Inheritance, the Prodigal Son and Interest in “Interest”

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

Is it possible to effectively resurrect the past?

Well that question will be answered presently.

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

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

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

And on and on we can debate.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Reflections on What Easter Really Meant To Me

Currently employed full time, I have few hours to spare on writing projects such as this one. Fortunately corporate Australia permits an extra day’s forced holiday over Eostre, so I have been able devote time to penning something on the tafaska cause; a cause, I might add, swamped by ambiguous sentiment. Easter, as with the other Christian-Pagan festival called Christmas, is a celebration of harvest (dedicated from the Goddess Eostre). It represents the death of the season, marked by grieving tears (who said grieving could not be happy?) of the Songkran, and the other welcomes a new birth that ushers in the burning summer sun. Infancy stages are marked and drawn out, so it naturally takes a devil of a long time for the sun (sol) to emerge in full bloom. Conversely, when the cold snap sets in one day out of the blue, it will refuse to shake for several months. Occasionally a seasonal death (metaphor) will linger, but when the cold’s in, it is there to stay.

Embroiled in the Easter message (which is an encapsulation of season changes, differing depending on locations) are numerous metaphors. Perhaps most significant is the death of Tiamat one and a half billion years ago when the planet was subsequently reborn as the Earth. Made popular through living necessity, the harvest festival is far removed from heavenly politics. There is evidence of cosmic philosophy in the Pol Vuh and other ancient records, but the sheer weight of celebrations of abundance shows what the ancients took the most seriously. Indeed, for them, only clearly sincere devotion to God would permit a bountiful harvest, or, In other words, God’s blessing and presumed associated goodwill needed a “trade”. Perhaps inspired by a perceived breakdown in community devotion, at some juncture human sacrifice became the popular way of demonstrating allegiance to God, evidenced by the Wiccan and those dreadful Mayan/Aztec practices of the deep past.

True “Gnostic” Christianity also emphasises the importance of harvest, being the staple for good life. “Evil” is the measure of sickness and disease and not the “justifier” that supports vicious, unholy opinions. Legacies found in some (but by no means all) documents euphemistically labelled “Dead Sea Scrolls” expand a pantheist narrative line fused with Eastern philosophy offering a variation of existential Zen Buddhism. Though the quantum layer is not mentioned directly (and is presumably unknown) by the Gnostics, their interpretations of the dynamics of spiritual (vibrational) existence are defined as states, characters and emotions and these mimic atomic expressive fluctuations.  I discuss the importance of this style of reasoning in detail in my book “The Beauty of Existence Decoded”.

While in shameless promotion mode, it would be remiss of me not to mention that I now offer professional consultation sessions. Current enquiries from potential clients have been split into two equal streams. Interest has been shared between the individual pursuit of divine purpose and wider communal discovery – corporeal deep genetic (potentially extra-terrestrial) heritage. I can evaluate and expand both arenas. Each session (via Skype) comes at a reasonable fee of $100 per hour, providing the currency is valid and of the US variety. Preconceptions are forbidden. Closed minds are unwelcome. Those interested in learning more should first read this article detailing an extended two hour consultation conducted recently, Captivated parties will find a contact point there for private communication.

Easter is a Christian religious festival, so to commercialise it in any way would be to insult God. Do our supermarkets give away spiced buns or chocolate eggs said to represent the mock crucifixion and rebirth of Jesus?  Other than everything seems to be “on sale” to sell these days, I saw no “giveaways” over the holiday. If Easter meant anything it seemed to represent only profit and loss. It also seemed to represent maintaining an illogical heathen fantasy that ridicules prosperity. Moreover the real Jesus would be horrified by what Christianity has become. Foul blabbermouths crusade bitterly on behalf of hollow, cynical virtues that are there only to enshrine order for order’s sake. They do not uphold the ethos of Jesus; that deliberate open hearted discovery tour and rite to passage.

