When “Belief in the Saviour” Teases Corrupt Zeal

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

Satan devoured it,” howl the sanctimoniously superstitious

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Advertisements

True Love, Convenient Marriages, Vaccines and Autism

True love in the morning sunOver the years I have collected numbers of angry critics. If I could consolidate all criticism into a simple cohesive summary, it would likely read, “you (me) are trying to prove something (God) exists that does not exist and cannot be proven”. Some would go further and retort, “Do you think you are God?” Of course, most of these, my more vehement critics, are devout Christians (i.e. that believe in the philosophy but not God). Though the fundamentalists are the cancer of progressive society and their extermination would be preferable, to all of them, I say this. God works in mysterious ways and can be found where science fails. Here’s an example. Imagine before us is a large open tank of water. In it we place twenty heavy stones and see that none float. We try the same experiment with flower petals but find those all float.  Science affirms [becoming] uniformity and, in step, our experiment is scientific. Creating another control group, let us suppose we specifically requisitioned humans that were unable to swim and threw them into the same tank. Prior we had dressed them all in garments laden with heavy stones. None floated in the tank. Without intervention, all would have drowned. Yet, a few might survived had their pockets been filled with flower petals instead of coarse rocks. Conversely, in the cases where bodies sunk, some (if not all) petals (that could not escape from the pocket interiors) would appear to defy order and also sink in their garment prisons.

slide_21Everything is very clear cut, demonstrating probabilities and quotas. Nevertheless God can be found in places where probabilities and quotas seem to have no jurisdiction. The best place to consistently find this type of evidence is in the quantum layer, beyond human visibility, where projected realities are inexplicably overlaid on top of that which is judged real. Most recently (2011) so-called Kondo effect attempted to “explain” the erratic, impossible behaviour of sub-particles. Science gibberish, inspired by the astronaut Edgar Mitchell, confidently solidifies zero point vacuum fields. Space, our cosmos, which isn’t even remotely understood, collects ubiquitous flamboyance in such measure that several encyclopaedias could be made from all the theories and accompanying science notes. Our physicists have yet to realise that the reason “empty” space appears curved is it contains all dimensions spread over a lateral plane. Yet-to-be-discovered dark matter (a version of light) creates a ripple effect that tempts the reflective analogy, “oceans”. If science understood the true properties of dark matter, they might, one day, work out where Newton went wrong with his assessments that are now known as “gravity”.

destruction of MaldekAs I begin to explain in my first book, “The Beauty of Existence Decoded” (available in e-format here) mainstream science has not correctly identified a single fundamental property of existence. This is mostly because it measures the illusion of existence in place of “what is”. My yet-to-be-published book “A New World Order” will unravel more on time (which is so deeply misunderstood), that most extraordinary union: electro-magnetic, the truth behind gravity, harmonisation of atomic frequencies via catalytic DNA. temper-tantrumsIt’s a book that will also talk about dragons, pixies and a hundred million years old manned civilisation on Mars that ceased with the destruction of Maldek, so it is unlikely to attract anyone remotely associated with the mainstreams other than, perhaps, scandal mongers and trolls. Human beings almost instinctively lionize beliefs systems, so it is no wonder the problems that have accrued over the eons, through diminished responsibility, are squarely the fault of those that inherit them – all of us. For instance, if all of us have a problem with what proliferates from the Whitehouse, all of us should surround the building and face off the wrong doers. Limp wristed protests do not lead to remedial action; remedial action forces those being faced off to protest. Howard-Terpning-Medicine-Man-Of-The-CheyenneWhen the powers protest, the people are achieving something!

Because just about all human beings are devout cowards, the closest communities ever come to remedial action is the reactive result of collective tantrums. Thus, most human beings behave as children for their entire lives. They were conditioned by brainwashed parents that knew only ignorance. Then, upon proscribed adulthood, they became the new overage children of government, whose absolute authority had been instilled by ignorance. Oh so few can laterally apply structured argument to that which defies the system.

 

Newton was wrong?

Never; impossible; he was a genius. My history books tell me so. My government’s credentialed “experts” tell me so. I don’t need to contemplate any more than that.

