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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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