No, Christianity succumbed to vile attack from the enemies beginning with the Nicolaitans partnering Constantine tyranny. But serious scholars know plans were well underway much earlier. I continue to argue Mark or Marcus, compiler of the synoptic gospel, was really a Roman aristocrat. His argument that Jesus was a part mortal Son of God satisfies all contemporary Roman ideals. If Jesus ministry, in deference to traditional dates, logically and provably (by analysis of journeying timelines) mapped the Jerusalem siege period (66-69AD), then far from there being an extended aural period (irrational in every sense), the Roman version of the life of Jesus was hot off the press right after they won the battle over Jerusalem.

The only unsatisfied enigma is as to why Disciple Peter was needed as star witness. The capture and imprisonment of what I originally believed to be one of Jesus’ chief bodyguards coincided with the collapse of Jerusalem. Given Peter’s prominence as a de facto priest in Mark’s “Acts of the Apostles”, clearly there is more to this picture than meets the eye. Thus, recently, I concluded that Peter’s association with Jesus (the figurehead) was more metaphorical than factual. Instead, he was one of the key Gnostics inside Jerusalem at the time of the siege while Jesus was journeying on the outside. Perhaps Peter’s sleeping at the time of Jesus’ capture represented the miscalculation of a Roman breach and attack of the city which ultimately ended the rebellion.

Contrary to popular opinion, the “Romans” (as were the Greeks prior) had been defeated by the Babylonian King David when the Mediterranean peoples were locally known as Philistines. The Philistines never disappeared. They relocated far from harm’s way, reconsolidated but did not undertake any large scale imperialist conquests until they had become sufficiently strong many centuries later. It is also worth mentioning that understanding of human genetics (genome) makes for greater confusion. Because the ancient Caucasian races all unrestrictedly interbred, authentic genetic traits have been indiscriminately spread over the great group today.

Originally, green eyed, red haired Celts, for instance, were a distinct variety separate of the black haired, grey eyed race and so on. It is hardly surprising the Genome project honestly judges Ashkenazi Jews as bulk-standard “whites”, much to the protest of Zionist supremacists of course. In fact green eyed, red haired priestly Celts are distinctly recorded as Viracocha’s (perhaps some sort of “Anunaki” manifestation) emissaries commissioned to transport Olmec man (presumed Negro) to Mayan South America. Each attired in loose fitting tunics tied at the waist by a coarse rope or sash, feet supported by open toed leather sandals, they appeared no different in descriptive appearance to modern day Benedictine monks.

Guatemala is most commonly referenced as the most up-to-date heritage of the Maya and tribes who have been recorded observing dozens of Earth bonding ceremonies over the Easter period. No wonder the violent imperialist Sandinistas focused on breaking the culture of that great land as a primo priority. Because of the spiritual integrity of genuine timeless ceremonies, all are destined to find a role as a holistic Easter cause. To presume spiritual disintegration of the whole and censorship of any of its parts does not violate the will of God is preposterous indeed. Divides were caused by those that assumed their own superiority and accorded that social apartheid was “justified” by these differences alone. Indeed it was overt racism that permitted the collapse of the Satan Star as the primary act of existence. I discuss the consequences in depth in my book “The Beauty of Existence Decoded”.

The earliest known copy of any New Testament manuscript heralds from the early Christian church located in Alexandria. The document in question arguably dates prior to 200AD and is perhaps contemporary with many of the Dead Sea Scrolls. It is odd that it did survive at all, because Constantine nobbled just about all other literatures his thugs could purge from the great Alexandrian library. Our enigmatic manuscript is a copy (the original would have been sketched between 66 and 69AD) of the Fourth Gospel, which is posthumously known as “John’s”.

Aiding by compelling arguments presented by Richard Leigh (et al) in “The Holy Blood, The Holy Grail”, I conclude that John’s Gospel is a very early bastardisation of the word of the real Jesus based on parts of (not tampered with) memoirs recorded by his brother-in-law, Lazarus (son of Joseph of Arimathea). John, the “alias”, was chosen because it derives from a Hebrew expression with means “God is gracious”. It is not beyond the realms of consideration that perhaps Jesus released his own version of “John” prior to the doctored version heralding from Alexandria.

