After Contemplating the Evidence; was Jeffrey Epstein Guilty?

The bare bones of this essay already roughly in position, I have been aiming for a release date prior to the emerging New Year. Back in the day, I used to churn articles out by the dozen. No more, I’m afraid. Now, each one somehow predicts a laborious project. Masterpieces-in-waiting eventually collectivise fragments into precarious tomes that would be merit worthy for audiences of merit. In association not all that long ago I recall a moody critic poorly procrastinated sarcasm directed at my truthful genre.

“So who’s the most brainwashed [person of all], tell me that then, eh?”

The answer to the question is starkly obvious. Most brainwashed are the ones that believe otherwise; the ones with science degrees; the ones in positions of authority and the one that feel they are on the right track, firmly aware and in control of their destinies. Let’s be frank here. That would describe at least ninety per cent of my “followers” who, on the rare occasion they think they can learn, certainly won’t compromise deep rooted opinions (which ironically approximate the very fabric of their own brainwashing). When present, so entrenched is programming it is almost impossible for the genuine soothsayer to communicate with any effect.

It would be dishonest of me not to acknowledge that I have been disappointed, demoralised even, by the lack of traction, by the sheer selfish blithering nature of human beings. And here I am talking about those that are supposedly “top of the class” spiritually speaking. If they’re as good as we get, humanity is in a horrible mess. In light of this, I have honestly thought about throwing in the towel. What is the purpose of going to enormous lengths to compile the truth only for messages to be scorned, ignored or scandalized? I have become lazy, for days on end forsaking my craft. My focus on important topical drivel that pollutes the internet is nulled to zero by my acute disinterest. Strange nightmares over the transition of my way of life have contributed to spells of insomnia. Then, at my lowest ebb, along came a knight in shining armour. His name was Jeffrey Epstein.

Epstein himself is (or, rather was) no posthumous confidante of mine, but circumstances surrounding his much publicised life do provide an ideal opportunity for free expression. So I am going to begin by coming right out, and saying it freely, avoiding early misconceptions. The title of this essay could be regarded as misleading. That’s right and it is important to come clean at the start, because occasional clickers may well visit me keen on finding new angles to pointless melodrama (given parallel press meanderings). Soap opera fanatics would be doomed to disappointment if I didn’t place a “disclaimer” straight away and it would be sad to see them disappointed. Mainstream Medias may well relish confusion, but this place is firmly destined to uphold virtue and, in that capacity, could plausibly offer a final refuge for the intrepidly sane.

Permanent staging infrastructures withstanding, the pending trial and subsequent sensational “suicide” death of industrialist Jeffrey Epstein didn’t happen. You hear me correctly. It didn’t happen, but there is very visible script supporting the potential for any or all of it to have happened. That is why I don’t care about much of the detail supposedly supporting the grandest of conspiracies; a conspiracy possibly beyond all conspiracies. As a whole it is a blithering fabrication. Therefore, to do justice to respective truth, diligent must duly only care about evidence. And here evidence is so lacking; sincere commentary on it would be absurd. So let me make it clear to fossickers panning for tittle-tattle. I am hardly going to discuss Epstein at all.

Speculative sensation over hearsay does afford the opportunity to expose a monstrous system whose values fester in the gutter. But it would be impossible to blame organs of state unless they were backed to the hilt by a most vile and deliberately corrupt “general public”. The Epstein case had been bubbling for more than a decade prior to his “what should be” ridiculous entrapment ultimately concluding in that supposed “suicide” death. Are there any substantiated facts associated with the case? Well there are numbers of videos presented as evidence which would be devoid of merit but for those nauseating talk over choruses of opinions that craft “suggestive scenarios” shaping content into “applied reality”. It’s a female trick. Women “shape” their men, but that’s our secret.

Inspecting the detail, one video exhibit features an individual who looks like President Trump. The person in question is in focus because he provocatively rolls his hips in a poor imitation of Elvis Presley (an act that fortified a reputation as “king” lest we forget) at a location “we are told” is on Epstein’s private island retreat. Either side of “cut out” Trump are cheerleaders of indiscriminate age. There is no obvious watermark verifying the island location for unfamiliar viewers and why cut out Trump or the cheerleaders are present is unclear. Government agents, who wouldn’t lie about something like that “we are told”, are adamant the video marks indisputable evidence of illegal sexual activity between current President of the United Sates of American and legally underage females. The actual sexual activity is left to the imagination as is any verification as to the true ages of the females; location or whether “cut out” is Trump.

Historical development of the entrapment of Epstein waxes fabrication from conception. Be under no dissolution. Correspondingly, the video allegedly featuring Trump provides no evidence supporting illegal acts. Historically, after pleading not guilty, Epstein’s 2008 conviction for trafficking prostitutes (by a “blind” Florida judge) was shaky at best. Judgement entirely relied on circumstantial hearsay backed by a fair degree of misrepresentation (are gifts uniformly payment for services? If so, should I offer my Christmas windfall up to the taxman?). The momentum on public distortion of Epstein’s private affairs had been constructed over decades. It is likely illicit planners (behind the misinformation) aimed at capitalising on common gossipers’ general distaste at strange goings on in high places.

The reason many Brits revile their “it’s alright for some” queen is because they are jealous of her extraordinary wealth and complimenting luxurious lifestyle

As far as I can discern, the very public Epstein saga began with a Palm Beach police report (dating back to the mid 1990’s?) which apparently cites an interview with the well-connected mother of a fifteen year old girl, who had accordingly confessed to (or perhaps bragged about) absconding to Epstein’s island hideaway for the weekend without permission. Come again, a sexy, albeit underage girl “pulling off” adult status and sneaking away to an elite party with all bells and whistles? Under what circumstance could that happen today? Today’s fifteen year girls are little children that are humbled by righteous authority of laws and associated parental power. They certainly wouldn’t flaunt sexual self-respect by eloping to a star studded limelight party of the century, correct? There are, for instance, no fifteen year old trollops today? You may think I jest, but sensationally, American President Benjamin Franklin placed a newspaper advert hiring a comely fifteen year old wench in the 1800’s. And that wasn’t that long ago.

Maybe it’s a coincidence, but if I have the dateline correct here, the mid 1990’s was most definitely a time of puritan renaissance or revolution. “Occult” Waco (’93) and Oklahoma (’95) saved President Clinton’s hide and this was more than partially courtesy of Hilary Clinton’s lesbian buddy (lawyer) Janet Reno in her capacity as head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Reno had also demonstrated her great passion by spearheading major crusades against closet paedophiles. One circumspect customs’ chief timely implied the postal service was “awash” with child pornography and that’s all the proof Reno needed, although my sources tell me bona fide contraband was intercepted “extremely rarely”. Even so her crusade turned out to be so effectively persistent; it grew into a considerably wider enterprise committed to backing off just about every plausible waking moment of corporate Media publicity. To be honest I’m surprised pederast attack innuendo hasn’t somehow polluted the car adverts.

A couple of years ago I penned the article “Callous Abuses of the Word Abuse”. Though terms “paedophile” and “child” are nothing more than labels, their trademark use by vicious propaganda forces can incriminate great or small simply by their very mention. In Epstein’s case “exhibits” appear to have been uniformly “underage” jail bate rather than demarked infants, yet related “shit stirred” (by fabricators) has undeniably stuck. Fantasy spinners will go to extreme lengths to obfuscate truth. The game is all about “picture painting”. Albeit quite a long time ago, one American report “claim” I witnessed cast a scene with a sixteen year old girl playing in her sandpit prior to abduction. Come on now! Was she demented? It does serve to highlight how desperate some propaganda agencies are. Even so, when the judiciary begin to take notice of feeble allegations, any notion of justice is forsaken. Gauging rigged trials of British Queen Elizabeth’s artist Rolf Harris and other less sensational scapegoats, the highest civil courts have been hijacked by kangaroos.

And let’s face it, the average newspaper reader believes rogue Hugh Hefner Epstein was not only guilty, but personified the saga “in life”. Melodrama of course eventually transfused into the courthouse culminating as the now “official” murder opinion. After Robin Williams (sic), demonstrating a referenced common script contains desired plot outcomes, mainstream journalists were quick (though muted) to cast questions over the perplexing “suicide” from the outset. They were clearly all essentially given identical blueprints of fundamentals (confabulated by vile political mercenaries) to publicise with license to “make up” the rest (padding). In that respect, one extremely visible popular Media source (for my research) had even dared reference conspiracy theorists’ views that cast aspersions over the ears of “Epstein’s” corpse. It is obvious to me that agents responsible for promotion of fantasy (as fact) are compelled to believe the whole charade will be of great appeal to those that are drawn to conspiracies.

Furthermore, conspiracy theorists love to blab about matters they don’t fully understand. This would give fantasy greater tinges of authenticity as researchers wade through dross to discern “hallmarks of truth”; enough to permit lapses of sanity

Thus, convenient Medias that had been describing the event as a “suiciding” (or professional hit) now turn out to be in tune with “truth” (sic). I am being facetious here of course, because the murdered guy on the slab “as presented” wasn’t Epstein. That fact does helpfully reinforce analysis determining the whole campaign had been “scripted” from onset, so I thank those responsible for being careless. Surely even to the untrained eye (after Pizzagate), this sordid affair must wax of Pulp Fiction?  What next? Will fairies, dragons and grey aliens make appearances, as they did in the “Little Rascals day care” trial debacle?  Indeed does Epstein actually exist at all or is he another great Sandy Hook style figment geared to fit in with the rest of the baloney? That said, there is clearly a true and very bitter purpose behind associated shenanigans. I fear writer George Orwell prepared the way so to speak with his novel “1984”, but he couldn’t quite fathom how slippery devil’s mercenaries can be.

There is definite motive here, but before I reveal it, it is vital to capture true function of “state”, law enforcement and justice. In historic terms, using the British chronology as my benchmark, legal foundations began with Roman occupation. Common law is generally presumed to have preceded twelve articles (bronze tablets called tables) introduced by the Romans which, limited to the affairs of citizens, aimed at harmonising equality. Long after the Romans exited, original British “public” courts were called star chambers (emerging from around the eighth century AD). However, the function of arbitration appears to have been limited as a facet of privilege pretty much until the system was overhauled in 1830 (directly after slavery abolition 1829 and the same year Robert Peel established his Metropolitan police Force, coincidence?).  There were some variations. King Henry II created an additional body of twelve knights (to represent local precincts) as jurors in settlement of land ownership disputes from 1160’s onwards. He further appointed five “wise men” of his personal household to act in the capacity of judges.

They morphed into a travelling circuit (assizes system), which was set up in 1166 (partially surviving until 1971 believe it or not!). For common man, the parish priest would usually double as “authority figure” to resolve local arguments. Magistrate courts hark back to Edward I in 1285 via his creation of justices of the peace. Nevertheless, I think resources would have been mostly devoted to support militias made famous by Robin Hood’s tales. Original justices of the peace were also sheriffs (as far as I can ascertain). Local criminal proceedings would have likely fallen under jurisdiction of the local honourable squire (who, in many instances, would have been victim as well). Above this was a centralised supreme court that dealt with extremely serious “national” offenses. Damningly, the court authority was beefed up in the reign of Charles I (himself causally beheaded by his own goodwill) when enemies forced him to appoint additional judges in 1642. Member salaries under these new conditions increased up to ten fold.

