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.

 

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

11059463_873711675999137_4171037146502540332_n

Introduction

Back in May, when the scales tipped over the 5,000 word mark, I decided to break my dissertation on “who’s behind ISIS” into roughly equal parts for ease of reading. It now looks as though all parts (maybe six or more) are destined to be weighty tomes in their own right (considering additional information contained in the numerous external links that complete the account). This segment feels certain to exceed the 5,000 word mark too, but, as the French say, “C’est la vie”. There is some big news, a most important announcement, from a very unusual source which confirms that October 2015 was indeed the trigger of a visceral, synthetic World War III all over possession of Ukraine. That is why Putin has found his way into so many recent headlines.

cowboys-and-indiansSome abettors may asset my criticism of the Ashkenazi, in particular, as overt Racism. Therefore, I need to inform reckless referees that insist on judging the book by the cover only a number of my close friends and associates are Ashkenazi. Let us not demean the creative thought processes to vulgar crassness. No, not all Ashkenazi Jews are Zionists. Most, like everyone else, have been exploited by the few. So let us not stoop to murky depths of Orwellian conspiratorial bipartisanism with bad “labels” agin’ good “trademarks” – “cowboys and Indians”, “cops and robbers” and so on. On the other hand, short of a few very well camouflaged Haredim, there have been next to no vocal protests or otherwise from those that deserve, nay should want, to have their names cleared, my friends and associates included.

POOP Network Commandants

POOP Network Commandants

Regularly, I pick up anonymous compliments of the style “at last there is someone who says it as it is”. The truth comes with barbs too and I have been wounded many times, so if you want to show me some shekels in appreciation, I would be very privileged (Go here for the donation/book purchase links. Oh hell, we missed Hanukah, but be a devil and bless the winter solstice). Let’s face it Israeli politics has been a sorry state of affairs. How could conscientiousness hope to gain any traction with, ex war hawk, Ehud Barak on one side of the Knesset and profoundly active war hawk, “neo-con”, Binjamin Netanyahu, on t’other?

Not only was the first part of this dissertation given an airing by Conscious Life News, but it attracted a vital response by way of comments. I recall one in-tune vocalist proposing ISIS stood for “Israeli Secret Intelligence Service”. Some of those ever present shill’s may have been part of the Professionally Organised Obstructive Persons (POOP) network. That’s not a real thing, by the way, because I just made it up. Formed from combined Sumerian Gods (simulating an ongoing balance of power, discussed later), Israel is very real, though. Everyone knows it is a country, although perhaps some Americans might not have figured it yet (given one time 25% reportedly responding to a pop poll answered that Australia was “somewhere in Europe”). Cruel may it be, but my rule of thumb is nine out of ten can’t tell their arms from their elbows, so, given this breadth, harvesting a crush of comments would expect to reap very few wise gems. Ozzie Thinker makes it clear he is not going to stand for any nonsense, so very little poop finds its way onto this humble sanctuary. Conscious Life News is a whole different kettle of fish, so I was blessed by the response.

www.usnews.comThough, arguably, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is the biggest criminal organisation on the planet, those tireless shadow operatives failed to attract a mention by me in part one, so I will address that complaint first. As this segment is devoted, in part, to the history of the “concept” Israel, it would be unfair of me to shield the CIA’s extraneous relationships with an international cauldron of co-conspirators; most pertinently rogue Israelite agencies, such as Mossad. There seemed to be some confusion as to what was meant by Zionism as, in the xenophobic spirit of national suffering, the Jews have always rather liked the idea of being pledged a promised land.

Ignoring the fact that their selected homelands (and there have been many, not just that dusty Middle Eastern hideaway) always seem to be occupied and deeply loved by existing inhabitants, attachment to one’s homeland is the root of all patriotism. Given the right attitude, patriotic causes can only be regarded as noble and worthy aspirations? Personally, as a Universalist, I do not practice patriotism, but I acknowledge without those distinctive ethnic flavours this world would not be the diverse haven for experiential excellence it is. A more in depth history of Zionism will be addressed next segment.

