In short, the IPCC has long been selling Global Warming as another tax-and-spend scheme, despite much greater environmental problems like pollution and food degradation. -- Miles Mathis
The hijacked environmental movement goes back to at least the first Earth Day in 1970. The real environmental movement was infiltrated at that time by various corporate sponsors, who immediately flipped it. -- Miles Mathis
People do bad things all the time on purpose, and we know that. Major government and corporate crimes are now admitted by the mainstream, and these crimes didn't just happen. They weren't accidents. The people involved didn't just disagree with you or with the laws of the land. They broke those laws for their own malevolent purposes. That isn't my opinion or my feeling, that is the fact, admitted now by both sides and all sides. All those involved may not admit malevolence, since they don't see profiting obscenely from other people's losses as malevolent, but they admit they did what they did.
To say it another way, I don't think they are malevolent because they disagree with me, they are malevolent because they did very bad things that hurt a lot of other people, and they did them on purpose with no regard for the consequences.
I am not talking about all the fakes and hoaxes I have uncovered in recent papers, mind you, I am talking about declassified projects the government now admits to, as well as more recent events like LIBOR and other scams, in which the banks and other entities have pleaded no contest and paid huge fines for gigantic crimes.
The major crimes have been financial: the billionaires and trillionaires moving huge piles of wealth out of society and into their own pockets, creating personal, cultural, and environmental ruin. That devastation wasn't caused by their need to be right. It was caused by their need to steal everything of value and to ignore all the consequences, even to themselves. It was caused not by their belief that they were right, but by their belief that they had the right to lie to us about anything and everything to hide their thefts.
If you are still refusing to admit what I know you know, here is one to start you off: the Tuskegee syphilis experiment. Amazingly, Wikipedia still describes that experiment on its search page as “a controversial clinical study”. Is it now controversial? No, there is no controversy: absolutely everyone admits it was wrong for the US Public Health Service to withhold penicillin from black men known to be infected with syphilis, and to watch them die of it, while they were being told they were receiving free health care. This is just one example of thousands, where there is no way to argue there wasn't some level of malevolence involved. -- Miles Mathis
This is what these people do: they are always promoting the unilateral ceasefire. Although they have been attacking you and yours for decades or centuries, the moment you fire back you are exhibiting ego or intolerance or moral solipsism or something. “Turning the other cheek” is always recommended to you, but is never practiced by them. You are supposed to be infinitely self-reflective and self-monitoring and self-effacing, while they are allowed to be infinitely oblivious to anything but their own infinite privilege. -- Miles Mathis
How completely self-absorbed do you have to be, to bomb like that and apparently have no least clue of it? Any normal person would have crawled offstage shedding a puddle of tears after a performance like that, but the robots of TED never do. They float out of the arena just as they floated in: completely unaware of any world beyond the Teleprompter or script. -- Miles Mathis
Agents often work at airlines, where they get training in bag handling—i.e. planting things in bags and smuggling contraband. -- Miles Mathis
Secrecy is a two-edged sword, since the dark can hide many things. It can hide good information from a bad party, but it can also hide bad information from a good party. In other words, it is far easier to infiltrate and subvert a secret society than to subvert a society that is completely open. -- Miles Mathis
I have found that the only way to discover the truth is to lean many lies against one another, watching how they fall into a heap. It is also useful weighing the lies against the known outcomes. By seeing what the lies lead to, you can often discover the point of the lies. Once you understand why the various parties are lying, you can sift out the likely truth. -- Miles Mathis
One of the main components of Millenarianism had always been the Zionist desideratum of a return of the Jewish homeland. -- Miles Mathis
We don't need notarized documents when we have the incontestable facts that the ban on Jews in England did end with Cromwell in 1657. More than that, we have the fact that interest banking in England began its rise at the very same time. It can be no coincidence that all this began after King Charles I confiscated the gold in the Royal Mint a few years earlier. He also confiscated stocks at the East India Company. We are usually told by historians that the Civil War was caused by religious strife or other causes, but in my opinion it was these moves by the King in 1640 against the Mint (which was the bank of time—holding much capital of the merchants and goldsmiths) and against major companies that doomed him. Certainly this is what caused the Jewish bankers in Amsterdam to move against him, bankrolling Cromwell and running other less obvious schemes. Since Charles had just stolen their money in broad daylight, we can understand why they were a little upset.
Which brings us to the way they moved against him. They financed armies and generals like Cromwell, yes, but they did much more than that. As now, they moved in more indirect and clandestine ways. We have already seen that with the Millenarian movement, which they promoted and probably invented. This is where we tie back into Bacon and the Rosicrucians, since this Millenarian movement has many parallels to the Rosicrucian movement. Besides being anti-Catholic, both were said to be interested in Hermetic knowledge or the Occult.
In case you missed it, I wish to draw your attention to the fact we have just seen Intelligence hiding behind the Occult once again. We have seen it more recently and more obviously in my papers on Charles Manson, the Zodiac, Son of Sam, and the Night Stalker, where the CIA hid behind Satanism, OTO, the Process Church, “ritual sacrifice”, and other instances of the manufactured Occult. We have seen that none of those things were really going on. In every case we studied, we found that Occult was always just a curtain Intelligence could hide behind. Well, we just saw the same thing 400 years earlier. The program is very old. This means any time you are being pushed into the Occult as the explanation for anything, you should understand that the real perpetrator is Intelligence. Every time you see the word Occult, substitute the word Intelligence. -- Miles Mathis
The book of Kabbalah is the Zohar, which wasn't published until 1557.