Corruption had ransacked the judiciary from conception, but it wasn’t until William III’s (of Orange) reign from 1701 onwards (under the Act of Settlement) that it became impossible for any monarch to suspend or remove a judge without due legal process.1215 saw common law reduced to impotence, and consistent with its draconian mandate, the Magna Carta made provision for Parliament to supplement royal legislature, which initially comprised of a House of Lords only. By 1265 government powers were widened to permit election of common members of sufficient social status (later to form the House of Commons). Prior to the introduction of parliament, legislation was commissioned at the behest of a monarch who was formally supported by a council of knights. The body, a reworking of the ancient Sanhedrin, was known as the curia regis (Latin for king’s court). Numerous failings of parliamentary authority have definitely assured violent war was the only way industrialists were going to successfully usurp power of oversight (cleverly euphemised as veto by modern day agencies of doom such as the United Nations).

Naturally, since conception, those in parliament have always run agendas in their own interests (i.e. when the royals had assumed authority, they acted in deference to, regularly conflicting with private merchants). Unsurprisingly, early government became a hotbed contest between opposing interests. For instance sensationally, in 1387 Richard II sentenced six judges to death (although only one was executed) for conspiring over a “traitorous” parliamentary commission. However, I would like to explore the significance of the Magna Carta a little further now, because it seems odd that industrialists would celebrate anything distinctly “for the masses”. Yet they place such zealous importance revering the goodness of this particular treaty or charter [allegedly] “championing popular rights”, one is instinctively drawn to “the catch”. And so here’s that “catch”. Though their dastardly plan temporarily stalled after one of the medieval King Edwards’ changed rules allocating land ownership, land ownership is what the Magna Carta was about and why the industrialists celebrate it.

Prior to 1215 only royals (and their extended aristocratic families) could own land. Under common law, you had right to live on land you didn’t own. Thus it was royalty (regularly egged on by industrialists of the day) that committed all acts of atrocity against the people, such as the (eleventh century onwards) seizure of land that belonged to but wasn’t owned by Scottish hill tribes, highlighted in part by Robert the Bruce’s epic battles. In America, native indigenous inhabitants were classed as slaves after Columbus’ “discovery” in order to strip them of land ownership rights, Thanks Giving marks a temporary amnesty when those that stole the land (imposing their own values on all in sundry) were forced to turn to natives for help or starve. In line with this dereliction of honour towards rightful occupiers (per common law etiquette), when the United States became the focus of gold speculators, greatest priority was given to [fraudulent under common law] authority of “verified” staked claims on land now free from British [royal] possession. “Red Indian” beggars were rarely given a look in.

Back in Medieval times, the English system remembered as “serfdom” (an apex of the “power pyramid” feudalism, introduced by William the Conqueror in 1066) bloomed after the ink on the various Magna Carta treaty documents was barely dry. Great tracts of British territory became instant property of newly appointed aristocratic knights and gentry (implied by Tales of Robin Hood). Free lands (of no interest to the powers) were eventually consolidated under the jurisdiction of today’s National Trust and that’s all “the people” ever preserved (they didn’t gain anything). Incidentally, peasants were able to live on what remained of “free lands” until the National Trust’s takeover. All other commoners were forced onto demarked “plots”. These, I would imagine, would have usually been where families were staked “without strings” up until the implementation of changes.  In effect, the major difference was residents had less land, but were also instructed to pay rent to new land owners (for their keep).

Rent generation was achieved by farming produce, which allowed for surplus incomes (sometimes providing revenue to fund royal taxes). Via the “rates” system even modern day property owners are still theoretically tenants (pinning them to patriotic government) of “higher landlords”, so (in effect) commerce mechanisms kick started by the Magna Carta are as they were from conception. Whilst my exampled history progression may seem irrelevant in relation to the wider Jeffrey Epstein saga, there are links that provide ample basis to demonstrate politics deliberately exploit truth to cast unattainable divides between classes. There is also the Epstein royal connection, of course, which I will elaborate on later in this essay. One of the great ironies exposed by shenanigans is the so-called elites are the most vulnerable of all because apparently laws don’t discriminate. Even when aided by corrupt judges and sleazy lawyers, elites can’t merely be paedophiles because they are elite. Elites can’t commit murder because they are elite, although those with diplomatic status are formally immune from prosecution.

Conversely, those of high status consistently do have a great deal to lose facing the looming prospect of a fall

It is no wonder great American philosophic essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “the fewer laws the better” penned shortly after the civil war is immortalised by dissenters. He knew that laws lead to manipulative opportunism culminating in the monster which is that Jeffrey Epstein charade. But the “rules” (or etiquette) have changed to validate Epstein. Provided by newfangled modern custom (as of 1980’s), entertaining mass Medias dictate orders to politicians, judiciary and by God everyone had better heed their “wisdom” or watch out for tar and feather campaigns can easily be redirected against you. In that regard we must never lose sight of the baseline (somewhat muddied by the trivial nature of the Epstein saga). Everything is in place for (to support) land owners. And “land owners” are not peasants with small residential holdings; far from it. No, these conglomerates presume the rights of merchant bankers, certain aristocrats and industrialists. Epstein had to be one of them himself to magnify confusion over authenticity of associated allegations. Intrigue is such that it has also had the effect of wobbling the” safety bar” guaranteeing diplomatic immunity. No one is “safe” and Sir Ron Brierley will find that out the hard way (elaborated on later).

Conglomerates ensured special legislation was drafted for their corporations to bestow them with super human rights. Predictably, recognised governments are corporations too and their “stock” is the “tax payers”. I am hoping a few will fathom the purpose of my background now. Tax payers are slaves under a Feudal System that was devised and implemented by Jewish Zionist William the Conqueror. In 1215 a treaty called the Magna Carta transferred casual arrangements to Law. The death of Charles I in 1649 paved the way for the Westminster System (whose embryo began with Cromwell even though political theorists speculate organised detached government coincided with Queen Anne’s 1707 cessation of royal assent). History has taught us the legacy constitution failed and that is why William of Orange’s Bill of Rights was hastily drafted in 1696 and has been incorporated in all constitutions since. Nevertheless, at least the equilibrium was relatively clearly scored, well until conspirators premeditated the Epstein plot.

Epstein-gate has given slaves the license to make that which is “none of their business” their posthumous business. Corporate Medias irritate the collective into blustering judgement on all those despicable royals they have never net and have never personally known, empowering our conspirators all the while

Before us are the makings of a cartoon feature more pungent than phoney baloney Osama Bin Laden. It is essential to identify how catastrophically different this brand of deception is from anything ever seen before, Revealed mechanics will come in due course,  but without sufficient explanation for “why?” the facts will struggle to speak for themselves. First we must understand how it is possible to distort and invalidate instruments of justice to such effect bias purports a veneer of sincerity. So returning to my assessment of historic British legal governance; when the first courts (star chambers) appeared, torture was considered a worthy accessory to prize “confessions from miscreants”. “Honourable” people were believed to be infallible. It was generally assumed that righteous would rather suffer death than submit to the Devil. In this context, it was thought torture actually improved the sense of nobility.

The concept may have been successful per virgin ambition, but unfortunately methods used became more and more extravagantly harmful as time went by, plausibly in desperation for prosecution victories. Suffice to say, subjects were routinely severely impaired by improvements and some even died in the torture chamber. For instance, there are pertinent records outlining events surrounding the fall of the Knights Templar. One vividly recalls a foot stove used to obtain a “confession” from one estranged knight had worked so efficiently; he carried charred remains in a pot as he hobbled to the bench on crutches, guilt confession in hand. More recently Hitler’s (creator of today’s conceptual corporation, lest we forget) Gestapo were so ruthless in obtaining desired results, innocents were sometimes miscategorised. I write this fully cognisant that Hitler has been unfairly painted as the “master of all modern evil”, almost an anti-Messiah, but enough valid documentation supports the opinion the Gestapo were a truly nasty bunch. That nastiness underscored dedication to behaving dishonourably.

Even so, but for peine forte et dure (abolished in 1772), the use of physical torture (as a British interrogation tool) petered out by the mid 1600’s. “Strangely” the reversal of standards coincides with Charles I’s fateful 1649 execution. It could be further argued that rough physical interrogation was doomed to retirement after considerably more effective attacks on the mind came into vogue. Bush’s Guantanamo Bay is a classic example of this. Inmates were put through barbaric sleep deprivation regimes but rarely sustained actual body injuries (though there are reports of hunger strikers’ ill-treatment where Feeding tubes were crudely inserted without anaesthetic). We must never forget not one of the Guantanamo inmates were theoretically proved “guilty” prior to their incarceration. Most had been duped (i.e. were no real threat to proscribed order) and at least three were there “in error”. They do also serve to highlight the current bureaucratic assumption that everyone who isn’t “ranked” must be (viewed as) a criminal-in-waiting.

Under such terms, an impossibly high wall separates commoners from those of honour. Honour “is” authority today. So when it comes to justice, obtaining evidence is an inconvenience that could well inhibit what are already “given facts”. Why give guilty an opportunity to wriggle free of authority’s judgement? For instance, imagine if there was no evidence available to substantiate a case. Then justice would have been outdone by the presiding sense of goodwill. That is why authorities have preferred to rely on necessity of confessions ether from the accused or accuser. And that summarises the nightmare in being that is “Jeffrey Epstein’s” legacy; a legacy whereby fake testimonies present dishonest allegations and despicable lies which are manufactured by the tonne. Nevertheless, flaws in authoritative philosophy should be plainly obvious. Indeed, just three days ago (as I write) the Australian New South Wales Supreme Court found ex-club bouncer Vinzent Tarantino not guilty after his “confession” to the murder of twelve year old schoolgirl Quanne Diec in 1998.

There is no doubt the court case was an intriguing one; seemly difficult to testify adequately and almost impossible to judge. Perhaps mitigated comparison of circumstances behind OJ Simpson’s trial might be applied here, other than the not guilty verdict outcome matching the plea. OJ was popularly “guilty” and that is the similarity. The trial by Medias, in both cases, had served up posthumous guilty verdicts and that is what incurred public belief. Careful scrutiny of facts supporting the murder of Nicole Simpson should cast no question as to who the real culprit was. Her son had been on a program of psychiatric drugs to combat anger management. I have lost count of the numbers of suicide murderers that were hopped up on similarly prescribed drugs at the time of their deadly insurrections against “faceless” pubic. It is known that “drug experimentation” has been one facet of CIA’s MKUltra since the 1970’s (after Watergate).

OJ Simpson and Vinzent Tarantino are two examples where the end (result) failed to justify the means, because they were popularly guilty, but proven innocent. Others (and too many to illustrate) were not so lucky.  Their journeys would end in tears, each one individually supporting gross miscarriages of justice. In Anglican Peter Hollingworth’s wake (discounting raucous tabloid banter) nothing would convince me that Australian Cardinal George Pell is guilty of allegations that led to his conviction of child sex abuse. Indeed so ambiguous was the verdict, there is discord amongst viperous Medias over him; allies calling out the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s smear campaign a “witch hunt”. Ironically, past inquisitions applied equal balanced latitude towards witches. The accused needed to drown to prove their innocence, to avoid suffering the heretic’s death; burnt at the stake. No such mercy was offered to poor Rolf Harris (perfect example of tall poppy syndrome), folk hero jailed for his royal patronage.

