When “Belief in the Saviour” Teases Corrupt Zeal

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

Satan devoured it,” howl the sanctimoniously superstitious

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Advertisements

A Modern Day “Love Cult” Assumes Detracting Truths Are Heresy

Trung-Nguyen-The-Lovers-Tarot-CardsI presume I have lost another Christian truther Facebook “friend”, Doug Bates, who will be mostly remembered as one too cowardly to face the truth. Affectionately known as Master Bates, the child of God showed glimpses of promise but ended up succumbing to common narcissism. Never have I un-friended a Facebook contact nor will I. In my humble opinion to do so would be a form of treachery. If I can’t face unwelcome information, I can’t face myself. My only “right” is either to respond or not as the case may be. The only sincere objectives of a God loving person are to excel in truth, spirit and heart. Of course not everyone has been efficiently groomed in etiquette to comply with the phantom conventions of civilisation, so when I am faced with extrovertly rude or intimidating sentiment, I tend to reply with enhanced like for like. Spirited responses may be many times more repulsive than any challenge. Tough talk negates far tougher love. Confusingly, the equilibrium of mutual desire can be equally well achieved by inspiration or exacerbated communications. Inspired connections are far pleasanter and so much less time consuming, but humans love to “butt heads”.

imagesofJesusandbuterflyandchi8ldMy Facebook channel is littered with identical sentiment that approximates the proverbial greasy pole or, perhaps, something akin to pushing dung uphill. The same old clapped out culturally chic quotes about 9/11, legal marijuana, “Saint” Tesla’s free energy, anti-chemtrails, toxic vaccines and abolishment of the Federal Reserve go round and round and round like doses of bad breath. They fulfil the pointless, nihilistic ambitions of their apathetic “Prophet Pimp” promoters. These folks are not libertarians in any way other than they feel the world owes each of them, individually, a living. Sovereign greed means everything, to them, should be free entailing no personal sacrifice, naturally. In fact the gall of these people is unconscionable. They don’t expect to give any of their precious “hard earned” wealth or “social status” up. Only those conveniently “appointed” rogue authorities that mostly identify designated evil and “superrich” masterminds of tyranny must suffer silently. Apathetic masses have been leeching off “the system” ever since leeching was invented, supporting it by will and deed. The slither that have supposedly broken free remain as firmly attached to the system as ever. Lip service is all that distinguishes love occultists from normal, everyday “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” folks.

I give it to the love cult philistines “as it is” on Facebook and, well, as I have already stated, masturbators of Doug’s ilk simply irresponsibly disconnect. Is it not logical that masturbators would absolutely insist on personal gratification ahead of anything else? Of course this leaves truth in a pretty desperate, lonely place; how about out languishing on the arctic ice shelf or deep in the bowels of heck – places only fit for the most determined hardened, illuminated adventurers? Truthers claim they are Christians. Has any one of them read Luke’s Prodigal Son parable? Self-gratification encapsulates desire and I have plenty to say on the subject in an earlier article here:

“There is no good or evil. These are brands. There is only desire or its antipathy “un-desire”. Where desire and its antipathy are not present, ambivalence reigns. Ambivalence is a state of not knowing, perhaps ignorance. Law makers count on ambivalence when they express legislation couched in rhetoric personalising fanatical desire. Other views neither have influence nor are accepted, however cogent. Their desire will win at any cost.”

alex_jones_cropJon Rappoport is one of the few tireless journalists that put the issues ahead of ambition and personal gratification. He has even managed his relationship with the questionable, animated Alex Jones admirably. It is only the most refined journalistic license of unfathomable brilliance that could present court Jester and “Clinton cousin” Donald Trump in an almost palatable light. It takes consummate divine craftsmanship to convert a depthless cartoon into profound reality and Jon shows his genius over and over. Though I haven’t been fortunate enough to access any of his technical writings, colleagues that have inform me his earlier works are impeccably inspiring, though the later stuff is comparatively surreal and consequentially less appealing. Channelling of the imagination in an effective way and being true to it is the key to personal sovereignty. Thrashing that message home is our joint mission but we also have different styles/methods, which illuminate different perspectives and approaches to the same ultimate goal.

If I had my way everyone (including you) would be required to undergo the truth test. As I see it, in its best form, this would be an audit of changes to individual core beliefs (i.e. you used to believe the world was a sphere, but it has now somehow become pancake flat in your opinion or vice versa). The audit wouldn’t extend to deliberate or white lies. Did your dad ever roll home from “the shops” on wobbly feet with no shopping smelling of strong mints and you swore on your life that he hadn’t been to the pub so mum wouldn’t explode? No, I am talking about your unshakable beliefs that UFO’s don’t exist, no one can govern better than the Republicans, guns don’t kill people, how “science” is infallible, GM mosquito Zika fever and anything else that is largely backed by emotion in absence of any meaningful and unbiased data. I am talking about “I believe I am a Christian because that is what I was brought up to be”. Lord knows, I’ve criticised dishonest atheists many times. Atheism was the principle topic of this article of mine. The truth is that there is no difference between religious deceit and the void offered by heretics. Religion and atheism covers up the same basic ignorance. Followers have neither been committed to nor wanted to explore the detail in order to validate their beliefs.

QQmqXtQZRichard Dawkins’ beliefs’ validation technique does not explore the detail. In fact it proposes the reverse position: denial and ignorance to truth. For instance, in order to dismiss Islam you first must understand it in absolute depth. Time poor students are not absolved from due diligence. They can’t say, “That’s ok, I’ve got a sick note from mum to say I can’t do it”. So many pretend to talk with authority about things they know nothing about often aided by cute proverbs taken wildly out of context. That is not basis. When vital clues are missing through lack of reference materials, any culminating pictorial assembly can only be a distortion of truth that risks dissolving reality. The summary is superficiality. Is not the truth all atheists believe in God? They reject religious gibberish, but go no further in their lack of spiritual ambition. The same can be said for the branded religious. Neither camp is honest. That is why I can confidently say no one could pass the truth test with full marks. Everyone has some maligned beliefs. But that wasn’t the point. I have already exposed this in several prior articles. It is impossible (given the time we have available) to pay much more than lip service to everything we know, but have you sacrificed any of your “core beliefs” to studious diligence? That is the question being asked here.