Central Intelligence Agency: A Zionist Front

Background history

What things become is not always what they were created to be, but it is important to review the background history to understand the issues. It is by no accident that 1789 is a monumentally important shared date demonstrating a pivot change in the direction of politics and management of the people. America became a formal republic (prior it had been a constitutional democracy, but this was nothing like ancient Vaishali) and the French peoples’ revolution catapulted into motion. Except, true historians know it was no peoples’ revolution, but that is a whole nother story for another day. Both also share the unfavourable outcomes that each ultimately, economically, was a monumental disaster.

pic_N_A_Napoleon_BonaparteFrance has always been the last Merovingian stronghold and I feel certain that, had things worked out, a new renaissance Messiah (“Sang Raal” of the Gnostic Jesus/Josephus bloodline) would have made the world stage long ago. Josephus was a Piso and a royal Vespasian, so the Romans have always been included in masonic plans. Imposter, Italian banker’s son, Napoleon Bonaparte was set up and betrayed by the Rothschild syndicate; business as usual?

To understand why the CIA was created, you have to consider the motive behind reestablishing the rogue (I give my case for this later) national state of Israel. Some are confused by the “Promised Land” mythology. Israel is no promised land but, rather, an administrative centre for “order” (Zionist protocols) and principled legislation. Maree Moore is not the only one to identify Ireland was selected as the land of milk and honey, per Moses’ dream (this link is particularly interesting as Eva Draconis’ chronicle of discussions with what she calls “The Orion Beings” outlined “human abductions” were off limits [only] in Denmark against a specified deal with NATO). The Celts, ultimately, proved too strong for the Philistines, so Anglo-Saxons had to settle for England, first.

Lands with “promise”

England expanded to absorb oppressive unions constituting the British Isles which also grabbed a chunk of Ireland for good measure, segregating its peoples (later marked by the Zionist/Rosicrucian, Protestant/Catholic apartheid). Saxons, Moore rightly explains, is a “phonetic” abbreviation of Sac’s sons. Given the natural Irish language is 40% Hebrew, their long established tin mining operations in Cornwall (linked to the Phoenicians) presided over by none other than Joseph of Arimathea at one juncture, the Celtic druids are evidence of a much earlier Jewish exodus.

Indeed, Alexey Trekhlebov makes some interesting points in his book, “Legends of the Phoenix” (2014). According to ancient (Russian – hence Putin’s role play as global corrupt virtuous Saviour)

Little leprechaun Putin

Little leprechaun Putin

Slavic-Aryan wisdom dating back to the first thoughts of man, green eyed red heads were devout spiritualists and made good priests (when religion could be taken seriously), whereas black haired silver-grey eyes denoted a military character. These men made great leaders. Of the two Irish archetypes, one is the Trojan tall, dark haired arrow and the other the mousy, short (often plump) auburn haired, emerald eyed leprechaun. Jewish heritage (long confused by power hungry oligarchs), therefore, must go right back to the days of Atlantis and they presumably have precisely the same roots as the Vedic Russians. mossad octopus 2Indeed, in light of Genome Project revelations, geneticists are in a quandary as to what “Jewish” is.

When Great Britain finally failed as acting Promised Land for the Jews (particularly after the Norman Conquest of 1066), Christopher Columbus was commissioned to find new lands suitable for the pure (Puritans). Thus, the United States of America became the fresh land of milk and honey in 1789. Two hundred and fifty or so years later, after the continent was finally prized from the natives, Adolph Hitler was persuaded (via the 1933 Haavara Agreement [26th August]) to restock Palestine with German Jews ready for “takeover” there. Ignoring the nonsense about a pointless war bunker suicide that, at worst, benefited his enemies; for augmenting the interests of Zionism, he was protected until death, from memory Bolivia 1976 (according to the KGB), by the Israeli spy agency, Mossad.