Even so, another Australian Schapelle Corby has become the centrepiece of the dreadful self-cleansing justice system. And now they vainly attempt to bestow aristocratic status (celebrity) on her to endorse their false claims. But a frog will always be a frog; any prince knows that

Going back to basics, aside from the Epstein “operation” (and that is what it is), there runs a supplementary agenda counterpoising the aggregated script aimlessly crafting reality. For as long as I have been cognisant, the “establishment” have obsessed over impressing their authority on juveniles. However, only since last decade or so has zeal escalated into viciousness that transcends warranted innocence or guilt. Representative truth is consequentially rendered superfluous. In line with their compulsion, enemies “in power” are routinely harangued by a “captivated” judiciary. There has precipitated (which I argue is no accident) a storm of fear represented by ever present headlines obtusely reporting vagaries of processions of failed fallen celebrities (if Schappelle makes one comment out of place, we know where she’s heading). Accompanying this is a horrid sense of infection. I don’t want to be Catholic, because I might catch what my local priest got. Problem (symptoms), reaction (slander), solution (quarantine) together dance the Pied Piper’s tune

Culpability is irrelevant (hence, the bland nature of content) and that is why unsecured “confessions” are used to the limit. How else to ram home predetermined [tainted] verdicts? On the other side, a percentage of juveniles are hardy enough to ignore implied rhetoric (issued against them). This has always been the case and, as such, represents the zealots’ primary obstacle. There will be no rite of passage in their domain

Perhaps at times of great austerity (and today is one of those times) more will pretend to desire “legal” chastity while actually playing it safe. Nevertheless (factoring guilty verdicts possibly issued “on merit”) there will always be enough “victims” (sic) to fill law enforcement’s net trap. This means the Epstein operation never needed victims beyond those professional publicised distortions of (what should be) dubious information. If everyone had personal connections to Epstein, we all knew him intimately; the scam would have collapsed before it started. No right minded reporter could have embraced any of the ludicrously tragic accounts paraded as truth. Witnesses would have been quietly ushered off to the funny farm for their efforts. Instead, none of us privy to their malicious campaign have any knowledge of Epstein beyond what they tell us. For all I know, he didn’t actually exist because, but for a large trust fund (unsurprisingly) contested by various [apparently] aggravated parties after his [purported] death (is real Epstein one of the contestors?), only that confessional legacy remains. They don’t seem too keen on investigating his murder with any purpose.

You know, law enforcement is no longer about police work. That was a thing of the past. Idolised by Al Pacino’s Serpico, law enforcers are now criminals. And that is okay, because they are policemen trained to do their duty; duty that includes counterfeiting morals, deceiving public honour and embezzling righteous trust.  As all commoners are “criminals-in-waiting”, the crime business is booming. No wonder scripts supporting Epstein’s sham life are so compellingly farfetched; any sane human being should question his very existence. They’re not “a bit dodgy”. Accounts are accordingly “off with the fairies”. I return to the 1989 Little Rascals’ Day-Care court case (all charges withdrawn and verdicts quashed in 1997) and recommend everyone research proceedings with upmost due diligence. Taking a parallel position in an attempt to discern “feasible guilt”, under different circumstances Rolf Harris has made my mention. Now, let’s make light of things and pretend victim confessions were in tune with his guilt “as charged”, how much did he have to lose by his reckless carelessness? But it’s not only suicide Rolf under the spotlight here. There are endless precessions of outlaw social glitterati, rank and peer “they” tell us arrogantly brag of twilight illicitness. But there’s rarely any more than what tell us to back up their spiteful claims aimed at ones with apparently sincere political death wishes.

On that point, though I do not know Epstein at all, I have met with Sir Ron Brierley personally on several occasions and was invited to one of his Christmas parties (which I vaguely recall was awash with the finest Bollinger champagne). Ultimately, he went out of his way to do me disservice, so no love was lost when we ceased communication back in the early 1990’s. Brierley is neither a friend nor an ally of mine, but under no circumstances could I affirm his apparent tendency towards paedophilia. Sensationally arrested attempting to flee Australia (which smells like a “set up” to me), Medias announced “100,000’s of illegal images” had been found on [his] computers which had been seized by authorities. Back when I knew him, he lived in a giant house and, but for a conscientious housekeeper, would have passed as a hermit. If there was any family, by all accounts, they weren’t regular visitors. With no feasible “associations with kids”, if accusations supporting findings by authorities are valid, his private research was for “other purposes”.

Innumerable exotic theories may be speculated as to what these “other purposes” are, but I have compelling firsthand experience of Sir Ron’s bent as a mad philatelist. He would have spent millions of dollars on this passion. By all accounts, he had album stock pages crammed with hundreds of skimmed duplicates of the 1892 $5 black Columbus commemorative (a desirably rare American postage stamp) and equal numbers of Australia’s sought after 1932 5/- Sydney Bridge in mint condition. Banker at heart always, I believe this was his committed attempt to synthesising greater rarity (i.e. by suppressing market numbers available for sale) with the objective of increasing the item’s market value. “Rarity value” fits in with a possible link with his alleged child porn collection.

Quite some time ago, I read of a thesis written by some B-grade US academic who concluded that “child porn collectors obsessed over fills”. Taking that idea, there seems to be some possible synergy with Sir Ron’s “other purposes” here. Stamp collectors obsess over fills and if the truth be known, many become mesmerised by “rarity”. That’s why Sir Ron hived away the American and Australian gems I exampled.  Of all porn genres, there is nothing scarcer than paedophilic content (there are claims it exists on the “deep web”, a place I have never found). I would further argue that child porn is the most illicit of all contraband. I don’t overstate here. A British policeman on the first Gary Glitter trial publically announced that “paedophilia is worse than murder”. Perhaps that is also why it is so regularly used as the ultimate excuse to blame limelight poppies that grow too tall for the comfort of authorities.

Though to me pathological voyeurism seems somewhat creepier than honest love between adult and juvenile stereotypes, anyone that does nothing more than investigate smutty literature for “personal reasons” is sexually invalid. There was no physical connection between Sir Ron and any children photographed he allegedly witnessed. As far as I can ascertain, contraband had been accumulated in the same manner a philatelist hoards postage stamps. In specific relation to Sir Ron’s arrest, a supplementary point is worth mentioning. Hall of Fame rock star and convicted [voyeur] “paedophile” Pete Townshend disputed numbers of illegal photographs law enforcement claimed he had possessed. At the time, his more precise words were “there’s no way I had as many [photographs] as they said”. It’s only a theory of mine, but worth elaborating to potentially explain inconsistences that bloom into accidental propaganda. If each moving picture was calculated frame by frame, a thirty minute film compiles “45,000” photographic stills (based on 25 frames a second). If that is a common law enforcement calculation in support of “evidence”, do all frames display offending images?

Were law enforcement intent on being transparent here, they may as well come out and tell the truth as it is for once, but I guess, compared to 45.000 photos, one video’s a pretty puny marketing haul

Views on guilt/culpability aside, Sir Ron, after dear Rolf, is another useful exhibit to force Queen Elizabeth’s abdication or, at least, that appears to be one of the utopian goals of those that craft reprisal initiatives such as the Epstein saga. Equilibrium that upholsters the nasty agenda relies on reusable formulas (i.e. hypotheticals). Will Sir Ron’s “defence” oddly mimic Pete Townshend’s “coming to terms with his own abuse as a child”? In my vigour to expose the puppet masters, I regularly single out the Pharisees for everything politically maligned. They are the creators and supporters of a prison planet blueprint idealised around a conceptual phoney occult Messiah ruling under dictated terms of Zionism. For Zionism to function as planned, societal conventions must be entrenched. Epstein has been used to firmly accent (in formulaic terms) the “divide between acceptable free expression and perversion”. We need to be clear on facts and, currently, everything is foggy (a staple for unproven idealism).

Believe it or not, sciences and evidence of historical preservation can be found in the very earliest records of humanity, and I am not just talking about ancient “extra-terrestrial” legacy documents NASA engineers paw over. However, for the large part, until circa 1780, accredited sanity was guided by what sceptics attempt to demote as superstition. There is a better term which has come into fashion again, courtesy of the New Age movement. Our deep ancestors were primarily guided by intuition, but we (or, rather, our sceptics) know better now were that to be true. The reality is cultures determining directional initiatives have radically changed to promote perception backed sciences as the best way to impose formulas, sorry, I mean improve humanity’s lot. The fact your average scientist couldn’t find his ass with both hands in a darkened toilet booth will remain our secret. Nevertheless, it is useful to note that modern science (which is the science of today, somewhat accounting for the lack of fundamental new ideas and innovation being produced) was originally corporatized by Rothschild French banking agents directly after the supposed “peoples’ revolution.

The notion that a “child” (at the borderline, essentially a wobblybranding”) miraculously morphs into an adult precisely eighteen years after the moment of birth (one presumes infant must be fully clear of mother) is a superstition which, of course, is anything but “scientific”. Sciences have ambiguously shambled together “evidence” that might appeal to ambitious believers. Collective formularisers decided the body begins to die “from age eighteen” so that must the fortuitous “missing link” (so to speak). Though evidence is generally disgracefully at odds with this vaporous conjecture, the intuitive adage has stuck and all I can say in response is “fancy that”. Tyrannical obsession over childhood is one of the best indicators for culpable insanity we call “governments” masquerading as slave management agencies. If “accountants rule the world” as the popular proverb illuminates, billowing formulas were perennially destined to coagulate into absurd absolutist bureaucracies.

One such symptom of absolutism would involve stakeholders behind calculation of the Epstein saga. Beyond the deliberate inflammation of the universal divide separating impoverished from tall poppies, have they not actuated fantasy that relies on sacred belief in adult baffling “theoretical” childhood?  In effect we have two sinister things running simultaneously here. Questionable truths and dubious standards scorn public patronage, vilifying the assumption commoners are criminals-in-waiting

Perhaps that knowledge alone adds justification for my use of the vernacular “Pulp Fiction” at the entrance of this essay. Defence is as important as attack to the people behind the Epstein con scheme. Any accused’s fortification options have had to be taken down as well. Of course Prince Andrew will lay claim his victims tell a pack of bare faced lies. Of course he will blame his staffers if all other arguments fail. But the truth of the matter is this. Those in positions of esteem have far too much to lose to allow indiscretions to ruin their lives. So, as much as I dislike him, I believe President Trump is innocent of all conspiracies levelled against him. He has merely played along with tabloid tattlers because it improved his image as a “go getting, get it done” bad boy. If there is anything he should be remembered for, it is taking on the Medias and beating them at their own game. Trump is a teetotaller and I have personally known many of these sorry individuals. For instance, no one I have interacted with has been prepared to take life adjusting risks in any measure. Bad boy maybe, but Trump plays it ultra-safe too.

That has not stopped those illustrious Medias bombarding the general public with accusations against him pre-presidency, all throughout the race, and then on from day one of his tenure. Thus your average mesmerised viewer must presume unlikely misogynist Trump’s hari-kari misdirection could only end in political suicide, but it is the Medias that set that up, not the man himself. Then again, people are welcome to speculate as much as they like. Some compellingly blame Wall Street, but I wonder whether AIPAC had a hand in Trump’s impeachment. In Australia, as far as I’m aware, it is “illegal” (sic) to boycott Israeli product. Thus, surely any vocal supporter of Palestinian Boycott, Divest and Sanctions (against Israel) is an obvious terrorist suspect, right? And, by way of background here, for those that bother to read the article I have referenced, I feel I need to clarify that AIPAC, from the cultural justification standpoint, is an odd association. I’m told letters represent American Israel Public Affairs Committee (its prior incarnation, American Zionist Organisation or something similar ended up being disbanded after it was deemed treasonous by the few righteous Americans in authority).

For me American Israel Public Affairs Committee makes no sense at all, as AIPAC’s mission was, is and will be clearly to improve Israeli stranglehold on world affairs via solidarity (its “contained” American puppet). By not banning two Muslim agitators from congress, Trump (a former AIPAC golden boy by the way) bit his puppet master right in the ass. It would be interesting to know what AIPAC’s stance on Jeffrey Epstein is, don’t you think? Yet, after scouring the tabloids, I could not find a single word issued by AIPAC on the world’s most visible Jewish-American industrialist. This is one of the many reasons I find the organisation odd, in a murky sense. I can say, while I was conducting research, I did come up with this unexpected little gem, which illustrates how the former tycoon’s pending trial managed to make centre stage in Jewish politics, encapsulated by a bitter war (of words) between right wing failed redundant militant-butcher Baby Netanyahu and lefty ex. military general-butcher Ehud Barak.