Jon Rappoport has published a number of books and contributes regular articles aimed at empowering sovereign individuality. The key to individuality, as he has recognised, is imagination. Positive imagination helps individuals break free from the system for without it there would be no new ideas. In fact, given that prognosis, belief systems are a type of cancer. Blind beliefs or blind faith equates to ignorance. Governments (the group view) turn untruths into truths by distorting facts that capitalise on unchecked blind faith. They then do everything in their power to monopolise proscribed fantasies based on these distortions. Jon and I both know that and that is why we, in different ways, offer such important contributions to the philosophic accord. His love is softer and he’s popular. Mine’s tough as nails, so I mostly attract spiritual masochists or cloaked government trolls seeking debunking strategy ammo (e.g. you must first know the devil to tackle it). Truth, in essence, cannot be manufactured so why do we all stick to our redundant, failed, unfair and unrepresentative beliefs?

7284c6cc0079139894dc619eb72f2b83Personally, I still shy from truths I suppose are “ridiculous”, “couldn’t possibly be so”. Nevertheless, I also constantly review what I know and have the open philosophy that I have no beliefs. It is not just because everything is static. My capacity to understand is limited by experience/information available [to me], perspective and accrued judgement. Yes, we all judge all the time, even those that insist they don’t. “I used to meet with a lovely old man. He was one of the nicest people I know, but then I found out he was a paedophile. Now I hate him.” How could that be? Nothing changed, except you received some unverified (which, in this case, we will pretend was correct) information and judgement either overcame reason or exposed vanity.  Many feel stupid when correcting themselves. Ego plays a big part in harnessing belief systems. Egos are the hinge pins of the modern day love cult. Perhaps I should serve myself up as the sacrificial lamb. My yet to be published book “A New World Order” (in the draft version) announces “Nun refers to primordial, creative waters” (in the literal sense). That version was written at least 18 months ago and has been rightly contradicted in my latest Exopolitician blog post “Serpents and Ladders – Introduction” where I update my position demonstrating I can change my “beliefs”:

Nun is compared to “darkness” and Aki the “light”. Extrapolating further, prehistoric darkness is not our superficial “colour” (or lack of), but, rather, the primordial dark waters of infinity. Some might suppose this adequately supports the fertile ooze notion evolutionists claim was at the root of man’s origins, but not so. The term refers to space which contains a sea of undetectable atomic matter used to create everything; animate and inanimate.”

This article, in correct context, happens to plug my first (and perhaps only) published book “The Beauty of Existence Decoded“. There I stress the insistence on PayPal donations now as I appear to have suffered the Hollywood fate of agent “inadvertently” running off with the proceeds. Naturally, I have had to temporarily withdraw all other purchase options. Let’s hope the blighter spends the embezzled $26.50 wisely. Some may wonder why so few sales have been made. Is it because it was a badly written book? It may well have been a badly written, depending on writing style preferences, but Hitler’s Mein Kampf sells (note the present tense) comparatively well. The reason my book hasn’t sold well is it is too profound. It is a celebration of sovereign individuality and that good will goes against everything love occultists stand for. Simply put, they would prefer to rebuff anything that has a chance at disaffirming those shallow belief systems I discussed earlier than face the truth.

That is why my book has sold poorly. Hitler’s “badly written” Mein Kampf offers mulched populism so it still sells very well. Seasoned trolls supporting the Jewish cause also like to labour the point so they use the work to anchor some of their exaggeration campaigns. Hitler is not renowned for charity, thus it is hardly ironic that his ideals have largely become the basis for the modern corporate “commerce” versions (you scratch my back and I stab yours). In fact all NAZI ideals are now corporate edict in some shape or form. Charitable donations for those “outside the group” defies projected corporate normalcy and the grander obscene mission of the love cult (i.e. they are behind censorship too). Thus, it is only books that are deemed worthy because they largely affirm belief system that are purchased to read. Supporters without reading ambitions might donate for books to charitably show appreciation of personalities or “causes”.

Borg_LoverTherefore people really don’t want to know Tesla’s secrets. They, as “borgs” of the love cult, only pretend to profoundly look up to icons like him in the spirit of ignorance to both preserve vanity and cash in. Remember everyone one of these parasites obsessively blocks all routes to disaffection or, in other words, any information that constructively and comprehensively demystifies the illusion. In Tesla’s case the only superficial interest is capitalising on free stuff, such as energy and absolutely not understanding or comprehending his genius.  That would ruin the mystery. This is a good thing for prosperity because if any more was known about Tesla than is currently circulated; he might be given the Hitler treatment by those doe eyed believers that had their faith “done over”. The same basic crew have been the ones protesting about inaccuracies (sic) of Wikipedia. Yes there are lots of lies circulated by that online encyclopaedic resource but none are placed in the campaign’s spotlight. Love vampires are exclusively besotted with manufacturing their own brand of fiction. When the devil is presented as “God”, truth and all the trappings of sincere knowledge are alien. Integrity, honour and due diligence evaporate as ghosts’ whispers.

Capitalising on free stuff without giving anything up is the only sincere ambition of just about every love occultist than aren’t suckers. The same foul hearted individuals are onto all those government benefits like rashes to save skin. Feeble protests are always anonymous because in every other way they back “the system” to the hilt. Far from rejecting it, as they like to constantly boast, the system can’t extricate them. Free health, police, transport, social security? Yes to all of those? Hate the Federal Reserve, but love the Federal Reserve governed banking system and its worthless money. The love cult mantra is, “we speak double Dutch and do double standards”. Let’s face it; with the exception of the pot heads, close to none of those vain protesters against the medical system would actually take alternative measures if they genuinely thought they had a life disabling illness. They are all talk (gibberish) and no action.

Ok, health and wellness (as the UN likes to call it) is a funny thing. Strange things can happen to minds when the body is threatened and that’s why the mainstream invests in alternatives. They invest in case the poisons offered up by medical institution quacks promoted as doctors become too unpopular. So desperate is the medical cartel to cover its tracks, it attempts to camouflage detrimental medications and statistics. Thimerosal was added to vaccines under the vagary “preservative” because that circumvented the need to identify obviously suspect ingredients. Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) denies meaningful responses to vaccine deaths in an identical way. “Generically neutral” terminologies distort meanings, threat alerts obfuscating truth. Incidentally, all “syndromes” are make-believe as it is the label given to learned responses against data that defies current science status quo (or anything that fails to comply with cultivated synthetic reality).  Anyway, time for a video empowering anyone thinking about undertaking a “medical education”:

Syndromes are fickle attempts at explaining the unexplained. The reason that what should be regarded as preposterous hocus-pocus constantly “catches” imaginative audiences is the vast majority of even supposedly thinking people are insolently sincere about their bullshit backed beliefs. Syndromes are reflective of corrupted knowledge; effects passed off as truths. When I disagree with Jon Rappoport, I go right out and say it. I don’t criticise as if it is in the vein of some grand contest between giant alter-egos. My duty is not to slander of slur. It is to research, collaborate and present similar or differing findings/conclusions.

