” systems of intolerance. “Anti-sex” campaigns have been prevalent, introducing the worst of all the Israelite brokered legislation against the people. Castration is apparently an odd fetish of homosexuals.

Hitler’s measures visibly targeted homosexuals in NAZI Germany, but there are also other parallels. Whilst popular opinions governing “paedophilia” (generally speaking) are hysterically insane, caution should be rationally applied. Social programming, vested interests, the potential for “victims” to be deceitful and the general lack of tangible evidence must take precedence in fair society, when considering testimony, motives and verdicts even if we assume “rules” (i.e. what “defines” paedophilia) are fair. Currently that is not happening.

Though the politics are different, campaigns against moderate Muslims might parry with prior German ones against secular Jews. Nevertheless, in this very divisive propaganda war, evidence as to the “authenticity” of parties targeted is rarely crystal clear, so, commonly the case, Putin’s reasoning is demonstrably valid. He is an undeniably slick operator.

The lot of the Russian people has viscerally improved since 2000 helped by a commodities boom, rapid consumerism, expendable cash, low priced housing and utilities. Pragmatists might persuasively be concerned that the current “illusion” can be undone far faster than it was put into being (the “break up” of the Soviet Union was certainly no mystery). An increase in Communist (Marxist) political activity is pointing towards a return to that Zionist Mecca sponsored by “Levite” bankers in 1917 (aided by the American government of the time) and I discuss how false communism has benefitted strategic Jews later in this dissertation. Then again, there might be hope yet as these current Communist demands are much closer to altruism.

Russian troops (supposedly “the best in the world”: where have I heard that before?) can be anywhere, any when now, courtesy of the United Nations. If Russia has become the new “super power” designate, a coup against America under the guise of “civil war” becomes more plausible by the minute. Could the US Senate draft Russians in UN uniform to assist removing guns from the American peoples without their general knowledge? It is a thought that doesn’t bear thinking. Putin “cracks” started to show when he capitulated in the misinformation campaign about Syria’s “cholera” origins, which actually highlights how dreadful conditions are there for some people of the ground. It proposes a total breakdown of government services infrastructure in some places.

The following section was written in stages some time ago so I may have to interject the odd comment, passage here and there to give continuity a chance at prudence. Rather than trading punches or droning on endlessly about the ills of government and master planners, I strip things right back to historic essentials after World War II but mostly post 1970’s introduction of the Petrodollar concept. Oil is one of the linchpins that keep Israel, ISIS and the whole sorry game afloat so, from memory, the filthy commodity steals the limelight somewhat. Anyway, without further ado, here is the meat of my assessment.

Israel and the United States have sterling reputations for “playing both sides”. For evidence of US dealings the references on Google are so crowded it would take a lifetime to research them all. Here’s “poll position” but there are albeit unlimited information sources for those willing to undertake the marathon.

Capturing Israeli double standards, I have found two articles. The first focuses on Netanyahu balancing his “Zionist objectives” with the needs of the people and the other is an abstract on high-tech war games with US agencies never far away (See here and there). This stimulated my imagination to ask the unthinkable question; could the US and Israel be behind operations both supporting and attacking ISIS?

Lately (several months ago) new critical information transpired in the Russian mainstream. Do I hear that right; US military contractors are reaping “billions of dollars” off this ISIS phoney war? Well, that’s one half of the puzzle. Russia’s involvement deserves separate inspection, so I shall discuss the wonder boy Putin’s “role” per Zionism’s master plan. The best way to check who’s behind a war is to follow weapons which lead to the money. Buffoons do not have imaginations and the Syrian gravy train is very similar to operations in Iraq. One group rebuilds as another demolishes.

A number of months ago a new source appeared that was so startling I needed to check its authenticity. It turned out that this piece about Israel suppling ISIS with weapons is as authentic as they come and that is the necessary evidence to confirm that the US/Israel partnership to enable the Zionist agenda is backing both sides. It shouldn’t be a surprise. We have seen it so many times before in exposes on Veterans Today, Jeff Rense and Activist Post to name a few. These are not the only sources, but I rate them as the cream of a large crop of dissenters.