It Jesus’ version did exist, it either has not survived or is hidden from public scrutiny. Either way, should the dating of the Alexandrian bogus scroll be deemed accurate, logic dictates distortion of Essene Gnosticism was well underway from the inside even as the early church was establishing formal roots. Mark, in Acts of the Apostles, it would be fair to say, does more than hint at deep politics collectivising the early church. This doubtlessly reflected turbulent times inside Jerusalem under siege, so why wouldn’t that turmoil carry over? In normal circumstances, Paul, an unmistakable hard line Pharisee, would have failed at every attempt at infiltration.

By the Synod of Hippo (394AD) Gnosticism was dead, as an authority. Roman Catholicism had its way and the Pharisees could breathe easy.  Doctrinal “sin” made man accountable to God. Indeed emphasis on Moses’ legacy pushed the concept a stage further by implying man, as a naturally imperfect sinful being, must be subservient to God. His “commandments” or orders from God prepared for unscripted tyranny. None of these ten “primary requirements” of man were or are possible to follow to the letter. Moses had crafted laws that would imply perennial guilt on the sincerely spiritual and this is why the early Christian church, under sentence from Catholicism, became the popular resolve. Priests (who were no different to anyone else) were “apparently” bestowed with mystical powers that allowed them to veto “sin” on behalf of their helpless God.

The tradition expanded as a form of universal transcendentalism delivered through the belief in the divinity of Virgin Mary. Emphasised by the Catholic Church’s relatively recent move on the tail of the New Age “Cosmic Christ” bandwagon highlights just how much Mary had undermined Jesus prior. Her effigy (idol) still holds so much power some believe it is a direct channel to God.  I am speaking superficially, of course, and do not responsibly suggest this could be the case. Although it should also be noted that the spiritual value of objects must never be underestimated. When fused in combination with the power of belief, “miracles” might be possible (underscored by our lack of understanding as to the true role of atoms, the building blocks of existence).

The ancients knew that only when very similarly tuned peoples lived on a planet; it would absorb and reflect the group emotional character bandwidth as pulsating echoes. Consequentially, as one infected planet crossed another’s path or came into the zone of influence, inhabitants would be deeply affected by the others’ mood. Even today ignorant horologists make a living from this presumption. Belief in energy saturated effigies is one thing, but the Catholic mumbo-jumbo certainly obscures the truth that Mary was a Roman royal and her idolisation was a deliberate ploy to give her the eternal prestige her status vested.

The Jews were no different in this regard. Melchizedek, the “king”, was a comparative oaf who adopted traditional folklore as a cover for his own historic prosperity. The same trick is partially played scripting Jesus and, undeniably, some of the tradition highlighted by Melchizedek is drawn upon, and why not, if Jesus was of royal blood? Hebrew chroniclers were metaphor makers. Miracles, if implausible, added colour to vestige. A royal shouldn’t be comparable to a commoner. The gospel writer “Matthew” (meaning, from Hebrew, gift of God) pushes the argument that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah, which (contrary to Greek philosophic barbarism of terms) says he was the rightful shepherd king to the people of the time. Private debate continues today as to whether he, by any stretch of the truth, could be proven to be seventieth in line (taken from Ezekiel’s prophecy) after Adam.

Jesus’ own identity, I have stated several times, is a Latin joke; an anagram found in the name Josephus. Not coincidentally, if the ministry of Jesus coincided with the Siege of Jerusalem, it would have ushered in Josephus’ coming of age (euphemised by the baptism performed by John the Baptist, son of Zechariah, and one of the progressive steps to messianic authority). His father was a High Priest of the line of King David. All religious scribes were from royal families. There were no equal opportunities in these times. However, because of presumed blood heritage, theoretically any scribe could make a bee-line for regal power. The case was made by Matthew and Mark in no uncertain terms. Jesus/Josephus/Joseph ben Matthias was placed as a direct descendant of David to give added strength to stressed patronage.

