Thursday, February 6, 2014

Current Interests

My current interests are best reflected in the following psi database from Dean Radin (for rebuttals to criticisms of him, see comments here), and the database from the University of Virginia Division of Perceptual Studies (this group is influenced by F.W.H. Myers, author of Human Personality and it's Survival of Bodily Death, who has been attacked on various grounds, though he is rehabilitated in Trevor Hamilton's biography Immortal Longings: F.W.H. Myers and the Victorian Search for Life after Death - see also Professional Heresy: Edmund Gurney (1847–88) and the Study of Hallucinations and Hypnotism, for partial rebuttal to criticism of Phantasms of the Living (a mere search for the partial word "corroborat" will show that great care was taken with regards to corroboration, rendering criticism spurious), the reception and nature of this is appraised in the aforementioned literature). For those unaware, Myers was a classicist and a poet who would later delve into philosophical psychology, and whose abilities and insights in this area would be praised by his qualified contemporaries like William James (for the praise of Myers by James, see:

Myers had been compared to Darwin and Copernicus by one of his supporters (Théodore Flournoy), but he is not currently lauded to the extent they are, because a key area of his work was in psychical research, of which he was a major, perhaps the major, theoretician. He coined the term "telepathy", and to put it very bluntly, much of his work can be seen as an attempt to demonstrate the reality of the human soul, grounding it in empiricism rather than arbitrary dogma. For more on the nature of his work, see the following review by Flournoy:

There is an attack on people who attempt to do this, fueled by an atheist culture war, in which militant activists have historically shown their determination to attempt to discredit anything suggesting the empirical reality of magic, mysticism, religion (which in my view should be freed from arbitrary excesses - I have a very limited familiarity with Plotinus, but what I have read from him so far suggests that some of what he was writing on helps to provide a picture of what this would look like), or the human soul (for insight into the consequent history of the obfuscation of these subjects by militant atheists, see The Hidden Power by Brian Inglis, a counter to militant materialist derision and the glib attempt to paint everything in this area as fraud, and also an argument that militant materialists, in their denials, have engaged in some fraud and misrepresentation of their own, and see also Science and Psychic Phenomena: The Fall of the House of Skeptics by Chris Carter). This culture war is fueled by the belief that validation of such things would inspire a retrogression of society to the dark ages, whereas in reality it would open up new vistas for an exploration of human potential and the nature of the cosmos. Furthermore, this empirical approach (along with a distillation of cross-cultural correlations from the sources in this), combining rationality with these other aspects of life (rather than arbitrarily denying them, or approving of the divide between science and religion, and thus arbitrarily encouraging superstition and dogma), would rid human society of the destructive aspects of religion, as they do not logically follow from validations of the above. However, there are neurological deficiencies resulting from the extreme left-brained imbalance many counter-advocates display, and this is a factor that needs to be considered as well.

I am also working on two items that provide full vindication for:
1) The views of the controversial "psi-biologist" Rupert Sheldrake:
2) Historical psychical research:

Philosophers may be interested in this for its implications regarding our understanding of reality, but a main interest would be it's relevance to human potential. If our history was not distorted, we would recognize that William Crookes demonstrated the reality of macro-psychokinesis in his book Researches in the Phenomena of Spiritualism. Yet Crookes, like Myers, is currently libeled as a fraud. Medhurst & Goldney, in their monograph William Crookes and the physical phenomena of mediumship (see also A Lawyer Defends Sir William Crookes), have done a great deal to refute much of the derision levied against Crookes (those cover all of his investigations except for the most important, with D.D. Home - regarding Home, Stephen Braude, a contemporary defender of his, is mistakenly is cited in internet articles as ignoring evidence of fraud and counter-advocate literature, when he actually engages this literature and counters it. See for instance his critique of Trevor Hall re. Home (see also Braude's rebuttal to M.H.Coleman's defense of Hall, which argues that Frank Podmore misrepresented the primary sources on Home, Andrew Lang, on pp. 333-339 of The Making of Religion, notes further inadequacies in Podmore's arguments, Brian Inglis and G. Zorab note the failures of G.W.Lambert's Podmorean pseudo-skepticism of physical phenomena with respect to Home (though, like Podmore, he provides a good defense of other cases not colored by his bias, in this case Myers, linked to above), see also Mary Rose Barrington's rebuttal to Gordon Stein's attacks on Crookes). The accusations of fraud against Home are not adequate to establish them - regarding the only meaningful ones, Stephen Braude, in "The Limits of Influence", 1997, p. 28, cites sources regarding contradictions in versions of Robert Browning's denunciations of Home, and Merrifield's denunciation of Home is likewise inadequate to establish fraud - see this and this). F.W.H. Myers and William Barrett, in a review of relevant information on Home, looked at the other allegations of fraud, and stated, "we have found no allegations of fraud on which we should be justified in laying much stress.”

There is more to write on that subject alone, for now, I will note that critics ignore the better items of evidence, like this, and something noted by Alfred Russell Wallace in his defense of Home - something that cannot be replicated by magic tricks - the ability to assume and transfer incombustibility (the way this was done, and how the incombustibility was selectively transfered, is important to read). The levitation of Home described by Adare has been attacked, though on all the essential details in is in agreement with that described by Lord Lindsay, (e.g. the description of Home being horizontally ejected out the window, precluding fraud), as shown in Light, No 770.—Vol . XV., Saturday, October 12, 1895, p. 490, and other descriptions of levitations, including a levitation of a table and descriptions of accordion phenomena like that given by Wallace that preclude fraud, are given here. And Crookes gives a description of Home's levitations, in vivid detail, as follows - "The best cases of Home’s levitation I witnessed were in my own house. On one occasion he went to a clear part of the room, and, after standing quietly for a minute, told us he was rising. I saw him slowly rise up with a continuous gliding movement, and remain about six inches off the ground for several seconds, when he slowly descended. On this occasion no one moved from their places. On another occasion I was invited to come to him, when he rose eighteen inches off the ground, and I passed my hands under his feet, round him, and over his head when he was in the air. On several occasions, Home and the chair on which he was sitting at the table rose off the ground. This was generally done very deliberately, and Home sometimes then tucked up his feet on the seat of the chair and held up his hands in full view of all of us. On such occasions I have gone down and seen and felt all four legs were off the ground at the same time, Home’s feet being on the chair. Less frequently the levitating power extended to those next to him. Once my wife was thus raised off the ground in her chair." For Crookes' experiments with Home, see Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 26, No.1, pp. 9-42, 2012: "A review of Sir William Crookes' papers on psychic force with some additional remarks on psychic phenomena.":

The wikipedia article on Daniel Dunglas Home gives all kinds of arguments attempting to argue that he was a fraud, though Hereward Carrington, who believed that most mediumship was fraudulent and exposed various deceptive magic tricks of mediums, gave in depth reasons why the mediumship of Home did not have fraudulent features in The Physical Phenomena of Spiritualism, p. 372. Also, there is false information in that debunking attempt - it states - "When Crookes published his report on the experiments with Home in the Quarterly Journal of Science in 1871 he did not mention the names of the other observers present in the room, four of whom were female. He also did not refer to any "spirits" in his report. Many years later in 1889 Crookes revealed in his Notes of séances with D. D. Home the names of the observers and claimed Home was in communication with spirits during the experiments" (Note the last sentence of that excerpt and then the following excerpt) That actually is false information with regards to the second item. Crookes said, "it is idle to attribute these results to trickery, for I would again remind my readers that what I relate has not been accomplished at the house of a medium, but in my own house, where preparations have been quite impossible. A medium, walking into my dining room, cannot, while seated in one part of the room with a number of persons keenly watching him, by trickery make an accordion play in my own hand when I hold it keys downwards, or cause the same accordion to float about the room playing all the time. He cannot introduce machinery which will wave window curtains or pull up Venetian blinds eight feet off, tie a knot in a handkerchief and place it in a far comer of the room, sound notes on a distant piano, cause a cardplate to float about the room, raise a water-bottle and tumbler from the table, make a coral necklace rise on end, cause a fan to move about and fan the company, or set in motion a pendulum when enclosed in a glass case firmly cemented to the wall." and "The following is a still more striking instance. As in the former case, Mr. Home was the medium. A phantom form came from a comer of the room, took an accordion in its hand, and then glided about the room playing the instrument. The form was visible to all present for many minutes, Mr. Home also being seen at the same time. Coming rather close to a lady who was sitting apart from the rest of the company, she gave a slight cry, upon which it vanished." (William Crookes, ‘Notes into an Enquiry into the Phenomena of Spiritualism during the Years 1870–1873', Quarterly Journal of Science, 1874.)- emphasis added:

The denunciations of Crookes by William Carpenter were based on spurious distortions, and those of George Stokes were based on a priori dismissal (S. Braude,"The Limits of Influence" (1997), p. 30, 77). A review of Medhust & Goldney on Crookes suggests a different perception of that work that what is conveyed by the obfuscatory current historical rewrite. They discovered that there were even interesting comments from the famed biologist Charles Darwin, a noted anti-Spiritualist who supported the persecution of the medium Henry Slade (I will attempt to justify my use of those words in updates to the piece on psychical research though a preliminary argument can be found here - incidentally the argument has been made that Darwin ripped off the work of Alfred Russel Wallace, who defended Slade and came to believe that evolution was guided). Darwin, while incredulous about Crookes' experiments, admitted he was "perplexed" by them, and that while he could not believe them, he "could not disbelieve" in Crookes reports of them. Francis Galton, Darwin's colleague, was more approving, stating that "I am utterly confounded with the results, and am very disinclined to discredit them. Crookes is working deliberately and well." Here we have, from one who attended the experiments, a corroboration of them. The militant atheist Edward Clodd attempted to discredit Crookes' ability to conduct these experiments by citing hearsay with no independent verification - Clodd has misrepresented statements against others in order to fabricate assertions against them, and the noted scholar of psychical research Alan Gauld referred to him as a "wholly unreliable source" in Appendix B of The Founders of Psychical Research (1968), noting how assertions in an article of his were completely in conflict with the primary source originals for the relevant details (other counteradvocates like the Stalinist Joseph McCabe, Joseph Rinn, Charles Mercier, Trevor Hall, Harry Houdini, et. al., have also made statements that were in conflict with or misrepresented the primary source literature, as I have demonstrated and will demonstrate further in in updates to the piece). But returning to the matter at hand - in this case, Galton's praise of Crookes and corroboration of his work is in conflict with Clodd's assertions of Crookes' incompetence. Crookes' descriptions are also vivid and detailed, in conflict with assertions of incompetence levied against him. The psychical researcher Walter Franklin Prince, in The Enchanted Boundary: Being a Survey of Negative Reactions to claims of Psychic Phenomena 1820-1930 (Boston Society for Psychic Research, 1930),who himself was a skeptic of some physical phenomena, on  p. 54 of that text, in a critique of Clodd noting his numerous inaccuracies, stated "The sneer that Crookes was too short sighted to be trusted is untrustworthy, even if Sir William Ramsay stooped to say it. In the first place, there were four other observers present. In the second, Crookes used spectacles, and it is the nature of these to correct defects of sight." And Galton also made comments about Home's willing and compliant attitude towards the experimenters that rule out the possibility that he was a charlatan - that "Home encourages going under the table and peering everywhere (I did so and held his feet while the table moved)". Galton had horrific impact as a eugenicist, and he is in no way to be lauded because of this, but he did have scientific training and is a source of corroboration for Crookes and for Home, who had many other sources of corroboration.

The assertion that Home only produced phenomena in semi-darkness is false, as it involves lying by omission. It is true that he did produce some phenomena in semi-darkness, but his mediumship produced phenomena "at all times and seasons, under all sorts of conditions - in broad daylight, in artificial light, in semi-darkness[...] indoors, out of doors, in private houses, in hotels - at home and abroad." (p. 22 of PSPR XCIII, June 1924, "The Earl of Dunraven's Record of Experiences With D.D. Home") William Crookes noted, in Researches in the Phenomena of Spiritualism, describing the accordion experiment, "The meetings took place in the evening, in a large room lighted by gas.", and noted of Home's phenomena, "The power possessed by Mr. Home is sufficiently strong to withstand this antagonistic influence; consequently, he always objects to darkness at his séances. Indeed, except on two occasions, when, for some particular experiments of my own, light was excluded, everything which I have witnessed with him has taken place in the light. I have had many opportunities of testing the action of light of different sources and colours, such as sun-light, diffused day light, moon light, gas, lamp, and candle light, electric light from a vacuum tube, homogeneous yellow light, &c." In both of these instances, as with many others, ther was no "female partner"According to John Beloff, writing in chapter 1, "Historical Overview" of Handbook of Parapsychology (Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1977), on p. 9, "Recent historical re" Home repudiated the charge that skeptics like Houdin (from whom Houdini took his name) were not allowed at sittings, stating that at the incident described, he had to choose 9 out of 30 people, and he happened to choose the conjurer M. Cante who testified that the phenomena were not conjuring tricks. JSPR vol. 4, p. 119, provides testimony from a conjurer that Home's phenomena could not be explained by magic tricks, Wallace provides the same in his defense, and even the professional skeptic and past president of the Edinburgh Magic Circle, Peter Lamont, admitted that Home's phenomena could not be adequately explained at the time of his writing (2006), with known conjuring methods.