Earlier, the USA pretty much dictated terms at the Treaty of Versailles (which set up the right conditions to launch Hitler, who was funded by Levite bankers under the Federal Reserve banner that sucked $840M in gold out of America to ultimately cause the 1929 Wall Street Crash) and they did the same at the end of World War II with initiatives such as the Nuremburg Trials (amply matched by Stalin’s show trial purges against the brotherhood). Capitalising on the misery of that dark period, American President Eisenhower became the salesman for something, inexplicably, called “the Holocaust” as justification for the forced removal (without compensation) or execution of the natural Palestinians and other non-Jewish nationals from the larger part of Palestine (this word, ironically, originally meant “free” or “no man’s land” from the Aryan Sanskrit).

The creation of the Military Industrial Complex

fdrpic

A crucial part of the 1948 illegal occupation, now known as Israel, was an outsourced military. The Pentagon’s, which had been established as an “idea” of closet Zionist, Franklin D Roosevelt, May 1941, construction began September 11th that year (heralded by fake terrorist 9/11 – an attack on the American people crafted by their own government) as a predestinated new military administration. I discuss alien connections in later segments. fox_ailes_statuelibertyThe CIA was another Roosevelt initiative. In 1942 he appointed William Donovan to the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and this led to the intelligence agencies formal structure in September 1947. An early objective was “control” of mainstream Medias (Operation Mockingbird), so when Allen W Dulles took the helm in 1953, at the end of the Korean War, most of the major news outlets were under CIA influence.

It was at this point, Influential German ex. NAZI’s (or perhaps NAZIO’s would be a truer representation of the 1920 alliance of National Socialism and Zionism) were given safe passage and “new lives” in the USA, courtesy of the CIA (Operation Bloodstone). I think it is worth determining whether acronyms, such as NAZI, ISIS and so on, were coincidental or calculated. It is implausible to presume Initials purely come as an accidental consequence of word creation. The official reasoning behind the NAZI initials is gibberish and even attestation to forces governing stigmas is less than plausible (i.e. strategic critics), emphasized by the fact that it was after Hitler’s 1933 rise to power (because of the Haavara Agreement) that sentiment changed to reflect the appreciation of the Zionists. The Franklin Union (of) Casual Knitters does not exist today because of its unmentionable partner acronym. Therefore, it is also no accident of fate that the certain Ashke-NAZI Jews are behind most forms of Zionism and it was their interference that created the concept National Socialism (a version of Marxism) in the first place.

ciaMindControlledKillersMemeThe same rules can be applied to the ISIS and ISS (to inflict Goddess style terror from darkness of space) initials. “Impact” of acronyms is almost always seriously considered by globalists and that would have been so for decisions as to the appropriateness of “CIA” (Counterfeit Information Agenda?) too. Anyway, returning to the topic, until Nixon, the CIA was mostly used to protect or further the political ambitions of the industrialists, but, in my opinion, part of the reason the agency had been established was as insurance against Israel’s too great an influence over US sovereign affairs. The Pentagon might need to be obstructed. Let us never forget FDR’s May 1941 admission,You know I am a juggler, and I never let my right hand know what my left hand does. I am perfectly willing to mislead and tell untruths….” The plan always was, slice it as you may, to impose Marxism by the backdoor as the ultimate model for the enslavement of man (demeaning the only real exit, true communism or libertarianism, as a Marxist rebrand) to the advantage of the industrialist globalist cabal.

Money, power and oil

American_Petro_Junkies__Petrodollars_Iran_and_World_War_3_III__115132

Of course, history has witnessed (and been corrupted by the influencers) the CIA involvement with the assassination of both Kennedys, but the agenda changed with George HW Bush’s appointment as agency director after Nixon. That was the final nail in the coffin containing US sovereignty. Israel, via the Bush Dynasty, now owned the Pentagon and the CIA. Failed lawyer (as was Russia’s Vladimir Illyich Ulyanov aka “Lenin”), Roosevelt has a very bad record with regards ethical provenance (this source barely scrapes the surface) so he seems to have employed creamy subterfuge as his weapon against the plebeians, just as Vladimir (the right to rule) Putin does today. vladimir-lenin2Indeed, there was a rather hot winded episode, egged on by uncompensated World War I veterans protesting from “tent city”, in which Major General Smedley Butler is infamously publicised as being part of a planned coup d’état to overthrow Roosevelt 1932-33.