My conclusion after leaning all the lies against one another is that the Zohar was written in the early Renaissance by the same people who faked the Corpus Hermeticum, and for the same reasons. Both appear to me to have been written by agents of the early bankers, who wished to weaken both Christianity and mainstream Judaism, since both were getting in the way of trade. To pursue this line of reasoning, we have to go back to these bankers and to the finding of the Corpus Hermeticum in 1463. Like the writer of the Zohar, the writers of the Corpus are a mystery, given to us only as the words of untrustworthy sources. The Corpus—the “foundational document of the hermetic tradition”—is said to have been written by Hermes Trismegistus of Egypt in the 3rd century AD. No substantiation of that exists, either of the person or of the date. Mainstream sources now admit this Hermes is mythical at best.
All this Hermetic and Occult stuff, including the Zohar, was created in the 14th and 15th century as part of the Jewish bankers' war with Rome. Notice I say Jewish bankers and not Jews. That is because we know the rank-and-file Jews of the time—although always under pressure from Rome—were not in favor of the Kabbalah, the Occult, or any of the other “Hermetic” ideas being promoted. This also applies to the real Jewish religious leaders, who banned the Kabbalah and its teaching as heretical. But since the bankers were not practicing Jews, they couldn't care less about the Bible or the Talmud. They thought they were doing their fellow Jews a favor, but couldn't really divulge what they were up to. They couldn't very well go to synagogue and admit the whole Kabbalah thing was a hoax. We may assume most rabbis at the time weren't in favor of such religious hoaxes, even as part of a holy war. Some rabbis have since changed their minds about this, but in the early days we must assume these hoaxes were a hard sell for those such as the de' Medicis, and they preferred to simply promote the Kabbalah as real, both to Christians and to their fellow Jews. I assume they figured most religious Jews wouldn't bite on it, so no harm done. In many ways that was a just assumption, and to this day many or most orthodox and practicing Jews aren't interested in the Kabbalah.
So why would the Jewish bankers in Italy in the early Renaissance be trying to sell the Occult as part of a holy war? Same reason they do it now. Why are the financiers still trying to sell you the Occult on a daily basis, in a thousand corrupt forms? One, because they still haven't finished off Christianity. As we saw in my paper on Theosophy, they were still trying to kill Christianity in 1875 with various gambits, including importing a bastardized Buddhism or Hinduism. And they are still doing it today, with Buddhism, Wicca, Satanism, Kabbalah, Isis, and a million other forms of mysticism and misdirection. I say this not as a Christian or Jew, but only as an honest student of history. I can see that is what they are doing, so that is what I report. Personally, I report this not to save Christianity, but to save myself from all the fake projects. I don't like fake projects or being lied to. I like to know the truth. -- Miles Mathis
In the Renaissance, the writers hired by the bankers to manufacture the Occult naturally went to non-Christian and pre-Christian texts to crib from. As later happened with Theosophy, they stirred together a crazy pot of the wildest and sexiest ideas they could find and sold it as a variant religion. These writers were instructed to seek out ideas in the past that would cause Rome the most trouble.
One of these writers was Marsilio Ficino. Ficino is the one who supposedly translated the Corpus Hermeticum. It is curious that he came into possession of that manuscript, since even before it came to him his mission was to revive the ancient teachings of the Chaldeans, Egyptians, Platonists, etc. We are told in the common history that he was already working on a translation of Plato when the Corpus was found. Although this Plato translation was an important project, de' Medici ordered him to pause and concentrate on the Corpus. Curiously, no one ever stops to analyze that statement. Of course the Kabbalah and other Hermetic works resemble Platonism and neo-Platonism: the same guys were working on both. Plato wasn't influenced by Kabbalists, since we have absolutely no evidence of any Kabbalists working in 400BC, in Athens or anywhere else. As we see, Plato influenced early Italian Renaissance writers, who then manufactured the Zohar and other Hermetic texts. That is the obvious source of any parallels, not any link between Plato and ancient itinerant Kabbalists.
We have more evidence of that, since Ficino is known to have invented other Occult artifacts, including the Tarot. That's right. The Tarot deck is said to have been invented by Ficino in the 15th century. Ficino was also an astrologer, and he was accused of magic by the Pope in 1489, narrowly avoiding a condemnation of heresy.
Another writer was Pico de Mirandola, a student of Ficino. Pico claimed that Pythagoras had gleaned Kabbalistic ideas from Jews in Egypt, but of course there is not a shred of evidence to support that. He used the parallels between Hermeticism and Kabbalah as evidence, but I have shown you that is inverted. There are parallels between Kabbalah and Pythagoras for the same reason there are parallels between Kabbalah and Plato: Kabbalah was manufactured almost two millennia later by Italian crypto-Jews using ideas they got from Pythagoras and Plato. Pico studied Hebrew, Aramaic and Arabic with Elia del Medigo, a Jewish Averroist, which of course was not normal for an Italian of the time. Why would the son of an Italian Duke bother to learn Hebrew and Aramaic? To understand it, it helps to know what an Averroist was. An Averroist was a follower of Averroes, and Averroes was a Spanish Muslim of the 12th century who was widely considered to be a dangerous heretic. He combined the ideas of Islam and Aristotle, famously promoting the idea of monopsychism—that all humans share a single great soul. This idea influenced many, from Spinoza to Jung. But in Renaissance Italy, Averroes ideas were anathema. Bishop Tempier had listed 219 ideas in Averroes that were considered antiCatholic. That is why Pico de Mirandola was studying with an Averroist, and why Pico was a student of Ficino, supported by the de' Medici. It was all about undermining Rome. -- Miles Mathis
Lorenzo clearly bought the Papacy for the express purpose of corrupting it. He no doubt instructed his son to act as anti-holy as humanly possible. For the record, it is likely the de' Medicis also bankrolled the Protestant response to Leo X. That is, there is some evidence Martin Luther was the controlled opposition, paid to publicize the atrocities of the Pope throughout Europe. Luther was even accused by his Catholic enemies of being a crypto-Jew himself, out to destroy Rome. In support of that, we find that Luther's mother was née Lindemann. Walter Kaufmann, in his book Tragedy and Philosophy says this: “Lindemann is a name that would strike most Germans as Jewish.” But rather than pursue that to its bitter end, I simply suggest to you it is not beyond imagining that the de' Medicis controlled both the action and the reaction. We know the financiers have done that again and again, and are doing it now on a daily basis, so why not in 1517? What could be better for the de' Medicis and their Jewish allies than to create a wicked Pope and then pay someone to list his vices? Even better if that someone is then excommunicated, since it adds to the scandal and gets it in more papers. If TV had been around then, it would have generated 24-hour coverage. -- Miles Mathis
Since Hermeticism is defined by Wikipeida as “a magical and religious movement stemming from the teachings of Hermes Trismegistus”, and since that person never existed, the whole category is a ghost. We have seen the same applies to the Kabbalah, and the Occult is just a broader category that includes all these smaller ghosts.