GFM-MEDIA-ITUNES-1400x1400-FOR-THRIVE-LANDING-PAGE1Another writer I admire goes the whole hog. Brendan D Murphy’s “The Grand Illusion” is the result of a monumental Noam Chomsky style writing project. Upon reading, for the first time I encountered content as dense (or condensed) as my own “The Beauty of Existence Decoded”. Brendan somehow manages to squeeze up to ten pages worth of information into every published sheet which theoretically expands the 500 or so “by normal standards” to an encyclopaedic 5000. His content is 90% “known” whereas the majority of mine is “new”. Given Brendan’s enormously important contribution to comprehending truth about existence, does he sell as many books as Adolph Hitler, for instance? I suggest you ask him for yourselves, but make sure you purchase a copy first.

When thinking people that should know better refuse to discard bullshit backed belief systems, uncompromising ignorant prejudice manifests as a virulent form of cognitive dissonance (usually incurable) to overwhelm faculties that govern reason. As with other theoretical viruses, anyone associated with others that display disease symptoms seriously risk becoming infected as it attacks the human libido. Those particularly susceptible to currying favour, popularity, compromising dishonesty or with poor attention are at highest risk. If you are even slightly popular, the chances are you already have mild symptoms but there might be a cure providing you apply the following measures. Assumes snappy “one line” proverbs or quotes are loaded.  If you can’t find the flaw, catch, deception, seek help. La-la land is not reality. Understand that and you are well on the way to recovery. God doesn’t love you. The universe won’t look out for you, but also if you exclusively and selfishly “look after number one”; I guarantee you’ll come a cropper.

Not realityLa-la land “love” never manifests because the whole “gig” is based on selfish infatuation. When circles of infatuation cross, wars begin. If you like, love, want to help, admire another, it is infatuation and not love.  Only when the reverse is so can you truly demonstrate your loving qualities. You can only show those you dislike, hate, detest and rather were dead your capacity “to love”. Our modern day love cult is nothing more than a destructive trading mechanism that leverages cooperation from vouchsafes. It is everything false, fake, trivial, synthetic and ever so, ever so vain. Everything being used as idealistic points of contention today have been used before and the response to the cries for help launched inept, deceptive, self-serving, reality-destroying, as human as human can be governments. The response “to the people” absolutely mirrored the peoples’ double Dutch and double standards. Never forget it. The masses have always pondered, dithered and eventually formed populist movements which have been shown to be generally unrepresentative of individual sovereignty. That is why distorted truths, all but lies in name, have been the response of representative governments. In place of real communal remedies, lasting solutions, human children seek only the next wish granting fairy godmother to kiss it better. That is why the modern day love cult insists detracting truths are heresy. They are representative of the shambles that is monopolised reality.

The Mindset of Psychosis

openPeople that claim they are “open-minded” simply do not tell the truth. Belief systems are formed in the earliest developmental stages of life and, when set; each rehearsed dogma needs a battle to be disbelieved. Our core beliefs are usually so strong they will remain valid even when believers are convinced otherwise. “Oh, they told me UFO’s were real but I knew that wasn’t true” is your typical reverse validation. Deep down, if the message doesn’t fit it won’t fit no matter what. Therefore, I have one paragraph to capture the imaginations of an audience. You are allowed to reach out and, providing comments are not unnecessarily rude, criticism is welcome. It would be nice to know a few of you actually had the chutzpah “to be”.

MoltingOwlConsidering the sheer weight of information to be found on the net these days, if my message deviates an inch from those beliefs’ comfort zone, I’m gone, finished, put in the trash can, offended readers likely never to revisit. Some, due to narcissism, won’t even refer to “unknown sources” which assures logic assesses references as must be spurious. So, I lost them before I even put pen to paper. Articles with ambiguous or neutral titles are avoided perhaps because time poor people waste not, but as likely, given the mindset of psychosis, readers might also do everything in their power to avoid being confronted with truth. Truth, contrary to erudite populism, is inflexible and consistent. People, in general, do not want their opinions challenged or ruffled in any way, so factual legitimacy all too rarely finds sanctuary in popular theories.

conspiracy-theories-emgn6It was the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) that reputedly first coined the phrase conspiracy theorists in 1967; a slur aimed at faceless critics distributing “evidence lacking” conjecture. Any more than two parties that join forces conspire. All statements are theories. The expression, conspiracy theorists, would be acceptable when used as a witty metaphor camouflaging the derogatory attack on simple minded enemies. Targets are gossipers that peddle myths lacking substance. faceless_man_by_onyxabyss-d5bgkgfThe term conspiracy theory, on the other hand, is ambiguous and nonsensical. Does this reflect statements that coordinate the joint efforts of multiple parties? If conspiracy is a euphemism for gossip, it is a poor one.

Nevertheless, the hybrid term is understood because it validates the mindset of psychosis, i.e. being right always trumps honesty and due diligence. Conspiracy theories, as labelled, can contain high levels of truth. We have already noted people like flexible authenticity and arbitrary verisimilitude. No black and white. Only shades of grey. Per faceless man reasoning, therefore, conspiracy theories should be avoided where possible. Back in the 1960’s I would like to think the majority of activists were sincere, their concerns just and their actions vigilant, whilst honourable. If this is correct, then logic dictates alternatives to official historic accounts were not frivolous. That philosophy doubtlessly has changed, for the internet has a down side. Sheer volume encourages mass production of the worse kind, bad habits and sloppiness. quote-there-is-no-definition-of-a-mental-disorder-it-s-bullshit-i-mean-you-just-can-t-define-jon-rappoport-73-63-02Views that contradict the mainstream can now be more corrupt than wayward accredited sources. We might find a suitable analogy in the espionage industry. Double agents are conceptually similar to “double conspiracy theories”.