Jeff Rense’s website, in particular, is a bulletin board that lists pertinent, current international affairs links. Turkey perpetually hovers on matters concerning ISIS and general misery in the Middle East. In this case, Turkey isn’t “the turkey”, but a lot of the really juicy stuff has been cooked so lightly the bird is rendered inedible. Therefore, I refer to other, mostly unknown, sources too. For instance, not that long ago I met with a young Turkish activist, the son of a lawyer. He informed me that the epicentre of the notorious 1999 Golcuk earthquake was directly under the naval HQ. At that time their [truly] democratically elected government (in this instance they didn’t have the fake candidates we always have) was pulling out of NATO (although extensive searches of Google Corporation have revealed no citing).

Only months after 9/11, in November 2002, the current proto-Israelite sycophant, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, seized power under the ever watchful eye of Ahmet Davutoglu reversing just about all prior decisions made by the exiting government. Could Erdogan’s associates have been behind the prior earthquake that murdered 50,000 Turks? Long ago he ran out of puff in his support of the phoney-baloney (ADL backed) anti-Hitler movement and now is demonstrably comfortable with Zionism.

Painstaking researchers would do well to thoroughly determine how the latest airport bombing, bogus “coup” and other “initiatives” fit into the scheme of things. Perhaps you will start here. Pressing on, I would like to offer a short video that American war veteran Ken O’Keefe made prior to the Russian intervention:

David Icke may well pound the wakeup call, but it seems as though the sheeple are even more lethargic than those guilded instruments of power (Illuminati “New World Order”) had calculated. Netanyahu’s grotesque depiction of a large bomb “for” Iran seems about the correct vibrational frequency vernacular for the average global slave. Subtle, terrorist, World War III materialising out of acrimony in 1984 (reverence to George Orwell’s fabulous work) has given the slip to all but the most acutely tuned minds. Here’s the (mainstream) checklist of key events of that year (see how much happened in the Middle East).

From about 1984 there were an explosion of kidnapping’s in the Arabic regions, including the abduction of the Archbishop’s emissary, Terry Waite, 1987 (eventually released in 1991). Of course, Hizbollah and other supposedly Islamic fundamentalist agencies are never far away from brothers of evil, the CIA/Mossad pact. Prior to reading an illuminating article on Veterans Today by Gordon Duff, I had only really ever heard of the Muslim guerrilla army, Mujahidin. According to Gordon, Mossad set up a Communist terrorist group in Iran and it was responsible for the seizure of the US embassy in Tehran which led to the ill-fated response from Jimmy Carter deliberately staged to embarrass him (see here and there), in my opinion.

According to my cursory research, beyond Gordon I find no other information sources, but the detail is so important, it is worth highlighting. I quote, “For the next few years, MEK killed political leaders across Iran before fleeing to Iraq to work for Saddam”. He then goes on to say they became Saddam’s personal army and it was also they that administered the (questionable) 1993 gas attacks that arbitrarily killed 30,000 Kurds in Northern Iraq. Moving the clock forward closer to present day, Gordon outlines Israel’s strategy with Iran, which is so blatant, it’s obvious. “If you want to control the opposition, be the opposition” (something Israeli dissident counter-spy Roi Tov has also argued). Contemplating, I think of all those pally, bosom buddy meetings between our Great White Hope, Vladimir Putin and the universal tyrant, Binyamin Netanyahu. Aren’t they truly the odd couple or is this more of that “control the opposition, control the game” agenda?

Ok, here’s the punch line and time to unveil Gordon’s article which was composed in response to the then recent VT invite to a “Congress for the 17,000 Victims of Iranian Terror” in Iran. As co-sponsor Veterans Today was unable to be there due to the Iranian government’s almighty failure to distribute short stay VISA’s to attendees in a timely manner (deliberate ploy?). The hosting Habilian Association was set up to support family members of those affected or killed by terrorist atrocities of the MEK (or Mujahideen-e-Khalq). Remember, this is the terrorist group set up by Mossad as an indefinite and ongoing ad hoc “psy-op”.

Even according to the eloquent pro-Israel (and believer of bullshit) writer (not admired by Gordon Duff), Shane Harris, MEK were classed as a terrorist organisation until 2012. Inexplicably, they were taken off the list and surreptitiously praised every now and again by strategically placed US congressional luminaries. Whereas Gordon daren’t think it, Shane hints that Iran’s government plays the game too and that is why I believe VT staffers were subject to that mitigated VISA’s cock up. I have had a personal taste of the same government through my association with Australian Iranian refugees. Iran’s police state is tighter than Ceausescu’s Romanian girdle. They are not fond of compensating those marred by terrorism either.