Unsurprisingly Israeli debate has done little more than consolidate Media opinion making, and all genres, mainstream or otherwise, have definitely taken sides over Epstein allegations, which I guess will have added to the impact of fortifying fantasy. And if that was not bad enough (I mean, what happened to transparent journalism?), obvious shills are routinely masqueraded as Messiahs for virtue by the spinners of bullshit. Prince Andrew’s accuser is a classic example. A cursory view of her salient points highlights glaring fraud (bearing in mind, “evidence” exclusively comprises her word against his). In a short clip of one of her prepared interviews, a hysteric lapse “revealed” how they (as children) were “passed around like bags of oranges” (I’ve changed words slightly but not to the detriment of the overall message). So, from that, how might we discern she is a detestable liar? Well, back in the 1990’s there was another woman who was given opportunity to publically sensationalise her treatment as “property of” a secret gang headed by the Bush family. These cocaine runners (what else?) used to congregate at unknown wilderness hang outs (fusing Bush’s cowboy confession and Charles Manson legacy?), armed to the teeth. Normally “kept in cages” children (in this case infants, rather than borderline adults) accompanied outings and were “…..wait for it…..passed around like bags of fruit” by their hosts.

The Bush family accuser (who I refuse to identify lest she gain from the endorsement) was your typical 30 or 40 something bleach blond (can I say tart?), oh, chick, who would strut about stage while “in character” until around the mid 2000’s. When beating up on Bush went out of vogue, the woman just vanished. After claims that she was in a supportive relationship with a member of the (politically pro Democrat Clinton) CIA helping her though her ordeal, I totally switched off even though no one else seemed to bat an eyelid. I feel sure the Bush clan put her down as some loose nut as I don’t recall any litigation moves. Anyway, so as with that miraculous 1919 post WWI US headliner “Six Million Jews Dead”, karma comes back to haunt Prince Andrew. After a tyranny of fantastical accusations (including access to “reptilian technologies”) levelled against the Bushes and (ironically) the Clintons as well, information has boomeranged forward to 2019. According to the bleach blond, Mrs Clinton, a known lesbian, regularly had sex with infant girls. That irony is compounded by the CIA’s (well, I never) support of Russian loving Bill Clinton. Even a rookie agent will confirm when it comes to anomalies, there’s officially nothing to see here or, rather, “law enforcement” (sic) has dead eyes for anything potentially damaging to its own creed.

Let’s face it; if you believe the hogwash about the Clintons, Bush, Trump and [well] why not stretch it to Epstein too; then you deserve a spell at Bedlam

I don’t admire Mrs Clinton, but I neither need to stoop to zealous foul depths to admonish her. In other correspondences, I have stated George Bush senior set up the CIA, which isn’t true in the strict sense (but I’ll I explain what I mean by that when I wrap this up). Formally, the organisation was created by Truman after WWII (on 16th September 1947 to be precise). Hinted at earlier, compelling criteria provide “basis” for the “concept” being a reaction from Wall Street. Even so, I am of the opinion that the CIA was actually conceived as insurance against the planned reformation of Israel. Thus, agents would have naturally created tight liaisons with Wall Street to spy on international executives. George Bush senior’s concentrated involvement with the CIA was throughout the 1960’s and, in that capacity; he has been implicated in both Kennedy assassinations. Good friends of the Bushes, the Clintons have been there all the way through. I suppose that’s why their dealings with Russia (notably selling weapons grade refined uranium) were deemed “patriotic” by the CIA, whereas Trump’s surreptitious involvement with vapid shills who had apparently “destroyed Mrs Clinton’s election hopes” was definitely “treasonous” (and basis enough for impeachment).

Trump “on form” mocked the impeachment process, demanding it [to be] “over quickly”, but proceedings should be a serious matter. They highlight Epstein’s true posthumous purpose for one. To offset miscarriage of justice, this article is dedicated to remedial virtue. Inasmuch, following that spirit, I have come right out and said it “as it is”. Phoney baloney exorcized Russians and “commie plot” McCarthyism, faking elections, running guns or drugs in no particular order all add up, but they’re not individual “clinchers”. The clincher, an accusation whose utterance alone should be enough to put dread into any limelight figure, is paedophilia. Though paedophilia (as used) is a scam, it precedes life destructive extortion powerfully convincing enough to arbitrarily take down authority figures that defy corrupt mandates. Notably in circles that govern “morality”, such as religious institutions, no mercy or quarter is either offered or given to the irredeemably tarred. In this regard, a little snippet from “Prophecy, Prediction and Consensus View – Preconditioning for Spirited Souls” might help those committed to envisaging how impetus (for conspiracy) began (and I personally feel sure content would make the honest detective blush).

“Imagine if the Pharisees had contacts in the prison system. Crime networks are other resource pools for undesirables. Would it be possible to not only hire strategic paedophile priests, but also throw in some extra shekels and promise of “protection” should any of the kids “blab”?”

I didn’t touch on potential for confessional blackmail and extortion, but that would certainly provide tinder for a white hot ferocious fire, would it not? Obviously, if true, decent priests of all shapes and sizes have been set up and falsely persecuted (verdicts hinging on flimsy confessions or spiteful allegations) on the back of a covert fraud operation. There is no pertinent argument to counter-justify the visible domino effect the vicious operation has had on strategic senior priests that needed to be removed. Once false precedence is rooted, it becomes almost impossible to dislodge. It is as though lower grades are deliberately knocked down one by one in the build-up to bring enough to the table to defeat a “kingpin”. As for transparency, interrogation and court proceedings have been reduced to Medieval Star chambers without the torture except, if only that was true. Any suspect in custody is given a deliberate rough ride, tantamount to psychological torture, something viperous Medias will sketchily acknowledge as “the ordeal”.  Given we are told paedophiles inflict irreparable “psychological trauma” on children which is retrograde of murder; clearly psychological must be worse than physical torture.

Nevertheless, there is something else which really highlights the illusory nature of paedophilia. In the “consensus view” article I referenced earlier, I philosophised over possibility for the “sexual child” (considering turn of sexual consent was age twelve in parts of the first world until only a few decades back, prompting considerable “ambiguity” surrounding current popular rationalisations) . Suffice to say; according to bureaucrats that draft laws, it is impossible for a child “to be sexual” which makes debate even more memorable. Per these “terms”, legally underage cannot lure adults into sexual alliances even though there are many, many “inexplicable” records of children making successful sexual advances towards other children. That grand contradiction exacerbates moral standards applied to published materials labelled “child pornography” as well.

I make many useful points to illustrate the paradox in my writing project “The ‘Powers’ Great Accolade – ‘Brand Pedo’”. Notably, if a child is not sexual, how can any unaccompanied “pose” (regardless of genre) be sexual either? Expanding this assumption, for a normal person (i.e. one that isn’t paedophile), no child pose could be sexual even it was deemed erotic. But there is a greater associated inconsistency. For any normal person to recognise a child’s “sexual pose”, whether he or she has been personally aroused by it or not, is superfluous, because the child’s pose that arouses IS arousing by its seemly erotic nature. Thus, either children are incapable of formally exuding sexuality (and summarily un-erotic) or they are (at the very minimum) inertly sexual. For “justice” to be transparent here, defining standards have to be radically reviewed. Simply put, if children are capable of carnal expression, then normal people are capable of succumbing to reflective lust. You see, contrary to popular religious persuasion, it impossible to null lustful intent, although spontaneous body reactions (such as male erections) can be “managed” accordingly. It is only possible to deny lust. And those that deny stand by their deceit.  Where does deceit fit into a transparent judicial system?

There is one other associated item deserving of scrutiny. If children are sexual after all, wouldn’t that imply legal bureaucracies actually persecute a child’s (God given) right to self-expression? If society isn’t elitist, why do heterosexuals, gays and lesbians have genre support when others remain unprotected? On the other hand, was society to be elitist, then public affairs would predictably encourage fabrication of a crooked, unfair justice system, bereft of justice, built on authoritarian double standards. In that light, returning to my theme, the Epstein saga, were allegations to be taken as partially believable (i.e. there has to be at least a little fire to cause that much smoke), then certain shady tales tendered as evidence, rather than being strictly “untrue” per se, might not be as presented. Considering the crusading inquisition’s pathological desire to collect scalps, were (in most instances) relationships between now estranged parties consensual at the time? Divorces are commonplace and often end bitterly. Surely it is not beyond the realms of possibility that bitter exaggeration has tainted Epstein’s witness accounts? That would explain implausible scenarios touted by desperate Medias. Even so, obvious fraud, such as those exampled bags of fruit confessions, warrants deserved sarcasm.

That is why when dumb allegations were made by loose nuts years ago (when mind your own business meant something) they were rightly routinely ignored

In fact this provides the vital clue to the real motive behind the establishment of law courts. Star chambers were not set up provide a vehicle for accused to establish their innocence. They were created to legitimise “justice” dealt out to anyone that defied leading authority. Accused were always presumed guilty as charged whether nobleman or pauper, but why the need for legitimacy? One can but speculate over the truth here, but I would hazard to guess that family revenge missions against perceived dishonour would have been normal practice until a “divine” override was accepted. Initially divinity would have been limited to “shielding” aristocratic affairs beneath an honour system paraphrased as “the fair trial”. Much later (formally 1830) the motif was widened to include “the public at large”. Industrialism was no coincidence. It began with the fraudulent “abolishment” of slavery (which made everyone slaves of sorts), to which the creation of career criminals was a symptom (beautifully symbolised by Charles Dickens’ “Fagan” in Oliver Twist). Those that commit crimes have no specific ambition to become criminals. Instead, they spurn morality that supposes laws are just. To expand clarity here, conditioned slaves. the “fodder”, are not willing to challenge unjust, unfair laws or, indeed, any authoritative measures that victimise.

Epstein “the vehicle” has reduced morality to crud. Building up to this, populations have been gradually ordered into civility via shallow, sometimes obtuse directives. Politicians’ market rhetoric which predetermines negotiation is always “slant”. Therefore laws are shamelessly biased and courts that uphold them partisan. Reflectively, Epstein appears to have resolutely empowered corporate (industrialist) aligned Medias in their roles as appointed judge, juror and executioner. That is why I insist his output is the grandest conspiracy the world has seen to date, but I think I need to back that statement up with logic if I am appeal to others. For logic, I would like to return to the earlier CIA theme and reintroduce George Bush senior. But before I do, just so we are aware, when formalisation of legislature came into being, already power brokers were moving to covert status. In this instance extended families would have members that were not widely known who could travel relatively incognito. These guys were the movers and the shakers, the string pullers. Ones in the firing line, such as personable royals, generally behaved very discreetly. If they did anything radically disaffecting, it was going to be behind an army of backers.

General Smedley D Butler may well have published his 1935 paper “War is a Racket” as a direct response to displaced WWI veterans huddled in “tent cities”, but now the racket it everywhere.  George Bush’s involvement with the Central Intelligence Agency converted supporting ethics to transform it into a racketeering organisation from the 1960’s onwards. Undoubtedly, one of Truman’s objectives would have been to ensure the CIA infiltrated and influenced governments to “keep America safe”. Mandates changed under Bush, which allowed international cooperation for mutual business purposes.  Quintessentially (though practice sometimes defies promise) the CIA extorted foreign domains whereas the (Roosevelt’s 1908) FBI looked after the home roost. For instance, in that capacity the CIA has regularly partnered with Israel’s Mossad. Nevertheless, certain joint initiatives have focused on home turf matters, such as Epstein “Inc.”. Maybe parallel agendas conflict with the FBI from time to time, but Israel’s association with Epstein dictates America is their turf.