Periodically, I reflect on something I call the human condition. Years ago, before I attempted to put thoughts to writing, perhaps forlorn, perhaps devout, I wandered the vast internet as a lonely hermit seeking identity for purpose. This journey look me before Jon Rappoport and, as a subscriber of his instructional blogs, I listen to what he has to say very carefully. We are not always in agreement on issues, but most of the time we are, well, the expression “of one mind” impresses me. Jon has asked me, us subscribers, to watch Sydney Lumet’s film “Network” more than once. Not a movies person, I reluctantly set aside 15 minutes discipline a week and have been gradually been working my way through the 2 hours of footage.

12172015_Network_Peter_FinchThe central character is a disgruntled news broadcaster who first has a meltdown on air and then is picked up and promoted by unscrupulous elements looking to improve corporate ratings, which is an impeccable irony (e.g. the network’s toxic critic is their golden cash calf to salvation). Howard Beale exposes the inadequacies of news broadcasts reduced to fantasies that pander to “highest bidder” stakeholder interests better than our current best conspiracy theorists. Rather underwhelming his thunder, he asks his viewers to “do nothing” but just “get madder than hell”. Though the dialogue sizzles with strategically placed F bombs, a novelty for 1976, the movie cannot avoid overstating the human condition. Indeed Beale’s big soccer punch does nothing more than expose that television does not report, but rather politicises. In fact, he highlights ongoing deficiencies in the population at large by his own lack of remedial direction. The mindset of psychosis is an ocean of problems with no solution in sight. It should be no surprise that buoyant stagnancy is the only feasible response.

Beale made an example of those that read newspapers (we presume serious copy, rather than tabloid smut). A paltry slither of the populations at large was representative, but how many of those really understood and “delved”? We know, today, that newspapers cannot be trusted as well as all are either the mouthpieces of corporate advertisers or governments. researchersEven books (that sell) are invariably written to support given opinions backing corporate or government interests, so to ascertain absolute neutrality (truth) is almost impossible.

I have only worked through an hour and a quarter so there is 45 minutes of movie unseen. There may be surprises to come, but, thus far, nothing has shocked me (though, back in 1976, this sort of overt criticism would have been very unusual and, in my limited scrutiny, I think watered down by any other vague comparisons). In exposing the deficiencies of the system, Beale inadvertently revealed two much greater defects in the populations at large. They (his followers), the script intimates, would not be prepared to revolt (to get mad is a form of protest). Their televisions’ make believe had largely become the basis for reality because of the academic redundancy of the majority. Neither did the people know any facts nor would they contemplate the issues in any meaningful way.

Doubt-is-our-productThis, to the greater degree, correlates with today’s situation. Whereas the perceived total reliability of information offered by “the news” is not what it was, because people have such limited knowledge, the void is mostly populated by doubt. That means, of course, peoples’ familiarity with truth is more or less absent, so doubts simply fester, unchallenged for the most part. People judge “the news” on what sounds believable and not on merit. Of course, that which satisfies social programming (i.e. “education”, government/corporate standards, widely promoted philosophies that justify what it is to be socially acceptable) is delivered by the very same forces that engineer “the news”. So we have a self-perpetuating circle, broken only by geniuses (oracles that see beyond “the bubble”).

are-vaccines-safe_1To a fashion this has encouraged a kind of mass psychosis which morphs as the mindset of populism. Though the mindset changes with political trends, the populist view is always active sanity even when reason or logic individually applied might demote certain views as insane. vacnonesafe1Thus, if the populist tradition is “vaccines are the sane choice”, to go against vaccines would be insanity, if that makes sense. Nevertheless, breakaways from the mainstream have calculated such a sizeable collection of swayable minds; it is noted that alternative dichotomies are strong enough to stand alone and, in that capacity, would usually predetermine that “sanity” is the precise opposite of the mainstreamers’ position. For alternatives, therefore, to back vaccines would be sheer insanity. The mainstream Media, as Jon Rappoport regularly illustrates, are masters at promoting populism. They control left and right, mainstream and alternative and everywhere in between. Only very occasional prophets (or geniuses, if you prefer), mostly misunderstood, remove the veil of hypocrisy.

ivf-oxymoronThe three main aspects of human character that drag group potential down to the gutter are greed, laziness and selfishness. These traits, particularly in the modern age, are the rule rather than the exception. This is partly because the true value of words has been deliberately twisted or obscured by corporate miscreants that direct mainstream Medias. 7972da31017da4e5282d744254cc92bfSpinelessness, pusillanimity and treachery are celebrated as evidence of qualities purveying patriotism, virtue and honour. Devout cowards are regularly called brave. Oxymoron after oxymoron crafts normalcy.  “The machine” wants submissive slaves, whining as they work and just about everyone obeys the system, hook, line and sinker. “The machine” wants sulking protestors. The more the merrier. You good people affirm social apathy. You are not a threat to them and they will destroy you at their leisure.

The "filth"

The “filth”

Those that dare to take on the system never protest. They act wisely, cunningly and discretely, conjuring and deploying the most plausibly destructive, clandestine strategies against their foes. The “masses” great and only advantage is being “faceless”, so anonymity is strength. Corporate order knows this well and that is why their hired trouble makers are always in plain clothes when all-too-rarely in focus. In fact the powers have manufactured invisibility in industrial quantities. How many unknown government agencies or outsourced third parties have contributed to the all-encompassing globalist agenda of Zionism? Thinking laterally, are those [Skype and] e-mail scammers (banking shams, cheap medications and other rip-offs) the coordinated product of a consolidated “op” dedicated to manufacturing “mistrust of strangers”?  If so, that would satisfy the wider interests of Zionism which has three fundamental wishes.

norway_1212016_1Family members must be held perpetually accountable. Public opinion is designed to gravitate around mainstream views calculated by the architects of our governance systems. Parents are both exalted and threatened. Pro-system whistle blowers, snitches, eves droppers are encouraged. Per this tyranny, children are commodities with no rights or personalities. As arbitrary tokens of justice, sensationalising the removal of children from bad broods is used to keep borderline recalcitrant families in line. For their part, families must systemise children. Parental, administrative (schools and so forth) oversight is crucial to the Zionist objective. tsa_cartoon_tina_nortonThere are no exceptions to diktat. There is no way out. Government is to be respected, feared or both and, as such, is answerable only to itself.