There is nothing Occult about classical Greek thought or Hellenism. Just the reverse. The Greeks were interested in light and clarity, not the dark and obscurantism. -- Miles Mathis
By the time of Cromwell, Freemasonry had already been flipped. By then the Jewish financiers had already infiltrated it and used it to subvert Christian institutions. In this way it was just an earlier example of later manufactured and subverted movements like Mormonism, the Jehovah's Witnesses, Theosophy, OTO, Wicca, Scientology, and many many others. Not all of these were created or subverted by Jewish interests (I assume), but all were created as some form of misdirection. Some of these movements include many earnest followers who I really have no wish to insult, but that doesn't change the fact the movements were created by agents and operatives. -- Miles Mathis
It is worth remembering that Bacon was the protégé of John Dee. Dee was a top counsellor of the Queen, an alleged magician, and many other things besides. He had invented the Enochian language, which he said he learned from conversing with angels. Since that looks like a cover, we should ask what the Enochian language really was. It turns out there is some evidence it was an early code used by British Intelligence. Yes, British Intelligence has existed as long as England has existed: it was not invented in the 19th century. In fact, John Dee of the late 16th century was the inspiration for Ian Fleming's James Bond in the 20th. Fleming came from British Intelligence himself, and that is now admitted, so he was simply giving the nod to previous agents. John Dee signed his letters to Queen Elizabeth as 007, which meant that they were “for her eyes only”.
Remember, Bacon had his hand in everything. He was Lord Chancellor, the highest position in England outside of court; and, given what we have uncovered, he must have also been head of British Intelligence. This reading gives us the key for unlocking a thousand mysteries of the time. It even gives us another way to read Shakespeare, although we won't go there in this paper. -- Miles Mathis
The battle between aristocratic wealth (mainly from land and taxation) and merchant wealth (from trade and interest) goes way back, and we see here probable signs of that battle in early British Intelligence. As I first assumed, the battle was indeed between those parties, but as usual science and philosophy and the Occult were just false fronts, behind which the real battle was raging. These battles were primarily for control of Intelligence. As now, Intelligence was a fundamental tool of governance and statecraft, and governance and statecraft were tools of wealth accumulation. As usual, this was spy versus spy and rich versus rich. -- Miles Mathis
Assuming anyone was really being tried and hung or burned, the ones being burned couldn't have been witches. That was another cover story. They had to be either spies for the State, or covert operatives working against Rome. As you should read Intelligence whenever you see Occult, you should read Agent whenever your read Witch.
Once we see the right answer, everything clicks. Of course the agencies of the time couldn't just admit they were killing spies, since to do that would be to blow their own cover. Until recently, Intelligence was fearful enough of its existence that it had to remain in the shadows. Only now is Intelligence so secure it can write about itself in the movies and on TV. Back then, cover was the first rule of existence, so the public reports could never tell the truth. For the masses, Intelligence wasn't even a word they knew. They knew about government officials, and some knew what spying was, but the idea that an entire arm of government operated completely in the black would never have occurred to them. It doesn't occur to a lot of people now, and if it does occur to them they dismiss as it as either fanciful or beyond their comprehension. They would sooner believe in witches, and do. Even today, most people are more comfortable talking to you about Witchcraft than talking to you about Intelligence. So, for many reasons, it was and is easier to tell people events involve the first rather than the second. They are more likely to believe the lie than the truth anyway. They would rather hear about witches than agents, so it works out for all parties.
Intelligence operations today are known as black ops. Well, the Occult also operates in the black, doesn't it? It is composed of the black arts. The parallel in language is no coincidence. As we have seen above, Intelligence and the Occult are the same thing. The Occult has been hiding Intelligence since the beginning.
As more proof of this, let us look at where the biggest witch trials in Germany were in that period. We are told they were in Trier, Bamberg, Fulda, and Wurzburg. These are all highly suspicious places to find major witch trials. For example, Trier was a major intellectual center, with a large university and an educated populace. The Archbishopric of Trier was one of the largest and most powerful in the Holy Roman Empire, and was an electorate. It hosted the Imperial Diet (Reichstag) in this period, which was like a Senate of the HRE. Finding a large witch trial in Trier in the 17th century would be like finding a large witch trial in Boston in the 19th century. But it would be a very likely place to find agents, and a trial of State spies.