Relationships-aren’t-for-getting-things-they’re-for-giving-things.-Never-make-yourself-fall-in-love-to-make-yourself-happy.-Fall-in-love-to-make-the-person-you-fall-in-love-with-happy.And that is humanity’s problem; apathy and cowardice bundled up in one neat package. There are many ways to break the system but the best way to start is with the children and that is why I am not anti-paedophilia (as a system correcting tool). Indoctrination and anti-Semitism have ransacked and shackled the discovery tour. Wondrous rites of passage have been reduced to cheap jargon and pointless slogans. Indeed the programming of society goes so far as to tell individuals who they are and what goals will be prioritised. We are told we should adopt careers, specialise as professionals, fall in love with the right person (this person must be statistically matched and of the correct financial class and, almost invariably, the wrong person). Love, of course, by this determination, can be nothing more than infatuation. People end up marrying fantasies and, unsurprisingly, as charades are hard to keep up indefinitely, without severe adjustment, most resoundingly fall out of love.

How is that possible? To fall out of love means there was never any love there in the first place.

Not everyone satisfies this trend and a few do come to realise that relationships must be more about giving than taking. These people are special. They also have the capability of being rational, and not in the proscribed sense of the word. These are the few that have put structured argument to the test and found their individual rites of passage against all odds. Through that commitment they found the way to become real communities of two. Other so-called communities are little more than products of the system (even when proponents are against it) utilising public armies that have been swayed (or dragged along) by public opinion. Those synthetic cultures emphasise what it is to be politically correct. Supposed debates are succinct political chess moves.

Hassids_Zionism_State_Organized_TerrorismSuccessful marriages either epitomise Mephistopheles pacts or represent honour between souls. Both, ironically, are equally faithful (or adherent to God’s wishes). Whether atheist or spiritual, based on control or intuition, all marriages must satisfy mutual standards of cooperation to be pure. Whether married or not, the closest anyone comes to seeing God is by witnessing starlight. If only witnesses realised what they saw. It is for that reason that those with star qualities shine as they accentuate aspects of God. 2178229-mephNot only are all stars imperfect, but most (courtesy of corporate programing) would be oblivious to the truth behind talent. In some ways spotlight individuals are kept as far from the truth as possible, for modern movie moguls are driven to excuse and promote a despicable (erstwhile hidden) agenda. Even those most trivial to Zionism’s strategic vested interests that see value in de-sexed, inept, covertly judgemental and selectively racist societies are courted by Hollywood and other populist broadcasters. Their stars are all too often used to sympathetically spin pungent myths over and over. These have become the bloated culture monster that has jellified globalism and has turned the world into something it is not. It must be said, when arguments are convoluted, they are usually devious. Lights, camera, action means one thing for the movie star. George Burns said it so well, “stars must be able deliver bullshit with sincerity to be successful.”

Robert De NiroThose that are oppressed agree to be unless they retaliate in some way. Sensationally, the brand name movie actor, Robert De Niro, backed “Vaxxed”, a film that criticised the vaccines industry. The first leg of its national release was going to be the New York Tribeca Film Festival. Andrew Wakefield, the (unfairly) dishonoured doctor, who first raised the alarm on a possible vaccines/autism connection back in the 1990’s, was heavily involved with the film.  De Niro has an 18 year old son, reputedly with a severe case of autism. I haven’t checked how severe the severity is because, if De Niro is one of those exceptionally rare cases of human integrity, then it shouldn’t matter how severe his son’s autism is. Indeed “as one of the greatest actors of all time”, it shouldn’t matter if his son wasn’t affected at all. Does he deliver bullshit with sincerity or speak plainly? In Analyze This then Analyze That De Niro played the same loveable Mafia rogue. In both cases the bad guy turned out good in the end. That’s the fantasy, but how does it match real life? His co-star, Billy Crystal, showed his Mephistopheles qualities shortly after 2001, when he suffered a rabid political embolism in front of international cameras. The featured event, so-called “911”, was something he knew nothing about. Perhaps his corporate activation was because he was Jewish, or black, or gay? Was he molested as a child or a reformed hard drug user as so many actors have to be these days? For someone to stand up, in sincerity, and say what he said about 911 deserves only excommunication and deportation. In my opinion he is neither worthy as a Jew nor responsible as an American.