Mischievously deceptive hyperbole dressed as paedophilia, terrorism and intoxication has been used to paint “the stranger” into a corner. Bad parts of families that aren’t bad broods are rejects or black sheep. Estranged family members may as well be strangers. This all came about because “stranger” is used as a code word in the bible. The Hebrew word it replaces is “Goyim” (which really means “national” or “person of a nation”). Thus, fundamental populist ignorance must be the mindset of modern psychosis, because just about everyone follows the script like lambs to the slaughter.

childs_play_3_poster_02The process does not stop with family programming. Systems (currently ad hoc Zionism, but that chic could rebrand) thrive on absolute control. khronosThey (the system architects) are attempting to regulate God. Ultimately God, the spiritual entity, cannot exist, because if He existed it would permit free thought and free thought does not work in programmed societies. Therefore the de facto science-atheist alliance (conspiracy?) that presumes authority is at constant loggerheads with nature. If nature is the cooperative essence of God, then regulation and proscribed order can only promote “chaos”. True anarchy (prescient order), proto-Zionism, has etched the mindset of psychosis which is man, the automaton. Zionists do at least live up to their name, for the Pharisees were the original usurpers of order.  “Jesus”, it seems, died in vain.

Christmas Cash

santa-cash_32021I would like to open my Christmas 2015 edition with a quote from my last entry. It is so important and relevant to the meaning of Christmas (recognition of essential Jesus); it deserves to be highlighted above all other anecdotes and proverbs issued by the idol. Attributed to Krishna, the message is so magnificent, it shames logic.

“Spiritual qualities bring to freedom, whereas demonic ones paralyse”

christmas-decorations-03Perhaps freedom is not the best word for our age. Even liberty is no longer deliverance. These terms have been closed down, boarded up and locked off by the “powers”. To which end, those that attribute their lives to mainstream freedoms are nothing more than broken slaves and the willing fodder of corruption. Today I would be more inclined to say, “Spiritual qualities prompt unconditional creativity, whereas demonic ones ensure the individual conforms to political domination.” Of course, there are numerous other versions of this that might equally add to summarising the modern mindset. “Swear words” determine there will never be free speech, for you cannot have open dialogue when certain words are unmentionable. The intelligent researcher would do well to ask the question as to whether these words were created as a deliberate ploy to limit speech; more importantly free speech. Today we all know the worst two are the “F” and “C” words, though I do note the Thais find “animal” and the wrong type of their numerous pronouns meaning “you” as an address particularly offensive, for instance.

christmas-tree-wallpapers-christmas-backgrounds-30233Last post I mentioned, by chance, I have been cohabiting with Iranians. Their word, koskesh, appeared in my first entry for 2015. A commenter against that article speculated that this “swear word” meant something like excrement, but he was wrong. In fact koskesh has no greater or lesser meaning or impact than our own “C” word (unless shared amongst friends, when it equates to something like “silly”). By “C”, I don’t mean Mrs “C”. Well, on reflection, perhaps I do. Thank goodness for “the Donald”. It takes a double “C” (corporate cowboy?) to tackle a “C”. Words never cease to amaze me. We have soft mother and hard mutha. There are many other homonyms. hard muthasElsewhere in this blog readers can discover the German NAZI inspired homophone, muselmann, which means both muscle wasting disease (or concentration camp walking death) and Muslim. Also, my Farsi housemates would not consider “converting” to Buddhism as they would be “smelly ones” in their native tongue.

How predictable these elites are to those merely prepared to research and discover the truth about them. Evidence is hardly buried deep. It is though they are proud of the misery they have caused. Once more thinking of Krishna’s illuminating quote, it is possible to define good and evil simply by using “F” and “C” words. This is important as, contrary to vibrant insistences dawning from the waking “truther” world, the vast majority are so committed to the system they should be all classed as insane. True definition of good and evil goes a long way to determining why this is so. For my first example of “F & C”, evil is simply Control encouraging brute Force. Restricting cash may be a control feature, thus, the other side of the “F & C” coin, good is unlimited, unrestricted Cash enabling absolute Faith.

Traditional-Christmas-Decorations-4We all know faith, over the ages, has been demeaned into a version of Control by powers of evil. The modern version has morphed into something akin to blind ignorance – devoid of spirituality. Absolute faith can only be attainted through complete knowledge and understanding (i.e. enlightenment). As all humans swear by different versions of ignorance and unknowingness (the Gnostics quaintly termed forgetfulness) we are all evil. By that token, unless they were not human; Mohamed, Moses, Jesus, the Buddha and all the other religious icons were also evil. Krishna may not have been human, but, after reviewing their legacy, I am convinced all the others undoubtedly were. That is why all religions are nothing more than dogmatic control doctrines. Nevertheless elements of true faith can be also found, sometimes hidden, sometimes out in plain sight, in all hallowed texts as well. None should be overlooked.

Traditions are often borrowed with conformity overlaid to suit everyday culture (of the day). Mohamed didn’t produce anything new. He merely rehashed Judaism. Judaism, in turn, fused Buddhism and Zoroastrianism (now Hinduism) to create “universalism” and that is why the Jews were called the “chosen people”. Yes, and we can all see how the powers have corrupted that meaning into what has become rabid nationalistic Zionism. The ink was barely dry on parchment; tablets still baked in the sun when “Order” muscled in on faith, turned it inside out and made it unrecognisable. If the poles between dark and light could be expressed in two simple words, it would be cooperation versus conflict. Cooperation is utopian diplomacy and conflict is war. 589895_638_365Somewhere in the middle is compromise. Compromise, via negotiation, is the agent of evil with the potential for goodness. Laws began with religions and every single zealous crusade, whether purporting a light or dark mission, is a war. All crusaders embrace Lucifer in deed.

Last Christmas I became “homeless” for a short while. Other than donations from two fellow bloggers, my pleas for assistance fell on dead ears. Christmas spirit had been befouled by Yahweh. New Year 2015 heralded the launch of my book, “The Beauty of Existence Decoded”. A follower of the great Jon Rappoport donated for a copy and, of the numerous claims of interest, no others cared to offer any support nor showed any belief in the virtual document. This Christmas I don’t want you to donate, purchase or buy the bloody book. You are all glued to the illusion scoped by them (the corrupters), whether you profess to be a truther (another proto religion) or other, and do not deserve exposure to the truth. The truth would trouble you, affect you and force you to think. Ultimately it would make you realise you were fundamentally wrong. Any expressions of interest will be dealt with swiftly and expediently. The only feasible mantra for Philistine usurpers is “F off”. Do well to remember it.