Returning to those Middle Eastern kidnappings and Terry Waite, reasons for the operations (which almost identically “reverse” the Zionist sanctioned ops used to further destabilise a divided Berlin after the war) tie in with the Muslim population explosions in the West. Everything usually ends up being linked which highlights my earlier sentiment observing orchestrated, coordinated hidden planners. Dutch “far right” politician, Geert Wilders, is projected as a loony anti-Islam character pitched against puerile anti-defamation in the two pronged strategy cartoon brokered by Israel that juggles universal implementation of Sharia Law under Zionist (Israelite elitist) supremacy.

Let’s face it the methods used to annex Pakistan with their version of the Mujahideen in 1958 has Zionism written all over it too, doesn’t it? Was the second most radically Islamic nation on the planet nuclear enabled as insurance against Hindu (a version of Zoroastrianism) India’s burgeoning global influencing populations? Will they be labelled as nuclear suicide bombers at the right time? Even so, Douglas Dietrich swears that the largest arsenal of nuclear warheads is not Israel’s supposed and aptly named Jericho weapons system but, rather, coveted by Taiwan. Politics run deep and no wonder China’s “ever present” threat hasn’t materialised.

So why were Anglican Christian pawn, Terry Waite, and others abducted? It was because Zionism precisely wants radical Islam to spread and their beguiled populations to swell (creating endless fodder for groups such as ISIS). Geert Wilders does a great job in publicising the fact, whilst insisting “Christians”, “humanists” and “Jews” are brothers of an identical [divide and conquer] cause. In fact, in opposition to contradictory mesmerised musings emanating from otherwise pure alternative news streams, Zionist ultimate objectives almost precisely match those of radical Islam.

Thus, Islamists are principally Zionists in all but name. Was the sacking of Medina any different to atrocities levelled against erstwhile lawful inhabitants of Jericho? Waite had been an instrument of British politics which ended with the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, whose book Satanic Verses empowering Persian homosexuals was shut down by Islamic tyranny (check Putin’s agenda again). Nevertheless, that was the smokescreen. Rushdie himself has spared no effort on cashing in on the politics, as revealed by tittle-tattle from socialite Padma Lakshmi. Real objectives of the intrigue are as clear as day.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews reviews the wording of all British laws to ensure they are not offensive to Jews in any way. Naturally any piece of legislation judged wholly and proverbially “anti-Semitic” is always marked “return to sender”. So the real reason for those sensational kidnappings was to give Islam almost joint status with the Jews via the Muslim Council of Britain. Rushdie, little more than a “prop”, was icing on the cake, because ensuing legislative censorship (subsequent banning of “Satanic Verses”) assured Islam had been seen to muscle in to become a political instrument of power that can and will affect British law making.

Zionism and Islam deliver “eye for eye” (if you’re lucky) fundamentalism. Sharia Law is an austere version of “Pharisaic Order”. Elite Zionists are all for a strong whip against the masses to keep them under control. Islam and, most instrumentally, “ISIS” are the raw face; ensuring deliverers of justice are blamed and/or targeted for actions radical Jews sanctioned and secretly applaud, of course. Once again, the reason Islam expands is that is precisely what the Illuminati brotherhood wants.

Taking cultural traditions, few criticise, or indeed are aware of, the open tradition of orthodox Jewish women wearing flamboyant wigs to disguise their natural hair. Are not burqas the more overt or, perhaps, in your face, honest, versions of this orthodox Jewish custom? Perhaps this has something to do with the belief in the strength of hair, after Samson, which was adopted as Christian practice and fashionable amongst early British kings until it was judged to be superstitious.

“Habits” (Scriptural veils) were worn by Christian nuns (in service to God) modelled on the Arabic hijab (women’s uniform comprising burqa and other items) after the medieval crusades. Romans, Corinthians and other epistles of Paul have turned Christianity into a mockery of Pharisaic fundamentalism that spits in the face of Jesus. The American Amish represent the moderate version of that “model society” even allowing the consumption of unclean pig meat. Are not the proponents adhering to radical Islam divinely insolent? If the koranic command “dress modestly” is to be taken seriously, why would religious (sic) Muslim women cover themselves from head to toe? Hardly inconspicuous and certainly not “minimal” attire; their “clothing prisons” make a global statement.