There is much more, to go into regarding these issues, and I could spend pages and pages on them, but for the sake of brevity, I will cite one other item - in "Mediumship and Survival", Alan Gauld cites an item that the detractors of Gladys Osborne Leonard (who already is misrepresented by counter-advocates, as will be established in updates of that piece) seem to overlook: "Some of the individual successes in these tests were very remarkable. In one case (145c, pp. 253-260) an anonymous sitter (Mrs Talbot) received through Feda [Leonard's "control"] a message from her late husband advising her to look for a relevant message on page twelve or thirteen of a book on her bookcase at home. Feda said the book was not printed, but had writing in it; was dark in colour; and contained a table of Indo-European, Aryan, Semitic and Arabian languages, whose relationships were shown by a diagram of radiating lines. Mrs Talbot knew of no such book, and ridiculed the message. However when she eventually looked, she found at the back of a top shelf a shabby black leather notebook of her husband's. Pasted into this book was a folded table of all the languages mentioned; whilst on page 13 was an extract from a book entitled Post Mortem. In this case the message related to a book unknown to medium and sitter (indeed, so far as could be told, to any living person), but undoubtedly known to the communicator."

There are so many others who displayed genuine abilities, who are misrepresented by critics confined to apriori assumptions that to acknowledge this would be to accept "miraculous anomalies" that are in conflict with "well established" universals. A rebuttal to this comes from Andrew Lang's "Cock Lang and Common-Sense" has been strangely cited by counter-adovcates as confirming their contentions, when it actually contains information that shifts the debate to the side of the advocates. Lang notes, in "Cock Lane and Common-Sense": "Thus enough is known to show that savage spiritualism wonderfully resembles, even in minute details, that of modern mediums and séances, while both have the most striking parallels in the old classical thaumaturgy.

This uniformity, to a certain extent, is not surprising, for savage, classical, and modern spiritualism all repose on the primæval animistic hypothesis as their metaphysical foundation. The origin of this hypothesis-namely, that disembodied intelligences exist and are active-is explained by anthropologists as the result of early reasonings on life, death, sleep, dreams, trances, shadows, the phenomena of epilepsy, and the illusions of starvation. This scientific theory is, in itself, unimpeachable; normal phenomena, psychological and physical, might suggest most of the animistic beliefs. {35}

At the same time 'veridical hallucinations,' if there are any, and clairvoyance, if there is such a thing, would do much to originate and confirm the animistic opinions. Meanwhile, the extraordinary similarity of savage and classical spiritualistic rites, with the corresponding similarity of alleged modern phenomena, raises problems which it is more easy to state than to solve. For example, such occurrences as `rappings,' as the movement of untouched objects, as the lights of the séance room, are all easily feigned. But that ignorant modern knaves should feign precisely the same raps, lights, and movements as the most remote and unsophisticated barbarians, and as the educated Platonists of the fourth century after Christ, and that many of the other phenomena should be identical in each case, is certainly noteworthy. This kind of folklore is the most persistent, the most apt to revive, and the most uniform. We have to decide between the theories of independent invention; of transmission, borrowing, and secular tradition; and of a substratum of actual fact."

So in this case, unless one assumes an ubiquitous "psychical/spiritualistic hoaxing gene", which is an absurd proposal, the argument from miracles would seem to be refuted, as instead of dealing with anomalies contradicting universals, we are dealing with universals (albiet more elusive), that seem to be in conflict with more common universals, but may in reality just require an expanded naturalism - perhaps expanded beyond our present conceptions, though that, for mature people, shouldn't be a problem. From this we can conclude that cases of fraud, rather than being the defining nature of the phenomena, are deviations from the underlying "substratum of actual fact." However, the cultural nature of the Spiritualist movement encouraged fraud (implicit commercialism, desire to produce "phenomena" to satisfy customers, etc.), and differed from other cases (e.g. - those under Iamblichus, by their nature, are more credible at face value, excepting the scientific investigations of the modern mediums - on this,it is important to note what James Hyslop said of Spiritualists, in a review attacking a book of Clodd, that "Their credulity and unscientific methods are the cause of such books, and they will receive no mercy until they yeild to the demands of science. But their faults are not an adequate excuse for bias and misrepresentation from the other side."). Regarding Iamblichus, though, it is interesting that Andrew Lang, on p. 339 of his aforementioned Making of Religion, stated, "The interesting point, historically, is the combination in Home of all the repertoire of the possessed men in lamblichus."

Future versions of the above item on psychical research will attempt to start from that foundation of cross-cultural correlation to provide an empirical basis for the "magical" aspect of the "occult" from Shamanism to Neo-Platonism (e.g. - Iamblichus, etc.), going on through the advent of Mesmerism and psychical research to "noetic science", and attempt to correct the historical record on this. Carrying the types of research engaged in by Myers and Crookes into modern times, we have the Scole experiment - anything like this is bound to attract criticism currently, though in comparison to this presentation, such criticism is superficial - and in this case, a professional magician testified to the fact that conditions for fraud could not occur and the phenomena could not be reproduced by conjuring. And in the style of both Myers and Crookes, an interesting article is Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol.24, No.1, pp.5-39, 2010: "Rebuttal to Claimed Refutations of Duncan MacDougall's Experiment on Human Weight Change at the Moment of Death.":

In all of this, the excellent text Natural and Supernatural by Brian Inglis is not so well known, but it deserves far more credit than it has so far received. And some debate between myself and a counteradvocate occurs in the comments section, that might help the reader in navigating through some of this.

As fascinating as the above is, there is something more interesting, and more compelling, than what has so far been presented. This relates to claimed yogic "magic powers", or siddhis - an overview of which occurs here:

The idea with this, though in yogic traditions they were claimed as a potential preoccupation hindering enlightenment, is that the practitioner, via extreme involvement in yogic practice, could transform, dissolve internal blockages, and become a channel for full-fledged super-normal powers.

This seems like an extreme claim, but there is validation. Sanjay C. Patel has written on how ancient yogis, apparently displaying super-psi, gave accurate descriptions consistent with modern science of the nature of deep sea volcanoes, in ways that were beyond their (known) physical technological capacity to encounter. See the following, but especially his notes after the extracts:
1) Sanjay C. Patel, Deep-Sea Volcanoes and Their Associated Hydrothermal Vents, Historical Notes, Indian National Science Academy (INSA), New Delhi, December 2004, 39.4 (2004), pp. 511-518:
2) Sanjay C. Patel, Who Really Discovered Deep-Sea Volcanoes? IMAREST, Marine Scientist, No. 9, 4Q, December 2004, pp. 27-29:
3) Sanjay C. Patel, Who Were the Earliest Scholars of Submarine Volcanoes and Their Submerged Hydrothermal Vents? 22nd International Congress of History of Science, Book of Abstracts, Beijing 24-30 July 2005, p. 355:

The papers argue the discoveries would have not been possible by physical means within the time-frame of the writings, or time frames of earlier cultures - as Patel notes in the notes after the extract of one document:  "I only postulated this physical explanation because it was a 'requirement' of getting these stunning agreements with modern discoveries accepted in scientific, mainstream peer-review. But here's the real crux: the physical explanation is quite inadmissible. Though India and the Indian Ocean display a remarkable history of volcanism, it is difficult to apply these conditions to the prehistoric past. Why? Because unlike Surtsey, India hasn't been a hotspot for millions of years. There is therefore no geological source for the tremendous volume of magma/lava required to build an island like Surtsey reaching above sea level. You can't get lava from nothing. Even by 'special pleading.' The severity of the problem has been pointed out to me by a number of geologists. [...] The yogis did not say that the emergence of the volcanic structure in the Indian ocean was a recent event. They said it occurred very soon after a part of the mainland of India itself was ablaze with volcanic fire. They explicitly said that this was about 120 million years ago! This timeline is in superb harmony with the objections of scientists who point out that no volcano like Surtsey could have emerged near India without a large hotspot magma source. However, it is scientifically established that such sources did exist 120 million years ago and a part of India was ablaze with volcanism at exactly the same time! How could the ancient yogis know this? Statistically, through sheer fantasy, they could have given any timeline whatsoever from 1 to infinite years ago. But they didn't. They chose exactly 120 million years ago. What are the chances of that? And what are the chances of all these descriptions coming together so coherently?"

That all may be fascinating, but there is an element of danger in getting lost in all of this, and that is as follows: Regardless of a possible ultimate Spiritual reality, this is the world where Spirit meets matter, and thus we need to be fully engaged in it, perhaps with the above informing aspects of our vision, but with our feet firmly on the ground. Some of this might have philosophical aspects that may help our orientation in our long term actions, but we mustn't let this obfuscate the necessity of personal and societal liberation,without which the above becomes mere opiate. Yet there is so much fraud in the opposition to it from the organized "skeptic" movement, that I feel a revisionist history in the tradition of Brian Inglis, but covering aspects he missed, is necessary, particularly when you consider the aspects relevant to human potential that we would gain insight into from a clear understanding of this. There is something else that is distorted in modern culture, and can, if one uncritically absorbs the distortions, severely harm people, but could also, if one sets aside the distortions, greatly liberate people:

I have engaged in, as a personal endeavor, a pursuit of Gnosis/mysticism, and I have found the apophatic approach advocated by Jiddu Krishnamurti in The First and Last Freedom, as well assom of the work of Boris Mouravieff in his Gnosis trilogy, and Aurobindo Ghose in The Life Divine to be useful in this respect. This field is usually filled with arbitrary, irrelevant arguments, but I have found the work of Krishnamurti in particular to be immensely valuable, as it was not dogmatic, but rather, more like a dialogue to effect transformations in consciousness - and working with that material in particular helped me transcend a deep, many year crisis period - though even in cases like that, a person would commit error by "following" somebody, instead of approaching this like a technology facilitating transformation. In contrast to my work with the material of Krishnamurti, though I have not delved into them with the necessary depth to make a qualified assessment, I feel that some aspects of the work of Mouravieff and Aurobindo have some mental structures that I consider arbitrary - and more to the point, I feel that while they can be useful, potential problems of engaging with them are spelled out by the statement of the former, that “An Ideal is merely an escape, an avoidance of what is, a contradiction of what is. An ideal prevents direct action upon what is. To have peace, we will have to love, we will have to begin not to live an ideal life but to see things as they are and act upon them, transform them.”

There is also so much in the way of garbage dissuading those involved in these pursuits, and currently, there is a complete perversion of this that has become a highly weaponized tool to lead people away from personal power and into a solipsistic, passive haze.  So I encourage people to recognize that, and also to not discard critical thinking for the acceptance of belief or dogma, but rather, to first and foremost have empiricism as their guide - I feel that this is a good tool to help people in refining their intellect to help them do this. Yet empiricism does not imply materialism, which many hold to irrationally as an infantile counter-reaction to the excesses of organized religion - a fact that this article explains rather beautifully. Empiricism can be used to refute materialism, as has been done in a book, Irreducible Mind, an update and corroboration of the theories of F.W.H. Myers, which is the result of a project from the researchers at the University of Virginia Division of Perceptual Studies, and which is tremendously important to me - the book has received mixed reviews from academia - one negative, prompting a rebuttal, and most positive. In a list of documents I have provided, near the bottom, I link to some of the positive reviews. One item explored in Irreducible Mind is the mystical experience, particularly interesting is their connection between Genius and Mysticism. Further empirical corroboration is as follows: Jeffrey Schwartz was able to demonstrate that self-directed thought could rewire the brain, curing obsessive compulsive patients, with a corroborating theoretical framework provided by Henry Stapp, in a 2004 article in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B,  and a  meta-analysis of meditation experiments published in the journal Psychological Bulletin, in May 2012, showed that meditation differs from mere relaxation and that it significantly benefits a broad range of psychological factors, including emotional regulation, anxiety, relationship issues, attention, etc. However, concerning the true core of this, there is a very interesting correlation between what Robert Jahn said was the most successful strategy for RNG micro-PK experiments (defended in the thread in the Radin blog) - that "successful strategy for anomalies experimentation involves some blurring of identities between operator and machine, or between percipient and agent. And, of course, this is also the recipe for any form of love: the surrender of self-centered interests of the partners in favor of those of the pair." - and the observation of the Neo-Platonist Plotinus that "Knowledge has three degrees—opinion, science, illumination. The means or instrument of the first is sense; of the second dialectic; of the third intuition. To the last I subordinate reason. It is absolute knowledge founded on the identity of the mind knowing with the object known." A good example of a person transformed by such a process is Lester Levenson, as is obvious from this presentation of his.

This can be of tremendous benefit to us, but only if it informs our actions in the world so as to lead to greater coherence, compassion, and right action, and not if it encourages escapism.

