And while having a bit of a moan… Aangirfan

I think “Aangirfan” and I share reasonable overlap when it comes to our world views, generally, that an elite group of people is fracking the planet, in a number of different ways. As someone who (appears to) oppose the dominion of a rather sinister elite, his efforts are to be generally appreciated. But he provides me with a good example of something that irks me.

E.g. On Saturday 26th August 2012, Syrian troops were reported (by who? – we don’t know) to have entered the town of Daraya, south-west of Damascus. A day later Syrian troops were reported (by who? – again we don’t know) to be accused (once more, we don’t really know the originator of these accusations)  of killing something like 200 civilians.

Just two days later, on Monday, August 27, 2012, Aangirfan puts up a post with the headline

“NATO FORCES MASSACRE CIVILIANS IN DARAYA” – source

Now, there may well have been some kind of force that has the backing of politicians and military men inside the NATO alliance, and that such a thing would be my default assumption, but something tells me Aangirfan isn’t in possession of evidence that would back up his claim…after probably less than 48 hours.

Aangirfan does this kind of thing quite a bit. Within a short space of time, it seems he knows exactly what happened and who did it. You will have to forgiive me for thinking that he is in fact NOT in possession of this kind of information. Aangirfan seems to jump the gun many times and lets his imagination run away with him, sometimes scraping around for connections that are pretty thin.

Even if what he says below is true:

“The civilians of the Daraya massacre were Pro-Assad.

They were ordered by the rebels to support them or die.

They refused to support the rebels.”

That still doesn’t mean NATO forces (as he puts it) can be proved to have indeed killed them., and which ‘rebels’ exactly are being mentioned here, Which civilians – all of them? If they were all killed how do we know this was said to them?

OK, that there are connections is something noteworthy and worth checking out, but Aangirfan doesn’t seem to check them out at all. It’s usually case closed for him. He could well be right, but I think his readers should treat his stuff with a reasonable amount of caution.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

 

The Vigilant Citizen, 2012 and I, Pet Goat II

I like VC a lot, still, I fancy a wee moan.

Some of the more recent reports VC has done are:

a) I, Pet Goat II” 486 comments to date and

b) “2012” (the movie) 508 comments to date

I don’t know why VC has reported on these. I watched 2012 at the cinema. It’s not really my kind of movie, but it was certainly breathtaking and well worth the price of the ticket. But the symbolism was so deliberate, like a rotting herring waved in front of the nose, that really there was nothing hidden or secretive about it. And I don’t think it’s because I’m ‘awake’ (at least so I have lead myself to believe).  For example: the cracking of the Adam/God depiction on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. So VC’s 2012 report is one of his worst.

Same for I, Pet Goat II.

Well, sort of…

The video’s visuals and fluidity are simply incredible, Artistically it is incredible – and it matters not a atom that it’s computer generated. Its probably got more symbols in it that there are Zionist thieves currently occupying Palestine.  If you go to http://www.heliofant.com/commentary.html (the producer of I, Pet Goat II, you will find this in the commentary…

“I would like to start off by saying that the film came to me in its visual form, much like a painter who sees colors and forms in his mind’s eye. And I tried to be faithful to what I saw visually without necessarily understanding what the symbols were alluding to. Some of the symbols were pretty obvious to decipher, whereas some scenes had me scratching my head and took me some time to understand.” – source

Note: Heliofant, (Loius Lefebvre?) the creator of the video, gives his commentary, somewhat ambiguously, on the apparent meaning of his video further down the page.

Frankly I have a very hard time accepting this to be a purely true and honest statement. It is so packed with ‘stuff’ and its duration is so long that to believe it’s free from “post-inspiration’ human add-ons, simply isn’t credible. What I mean is that some – if not most – of its symbolism is deliberately put in there. And I feel VC misses many of the more interesting things what are subtle. Instead, like 2012, VC analyses what doesn’t really need analysing.

