After Contemplating the Evidence; was Jeffrey Epstein Guilty?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Callous Abuses of the Word Abuse

callousNo one should honestly embrace this topic “in sincerity” without first addressing the greatest abuse of all current abuses: “paedophilia”. Perhaps it’s the circles I frequent, but I cannot fathom why more people don’t “get it”. Are you all so consumed with passion you cannot distinguish reliable information from the vagaries of conjecture? Jon Rappoport’s work on the disintegration of problem solving logic very much impinges on modern social conditioning, in my opinion.  Therefore, I plan to separately tackle the child designate sex issue head on, in isolation and as thoroughly as I am able. Be assured detail will be exquisite. A future release has already been part-scripted in essay form and aptly provisionally titled, “The Powers’ Proud Accolade: Brand Pedo”.

bushbillboard2Few today (of correct age) would have the presence of mind to remember that the transition from homophobia to pedophobia began in the 1970’s, perhaps inspired by the sexual revolution a decade prior.  The “powers” were quick to action a remedy against that dissent (which included droves of AWOL’s from Vietnam), and how to impose sexual sobriety was one of the foundation stones laid in 1971-75 plans aimed at stemming aggressive independent cultures (cults) non-compliance with aggregate society. Multiculturalism synthetically imposing “common goals” was sure to vanquish any notion of social independence. It was no coincidence that Britain had set the precedent for total censorship of pictorial sexual literature after a number of successful prosecution outcomes against publisher David Gold in 1972. Under his new business partner, the desperately corrupt David Sullivan, their new marketing policy saw grossly misleading advertising fortuitously erupt into an explosion of sales of legal censored or “soft core” topical picture books and films. Arguably “smut’s” new found popularity had arisen as a symptom of burgeoning bohemian attitudes reacting against prohibition. For instance, the same thing happened after Mary Whitehouse successfully targeted schlock horror “B movies” in the 1980’s.

Behind the scenes (though nothing explicit was produced by Gold or Sullivan after the court losses) extremist sentiment against “hard core” pornography in general saw a misdirection campaign that strategically positioned child porn as the undeniable progressive pinnacle of perverse licentiousness.  Circular logic fused “thin end of the wedge” and “guilt by association” opinion to fan misguided and erroneous belief that all things illicit are “related” and virulently spread like cancers. Predictably absolute “resolution” determined anything pornographic must be forbidden to “cure” harmonious society. Conversely, attitudes were relaxing against salacious (one time pornographic) literatures, after a case against Penguin Books over publication of D H Lawrence’s “Lady Chatterley’s Lover” was overturned by the British courts in the 1960’s.

ff-bild-1A pithy American current affair propaganda piece titled “The Children of God” (or something similar) made in 1971 (there have been several subsequent “documentaries” based on similar themes) ridiculed a network of community groups that called themselves The Family International (established in California by David Berg in 1968). According to the original documentary, ethics of the institution placed no age restrictions on sexual interaction between incestuous community members (a policy that radically changed in 1985). Production of pornographic literatures (examples offered were classed as child porn) was encouraged and sales were used to raise funds for the group. Unsurprisingly, film makers were only concerned with exposing perceived negatives and, beyond that, nothing was learned about the mission and ethos of The Family International. My personal research showed a number of cult members were pushed into suicide after trying to reintegrate into “closed minded” wider society before and after Berg’s (whose written legacy by no means identifies with vicious hysteria post documentary) death in 1994.

Homosexuality ran a different, though in some ways parallel, course, marked by virulent crusades against suspected public figures and all promotional publications. Throughout the 1970’s I would argue that it was viewed as a far greater social evil than paedophilia. Rather interestingly society’s whims so often seem adrift of reality. In more tolerant times, a relatively well publicised survey suggested roughly one in three males were clinical paedophiles. Other censuses have calculated one in five males showing bisexual tendencies. Personally I am inclined to take “statistics” with a big pinch of salt and that’s why I haven’t cited specific references. Even so, I am rather compelled to believe that the percentage of potential agitators for or against specific causes might disproportionately swell if people were a little more honest about themselves.

center_homepage_2Attitudes didn’t relax against gay communities until well into the 1980’s. By the 1990’s AIDS (or gay plague) fear, mostly a misdirection campaign or scam, had reached fever pitch and this, I feel, was the cause of softened social attitudes towards the “plight of homosexual men” (in particular). However, in my opinion, had Bill Clinton (an alleged paedophile, by the way) not made it as President of the United States of America, the “changeover” (from homo to pedophobia) likely would not have happened. He began gay favourable rhetoric which laterally blossomed through corrupt [mainstream] Medias. His appointment of Janet Reno as head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) mandated radical development of a “Child porn entrapment market” as number one priority.

448_1ice_cream_teenagers_composite_stv_rgbFrom around 1995 malignant advertising campaigns specifically targeted borderline adults as never before and these were accompanied by numerous arrests of teenagers and similar aged adults (i.e. 18-21) that had allegedly engaged in sexual acts. Those trading explicit visual materials depicting “teenagers” also came under scrutiny in a much bigger way than before.  Many arrests on the back of ignorantly innocent distribution networks included sensational pieces of “evidence”, such as a hard core stag film featuring an alleged fifteen year old Rob Lowe as “pizza boy”. Reno (who has been promoted as a “lover” of Mrs Clinton, also an alleged paedophile), incidentally, was the one that ordered the murder of innocent American citizens under the auspices of the 1993 FBI attack on the Dravidian (cult) community located at Waco Texas.

fathersdayplacards_page_4As mentioned earlier, I shall discuss the origins of the concept (and that’s all it is) paedophilia (which literally means to have an intellectual compatibility or love of children) in much more detail in the future. It will also give readers the opportunity to explore and evaluate some of the (inquisition style) tricks used to calculate confessions from targeted individuals or groups, manufacture the presumption of guilt “as charged” and regularly encourage bearers of false witness to commit perjury (in court). But, for now, I will only deal with that which is contextually related to the word “abuse”, which, I must say, in the context of paedophilia, is so vastly widespread, it may well serve evidence to justify multitudes of reports. The arbitrary nature of an inflexible (paralysis) and baseless (no scientific case) age of adulthood (currently set at eighteen, until the next foul referendum) should raise a cacophony of “destruction of liberty” alarm bells. I am fondly reminded of Krishna’s timelessly wise instruction, “The forces of evil paralyse”.

americanfascismPerhaps anyone else would have said “sovereign choice” in place of liberty. However, sovereign individuality potentially conflicts with social liberty and the distorters of “abuse” know that all too well. Mankind is heading towards totalitarianism, the only utopian federal alternative to communion, at a rapid rate. There are two fundamental branches of the slave/master paradigm. One is labelled Fascism. This version of order is built on the premise that the fabric of commerce is strong enough to regulate social charters. Evidence might appear in the form of something like, shall we say, corporate responsibility whereby employee-slaves are both bound by “the law” and their company manifesto. Under Fascist totalitarianism, companies seeking new employees (of all rank) would rate assessment of authority documentation (official identification, police check, bankruptcy report and so on) as the most important stage of the internment process. Penal facilities would be outsourced and run by privateers. Marxism, the alternative totalitarian system, is very similar, except the social charter is administered by government and, consequentially, core business might be nationalised to compliment that seamless authority.

Sovereign individuals disrupt utopian society (per the Fascist/Marxist models). Societies are governed by standards and these might conceivably be eroded by abusers. Therefore, logically, abuse of the word abuse relies on the distortion of truth, which allows the marginalisation of social values geared to reducing sovereign choice in favour of social conditioning (i.e. only “choice” to conform and not to rebel). Society masters impose order on members by the same methods parents use to oppress children. In today’s society children are broken into conformation (to conform is the only “choice”) for what can become lifelong family feuds that are amply exploited by “authorities”. The regime treats its members with common impunity. Children are conditioned into responding to but not respecting family boundaries. So too society’s parts are tolerant but not understanding of individual prisoner status. Freedom is limited to “they tell me this is allowed”. Abuse has been distorted to vilify the authority against “that which isn’t allowed”. True violation is certainly secondary (a sort of bi-product) and mostly irrelevant beyond ramping up any case in favour of abuse stipulations.

screen-shot-2013-02-12-at-9-40-21-amThe flawed logic of this philosophy doesn’t end there. If abuse is a symptom of that which defies freedom, our vile powers may as well argue they protect those locked up in prisons from the world at large. Under that premise, they would do detainees a great service. The whole foundation of abuse as a concept has been twisted to satisfy the crime (as it were) in this way. Expanding on my incarceration metaphor, it might be argued that though people may well be taken against their will, social disinfection actually serves the dual purpose of ensuring captive would-be criminals are locked into cramped cells “each for their own good”. The “powers” claim, therefore, incarceration is not “abuse”. Whereas currently, for my research, the justice system hasn’t made humanitarian assertions of this nature, it’s only a matter of time before it happens.

In the same manner sexually orientated child designates are persecuted under the guise of “protection”, the rules governing society transcend individual reasoning. The bi-product is an insanity which permits free thinking individuals can be stripped of all tenable rights and abused in spirit but not “under law”. Wayward laws were never in place to protect society, but rather to purge incongruous elements; those that choose to be different, set apart from the masses. A corresponding history of the delineation of order can be charted from the very cradle of civilisation. For the peoples of ancient Atlantis, administrative powers determined wrong doers should be scooped up and separated from the masses in order to purify society. Consequentially, prisoners (that were not routinely executed) were banished from their impenetrable towering citadel home.

20554984After the collapse of Atlantis, roaming derelict tribes (prisoner outcasts) gradually re-civilised and this encouraged the consolidation of penal codes configured to administer secure wholesale capture and disposal of enemies. Today’s confinement model was the natural evolution of those haphazard reactionary origins. That is largely why the modern day “justice system” is terminally flawed. It was built on a framework geared to exclusively serving the “in-group”. Incidentally, our price busting “captive labour” prison system fits the Fascist corporate ordained order model like a glove. If those detained were classed as “privileged” (rescued) by the system, what would inhibit it from billing them full board over incarceration periods? In the future could everyone be forced into bonded labour to “cover penal charges”?

Governments, whether supporting Marxist or Fascist policy objectives, are exclusively in power to construct the framework or refinement of “order”. Manifestos are only delivered by governments and not created by them. Even so, given those ever teetering cyclic oscillations that divine the “power sharing” poled between aggressive conservative and leftist opinion making, manifestos are also “open” enough to permit “the law” and its administrational infrastructures change with the seasons.  Dramatic “anti-social” policy making relies on false flags to subvert rebellion. Complimenting this deception government backed terrorists are routinely commissioned to attack in ways that ensure sponsored solutions [to fictitious problems] are both feasible and “palatable”. Were any planes used in the so-called “9/11” attack or was Fascist “News’” “live cut” really a stage-play of pre-recorded enhanced special effects (or, in other words, government sponsored propaganda)? Reasoning determining these ongoing travesties against societies is almost identical to the philosophic candour that claims to justify the distorted abuse of “abuse”.

earthinhandFantasy is deemed more vital than reality in so much as nature and everything vibrantly natural has become the subliminally targeted enemy of the spinners of make-believe. They, as evidenced by their non-existent reasoning that has become the graduation of child status on ever more bodily adults, assures their followers that survival of power is the only real justification for all social considerations. For anyone that questions this “balance of power”, genetically modified organisms (GMO’s) are all about demonstrating the “machine” can conquer nature and (from the inspiration perspective) have nothing to do with the manufacture of goodness. Unforseen dietary advantages innocently improve “spin campaigns”. An expansion of this, should I call it, platform insists presumption of guilt defines society at large (per an expansion of unknown nationals or “Goyim’s” categorisation as strangers that are presumed “untrustworthy”), with exemptions given to the honourable or those with the right credentials (in the “family”). Thus, everyone of “file” is a potential prisoner-in-waiting when not of sufficient “rank”.  That is the primary reason why “abuse” has been distorted as a condition of that framework (i.e. behind “presumption of guilt” is the contamination assurance that an abuse has been committed).

1481200216_maxresdefaultWith empirical clarity abuse is transformed into something material, solid, clear cut. It is something that can be tangibly used in a court of law. [Individual] circumstances become secondary, perhaps even arbitrary or elementary (i.e. if a “black and white” abuse has occurred; how are circumstances relevant?). In that fashion, any accusation becomes virulently more potent than all cohesive evidence backed defences (which risk being judged as excuses or hindrances). In other words, if “circumstances” are irrelevant, for abuse is abuse, then what is the purpose of evidence beyond obstructing the course of justice? Once an abuse is “agreed on”, all that’s needed is a wrongly done by claimant. That’s the lack of logic being applied here and that is why evidence is going to potentially obstruct the potency of any abuse claim (which must be true to be potent) under those farcical terms. Referring again to my mention of Jon Rappoport’s work, that is why the education system does everything and anything to block critical thinking. “Truth” is becoming so estranged from popular acumen; I fear it is threatened with extinction.

article-9146-heroIn fact immortalisation of distorted abuse is a feature of a watershed that is slowly but surely stripping away all sovereign rights. On this course when a “file” member thinks for himself it is potentially a most destructive act against the regime. Frankly put, the only way to possibly undermine the power brokers and their fraudulence passed off as “goodwill” is to outwit them. Therefore, I could well see critical thinkers labelled “terrorists” under threat of some capital offense or other at some juncture. Currently the Mental Health Act substitutes as the primary lateral filter. It has made damned sure that we no longer have the right to use our bodies in the way we decide. Examples to illustrate this include impingement on just about every functional aspect of life. We must wear clothes at all times except by arrangement when on private property. All bodily functions are limited in some way. I could focus on sexual reassignment of homosexuals, but the more obvious “for instance” is the denial of consenting sex between “minors” (i.e. all parties are legally underage).

To show just how fanatically lacking in conscience and common sense the powers’ lust for control has become, per their “abuse philosophy”, a statutory rape charge must be served on at least one party (all underage, per this example, let us not forget) when infractions occur. Thus, the justice system will determine at least one person has been abused whether claimed or not. To any reasoned thinker, potential consequences should be startlingly obvious. Predictably, there have been a number of judicial outcomes after no one embroiled agreed to being abused. In instances of this sort “the system” has been seen to judge everyone involved as having “raped each other”. How can that be? Is it possible for there to be perpetrators without victims or victims without perpetrators (depending on the legal insistence)? Surely this must be one of the best examples that conclusively demonstrate how unchallengeable validation of a concept can pervert reality.

20435060There must be no doubt that corrupt goodwill does pervert reality and it causes all kinds of nasty chain reaction consequences. I plan to explore what motives are behind and ramifications result from circumcision in “The Powers Proud Accolade: Brand Pedo”. Recently a commenter on Jon Rappoport’s blog asked if I could include her feedback on the subject in one of my public writings. Presumably of Jewish ancestry, she reported her sibling’s circumcision had contributed to a painfully vicious hate/guilt cycle that has persisted to haunt the family relationship and, ultimately, befoul the lateral mother/son bonding process.

Men are considered (by the Pharisees) to have much stronger libidos than women, so males are circumcised shortly after birth. Contrary to popular opinion, Islam was created to radicalise Judaism (as “Christianity” had failed in the Pharisees’ utopian quest) and circumcises females as well (originally Muslim males were cut to honour the prophet). However, if the ceremony is done too early in the female’s case, it risks destroying all sexual self-esteem (leading to frigidity). Therefore the clitoris is partly removed from girls around age six. It is not fully extracted as the function of circumcision is merely to act as a masturbation (inappropriate lust) inhibitor and not to create permanent dysfunctional sexuality.

Fake “abuse” wields as much power as “blasphemy”. The very mention of it should send shivers down the spine and not for noble reasons. In fact in its current use it marks the total collapse of sanity. Abuse is a winner. It can hang a court. It has acted as anchor to all past and current inquisition movements, including the latest one used against Catholic priests, Jewish rabbis and others that dare inhibit Zionist order. Juries are marginalised, perhaps superfluous even, when presented accused are “certainly guilty” beyond any doubt without need of peer review.

man-on-mountainFrom the provable “conspiratorial” angle I could argue there is a covert agenda geared to demeaning anything and everything that entitles communion. This, by extension, distorts purposeful living into desecration. Underpinned by many unwelcome corporate compliance terms, whether delivered through the private sector or “government”, the final step has been to vilify slavery (dressed as “employment”) as the fundamental point of vocational existence. Bearing in mind the “contract” everyone makes with God prior to coming into the world is to balance “living life to the max” and “revering the body as the temple”, real abuse, real violation has been mutated into something beautifully sacred. The powers’ grand coup, great deception against the peoples’ contract with God could not be more amply highlighted than by outlining how religions scammedbeliefs”.

how-to-pervert-realityReligions gave “God” a voice and it was a remarkable revolution, because God never actually said anything and none dare question what wasn’t said. In precisely the same way shadow powers execute government, the Pharisees control all religions today and the basic “blasphemy” indoctrination has been incorporated into Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism. Perhaps there’s the odd tribal culture “exception” saved by lack of popularity, but the rationalisation has predominantly been a global one. “God” has also been incorporated into civil law federally, so religions have served their purpose and cease to be explicitly necessary. Through those wonderful pharisaic ideologists, God talks in mysterious ways. Mass indoctrination continues, unaltered by atheism, unhampered and never erring in the deliverance of the never spoken word.

4f6149372d027ff480b8a357edc0106dOf course, everyone “should” know the “word of God” is actually bullshit and “God’s values” are actually the Pharisees’ Laws. The real God talks through nature and that’s why they (the shadow powers) attack any known pantheist cult, attempt to destroy natural foods (supress organic, flood GMO’s), aggressively sponsor sexual “reassignment” and support, impose anything else that is sure to give nature a whack in the nose. Those believed-to-be vigilant “forces for light” (euphemistically calling themselves Truthers) couldn’t discover the “truth” if they tripped over it. Their spiteful and pointless crusade against phantom “Illuminati” power has failed to get close to coming to terms with the real evil doers and their so-called “Luciferian Doctrine”. Illuminati occultists (hidden ones) have scripted the greatest violation, abuse imaginable. The ultimate goal is poison the planet whilst “undoing nature” in an agenda determined to reduce humanity to abject trans-humanism, a globe populated by living robots if you will.

quote-the-masses-are-still-ungrateful-or-ignorant-they-prefer-murder-poisonings-and-crimes-george-sand-116-43-12Everyone seems to go along with the plan, blindly and ignorantly. The few that become aware do nothing meaningful to inhibit destruction in motion. Babbling do-gooders assume if it “ain’t noticeably broken, why fix it?” People culturally attune and do their upmost to maintain their selfishly favourable status quos for as long as they persist. Conversely, those that dare challenge their “hard earned”, wilfully fickle resources are despised. Per this haughty arrogance, ones that beg for support “must be” inferior parasites of the lowest character. How dare they abuse us by “expecting” donations and other spiritually draining demands? It’s not only the “powers” that callously abuse the word “abuse”. You all do.

Me Playing for my Supper

 

 

PayPal Donate Button

Donations Welcome

 

Rogue Justice, Royalty and How the World Was Won

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Key outcomes in chronological order were:

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

1914 Federal Reserve issued the first unbacked currency, German papiermark

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1974 Creation of the theoretical Petrodollar

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1990 First Gulf War over control of the global petrochemical supply

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2015 Japan legislates for military “self-defence

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

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