And there is one terrible consequence of modern atheism - and that is the brutal nihilism and moral relativism that ensues from it, and the fact that it is internally contradictory since according to its tenets, perceptions and beliefs are at best adaptations for survival, not reliable means of discovering truth, as admitted by its leading adherents. However, aside from the immediate philosophical objections, one does not need blind faith in arbitrary religious arguments to realize the fallacy of this. The PhysOrg article, Quantum Mysticism: Gone but Not Forgotten, noted that the opposition to the mystical views of the results of Quantum physics that were held by physicists like Wolfgang Pauli were based on an adherence to philosophic realism. Advances in quantum physics refuting realism have affirmed Neo-Platonic Panentheism - an article in Physics World, "Quantum physics says goodbye to reality", notes that belief in a mind-independent reality is no longer valid based on current results, and Richard Cohn Henry, a relevant expert who has published in Nature, noted, in separate commentary, regarding the philosophical implications of these results, that "if mind is not a product of real matter, but rather is the creator of the illusion of material reality (which has, in fact, despite the materialists, been known to be the case, since the discovery of quantum mechanics in 1925), then a theistic view of our existence becomes the only rational alternative to solipsism." Solipsism as a position is incoherent (and extremely dangerous), so we are left with panentheism. There are, of course, in addition, the Natural Theology arguments, cosmological arguments like Koon's New Look at the Cosmological Argument, the Leibnizian Cosmological Argument, etc, but a key error many of the adherents of this make is adding to their coherent general theistic arguments arbitrary Christian religious arguments (this is particularly pernicious due to the Salvationist aspect, which is a form of child abuse, though that very Salvationism has contradictory interpretations within the New Testament literature itself; moreover, the Gospel of Thomas, noted by many scholars as emerging within the time period of the synoptic Gospels and having verses that reflect aspects of Christianity and other verses that demonstrate a bridge to Gnosticism, is in many ways a repudiation of Salvationism; the New Testament is not only internally contradictory, but in conflict with the Old Testament, as noted by Marcion (who affirmed Christianity because he was unaware of internal inconsistencies in the New Testament), who was of course hated by Orthodoxy, but who has been defended by GRS Mead - and finally, Near Death Experiences, which materialists like to discredit probably because they fear an embrace of the subject will validate traditional religion, actually refute salvationism - with that said though, there is one interpretation of this that I find coherent - assuming the existence of souls, "hell" is a freely chosen identity based on something besides God going on forever, perpetually disintegrating with its attachments and entering into ever greater despair). Also, there is the argument for general theism that mathematics applies to the physical world, the veracity of this argument is highlighted moreover by the innate mathematical harmony of the physical world.

And there are very important implications from the above for our action in the physical world, highlighted by Mark Passio in his very important "Natural Law Seminar":

That seminar gives one of the most powerful calls to action for internal and external liberation that I have ever heard.

Aside from this, as a means of improving the personal and societal condition, I have taken up a deep interest in natural health, and very much appreciate the databases from Greenmedinfo and the Life Extension Foundation.

I am working on countering the historical misrepresentations levied against Linus Pauling's Orthomolecular Medicine here:

And I agree with him totally that optimum nutrition is the desirable medicine - if the enough work is done, it may, in accordance with his desire, as of yet become the medicine of the future.

Finally, I am beginning to delve into the work of the economic reformer Henry George, but used towards alleviating Statist excesses and ultimately something to use put towards increasing anarchy, and I desire to come up with similar forms that could challenge existing monopolies and then ultimately become anarchic in the monetary system. Adjunctive to this are some of the proposals of the anarchist Bob Black. I am also appreciative of the efforts of Michel Chossudovsky and others with the Centre for Research on Globalization, though I believe that many of the writers of that organization are duped by fallacious Marxist arguments, and that their analysis, while useful, is limited in scope. My previous posts on this site provide a perspective that is important to consider in conjunction with theirs.

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Proclamation, pt. III

For those coming upon this information for the first time, looking at that which I took the effort to document, I implore you to take to heart the following insight from Frederich Neitzche:

"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster.  And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you."

It is important that in looking at the more grotesque aspects of our situation, we do not contribute, by emulating the violence we see, to the circumstances we deplore. I was, previously, at a risk of doing this as I concentrated accumulated hostilities into toxic polemics that I would write to shock people with. That very action, though, was a coping mechanism for a deeper turmoil, that began to dissolve as I entered more and more into a state of loving, choiceless awareness. Various circumstances necessitated this, and I found from personal experience, and a study of the experiences of others, that this can resolve internal crisis periods. And externally, it can dissolve the violence, in whatever form, leading to worldwide misery. It is my view that doing this can lead us to come upon our natural state, which expresses itself more and more as incoherence is dissolved. As William James noted in The Varieties of Religious Experience:

"The mind-curers ... have demonstrated that a form of regeneration by relaxing, by letting go, psychologically indistinguishable from the Lutheran justification by faith and the Wesleyan acceptance of free grace, is within the reach of persons who have no conviction of sin and care nothing for Lutheran theology. It is but giving your little private convulsive self a rest, and finding that a greater Self is there. The results, slow or sudden, or great or small, of the combined optimism and expectancy, and the regenerative phenomena which ensue on the abandonment of effort, remain firm facts of human nature, no matter whether we adopt a theistic, pantheistic-idealistic, or a medical-materialistic view of their ultimate causal explanation."

With that said, as has been brought out by Aurobindo Ghose in his response to Ghandi, and as can be brought out with personal reflection and experience, Love does not imply apathy and acquiescence. It implies doing what we can to make the most harmonious world possible for all of us, but it also implies that, with our vision of Heaven, we unflinchingly encounter, confront, and transmute the demons of the world, internally and externally, so as to build a New Earth. And it is in acknowledgement of this fact that I write what follows, not to advocate that people engage in the destructive activity of those being scrutinized here, but nevertheless, to hold those who I critique accountable, lest their delusional actions imperil the human species.

As for my commentary below, it, and everything else I have written, are rough drafts subject to revision, until further notice. By that, I do not mean that I am abandoning the various theses I have put forward, but rather, since everything I have put forward here is controversial, I will have to thoroughly refine and in some cases expand my argument, a process that will take months and, in some cases, years. At present it is a serious contender with widely held narratives that I feel are erroneous or unjust. I would like the full power of these points to be felt, so that they make the necessary refutations or modifications to these widely held narratives.

I will start simply in developing what follows: A major point of interest to me is remedying what I feel to be implicit structural economic flaws. I am a 22 year old undergraduate who was studying economics, and will complete my bachelors in it, but found that it, as presented, was in many ways a form of apologetics for neoliberalism (there are several recent arguments against it that I have found interesting - Michael Hudson's book "Trade, Development, and Foreign Debt", which I have preliminarily looked at and will look at more in depth, Stephen Zarlenga's "The Lost Science of Money", positively reviewed by Hudson, and Mason Gaffney's essay (which I have some familiarity with, but which I will more thoroughly look at later). There is also this independently verifiable fact of hidden in plain sight government ownership of major portions of multinationals, showing stores of wealth that reveal a discrepancy between alleged wealth and real wealth of government, and that government and industry are a sort of fusion. This is well documented by Walter Burien in his overview of comprehensive annual financial reports - it challenges those who defend the system we are in:

I will perhaps get a Masters degree in Finance so that I can launch a compelling, credible critique of my own, from a social justice perspective, and I think the above authors are on the right track, though they seem to ignore that major economic changes follow the patterns of top down, pre-determined agendas.Their structural critiques would, I feel, halt the ability for these agendas to manifest as they do, but it is an extreme error, in my view, for these critics to not acknowledge that this is a driving force. To see how this plays out, just look at the UK Ministry of Defence DCDC Global Strategic Trends Programme 2007-2036 document, which "predicts" (p. 78), that "Globalization will result in critical interdependencies that will link members of a globalized society that includes a small super-rich elite and a substantial underclass of slum and subsistence dwellers, who will make up 20% of the world population in 2020." This document used to be here:, but it is archived here:

Of course, this is conservative, since the following Dec., 2011 NBC News article noted that 50% of Americans are poor:

Jacques Attali, in Millennium: Winners and Losers in the Coming World Order (1991), was more explicit, though rather than engaging in "prediction", he spoke in pure unbridled prophecy - he said (p. 12), "Ordinary people will gape with awe and resentment from their modest suburbs and homeless streets at the high rises of wealth and skyscrapers of power that will loom above their reach.", and (p. 84), "In the coming world order, there will be winners and there will be losers. The losers will outnumber the winners by an unimaginable factor. They will yearn for the chance to live decently, and they are likely to be denied that chance. They will encounter rampant prejudice and fear. They will find themselves penned in, asphyxiated by pollution, neglected through indifference. The horrors of the twentieth century will fade by comparison."

Finally, when we get to items like the 2012 fiscal year Annual Financial Report for the educational behemoth CORE, we find (p. 3) that:
"The global agenda of the 21st century is set around economy and trade, with manufacturing shifting from the west to the east, employment landscape would immensely change at both ends. In order to sustain their economic growth, developed as well as developing economies need to intensify their human capital formation. Not surprising then, nations across the world are increasingly investing in education for continued development of their human capital, quantitatively as well as qualitatively.":

So, from that alone, we know that the transfer of productive capacity was pre-planned - and the pre-planned setting up of the Chinese Communist machine is something that will be further explored in the initial post. We also learn that human beings are considered to be natural resources, just like the other natural resources that are exploited and controlled by a few extremely wealthy families whose incorporated old world assets have, along with modern extortion strategies, become the foundation upon which the world's economy is currently indebted. The present basis for such human management is cybernetics and control theories - noting such a fact might be in contradiction to sociological dogmas, but it is clearly laid out in relevant military literature, as I have shown here:

Neil Kramer is a person who seems to have independently had many of the same insights I have had about life. In "The Unfoldment", he noted quite correctly: "Once you have the distortion coordinates-the cipher that makes sense of all the surface weirdness-everything begins to slot into place. The mist of the confusion disperses. You can see. And those coordinates are horribly uncomplicated: Most of the human population on the planet lives in a consumer plantation designed to provide physical and spiritual slave labor to an elite few. Reality and truth are concealed in order to maintain and protect the powerbase. None of this has anything to do with politics or ideologies."

Yet ideologies and movements can often serve as masks behind which the World Order, as of this writing, operates, and because of the emotions associated with such masks, prevent, by Pavlovian reflex, a proper comprehension of the death-oriented control system we live in. I have seen this behavior express itself most blatantly among the "educated", in their incredulity and aversion to items such as those that are discussed here, and they, in their actions, highlight the veracity of the observations of the sociologist Jacques Ellul, who, when commenting on the tendency for "intellectuals" to absorb ideas based on the mainstream consensus, noted, in his book "Propaganda": "Naturally, the educated man does not believe in propaganda, he shrugs and is convinced that propaganda has no effect on him. This is, in fact, one of his great weaknesses, and propagandists are well aware that in order to reach someone, one must first convince him that propaganda is ineffectual and not very clever. Because he is convinced of his own superiority, the intellectual is much more vulnerable than anybody else to this maneuver." And on p. 81, he noted: "The individual's adherence to his group is "conscious" because he is aware of it and recognizes it, but it is ultimately involuntary because he is trapped in a dialectic and in a group that leads him unfailingly to his adherence. His adherence is also 'intellectual' because he can express his conviction clearly and logically, but it is not genuine because the information, the data, the reasoning, that have led him to adherence to the group were themselves deliberately falsified in order to lead him there."

I was, for a few years deeply concerned about a movement towards World government that I document on this site, provably being steered by a global "elite" with illegitimate power. I was immediately shot sown in this, with people, who were sufferers from the problem Ellul diagnoses, arguing to me that claims of this taking place had their origins in "anti-semitic propaganda" based on the Protocols of Zion "forgery". I later found that those who have made in depth analyses of the subject have shown serious flaws in the standard forgery arguments - e.g. - Peter Myers made an in depth critique of Norman Cohn, the leading proponent of the "Protocols as fake" idea, which includes this gem - "Cohn's arithmetic is incorrect. The word-count of the parallel-passages from the Protocols, as listed by Bernstein (at, is 4,361, while the word-count of the Protocols is 26, 496. That is, the parallel passages comprise 16.45% of the Protocols; this is substantial, but still less than one sixth of the total. What Cohn especially omits to mention, is the Protocols' extensive coverage of the world finance system. ":

More textual critique is given in the initial post, showing that the Protocols are best thought as a part of the continuing literature of an older semi-clandestine movement, and also, as I substantiate in the main post, the testimony on which the arguments against it are flawed and controverted by another disposition, and that looking into Joly's text reveals an association of it with the World Revolutionary Movement of the time. But much more importantly, I was able to accumulate primary source literature showing that the essential aspects of the Protocols were reflected in the actions and words of key power elite figures - associated, in fact, with the Zionist movement. Moreover, aspects of the organization and ideology permeating the Protocols had parallels in historical Jewish power structures - see the chapter from The Controversy of Zion entitled The Rise of the Pharisees.