Washington Tent City 1932

Washington Tent City 1932

In fact the pantomime was used to disguise the dismal failure of the gold standard and capitalism; per se, highlighted in some detail in Butler’s powerful thesis, “War is a Racket” (excerpts here).

Roosevelt sneakily moved the greenback off the gold standard, of course, in June 1933 (just after Hitler’s Zionist power pact), but, for the most part, the Bretton-Woods system acted as an interim standard from 1946 until Nixon finally stopped the rot in 1971. Radical new economic 25 year plans ensued 1971-75 which saw the emergence of the Trilateral Commission in 1973 under the tutelage of David Rockefeller (many Tri-lateral Commission members hold ministerial governmental portfolios in the US today). Israel was created, once more, in 1948, when the Brett-Woods accord was in effect. Only shortly after Nixon had formally abandoned the gold standard it played havoc with the US dollar on the foreign exchange.

20120724101227-petrodollar-goldsilver-comAs all oil trades were transacted though US dollars (a separate discussion), the so-called petrodollar spectacularly wobbled in 1973 and again in 1979. The 1973 date was the more important (remember that is when the Trilateral Commission was set up) as it backed off Israel’s Yom Kippur War (which smells of a Zionist “op”). The important Jews along with their Bush Dynasty friends had lots of fingers in the oil pie via US/UK trading corporations. OPEC action netted a giant payday for the Globalists. H Bradford Westerfield’s book “Inside CIA’s Private World: Declassified Articles from the Agency’s Internal Journal 1955-92” is an interesting read (considering what hasn’t been omitted. This excerpt touches on their involvement with OPEC from 1973)

The Israel Connection

Though I am well aware of the Biblical misinterpretation of Genesis 32:28Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have struggled with God and with men and have overcome”” (NIV translation), Israel is a combination of the Babylonian Gods Isis, Ra and Amen/Amon/Amun (Hebrew light version El is the stem of Elohim – “manifest gods”). They [propagandists] may well say that Y’Israel means “God contended” (or God overpowered?) but the reason so much global iconography heralds from Babylonian tradition is that Israel is Babylonian (Phoenician) tradition. Israel’s very existence according to strict rabbinical interpretation of the Torah is heresy.

Is Ra ElPharisaic perversity, pagan Star of David, has evolved the manipulation of the Atlantean divine triangle [though the real symbol represents the trinity of causeways that contain/express existence, I like this artistic opinion too] creating a bonded star (very different to Bhakta Yoga tradition) promising eternal conflict that is now appropriately seated on the flag of Israel as evidence to all who know what it means in context (Opinions here or there).

Though not mentioned in this fine article, most (if not all) of the Bush clan are members of the Babylonian Brotherhood, which links in with invisible Draco Reptilian mind-control mechanisms (touched on here from the deep historic perspective – here and there). Skull & Bones, Priory of Sion and even, what has become of, Rosicrucian Order have ultimately been party to a singularly purposed masonic agenda scoped by the Babylonian Brotherhood. Later we will see how the Muslim Brotherhood has been reduced from Arab Spring renaissance to proto-Zionist totalitarianism. They are behind all chaos, regardless of the vivid imaginations of the mainstream (and many alternative) Medias. If the Buddhists adopted a terrorist attack strategy (as has been done “in the name of Islam”), be in no doubt that all plans are the brainchild of Zionist entrepreneurs and their extensive, well financed, control networks.