This may seem a tad harsh on VC, but w.r.t. I, Pet Goat II, I wish he would have pointed out some of the less obvious things, because I feel it would have been closer to exposing what Heliofant was really trying to get across with the video (assuming he wasn’t 2012’ing it, spicing it up, adding many extras, just to try to grab the attention – hence publicity – of a conspiracy researcher.

Putting possible/deliberately-added-baiting-garnish aside for now, I wonder what was the source of I, Pet Goat II that came to Heliofant’s minds eye?  Indeed the name Heliofant itself is interesting but rather synthetic.

The video is sinister and as with ALL computer aided graphics, every single pixel is created, hence deliberate.  The video probably contains many many deeper layers of  possible meanings than VC pointed out, perhaps the obvious one being the age old attempted attack on monotheistic faith, but dressed up in the usual disguises of  Zionism. Illuminati, FreeMasonry etc.

It would be nice if VC gave a deeper analysis of the symbols (those from artistic inspiration as well as those deliberately concocted).

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Once again, I recommend thisisyourwakeup

I recommend www.youtube.com/user/thisisyourwakeup again despite me being on the opposite side of the debate to him on a couple issues (e.g. his pro-choice view). I recommend him because I believe he is honest, sincere and committed to rational and sensible discussion as to many of the sticky situations we find ourselves in.

Plus the fact his “holocaust.wmv” video has 90 views, 13 dislikes, no likes, suggests he’s on the right track.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

 

Withdrawl – closer than ever before

At what point should one withdraw from a decaying world? Islamically, when society appears on the point of collapse or beyond rescue, one is advised to detach/flee from that society .

I have fulfilled some of my responsibility by speaking out against what I believe are (some of) the GREAT EVILS of this world. I had the aim that of showing this to others and encouraging them to do so similarly against this grand tyranny.

But lets take a reality check here: The sheeple are NOT waking up (in anywhere near enough quantities). The masses are going along with the slide into despotism, and I suspect they are doing so with various levels of deliberate decision making.

Those who can and have seen the evil core of society spreading and infecting just about anything it can are massively ineffectual (yes, including me).

I think it may be time to stop shouting and time to withdraw. I must have spent years of my life reading and researching. Sadly I have almost nothing to show from it, other than an inner satisfaction that I have not succumbed to that evils and its withering touch (or so I believe!). I think a lot of my use of ‘life force’ has not been fruitful.

I am increasingly of the mindset that its just about time to ‘call time’, and begin to prepare seriously for the collapse, but I suspect any such preparation other than relocation to the isolated countryside to live a detached simple life, relatively free of technology, would be doomed.

That is surely what should occupy my time now.

Islam and monotheism has all but gone, and some miserable deceptive imitation has been hoisted up in its place. I simply can’t see any way to bring back the kind of God fearing (fear of the unquestionably justice that we will one day have to account for) and God loving based society that we need and offers salvation.

I’m not a Christian in the commonly understood sense of the word, but there is something in the concept of humans; may I call it: perpetual sin, which does indeed show the need for man to have an absolver and guiding ‘father’ figure.

I think it’s time to be a bit more “selfish” and prepare.

Question is…. am I able to?

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Julian Assange & the Likely Attack on Ecuador’s London Embassy: America’s Vassal Acts Decisively and Illegally

Due to a general request by Craig Murray, I repost his article…

America’s Vassal Acts Decisively and Illegally

by craig on August 16, 2012 11:30 am in Uncategorized

UPDATE

100,000 HITS IN 100 MINUTES CRASHED THE SITE. WE DON’T KNOW YET IF GENUINE INTEREST OR DENIAL OF SERVICE ATTACK. OUR BRILLIANT WEBHOSTS HAVE QUADRUPLED THE RESOURCE, BUT IF YOU CAN HELP TAKE THE STRAIN BY REPOSTING I WOULD BE VERY GRATEFUL.

I returned to the UK today to be astonished by private confirmation from within the FCO that the UK government has indeed decided – after immense pressure from the Obama administration – to enter the Ecuadorean Embassy and seize Julian Assange.