William the Conqueror’s Feudal System made an introduction earlier. I can confirm it is still alive and well, except those that run the pyramid take ultra-safe covert positions. David Rockefeller was a “front man”. It was felt he had the gift of the gab and was endearing enough not to get himself killed for his efforts. Thus, it is also sound to presume that organisations such as the CIA, FBI and Mossad follow an identical “rule by the few” model. In that respect, lowly agents should be viewed as bunnies that distinctly follow orders. Once, at a dinner party, I discussed the prospect of all out nuclear war. My left wing counterpart tried to argue that no decent person could ever “press the button”. My sad duty was to inform him that those that created supporting infrastructures must have been of similar opinion too; for they run constant drills, operators never given latitude of forethought as to which events might be genuine live attacks. They are at liberty only to follow orders as “monkeys”. So, perhaps, in this manner, lowly enforcement agents are managed from above by like manoeuvres.

There is no question as to the deceitful nature of slander posthumously attached to Epstein. However, while “the pyramid” says otherwise, agents would have no alternative but to uphold their duty diligently. Unfortunately, after George Bush senior, “diligence” equates to “use any means to win”. Here, I can only speculate as to who is ultimate behind fraudulent confessions exampled and how they escalated from limelight to public judiciary, but I can hypothesise why and what templates were used to craft intrigue. So, to be fair to our dutiful enforcement agents, let us presume they believe that evidence IS representative of truth. How did they arrive at the current junction? Well, we’ve all seen those movies where the key witness is shot dead, potentially jeopardising court processes, justifying a frantic hunt for “reinforcements”. Maybe, in Epstein’s case, law enforcement hit brick walls all the way down the investigation path. Maybe none, not one, of their potential witnesses wanted anything to do with the investigation or due diligence. Do our valiant agents give up or press on against all odds?

Using any means” (which is the modern method) provides agents an enormous amount of political license. Remember, as far as they are concerned, any criminal is as guilty as sin and, when complicity is lacking, he must have “corrupted” vital witnesses. As far as our valiant agents are concerned, he also still must pay for his crime and, consequentially, they are at liberty to be as deceitful as they like, if the greater good is avenged. Particularly in the US, there are a whole bunch of actors that always seem out of work, sorry, rehearsing between assignments. Why not put them to good effect? They could become surrogate star witnesses that should have been “real” had the devil not corrupted virtue. Whereas I may feel the nature of the greater portion of information justifying affirmative action is obviously “flaky”, dedicated law enforcement likely doesn’t share this opinion. However, there is no doubt in my mind key witnesses have been “prepped” by external arbiters who, highest common denominator logic prefers, are either CIA or their associates. Let us be clear on what’s at stake here. For the fake witnesses the risks are high. Though revenue wise they can receive lucrative incomes from chat shows, if any slip of the tongue was to ever compromise things, ensuring public renege on “truth”, well, the whole charade would turned back on them as violently as it did to poor “Jeffrey Epstein” (if it was him).

So I missed my planned pre-New Years’ release date but, all things considered, that’s something I can live with. I mean…..I am alive.

 

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.

Reflections on What Easter Really Meant To Me

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rogue Justice, Royalty and How the World Was Won

rogue-justiceRegular visitors should be aware of my other exo-political blog by now. In a sense the format is similar to here, but content focuses on everything “outside politics” (politics normally being the affairs of the people). Articles tend to be long and weighty. Recently, in conjunction with the alien theme, I set up a new website. It is a resource specifically catering for shorter bulletins or videos about paranormal, extra-terrestrial/dimensional matters. Ultimately the format will be expanded at some point as a political-conscience counterpart. In principle this will allow time pressed visitors the comfort of an easy stretch (writing topics never expanding beyond a thousand words). I plan to deliver Ozzie Thinker in brief if you will.

get-attachment-734-aspxToday’s post is all about rigged justice, right royalty conspiracies and global enslavement of the masses in the name of Zionism. It should hardly surprise readers content has gone way over-budget yet again (given the mythical ideal of 2,800 words). The count thus far has headed north of 7,000 (roughly a third of the size of my book, “The Beauty of Existence Decoded”) so my die-hards are in for a treat. There is much more that could have been said and I rely on the “implications” of highlighted items as sufficient prudence for wider causes. I could have mentioned how vaccines and other “so-called” medicines are in place to reduce populations that refuse to die quickly. I hint at it but please keep an eye on the expansive work of Jon Rappoport. The cynical attack on the people from above becomes abhorrently clear. Fake psychiatry partnering with arsenals of toxic drugs is implicated between the lines weighing up tantalising titbits on MKUltra, McVeigh’s violent protest at the first Gulf War “AIDS epidemic” and other less conspicuous commentaries. In total, I script a journey from most ancient eras to present day. So all that’s left for readers to do now is strap in, hold tight and hang on for dear life.

Back in unknown Atlantis times justice was administered differently. Few realise that the traditional accoutrements issued to kings or queens at coronations represent “lost” supreme objects of incredible (literally) power. The crown was an all-purpose headdress which doubled as laser weapon (more deadly than today’s most lethal nuclear warheads) and other tricks, such as technology that made the wearer invisible. The sceptre is modelled on the ancient wand, mostly either used as a healing aid or a lower power stun weapon. Royal orbs, if operable, would miraculously dial into special remote (inherent) frequencies and stream perfect, true holographic records of past events. Yes, that’s correct, you’ve read me right. Everything, every last detail of time is streamed in pristine clarity. Under those terms, justice was unavoidable. The orb would simply determine absolute truth without the need for a single corrupt witness.

After the collapse of Atlantis (Tower of Babel), civilisation morphed from Aryan outlaw settlements eventually transforming into the Greco-Roman republics. Justice was no more. Instead a fusion of arbitrary mob rule accentuating individual royal might transferred as a “holistic” superficial magistrates system that relied on ad hoc, routine, biased investigations by “state appointees” similar to methods applied by modern day police. Given today’s constables’ exalted status in courtrooms, nothing much has changed at all. Opinions of police personnel are considered generally sacrosanct. In Greco-Roman times the magistrate would act as judge and juror in front of a governor, whose job was merely to decide the severity of each infraction.

The concept of citizenship was ushered in with various republic models that segregated different rights for “free men”, foreigners and slaves. By the Middle Ages in Europe conceptual refinement saw progression to the honourable man tradition; coordinating the peerage system. An honourable man (as termed) was deemed incapable of dishonour (unless corrupted by witches). Therefore, for these men criminal accusations were to require countersigned confessions as admissions of guilt. Sensationally, all manner of grotesquely imaginative tortures have been recorded as being used as the means of achieving necessary compliance in stubborn cases. It was thought honourable men would rather succumb (die) than admit dishonour. The notion was similar to the one applied to witches in the great inquisitions. Nevertheless, commoners were still generally processed in the old Greco-Roman way.

55486_star_chamber_lgBy Tudor period (15th century) England, justice had come far. Introduction of Star (contract) Chambers (for aristocrats) implied fair hearings were possible. For the first time in history, defendants were able to give their own counsel and provide case supporting evidence and witnesses (when permitted).  Unfortunately that encouraged the appointment of politically aligned (corrupt) judges whose reputations sometimes preceded bias and ignorance more than before. According to surviving family members, Ann Boleyn eloquently substantiated her innocence of adultery before Henry VIII only to be bitterly refuted by the king’s better judgement.  Admittedly the thought of transparency was a hollow one in this case as he had abolished all court judges. Nevertheless, the system was a definitely step in the right direction assuming fair application of law was applied.

Structured justice theoretically preceded Greco-Roman order. What became known as “Judaism” has a much more ancient past that stretches back to highway law used by outcasts of Atlantis. When Israel formalised as a nation from Russian/Iranian stock, a royal backed Sanhedrin (or court) was eventually created. Formally, a small panel of Pharisees (judges) debated with comparatively large numbers of Sadducees (scribes) to establish the numerous precedents required for that attempt at holistic legislature. Justice itself unfortunately still promoted mob rule. Each posse would form to round up the “wanted” something akin to folklore shrouding the “Wild West”. Imagination suggests the commonest infractions against law must have been adultery or blasphemy; both almost impossible to argue fairly. Accused would be subject to the reasoning of the local Pharisee, who literally acted as judge, juror and executioner (Does Jesus’ mock trial give us insight?). The closest we come to this method of outlaw enforcement today is the holus bolus ad hoc administration of Sharia Law “ISIS style” on lands lacking infrastructure.

Although Latin “Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies)” presumption of innocence was brought into Roman criminal law by Antonius Pius in the second century, it was rarely (if ever) referenced in court. Seventh century Islamic scholar Inam Nawawi, reinterpreting Qu’ranic Hadith (verses), is reputed to be the first to have upgraded “warranted suspicion” as circumstantially acceptable evidence against those who are accused. Nevertheless Roman and Islamic Law adhered to the common principle “onus of innocence or guilt is jointly that of the accuser and claimant”. The formal shift from common law to “innocent until proven guilty” was introduced to the British code of practice after English lawyer Sir William Garrow’s (1760-1840) sensational court arguments.

Naturally a French system of criminal justice was adopted by America (whose independence from Britain was funded by France) and therefore the Roman/Islamic “guilt before innocence is proved” (implying criminal societies) anchors justice standards there. Nevertheless, returning to the history of the British law courts, King Henry II appointed 18 judges to oversee common law justice. A declaration was made before the Assize of Clarendon (royal council) in 1166 detailing the judges’ national circuit. This also assumed a shift from common to federal law (a precursor to the Westminster System). 1346 ushered in a decree that judges could or would not be bribed (bound by oath). Notably Chief justice of the King’s Bench, William Thorpe, narrowly escaped the death penalty for bribery in 1350 by the resulting pardon which entailed his demotion. From Edward III’s (Confessor) reign, the judiciary became integrated with politics culminating in the creation of the Star Chambers (to become an integral part of the loaded Westminster System) mentioned before.

family_of_henry_viii_c_1545_detailHenry VIII abolished all judges in his privy council and that led to a spike in executions (Wild West style) of common criminals. More than seven thousand deaths reported compared with infamous Bloody Mary’s three hundred sensational religious purges. Contrary to historic populism, Mary was a champion of social injustice in her own way, introducing (for the time) far reaching community improvements and reinstating some judges. Inextricable religious interference in regal political affairs had been cited as the supposed reason for the “breakup” of the vast Roman Empire. Truth paints a very different picture. Instruments of power simply shifted to Constantinople to rule by proxy utilising a prescient order of “untouchable” (or offend God) demagogue popes established first by Constantine I in the fourth century.

The earliest “Zionist” king to break the stranglehold of the Roman Catholic overseers was Henry VIII in 1530’s. Though the Church of England formerly dates back to 587AD after Saint Augustine’s celebrated mission, Henry formally renounced the Papacy in order to divorce his then wife (Spanish royal), Catherine of Aragon.  Spain and Portugal were trailblazing all the Catholic merchant routes into the New World at the time, so Henry’s disobedience was very serious. Iron Queen, Elizabeth I, zealously continued her father’s tyranny once more stripping all judges of rank and duty and used the churches as “local gazetteers” announcing new laws of the realm (widening the shift to federalism over common law) imposing hefty fines (a shilling per infraction) on anyone failing to attend Sunday services. She was also the one that was ultimately posthumously behind the establishment of the Virginia Company; historic owner of the United States of America.