As we have seen, the rise of the German witch trials coincided with the rise of the Rosicrucian movement across Europe. So at the same time witches were being convicted of magic, the wealthiest and most privileged people in the realm were promoting magic. Does that make any sense? Not until you realize that both Rosicrucianism and Witchcraft were covers for Intelligence. There was no Witchcraft going on—at least not in the places or in the levels of society were are told. There was only spy versus spy. -- Miles Mathis
The Fama Fraternitatis of Johann Valentin Andreae came out in 1614 and was followed by other manifestos soon thereafter. John Dee's trip to Prague was said to have been the antecedent and proximate cause of these publications, and Francis Bacon may also have been involved. The manifestos promoted “Magia, Cabala, and Alchymia”. This is strange because the Fama was later published as part of a Protestant treatise called the Universal and General Reformation. This linked the Rosicrucians to the Protestant movement, a thing admitted by lodges of the time. This is not to be wondered at, since Bacon was also making alliances with the Protestants at the same time, allegedly to resist the power of Rome against science. It is also worth noting that Martin Luther used a rose and cross as his personal seal, which takes us back to our previous musings about Luther and his true background. Why would those founding the Protestant movement link themselves to magic, Kabbalah, and alchemy? Not only does it not seem to be a very politic move, it seems outright foolhardy. If you really wished to convert Christians away from Rome and to a “cleaner” form of worship, would you link yourself to the Occult? What sense does it make to accuse the Pope of venery, profligacy, and unholiness, and then ally yourself to magicians, witches, and wizards? As with Luther's rose and cross, it smacks of overconfidence and base hypocrisy. Clearly these people were very sure of their positions, and cared nothing for the opinions of the masses. Everything done at the time was done as a shallow political feint, meant to be read by other agents and not by any religious people whatsoever. -- Miles Mathis
Like the texts of Hermeticism and Kabbalah, the texts of Rosicrucianism are suspect in the extreme. According to agents like Gerald Gardner and his companion Idries Shah, the Order of the Rosy Cross started in the 1300's when Christian Rosenkreutz traveled to Turkey and convened with the Sufis. How much positive evidence for that do we have? None. How much negative evidence do we have? Well, we have the word of Gardner and Shah, which is worth precisely nothing. We can dismiss the story based on the reputation of the storytellers alone. And this applies to all the previous storytellers of the Rosy Cross. The story arose in the 17th century from these murky sources, but the murky sources always spring from the same suspicious characters in the same suspicious localities, which indicates it was manufactured by European Intelligence like everything else, as a tool against Rome. -- Miles Mathis
The reason Zevi was left alone by Church and State officials is that they knew he was an agent of the bankers, just pretending to be the Messiah in order to mess with all the Millenarian boneheads in Europe who were buying into this scam. Remember, we saw the Jewish bankers and Gentile Intelligence agents in Western Europe promoting Millenarianism for many reasons, the main ones being promotion of the Jewish state, promotion of Jewish settlement, and promotion of interest banking. The Gentiles were promoting it because they wanted the backing of Jewish bankers, who were bankrolling their wars. The Gentiles failed to see the deeper and longer consequences of these schemes and were fooled into supporting them. Those Gentiles in the West who were working for the fall of the aristocracy didn't even have to be fooled, since they wanted pretty much what the Jews wanted: open trade and the fall of both Rome and the Royals.
By 1666, they had achieved major destabilization of both the Vatican and Europe as a whole. The de' Medicis got three more Popes on the throne after Leo X, four if you include Paul V, whom they also owned. At the same time, Jewish agents had achieved the death of Charles I in England, replacing him with Cromwell and permanently damaging the English line. Once the bankers got in, England would never be the same. England was so destabilized by 1666 London was almost in ruins. In Germany, (HRE) the same sort of collapse was at hand. The Thirty Years' War had decimated the Empire by 1648, with losses of 1/3 of all inhabitants; and, not surprisingly, the Catholic Habsburgs were the big losers. -- Miles Mathis
Truth telling is turning on the lights in a dirty room. It is what allows for the clean-up in the first place. -- Miles Mathis
Godfrey's fake death was part of the Popish Plot of 1678, which historians now admit was fictitious. It was started by gay priest Titus Oates, who faked his degree from Oxford. He was obviously an agent, since, despite having no degree, he was appointed as a curate by the Bishop of London. He soon fled the priesthood under charges of perjury, but was nonetheless admitted to the Royal Navy as a chaplain. There he was charged with buggery. That was then a capital offense, but he somehow skated. He was arrested in London again the same year for the perjury charges, but again skated. Despite allegedly having two such marks on his record, he was nonetheless hired by the Duke of Norfolk. He then converted to Catholicism. He and Israel Tonge [note the first name] then wrote up a pamphlet accusing the Catholic Church of approving the assassination of King Charles II. What is never explained is why anyone ever believed Oates, given his record. The whole thing was obviously manufactured by crypto-Jews and Anglicans to damage Rome. In fact, historians later admit that, but they usually don't admit that the plot went much deeper than Oates and Tonge. They were just pawns, and those behind Charles knew very well there was no plot. It was a massive false flag.
Despite that, we are told that when it became clear Oates had lied about the whole thing, the King was furious. Oates was supposedly whipped through the streets and sentenced to jail for life. We know that is false because normally he would have had his head lopped. At the end he had denounced the King himself. We also know it is false because they admit he spent no more than three years in jail and was later granted a pension. Note that, 3 years. For denouncing the King. I can tell you he didn't spend one minute in jail.
Anyway, Godfrey is the one who allegedly verified that the pamphlet created by Oates and Tonge was true. He was Justice of the Peace for Westminster, and Oates and Tonge took their oaths in his presence. This of course indicates he was another paid actor in this play, since no real judge would have authenticated such a thing. He was from huge wealth, his father being a Member of Parliament, and if the pamphlet had been genuine, he would have delivered it directly to the authorities, lest any blame attach to him. He had nothing to gain by getting involved in such a plot.
You will say he wasn't involved in the Popish Plot, he was just involved in publicizing it. But that isn't the story we are told. We are told Godfrey was a member of the Green Ribbon Club, which was accusing the King of trying to make England Catholic again. But again, there is no way Godfrey would have gotten involved in such a thing. The story is absurd from first to last.