Historically, corporeal (of the body) politics between Pharisees (judges) and Sadducees (scribes) was thought to act as an order balancer. This affected law making outcomes determined by the scales of power. Therefore, the most significant outcome of the Roman sacking of Jerusalem was the end of the Sanhedrin (religious government). From that point on, the Sadducees were axed leaving only totalitarian pharisaic (judgemental) domination to thrive. The corresponding exodus from Judea not only rendered Jews without a nation, but also began a new age of spiritual dogma. In effect the payoff for divine tyranny ensured complicit Jews could celebrate the fact they were no longer “goyim” (nationals) because they had no nation.

Rabid distortion of the Moses instructions (emphasised in the Book of Leviticus and others) logically ensued. Per this new irrational epoch, corrupt “Jews” no longer needed to be responsible goyim as they weren’t goyim (being nationless). Corruption was turned sour by the void in explanation as to why Moses’ generalisation tarred the goy “lower than the common beast”. Inhumane, immoral, unjustified behaviour prevailed as a result of abuse of privilege (God presumed the Jews had higher spirituality than other nationals given their grounding in faith) and this message should thrashed home by all decent, God loving Rabbis. Logic proposes Moses actually only targeted goyim that put their “nation” ahead of responsible humanity. Perhaps the answer would be found in the “lost” tabernacles protected by the Arc of the Covenant? Therefore, Israelites that suppose otherwise defy Moses and mock their true God.

With the critical loss of nationhood, the Pharisees have exploited the fact ever since. Even today Haredim deny the legality of Israel as a nation state. Why? They do so to crudely preserve pharisaic injustices whereby the Israelites can have a nation, but are not regarded as “nationals”, because ambiguity determines their nation is not certainly divinely legitimate. For those oblivious to Mosaic doctrine, it was said, of Earth’s peoples, the tribe of Levi was the most worthy under God. Under this vein of responsibility, they could guide the wider Jewish brethren, who were corporeally known as “God’s chosen people”. Finally, whatever could be done for the rest, God’s spawn, was up to the furtive moral probity of the chosen. The doctrine, in the suggestion that the Jews were God’s “chosen people”, implies Judaism is “the” unblemished authentic divine instruction. It also implies that Jews must lead by example.

Remember, none of Moses’ ten fundamental commandments’ are possible to follow to the letter; particularly given the belief that a divine authority would expect any instruction to be observed beyond fully. Therefore, if the commandments were issued “under divine authority” as described, then God was a pretty poor judge of human faculty. Indeed the philosophy behind the commandments pragmatically only encourages human beings to nit-pick ways out of responsibility, perhaps using the same five star lawyers corporates favour today, or resign to resolute spiritual incompetence. The commandments seem to have been drafted to ensure all humans are sure to fail (from the divine perspective). Given this consideration, it is hardly surprising that the Jews have assumed their arbitrary role as chosen, proto divine, people is something of an in-house joke. Faced with the impossible task of demonstrating divinity (based on the commandments), certainly Jews are no different to other humans. They innocently kill things. They have unworthy thoughts. They don’t truly believe less love something they don’t know is true. Moses “as paraphrased” gave his people a simple choice: follow the doctrine and be more worthy than anyone else or fudge it, manipulate it and abuse it.

Up to the point the Sanhedrin was disbanded, similar to politics of today, merit in decision making relied on a two party system. Over hundreds of years the some sorry debates went round and round, drawing the same old time-endured predictable conclusions. That is why Jesus was not particularly satisfied by the Sadducees as he vehemently opposed the Pharisees. Complimenting today’s political machinations, certain groups and views were marginalised to the point of deliberate ignorance or worse. Those deemed a threat to order were persecuted. Today, in conjunction, many people are “persuaded to believe” fate is merely coincidental or random by corrupt, “partisan” sciences, when the reverse is true. The Sanhedrin collapsed because its internal politics had become stale, The Roman “attack” on Jerusalem acted as a “cover story”. I used the term “attack” glibly as no evidence has been forthcoming (beyond more or less instant persecution of Gnostic Christians) to support claims. Like the sensation “holocaust” (creating more ambiguity over the spiritual “legality” of Israel), the supposedly destroyed temple may have equally been “imaginary”, in light of its defiance of strict prophesy.