ChristmasTreeAn alternative title for this entry might have been “Christmas Cash and Commerce” and before I present some flesh for those bones, I would like to touch on the spirit of Christmas. Oddly, the essence of Jesus never existed as that identity was modelled on a number of characters per Roman tradition. The theoretical King of the Jews and “Christ” (by Pharisaic) determination is arguably Josephus (Latin anagram “to bear/present Jesus”). Lateral alternatives categorising true faith have always been Sufism (pantheism; faith in the wonder of nature) versus demystification (reasoned logic that has become science-atheism in the modern age). christmas-decorationsAt the time of Josephus, conflict between Mosaic Laws dictating faith and Gnostic philosophy as to the rules of harmony (fundamental essence of nature) reached a head at the Siege of Jerusalem (66-69 AD). Losing Gnostics rebranded themselves as “Christians” and that is why the persecution of believers began immediately. Other than Nero (persecutor of Jews and not Christians), Caligula and Caesar himself, just about all Roman Caesars were allies of the Pharisaic elite (friends of Zion). The great irony is “Gnostic” Josephus/Jesus also worked for the Pharisaic elite (Jesus/Barabbas offered to the crowd is a thinly veiled metaphor emphasised by his final moments on the cross (sic) where he “questions” his own divinity). Redemption became his administration of gnostic Christianity.

vitamins-d-sun-worshipLet us never forget Christmas was the old Pagan winter solstice; celebrated by sun worshipers. Of those, the Roman brand is labelled Sol Invictus (Sun unconquered; and that is why Pharaoh Akhenaton abolished Amon-Re. His reward was eternal disappearance. That’s how “deep” this goes). The very mission of the cult (worship, from the stem “growth”) was tyranny, for the sun had been offered as the ultimate conquest (pre-empting conflict or EVIL). Modern day Christmas is reflective of the British high Victorian Christian renaissance that led to a review of morality (inspiring many modern crusades, it must be said). Prior the Druidic (Pagan) harvest festival (very similar to the Vedic-Aryan one) had remained pretty much unchanged over the ages. That religion can only be pieced together by spurious references, so it is clear some Order went to a great deal of trouble to abolish the knowledge. Speculating, I am compelled to consider the Vedic-Aryan Book of Veles might be the closest approximation of Druidic wisdom. There are many valid theories proposing the Irish/Anglo Celts were in fact Jews that had settled after an exodus there between 500-600BC. Though of the same basic stock, these people did not have any direct relationship to the later Saxon (predominantly Teutonic tribes) invaders. I touch on the strange importance of the “Viking” Tribe of Dan here.

The-Maine-PennyThe links with Joseph of Arimathea, Josephus, Cornwall, the Druids and the English mystery schools should never be understated. Britain, at the time of Roman conquest, was the only place to secure a real education. It was only when the famous mystery schools began to close down that the Roman machine realised they had lost their conquest of Britain and made a rapid exit. Ok, for clarity, there were plenty of other reasons, but that was the clincher. Though the Romans had also failed at introducing money to the Celts, the ruling classes, the Chieftains, already had money. Gold, silver and billon staters were in circulation decades before Romans maliciously set foot on British soil. Recorded in the Vedas, Vedic-Aryans had been using “cuts of silver” as currency for as long as memory persisted. It is presumed the reason Biblical gold shekels have never turned up is [Hebrew] shaqal (weight) referred to a measure rather than a coin. Christmas_ornaments_676592Nonetheless, there is the enigma of the 200,000 year old “Pittsburgh penny” (I cannot find any references to the spurious talisman, but did turn up these links – on from Tellinger’s stone circles and the bridge to Atlantis which is not as old as they think).

That aside, fundamentalist visitors are probably still reeling from my denial of the Cosmic Christ energy. Perhaps they missed my “befouled by Yahweh” remark. I touched on Nis (well, I mentioned the Hebrew Easter, Nisan) or the Copper Serpent last post, presenting a depiction of Moses’ famous rod. Thinking “unorthodox” Christians occasionally devote their belief in Easter as the more plausible reference point for the “Birth of Jesus”. Although, I too am a Capricorn, so Christmas does make more “Character” sense as a birthdate. This Ozzie Thinker post was devoted to Ishtar and the birth of Horus (Adonis) symbolism. Fantasy__038997_In addition, my other blog scoped a long article about, amongst other things, Zamolxis. That mythical Hyperborean king shapes the cultural identity of tradition’s dark, scythe brandishing, Death. In his Legends of the Phoenix, Alexey Trekhlebov offers impressive and hard to rebut detail supporting the notion that Yahweh and Jehovah represent death (in different ways). He refers to the etymology of an ancient Slavic past revealing a number of stems that adequately substantiate his opinions.

One such reference is a most ancient enigmatic text that heralds from Crete (Hyperborea?) and says, “Ne do sebe I chaso dla ye teni zhiyve” translating as “Don’t bother giving an hour of your life in devotion to God (i.e. Yahweh-Jehovah)”. Trekhlebov is rightly fixated on Sabaoth (from the Hebrew tsaba or tsava which means “armies” or “physical forces” but can be used as “occupy”, “possess”, etc.) and this signifies the physical, perhaps material even, presence of “God”. He appealingly speculates the Hebrew tradition of “maranta” (God joining his human servants on Earth after preparation by the final Messiah) is a celebration of death. Comparably, Slavic-Aryan spiritual ascension or blessing at death is represented by the word “marana” (there are many other words that signify death sharing the mar/mor stem. In Slavic: marazm, marat, moroz, morg, and English: morgue, morbid). A surviving pre 9th century Vedic anecdote with ambiguous origins reads “Jehovah-Sabaoth-Adonay ehay eya laitsya u toy tartaroy skotin” and means “Let that dirty animal and malicious one, Jehovah-Sabaoth-Adonay lie in hell”. This is important because Jehovah-Yahweh-Sabaoth-Adonay is looking down on every Christian through the legacy of Egyptian scribe-prince Moses/Baruch. “He” is looking down on every Muslim too.