This will be, beyond any argument, a blatant breach of the Vienna Convention of 1961, to which the UK is one of the original parties and which encodes the centuries – arguably millennia – of practice which have enabled diplomatic relations to function. The Vienna Convention is the most subscribed single international treaty in the world.

The provisions of the Vienna Convention on the status of diplomatic premises are expressed in deliberately absolute terms. There is no modification or qualification elsewhere in the treaty.

Article 22

1.The premises of the mission shall be inviolable. The agents of the receiving State may not enter
them, except with the consent of the head of the mission.
2.The receiving State is under a special duty to take all appropriate steps to protect the premises
of the mission against any intrusion or damage and to prevent any disturbance of the peace of the
mission or impairment of its dignity.
3.The premises of the mission, their furnishings and other property thereon and the means of
transport of the mission shall be immune from search, requisition, attachment or execution.

Not even the Chinese government tried to enter the US Embassy to arrest the Chinese dissident Chen Guangchen. Even during the decades of the Cold War, defectors or dissidents were never seized from each other’s embassies. Murder in Samarkand relates in detail my attempts in the British Embassy to help Uzbek dissidents. This terrible breach of international law will result in British Embassies being subject to raids and harassment worldwide.

The government’s calculation is that, unlike Ecuador, Britain is a strong enough power to deter such intrusions. This is yet another symptom of the “might is right” principle in international relations, in the era of the neo-conservative abandonment of the idea of the rule of international law.

The British Government bases its argument on domestic British legislation. But the domestic legislation of a country cannot counter its obligations in international law, unless it chooses to withdraw from them. If the government does not wish to follow the obligations imposed on it by the Vienna Convention, it has the right to resile from it – which would leave British diplomats with no protection worldwide.

I hope to have more information soon on the threats used by the US administration. William Hague had been supporting the move against the concerted advice of his own officials; Ken Clarke has been opposing the move against the advice of his. I gather the decision to act has been taken in Number 10.

There appears to have been no input of any kind from the Liberal Democrats. That opens a wider question – there appears to be no “liberal” impact now in any question of coalition policy. It is amazing how government salaries and privileges and ministerial limousines are worth far more than any belief to these people. I cannot now conceive how I was a member of that party for over thirty years, deluded into a genuine belief that they had principles.

The atheists and anti-theists poor performance.

I’ve been feverish of late trying to expand my familiarization (and re-visitation) of the church of atheism. I am shocked at what I’m turning up. The theists, mostly Christians, are (generally) positing a scientific line in defence of their world view (and very powerfully I must say) and the hijackers of ‘science’, those who are seeking to covet science, i.e. the atheists,  simply side-step the issues, instead trying to ‘sell’ their world-view by simply bashing the sins of a minority of people of people professing religiosity but who do great crimes. Any attempt to talk about the science issues are pathetically in the atheistic camp.

From the last time I looked at this, it seemed mostly the opposite way around. Now the atheists are loitering in the realm of sociology and social science and are getting trampled upon.

Yes, as a theist I look at things from a theistic viewpoint, but as I’ve said elsewhere, I think this is balanced by the atheists viewing things from their standpoint. But I have tried to be sincere to looking at the atheistic arguments sympathetically.

Here’s some things that the atheists get stumped on.

1) Atheists are at a total loss to explain how the first life form came about. Instead they beguile their audience with micro-evolution of pre-existing life forms and fool you into accepting micro evolution as actually macro-evolution – not that they will point out the difference.

2) The question of how the Universe began.

3) The fine tuning of the Universe, the anthropic principle.

4) The Dawkinite “high probability” of aliens seeding life is TOTALLY lacking evidence.

5) The Multiverse theory does not and CANNOT have any evidence for it.

6) The attempt to set up science as the new religion air-brushes the large number of theistic and deists who engage fully in science.

7) Science – th study of the physical simply CANNOT explain that which is proposed to he beyond physicaliy.

–

The moral and conscious/mind/information/language/geological/palaeontologically/historical and economic arguments against the atheists are also pushing the atheists into a corner.

I’m seeing that it’s game set and match! It seems its never been a better time to argue for the existence of God.