Between 66-69AD Jesus was on the political campaign trail one jump ahead of authorities. Politics have become much more civil in the modern age. The roguish “pro-sovereignty” Irish party, Sinn Fein, was overtly censored for years by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) on behalf of successive British governments. Though no “Jesus” by any stretch of the imagination, telecasts of leader Gerry Adams’ speeches were silenced but for newsreaders’ doctored talk-overs. His voice was said to be too intoxicating with the potential of corrupting listeners. In other words, his arguments were too valid, too compelling to be allowed to be heard and compares with predicable censorship in Jesus’ time, which is the main reason all religious texts offer so much innuendo and metaphor. No one (in sanity) could put a real name to this stuff unless he was a seriously important personage with a giant army to back his mouth up.

Though Flavius can mean golden (sometimes referring “blond haired” boys) or imperial, the Roman Flavian Dynasty is famous for its wreaths (dual metaphor – the laureate poet wearing a crown of thorns?). Encapsulated by the anagram “Josephus”, a royal poet laureate gives birth to spiritual Jesus, in turn sacrificed for sin under a crown of thorns. Mystics know this symbolism is discombobulated and stretches much further. The crown of thorns represents the barbed rose cross reinforced by the “crucifixion”. It is Jesus’ Rosicrucian/Atlantean calling card. Sadly few have the presence of mind to scrutinise this less consider implications. Rather than being one the Rosicrucians, I interpret the message stating Jesus and all Gnostics were up against the Roman version of that order which transferred to the Catholic Church, as is currently the case today. It also confirms that Zionist pharisaic nationless hard liners have partnered with Rosicrucian Philistines in order to secure the globe. Zion approximates an ancient Hebrew word that means fortress or prison.

Easter, the Christian festival, simply calculates Jesus’ death and rebirth as euphemised by the crucifixion/resurrection stories. The four gospels treat the resurrection accounts very differently. In Mark the episode is missing. Matthew passes off the occurrence almost as an aside, perhaps even “with indifference”. Luke slightly improves on Matthew’s trite delivery by adding a short précis of the outline found in Mark’s Acts of the Apostles. In the Acts of the Apostles account Jesus is presented as so disfigured by his harrowing ordeal, he is barely recognisable. Only by “his words” (metaphor – the “legacy of Jesus” and beware of false prophets too) can some of the apostles “see” (another couched metaphor – damned by censorship). For Mark (the Roman who possibly was the character that is labelled Judas Iscariot) Jesus was spent, done, finished and only belong with the other dead (and out of fashion) prophets, so he sent him off in a cloud (we have the expression today “head in the clouds” meaning “to be unrealistic”. It appears to also be a contemporary Roman idiom, so might it apply here?).

It is the legacy of Jesus that was the great threat to pharisaic order and this needed to be censored as all cost. Over the Easter period, I had an enlightening discussion with an Islamic scholar. Unbeknownst to me, the one thing that separates Jesus from all other mystics is he refrained from use of the instructions “no” or “don’t”. Mohamed, we both concluded, took the pharisaic “forced order” path, which, upon reflection, is not entirely “without merit”. His doctrine assuring “alms for the poor” significantly improves on Jesus’ own suggestive Feeding of the Five Thousand and Good Samaritan parables. Was support of others to be made obligatory, then social communion would be a small step away. It is no wonder that the very first Islamic war was fought over the interpretation of Mohamed’s alms for the poor doctrine.

That is why Easter has succumbed to crass commercial “Passover” and the desperate, disadvantaged and poor have been left, all but forsaken.