Zionism (fortress Earth) is globalism and for globalism to be universal there must be peace on Earth. According to Pharisaic Scripture, the Messiah will herald universal peace. Obama was a candidate and has quietly seceded the United States to United Nations brokered Maritime Law. He hasn’t time to “complete”, so Putin is being groomed as the man of the hour (whenever that hour may be) and universal saviour (anti-Christ?) by various so-called “Truther” movements. Truther movements are the voice of the Puritan (another meaning of Pharisees) Christian orthodoxy and observe all wishes of Zionist planners. They are as pro-Putin as anti-Catholics and paedophilia, so the sane would be wise to tremble or begin rapid contingency plans.

There have been numerous indicators, subtle legislative oversight administered by the Duma, that can I go as far to say categorically state Putin is an extension of New World Order? Probably not, but no better example of where our friend-of-Zion stands on truth and censorship can be found in this Jewish Telegraphic Agency article issued May 2014. We are not privy to which of the numerous narrative lines have been selected to endorse the advent of the so-called (and possibly inappropriately termed) holocaust, but we know in Putin’s Russia fraud and deceit are now diktat. Putin has delivered his jackboot to the face of truth and, thus, this friend of Netanyahu ranks as the most dangerous man (or “men”) on the planet. My scepticism is surely vilified by the total absence of due diligence applied to propaganda caking promoting lies about the far more substantial Russian purges that mercilessly ended the lives of up to 100 million mostly Christian Aryan Slavs.

One of the most complete lucid accounts of that Zionist New World Order amalgam engineered Marxist mockery of communism is given by Juri Lina in “Under the Sign of scorpion” (2002). Perhaps coincidentally, the mark of scorpion is also used by South American drug cartels in Mexico and other places.

These featured in the first of my series of articles on this subject. Conscious Life News’ editor, Robert O’Leary, posited that ISIS had been drafted to the precipitate the extreme violence associated with these Latin gangs. Anyway, on the inner cover of Juri Lina’s book, just prior to the introduction, there are two powerful quotes. Both deserve paraphrase:

“Nobody knows that Zionism appeared as a Marxist movement, a socialist one…Zionism is actually a revolution.” Sergei Lezov, scientist at the Soviet Academy of Science, Institute for Scientific Information, Strana I Mir magazine (Munich), No. 3, 1966, page 94.

“The ideals of Bolshevism at many points are consonant with the finest ideals of Judaism.” Jewish Chronicle, 4^th April 1919 (London).

Nicolai Levashov, reportedly “gruesomely murdered by Zionist sympathisers” in 2012, wrote a book titled, “Russian History: Viewed through Distorted Mirrors”, Volume I (published in 2007. See page 241 onwards). This, in part, refers to the so-called Russian Workers Revolution of 1917. Importantly, he notes, all early communist leaders were either full or half blood Jews and none of the storm troopers were Russian nor spoke the language. They, it transpires, were all Brooklyn Jews and the vast majority of the supposedly 25,000 strong workers union were, unsurprising, also Jews without Russian heritage. Half-blood, Putin, is no different and his grandfather was a well-connected chef, serving Rasputin (sinisterly translates as “Putin one time only”), Lenin and Stalin. His father worked for the NAZI’s (Nationalist Zionists?) under a collaboration coordinated by General Vlasov aimed at wreaking havoc on the Ukrainians.

I did send an unanswered e-mail to Levashov, after reading his book, as he had used the intriguing metaphor that the she-wolf (i.e. Russian peoples) had turned. Back in 2011, Putin was beginning to shine as a pseudo-Messiah, but I felt then, as I do now, he was a fraud. I wanted to find out from an educated Russian, someone in the thick of things, whether Putin was indeed a wolf in sheep’s clothing (compared to, say, Adolph Hitler, whose name literally means wolf shepherd) or misjudged by me. Now, courtesy Nicolai’s tragic demise, I shall never know the answer. But, the truth (as far as I am concerned) is plainly obvious, and that is Putin is a devious snake slithering himself to poll position all the while playing the globalist’s game under the loving eyes of Binyamin Netanyahu and other Israelite “old guard” Zionists.