maxresdefault

Ra, of course, is the God of Light and Isis is the (Moon) Goddess of Darkness. Therefore, it is no coincidence that the International Space Station (ISS) was named so (i.e., to imply control from the darkness after Reagan’s Star Wars concept, as exampled earlier). The Islamic State of Iraq & Syria (ISIS) was initially labeled Islamic State of Iraq & the Levant (ISIL) to confuse thinkers, but the conspirators have big egos and enjoy flaunting their power to ignorant slaves, plus they needed to be sure they had won. We can only assume that confidence in goals met was that strong, they could let the moggie out of the bag in 2012. This extremely violent and inhumane group of terrorists is allegedly controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood, although perhaps that is malicious “rebranding. Should not a violent anarchistic arm of Islam be called the “Islamic Brotherhood”? If the plan, by malicious powers, was squarely to destabilise the image of the moderate (peaceful) Muslim (just as the NAZI’s did to the Diasporas), might not the reaction create some ambiguity [on what is meant by moderate] whilst removing [absolute] radical hostility towards “brotherhood groups” such as the Babylonian Brotherhood too? The exact same German “walking dead” term for maltreated Diasporas was given to the Muslims; surely no coincidence?

A US-Israel criminal pact

As my colleague Robert O’Leary pointed out in his article, (ignoring mainstream fanfare) the Tsarnaev brothers were set up as plants to enable the Boston Marathon bombing propaganda campaign (Google has purged all the juicy articles, but on page 10 I found this thorough analysis, not forgetting busted Lieutenant Nicholas Vogt’s role). boston-bombing-victim-actually-nick-vogtThat satisfied the objective of presenting moderate Muslims as “radicalised” (the same propaganda planners use similar rhetoric as justification to defend their human shield statements). It wasn’t the only objective. Subliminal messages were many and varied. “Anyone can make a pipe bomb. No one is safe”. “They (radical terrorists) will attack people for having fun”. “They (radical terrorists) could attack the most skilled or even icons (professional athletes)”. “They (radical terrorists) are immoral and deserve a violent inhumane reaction”. The list goes on. Not dissimilar sentiment was applied to the campaign promoting “Al Qaeda in Iraq”. Crazy, draconian legislation will be justified on the back of each proto-government psy-op.

Of course, in the modern age, the way power structures are presented by the mainstream poses some ambiguity as to who controls what. There, for instance, has been a fervent campaign (ongoing for many years) to imply that the United States is an “autonomous super power”. All too frequently brisk differences of opinion between it and Israel’s foreign policies play out as extended melodramas between key national and international tabloids. hqdefaultThere are some uncomfortable realities that have not been entirely buried by Google and other “establishment sponsored” censors. Some question whether AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) runs US foreign policy (see this groveling article supporting the Zionist “cause” (sic). Arab American Mantiq-Al-Tayr is not a supporter [warning: contains disturbing images]).

Other evidence supporting a Hebrew takeover of the US is extensive. Though, officially, a modest number of US senators are formally Jewish, the greater percentage of congressmen, in general, are “friends of Israel”. This parries with an estimated 1.7% Jewish Americans. The radical writer, Brother Nathanael Kapner, is noted for unorthodox opinions (many of which seem to parry with reality), however this article makes an excellent point about a quasi-Jewish “Protestant majority” running the US. The notion of Jews running politics stretches back to George Washington and Benjamin Franklin and the Chinese, by all accounts, are under no illusion either.

A short history of Pharisaic (dissent) order and US stakeholders

0201_01

For clarity of vision, researchers must go right back to the beginning; a past which shows settlement of the United States of America required conflict and broken promises, a violent takeover, with the sole purpose of usurping American native Indian populations’ territories consequentially reducing them to homelessness on their own soil (let us never forget that Israel did this to the Palestinians too against the instruction of rabbinical orders, so motives have always been globalist/industrialist and not religious nationalistic). Protestant “Puritan” Pilgrim Fathers had travelled to the great continent to set up a new land of milk and honey, or their “Promised Land” (according to Scripture). Puritanism is so radically Pharisaic in character; it may as well be called pseudo Judaism. Ironically, the other radical interpretation is Islam.