For a while, I continued this quest of understanding this problem of Globalism that I, initially, felt was true only by intuition, as I was beleaguered by the seemingly fully comprehensive counterarguments put forth by apologists for the present system. I looked into the standard, low quality "conspiratorial" literature on the subject, and gradually came across better, higher quality presentations, like those offered here and here. I did some more in depth research on the subject, looking into problems of Globalism that the "political far-right" and the "political far-left" critiques in different ways, though what they're critiquing has a common origin (this can be further substantiated by comparing the following review of the latest Ludwig von Mises Institute lauded biography of their hero, a key founder of "libertarian" Austrian Economics, which states that "Many readers may be surprised to learn the extent to which the Graduate Institute and then Mises himself in the years immediately after he came to United States were kept afloat financially through generous grants from the Rockefeller Foundation. In fact, for the first years of Mises’s life in the United States, before his appointment as a visiting professor in the Graduate School of Business Administration at New York University (NYU) in 1945, he was almost totally dependent on annual research grants from the Rockefeller Foundation.", and items like the following statement of the Communist icon Leon Trotsky, recorded in LIFE Magazine, Dec 26, 1938, as follows: "You will have a revolution, a terrible revolution. What course it takes will depend much on what Mr. Rockefeller tells Mr. Hague to do. Mr. Rockefeller is a symbol of the American ruling class and Mr. Hague is a symbol of its political tools.") Eventually, I came upon items like the following:

A major item of importance is the recordings of the 4th World Wilderness Congress that preceded the 1992 Earth Summit. Here people like you and I are called "the cannon fodder, unfortunately, that populates the Earth". And a banking system set up by and for the Rothschilds is shown to be the centerpiece of the new mode of organization that "sustainability" measures will create. The attendees (like Maurice Strong) have no qualms about acknowledging the dominance of that family in World Affairs. Strong states that there is "no better person" to spearhead this project than Edmund Leopold de Rothschild, and that he (Rothschild) "epitomizes in his own life that positive synthesis between environment and conservation on the one hand and economics on the other":

The following overview notes what this would metastasize into, that "The 4th WWC introduced the concept of a World Conservation Bank, leading to the formation of the The Global Environment Facility (GEF) of the World Bank.":

We can see the outlines of these proposals being promoted at the present time. In a document called "Trading Emissions: Full Global Potential" (London: The Social Market Foundation, January 2008: - written by Simon Linnett, Executive Vice Chairman of N.M. Rothschild, London (see "about the author" section of that document). In the document, he defines "greenhouse emissions" as the new form of "social market" and states: "That such a market has to be established on a world basis coordinated by an international institution with a constitution to match.... That, perhaps, it might be regarded as having wider benefits than merely `saving the planet' - perhaps it might be the basis of a new world order, one that is not based on trade and/or conflict resolution. Perhaps one can see a way to achieve this goal through leadership, vision and some marginal and manageable renunciation of national sovereignty, how the world might just get there. The repercussions of addressing climate change may extend well beyond that single but critical issue.... Implicit in all the above is that nations have to be prepared to subordinate, to a certain extent, some element of their sovereignty to this world initiative." He notes that "The political costs of such loss of sovereignty are lengthy. Loss of competitiveness (massively overstated in the activities in which energy is used - especially since trade will be more difficult, if, at the margin, transport is made more costly), loss of power and loss of direct control over economic levers are potentially the most significant and give the most cause for concern. But these actions are necessary if we are to answer the accusation that "it doesn't matter what we do when China is expanding its energy usage at its current rate" - we have to bring China and India in and they are not going to enter a scheme where they do not have a "say". When countries are already foregoing the right of direct control over monetary policy through the creation of independent central banks, this [the above] could be a relatively small price to pay for such inclusion." He furthermore states that "The EU member states have recognised their need to subordinate sovereignty to the EU; in time, if this is to work, the EU itself will need to yield sovereignty to a bigger world body on carbon trading." He states "Above all, this plan requires "sponsors" - a country prepared to host it and a senior politician prepared to lead this new initiative. If such a route map could be found, then perhaps we might be at the beginning of a new world constitution and a new world order." He states that regulating this should be a "World Environment Authority" operating from a "world city with world skills and world facilities." He then notes, in a section entitled "A natural role for London", "London is a world financial centre (possibly "the" world financial centre)." and that "London would make a compelling case to house the World Environmental Agency."

Documents retrieved from the congress from which audio of Edmund de Rothschild was taken state the following (in the introductory email, I endorsed Mullins - an endorsement which I redact because he is such a problematic source, but I stand behind everything else in the email prefacing the document. The document itself gives insight into the accumulated degeneracy of the elite of the world at present - I thought initially that a signed letter preceding document was sufficient as an affidavit, but I will be getting a genuine affadivit supervised by a notary from George Hunt concerning this document very shortly - and there are people who question this because online knockoffs have the wrong number of Gephardt - 814-631-9959. But this,a copy of the original (see p. 5), has the right number, 314-631-9959, and is consistent with the other items presented, a part of the continuing literature of this partially-open-conspiracy: Excerpts are as follows: "The time is pressing. The Club of Rome was founded in 1968, Limits to Growth was written in 1971, Global 2000 was written in 1979, but insufficient progress has been made in population reduction. Given global instabilities, including those of the former Soviet bloc, the need for firm control of world technology, weaponry, and resources, is absolutely mandatory. The immediate reduction of world population, according to the mid-1970's recommendation of the Draper Fund, must be immediately affected. The present vast overpopulation, now far beyond the world carrying capacity, cannot be answered by future reductions in the birth rate due to contraception, sterilization and abortion, but must be met in the present by the reduction of numbers presently existing. This must be done by whatever means necessary. ... Compulsory cooperation is not debatable with 166 nations, most of whose leaders are irresolute, conditioned by localist "cultures" and lacking the appropriate notions of the New World Order. Debate only means delay and forfeiture of our goals and purpose. The UN action against Iraq proves conclusively that resolute action on our part can sway other leaders to go along with the necessary program. The Iraq action proves that the aura of power can be projected and sustained and that the wave of history is sweeping forward. ... We are the living sponsors of the great Cecil Rhodes will of 1877 ... We stand with Lord Milner's credo. We too are "British Race Patriots" and our patriotism is "the speech, the tradition, the principles, the aspirations of the British Race". Do you fear to take this stand, at the very last moment when this purpose can be realized? do you not see that failure now, is to be pulled down by the billions of Lilliputians of lesser race who care little or nothing for the Anglo-Saxon system? ...The Security Council of the UN, led by the Anglo-American Major Nation Powers, will decree that, henceforth, all nations have quotas for REDUCTION on a yearly basis, which will be enforced by the Security Council by selective or total embargo of credit, food, medicine or military force, when required. ... outmoded notions of sovereignty will be discarded and the Security Council has complete legal, military and economic jurisdiction in any region in the world, to be enforced by the Major Nations of the Security Council. The Security Council of the U.N. will explain that not all races are equal, nor should they be. Those races proven superior by superior achievements ought to rule the lesser races, caring for them on sufferance that they cooperate with the Security Council. ... All could be lost if opposition by minor races is tolerated and the vacillations of those we work with, our closest comrades, is cause for our hesitations. Open declaration of intent followed by decisive force is the final solution."

Incidentally, Baron Phillipe de Rothschild admitted that his was “the richest and most powerful family in the world”:

As for the references to Cecil Rhodes, it is well known that the Rothschild family was a sponsor of his ambitions. Penetrating insight into those ambitions comes from the following article in the New York Times, in 1902, which noted that following his 1877 will, Rhodes, in 1890, set forth the goal that his secret society should work towards "gradually absorbing the wealth of the world":

The Last Will and Testament of Cecil John Rhodes verifies that article.:
It states (p. 73): "What an awful thought it is that if we had not lost America, or if even now we could arrange with the present members of the United States Assembly and our House of Commons, the peace of the world is secured for all eternity. We could hold federal parliament five years at Washington and five at London. The only thing feasible to carry this idea out is a secret one (society) gradually absorbing the wealth of the world to be devoted to such an object. There is Hirsch with twenty millions, very soon to cross the unknown border, and struggling in the dark to know what to do with his money; and so one might go on ad infinitum."
It also states (p. 74): "It would have been better for Europe if Napoleon had carried out his idea of Universal Monarchy; he might have succeeded if he had hit on the idea of granting self government to the component parts. Still, I will own tradition, race, and diverse languages acted against his dream; all these do not exist as to the present English speaking world, and apart from this union is the sacred duty of taking the responsibility of the still uncivilized parts of the world. The trial of these countries who have been found wanting---such as Portugal, Persia, even Spain---and the judgment that they must depart, and of course, the whole of the South American republics. "
He continues: "What a scope and what a horizon of work for the next two centuries, the best energies of the best people in the world; perfectly feasible, but needing an organization, for it is impossible for one human atom to contemplate anything, Much less such an idea requiring the devotion of the best souls of the next 200 years. There are three essentials--- (1) The plan duly weighed and agreed to (2) The first organization (3) The seizure of the wealth necessary."

In the text “The First Global Revolution”, leading “intellectual elites” in the Club of Rome admitted that they manufactured the threat of anthropogenic global warming as a “unifying external threat” that would place the blame on humanity (and this would obviously make people sympathetic to the Globalist rhetoric of “global problems requiring global solutions”), and that appointed bureaucracies must replace any vestige of democracy as a governing force. The relevant chapter is called “The Vacuum”. Excerpts are as follows:

"It would seem that men and women need a common motivation, namely a common adversary to organize and act together; in the vacuum such motivations seem to have ceased to exist‚ or have yet to be found.

The need for enemies seems to be a common historical factor. States have striven to overcome domestic failure and internal contradictions by designating external enemies. The scapegoat practice is as old as mankind itself. When things become too difficult at home, divert attention by adventure abroad. Bring the divided nation together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose. With the disappearance of the traditional enemy, the temptation is to designate as scapegoat religious or ethnic minorities whose differences are disturbing.

[...]The old democracies have functioned reasonably well over the last 200 years, but they appear now to be in a phase of complacent stagnation with little evidence of real leadership and innovation

Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything and it is unaware of its own limits. These facts must be faced squarely. Sacrilegious though this may sound, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead [so obviously the "intellectual elite" should take over decision making - as they have been doing for a very long time]. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today’s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time.

[...]The Common Enemy of Humanity is Man

In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine, and the like would fit the bill. In their totality and interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which demands the solidarity of all peoples. But in designating them as the enemy, we fall into the trap about which we have already warned, namely, mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself." (Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider, The First Global Revolution: A Report by the Council of the Club of Rome (New York : Pantheon Books, c1991), pp. 107-108, 109-110, 115)

Interestingly, in the 1970s, this think tank was warning of the "threat" of “global cooling” which would herald in a “new ice age”:

For more on this, see the following:

Many of these people have used these arguments as an excuse to increase Governmental power. One such example is Arnold Toynbee, director of studies for the Royal Institute of International Affairs, who, addressing these issues, said in that “In all developed countries a new way of life—a severely regimented way—will have to be imposed by a ruthless authoritarian government” (cited by Arthur Miller in an article in the Washington and Lee Law Review, Volume 41, Issue 4, p. 1262):

Toynbee, prior to that, as recorded in the RIIA’s own journal, said, "In the world as it is to-day, this institution can hardly be a Universal Church. It is more likely to be something like a League of Nations. I will not prophesy. I will merely repeat that we are at present working, discreetly but with all our might, to wrest this mysterious political force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local national states of our world. And all the time we are denying with out lips what we are doing with our hands, because to impugn the sovereignty of the local national state of the world is still a heresy for which a statesman or a publicist can be - perhaps not quite burnt at the stake, but certainly ostracized and discredited. The dragon of local sovereignty can still use its teeth and claws when it is brought to bay. Nevertheless, I believe that the monster is doomed to perish by our sword. The fifty or sixty local states of the world will no doubt survive as administrative conveniences. But sooner or later sovereignty will depart from them. Sovereignty will cease, in fact if not in name, to be a local affair." ("The Trend of International Affairs Since the War", International affairs: Journal of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, Volume 10, p. 809):

Maurice Strong presided over the UNCED 4th World Wilderness Congress and was a co-signer of the Earth charter. Mikhail Gorbachev was also a co-signer of the Earth charter. In 1987, he said: “We are moving toward a New World, the world of Communism. We shall never turn off that road.” (cited in Conquest, Robert and Paul Hollander. Political Violence: Belief, Behavior, and Legitimation. Palgrave Macmillan; First Edition (October 28, 2008). p. 118)

The Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky was allowed to examine secret Soviet archives, which show that the modern EU was implemented as a result of a conspiracy between the Politburo led by Gorbachev and the elite of the Trilateral Commission - David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, Yasuhiro Nakasone, and Valéry Giscard d’Estaing:

He gave excerpts from the documents in his monograph "EUSSR: The Soviet Roots of European Integration":