vaxxed-1200x627-facebook-linkLet us all be clear; Zionism is the only religion on the planet that insists indoctrination must be through cause of bloodline heritage and not faith. Therefore hereditary Jews that bless Zionism cannot be Americans. They will always be Israelites even if they have never visited their homeland; a homeland that shouldn’t exist at all, according to the religious Haredim. Billy Crystal and other movie stars need to be very aware of the facts and lucid about them if they decide to open their big mouths in public places. But De Niro must be different, surely? Here’s a guy the majority of Americans would count on to step up to the plate. He’s not some washed out Austrian import or one of those gung ho cowboys that shoots for order. If he went for President, the laurels of Rome would await. Stallone may well exemplify the Jersey Shore brigade, but De Niro has a brain. He’s almost classical for Christ’s sake!

There have been new developments that alter everything and following sentiment was written prior to De Niro’s very public announcement in favour of Vaxxed and resolution of the vaccines/autism link. I have left in all the original commentary as it is important. There are others, not as tall as De Niro this might apply to. Activists must constantly kick up a fuss, even if it might seem premature or unfair, if we expect remedial action. We must protest like we never protested before.

Southpark turd sandwichIn a sense it is old and very painful news as he did indeed rat out on his promise to introduce Andrew Wakefield’s movie in its promotion of truth about something that should have been very dear to him, considering his intellectually disabled son. Of course, human beings being human say it wasn’t De Niro’s fault. It was the organisers, the Government, the Jews or anything else to divert attention away from their dim star. He’s okay. No lack of responsibility here. It could have happened to anyone. The difference between De Niro and anyone with a shred of integrity is he should have gone out gunning for the movie, made waves, kicked up his own personal protest. All we, the viewers, witnessed, quite frankly was, nothing to see here, move along now, quietly as you go. For anyone that’s seen the old Southpark cartoon episode, I’ll take the turd sandwich, thanks. That’s the “De Niro promise”. Don’t blame me, I’m only famous.

Surely, if the claim of fame is to be taken seriously, a star should behave better than everyone else. That’s why Illuminati mainstream Medias constantly shine the spotlight on ungainly goings on in high places. It is their viperous way of augmenting double standards for a two tier society: the haves versus the have nots. The rich can behave with moral impunity as long as they are in favour. Once targeted, phantom paedophile horrors and a large closet filled with other potential nasties might be used as make believe in extended courtroom fantasies. In a previous post I revealed rumours that deliberate toxication of vaccines were explored at an open Council of Rome meeting back in 1981. Discussions then were all about how to put the brakes on an ever expanding global population. TV all seeing eyeThat “op” could not have happened without the help of the all Seeing Eye. Nothing has been more powerful at shaping public opinion than the every present goggle box that streams television. In masonic lore the eye in the pyramid means something real. Ancient visitors to these extraordinary monuments were able to use the structures as a means of negotiation for direct [third eye] connection with the Akashic Records. Our modern day all Seeing Eye has been twisted into pulp fiction courtesy of the illuminating Illuminati.

ba401-eli-lilly-and-company-1-638Toxication of vaccines was achieved, arguably, when Eli Lilly launched their Thimerosal preservative brand; a mercury compound. Though patented in 1931, ingredients have increased to include the heavy metal, aluminium and, best known as rat poison, formaldehyde, in more recent times. Even back in the 1940’s Thimerosal was known to cause Pink’s Disease. Physicians, such as Andrew Wakefield, were not prepared to stand idly by when patient after patient was clearly and irresponsibly injured by their vaccines. 51SXNFjLUVL._SY300_In 1930 one in ten thousand suffered from conditions that would be diagnosed as autism today. Now one in fifty are autistic. The problem is there are other statistics too. Whereas no one can disagree that vaccines trigger autism, there could be a spectrum of contributors. Pesticides, notably the chemical agent glyphosate, statistically cause autism too. Though perhaps not directly related, prior to the introduction of the automobile in 1905, it is estimated roughly one in forty would develop cancers. That probability has increased to, maybe, one in three. Cancer is big business. One patient is worth up to $400,000 in medical bills. I make the case that pollution, in general, is a big contributor to all disease. Considering all forms of pollution, the petrochemical industry is by far the most responsible for all man made carbon emissions.