Notice how they try to confuse the issue with all these overlapping plots. In the Popish Plot, the Catholics wanted to kill the King. In the Green Ribbon plot, the King was a Catholic. It can't really be both ways, can it? But if they get you confused enough, you don't see the truth: both stories were manufactured to blackwash Rome. In both, Rome is plotting to retake England. Although Rome was capable of doing no such thing at the time, these multiple false flags were successful in further diminishing the power of Rome in England.
Godfrey's death was faked to make it look like the Catholics got him. But nobody got him. As usual, the whole thing was just theater. The trials were faked and no one was hanged. -- Miles Mathis
You see, they know that when you read history in a book or in the Encyclopedia or at Wikipedia or are taught it in school or on the internet, you will see many “coincidences”. You will see lots of pieces that fit together in strange ways. You will see number and name matches like we saw above with Godfrey. Well, they want you think those matches are just the gods having a little jest with you. They don't want you to figure out it isn't the gods jesting, in most cases. In most cases, we have seen it is Intelligence jesting with you, or signalling other agents. Yes, you are being messed with, but not by the gods or aliens. You are being messed with by those manufacturing history. -- Miles Mathis
“In order that the world might be made safe for so many conflicting points of view, broad-mindedness was cultivated as the most desirable of all virtues. The man who still believed in truth was often called narrow, while he who cared not to distinguish it from error was praised for his breadth.” Archbishop Fulton Sheen (Freedom Under God)
"The fact the enemies of God must face is that modern civilization has conquered the world, but in doing so has lost its soul. And in losing its soul it will lose the very world it gained. Even our own so-called Liberal culture in these United States which has tried to avoid complete secularization by leaving little zones of individual freedom is in danger of forgetting that these zones were preserved only because religion was in their soul. And as religion fades so will freedom, for only where the spirit of God is, is there liberty. Archbishop Fulton Sheen (Characters of Passion)
What most people forget is that the Beatles were in the toilet in 1966. Their US tour had been a flop, playing to half-empty venues. The masters of propaganda behind them had made a big mistake with the “we're more popular than Jesus now” quote. That line had been no accident. Lennon didn't just say it as a joke, off-the-cuff. It was an important part of the storyline, since part of the propaganda was the destruction of Christianity. Intelligence had been trying to destroy Christianity since at least 1875, when Theosophy was created to help do just that. But they played their hand too far and encountered serious backlash in the US in 1966. Rather than quit, Intelligence decided to re-invent the Beatles, creating a brand new PR push and a total repackaging. To counter Christianity, they used the slightly more subtle approach of pushing Buddhism—as with Theosophy. The Beatles suddenly became Buddhists and Eastern mystics and all that. At the same time, Intelligence imported the manufactured drug culture into the Beatles' regimen, including pushing LSD and other drugs. The Beatles denied that Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds was written to push LSD, but that denial falls flat. Do you really think it is just an accident the song title includes the initials LSD? No. Many of the 60's bands were turned into drug pushers on purpose. These drugs were one of the top weapons of Intelligence against the hippies and the anti-war movement. -- Miles Mathis
Many great songs were written, though it is often hard to say who wrote them. A large number of people either in the bands or behind them were very talented at creating catchy tunes, preparing instrumentals, and producing a nice finished product. And even if the people in the bands weren't writing the songs, some of them could play their instruments quite well and many were accomplished singers and performers. If you wish to critique pop music, you have to do so rationally. No one who has grown up on the music can deny its beauty and power. That said, we cannot refuse to follow evidence when we find it, and there is plenty of evidence popular music has been controlled from the beginning. -- Miles Mathis
Although John Pepper was head of the entire British spy organization in the US from the late 1940's, his presence has been pretty well scrubbed from the literature. While the first head of BSC, William Stephenson, has a long page at Wikipedia, Pepper has nothing. They can now admit Stephenson was a master spy, the inspiration for James Bond, but Pepper is still in the shadows. Why? Because his name was used by the Beatles for an album. They foolishly used his real name and told you to look twenty years before. The album actually lacks any subtlety, and as you have seen, they give you a list of agents on the cover, providing you with their pictures in case you don't know their names. Sgt. Pepper's blows the cover of almost 100 agents, so its success as propaganda relies on the assumption of an incredible ignorance and laziness by the audience—which assumption turned out to be true. An intelligent audience would have taken the hint and marked all these people as “compromised”, never believing them again; but the audience did just the opposite. Without exception, everyone who appeared on the cover of Sgt. Pepper's added greatly to his or her fame, and the album was voted the greatest album of all time by Rolling Stone in 2003. Which means we can add Rolling Stone to the “compromised” list. It is yet another creation of Intelligence. -- Miles Mathis
I read the news today oboy
about a lucky man who'd made the grade
It is easy to see why Intelligence chose the apple as its trademark. Just ask yourself what the apple refers to in historical literature. In Genesis, the apple is on the tree of knowledge, right? It therefore signifies forbidden or secret knowledge. -- Miles Mathis
The History Channel is a favorite bullhorn of propaganda for the Intelligence agencies, and it was created just for that purpose. Personally, I call it the Newspeak Channel, since it doesn't report history, it reports rewrites of history. -- Miles Mathis
It looks like the film Let Him Be backfired as propaganda, so job one was to suppress it, removing it from all the shelves. Job two was to quickly make a new documentary and air it, as damage control. Again, Let Him Be came out in 2009. The Day John Lennon Died came out in 2010. Not a coincidence. Other partners in this documentary are ITV and Finestripe Productions. Finestripe specializes in propaganda as well. One of its other recent documentaries is The Day Kennedy Died, which also simply repeats the mainstream story. Another is called HeadCase: treat yourself to better mental health, which sells mainstream pharmaceuticals for anxiety, depression and bipolar disorder. That is more propaganda. And although ITV is sold to us as an “independent” channel, that independence is now completely meaningless. In reality, ITV is owned by the same consortium of billionaire spooks that own American TV, including Rupert Murdoch. -- Miles Mathis
Around 90% of what you see on these channels is propaganda, the rest being sports. -- Miles Mathis
Those running the world don't concern themselves anymore with the small percentages, since they have found they can be ignored. If a few smart people see through the scams, so what. The rest won't follow them. Most people follow the mainstream propaganda because it is louder, and for no other reason. And that will not change. -- Miles Mathis
But why did John fake his death? Was it only to avoid a pushy public? He was ready to retire and this was his out? That was part of it, but it doesn't explain the whole story. To really understand what happened, we would benefit from linking Lennon to Michael Jackson, who—if you will remember— owned a large part of the publishing rights to the Beatles' songs. The problem with both John and Michael is that they were taking huge profits from big companies like Warner Bros and Sony. Billions, literally. -- Miles Mathis
We have seen an extraordinary amount of very large mergers and acquisitions in the past decade, many of them takeovers and many of them hostile. That much is admitted. But what is not normally admitted is the degree of incest we see in these hostile takeovers. What I mean is, most of the large companies are related, and as we whittle down to fewer and fewer companies, those remaining are related even more. We are moving very quickly to a world owned by just a few families. Companies don't actually do anything in this world; people do. The companies are just fronts for real people. As we increase the buyouts, we decrease the number of real people involved at the top. The billionaires that are bought out are still billionaires, but they no longer own any companies. They are just sitting on a pile of money, but they have no real power.