So that covers some of my explorations into the modern globalist milieu. But gradually I came upon other items suggesting the crucial role of Zionism in the behind the scenes shaping of world affairs.  A major source of my awakening to this issue was the speech of Benjamin Freedman concerning Zionism and the world wars - and my later corroboration, discovering his speech was mot merely the rambling of an extremist, but was in fact corroborated by admissions from key figures in the Zionist movement, showing the steering of the world wars by the Zionists:

I later discovered verification of other aspects of Freedman's argument, that the Khazarian thesis, arguing that a non-Semitic Turko-slavic group is the origin of much of European Jewry, has recently been verified by genetic research by Dr. Eran Elhaik  (commentary on it occurs in the article Highlight: Out of Khazaria—Evidence for “Jewish Genome” Lacking, and a news article on it began with the headline Gene study settles debate over origin of European Jews). And in the following Jewish Daily Forward article, we find Elhaik arguing that the arguments of his opponent, Harry Ostrer, are spurious and fraudulent, and that Ostrer precluded those who did not wish to further Jewish political ambitions from analyzing his data - thus we can see that Ostrer was engaging in Zionist apologetics. His findings rebuke the insane proponents of Zionist nationalism, but they also rebuke the argument of racists- basically, they are another nail in the coffin of both sides who wish to perpetuate such madness. Lest the "racist" card is used against me as I continue this critique that is more devastating than most, but also rigorously substantiated, I would like to state that I have Jewish ancestry, and some of my all time favorite people, David Bohm, Brian Josephson, Lester Levenson, Seth Farber, and Phillip Glass, had a Jewish background - I hold that to criticize people based on birth is the height of bigotry and ignorance - and a major point I stress, throughout this piece, is that narcotizing ourselves with ideologies is an immense breeder of destruction, and prevents the emergence of an undivided humanity. Moreover, I feel that buttressing ourselves with identity structures like this is delusional action - some of the aforementioned individuals have transcended this action. I do not "follow" Jiddu Krishnamurti, but I consider him very relevant for his insights in philosophical psychology and the investigation into the nature of consciousness, and he has brought this out rather lucidly what I feel is the solution to this problem. (and I don't think it would be possible to be a Krishnamurti disciple. Others might have given him the role of a "guru", but he wholeheartedly rejected that, and merely went into dialogues into others, diving into the the nature of self and immanent experience.)

What we do find from this, however, is both that the Jewish racial claim to Palestine is illegitimate, and that we are dealing with a hyperbolic manifestation of this ideological problem that leads to what, for want of a better phrase, is a corrosive culturally conditioned mental race - similar to the occult concept of an egregore. Like all forms of destructive indoctrination, there is here the possibility for a dissolution of conditioning, and it is my hope, for reasons that will be further substantiated, that people of a Jewish background learn to shake off their cultural conditioning, which is comparable to the cultural conditioning of a member of the Ku Klux Klan, though more pernicious. It is also my hope that they work to dismantle the destructive political edifice that is their legacy. And I bring attention to this, while otherwise noting the more general destructive actions of humanity, because if we don't give attention to this immediate problem, then our species is imperiled.

Cementing this interpretation for me was the historical argument I later discovered that was put forth by Douglas Reed in The Controversy of Zion,a book that is not anti-Semitic, but anti-clerical, and seeks to document the explosive impact of a racist, megalomaniacal ideology upon world politics. This ideology we can clearly see in the Old Testament, and Reed provides a mindblowing analysis of it. He cogently states, in a chapter of the book entitled The End of Israel, "Judah (to which the very small tribe of Benjamin attached itself) was a petty chiefdom in the south.Judah, from which today's Zionism comes down, was a tribe of ill repute. Judah sold his brother Joseph, the most beloved son of Jacob-called-Israel, to the Ishmaelites for twenty pieces of silver (as Judas, the only Judean among the disciples, much later betrayed Jesus for thirty pieces of silver), and then founded the tribe in incest, (Genesis 37-38). The priestly scribes who wrote this Scriptural account centuries afterwards had made themselves the masters of Judah and as they altered the oral tradition, whenever it suited them, the question prompts itself: why were they at pains to preserve, or possibly even to insert, this attribution of incestuous beginnings and a treacherous nature to the very people who, they said, were the chosen of God? The thing is mysterious, like much else in the Levitical Scriptures, and only the inner sect could supply an answer.  

Anyway, those Scriptures and today's authorities agree about the separateness of “Israel ” and “ Judah .” In the Old Testament Israel is often called “the house of Joseph,” in pointed distinction from “the house of Judah.” The Jewish Encyclopaedia says, ‘‘Joseph and Judah typify two distinct lines of descent” and adds (as already cited) that Judah was “in all likelihood a non-Israelitish tribe.” The Encyclopaedia Britannica says that Judaism developed long after the Israelites had merged themselves with mankind, and that the true relationship of the two peoples is best expressed in the phrase, “The Israelites were not Jews.” Historically, Judah was to survive for a little while and to bring forth Judaism, which begat Zionism.


Dr Kastein says:  “The two states had no more in common, for good or evil, than any other two countries with a common frontier. From time to time they waged war against each other or made treaties, but they were entirely separate. The Israelites ceased to believe that they had a destiny apart from their neighbours and King Jeroboam made separation from Judah as complete in the religious as in the political sense.” Then, of the Judahites, Dr. Kastein adds, “they decided that they were destined to develop as a race apart … they demanded an order of existence fundamentally different from that of the people about them. These were differences which allowed of no process of assimilation to others. They demanded separation, absolute differentiation."

Thus the cause of the breach and separation is made clear. Israel believed that its destiny lay with involvement in mankind, and rejected Judah on the very grounds which recurrently, in the ensuing three thousand years, caused other peoples to turn in alarm, resentment and repudiation from Judaism. Judah “demanded separation, absolute differentiation.” (However, Dr. Kastein, though he says “Judah,” means “the Levites.” How could even the tribespeople of Judah, at that stage, have demanded “separation, absolute differentiation,” when Solomon had had a thousand wives?)  

It was the Levites, with their racial creed, that Israel rejected. The next two hundred years, during which Israel and Judah existed separately, and often in enmity, but side by side, are filled with the voices of the Hebrew “prophets,” arraigning the Levites and the creed which they were constructing. These voices still call to mankind out of the tribal darkness which beclouds much of the Old Testament, for they scarified the creed which was in the making just as Jesus scarified it seven or eight hundred years later, when it was long established, at the Temple in Jerusalem.  

These men were nearly all Israelites; most of them were Josephites. They were on the road to the one-God of all-peoples and to participation in mankind. They were not unique among men in this: soon the Buddha, in India, was to oppose his Sermon at Benares and his Five Commands of Uprightness to the creed of Brahma, the creator of caste-segregation, and to the worship of idols. They were in truth Israelite remonstrants against the Levitical teaching which was to become identified with the name of Judah. The name “Hebrew prophets” is inapt because they made no pretence to power of divination and were angered by the description (“I was no prophet, neither was I a prophet's son,” Amos). They were protestants in their time and gave simple warning of the calculable consequences of the racial creed; their warning remains valid today."

Later, I found that the Old Testament is replete with verses advocating Jewish world domination.

I then found that subsequent commentary in the Talmud and Zohar, and modern Rabbinic commentary, is in some cases even worse, as I show in the main comments to my site, though preliminarily, insight into the racism that permeates it even in modern times is provided in the following collection of primary source footage.

Regarding criticism of these extra-biblical texts - I will point out the following - concerning the most vociferous critic of Judaism, Johann Andreas Eisenmenger, who has highlighted its absurdities and atrocities, and whose arguments form the basis for subsequent criticisms of extra-biblical Judaic texts. Validation of Eisenmenger comes from notable Jewish scholars (The Jewish Encyclopedia attempts to dismiss him, by that is superseded by these citations), and some of the same arguments he gives have been put forth by Jewish critics of Judaism like Israel Shahak, and thus revelation of this is not anti-Semitic. First:
"[Eisenmenger's] book was impressive both on account of its size-some 2,120 pages in two volumes-and its tremendous erudition. ... [He] was acquainted with all the literature a Jewish scholar of standing would have known. ... Contrary to accusations that have been made against him, he DOES NOT FALSIFY HIS SOURCES. He quotes them in full and translates them literally. ... The question is how did Eisenmenger arrive at so darkly a negative picture of Judaism while quoting its sources unadulteratedly?" [emphasis added] (Jacob Katz - "From Prejudice to Destruction", 1980, pp. 14-15)

Katz attempts to obfuscate, but others would be more forthright, candidly admit that Eisenmenger's portrayal of Judaism is fitting, and revel in the fact. Ernst Bloch is admitted in several academic texts to be at the forefront of revolutionary Jewish Messianic thinking - see, for example, the following from Paul Mendes-Flohr, Political Messianism in the Weimar Republic in Studies in Contemporary Jewry: Volume VII: Jews and Messianism in the Modern Era: Metaphor and Meaning. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Jonathan Frankel Institute of Contemporary Jewry - June 13, 1991. Oxford University Press. p. 176:

Yet the Jewish scholar Gershom Scholem, recalling his meeting with Bloch, said, on p. 98 of "Walter Benjamin: The Story of a Friendship", "When I entered his study, I saw on a shelf on his desk Johann Andreas Eisenmenger's two-thousand page Edenkthes Judenthum, the most scholarly anti-Semitic work in the German language...In response to my surprised look, Bloch said that certain large portions of it were the finest writings on Judaism he knew..the author had quoted and translated the most wonderful, the most profound things...I liked his assessment very much and when I acquired my own copy of the work two years later, I found it confirmed."

Aside from that, Scholem states in the text that Eisenmenger simply could not appreciate "profound" nature of the texts he translated and decried, and that one should look at them from the opposite perspective Eisenmenger gives to, as Bloch put it, "have an eminently worthwhile experience." Given that, as Scholem admits, Eisenmenger was accurate and moreover, a very good source on Judaism, (per his admission, Eisenmenger is perhaps one of the best sources aside from the original non-translated Judaic texts), the reader can look at the text and decide for himself what he thinks, and then be convinced of Scholem's depravity.

I present the astonishingly racist views of modern leading Rabbis as recorded in the Israeli press in the main post in this website, but some might dismiss them as radicals, so I will now demonstrate that these views are mainstream Judaism: 
In its article "Gentile", under the subheading "Rabbinical Modification of Laws", The Jewish Encyclopedia states:
 "With regard to the text 'This is the law when a man dieth in a tent' (Num. xix. 14), they held that only Israelites are men, quoting the prophet, 'Ye my flock, the flock of my pasture, are men' (Ezek. xxxiv. 31); Gentiles they classed not as men but as barbarians (B. M. 108b). [...] The barbarian Gentiles who could not be prevailed upon to observe law and order were not to be benefited by the Jewish civil laws, framed to regulate a stable and orderly society, and based on reciprocity. The passage in Moses' farewell address: 'The Lord came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from Mount Paran' (Deut. xxxiii. 2), indicates that the Almighty offered the Torah to the Gentile nations also, but, since they refused to accept it, He withdrew His 'shining' legal protection from them, and transferred their property rights to Israel, who observed His Law. A passage of Habakkuk is quoted as confirming this claim: 'God came from Teman, and the Holy One from Mount Paran. . . . He stood, and measured the earth; he beheld, and drove asunder [ = "let loose," "outlawed"] the nations' (Hab. iii. 3-6); the Talmud adds that He had observed how the Gentile nations steadfastly refused to obey the seven moral Nachian precepts, and hence had decided to outlaw them (B. K. 38a)."

Now, of course this is obfuscated in mainstream discourse, and Judaism is presented as a "humanitarian" and "Universalist" religion. This is understandable, since adherents of it might have difficulty accomplishing their objectives if it was widely known that they viewed others as subhuman, only worthy of being enslaved or killed. To illustrate this strategy of obfuscation, consider the way in which consider Sopherim 15, rule 10 - "even the best of the Gentiles should be killed" - is dealt with in The Jewish Encyclopedia. The Jewish Encyclopedia notes this verse, but attempts to dismiss the Rabbi who said this as fringe. It says, in it's entry under "Gentile":  "Simon ben Yoḥai is preeminently the anti-Gentile teacher. In a collection of three sayings of his, beginning with the keyword (Yer. Ḳid. 66c; Massek. Soferim xv. 10; Mek., Beshal-laḥ, 27a; Tan., Wayera, ed. Buber, 20), is found the expression, often quoted by anti-Semites, "Ṭob shebe-goyyim harog" (="The best among the Gentiles deserves to be killed"). This utterance has been felt by Jews to be due to an exaggerated antipathy on the part of a fanatic whose life experiences may furnish an explanation for his animosity; hence in the various versions the reading has been altered, "The best among the Egyptians" being generally substituted. In the connection in which it stands, the import of this observation is similar to that of the two others: "The most pious woman is addicted to sorcery"; "The best of snakes ought to have its head crushed" (comp. the saying, "Scratch a Russian and you will find a Tartar")."  