We still must be careful when making sweeping accusations. Thimersosal has been used in some vaccines since the 1930’s, yet noticeable effects weren’t noticed en-masse until 1990’s. Perhaps that meant more tainted vaccines were circulated or could it mean something else? UFO-UFOs-sighting-sightings-Lyon-France-europe-march-2012-space-alien-aliens-ET-W56-uredda-top-secret-face-mars-moon-base-Jeremy-LinScreen-Shot-2012-03-10Instinctively I smell a cover up. Will the autism problem disappear with good vaccines? Particularly in alternative Medias, a big fuss has been made over so-called chemtrails. Those lucky enough to catch the spraying planes red handed will notice they are regularly accompanied by light orbs, or superfast moving black rods of unknown origins. This is no coincidence as pedestrian man is helping factions not of this Earth prepare us for the new extra-terrestrial age. It is unlikely even the planes’ pilots know the true agenda. Unsightly interruptions of stagnancy are “noticed” by wannabe crusaders. Yet “100’s millions of vehicles, 100’s thousands of industrial chimney stacks daily belching billions of tons of pollution into our atmosphere” has rarely been deemed a topic worthy of discussion, when it should be a constant vigil.  I suppose it is because that is a known evil and not the consequence of corporate infiltration at all levels of protest.  There are between 4,000 and 19,000 planes in the air at any time. According to the extra-dimensional Zeta Grey Beings, these constant “cuts” of the electro-magnetic field affect everyone’s central nervous system. Is that a possible autism connection?

AutismRegularly I touch on the paranormal when discussing the mundane. In the case of autism, given the vaccine injuries statistic is comparatively so minute compared to those that turn out healthy, how can that be so? A thousand, to all intents and purposes, identical children are given MMR vaccines, yet only twenty or so demonstrate symptoms of autism. Using the “stones analogy” of my introduction, one thousand out of one thousand should be afflicted per probability logic. So it must be something else. I point out in “Autism Corroborates Darwinism” that DNA is not understood by science because it is metaphysical. Going further, I have stated physics does not even comprehend the physical cosmos due to its inability to process anything that exists beyond or outside material illusion. My first book, “The Beauty of Existence Decoded” begins to unravel the truth. It is a start; a firm base, but there is more to come; much more. I mentioned earlier that “God” can be “seen” in starlight, but there is a simpler way. Atoms act as God’s pores. They are the missing link. Every single atomic nucleus becomes a soul portal (revealing a reflective aspect of God). Thus, these are the root of change delivered by unseen sunlight (or “starlight”). Manifest DNA is the cellular facilitator. I go into detail in “The Beauty of Existence Decoded”. Heavy stuff, yes, but fine minds can grasp it.

curvedspace1In “Autism Corroborates Darwinism”, I hypothesise that the evolutionists are correct “in measure”. However physical adjustments are made by the holy combination of atoms, starlight and DNA – another interpretation of “trinity”? Put your “beliefs” in the reject basket and you can learn so much. For instance, when I announced the reason space appears curved is that all dimensions are housed on the same lateral plane prior is the implications are massive for us. We, “carbon based life forms”, have restricted access because we can only tune into the frequency we call “3D”. Should there be an atomic shift, then anything might be possible. Compressed dark matter (simply a theory thus far) delivers an ocean effect. Our atmosphere holds back its pressing blackness, but this could only be so because of enormous electro-magnetic forces generated by our planet. These bounce off the rim of darkness and are responsible for the phenomenon known as “gravity”. Everything is not pulled, but pushed to the ground. No wonder “the powers” have kept the lid on serious investigation into any inner Earth settlements.

htc-droid-dna-verizon-ad-1There is so much we could know if only we opened our minds. Slowly I reveal the unrevealable. In “Autism Corroborates Darwinism” I concluded that evolution is spread over the relative skill set by a combination of our holy trinity: atoms, starlight and DNA. Doctor Andrew Wakefield speaks to the media after a hearing at the General Medical Council in LondonPer this system, changes could be negotiated at individual, full or sub-group levels. In the case of vaccines, a few unlucky individuals presumably take the hit for the group. In line with this mechanism, every child of a particular batch is made autistic, but most suffer complaints so mild symptoms would be barely recognisable, if at all. Because the majority, including most so-called intellectuals, are so busy validating or accounting their rogue belief systems, truths like this are literally beyond comprehension. I couldn’t imagine Andrew Wakefield would believe it too, but he does know there is an autism/vaccines link. The devil is always found in the detail and even the very best seem to be compelled to pay nothing more than lip service (if we’re lucky) to ideas and remedies that conflict with presupposition.