That hostile takeover of America to create the Promised Land has been shown to be very much an act of Zionism, given the relationship Jesuit middle men had with Columbus, Lutheran Protestantism, Illuminati order of the New World, May Day, 1776 and so on. Zion (or Sion) means fortress (in Hebrew) and there has been a long, predictable history of violence associated with forces attached to this order. Turning the clock much further back, we can review the mechanics of ancient Roman civilization as globalist utopianism. reichstagfireIndeed, as long as 2,000 years ago, some compellingly blame Nero’s Roman arson (Great Fire of Rome 64 AD) on disgruntled Zealots (a past version of Zionists) which ultimately saw violent Roman retaliation with the siege of Jerusalem 66-69 AD. The Romans interest in and takeover of Judea in 63BC deserves detailed inspection; given the relationship with “Arab” Herod’s at the Jews expense. There are too many other stones to upturn right now, so that discovery tour will have to wait another day.

A little farfetched, maybe, but even considering the choice of fire [in particular] as a popular method of destruction is worthy of examination. Remember things are often done for not particularly obvious reasons and that is why the average person is mostly blind to political motives. The old “purgatory” concept uses fire to bring a small piece of “hell on Earth”. That is why Catholics burned witches at the stake (drowning offered a form of “Baptismal cleansing” when the sinner passed over). censorship_quoteThe theme continues with infamous Guy Fawkes and his failed attempt at reducing England’s parliament to a bonfire. Ironically (or maybe not so), one member of the small band of agitators was named Pierce and is a direct ancestor of the Clintons. Of course the most topically recent event that concurs with Roman arson symbolism was the torching of the Reichstag in February 1933. After this (April of the same year), one of Hilter’s early demonstrations of leadership power was the (PR stunt?) incineration of the unapproved books allegedly targeting Jewish book stores and authors. Vladimir Putin loves censorship too.

Traditionally the Reichstag fire was blamed on communists. Here is a possible reason. Aryan-Slavs passionately upheld ideals of libertarianism as exquisite virtues of Vedic philosophy, so many were connected to the various idealistic communist movements before they became polluted by toxic Marist-Zionism. Anne-Frank-DeskSlavic peoples, in general, saw international defeat and castigation after the 9th century when their last bastion fell and that is the origin of the word “slave” (note: Latin “esclava” has a more modern etymology, servant, servitude stem being the more ancient term). “Slav” means either “glorious” (slavniy) or “fame” (slava). Hitler’s “worship” of the Aryan type was reverse PR (one of those “big lies” he boasts of in Mein Kampf), just like his reversal of the Swastika symbol of Vedic enlightenment. Let us be frank (maybe using Anne Frank’s malnourished tuberculosis death at Bergen-Belsen concentration camp is a good lead in), Hitler was not against the Jews, per se, just the cosmopolitan enablers with conscience activated. Those, mostly Diasporas, were the ones he targeted. Was Hitler allowed to be sarcastic when he said he hated the Jews but loved the Aryans?

So after the Reichstag fire, Jewish (supposedly “Levites” – “above the law” and see here for an explanation of the confusion) Ashkenazi bankers could rubber stamp Adolph Hitler’s power authority. They were also originated from the Ukraine and known as Khazars by that heritage. Khazar means “wicked, disgusting” from the dark ages Aryan Christian word pogani. The meaning changed by medieval times with heretic preferred after the German (from Greek) which signified “outcast”. Apostate, from the Greek too, was also used as this means “revolt/defect”. Unsurprisingly they are a perfect match for the colloquial translation of the term “pharisaic”. The Khazars are the modern version of the Pharisees and that’s why Ukraine wants its “independence”.

offeringlight~2Their trade with Hitler, highlighted earlier, was evidenced by the Haavara Agreement in exchange for Federal Reserve (established by the Zionists 1913-14 to coordinate a global New World Order precipitating World War I and the 1917 Russian takeover to test austere controlled enslavement of the masses) gold. History tells us the Schiff/Warburg engineered contract was so detrimental to the New York Stock Exchange it caused the Wall Street Crash (1929). A decade long Depression was only saved by world war (courtesy of the newly empowered Hitler). There is no doubt WWII was planned and engineered by the same Jewish hierarchies as part of the final solution for the enslavement of man. The predominant outcome from this global turmoil was the recreation of Israel, validated by a vapid holocaust, which means “sacrificial burnt offering.