Therefore, the “pilgrim” (religious merchants) New World founding fathers were actually agents of Zionism sent to oversee trading concerns. America was meant to be kept the great secret, but fate had other ideas. It is fairly obvious to anyone with half a brain that Ireland was earmarked to become the “new Israel” after pharisaic elites adopted incognito status when the Siege of Jerusalem (66-69AD) was over. In effect the Union of Jacob mecca (unified British Isles) shifted to the New World under rule of the pilgrims. Ireland, for various reasons, was too hard to settle/conquer so the powers opted for England eventually. As for “old Israel”, it is painfully clear the reason that the Sanhedrin was never reinstated (comparably, the modern abomination, the Knesset, is a monstrous sham) because the Pharisees had assumed total power. Consistent with this line of thinking, either the supposedly destroyed second temple was regarded as a heresy by religious purists or it was an idiom that had never [physically] existed.

If all (or most) Caucasians were the original Jews (as is indicated by the Genome Project), it is no wonder that Zionists have desperately tried to water down global genetic stocks. This is evidenced by their fraudulent rhetoric promoting “one race” as basis for dreaded multiculturalism. The great, traditionally “white”, population centres have been “multicultured” at every waking opportunity. Russia (Mahgog) is the last domino to fall. The old Soviet Union was not entirely “broken” by the Zionists and still presents the greatest superficial threat to their horrific brand of “Order”. Let us not forget, many lost Jews returned from Russia after Israel was repatriated in 1948. If Michael Tsarion’s impressions are correct, then peoples of Israel even prior to 70AD had numerous population exoduses (some gently implied by biblical and other historic textual references).

philistines-palestinians-1-copyThere are other things I can add. The popularisation of the notion that the giant “bolshy” Philistine warriors were the ancestors of (average sized) Palestinians is highly implausible. Careful consideration of character points attribution to the obstinate ancient Greeks, whose warriors were also renowned for their great stature.  Criticism of Jewish-“Arab” kings, notably the Herod’s, unconvincingly combines scandalous hearsay with those laughably hyperbolic character assassinations of Roman Emperors’ Caligula and Nero. Commonality reveals all tainted parties worked in union to take on the Pharisees and researchers with cool heads can plainly see it was said attacks on pharisaic domination that is the common factor tragically obscured by those humorous exaggerations or out-and-out lies. Herod Antipas could not have survived all the ailments described by Flavius Josephus (including something that might equate to “cancer of the genitals”) less function!

Josephus, the only contemporary “Roman” historian that bothered to mention Jesus, clearly was Jesus (as determined by the clever Latin anagram concealed in Josephus but there are other obvious clues too). This meant that Jesus’ ministry ran from 66-69AD logically coinciding with the Siege of Jerusalem, beginning when he was months away from [Jewish] maturity (age 30). It was immediately after that the persecutions of the “Christians” (though first appearing as a term in Mark’s Acts of the Apostles, probably more regularly adopted long after the Gnostic exodus to North Africa) began and this consequentially saw disciple (a euphemism for bodyguard) Peter (probably an alias) scooped up and interviewed by [Roman] aristocratic bohemian social-networker (spy), Mark (or Marcus) to plausibly distort (Romanise) Jesus’ philology. As a young apostle, he would have presumably been on first name terms with Jesus/Josephus. In fact, I question whether he also doubled as the persona “Judas Iscariot” and that is why he exclusively revealed the bribe secret (in Acts).

Competent deduction impresses the realisation that it was the Gnostic Essenes that were scattered by the Roman incursion 70AD and many [survivors] ended up relocating to Egypt or Turkey rebranding as Christians later. Not all buried prized literatures (euphemistically known as Dead Sea Scrolls) have been discovered yet, they were that well hidden. In addition an eighth century amnesty was given to Ashkenazi Turkish Jews (capitalising on potentially corrupt “converts”) and why the folklore/tradition of Ireland/England’s ancient Celts had so many corresponding similarities to those of the Semitic local peoples (given the inexplicable distance between them). Gaelic (the Irish language) is substantially about two fifths Hebrew.

Cordially, I deduce that epistles compiled to build the New Testament doctrine actually presented pharisaic dogma designed to undermine or [ideally] make Gnosticism obsolete. Fundamentally the core difference between the two cults is Gnostics believe in spiritual atonement through the management of mind over matter. For the Pharisee, mind is irrelevant, spirituality superfluous as existence can only be celebrated as the exclusive domain of flesh (physicality). Zionists distort this as hybrid atheism, but it is a corruption of the “wisdom of blasphemy” ideology (a measure to maintain the purity of spirituality), which acts as an anti-contamination fence partitioning the exclusive higher “un-breached” realm of God. Was Moses’ issuance of divine commandments the beginning of the corruption of faith? Our present day battle ground, the unrestricted medical use of marijuana, conceivably by population majorities (given genetic potential for cancers courtesy of petro-carbons) is the great threat (to Zionist Order). Whilst comparatively impotent Pentecostal breath work, Islamic and Catholic fasting festivals could theoretically induce mild Manyana state; it is not close to the paradoxical oneness with nature achieved under influence of cannabis. If the Elohim were ever allowed a universal foothold again, it would awaken the beast that is contained by oblivion.

paul-the-apostleEgo-maniac Saul aka Paul had the bare-face to admit he was a “persecutor of Christians” who saw the light. The operation was a pivotal political move for the Pharisees and I wonder whether more can be read into the choice of the Damascus Road as the conversion location, given the current (Pharisee engineered) problems in Syria. Is there another link (ISIS) with Damascus steel used by legendary Varangian Guard mercenaries? The letters to Romans and Corinthians only demonstrate Paul’s seeing the light negated his Christian group infiltration and subsequent ideological corruption. Jesus’ discovery tour is reduced to unrequited pharisaic “bell, book and candle” dogma. It is no coincidence these works have been made the favourites of tyrannous missionaries and Pentecostal lay preachers.

The only “gospel” that directly records the actual words of Josephus is John (Fourth Gospel) as he likely issued tempered sentiment through his brother-in-law scribe, Lazarus, in order to [plausibly] confuse students familiar with his own writing style. We see the treasonous “Jesus, rightful King of Jews” sub-plot in all gospels, so there is no way Josephus would have made himself easily recognisable, in my opinion (just glimpses for the fans). Though unconfirmed, I believe a single word of the original manuscript (Jesus’ working copy) has survived. A complete John’s Gospel discovered in Alexandria [arguably] dating back close to the contemporary period has certainly been doctored. It would be implausible to think otherwise. I suspect the Pharisees’ agents would have ghost written over existing texts, extinguishing anything controversial other than the most ambiguous Gnostic philosophy (that few would be educated enough to comprehend) and anything else that wouldn’t change history. Anyone that has dabbled with the Hermetica’s celebration of nature’s divine engineering (i.e. why do mountains have flat tops?) and wondrous support of life (perhaps expanded by seventeen century Baruch Spinoza’s timeless neo-Gnostic poetry?) would empathise.

Gauging the closeness of ancient Greek philosophy when compared with gnostic wisdom and the proto-Israelite (according to Josephus), Greek “Hyksos”, takeover of Babylon, I feel certain my earlier insistence on their connection with the Philistines is correct. Conceivably, these may have also been a branch of the feared Varangian Guard too, which, Graham Hancock theorises, were highest bidder mercenaries not tied to any nation in particular. The only other possible contenders were the equally feared Negro tribes, but these have been identified as Nubians from the land of Kush (Ethiopia) in biblical and other ancient texts. Supposed decedents of the Queen of Sheba have led to the recognition of a small Jewish black population group called the Falashas. For Solomon to have married in to Nubian society demonstrates just how importantly strategic the labour resource was at the time.

Pharisees and rabbinical Jews are best known for their rational ideologies and trading abilities. The grand key to this success has been the introduction of money (whether in the form of barter tokens or hard cash). According to biblical Genesis, Abraham subtly canonised the Talent (an ancient version of Shekel) by offering mammon to God in place of the traditional first born son. Even hard line fanatics struggle with the notion ancient patriarchs unconscionably put the first son to death for God. What sort of God would want that injustice? In fact, prior to Abraham’s pledge, rumours of infant sacrifice are absent from Jewish folklore (note: to purge society of perceived wickedness was culturally acceptable).

abraham_sacrificing_isaacIt seems to me that it was Abraham that inexplicably decided the first born son should be sacrificed in order to create a levy to canonise currency. No sons had actually been sacrificed. The “op” was merely a device to impose commerce and twist faith into dogma at the same time. The significant implication was every single child bearing family needed to work or trade as a means of supporting their tribute to God. Even when sacrifice is interpreted metaphorically, the same reasoning applies. If the first born son’s “sacrifice” was seen as being pure to God (technically a form of utopian blasphemy), retribution fearing parents would have been forced to pay up or suffer the consequences.

Jericho shamefully revealed wars were nothing short of vehicles for plunder leaving disenfranchised surviving populations stripped of dignity and natural rights. Those were the lucky ones. Many populations were consequentially processed as slaves to be used as bonded labour. Orthodox rabbinical “religious” doctrine assured this fodder was lower in status than “animals”, void of protection and to be treated in any way “deemed fit” or terminated at the “slightest infraction of the will of the masters”. Whereas the Goyim (regularly translated as strangers) are considered to be non-Jews or gentiles, this may not be correct for “goy” is the Hebrew word for “nation”. Thus, strictly, Goyim should be translated as “nationals” or “those of nations”. Of course, meaning actually depends on the stigma attached to the usage of a given term. Nevertheless, as many Jewish clansmen remain unidentified and lost to history, logic presupposes subsequent presumed gentile nations were just as Jewish as their captors. Additionally, the Kabbalah and Talmud are loaded with Hindu/Buddhist comparisons which suggest all regions stem from a single ideological source.

emperors-clothesConsortiums of merchants have been responsible for manufacturing just about everything associated with national pride or patriotism which is geared to reproducing the royal Mandela effect. This has not exclusively been a Jewish preoccupation, though trade has tended to assume Caucasian migration routes. Japan was at war with China at regular intervals long before western industrialists discovered the islands group. China’s Silk Road proffers a history stretching back thousands of years which provided ample opportunity for Jewish militias to establish protection rackets and other nationalistic infrastructures. These became the forerunners of banking systems (masonic orders cloaking dissident merchant alliances). At the beginning of a power move by these merchants, backed royals were first encouraged and then press ganged into behaving flamboyantly – spectacles that separated themselves from everyday commoners. Greater control over the people could only be expanded by conquering new territories. If any allied king became war weary, his enemies were the immediate investment targets of the devious pseudo-bankers.

Nevertheless, ultimately the royals held all the wealth of land even while possessed by surrogates. When King John of England seized vast tracts of common lands after 1211, he exemplified this reasoning. Whereas the folklore of Robin Hood disguises the First Barons (civil) War 1215-17, it was the conflict between royalty and aristocratic merchant bankers that underwrote the Magna Carta treaty and first step towards holistic cartel-controlled global federalism (becoming reality after the execution of King Charles I in 1649). That is why the powers today so uncharacteristically celebrate the event and not because it furbished plebeians with liberty. It was always presumed that “the people” were the “natural owners” of the land that was seized, when they never were. After the Magna Carta came into being, a tithes system was rapidly implemented making the truth abundantly clear. Peasants paid rent as tenants of “their” land holdings. In effect, the squire of the manor was your friendly merchant lease-issuer (banker) of the time.

vikings_amazing_facts-770x437Sensational Viking (some argue were a branch of the Varangian Guard given their size and special steel weapons) takeover of Britain 793-876 saw tribute paid in sums of silver coins until Ethelred finally defeated the invaders at the Battle of Reading. Prior, when forces found no tribute, they ransacked local populations. That style of remedial action was not limited to the Vikings. Edward the Confessor’s Welsh, Scottish and Irish wars were to impose the same sort of extortion funnel. Our modern day “taxes” are variants of this style of exaction. “The people” have always been required to supply the resources for commerce. In that way, nothing has changed, except some argue all income taxes supply “first world” national war chests under the flimsy excuse of defence.