turdpolishThere’s a bit of “I look after number one, so I behave like a number two” in everyone. Those in high places have a long way to fall, so I understand the easiest line of defence against “would be attackers” is to pretend to be holier than thou. “You are not qualified to respond” is the only sure fire way to deflect reasoned criticism. They (the old guard) know that once you are tagged, you will either never be given the opportunity to become qualified or seasoned judges will demote your input as vagaries or interesting but unsound ideas. When weak links do occasionally emerge from those safe, tried & tested sources, ideas are all too briskly destabilised with liberal doses of tar and feathers. The system is “self-emulating” and that is what makes it so successful. Taking the point in question, toxic vaccines, the mainstream experts can and do not only endorse products as perfectly safe and useful that aren’t, but also make ludicrous, illogical claims against those that don’t share their corrupt opinions. The most popular call is to present “anti-vaxxers” as social-terrorists determined to infect healthy, vaccinated people (usually children). According to reason, this means vaccination does not actually protect anyone at all.

artworks-000146599488-4sanol-t500x500From the holistic DNA perspective attributes are guided by intent. If you wanted to be a woman that is what you are. Those that trumpet about being born as the wrong bodies are misguided. Certainly, past lives (something mainstay science doesn’t want to “discuss” let alone accept) might reveal a pre-inclination towards one sex or the other and, with hindsight, the choices to reincarnate as males or females might have been forlorn ones in some cases, but mitigated decisions they were. I mentioned earlier about true love and sham marriages. Sham marriages that last the test of time are as strong as real marriages built on virtue. One is based on control, the other faith and, I am compelled to believe, if autism was to strike any marital union in particular, these would be the focus. For those that control, autism is an angry outcome. The faithful produce offspring that are products of sadness. Impact is never found in logic. The passionate have no scruples. They win or lose at all cost. Thus, if “God” were to use autism as a metaphor prompt, then the ideal choices for impact would be the offspring of the “holy” or the “holier than thou”. There is hope on the horizon because it is revenge only that unites every human being – great or small, deceptive or virtuous, intellectual or shallow. Armies of “truther networks” are, perhaps, inches away from orchestrated militancy. Their only missing ingredient is courage.

Truther networksI am regularly critical of truther networks. This is not because individuals lack scruples or causes are necessarily invalid. There are two main complaints. Firstly, many claims are baseless through fault of lack of or maligned sources. Secondly, various crusades are, after the fictional Spanish soubrette, Don Quixote in character (i.e. chasing evil windmills) and either target non-existent threats or, more commonly, after the fact campaigns. quijoteThe 911 incident has gone, passed by and is no more. Yet, there are endless memories regurgitating dusty conspiracy theories or substantiated claims of wrong doing. Hollow laments for impeachment is the closest we ever come to resolve or action, which, frankly, is nothing short of blame game or pass the hot potato. The real issues are always buried deep and answers are invariably impractical. Unsurprisingly, the same can be said for information sources that routinely revolve the alternative Media circuits. BlameGameThe same old chestnuts, bad pennies are rebranded, rehashed and misconstrued over and over. So much so, there are very few sources I subscribe to and regularly review.

Occasionally something comes along, out of the blue, that smacks me in the face and commands respect. One such epic article, from memory reproduced by Brendan D Murphy’s Facebook channel, has everything a true researcher needs. It is an exceptionally long read (including a number of videos) that deserves thorough processing. Half or part reading it shows no respect for the author and would be the consequence of sloppy, ill-disciplined behaviour. Truth seekers, researchers may as well not be lazy else give up and do something productive. A job not done well is a job not done at all. Those that are time poor have lives cluttered with too much nonsense. If you are time poor, it is your duty to review life processes. But, let’s face it, most time poor people are sorry liars.