Global tyranny administered by the US per Israel’s vision

Since the same basic parties had established the land of Israel, pretty much every US President has worked with and, in general, given favour to Israel. President Obama has been called the most “anti-Israel President ever” (Mein Kampf style?). To establish for myself whether this is true or not, I have scoured the internet in search of any anti-Israel material/quotes from Barack Obama. 536030211All damning remarks have been excised from the account, so allegations seem to substantively rely on journalistic license (exaggeration or out-and-out lies). Even going way beyond Google page 10, the only remotely anti-Israel quote I have found is “The only way for Israel to thrive as a Jewish and democratic state is through the realisation of an independent and viable Palestine”. Though this seems like a borrowed quote, or something very similar to earlier sentiment, I understand why some Israelites take umbrage.

Researchers need to investigate the creation of Judaism and key figures, such as the mythical Moses (was he the Babylonian scribe Barach/Barak?). Under the extreme Pharisaic interpretation of Law, God (El/Yahweh) is above the Law, Levites are exempt from the Torah and other Scriptural references (which encourages some to question whether they are Jews at all, if religion is determined by faith), Jews [must] religiously follow the Law and non-Jews (Goyim) must both follow the Law and exist only to serve the Chosen People (Jews). Being Goyim (officially), I have a big problem with that. Researchers quickly learn that the reason Obama’s allegedly “anti-Semitic” quote is anti-Israel is that he has dared to suggest empowerment of Palestinian slaves by validating their assault on “rightful” Israelite land (per Zionist beliefs).

dog-(R)dees

Better comprehension of this reasoning can be gained from an analysis of the fall of Jericho, which saw no land settlement by Israelites of the time. Under “God’s instruction”, they left with three wagon loads of treasure at the expense of the occupants. It’s a moot point, but in regular debates I have with a Rabbi colleague, we are edging closer and closer to the philosophy that Pharisaic extremists believe all habitable locations of the Earth’s surface is the extent of Israel and they only allow Goyim colonies out of the goodness of their hearts. 4525274963_b7d8ea6e7c_zWould that make the Goyim lepers? From the spiritual perspective (by rabbinical interpretation), leprosy is a problem with the skin which might surely be symbolic of afflicted, wrong skinned Goyim in light of Jesus’ attention? As mentioned earlier, the “Jewish” bankers that funded Hitler were all reputedly Levites. However, doing more than a little digging, I find not a skerrick of evidence (just supposition) that proves one [of those bankers] is a true Levite. Indeed it is my opinion they were/are all common and ordinary Ashkenazi Jews.

Much can be gained from the double impact of published rogue sentiment via unknown, foreign journals. Here’s a made-up (fictional) example. Headline: “The Australian Prime Minister believes the Bali Nine (“heroin exporters” set up through an ReptilianCheneyAustralian Federal Police sting to diffuse the Schapelle Corby “customs debacle”) deserved to die” after giving the Australian public broadcast “crocodile tears” and “outrage” over Indonesia’s handling of the matter. He, per this fiction, made the comment in print in some French Lady’s magazine called, shall we say, “Moi”. I believe, as much as I admire his writing style, that Roi Tov is an agent for the interests of Zion. He exists to lifelong translate the true meaning of ludicrous Israelite political sentiment for the dumb Goyim.

Of course any agitator must be kept in a virtual prison (as Pharisee Paul tells us) ever threatened by capital punishment by those upholding Pharisaic order and these, predictably, are Roi’s alleged perpetual circumstances. Along similar lines, in general, I have a problem with so-called “conspiracy theories”. Whereas many revelations offer great insight to readers, they each, invariably, contain their own propaganda slant. Last year, in the spirit of truth solidarity, I changed my internet explorer default page from MSN to Jeff Rense’s bulletin board. However, I found the change fostered such an increase in personal negativity that my default is now blank (soon to be replaced by Conscious Life News, of course) for health reasons. The point being is, absolute negativity can be destructively overwhelming (i.e. who does Rense really represent?). My joking style, I have been told, “powerfully enlightens”. That’s why the, ahem, three brave people that regularly reference this blog are presumably empowered by it.