Assortment of fruits and vegetables

In actual fact, historical opinion of a number of sources favours the concept that Yahweh-Jehovah was originally only worshipped by the tribe of Judea prior to Judaism being formalised. Trekhlebov compelling argues the reason the tetragram, YHWH, was never spoken by priests prior to the “pointing” (vowel sounds added) of the Hebrew alphabet, is it represented death. Principally this is correct, however there were supplementary reasons. One of which is that the Hebrew peoples were never given the true name of God and, besides, even if they had it, it is unpronounceable by the human tongue. The notable Thracian God, Baba Yaga has many variations, including Yama, Yahve, Yahu, Yaho and so on (note the Yah stem of Yahweh which is very similar in pronunciation to Yahve). As with Zamolxis (the embodiment of), they all mean death.

Christmas-Decorations-Images-07Returning to the idea of Sabaoth being the physical representation of Yahweh-Jehovah-Adonay, perhaps Zoroastrian wisdom now begins to make sense. According to that philosophy metaphysical forces of good or evil created energy fields of influence that would infect host armies in one direction or another (i.e. for “dark” or for “light”). Therefore, I originally concluded that Yahweh-Jehovah-Adonay is evidence for the so-called “Annunaki” who, at the time, could adopt human “blanks” for their supplementary purposes (whether dark or light) and that is why (I presumed) the Prophet Zoroaster issued the warning. 2014-12-christmas-decorations-london-uk-05Theoretically, after the Draco sealed off the Earth from cosmic influences we were safe (from this theorised dominance), except Zoroaster was born long after the Annunaki exited. Therefore, supplementary conclusions dictate it is fair to say that the Draco have adopted the Annunaki techniques and use them for their own influence over all human beings. Zechariah Sitchin presented the Annunaki as plundering humanoids (different gene set to humans). He was only partially correct and, in many ways, could not have been more wrong.

The humanoids were spiritual surrogates, as I point out in my last exo-politician post. But, more importantly, they reneged on the deal with the Annunaki and this, in part, led to the enormous rift between the masters and their “face of God” progeny. Complimenting this line of consideration, Mary Rodwell exposes accounts (via regressive hypnosis) of living spaceships. Christmas-Snow-Tree-Lights-House-WallpapersThat alien technology appears to have been designed to allow the experiencer to add the spaceship component to his or her body, as a vital living extension not separate but part of the whole. This is best example I can find that likens to the more natural techniques the Annunaki use. In other articles I have revealed some of their direct manifestations that prompt awe, terror and perhaps a measure of fascination combined. These unique creations go by the group name Ba’al. Ciakar “reptilians” (a branch of the Draco hierarchy) reputedly conducted blood curdling ceremonies involving adolescent human males, each coerced into some kind of sexual sacrifice, usually resulting in death. The chant of the real name of God combined with pungent sexual energy was apparently too much for Ba’al to resist. It is the same basic Ciakar crew that David Icke and others postulate infect the administrators of humanity via the Illuminati New World Order and masonic religions.

outdoor_christmas_decoration_Gnosticism presents things (whilst perennially aware of other versions) in a very different light. I am that impressed with much of the philosophic insight delivered by examples such as from the Nag Hammadi scrolls; I provided references in my book, “The Beauty of Existence Decoded”. In the same volume, I deal with the flawless Satan Star, foundations of existence and the ultimate, inevitable collapse (something our sciences erroneously call “black holes”). Gnosticism also includes some subtle bogeys, largely due to a lack of compassion, insight or belief that superiority could fail or err. The author of the Apocryphon of John (we cannot be sure “John” is a real entity) unfairly judges Sophia for making a miscalculation, though perhaps fairly apprehends her arrogance. She, the female aspect of God, stands for wisdom (ironically). Everything stemmed from her discovery tour, while the masculine aspect slumbered. The creative passion could only manifest conceptual thought (in the beginning was word, logic…) – Epinoia.

Per Sophia’s reference, everything is a concept; a construct. Reflection via internal thought processes (enthymesis) reconstructed a blueprint for existence (prognosis) from the concept. According to “John”, the “spirit” became the indelible guide. Yet, as a guide, it referenced the will of both masculine and feminine aspect and the blueprint was rejected outright. Because it was her vision, she ignored the controls and brought existence into being without permission or approval of the whole (masculine and feminine). christmas-decorations-santa-christmas-postsRejecting the spirit and bypassing the masculine was not entirely ineffective and she demonstrated unconquerable power. The miscalculations saw problems manifest with the creation of her son, the first being of “form”, Yaldabaoth (Satan?). He was the epitome of Sophia and took both the power (dynamis) and thoughtlessness (aponoia) from his mother. Because he was the ruling authority (exousia) of existence, the incorruptible higher realms were manifested as corruption. According to “John”, the fifth realm as manifest was called “Adonaiu” (or Sabaoth) and it had the face of a dragon (Ba’al). The human line via our reptilian heritage looks something like hu-man > Ciakar/Pteroid/humanoid > dragon/ultra being > Ba’al/supreme being > Annunaki/God in unimaginable manifest form.

quote-great-actions-are-not-always-true-sons-of-great-and-mighty-resolutions-samuel-butler-poet-382162

Though it is a generalisation as the truth is far more complex, Yahweh-Jehovah-Sabaoth is, in part, Ba’al. Some Biblical texts expose how evil has been rebranded as good (if read in the right way) and others go to great lengths to confuse, obscure and obfuscate inconvenient truths. Yet, have people woken up? No, the arrogance of dogmatic doctrine has infected any “cause”; no matter what. Everyone, lowly or great, insists their way is right. New Year’s resolutions were abolished long ago. How could you mini-gods improve? Do you not understand it is your, the individual’s, refusal to absolve that is creating all evil by fostering hatred? Homosexuals are very well looked after today, providing they are not underage. Prior, did their pleas of true love meet an appreciative audience at the law courts? No, because love is forbidden by arbitrary laws which implement standards that are (or will become) the basis for all conflict. Therefore, money is not the root of all evil; it is the Law. Just as “John” blames Sophia for the legacy of error, so you all eternally blame your detractors. Laws find harmony and support in your hatred of “the other”.

cocaine christmas

Occasionally I refer to my research of human behaviours at webcam sites. Worryingly, in certainly places, modern day renaissance of homosexuality (a Greco-Roman tradition) has become so entrenched cam-boys perhaps seem more popular than cam-girls. The dynamics are always very simple. Santa is SatanIgnoring some of the unconscionable (and hard to believe) menu items offered by, notably, the Latin sector (perhaps inspired by coca-de-Colombia?), communications are invariably the same. Performers are always desperate to become rich beyond their wildest dreams, whilst viewers predictably want something for nothing. In other words, performers want to get something by giving nothing and viewers want to take something for nothing in return. You see, that is why cash reigns, because without it, there would be instant and absolute paralysis. Only when performers give for nothing and receivers take for something will cash loose its power.