He is no people’s saviour. He is a manipulator in soft costume coveting vials of poison. Given his unremarkable (according to mainstreamers) humble beginnings as the “grandson of a lowly chef” (a chef that, at least, attempted to poison Rasputin for influencing the king), it is odd that the family has passed on the given name and surname to preserve that lineage. Why would a lowly cur do this? Vladimir means “powerful leader”. Putin, on the other hand, might translate as “whore”, though it is more likely to be a derivative of the Russian word “poot”, which means to prepare the way (Messiah). Long form, Vladimirovitch, has the precise same meaning as Vladimir, so I deduce his name was not merely a strange coincidence of fate (For more background on Putin’s ancestry see here).

Neither was it “fate” that Lenin’s given name matched Putin’s aptly validating planned historic outcomes. According to traditional accounts, Lenin had been hijacked by highwaymen before cruelly seizing power, so, once at the helm, he made the target and eradication of mafia gangs a priority. The culprits were possibly never caught and the vanguard went on well into Stalin’s reign. His creation of gulags (slave labour camps) for criminal businessmen saw droves of privateers scooped up as well. Unsurprisingly, these prisons became the gestation grounds for new crime hierarchies with various honour codes (usually represented by special tattoos) separating the various factions.

Stalin, an enterprising man, put this fodder to good use in World War II when things were not going well against Hitler. However, cooperation between the factions led to breaks in the honour codes. Predictably, after the war, gang disputes, known as the suka (bitch) wars, erupted. This was not the only reason. Apparently, Stalin had made lavish promises to recompense wartime services which remained unfulfilled so hostilities continued until his death. The use of Crime Gangs as “influencers” can be seen in many places about the globe. US naval presence in Thailand’s Pattaya is unofficially courtesy of Chinese and Thai triads that “run things”.

Privateering in Russia can be traced back to at least the 1700’s with charismatic tales of enigmatic figures of the style of England’s Dick Turpin. However, mafia enterprises spread to Europe and the US from 1970’s courtesy of totalitarianism Brezhnev-style (spookily coinciding with the invention of the Petrodollar). The exodus of opportunistic Jews into Russia under Brezhnev, spurred on by his “five year plans” (like the US globalism one 1971-75 which saw the creation of the Trilateral Commission) rationalising agriculture and so on is hardly noticed by “historians”.  Pro-Zionists crow about a general tolerance towards Jews as one the highlights of communism only to be blighted by Stalin’s sensational purges. 1991 Perestroika and Gorbachev’s exit saw an explosion of mafia enterprises that went up to state government level. Out of control rogue commercialism gradually began infecting foreign industries. That’s the Russian style.

Before I explore Russia’s involvement in Syria, here is a detailed evaluation of the timeline (pertaining to key events) constructing the origins and evolution of ISIS/ISIL. We have to go back to 2003 and the formation of something called the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) which appears to have been an adjunct to Mossad created “Mujahidin” (that has been terrorising Iran from the “Petrodollar” 1970’s, remember). Sponsored by Israel (after oil control negotiations turned sour), Al Qaeda in Iraq (quintessentially “ISI” or the “Mujahidin” in drag) was used to destabilise Saddam Hussein’s powerbase. Cordially mainstreamers, in rare moments of sanity, have confirmed Zionist sanctioned terrorists were his primo target, though they are deliberately foggy on “details”.

Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi was the original, CIA trained, leader of ISI who came to light in 2004, although, until October 2006, the group was generically only called Al Qaeda in Iraq (a CIA branding). Under this new guise, Abu Omar al-Baghdadi was referred to as emir or “acting caliph” by the authoritarian regime. Whilst the framework of power mimicked political instruments, controllers were nothing more than insane terrorist thugs. These people are hard to control (even by Mossad) and a few broke rank, such as Abdullah al-Janabi and Abu Ayyub al-Masri and they are now “wanted” by the same instruments that enabled them. Prior, Saddam Hussein had been reputedly CIA (with Mossad in the wings) trained, taking leadership by force.

Thus ISIS/ISIL has morphed out of an ongoing Pentagon/CIA/Mossad (to name a few) joint-enterprise partially creating the impetus for the very terrorist so-called “War on Terrorism”. Transition began 2011 but on 8^th April 2013, the acronym “ISIL” was first adopted (as used by the western mainstream) as terminology for the same rag tag army that expanded to invade Syria. The term Levant was out-of-date and not so widely known, so broadcasters decided Syria was more apt.