None, in office, dare publically criticise

jewish vampire

To discover anti-American sentiment from Israel, we only need to turn to their current Prime Minister Benjamin [Bibi] Netanyahu. As a failed furniture salesman, his experience with the US was not a good one. From that vein perhaps readers can understand the hostility. Nevertheless I cannot see any right-minded American accepting this:

golden-calf1“It does not matter what you do. America is a golden calf and we will suck it dry, chop it up, and sell it off piece by piece until there is nothing left but the world’s biggest welfare state that we will create and control. Why? Because it is the will of God. This is what we do to countries we hate. We destroy them very slowly and make them suffer for refusing to be our slaves.” (1990)

rachel corey RIPSomething like that appears to be happening now thanks to the rigged, “Levite ordained” Grand Financial Crisis (GFC). Rachel Corey why did you not listen? (2003) May you rest in peace, the true martyr you are, lest we forget? Israel, of course, has learned nothing (2010).

Netanyahu’s use of the enigmatic symbol “golden calf” is pivotal to my argument that Israel, Zion and ISIS are intrinsically connected. In fact this is the Babylonian fertility symbol that links the Roman/Greek “Philistines” with Israel’s Zionist Pharisaic elite. Paul McGuire has a very good understanding of how this encapsulates an imperialist tradition, in part, hell bent on plundering the land of “milk and honey”.

Crop Circles offer more than meets the casual eye

Crop circle collage courtesy of Red Collie, the maths genius

Crop circle collage courtesy of Red Collie, the maths genius

I promised some big news. It has come in a rather unlikely, controversial form. Though I have failed to locate the site, arguably somewhere in Brazil, a Crop Circle appeared before the fateful Halloween Russian plane crash in the Egyptian Sinai desert. There is a reference to the twin propeller plane (note two concentric circles), CBS News and the colour scheme even suggests “sand”. But the humble (Zeta grey being sanctioned) pictogram offers so much more in its warning for humanity. Please check the photo carefully to understand the clever symbolism.

An ellipse (outer circle) is representative of the rise/fall of the human soul (a soul under attack from negative elements). There are two rings which signify transition or stages and the central one is perfect and significantly smaller than the damaged outer human soul. It can only mean the pure either break away or are saved by some arbitrary power. The “propeller” doubles as a lotus flower lily which is symbolic of rebirth. There are four uneven petals, representative of cooperation or some kind of pact between different factions only covering the “chosen few” (in the small circle). Evil EyeIn light of the sorry state of the human soul network, CBS is the so-called “evil eye” of misrepresentation. It is generally believed the rise and fall of the human soul can only end with apocalypse and the plane crash, whether planned or accidental, is going to be used as the trigger to stimulate a visceral World War III (that began in 1984 under the people’s noses while they were sleeping) and possible Armageddon simply to justify the hostile repatriation of Ukraine as Khazaria. George-Orwell-truth-quotesLogic points to a symbolic Russian defeat, but could Messianic Putin “win” and still grant the Ashkenazi’s sovereignty at the Russian Ukrainians expense? How would wise Solomon have reacted?

So there you have it. Next segment will discuss Zionism and its historic evolution in more detail. I rattled the tin in front of the Jews (Ashkenazi included) earlier. Now, in the spirit, of Christmas, Ramadan, Diwali, Losar, Songkran and any other festival convenient for my purposes, here is another donation plea to the Goyim. I tried being homeless last Christmas but (other than two fellow bloggers) no one bothered to respond with care. This time I give you something in return for your donations, so not only do you achieve nirvana (that special warm glow from helping out your fellow man that volunteers a huge amount of time to the salvation of humanity) but there are a number of gift options depending on whether you like reading or listening. Or, then again, you can simply donate because you feel it is the right thing to do. Visit here, scroll down and you will find all the juicy details, PayPal and other links. Thank you for reading; go empowered.