I could have devoted this article to exploring to what extent dreadful commerce has perverted what should be a harvest festival of truth and celebration of the abundance of creation by the grace of God, but, of course, there are always so many priorities I could produce several encyclopaedias simply to scratch the surface. I will say this, though. TofuturkeyEveryone picks on Santa and that unfortunate “Satan” anagram. Claus, incidentally, is an anagram of “calus” (callus) – the thorny exterior. For you Satanists; Satan was as pure as any other light source that became corrupted by the indifference of Sophia, so don’t talk to me about your mindless philosophies that espouse bottomless meaninglessness. eliminar-cucarachasRemember, don’t you dare buy my book, “The Beauty of Existence Decoded”. The truth would be too much for your narcissism.

Putting Satanism to one side and reaching out to all you other cultists (that’s right all religions are cults), putting things in perspective, Christians (in particular) how many insects have you killed this Christmas, for daring to exist? At least some of you eat the turkey, I guess. Do you see how vile, self-serving and unappreciative the majority of you are and you mostly have the gall to call yourselves spiritual, believers (in God), dare I say it, good? But, I suppose, you are not committed to a universal holocaust unless you celebrate maranta. Yes, that is what it means and a few of your foul, demented leaders have decided the only way God can join his human servants on Earth is through a ritual purging by fire; Earth plane suicide for all to enable the few. They call this Armageddon and that is their interpretation of the phoenix (Ba’al is Yahweh-Jehovah-Sabaoth in dragon form) rising from the ashes. I can inform these pheasant brained individuals the “few” are not them and their grand sacrifice will become their eternal tombs as purgatory.

phoenix_risingIt is good to give to charity over Christmas? Particularly to the homeless, if you can find one that is not a Christian “soldier” or a scammer (same thing?). In fact there are very few “homeless” people. Many are subject to the most unsatisfactory, perhaps dire, circumstances though. And that is largely thanks to all of you; the group that “to death” support the system to the hilt. Charity, I have said before, is a con unless there is no government. A Prince of Wales charity was outside my local supermarket the other day (commerce attracts commerce – fitting). The cause generalised about saving various body parts and other stuff and all they needed was “so much” for “human salvation”. Yet, what is money? Is it not an artificial standard, like laws, punitively arbitrating value? If humans were committed to giving objectives would never conflict with needs, wants or anything virtuous for that would be inhumane. The “justice” system does nothing more than precipitating standards for commerce and these represent arrogance, cruelty and betrayal of humanity. Indeed, far from improving people’s lives, commerce is destined to suck the lifeblood from everything. Who were the winners from the “Grand Financial Crisis”? Did the money simply vanish?

SARS insecticidesTaking health as the shining example of commerce, quotas assure only a limited number of individuals can be “sick” for any given period. When the quota is exceeded, who is going to pay for it? Remember all money is based on a fictitious, arbitrary standard that was supposedly agreed on by “reasonable man” (theoretically the measure for justice) to determine value. So, in order to protect this standard, governments see sick or dying people are unattended (check those hospital waiting lists) as the priority over their health and wellbeing. Indeed, so much government money has been devoted to instruments of death and destruction (wars and so on), there is virtually nothing left (according to their superficial punitive standards) for sick health. Let’s face it, it’s a double whammy. One of the biggest attributions to cancers caused in Iraq before Bush’s “war on terror” was by the plutonium in Clinton’s weapons of mass destruction. The few trillion shekels left in government coffers are distributed to the industrialist pollutin’, tootin’ poisoners. Numerous viruses (such as Ebola) caused by industrial toxins are their legacy. wp-ROC-OurTownsBlog-7329-7bc77d10Merry Christmas guys! These monsters don’t care. How they attain maranta is irrelevant. The end always justifies the means as far as they are concerned.

I agree with Jon Rappoport. They don’t have vials of “deadly diseases” to infect the water ways. Bio war is limited to chemicals and most of them are household names. A bit of crude in your water supply surely won’t harm you? I can assure you they can find scientists to prove ice is created by fire if that suits the agenda. On the other hand, I see the limp wristed protesters “vigilantly” speaking out against thimerosal (mercury and other nasties) in vaccines. Where’s the action, puppets? You have mostly done nothing to disaffect the system. In order to remedy the fake deficit created by their insistence on a flawed standard that could never meet the needs of the wider populations, they allowed pariah bankers to create insurance initiatives which sucked yet more out of the existing impoverished health system. So, along came bonnie prince Charlie to my local supermarket, cap outstretched, after handouts for heath. I say “F you” and “F off” “C”.

christmas-presents-453onv52Instead of an unconditional outpouring in celebration of the gift of existence, we have strategic party invites and colourfully wrapped bribes with strings attached. For that I don’t blame Satan or Santa or the Jews or the Federal Reserve or anything else that deflects your ineptitude. The reason your children are faithless, greedy parasites that value only cash and what cash brings is through fault of upbringing. Denial of sex except as a parental power of “God status” has made sure there will be endless supplies of cam girls, cam boys and other prostitutes of worth lining up from “age 18” in places where decent fake ID’s aren’t available. satan_claus_small1Are not all sexual relationships forms of prostitution, which arbitrarily and vindictively shut out the other on the selfish grounds of privilege; privilege that reviles the other? Has not the collapse of society been caused by the castigation of free will of the other as vilified by privilege of self? How can anyone be special without first the intent for specialness? How can anything be known before it is experienced? Marriages (each, ideally, the model of cooperation and optimum standard for all relationships), as with Christmas, are founded on infatuations concocting synthetic paradise islands. That is why when all the gifts are revealed the bubbles bursts and the spirit dies.

Having said all that; tomorrow is another day and what happened before doesn’t matter providing there is resolution, so Merry Christmas, as long as your cash is worthy and that sets the standard.