Thus Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant became Islamic State of Iraq and Syria for Media purposes and nothing to do with a Babylonian Goddess casting her pall of darkness [media blackout] for [Zionist] assassins to facilitate “God’s will”, of course. To further corroborate the Pentagon’s role, I have selected the Veterans Today release of a declassified internal report indicating ISIL was their creation aimed at “destabilising Assad”. Key details (useful information) have been omitted from the lukewarm brief, but this is to be expected in a dirty game.

Adding further credence, messeur’s Fix-it Dmitry Medvedev and Sergei Lavrov had been circling Syria like patriotic vultures since 2012 and prior, in Medvedev’s case (when the Pentagon report came to light). Reputedly, Assad had fervent indirect negotiations with Israel throughout the 1990’s (or earlier) to exit Syria with dignity and it was Israel that was not having a bar of it (though no specific citations have resulted from painstaking research, this an interesting topical read nonetheless; see here). We must not assume Assad has behaved in ways that have been beyond reproach. Early in his leadership term he unsympathetically flexed his muscles against the people. It cannot be stressed enough. All players, whether good or bad, are scripted for the game.

To me, it seems obvious (looking at the narrative line) from all angles, that “puppet Putin” and his “merry band of Muppets”, all dressed Lincoln green, are being used as the glue that holds the festering, mouldy psy-op in place and all over the place. Frenzied showcases for valour pollute alternative Media streams. Even cheese master extraordinaire Donald Trump jumped on the bandwagon in the early stages of his American presidency bid (and if that doesn’t make you barf, nothing will), so it must be a winner!

The game has become rather more complex than satirical reasoning permits according to Veterans Today. For those that missed the “spoof”; what better name for a cardboard cut-out cartoon journalist than E(lmer) Fudd to parody Putinesque folklore? Of course, we are told by the mainstream that Russia is Syria’s protector illegally attacking ISIS. This is because it turns out there is “good” and “bad” ISIS. As far as the vigilant mainstreamers are concerned, good ISIS is working for the globalist alliance to remove evil Assad from power without dignity at any price and bad ISIS expands evil by obstructing that unhindered assault. Those mainstreamers are a good laugh, eh?

Power broking fat cats lounge in plush hotels serviced by whore mongers well away from trouble, so they don’t care how many and who is killed just as long as it isn’t them. It is a shame no enterprising “do-gooder” has figured this out yet. One day virtue might deliver sound reasons for applauding measured targeted violence, but now we can only hope. Instead of vigilant defenders of faith we have an endless conveyor of mainstream headline sirens screaming drivel aimed at enflaming puerile masses into fomenting flagrant cultures of ignorance in ways, given the mindset of the bone idle proletariat, that are hard to shake. Generally putting the fear-of-God into Syrians not exposed to “action” and others that learn of the real horrors of war, the globalist/Zionist cartel has a singular stark message: “Don’t mess with us or we’ll give you a jackboot in the mush”.

It is fair to say, given mammoth sized information portions served up by Veterans Today, Global Research and other less prolific resources, we can piece together a pretty realistic appraisal of the objectives of all this, i.e. who’s behind the ISIS mess and so on. For instance, here’s a Global Research article that’s particularly compelling (although I disagree with the Dutch diplomat’s slant view on tarring the name of Islam, are you with me on this MT?). In my humble opinion the powers are preparing the world for what to expect from Islam when Sharia Law becomes Universal Law (though perhaps not as flagrantly interpreted as it is currently).

Laws themselves are regularly made only to be loosely enforced.  Who smokes pot? Authoritarian regimes manufacture tyranny by ensuring consequences for all transgressions are not only followed through (acted on) but also pursued vigorously via every (or any) possible means (which might include turning the general public into an obscene “crime stoppers” style conspiracy of religious spies and snitches). Islamic peoples now have the conspicuous contradictory reputation of being a “mercifully” tough bunch of “mothers”. Ironically that was the old Israelite way too (prior to the reformation of Israel). On one side were a people dazzlingly beautiful and the essence of moral probity. The rest were disgraceful calculating hypocrites that would go to any lengths in order to confuse and deceive.