So we can see an attempt to ignore the reality of extremist hate by cushioning it with hysteria over snakes and misogyny. At least we get an admission, however, that Jews censor the Talmud outside of their own circles.  Throughout the entry on "Gentile", we find irrelevant verses that are superseded by other verses.  And keep in mind, as we further this exegesis, that "Simeon" and "Simon" are interchangeable names  - the relevant entry in The Jewish Encyclopedia cites the text Rabbi Simon ben Jochai as a source and also contains his commentary on gentiles, but presented without an attempt to explain it away, and in a different context:

As can be substantiated with the article just given on him, and as will be further substantiated, this Rabbi was not a fringe character. In the entry under Lag B'omer, we find the following:  "
Thirty-third day in the period of the counting of the 'omer ("Lag" = , the numerical value of which is 33), corresponding to the 18th day of Iyyar. This day is celebrated as a semi-holiday, although the reason for this celebration has not been detinitely ascertained. The reason most commonly given is that the plague which raged among the disciples of R. Akiba during the period of the 'omer (Yeb. 62b) ceased on that day(Shulḥan 'Aruk, Oraḥ Ḥayyim, 493, 2). The day is therefore known as the "Scholars' Festival," when the baḥurim indulged in various kinds of amusement and merrymaking. There is, however, no foundation in the Talmud for this tradition, unless, as was suggested, the text be changed to read "from Passover to the middle ["peras"] of 'Aẓeret" (Heilprin, "Seder ha-Dorot," vol. ii., s.v. "Akiba," § 4; Jacob Mölln, "Sefer ha-Maharil," § 54, Sabbionetta, 1556; comp. "Bet Yosef" and "Darke Mosheh" to Ṭur Oraḥ Ḥayyim, 493). But even then casuistic methods have to be employed to make the incident fit the day in question. Another reason given is that the manna first descended on this day ("Ḥatam Sofer," on Shulḥan 'Aruk, Yoreh De'ah, 233). For the reasons suggested in more modern times see 'Omer.
Lag be-'Omer.
(From an old print.)The cabalists attach a peculiar importance to Lag be-'Omer. It is a tradition with them that Simeon ben Yoḥai, the alleged author of the Zohar, died on that day, and at his death revealed to his pupils many secrets which were subsequently incorporated into the Zohar. The day is therefore called "Hillula de-Rabbi Simeon ben Yoḥai" (Zohar, ed. Amsterdam, 1685, p. 291b). The term "Hillula" (= "wedding ") points to the harmonious union of all the worlds that was effected at the death of that great rabbi. The day is celebrated with illuminations, because, according to the narrative, at the death of R. Simeon the world was filled with light, since the revelations which he had received were then put in writing in the Zohar (see Zohar, l.c. and p. 296b). A hymn entitled "Bar Yoḥai," which consists of ten stanzas, each stanza corresponding to one of the ten sefirot, is sung in many communities on that day. School-children are given bows and arrows, for, according to tradition, the rainbow did not appear during the life of R. Simeon; hence the children playing with bows symbolize the death of the sage. Another interpretation is given of this custom, in accordance with a saying in the Zohar that a bow of many colors will appear in the sky immediately before the coming of the Messiah. The bow with which the children play on that day thus symbolizes the prayer of the Jews that the promised bow shall appear."  

So he was one of the most important Rabbis in all of Judaism! 

Consideration of Rabbinical commentary is important, since, as an introduction to one (probably sanitized) translation of the Talmud notes, "The modern Jew is the product of the Talmud.", and as James Hastings notes in his Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics, "without the influence of the Kabbala, Judaism to-day might have been one-sided, lacking in warmth and imagination. Indeed, so deeply has it penetrated into the body of the faith that many ideas and prayers are now immovably rooted in the general body of orthodox doctrine and practice. This element has not only become incorporated, but it has fixed its hold on the affections of the Jews and cannot be eradicated." Many Jews engage in deceit to obfuscate their literature - see the following famous case concerning Dibre David - Talmudists like to play on misperceptions of this to ridicule people who attack their literature. Given what we have seen so far concernng this method of obfuscation, and given the above citations concerning Eisenmenger, it is obvious that we should rely on him as our guide through this literature in order to not be misled by obfuscation. Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky, in "Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel" (2d ed. 2004), corroborate he necessity of taking an approach like this, noting that "in the usual English translations of talmudic literature some of the most sensitive passages are usually toned down or falsified," (p. 1) and that "the great majority of books on Judaism and Israel, published in English especially, falsify their subject matter," in part by omitting or obscuring such teachings (pp. 150-51). And as Eisenmenger, as translated by Stehelin, himself notes, "That the Talmud is held in greater Esteem, among the Jews, than the Bible, will appear in the following Quotations. [... citations given ... one interesting one says "We are to hold no Conversation with those who take the Bible and the Mishna into their hands without understanding the Talmud, (which is here to be understood of the Gemara.)" ...] The Jews believe and teach, that it is their duty to obey the Rabbins; and likewise to give Credit to everything they say. [...] The Jews are not permitted to contradict, or argue against their Rabbins, or Teachers. [...] There are several Punishments threaten'd in the Talmud against the Jew who shall contemn [sic] or fight against the Words or Instructions of their Rabbins. The Eruvin says, "He who transgresseth the Words of One learned in the Law, is guilty unto Death."" (cited in a facsimile of Traditions of the Jews, provided in Eisenmenger, Johann Andreas, John Peter Stehelin, and Michael A. Hoffman. The Traditions of the Jews. Coeur D'Alene, ID: Independent History & Research, 2006. pp. 201-204) - keep the words of Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai, previously revealed, in mind as you read this.

The above Eisenmenger source is useful for English speakers - the introduction and bibliography are particularly interesting (aside from the appeals to Christianity of the introducer, which are falsified on account of the fact that Christianity is internally contradictory, as I will demonstrate in the comments section to this post), but for those who know German, pdfs of the original are, in the age of the internet, now available:
Vol. 1)
Vol. 2)

Noting this we can see an ideologically based megalomania that is not confined to Zionism, but is a political consequence of Judaism - having effects recorded by historians throughout the ages. For example, the Roman historian Suetonius noted that “There had spread over all the Orient an old and established belief, that it was fated at that time for men coming from Judaea to rule the world. This prediction, referring to the emperor of Rome, as afterwards appeared from the event, the people of Judaea took to themselves; accordingly they revolted and after killing their governor, they routed the consular ruler of Syria as well, when he came to the rescue, and took one of his eagles. Since to put down this rebellion required a considerable army with a leader of no little enterprise, yet one to whom so great power could be entrusted without risk, Vespasian was chosen for the task, both as a man of tried energy and as one in no wise to be feared because of the obscurity of his family and name. 6 Therefore there were added to the forces in Judaea two legions with eight divisions of cavalry and ten cohorts.13 He took his elder son as one of his lieutenants, and as soon as he reached his province he attracted the attention of the neighbouring provinces also; for he at once reformed the discipline of the army and fought one or two battles with such daring, that in the storming of a fortress he was wounded in the knee with a stone and received several arrows in his shield.” (Tranquillus, Gaius Suetonius. “The Life of Vespasian 4:5″, The Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Loeb Classical Library, (1914), pp. 289-291):*.html

Moreover, within the Jewish religious literature are other verses showing that what is forbidden to discuss in modern society - ritual murder and blood drinking associated with Judaism - was actually approved religious practice in this cult! I would be an extremely horrible, anti-Semitic monster if this was my fabrication, but I take note of this because it is noted in Jewish scholarship - and the discrepancy between what is noted in this way and what is given for public consumption is rather chilling. Jewish scholars even note the role of Satanism in Judaism, how animals are sacrificed to "Satan". Other scholars note the preponderance of cannibalism and other such acts in the Jewish tradition on behalf of the Old Testament God. To me, considering the expressed nature of both, I really don't see a distinction between Satan and many of the pronouncements of the Old Testament "God" (given that, as Douglas Reed argues, the Old Testament is replete with Levitical interpolations (search for the term "Moloch" in the chapter of The Controversy of Zion entitled The Warnings of Disraeli) - and also, Juri Lina's book "Architects of Deception" is much less serious than Reed's - anything in it would have to be independently verified, but in that book, he has an interesting passage - "The bolshevik freemasons [really Jews - to his credit, Lina notes that "Minutes taken at a meeting of the Grand Lodge of Germany in 1917 record the following statement: "The anarchist and revolutionary Lenin actually and consistently represents the political ideal of international freemasonry." (The Special Archive in Moscow, 1421-1-9064 and 815; Viktor Ostretsov, "Freemasonry, Culture, and Russian History", Moscow, 1999, p. 585).", and Leon Trotsky noted, when writing about his period in Odessa prison in My Life, stated: "It was during that period that I became interested in freemasonry. ... In the eighteenth century freemasonry became expressive of a militant policy of enlightenment, as in the case of the Illuminati, who were the forerunners of the revolution; on its left it culminated in the Carbonari. Freemasons counted among their members both Louis XVI and the Dr. Guillotin who invented the guillotine. In southern Germany freemasonry assumed an openly revolutionary character, whereas at the court of Catherine the Great it was a masquerade reflecting the aristocratic and bureaucratic hierarchy. A freemason Novikov was exiled to Siberia by a freemason Empress. ... I discontinued my work on freemasonry to take up the study of Marxian economics. ... The work on freemasonry acted as a sort of test for these hypotheses. ... I think this influenced the whole course of my intellectual development.", however, The Communist International, 1919-1943: documents, ed. by Jane Degras, Vol. I, p. 403, noted that Trotsky stated during the Fourth Congress of the Comintern that Freemasonry "was a bridge leading to the bourgeois camp, and it had to be blown up." - insight into this discrepancy is revealed in the document Red Symphony] needed human sacrifices. According to Lenin, they sacrificed people to Molok, as revealed by the defected bolshevik leader Georges Solomon (Georges Solomon, "Among Red Rulers", Stockholm, 1930, p. 56). The name of the demon Molok is derived from the Hebrew expression la-molek ('to the king'), which is used in connection with the sacrifice.") - both could reasonably be put under one name - Depravity. On the subject of Satanism with Judaism, though, the Jewish scholar Israel Shahak noted how fundamental it is to it, writing, in "Jewish History, Jewish Religion": "Other prayers or religious acts, as interpreted by the cabbalists, are designed to deceive various angels (imagined as minor deities with a measure of independence) or to propitiate Satan. At a certain point in the morning prayer, some verses in Aramaic (rather than the more usual Hebrew) are pronounced. This is supposed to be a means for tricking the angels who operate the gates through which prayers enter heaven and who have the power to block the prayers of the pious. The angels only understand Hebrew and are baffled by the Aramaic verses; being somewhat dull-witted (presumably they are far less clever than the cabbalists) they open the gates, and at this moment all the prayers, including those in Hebrew, get through. Or take another example: both before and after a meal, a pious Jew ritually washes his hands, uttering a special blessing. On one of these two occasions he is worshipping God, by promoting the divine union of Son and Daughter; but on the other he is worshipping Satan, who likes Jewish prayers and ritual acts so much that when he is offered a few of them it keeps him busy for a while and he forgets to pester the divine Daughter. Indeed, the cabbalists believe that some of the sacrifices burnt in the Temple were intended for Satan. For example, the seventy bullocks sacrificed during the seven days of the feast of Tabernacles, were supposedly offered to Satan in his capacity as ruler of the Gentiles, in order to keep him too busy to interfere on the eighth day, when sacrifice is made to God. Many other examples of the same can be given.":
Likewise, the Jewish religious text "The Zohar" (1:65a) states, "Come and see: Every single new moon, as the moon is renewed, this End of all flesh is given one portion over and above the offerings, to keep him occupied handling his portion, so that the aspect of Israel is alone to delight with their King. This is the goat (According to Numbers 28:15, on each new moon a goat must be brought as a sin-offering. Here, this goat is intended to preoccupy Satan, leaving Israel alone with God.)":
See also, for citations of Jewish scholars concerning Jews sacrificing chickens to Satan on the Kapparot ritual on the eve of Yom Kippur, the following:

Of course, much of this is approved within the traditional Jewish religious literature, in spite of the Satanic excursions of some adherents. Full discussion of this is beyond the scope of this piece, but for a preliminary overview, note that Deuteronomy 7:16 states: "And thou shalt consume all the people which the LORD thy God shall deliver thee..."

Also, the book of Ezekiel states: "Assemble yourselves, and come; gather yourselves on every side to my sacrifice that I do sacrifice for you, even a great sacrifice for you, even a great sacrifice upon the mountains of Israel, that ye may eat flesh and drink blood. Ye shall eat the flesh of the mighty, and drink the blood of the princes of the earth (39:17-18)… And ye shall eat fat till ye be full, and drink blood till ye be drunken (39:19)… and I will set my glory among the heathen, and all the heathen shall see my judgment that I have executed, and my hand that I have laid upon them (39:21)."