Pasteur plagiaristThe Pasteur article has exposed a number of weaknesses pertaining to the human condition. Now we near the end of this entry, I am obliged to highlight poor attention span as an extra consequence of our fraudulent nature. When, last post, I intimated people don’t read e-books because they are ungenerous, that was not the only reason. Many have such poor attention; simple phrases only are barely retained. Thus, I try to keep my blog entries to “fewer than 3,000 words”. We have already gone way over budget so I will try to summarise, “Louis Pasteur Plagiarist, Imposter & the Truth About Vaccines” in two paragraphs, if that’s possible. Though I won’t attempt to unravel its rather confusing terminology now, suffice to say, a future post may try and transcribe some of that detail in a more resounding way. Sensationally, the article reveals Pasteur reputedly admitted he was a fraud on his deathbed and his germ theory was both unproved and wrong. As just about all modern mainstream medicinal philosophy relies on underlying principles of germ theory, this is a massive piece of information.

It subliminally highlights just how rotten the modern medical system is. Should not this information be acted on now by all you petty crusaders? Your health system causes more deaths and debilitating injuries than your wars. “911” was nothing by comparison.

Broken healthcareI have no reason to doubt the article as the author provides a lucid account of the 19th century French biologist, Professor Antoine Bechamp, whose cellular tissue theory formed the basis for most of Pasteur’s wayward conclusions. Micro-organisms (affectionately known as germs) that feed on dead tissue matter are changelings. They are changelings because they are the product of very much smaller microzyma, which can morph into bacteria or “viruses” depending on the body environment. Personally I find this very revealing as I have stated on a number of occasions that all virus are caused by pollution (whether organic or inorganic) and are evidence of how [invaded] bodies deal with threats of this type. Pasteur-BechampBechamp has confirmed that microzyma are the agents of change that create organism-like microbes which are accounted for as viruses (or bacteria) by statisticians. In conclusion, the expansive article goes on to say that the reasoning behind vaccines is flawed and all serums are not beneficial and probably detrimental to users. That is you and me, by the way! Mild doses of complaints (such as Polio) do nothing to stop adverse catalytic reactions in the body and well documented cases are shown up as evidence. Indeed, the writer plainly argues that all modern cases of polio are caused by the polio vaccine.

Wikia-Visualization-MainIf this is correct, and I have no reason to suggest otherwise, then vaccines may well ultimately cause autism. Nevertheless, the human body and its mysterious, magical way of dealing with issues must, at least, contribute to the syndrome. Whether we single out loveless money marriages or unions of intertwined hearts, it would surely be worth testing a vaccine-free control group to ascertain whether there is any merit to William Thompson’s (scientist for the Centres for Disease Control) sensational claims that he documented evidence categorically linking vaccines to autism effects. NEWJERUSALEMThis means that if Robert De Niro, Billy Crystal and other high profile stars could detach themselves from the corporate pariahs just as Anthony Hopkins has done and show true God qualities, perhaps they could save the world. I’m reluctant to cite Marlon Brando whose infamous Oscar rejection so aptly highlighted the plight of the American Indian (or native Redskin), because nepotism shouldn’t pay. After 25,000 years we, the human group, are beginning to embrace a new age of light. If that is to mean anything at all, gloves must come off and action must replace apathy. True love must trump convenience if autism is to win the war, and make no mistake about it for that is what it is. Our stars, our true to God must be resilient pitted against all odds if autism is to win the war against vaccines.

Has a prayer been answered?

Enjoy the clip, as it is rare I am given the opportunity to be optimistic. Recently, Robert De Niro not only proved he was a giant Redwood completely redeeming his prior pathetic inaction in promotion of the sensational movie, “Vaxxed”. Doing more for the film than the New York Tribeca Festival could ever have done, he broadcast to 100’s of millions of people across the globe on Sunrise (a television stream) making his sane recommendations. As much as the vain interviewers tried to downplay issues, De Niro countered with prestigious authority and nobility. The veil was well and truly lifted on the “mercury based preservative, Thimerosal”. He asked why our scientists have done nothing about the complex issues that logically propose a vaccines/autism link. Like everyone else, he “wasn’t sure about Andrew Wakefield”, but he also insisted not being sure was no reason to inhibit a meaningful investigation. De Niro intimated this needed to be done by experts not in the pockets of corporate health. Yes, he mentioned the damned money grabbing pharmaceutical monopoly in the lowest possible light.

Charge of the Light Brigade by Thomas Jones BarkerOn that up note, I think several people may be feeling true love for Robert De Niro and his inconvenient views. Bravo to a cultural hero. May he lead the charge….