Without doubt, prior to having the strength to go it alone, pharisaic Jews partnered with the Catholics combining as a mock Zionist-Rosicrucian (old Atlantis) front. Given the historic press, it seems likely most of the prior Roman leaders had been proto-agents of Zionism (I use the term in the sense – fortress Earth prepared for the global elites) too. I am unclear whether Mohamed was the new Jesus purveying a unique breed of Gnosticism or a Pharisee double agent in light of the overzealous corruption of the ideology and philosophy of Islam since his death. Could the “Jews” killed in Medina have been Gnostics; ancestors of the Cathars?  Jewish William the Conqueror did little more than partially “unify” Europe and impose Catholic Christianity on the Brits. Catholicism, let us never forget, desperately tried to manufacture an illusion, reducing investigative science (any opportunity to demystify) to heresy and launch regular inquisition waves for the specific aim of purging naturopath (oneness with nature/God or pantheist) physicians branded witches.

Druidic Celtic (Gnosticism) customs (equally aligned to pantheism) were gradually made impotent and integrated as trite rebranded “customs of worship”. The harvest festival eventually virtually lost all meaning, although it is heartening to learn ancient customs have been kept alive by a wick over thousands of years and there has been a mild renaissance of values (white witchcraft) on the back of the fraudulent New Age movement. Wholesale import of Jews from 1066 did test the Church of England. Records of significant contracts (Rabbi notarised Starra) bankrolling kings, such as Richard I, began in the 1100’s. It did more to highlight the lack of goodwill between noblemen than specifically implicate Zionist bad practice. Exploitation of this lack of goodwill became the trademark that built the later Rothschild Empire. Edward I of England attempted to put a stop to banking practices with the Jewish Affairs Bill of 1275, which outlawed interest bearing loans (considered a heresy) partially in response to the earlier Baron Wars. In 1290 he took unprecedented step of expelling the Jews in entirety (not returning in significant numbers until the 1500’s to a welcoming Zionist, Henry VIII) forcing traditions underground.

If the period of kings with absolute authority began to wither with the collapse of the Roman Empire, pseudo-governance by the Constantinople (annex of today’s Turkey as part of the earlier expansive Greek Empire) based Catholic Papacy had allowed greater merchant control. Coupled with the numerous external influences on the system, with equivalents to modern day Zionist “lobbyists” such as the Nicolaitians (there at Catholicism’s conception), was a fanatical underlying determination to eventually seize absolute power. Fanaticism transformed into reality with the formularisation of the Rothschild banking empire which expanded as the great East India Company over several generations.

The conversion to overall power began with the capture and civil execution of unrepentant English king, Charles I (1649). It was no coincidence the banking industry changed forever from 1660, even though the Italian Medici’s (Roman black aristocracy) had formulated corporate (orders from the grave) infrastructure templates between 1397 and 1472, just before the United States of America was “miraculously” discovered (1492) by Columbus who was financed by them. Because the powers had planned for the region to be a secret “Promised Land” by invite only, mid nineteenth century gold fever exoduses had not been calculated, arguably destroying all cultural ambitions hence. Consequentially, politics in the US for a long while assumed relative transparency with limited (to those exclusively supported) fair governance set as the overall precedent. That is why Andrew Jackson was able to revoke the First National Bank’s charter in 1836 for “yielding too much corporate power”.

american-civil-warThe game was over (and America became “corporate” property) after the oligarch’s war (generally known as the American Civil War, 1861-65 through use of civilian fodder) when Andrew Johnson’s 14th Amendment (1868) effectively converted the Constitution into an abridged corporate charter (akin to the other great coup for the Zionists – the Magna Carta). Universal commerce (manipulating land that could now be owned) saw land values intrinsically underpinned by finance after Britain adopted the Dutch mortgage system with William of Orange’s appointment to the throne in 1696. He was the king that hastily introduced the [oh so often] misquoted “Bill of Rights” which, contrary to popular psychosis, was exclusively for merchant classes and not the commoners. Reasoning was devoted to halting any future royal reclaimers after James II tried to reinstate his absolute authority over politics (such as seizing treasonous businesses and jailing owners) before he was forced into exile by Zionist militias.

The “Bill of Rights” was conceptually integrated with the American Constitution via the 1791 “Fifth Amendment” reform. Modern day usage is regularly celebrated as a troubled industrialist’s “get out of jail free” mechanism. For the industrialists (Zionists), it was imperative the precursor to consumerism, luxury trade, was expanded at every opportunity. The greater influence trading networks had on everyday life assured the industrialists hold on everyday life. Establishment of the New World was a small step in the chain. English king Henry VIII’s wife, Ann Boleyn, was the envy of upper class society after she publically showed off {enormously valuable for the time] peacock feathers attached to her attire. Exotic produce in industrial quantities began to broaden markets from the 1570’s under Elizabeth I, hence her interest in the Virginia Company (owner of the United States of America).

Yet it was the same corporate greed that broke Sir Isaac Newton’s gold standard in 1797 with Britain forced to issue royal stamped Spanish doubloons for a few months (under George III). The New World commodity, tea, at the market peak (circa 1750) spiralled to a staggering price equating to $1 million per pound ($15K a mug) retail (by today’s standards). Don’t complain so much next morning cuppa! The spectacular market collapse is known as the South Sea Bubble. Templates were set from that initial learning curve and, rather than heeding the warnings, most financial collapses have been engineered ever since, including the 2008 Grand Financial Crisis (GFC).

Old wounds die hard and after the demise of Norman William Conqueror’s family line, English kings steadily attempted to de-integrate commonwealth links with unified France. French influence over the Papacy (including putting an end to Zionist force, the Knights Templar, after the torturous death of 23rd Grand Master Jacques De Molay, 1292) created strain over relations with England. The pope’s meddling in sovereign affairs of Scotland and Ireland did nothing to improve harmony. It would be fair to say that by Henry VIII’s time, the Catholics had no more than token influence on British royal politics. Recalcitrant British authority over the rest of the globe continued even after royal autonomy had been completely extinguished reaching a tentative pinnacle with the invasion of the newly “independent” US in 1812. This, I believe, was an attempt to stigmatise colonisation of the new nation and fend off possible mass exoduses rather than a real power grab. It also suggests to me the “greatness” of puppet royal Queen Victoria was manufactured to impress history.

It is no coincidence that the Rothschild’s empire base in France stemmed from their role financing US independence (founding members of Illuminati Order 1st May, 1776 were Rothschild associates) and the French “revolution” was also bankrolled by them for a mere 1,250,000 pounds sterling. Not only did France and America both become common “Republics” in 1789, but the emancipation of French Jews coincided with the 1791 American Fifth Amendment. That extraordinary bond has continued to the present day. Some so-called NWO “insiders” view the storming of the bastille as the commencement of the total enslavement of humanity.

There are numerous other important bumps forward for the oppressors of virtue that could be highlighted, but I would like to speed ahead to the last hundred years. Simultaneous large wars in China, South Africa and Colombia at the end of the nineteenth century tested indiscriminate killing on industrial scales. However, the Zionists were blessed with a pleasant bonus. Concentration camps of St Helena were that effective at killing off captured civilians, they have been standardised as a punitive measure of war ever since (most recently as FEMA camps). Expanding way beyond military zones, I wonder whether the humanitarian camps established in Africa in accordance with the war on famine are in place to help or hinder populations of stricken regions. I shan’t dwell on the double standards of the Red Cross.

kubanphoto41The first “world” war was merely implemented to break Germany and Russia where royal patronage was considered too strong for manageable Zionism. Ironically, the Russian Romanov dynasty was in place courtesy of Rothschild funding for the war against the Cossacks (now in Ukraine?) 1771-75. History of the Chinese Dowagers may not parallel but is equally important. empress_dowagerRule by Imperial dynasties ceased with the death of Empress Cixi in 1908. It is widely argued by alternative historians that the shift of politics did not change the dynamic (hidden) royal power base even into Mao’s regime. Never too far away from the limelight, recent sources of unknown origin have sensationally painted the infamous Dragon Family as being party to a supposed minor repayment of an old American ($4 trillion) debt. In 2008, according to this conspiracy, a large shipment of tungsten-tainted gold bars (worth $ billions) was allegedly delivered through Chinese triads. Whereas I find it compellingly plausible enough to mention, for my research I have not validated allegations.

Many other key items could have been included in my chronology (such as the manipulation of gold), but ones listed are the most important when gauging a sense of perspective on the direction of how the world was won.

Before reading on, an important anomalous misconception needs to be clarified before unfair judgement is made. Whether Helena Blavatsky’s Theosophical Society stood for (dare I say?) truth or deception is by no means clear. Theosophists’ explanation of the proposed role of thought being and archangel, Lucifer, as all consuming “logosremote controller of Earth is painfully correct. Lucifer formulated the (labelled) survival of the fittest system on Earth, conceived with the dinosaurs (manufactured by affiliated Drakkon geneticists). An unending incarnate environmental war replaced [prior] universal white light order because trade or control measures had always encouraged conflict resulting in wanton destructive, nihilistic assaults.

hpbjpgrsm1891bNevertheless, where I take umbrage at Theosophical wisdom is in the construction of “Satan”. Those that understand the history of the very first star ever to bless the cosmos will realise subsequent folklore surrounding the many namesakes called Satan have no more than superficial or unrelated connections. Indeed, the earliest recognitions of the “fall of man” (as the desired Annunaki image of God) are profoundly aligned to white light order or Gnosticism in the raw.  The Theosophists loose correctness with the human ego analogy seems more like something that may have been cultivated in high Victorian Illuminati satanic covens. In practicality, the ego is what remains of the (so-called) fall of man which (in turn) was the consequence of the error of Sophia (father) permitting biased (existential) manifestation that forged the ever present character paradox between ideological (holy spirit) and scoped reality (son). It is strange that Blavatsky was born in Ukraine (or Khazaria), perennial home to Zionism. Are the Theosophists manipulators or manipulated is the unanswered (for my research) $64 question?

Key outcomes in chronological order were:

1833 British and 1866 US “Abolishment of Slavery” (in practicality “anything but”) Acts made all “common citizens” potential bonded labour assets and removed the need to provide communal social security (hence the rapid emergence of Dickensian “charitable” labour camps from the Victorian period onwards). Prior, when sectioned commoners had been slaves (in the case of the Irish – a humanitarian post war measure) the implication was the owner had a moral duty of care towards all cooperative bonded workers

1914 Federal Reserve issued the first unbacked currency, German papiermark

1916 Battle of Somme sanctioned the indiscriminate slaughter of over one million Caucasian Goyim (proto-Jews)

1917 Thule Society formed (later encourages Adolph Hitler’s membership) and attempts to refine some of the Illuminati “satanic” occult practices and their obsession with the paranormal

1919 WWI reparations against Germany leveraged the special relationship with France (Rothschild bankers) in order to funnel gold in massive quantities to jump start the US consumer boom (euphemistically known as the roaring 20’s). Zionist “communism” (radical state-sanctioned socialism) tested in Russia

1920 Hire purchase introduced on a commercial-scale as the prelude to ownership of mortgaged common classes

1921 End of private British banknote issuers after (Rothschild adjunct) Lloyds of London acquired Fox, Fowler and Company. Council of Foreign Relations was founded as an elite watchdog of the 1920 League of Nations (testing global federalism)

1929 Sensational Wall Street Crash after gold was sucked from US by (Rothschild affiliated) Federal Reserve bankers to build up Hitler’s Germany for his chancellorship, bankrupting the American people in the process

1931 Pharmaceutical corporation, Eli Lilly, successfully patents the poison Thimerosal as a "medicine" after no formal trails

1932 Zionist insider, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, ended gold backed currency in the United States

1933 Theosophist Adolph Hilter is appointed Chancellor of Germany only after the Zionists are granted the Haavara (homecoming to Palestine) Agreement. Sunni (pharisaic) Islamic Saudi Arabia secured after the commercial collaboration with US Standard Oil. Later this would become Arab American Company (ARAMCO)

1934 Zionists back Mao Tse Tung to destabilise the massive Chinese populations in an attempt to break the phantom royal Dowagers. Lawyer Maurice Fishbein began steps to dismantle Royal Rife’s universal cancer cure (completed 1939)

1939 Declaration of [what was to become] World War II or “the final act [of enslavement]” according to NWO “insiders”. Medicinal cannabis outlawed because of its celebrated potency as a healing agent.