William Douglas Morrison, in “The Jews under Roman Rule”, cited Dio Cassius to show the method by which Jews in the eastern provinces of the Roman Empire, in the year 116 A.D., began to murder various peoples they lived among during a rebellion. He noted that “in the Island of Cyprus alone the Jews put two hundred and forty thousand of the native population to death, and in Cyrene on the African coast more than two hundred thousand Greeks and Romans were brutally massacred. … Wherever the Jews obtained the mastery they behaved like hordes of cannibals, eating the flesh of their victims and smearing themselves with blood.”(Morrison, William Douglas. The Jews Under Roman Rule, T. Fisher Unwin: Paternoster Square, G.P. Putnam’s Sons: New York, 1890, pp. 191-193):

The most famous occultist of the 20th century, Aleister Crowley, noted in his "Preface to Sepher Sephiroth" that "Human sacrifices are today still practised by the Jews of Eastern Europe, as is set forth at length by the late Sir Richard Burton in the MS. which the wealthy Jews of England have compassed heaven and earth to suppress, and evidenced by the ever-recurring Pogroms against which so senseless an outcry is made by those who live among those degenerate Jews who are at least not cannibals.":

I also urge readers to see the following  items, relating this to occult/magical beliefs within Judaism, which tie into this:
Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan introduces the occult practices of the Kabbalah, in his introduction to the Sefer Yetzirah: "The third category of Kaballah - the magical - is closely related to the meditative. It consists of various signs, incantations, and divine names, through which one can influence or alter natural events. Many of the techniques closely resemble meditative methods, and their success may depend on their ability to induce mental states where telekenetic or spiritual power can be effectively channeled. As with the second category, the most important texts have never been printed, although some fragments have been published. One of the best examples is the book Raziel" (Sefer Yetzirah: The Book of Creation in Theory and Practice, 1997. p. x):
Bernard Lazare could hardly be considered an "anti-Semite" - he wrote a book attacking "anti-Semitism", and was a Dreyfusard and participant in the Zionist movement. Yet in that book attacking "anti-Semitism", although he attempted to dilute the charges, he nevertheless made some important confessions:
"Throughout the Middle Ages the Jew was considered by the common people as the magician par excellence. As a matter of fact, a number of Jews did devote themselves to magic. We find many formulas of exorcism in the Talmud, and the demonology both of the Talmud and the Kabbala is very complicated. Now it is well known the blood played always a very important part in the arts of sorcery. In Chaldean magic, it was of the utmost consequence... Now it is quite probable, certain, in fact, that Jewish magicians may have sacrificed children, and thence the genesis of ritual murder. The isolated acts of certain magicians were attributed to them in their character as Jews. It was maintained that the Jewish religion which approved of the Crucifixion of Christ, prescribed in addition the shedding of Christian blood; and the Talmud and the Kabbala were zealously searched for text that might be made to justify such a thesis. Such investigations have succeeded only through deliberate misinterpretation, as in the Middle Ages, or through actual falsifications like those recently committed by Dr. Rohling, and[161] proven spurious by Delitzch. The result, therefore, is this, that whatever the facts brought forward, they cannot prove that the murder of children constituted, or still constitutes, a part of the Jewish ritual any more than the acts of the marechal de Retz and of the sacrilegious priests who practiced the "black mass" would prove that the Church recommends in its books assassination and human sacrifice."
For more on the types of characters, self-styled magicians, that Lazare was discussing, and their political influence, see the following: (for a defense of Webster against her attackers, see this very old forum post I wrote, which is vastly inferior to my present work, and extremely truncated (I have lost the original full text of my argument), but still establishes definitively that her critics misrepresent her (I made one citation there that I redact regarding percentages of Jews in political positions that was from an unsubstantiated source, though much better sources corroborate a similar argument);wap2)
Lazare was extremely convoluted in this, because he noted demonology as a part of the Kabbalah, and that many Kabbalists did engage in human sacrifices, but attempted to distance this from Judaism. Professor Ariel Toaff is the son of the Chief Rabbi of Rome, and he is a bit less convoluted in his presentation. He has written a book going much further, saying that ritual murder was indeed a part of certain extremist sects of Judaism - including that blood was believed to have magical properties. He said "I will fight for my truth even if I am crucified":
  - Toaff was forced under pressure to partially recant, see the following item for information on the obfuscatory nature of subsequent work:, see the following for uncensored revelations:
See also the following two items - concerning Jewish testimony to ritual murder:

Also, In May 2011, a Swiss banker, who would not be named for fear of the consequences, was interviewed by the Russian magazine NoviDen. He revealed the mentality of these people, what they like to do in their spare time:

"these people are corrupt, sick in their minds, so sick they are full of vices and those vices are kept under wraps on their orders. Some of them like Strauss-Kahn rape women, others are sado maso, or paedophile and many are into Satanism. When you go in some banks you see these satanistic symbols, like in the Rothschild Bank in Zurich. These people are controlled by black-mail because of the weaknesses they have. They have to follow orders or they will be exposed, they will be destroyed or even killed."

He also noted, regarding the powerful policy steering group known as the Bilderberg group: "You have the inner circle who are into Satanism and then there are the naive or less informed people. Some people even think they are doing something good, the outer circle."

Again, full discussion of this lies far beyond the scope of the present article, but it provides a taste of a suppressed reality. Thus we see a huge discrepancy between approved public discourse and the actual facts.

To continue - this "religion" is so sick that within it is the Kol Nidre prayer - used many Jews to break oaths to gentiles. Many deny the reality of this, but using Jewish sources, I have refuted them:

This is probably one of the reasons why there are at least 256 newspaper references prior to the Nuremberg trial, beginning in 1900, concerning the claims, fabricated by Jewish organizations, of "6,000,000" Jews in various types of "peril" - also of interest is the admitted lack of evidence for the mainstream holocaust narrative that comes from the words of the leading holocaust historians!:

What has been presented opens up the possibility of holocaust revisionism. Because I am not tendentious, I present arguments arguing for both sides of this in the initial post.

Now, I am in no position to deny individual suffering which may have occurred, but we must face the fact that America and Europe are being blackmailed and bludgeoned by this to permit the destructive fury of World Zionism as it is used to "conquer the world" (far from exaggeration, this is the function of Zionism as described by the Zionist leader David Wolffsohn - as recorded in the New York Times (August 22, 1907):, (September 17, 1914):

Insight into the real nature of the Zionist entity, which necessitates our vigilance in neutralizing it, comes from a speech in Jerusalem in December 1919 given by Chaim Weizmann, who months later would become president of the World Zionist Organization, and would later become the first president of the state of Israel. As recorded by Judische Rundschau, January 16, 1920 (No. 4), p.4, Weizmann stated the following:

"Lloyd George once said: I know the Palestinian front much better than I know the French front, for every patch of land and every stream is familiar to me from the Bible. Palestine is, above all, a matter of the Bible for England. The English believe in the Bible more than many groups in Jewry. Thus, first came the idealistic grounds [for the decision to issue the Balfour Declaration], and only afterwards the material. We are the ones who have made clear to the English political leadership that it was in England's interest to join with us, to spread the British protectorate over Palestine. We reached the [Balfour] Declaration not by miracles, but through persistent propaganda, through unceasing demonstration of the life force of our people. We told the responsible authorities: We will establish ourselves in Palestine whether you like it or not. You can hasten our arrival or you can equally retard it. It is however better for you to help us so as to avoid our constructive powers being turned into a destructive power which will overthrow the world.

We demand neither a charter nor concessions, but rather a complete national edifice that meets the following preconditions: the right to acquisition of ownerless land, the facilitation of land acquisition in general, the prerogative of developing public works, complete autonomy in the spiritual and intellectual sphere, and last not least, a direct influence upon the English administration in the territory. The regulation of immigration by us is, for us, likewise an unconditional demand." 

 This admission validates what was provided above, and is corroborated with information given below. With that said, I would like to emphasize strongly the importance of not "solving" these kinds of problems with the same level of consciousness that created them, of not responding with destruction, but rather, responding with solutions that will transcend the master-slave, oppressor-oppressed dialectic.

Beyond this, the leaders of the Zionist movement have explicitly stated their desire for a World Government to be ruled by Israel in outlets like the New York Times. According to Theodore Herzl, the official (though not actual - see the initial post) founder of Zionism, this Israel would ultimately be massively expanded beyond the 2013 boundaries. A current threat to this species from Zionism was enunciated by Martin Levi van Creveld, professor of military history at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, when he wrote: “We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: “Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.” I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.:

And there are other facts showing a parallel major problem in history - the association of Jews and Bolshevism - that has been ingeniously covered up, that are discussed at length in the main post in this website, with refutations of the narratives obfuscating those facts, showing that sources seeming to controvert it rely on falsified information or can otherwise be controverted.

My belief is that there is an ideological origin to this extremism and hate in the Jewish religion, fueling this mask that is the public face of the global oligarchy - and I have devoted time to it in order to penetrate this layer of our World System that the "educated" refuse to question because they are living under mind control - and I credit a very fortunate prior alienation that I was eventually able to overcome (to become post-alienated, but not trapped in the traditional mode of competitive conformity), as well as an unflinching desire to go where the facts took me, as the two things that broke me from such mind control. I have substantiated my argument on this above and I substantiate this in much more detail in the main post. So while my ultimate desire is for an undivided humanity, I believe it is important to constatate this aspect of our political situation, and nullify in such a way as to not emulate the problem, lest we be overrun by the megalomania fueling it. And although I am not Jewish, I do have Jewish ancestry, and have no problem with that (though I do have problems with the Jewish religion, which I document as a probable ideological origin of the malicious activity of the Zealots leading these movements, which percolates even the purportedly “atheistic” variants:, and I maintain the distinction between those zealots and other people, not intoxicated with hatred and megalomania, who merely happened to be born Jewish. I am working in the tradition of Oscar Levy - see his commentary at pp. viii-xiii of the following:

The effects of this are clearly brought out in the lengthy quotations from Theodore Herzl, given above.

As for what is presented here - this constitutes only one of several items of interest - I will move on to those other items and focus primarily on them from this point forward, after exploring the can of worms that are opened with a consideration of the role of PTech in the September 11th attacks, and exploring the allegations of Zionist connections to the firm (for 9/11 in general, a thorough discussion of challenges to the mainstream narrative and oppositions to these challenges that has occurred over the last few years is to be found in 9/11 Ten Years Later: When State Crimes Against Democracy Succeed - though for those who still hold to the mainstream narrative, I recommend first the book Declassifying 9/11, which is based almost entirely on primary sources and the result of FOIA requests, and is some of the most convincing evidence that something is seriously wrong in this case - and regarding this issue, the standard narrative is so internally contradictory that it is no wonder leaders of the Intelligence community reject it - both Hamid Gul, former head of the ISI, and Andreas von Bulow, who had experience overseeing the German secret service, noted Mossad involvement. The former Italian President Francesco Cossiga, who revealed the existence of Operation Gladio, also noted that it was common knowledge in intelligence agencies around the world that the Mossad orchestrated the 9/11 attacks -  and people are ridiculed merely for point out what is common knowledge in the Intelligence community). I will also focus on obtaining the remaining documentation (and full archival information for this documentation) that I mentioned in the first post would be required to establish that the banking firm of  Kuhn, Loeb, & Co was the "hidden hand" behind the Bolshevik revolution and resolve the contradictory accounts that surround this issue (though Jewish scholars acknowledge the connections between the Rothschilds and both Trotsky and Stalin, as I demonstrate in my initial post). It also appears, given the Weizmann admission and other corroborating admissions, that Zionism may be illegal, the laws outlawing it may have just not yet been enforced. I have seen references to a couple - as one whose closest political stance is that of philosophical anarchist, but who does not want revolution, but rather, wants change, I hesitate to recommend such laws be enforced, but recognize the importance of doing so. The alleged references are as follows:

Corpus Juris Secundum 16: Constitutional Law 213 (10):
"The Constitutional guaranty of freedom of speech does not include the right to advocate, or conspire to effect, the violent destruction or overthrow of the government or the criminal destruction of property."
Corpus Juris Secundum 22, Criminal Law sec. 182 (3):
"A prosecution for conspiracy to commit an offense against the U.S., may also be tried in any district wherein any overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy is performed." U.S. v. Cohen C.A.N.J. 197 F 2d 26.

Looking at those two references alone, we can easily see how they can be applied to the Zionist movement, given what has been provided. I will have to verify these references to see if they, or analogues of them are genuine.