The deregulation since the 1990's has not led to more competition, it has led to to more incest and more collusion. We see billionaires joining together to oust other billionaires and steal their companies. That is not competition, that is predation. And that is precisely what we are seeing here. -- Miles Mathis
Here is how it probably worked: Blackstone faked the death of MJ and then framed Sony for the murder. Blackstone went to Sony and said, “Hey, we control the press and police and courts in LA. We have planted all sorts of fake evidence you were involved in the fake murder. Since you don't control any of the press in the US, you will have no way to respond. It is going to look very bad for you, unless you agree to bring us into the consortium.” I can see no other circumstances in which Sony would allow new partners into Sony/ATV. This brings a whole new meaning to “leveraged buyouts,” doesn't it? Since Sony agreed to play ball, Blackstone didn't need to tie Sony to the fake murder. This is why you only see a few hints of that early on, and then see them buried.
As we have seen, these giant investment groups have created wedges into both Sony and Universal Music in the past five years, and I predict that in another ten years or less, they will own all of both music empires, and all the others as well. They will then devour one another until we have one company owning everything in the world.
I think it is probable we are already a lot closer to that scenario than you think. I would say it is probable these investment groups are not separate, and that most of them are run by the same people. Blackstone and Blackrock may only seem to be separate entities, for example.
For more indication I am on the right track, we can look at Philip Anschutz and his company AEG. Anschutz is estimated to be worth about $10 billion, which makes him one of the richest men in the world. Well, Anschutz was a target in this Michael Jackson death hoax, along with Sony and Vivendi. AEG was to be hosting and promoting MJ's 2009 world tour. They had already spent millions in promotion and had sold millions of tickets. When the tour was canceled, they lost many millions. Furthermore, the Jackson estate attacked AEG afterwards, claiming it was somehow responsible for Jackson's death. As you can see, this staged death was also being used as a wedge to buy out AEG, the most profitable sports and entertainment company in the world. Philip Anschutz was able to weather that storm, so they tried another wedge in 2012. It was in the summer of that year that Anschutz was tied to the Aurora “Batman” shooting, which took place in one of Anschutz-owned Cinemark theaters. The shooter James Holmes was also said to be a psychiatric patient at Anschutz's Student Mental Health Services. After being dragged through the mud in this manufactured tragedy, Anschutz nearly cracked. It was reported he planned to sell AEG in late 2012, and guess who he hired to “advise” him in this sale? Blackstone. However, Anschutz counter-attacked through his Examiner newspapers and online site in 2013 and took AEG off the market. He fired Blackstone and his own CEO Tim Leiweke. He even expanded in 2013, taking over Wembley Arena in London. Anschutz is worth more now than he was in 2009.
Let's look at Jackson's doctor, Conrad Murray. How did he end up taking the fall for this? He ended up being given a very short sentence (two years) for involuntary manslaughter, but that isn't because he did anything wrong. Since the death was faked, he couldn't possibly be guilty. So why was he prosecuted? He was prosecuted because he refused to give false testimony against Philip Anschutz. Remember, Anschutz was a major target of this false flag as well, and Jackson's mother Katherine sued AEG for wrongful death. That lawsuit failed, and it failed because Murray refused to testify against Anschutz. We can read one of two things from that: 1) although agreeing to be part of the scheme early on, Murray decided something had gone too far and he balked; 2) Anschutz got to Murray and paid him a large sum not to testify. I lean toward #2.
The Rockefeller Empire is taking over Sony/ATV, and I showed you above how they managed that. The Jackson Estate is just a front. -- Miles Mathis
When Blackstone faked the death of Jackson, they didn't really fake Jackson's death. They faked the death of Jackson's body double. The real Michael Jackson has been living in Abu Dhabi for many years. The guy in the news during the past decade is Jackson's body double, who took over all public appearances after about 2001. The guy with the tiny sharp nose: that isn't even Jackson. It is the body double who was scheduled to go on world tour and whose death was faked. It was the body double they had to whisk away in the fake ambulance and the body double they had to relocate. The real Michael Jackson had relocated long ago. -- Miles Mathis
When Lennon told them he wanted out, Intelligence was there to facilitate the exit. Everyone else then went to work to figure out how to best profit from the exit. Intelligence could see it was a great way to help their man Geffen, positioning him for a big move up in both industries—music and film. Lennon's death was guaranteed to boost the sales of Double Fantasy, and the profits from that would guarantee the success of Geffen Records for several years. Beyond that, the death would allow for an entire new industry of Beatles and Lennon memorabilia, memorials, shows, exhibits, books, and tributes. In fact, is the Lennon event that allowed for the “golden decade” for Warner in the 1980's. It was Warner's most successful decade ever, and the company was on top of the world until it was eventually destroyed by buy-outs and buy-ins in the 1990's. -- Miles Mathis
So who is Blackstone? It is Peter Peterson and Stephen Schwarzman. Peterson was Secretary of Commerce under Nixon and Chairman of the CFR from 1985 to 2007. He was also chair of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. He was Chairman and CEO of Lehman Brothers from 1973 to 1984. He has worked closely with the Rockefellers, and is a trustee of MOMA. Schwarzman was the managing director of Lehman Brothers, and the director of mergers and acquisitions there. In short, Blackstone is mainly a creation of Peterson, and Peterson is mainly a creation of. . . Rockefeller.
Who is Blackrock? While Blackstone was founded in 1985, Blackrock was founded in 1988. Initially, Blackrock was part of the Blackstone Group, so there you have it. It simply changed its name in 1992. We are told Blackrock is now independent, but we have no real indication of that, except for the different names and different buildings.
So, Blackrock, Blackstone. If you ask where the name came from, places like Wikipedia tell you it came from combining the names of Schwarzman and Peterson. Schwartz means black and Peter means stone. Sounds plausible until you discover ROCKefeller is behind both groups. I will leave it up to you to decide what “black” then signifies. -- Miles Mathis
In today's dollars, Rockefeller's granddad was already worth almost a trillion dollars in 1937, and they had just got into banking at the time. That first trillion came from oil, not banking. If you think the Rockefeller's own bank (Chase Bank) wasn't able to earn interest on that first trillion over the past eight decades, well, you need serious help from somewhere. -- Miles Mathis
If you post enough bad evidence, people miss the good evidence. True face matches get buried in a slag heap of false matches. You see, there are deaths being faked and there are actors being used in fake news stories, and so those faking the deaths and using the actors know that some people are going to catch on. They see papers like mine coming. Cleverly, they create confusion before the paper is even published. They go, “Someone is going to write a really strong paper blowing our cover. The best thing we can do is write that paper first, but do it really poorly. Then, when the strong paper comes out, we will link that strong paper to our weak paper, painting them with the same brush. Most people won't be able to sort through the confusion and will dismiss them both.” They have been doing that with the JFK assassination theories from the beginning. To muddy the waters, they plant a lot of bad information, trying to sell it as an “alternative theory”. Readers then study that planted information, realize it is bad, and either go back to the mainstream theory or just give up. There is so much planted bad information that almost no one can sort through it all. -- Miles Mathis
These people are shameless. They are so impatient to get the manufactured story out there that they don't take into account how odd it looks to be doing interviews about dead people less than 24 hours after the fact.
They couldn't have pulled themselves together for a TV interview if they wanted to. And if they could have pulled themselves together for it, someone with taste close to them should have pulled them aside and reminded them how flagrantly disrespectful and dishonorable and downright gauche it is to giving interviews about the dead that soon. If you watch the interview, you find it is just used as another opportunity to unload a further pile of transparent propaganda on the TV audience, telling them how to feel about the event. -- Miles Mathis
UNCLE SAM
“Sansom” is simply an anagram for “Masons.”
It states that Jehovah created EVE, that the Lucifer Spirit SAMAEL united with her but that he was ousted by Jehovah and forced to leave her before the birth of her son Cain, who was thus THE SON OF A WIDOW.
Incidentally, Sansom/Samson is also derived from the Hebrew word for “sun”. The sun is arguably the preeminent symbol of the devious powers-that-be behind Western Intelligence. Interestingly (and incredibly) the Bible warns in Ezekiel 8:16 of the existence of a governing class of Jewish elites who secretly participate in a covert sun worship cult.
SAMAEL (pronounced Sam-kel when spoken) is a Prince of the demons, and an important figure both in Talmudic and in post-Talmudic literature, where he appears as: The Seducer, The Accuser, and The Destroyer. His name is etymologized as “The Venom of God,” since he is identical with The Angel of Death (Targ. Yer. to Gen. iii. 6; see also Death, Angel of), who slays men with a drop of poison.
Samael flies through the air like a bird (Targ. to Job xxviii. 7). Even at the Creation of the world Samael was Lucifer, who ever sought evil and who began his malignant activity with Adam haRishom in Gan Eden. His opponent is Michael, who represents The Beneficent Principle, and who frequently comes into conflict with him.(Read more from the Jewish Encyclopedia)
sam" could be "mass" backwards
1977: THE SUMMER OF SAM
summer's end (samhain)
The expression dog days refers to the hot, sultry days of summer
GOD is DOG spelled backwards, of course.
This dim ruler has three names:
Yaldabaoth is the first.
Saklas is the second.
Samael is the third.
He is blasphemous through his thoughtlessness.
He said “I am God, and there is no God but me!”
Since he didn’t know where his own Power originated.
In 1972, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms was created. Enforcement of the Gun Control Act was given to the Dept. of the Treasury's Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division of the Internal Revenue Service. The organization replaced "tax" with "firearms," nearly doubled in size, and became the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF).
"A river must be happier than a swamp because it has banks and boundaries; a swamp is a valley of liberty that lost its shores and became liberal. Liberty is no heirloom. It requires the daily bread of self denial, the salt of law and, above all, the backbone of acknowledging responsibility for our deeds." Archbishop Fulton Sheen
“WHY shouldn’t we quarrel about a word? What is the good of words if they aren’t important enough to quarrel over? Why do we choose one word more than another if there isn’t any difference between them? If you called a woman a chimpanzee instead of an angel, wouldn’t there be a quarrel about a word? If you’re not going to argue about words, what are you going to argue about? Are you going to convey your meaning to me by moving your ears? The Church and the heresies always used to fight about words, because they are the only things worth fighting about." ~G.K. Chesterton: "The Ball and the Cross," Chap. V—The Peacemaker.
John 16:2: "The hour cometh, that whosoever killeth you, will think that he doth a service to God."
“If Christ is the Prince of Peace then how do we reconcile these other seemingly contradictory words of Our Lord: ‘Do not think that I come to send peace upon earth, I came not to send peace, but the sword’ and ‘Think you, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no but separation.’ The explanation of these apparent contradictions is to be found in the words he addressed to his apostles the night of the Last Supper in which he made an important distinction between two kinds of peace: ‘My peace I give unto you, not as the world gives, do I give unto you’ and ‘These things I have spoken to you, that in me you may have peace. In the world you shall have distress, but have confidence, I have overcome the world.’ There is a difference, then, between His Peace and the peace of the world. It is evident from these words that Our Lord offers a peace and a consolation that He alone can confer, a peace that comes from the right ordering of conscience, from justice, charity, love of God and love of neighbor.” Archbishop Fulton Sheen (The Cross and the Beatitudes)
"MAN can be defined as an animal that makes dogmas. As he piles doctrine on doctrine and conclusion on conclusion in the formation of some tremendous scheme of philosophy and religion, he is, in the only legitimate sense of which the expression is capable, becoming more and more human. When he drops one doctrine after another in a refined scepticism, when he declines to tie himself to a system, when he says that he has outgrown definitions, when he says that he disbelieves in finality, when, in his own imagination, he sits as God, holding no form of creed but contemplating all, then he is by that very process sinking slowly backwards into the vagueness of the vagrant animals and the unconsciousness of the grass. Trees have no dogmas. Turnips are singularly broad-minded." ... ~G.K. Chesterton: "Heretics," Ch. XX.
GOT GUILT? "Confession of sin and repentance are the preconditions for faith and salvation." --Kreeft
In 1991, Yeltsin et al had sold Russia’s interests down the river, and in return, The West allowed the bastards to hoard their ill-gotten gains in the Western financial system. Yeltsin et al had promised to let the Soviet republics go; to disarm; to follow the Washington Consensus, i.e. to stick to the liberal economic model; to allow the free import of consumer goods; to allow Western access to the Russian military complex; to let the West write Russian laws; to permit the free outflow of capital from Russia. The West promised to bring investment, to let Russia live in peace, to keep NATO away from Russian borders.
Mr Putin inherited The Deal. Slowly, the Deal has been eroded from both sides. NATO troops moved eastward, no sizeable investment came in, the West supported Chechen rebels. Russia limited Western access to its military-industrial complex; took Crimea; regained some of its international independence.
Putin was elected, or you may say, he was appointed to stick to the Deal and to serve as the Supreme Arbiter among the oligarchs, with very little of a power base of his own. Slowly, he created his own oligarchs (they are described as “siloviki”, though not all of them have some security forces background), and he had built up a limited power base; though many important positions, in particular in the economic sphere, remained in the hands of the Old Guard, Yeltsin’s men. This, too, was a part of the Deal.
The powerful personalities of Yeltsin’s era remained embedded in the upper echelons of Putin’s state. Chubais and Kudrin were and are untouchable. They are connected with the FRS and the IMF, they go to Bilderberg and Davos, they are often described as ‘the colonial administration’. They steal with both hands, and do it with impunity. Just last week it was revealed and published that Mr Chubais and Mr Kudrin appropriated a cool billion dollars of Russian state money while repaying the Soviet debt to the Czech Republic. The worst Putin can do about them is to give them a fat chunk of the Russian economy to chew on, while limiting their access to the rest. So he gave Mr Chubais the Rusnano company that made no profit but embezzled billions. This was the Deal.
Yeltsin’s oligarchs remained as rich as they were; Yeltsin’s family still possesses immense riches. And Putin does not dare to touch them. He goes hat in hand to open a Yeltsin’s Memorial Centre; he is courteous with Yeltsin’s widow and daughter. Putin’s establishment cautiously avoided celebration, or even mention of the Revolution centenary, in keeping with Yeltsin’s anticommunism. This is the Deal.
The topmost schools of Russia, the most endowed, the most privileged schools for the children of the new nobility are the HSE, (the Higher School of Economics, a clone of the LSE and the economic think-tank of the government), and MGIMO, (Moscow State Institute of International Relations, the school for perspective diplomats). Their graduates were been trained to despise Russia and admire the neo-liberal West (just like the Indian students trained by the Brits, had admired England and despised their country in the days of the British Raj). Professor Medvedev of the HSE called upon Russian government to transfer the Russian Far North to the international community, though this is the place of the greatest gas reserves (he kept his position). Professor Zubov of the MGIMO had compared Putin to Hitler, and denounced Russian diplomats as liars (his contract hasn’t been prolonged). All that is a part of the Deal.
Putin has been unhappy with the Deal for a long time, vocally so since his Munich talk in 2007, but he stuck to the script. Even now, Russia’s economy follows the liberal model; billions of dollars are being siphoned out of Russia monthly; billions of dollars’ worth of Western manufactured consumer goods are imported and sold in Russia, though it would make perfect sense to organise local manufacture. Russia’s Central Bank is directly connected to the Western finance system, and its emission is limited by the amount of hard currency in its coffers. The Rouble carry trade prospers, like the Yen carry trade did years ago.
Meanwhile, the Deal has been undone from the West, as a result of the epic struggle between Bankers and Producers, otherwise described as Liberals vs. Conservatives, or Globalists vs. Regionalists, personalised as Clinton vs. Trump. Yeltsin’s people are historically aligned with the Clinton camp. Now, their assets in the West, previously protected by the Deal, have lost their protection and come up for grabs. -- Shamir