Saudi Arabia has an enormously bad and horrifically long record of crimes against its own people (See more from my friends at GR) which adds credence to the assertion that the Wahhabis (royalty) are of mixed Israelite blood. Let us not forget, that omnipresent proto-Judaic leadership of Turkey has not only been behind ISIS every step of the way, but also instrumental in enabling the mayhem as well. Sound hypothesis points to an Israel-Saudi Arabia-Turkey chain of command coordinating cloaked Middle Eastern military affairs. Impoverished Yemen and Palestinian ex-pats in Lebanon are commonly used as ground forces cannon fodder backed up by Egypt’s torturers.

Historically, Saddam’s gassing of the Kurds in 1988 seems to be an evidence-free act of wilful propaganda disguising an alliance between Turkey and Iraq (both favouring radicals free moderate, secular societies at the time) that ostracised unwelcome peoples (i.e. Islamic “nutcases”). No wonder the Kurds wanted their independence after the collapse of Iraq. Regional politics in the lead up to the creation of ISIS is vital to gauge an understanding as to bigger picture motives; motives that are at the heart of Zionist-globalist ambition. Big picture determines, as I pointed out in the introduction, that ISIS is a transient incidental. In other words, ISIS can disappear as fast as it appeared should “politics” determine it.

Another article I can present as evidence liberally exposing the real agenda behind ISIS et al was hot off the press at the original time of writing, but is now looking rather tired and old news. Here we see a right royal puppet and Putin’s merry band of Muppets at work. Oh I still think they would look so good in traditional Lincoln green! In line with Israeli logic, Saudi Arabia (with classy export products such as Osama Bin Laden) makes all the actual decisions for the “Middle East” as protectorate masters. Assad and other Syrian stakeholders were nowhere to be seen at Putin’s “negotiations” pantomime. Mind you, apparently Israel’s leaders have never actually directly met with the Palestinians “in charge”. And that’s how you broker lasting “peace”; with results as transparent as the agenda.

Zionists trust the Russians and the Saudi’s to look after their best interests just as Elmer Fudd attempts to snare Bugs Bunny: puppets and Muppets completing the scripted cartoon. Even so the Russian involvement seems to be changing the face of the war. Hiccups in strategy, as to be expected, are met by booming silence from the globalist’s corridors of power. Putin seems to be projecting himself as a Messiah with teeth, vaguely, but I hate to burst the bubble for the wishful thinkers. Anyone that loves Putin, look away and don’t click on this link (an old one that discusses activities from 2011) about that giant gas pipeline stretching from Syria to Russia worth $ billions. Ah commerce….

If there is any doubt where the thinking Russian people stand on their [God given] rights we only need to refer to the great 19^th century Aryan poet, Fyodor Tyutchev. His “To the Slavs” (1867) beggars the question to Mr Putin: have you addressed this, sir?

“Long ago on European soil,

Where falsehood grew luxuriantly,

Long ago with the learning of the Pharisee (Zionist),

A dual truth was created,

For them – law and justice,

For us – violation and deceit,

And antiquity reinforced,

Them, as the inheritance of the Slavs”

No, not as according to Mr Megre (another Vladimir) and the Crimean activist simply known as “Anastasia”. Incidentally Megre is very similar to the English word meagre, which also means “humble”. Perhaps fate is saying do you choose between meekness and pomp? I know which path Jesus would have chosen.

In temporary conclusion, for anyone that still doubts the relevance and importance of the Petrodollar, I offer learned and brave Jon Rappoport’s evidence for commercial motive (as an aside, here’s more on that Syrian-Russian pipeline and “ISIS”) from the desperate ISIS tyranny. Admittedly Israel has always behaved like a scavenging cur, being the creation of foul, corrupt minds, so the concept of un-plundered resources is a new one to them, perhaps.

Whilst I don’t tar all Israelites with the same brush, let us never forget evil needs anonymous henchmen and lots of them. Compliant working classes are at least as much to blame as those wielding power. Jon has released the nasty Genie from its awfully cloudy bottle for detail reveals that those parts of the Golan Heights that Israel stole from Syria back in 1967 contain the massive deposits of hard to get at oil. Old form dies hard. The mangy mutt hasn’t learned any new tricks after all.

I would like to end this segment with a final message that a retired American officer has directed to the Pentagon. Enjoy the movie: