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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Introduction

white-slave-children-new-orleans

Just as with everyone else not born into money, I have to ghost as a slave to survive. Eating is an expensive requirement but, frankly, to follow breatharian systems, in my view, surely removes the greatest fundamental living pleasure of all. Consumption of food and liquid has been the major highlight of my existence. On the other hand, taking a scrape of raw brains from downed opponents (a macabre armed forces tradition Douglas Dietrich highlights) or devouring the still beating hearts of innocents (a feature of ISIS terrorism), to me, is devoid of anything that resembles bliss. Anyway, the point is, or was, I am presently working full time to survive and that has slowed progress on research and writing. In recent weeks Paris, Turkey, Russia and the CIA/Mossad pact, of course, have featured big time, so I would like to begin with a little video. I can’t remember if this one’s about Charlie Hebdo or the other Paris event, but…..same deal:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxkInbEcEZ4&feature=youtu.be

Isn’t it a strange that just about every one of these terrorist attacks coincides with official training exercises? What are the odds?

n_84002_1Moving along, we covered Israel in the last segment, so this part I would like to define Zionism, but before I do that a whole heap of other stuff has cropped up that really deserves an airing. Take the interesting recent revelation of Turkish President Erdogan’s intimate connections with the ISIS/ISIL (yes, I know, I’m as confused as you) brass, or, supposed brass. Then we have Paris and theories as to the purpose of the obvious false flag staged terrorist attack. Was it to coerce France into NATO (Zionist Pentagon Inc.), impose a version of the Patriot Act on the French people or to ram home “Climategate”?

Jon Rappoport produced a brilliant article about early 1990’s CIA weapons manufacture in Arizona that missed my last article. Apologies, Jon. 060801_oilSpill_hmed_1p.grid-6x2Perhaps some were used to down that Russian jet travelling perilously close to Turkish airspace? My friends at Veterans Today argue that was actually about “ISIS oil” – something new to me. Oil, did I hear oil? Ah well, these sort of antics are hardly unknown to my seasoned readers. Absence of false flag motive is a scarce commodity these days.

To understand Zionism, you first must accept that nationalism is separate from spirituality and always has been. The concept of a fortress (Sion) world is nothing other than nationalistic utopianism. phoenix_final07_by_eedenartwork-d5mohzqWhether the globe is “secure” or “insecure” does not reflect on sincere belief systems. Insincere ones demonstrate an absence of beliefs. Most recently, I have been particularly obsessed by etymology. “Belief” is a classic example of how meanings have been twisted to reflect the opposite of truth. Assertions, allegations and opinions are not beliefs. Yet, that, for the large part, is the only evidence required as an expression of faith. Except for nationalistic Judaism (and Islam to some degree), believers merely need to claim they are party to one religious brand or another to be unquestionably accepted by all as valued creed representatives. No one reads books anymore. Everything is on the cover. Everything has become branded concepts. Not so, I must say, is the case as I battle the very difficult book, “Legends of the Phoenix” by Alexey Trekhlebov (the cover is non-descript). Aside from his devotion to Russian/Atlantean supremacy, he makes some staggeringly good, well researched points. Included is a quote [supposedly] by Krishna:

Spiritual qualities bring to freedom, whereas demonic ones paralyze

JerichoMissile-IM

Interesting, eh? What was I just saying about nationalistic control versus true spirituality? Is not control a type of paralysis? Trekhlebov also illuminates the Vedic dark Nav principle, which can only be appraised as a version of the “ISIS scheme”, equating to harnessing/managing/manipulating parasitic evil from the realms of darkness. I explore the Jewish Passover analogy shortly, but let me reinforce the punch line now. How anyone can celebrate the indiscriminate slaughter of human beings by God, heck only knows. 7de2827caf2d480274c0c4f666e54b95Conscientious Jews know Jericho presents a demonic Achilles heel an eternity wide. After excising chunks of Deuteronomy, Leviticus and a few other pungent texts, Judaism might become spiritually redeemable, but for the alleged fact of history, Jericho.

Demon is an interesting word too and a prime example of how Zionist sympathisers have turned good into evil. Checking the origins, nature_sprite_by_soleibee-d2z4aniGreek “daimon” meant benevolent or benign nature sprite. Thus modern twisted etymology has been used to dissuade and ultimately destroy any participation in (anything but) demonic pantheism. Though there appears to be no relationship between demon and demos (Greek for “people”), the shared stem does have a subtle common link. Latin “demo” means to “remove” or “take away”. We, people, draw on (take) the resources of the Earth all our lives. Democracies are the unification of plunder; build on principles of mob rule. By that token, ISIS/ISIL is merely a symptom of the demonic nature of man; professionally sanctioned by chaotic usurpers (Pharisaic Zionists). Thinking of potential remedies/solutions to this, and given an insistence on instruments of power, only a constitutional monarchy that championed the moral fortitude of the people (i.e. as a flexible active organ) could offer effective representation. Of course, emphasis on “could” is so strong I think it would be too extreme to be possible.

The Zionist mindset

yeshua_passover_lambBefore I give a brief history on the objectives of Zionist versus Rosicrucian Order, I am drawn once again to those spirited debates with my rabbinical colleague. Each April, we discuss the Passover. Isis, the Goddess of darkness, would hide (under cover of night) willful assassins to do “God’s bidding”. According to the fable, all Israelites daubed their dwellings with the blood of lambs [of God] and for that they were spared the wrath of ISIS. Regardless of galvanised Jewish nationalism, celebration of barbarous atrocities openly declares an inhumane god in its defiling blasphemy. As everything must, ultimately, be the summary of a single presence, any form of attack on anything else theoretically, at least, is an attack on God (see my book).

To see how Zionism has catapulted into action the above Passover sentiment, here is a Zionist “form guide”:

The first link I have selected, appropriately titled “the French Connection”, lists considerable numbers of atrocities “in the name of Zion” for 1944-48 by the Jewish Stern Gang (who finally assassinated Swedish diplomat, Count Bernadotte on September 17, 1948). It is the summary of a report prepared for Dr Ralph J. Bunche, UN Mediator for Palestine (Bernadotte’s replacement).

tumblr_m97jxdS8Vg1qb1quio1_1280

My next choice of Israelite terrorists is Irgun, who terrorised Palestine 1936-48. Their methods are eerily similar to so-called Al Qaeda in Iraq, but this is not the only feasible comparison. Methods noted are so likened to techniques ISIS/ISIL use, the group is being called Al Qaeda’s “rogue stepchild” by some sources. Indeed, Israel’s marketing arm, the American government, created Al Qaeda and ISIS out of mostly disparate, malignant offensive groups to be targeted or supported.

mossad-1Many years ago, I somehow charmed my way into a passionate liaison with a well-connected Australian female (who will remain nameless). It so happens, as sheer luck would have it, that her ex-boyfriend (whose name I sincerely forget) was ex-Mossad or had represented some other Israelite special forces unit. He was too paranoid about the promise of attacks from renegades so I understood the union was a brief one. I was informed that, in moments of delirium, he revealed to my, then, girlfriend, that “Palestine is supplied all weapons by Israel through French intermediaries….and if the people knew they would lynch the government”. Where have I heard that before?. That wild card, France, keeps bobbing up like a bad penny.

A brief history of Zionism versus Rosicrucian Order

Pieter_Bruegel_the_Elder_-_The_Tower_of_Babel_(Vienna)_-_Google_Art_Project_-_editedWe have to go back to the time of mythical Atlantis to understand the dynamics that have ultimately forged the duplicitous, bi-partisan politics of the modern age. Create as many labels, brands, types as you like, but it is always “us” versus “them’ (or the other). Historically contextually, the Tower of Babel tale from the Biblical book of Genesis is wildly out of place. The short passage actually referred to a long period of development that perhaps commenced 30,000 years ago. It led to the creation of all nations and most languages today. Though the hallowed texts fail to harpoon the truth in glorious transparency, I can add that the towers represented the rose/cross impenetrable citadels and subsequent policies of banishment. Nikolai Levashov talks of roaming “derelicts” (the fallout from the destruction of Atlantis metropolis) emerging as new leaders in “Russian History Viewed through Distorted Mirrors” (2007). atlantis5These were the mysterious “Aryans” that plundered India but all mysticism overlaid on the Dravidian cultures, surprisingly, is theirs. Sanskrit, for instance, is a version of ancient Russian. Nevertheless, at some point in the development of old Atlantis order, a philosophic split between those that wanted to engage and those that were simply intent on plundering has casted a dim pall over civilisation.