1940 Katyn massacre after the Soviet (Russia) invasion of Poland wiped out just about all key military and police officers leaving an estimated 22,000 (including civilians) dead. This was to control the key trading port, Danzig

1941 Pentagon founded from consolidation (in part) of a collaboration of militias that once served the interests of the Zionist merchant consortium, the (Rothschild controlled) British East India Company

1945 Oriental threat, Japan, is broken by the Zionists. League of Nations rehash, the United Nations, founded as the future utopian administrative centre of global federalism (a fusion of Zionism and hybrid Catholicism). Theosophist disciple, Alice Bailey, wrote the New Age intellectual philology

1947 Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) established as post-war insurance against over exertion of the Pentagon

1948 British (and other) mercenaries assisted in the creation of monster state, Israel, as part of the terms of reparations against Germany even though Palestine had supported the Allies against Hitler. Scientists knew of the link between petrochemical products and cancers proscribing benzene “safe levels” at ZERO

1949 George Orwell’s divine prophecy “1984” mocks Israelite grand elitist plans. US Greenback becomes the new currency standard after the Bretton-Woods agreement. Chiang-Kai-shek supported (militarily) by US subordinates as insurance against Zionism (today Taiwan holds the largest global supply of nuclear warheads according to Douglas Dietrich. That is why fickle Zionist China cannot invade). Pentagon expanded as North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) as a measure against the non-existent “communist (Zionist) threat”

1950 Operation Paperclip (managed by the Office of Strategic Services) began repatriation of key German NAZI scientists into the US, many to support the air force, NASA and so on. Over 1500 were eventually relocated

1951 Never registered American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) was formed from “illegal” (per 1938 Registration of Foreign Agents Act) American Zionist Committee (created 1949)

1952 Pentagon adjunct NSA created to counter CIA. Arch-Zionist King Farouk of Egypt deposed by Gamal Nasser securing the administrative key to Arabian trading networks

1953 Inspired by Orwell (1984), North Korea established as a Zionist secret haven and nuclear weapons store. This is where the [nuclear] attack on Iran will originate from and why visitation from unwelcome eavesdroppers (foreign tourists) is discouraged [via incessant mainstream propaganda] or strictly managed from within

1954 Mass production and sensational advertising of highly toxic filtered cigarettes designed to slowly kill off useless eaters

1956 “Nasser payback” Suez Crisis (Israel, US, Britain and France) started the strategic ongoing war over oil and amplified Zionist “Greater Israel” ambitions (though, as devout cowards, they have always opted for covert rule by surrogates to date)

1960 Oil Producing Exporting Countries (OPEC) cabal specialising in fraud and embezzlement formed in Baghdad, Iraq

1962 US-French Vietnam failed war for commerce in part [a false flag] to disguise the true purpose of the Korean War

1963 Assassination of JFK for daring to attempt to introduce silver backed currency

1966 Assassination of Harold Holt (Australian Prime Minister) for reintroducing silver currency. LSD outlawed in the US because users could access inherence (pure truth) under Influence

1971(-75) Zionist-American plans for the ongoing shape of Globalism. Nixon declares “war on drugs” in order to break the anti-Zionist “Hippie” movement

1972 Watergate eventually exposed CIA’s MKUltra program (1980) which proved attempts had been made at cultivating “Manchurian candidate” sleeper terrorists

1973 “Futures and options” were instrumented as a new commerce exchange mechanism by Wall Street traders. US “futures debt” is said to currently exceed $200 trillion. David (John) Rockefeller founded and chaired the Trilateral Commission

1974 Creation of the theoretical Petrodollar

1975 Saw the end of Vietnam War. Pol Pot’s (circumstantial) purge of Cambodian social intellectuals tests the systemisation of a nation

1978 US Army distributed a “Handbook to Chaplains” which listed the Church of Satan and Temple of Set as tolerated “other religions”. Lieutenant Colonel Michael Aquino (head of the Temple of Set) had been “Pentagon Chaplain” at some point (no reference cited) according to Douglas Dietrich.

1979 British Secret Service assisted Ayatollah (Islamic Jesuit – fusion of Islam, Judaism and Catholicism) Khomeini to leave French exile ousting Arch-Zionist Shah Pahlavi and seizing Persia. This led to the highly unpopular creation of the austere Islamic (Shia) Republic of Iran. Zionists set up the Mujahedeen as a counter political measure and have been trying to control from within by different means ever since

1980 US trigger bombing of Tripoli. Georgia Guidestones (Mosaic tablets) “command” global populations reduce to 500 million people

1983 US bombing of Lebanon (at the end of 1982-83 war with Israel over water)

1984 World War III began in the Middle East to fulfil Orwellian divine prophecy marked by Russia’s boycott of the summer Olympics over Afghanistan

1988 British agent, Ayatollah Khomeini, issues a fatwa against Salman Rushdie after his pro-homosexual, “Satan Verses“, was published by Penguin Books

1989 Poland’s revolt against Zionist-communism spearheaded by front man, Lech Walesa

1990 First Gulf War over control of the global petrochemical supply

1991 (perhaps earlier) The FBI began a faux war on child pornography virtually exclusively creating the internet “market” as an ongoing sting operation. This was a late phase of the strategy that imposes synthetic standards of “adulthood” as preparation/indoctrination for forced state servitude (voting, working and other perceived privileges that are actually violating obligations). Yugoslavia used to war test (unauthorised) NATO calculated to permanently break Slavic rebellion against the corporates

1993 A special weather research project called HAARP was set up at Alaska’s Fairbank University. Janet Reno (allegedly a lover of Hillary Clinton) ordered the FBI to successfully use lethal force against defenceless untried American citizens that were part of a Seventh Day Adventist splinter called the “Dravidians”. No one has been held accountable for the murders of the Texans to date

1995 Oklahoma City bombing was an “inside job” dry run for the notorious Zionist commissioned 9/11 attack. Guilty mis-adventurer Timothy McVeigh acted in outrage at the effects forced medications had had on fellow Gulf War veterans (43,000 reported with “AIDS like” symptoms). Those responsible for the actual destruction have never been formally identified or apprehended

1996 French underground “nuclear test” and industrial scale fracking assault on the fragile pacific basin

1999 Pakistan “secured” as insurance against potential rebellion in India

2001 Supposed target date of utopian Rosicrucian Order. So-called “9/11” was the Zionist sanctioned “inside job” terrorist attack that disastrously mirrored the Oklahoma City demolition. This event directly advanced the creation of Transport Security Administration (TSA) for use against minor dissident commoners (strategic “protestors”). Patriot Act rushed through parliament to allow the torture and routine imprisonment of minor dissident commoners in apprehension of controlled civil war. Invasion of Afghanistan secures transcontinental oil pipeline, improves the global opiates (heroin) distribution funnel and seizes ancient (Atlantis origins?) technologies. Al Qaeda (database) invented as a Mossad/CIA branding joint venture.

2002 Bali bombing or so-called “Australian 9/11” demonstrated how ineffective mini-nukes (presumed Israeli) are at killing civilian groups. Unlike the American “professional demolition job” counterpart, here a suicide (sic) back-packer was used

2003 Invasion of Iraq to secure the corporate oil industry (which had been nationalised by Saddam Hussein) and plunder ancient Sumerian secrets (detail on how to construct ancient technologies) newly discovered by German archaeologists

2004 Christmas tsunami was the first successfully targeted HAARP attack. Strategic explosives ignited an underwater Sumatran volcano, but the resulting shock/tsunami had been much bigger than anticipated. Techniques for this method were allegedly channelled via the Pentagon’s Draco-Satanist alliance (legacy of Michael Aquino) or was there a connection with ancient secrets plundered in Iraq? Poland joined the European Union

2005 London bombings exposed the possibility that “suicide” bombers were remotely triggered and potentially not even aware of complicity in terrorism

2007 Grand financial crisis (GFC) used to break (reengineer) the European Union and the first punitive measure in the steps to a “universal” cashless electronic currency. Flaccid Al Qaeda “op” rebrands as ISI (later ISIL). Cheney exports unknown numbers of nuclear warheads (designated for the eventual attack on Iran via North Korea) to Japan using the diplomatic bag as an insurance measure against possible Chinese rebellion (linked to the alleged tainted gold shipment of 2008?)

2009 First unquestionable use of a (MKUltra programmed) “Manchurian candidate” for the Fort Hood shootings

2010 HAARP attack via satellite destabilises Haiti causing devastating earthquakes. Aftershocks have been catastrophic for New Zealand, Japan and Chile. BP “oil spill” and pollution of the Gulf of Mexico was a deliberate strategy in the bitter war against deep sea “extra-terrestrial” colonies. Poland’s key leaders (civil and military) were killed in a Russian plane crash (probably shot down) in retaliation against Walesa’s Solidarity movement ousting Zionist-communism. Best (superficial) evidence that Putin is an Israeli agent of doom

2011 Putin launched as the Russian (Mahgog) New Age Messiah by the dead-eyed “alternative Medias”. The land of Phut (Libya) conquered as the first phase of biblical prophecy (Ezekiel and others). All-out (world) war in Syria began

2012 Fukushima nuclear disaster caused by the earlier Haitian HAARP attack impedes US/Israeli nuclear [strike] ambitions against Iran (Gog). Synthetic Hurricane Sandy was a sensational operational marketing failure.

2013 Micro-nukes (allegedly Israeli) tested at a Texan fertiliser plant killing 15 and injuring a further 160. “Faux-pas” ISIS (Al Qaeda, ISI, ISIL, etc.) rebrand is formally recognised the following year

2015 Japan legislates for military “self-defence

2016 Obama fast tracking of Maritime Law geared to eroding control of US constitution for succession to United Nations oversight (or formal global federalism) almost complete

3d230d441I would like to conclude by giving my fellow Arab-American journalist, best known as Mantiq Al-Tayr, another introduction. His tireless efforts at raising awareness of how Zionist domination has impinged on American and everyman liberty are to be commended. A recent article covering the Israeli managed Trump/Clinton farce introduced the public figure, Grant Smith. To his monumental credit Grant doesn’t see American sovereignty as logically subject to Zionist oversight. In a short video presentation (under 15 minutes) he packs in (to name a few highlights) nuclear treason (NUMEC, Shapiro, Apollo Affair), manipulation of the Registration of Foreign Agents Act, the Lavron Affair, US-Israel Free Trade Area (UIFTA) and notably how Monsanto tried to stand up against the Zionist beast in the mid 1980’s. There’s plenty more to say, but I feel digestion will have to wait until the next instalment on the subject. Enjoy the movie.