I will refine my writing to include only primary and academic sources, or seriously well documented, reliable sources outside of academia (these three classes of sources at this time constitute almost all of the material on this website). At some time I might be able to get my findings published in a peer-reviewed journal - they have relevance as substantive items of information. However, given that they controvert widely accepted narratives, in the current climate, this might be difficult. As noted in Casadevall & Fang (2009), Is Peer Review Censorship?:

"Given the unpleasantness of having one's work rejected, as well as a desire for more-rapid communication of scientific findings, some scientists have expressed nostalgia for the good old days when nearly any submitted manuscript was accepted for publication, and some have even compared peer review to censorship. After all, neither Newton nor Darwin had to submit to the indignity of peer review prior to publication!
The current system persists despite abundant evidence of imperfections in the peer review process. Most scientists would agree that peer review improves manuscripts and prevents some errors in publication. However, although there is widespread consensus among scientists that peer review is a good thing, there are remarkably little data that the system works as intended. In fact, studies of peer review have identified numerous problems, including confirmatory bias, bias against negative results, favoritism for established investigators in a given field, address bias, gender bias, and ideological orientation. Smith wrote that peer review is “slow, expensive, ineffective, something of a lottery, prone to bias and abuse, and hopeless at spotting errors and fraud”. Chance has been shown to play an important role in determining the outcome of peer review, and agreement between reviewers is disconcertingly low. Bauer has noted that as a field matures, “knowledge monopolies” and “research cartels”, which fiercely protect their domains, suppress minority opinions, and curtail publication and funding of unorthodox viewpoints, are established. In response, experienced authors learn to negotiate reviewer hurdles by embracing conservatism and avoiding speculation, although some have complained that this response has the effect of “dumbing down” the scientific literature. [...] it is self-evident how foibles in peer review can create a major problem with scientific acceptance, for peer reviewers are the major gatekeepers for the printed word.
Misrepresenting [...] discredited ideas as victims of censorship risks minimizing the true threats of scientific censorship, as when a government deletes politically sensitive remarks by scientific agency heads and surgeon generals, alters reports by government scientists, or prohibits the publication of sensitive data.

Publishing in peer-reviewed journals remains the major mechanism for the dissemination of scientific knowledge. The peer review of scientific manuscripts is clearly distinct from these examples of censorship. However, if reviewers prevent authors from any discussion of controversial or speculative viewpoints or if editors are overzealous in screening manuscripts for perceived newsworthiness or consistency with prevailing dogma, there is a danger of blurring the distinction between peer review and censorship. If a reviewer obstructs the publication of a manuscript because it competes with or questions his or her own work, there is an ethical dimension as well. [...] Even more importantly, excessive influence by reviewers can stifle legitimate scientific debate and encourage conformity.
Peer review is very different from censorship, but we need to be careful to maintain the distinction. A respect for the wisdom of age requires us to give Galileo the final word here: “Long experience has taught me this about the status of mankind with regard to matters requiring thought: the less people know and understand about them, the more positively they attempt to argue concerning them, while on the other hand to know and understand a multitude of things renders men cautious in passing judgment upon anything new”."

That, though, may be too much of a rosy picture - see Brian Josephson's presentation Pathological Disbelief. Additionally, this may be difficult in the political climate in the United States as of 2013. But I will not be silenced on these issues that, for me, are of tremendous importance, and I will persist in refining this work and spreading it.

I will now refute the attempts of those who would like to ignore this information by using poisoning the well fallacies. People who use this strategy desire to kill the messenger so as to make others of their mind set see him as non worthy of responding to and wrong from the start. It is a flawed, intellectually dishonest, but unfortunately effective method for propagandizing to those who lack intellectual self-defense skills that s used by those who wish to combat material that is different from their belief system. In this particular case, such an approach is entirely invalid because I have made my information independently verifiable. But I will address it anyway:

As I noted in the initial post, in an exploratory and much more immature stage, I left an internet legacy. At this time, the items I stand behind that are on the internet that I wrote are those written during and after the summer of 2013 as myself and as Blissentia, this blog, and the following items (items I have shared - 1,2 - items I have written and/or will rewrite 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 - and items I will expand - 1,2,3). However, I will explain some of the other items:

This forum cites some support I gave to the website "Zioncrimefactory" because of the Israel and 9/11 book of the author. I am very much a supporter of much of his update to the book. However, for a while, the author engaged in extremist, racist rhetoric. On his old site, before it was hijacked by a Christian Identity adherent, at personal risk to myself, I commented using my own name on some of his articles. I attempted to show, in lengthy comments to the "about" page, the fallacy of the racist approach, and while extremely egregious anti-social behavior is associated with Zionism, and that it was much more pernicious than mainstream critics acknowledged, this did not justify the fallacious racist approach (this commentary is archived here). Some of the responses in the comments show a beginning of a change in view, and later, on his current site, he declared White Nationalism to be a racist cult. From the time period that I was making these arguments, I made various statements trying to show the fallacy of this approach. One person in comments to a racist website that I do not endorse quoted something that I said during this time period - "Judaism is a sociopolitical mental illness that has wreaked immense havoc with Communism, Zionism, and the Rothschild banking system." I currently hold that this assertion is misguided, and the "mental illness" gambit is historically a weapon of political oppression that is lacking in scientific basis, but I do maintain, and substantiate below, that there is immense extremism and hate in Judaism that contributed ideologically to the movements I critique here (some could certainly describe this as mental illness, but it is only a more virulent strain of what is currently a general human malaise), and because of ruthless strategy, these movements achieved success. In contrast to those efforts, the old manager of the "Outlaw Forum" once wrote a quasi-reasonable article on these issues, but then his perspective degenerated to embrace extremism and hate. So, I, again, at personal risk to myself, attempted to show on his "updated" site the fallacy of such an approach, but this seemed to have no effect.

I used to post at the outlaw forum when I was 19 and 20, when I got into this after I went into a shock from watching ENDGAME the movie, which contains some good information but a lot of hot air and dearth of quality sources to back up its claims (in spite of this, I still intuitively resonated with core elements of the film, like the excerpt of Aldous Huxley's discussion of scientific dictatorship - that Brave New World was not fiction, but what was actually being implemented, and I later discovered that Huxley was way up in power elite circles implementing this, and while he feigned concern, his associates, like his brother, were actively implementing much of this. I later found that  much of the underlying narrative of the film can be substantiated, and I did this, but it cannot be substantiated from the material the dubious filmmaker provides (note - I don't support the overall site of the embedded link just given - - but the article I just linked to - - is very good and is very relevant)). Around this time, when my intellectual strength was less developed, I wrote up a glib forum thread cutting and pasting a bunch of material from popular "alternative media" sources that had varying degrees of documentation justifying their claims (some were of low quality, others were of high quality) and using that as the crux of my argument on conspiratorial narratives. Thus this critic, "Muertos", using appeal to ridicule, made false statements about that, implying that I did not even read the articles I cited (I did, and I acknowledge this, make the error of glibly cutting and pasting a bunch of sources rather than systematically addressing claims, and previously, I would make the error of giving sources other cited and not checking them, I have since updated my approach by giving links to google books excerpts or facsimiles of the texts cited where I could, and I will continue this by providing full facsimiles where appropriate), and then, after I had a bit of an exchange, on his website addressing a film that I in no way endorse totally, but endorse aspects of, engaged in belittling appeal to ridicule. I have become much more assiduous than I was when I made that "outlaw forum" thread, and have provided overlooked, but necessary sources to the public stemming from original research for the issues of concern here. This critic will no longer let me comment on his site to provide refutations of his commentary, and if his item ever becomes problematic, I will provide a copy of his admission of censorship. I don't really care to engage him further however, as much of his commentary is refuted within the body of this site. "Muertos" means "dead", and I am reminded of the phrase "let the dead bury their own dead" when considering his outlook and arguments. With intellectual laziness, he references Wikipedia as a main source. I  have provided here proof of the deep flaws of Wikipedia as a source for controversial issues - people can also see this and this and the general history of my struggles as Pottinger's cats on wikipedia - showing double standards and obfuscation being applied throughout contentious articles, and giving further proof of these flaws.

In contrast, I do have respect for Ernie Lazar, and the work he has done, though, when I wrote more polemically, I nevertheless noted an accurate truth - that he ignores the points corroborating his opponents, and uses logical fallacies. He is a source that challenges some of the historical ideological aspects of arguments I present here. And because of my intellectual honesty, and desire to not be tendentious, I provide, in the comments section of the original post, other sources upholding the more widely held narratives. I nevertheless persist with my thesis because in spite of that, I have found deep holes in those narratives - and evidence showing a different reality from what they promote. What people like Lazar seem to forget however is the following - THE FACT THAT BIGOTS AND EXTREME RIGHTISTS HAVE DISCUSSED THESE ISSUES IN THE PAST DOESN'T NULLIFY WHAT THE LEADERS OF THE POWER ELITE MOVEMENTS, WHO I AM BRINGING ATTENTION TO, ADMIT THEY ARE DOING IN THEIR OWN WORDS.

Many people will be reluctant to accept the facts presented here, in spite of the documentation corroborating them, because the Establishment version created the narratives they uphold first, and it is a scary thought that those in such positions, who people are trained to look up to, could be psychopaths and predators and deceive people. Those using this type of argumentation usually look to corporate media, regulatory agencies, and government as final arbiters of "truth". But such a stance is problematic for several reasons:

The concentration of media ownership, as it falls ever more into the hands unaccountable mega-corporations that, though it is not immediately obvious, are becoming (and have been for quite some time) increasingly like cartels because of interlocking directorates is a major reason whey that stance is untenable. And for the issues examined in this site, a relevant item is Manny Friedman's Times of Israel article "Jews DO control the media", which is filled with very disturbing rhetoric. It is addressed to a Jewish audience, and is thus more candid than a normal publication. Beyond that, it is important to note that Kent Cooper, who served as general manager of the Associated Press from 1925 to 1943, and then became it's executive director, in his book "Barriers Down", pp. 6-9, noted that by the beginning of the 20th century, the news agencies Reuters, Wolff, and Havas were a triumvirate that together monopolized international news. On p. 21, he noted that in his circles, the account was that international bankers, led by the Rothschilds, assumed ownership of those agencies at the beginning of the 20th Century.

It is true that many items informing my analysis are derived from mainstream media sources, but these sources stop short of giving a full picture, and, for most articles, bombard the readers with propaganda meant to further the objectives of Zionists and various multinational cartels.

For regulatory agencies, it is important to note that even though the EFSA states that "involvement in industry-funded research does not necessarily constitute a conflict of interest provided that the research does not relate directly to the topic being considered by the Panel or Working Group.", it is provable that the leaders of EFSA research panels have deep conflict of interest according to the EFSA's own guidelines (see also this and this), and thus they invalidate themselves as a reliable source according to the principles of witness impeachment. The same is true of so called "science watchdog" groups who selectively attack opponents, like Gilles-Éric Séralini, of the trends set by monopoly capitalists in their mad lust for power, in spite of the fact that those like Séralini who are selectively attacked are actually using perfectly fine protocols in their research, according to the regulatory agencies, when not selectively attacking those who raise items about concern regarding their corporate sponsors, themselves (see also this (rebuttal to criticisms of Séralini) and this (general research papers of Séralini) - and for the bigger picture, see this (pertaining to horizontal gene transfer with GMOs) and this (pertaining to the toxicity of the Roundup herbicide) and ESPECIALLY this (a superb article on GM health dangers): -and this - concerning the environmental problem shown by the fact that in 2001 Mexican government ministers attempted to intimidate Prof Ignacio Chapela into withdrawing or renouncing his work which showed that the country’s maize landraces were contaminated by GM cross-pollination). For a general overview of everything on this, see the following:
There is also less subtle conflict of interest with the FDA, and this is a reason for the extremely egregious behavior of this organization.

Subtle, hidden in plain sight government ownership of major corporations takes conflict of interest to a whole new level, and reveals not only that there are stores of wealth separate from the money governments make taxing people (showing across the board lying by officials who are either deceptive or ignorant of this major problem, and that many claims of budgetary deficit are fictional), but also that government and industry are a self serving fusion. Aside from that, monopoly capitalists are often the people steering the formation of major governmental bodies - again, an interesting item, in this regard, is the work of Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky, who was allowed to examine secret Soviet archives, and found that the modern EU was implemented as a result of a conspiracy between the Politburo and the elite of the Trilateral Commission – David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, Yasuhiro Nakasone, and Valéry Giscard d’Estaing. He gives the documentation in his book “EUSSR”, and an interesting article on this is here. And on a related note, presidents are groomed by these types of organizations - Reuters noted that "Invited as speakers, Bill Clinton and Tony Blair were groomed at Bilderberg meetings before rising to fame as U.S. President and British Prime Minister respectively." This used to be on yahoo news (*/, but it has been removed - fortunately it has been preserved here. And finally, for those who, after reading all of this, still think we live in any kind of "democratic open society", the following is of relevance - Burke's Peerage is considered the definitive source for royal genealogy, and according to Burke's Peerage researchers, "The presidential candidate with the most royal genes and chromosomes has, up to now, always won the White House..."

So why would you expect these entities to bite the hand that feeds them?

Finally, some with intellectual cowardice might like to dismiss my argument as "crazy", because of its variance with their Pavlovian conditioning and indoctrination. Such a stance is invalid, but even if we were to entertain it, the documentation is independently verifiable, and aside from that, the defamatory accusation has interesting historical connotations (see 1, 2, 3, 4).