A significant section of the final part of Levashov’s book is devoted to explaining the realities behind Zionist communism; a thinly veiled attempt at enslaving humanity with view to ensuring directed labour and other resources are available and ready to satisfy any whim of the exalted leaders (extended industrialist oligarchy). The man power behind ISIS/ISIL, for instance, is an excellent example of this type of cultivated resource. We all should know by now that Vladimir Lenin was a failed lawyer, only with experience of a handful of court cases that were all spectacularly lost (similar, in some ways, to Franklin Roosevelt). Russian Bolshevism, I have mentioned before, was funded by Rothschild’s Inc. via a posse of newly created Federal Reserve bankers (the same ones’ more or less funded Adolph Hitler to the detriment of the American people). Ignoring Levashov’s observation that all Russian Presidents have either been white (both parents) or black (via the maternal line) Israelites, I wonder why no one questions America’s real motive in attacking French Indo-china (Vietnam) to progress the “War on Communism” after China was ignored by President Harry Truman. Korea became one of the operational satellites to conduct clandestine activities between East and West in secret after “terms” were organised in 1953.

3596073744_cd23a79aec_oPrior to Vietnam, we were told the Bay of Pigs incident almost led to nuclear war with Russia (and if you believe that you acknowledge pigs can fly). It amazes me that some teeny-weeny Island (Cuba) within spitting distance of the “world’s super power” could harbour a tin pot dictator whose regime was at loggerheads with the master of global tyranny without ever being formally attacked. Then, in 1996, the truth was revealed. Guantanamo Bay told us the premium resource for torturers could be found on Cuba. Castro was renowned for his appalling treatment of dissidents. That is why Cuba was created. After British Queen Victoria’s lease on the islands of Hong Kong ran out in 1997, it turned out that Communism was AOK after all, because when the administrative wealth reverted to Red China (which is redder than ever today, lest we forget) she was open for business. Of course the alternative movements of the 1920’s and ‘30’s backed real communism inspired by the legacy of Louisa Sarah Bevington, James Tochatti and others. Those that reached their Soviet Mecca became starkly aware that Marxism was a fraud and nothing more than state sanctioned/controlled Capitalism and en-masse oppression of the lower classes.

Solzhenitsyn200YearsTogether

I would liked to have explored Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s “200 Years Together Russian-Jewish History” but the English translation is banned. Also time is pressing. So much so, here is a “brief”, selective history on the evolution of Zionist, Rosicrucian politics. The most recent separation in the philology of civilisation saw the creation of Christianity emphasizing Gnostic wisdom. kobberAn attempt was also made to fuse Pharisaic Order with Greco-Roman Pantheism, but, ultimately, atheism and nature will never be a good mix. What remains of old alternative order is the New Age Lucifer brand constructing an ever-shifting Catholic “cosmic Christ” to dictate to the masses. Because St Paul’s valiant attempt (note he writes letters to the Romans and the Corinthians) at throttling spirituality failed, another mini-tyrant, known only as Mohamed, was elevated to power in the 8th Century. His Koranic “Satanic Verses” have been misconstrued and disambiguated ever since. Anything remotely gnostic in flavour is branded spurious. Just as with the nation-religion Islam, ISIS/ISIL is equally clandestine.

Nevertheless, string pullers are always clearly Zionist and this cloaks an absence of spirituality promoting willful atheistic industrialism. Judaism, from the sacred perspective, is for suckers too. Details on the copper serpent and the Hebrews’ connection to Easter, denial of Sophia, and why Samael was offered the Torah as the “chief of evil spirits” will have to wait for another day. Then there’s the enigma of that French Merovingian Messiah. If I could conjure a simple statement that might summarise the overall objectives of Zionism, it would be – create nations and control them. That, my friends, is immigration. There are neither countries nor borders without the tyranny of nationalism.

Isis – an American psy-op?

Isis_in_MexicoMy well-researched colleague, Robert O’Leary, is not the only one determining an alignment between ISIS and Mexico’s vile drug cartels. Someone also wants to imply a connection between Mexico and “rogue Palestinian, ‘anti-Israel’ forces”.

This, we have learned, would be similar to the rebranding tactics used against the [comparatively moderate] Muslim Brotherhood democratic movement. Here is some on the alleged relationship between Egyptian Islamic fundamentalists and the CIA (Note Israel is absent but never far away in the pictorial study of the NAZI machine. See here and another “politically correct” analysis limply implicates Israeli wrong doing). Israelite surveillance equipment led to the impeachment of Bill Clinton, which was to take the focus off a massive [Israeli] spy network sprung inside the United States by the FBI. Here is Israel’s public boast as to the extent of the power of their surveillance plexus.

Dees_Illustration_Jet_FuelRather more importantly, I have discovered an article that finds the heart of this debate – control of the Pentagon (or larger Military Industrial Complex). Of course, the great event that supposedly changed history was 9/11 (although I think history was well on its way after the Oklahoma City Bombing). Once you control the Pentagon, you control everything (see here and there). We know 9/11 was on Pentagon’s 60th anniversary of foundation day so everyone (except minions and a team of auditors) was away (with the fairies). The only casualties/deaths were of that Bill Clinton’s ill-fated team of accountants investigating trillions of dollars in Pentagon fraud. Andersen Consulting’s calculated demise was down to fraud deliberately sending a message to any accountants that investigate the Pentagon to expect retribution demonstrating the vicious, narcissistic payback methods used by these career criminal “powers that be”.

Note: I would suggest Jimmie E. Cain Jr’s “Bram Stoker and Russophobia: Evidence of the British Fear of Russia in: “Dracula and the Lady of the Shroud“” makes excellent reading for those interested in the historic development of last century, including information on how the British East India Company (cotton trade link) partially morphed into the US Pentagon. It is interesting that Dracula has all the behavioural hallmarks of the extra-dimensional mammalian Pteroid Draco. Ex. Pentagon Chaplain, Colonel Michael Aquino reputedly tried to set up a pact with the Draco (euphamised as “Satan”) for the military (similar to the objectives of Hitler’s Thule Society). A progression of this theme prompted the creation of the Temple of Set.

Conclusions

Dracula

I had originally planned to conclude this article by establishing a link between Latin criminal gangs, such as the Favelas, and their US counterparts with the ISIS sponsored terrorism in Mexico. However, unexpectedly, I found there to be no similarity whatsoever, other than the obvious drug trafficking connection. The consistencies in the methods and development of US versus Latin drug gangs do suggest a common, coordinated controller (or puppet master) has manipulated injustices against impoverished (predominantly ethnic) population groups. Abstract Businessman sends Smoke Signals on an Island.Explosive effects seen from the [what can only be described as] parallel development of numerous cross-cultures share so many similarities it leads the impartial researcher to conclude, “There ain’t no smoke without fire”.

Racking my brains as to the real point of the ISIS/Mexico connection, I came across this startling article (if that’s the right word). I cannot vouch for the accuracy of the account or source, but the first observation is the great Jewish centre, New York City, isn’t on the list – odd for an attack list of supposed Islamic fanatics. Living with Persian refugees, I have been immersed in their culture for over a year and this has given me a good understanding of the Farsi artistic perspective. The photograph depicting the ISIS militants is so flourishing; given the styles I had seen in numerous other Persian illustrations, it could only be Iranian. Thinking aloud, I had a “eureka moment”. If ISIS was to process a barbaric attack on the peoples of the United States of America, what retaliation would come at the expense of the Middle East? More importantly, would this diabolical (the Boston marathon has shown they are well prepared to kill Americans for effect) false flag lead to a nuclear strike on Iran and all out Armageddon? nasir-al-mulk-mosque-shiraz-iran-01Another “incidental” that may be hardly worth mentioning is that, reputedly, ISIS/ISIL has attacked or been blamed for terrorist activity in just about all Middle Eastern countries. Yet, according to my sources, Israel has never been attacked once. An “Islamic fundamentalist” group that only attacks would-be Islamists – isn’t that odd?

Ok, that may be old news, but readers should remember I began the bare bones of this dissertation back in April and a lot has happened in the meantime. Besides, this old evidence is hardly water under the bridge, and goes well to shaping a clarity that might be fogged by present day theatricals. I have a feeling we have already exceeded the 10,000 word promise and I have barely reached the halfway point. Next segment will explore the “interests” behind global politics and their corresponding evolution of a system that has become ISIS/ISIL. See you soon.