Alhamdulillah, and these are Christians who are doing it, the Muslims are proportionately deadly silent on the matter.

–

Anyway, this post is triggered by me uncovering what I think is a lie by Christopher Hitchens in his ‘never’ having had a Christian debate his standpoint from a scriptural stance.

So watch these two videos:

1) Does God Exist? (Frank Turek vs Christopher Hitchens)
September 9, 2008

2) The God Debate: Hitchens vs. D’Souza
April 7, 2010

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Curiosity Mars Rover

As a youngster, outer-space and the possibly of travelling to off-world destinations fascinated me, This is especially true of Mars. Mars was always had me carrying the hope of finding some kind of life out there. The Viking missions were awe inspiring.

Now though, these feelings have largely abandoned me. The Curiousity Mars Rover is just another 1 minute story. And as for this ‘7 Minutes of Terror’ thing [the descent to the planet], who the hell plastered that damn ‘terror’ label on it. For pity’s sake! If ever a stinging slap was deserved, it should go to the person who ‘marketeered’ that.

What happened?

Many things probably. Massive disillusionment with the lies and spin within physical science. Shock at the great sums of money and resources wasted on it, while almost 1 billion people go hungry at the end of every day. The weaponisation of science, the politicisation of science, an attempted secularisation/hijacking of science. I have come to see the shit of this world [human acts] covering many of the things I used to hold very dear to my heart. And all the signs are that it’s going to get worse. Much worse. Plus, the realisation there are just some things that we are almost never likely to be able to do.

All this leaves me very sad. The Curiosity Mars Rover has once again makes me remember my young mans optimism for the world and the species – a young man who was brought up ignorant of the monumental failings of the world. Perhaps the worlds crap was deliberately hidden from me, or perhaps not. When young, reading about historical and contemporary wars etc, I would have never imagined anything like suddenly inflicting itself upon my surroundings. I would have totallly not understood why bomds destruction and death were suddenly around me. No, wars and ‘global crap’ were a thing of history. Sure, The Lebanon, Iraq-Iran war were on the TV, but it didn’t really resister and/or it was very quickly forgotten that somewhere, bullets were flying and people were dying.

How different and unexpected my mature elderly life has turned out to be, and boy!, how much crap there is!

Even if Mars was in the news today was discussing its colonisation, I doubt it would have much meaning and significance to me today. We would just be exporting the Earth’s crap onto another unfortunate place.

No doubt the Curiosity Mars Rover reports will seed a new young generation who stupefy themselves with the ‘glories’ of science (chiefly sci-fi and ‘big-talk’ dressed as  science) while their neighbours are spied upon and sent to to some torture dungeon somewhere, while shitty Israyhell kills more Palestinians and thieves more of Palestine.

–

Well now I’m beginning to recall some kind of (1980’s british TV series) where people tried to colonise Mars but (I think) In the storyline the Martians weren’t having any of it. I suddenly have the desire to watch it again. Anyone know what the series was called? – The Mars Chronicles I think – YES IT WAS !!! With Rock Hudson amongst others. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martian_Chronicles_%28TV_miniseries%29

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

If 9/11 was a false flag opration, why hasn’t anyone squealed?

For some, that question is enough to stop them believing anything other than the official conspiracy theory or ‘official narrative’ as others may phrase it.

But lets be frank, it is a thoroughly stupid stance to take.

1) That someone involved in one of the most significant world shaking event would, having initially been a willing participant, simply MUST admit to the fact later. This ‘opening’ condition alone, is likely to result in the majority of participants having a very strong reason to keep it secret.

2) Given the likely real suspects behind 9/11 and the dirty things they get up to, it is more than reasonable to believe any potential squealer would face execution with a similar threat facing their families.

3) Imagine some false-flag (FF) has occurred and a squealer came forth 7 years alter. From the time the event happened up until the ‘confession’ the false flag was still a false-flag. It does not magically become a FF simply when someone admits to it.

4) Even if a confession does come forth, the following powerful filters need to be successfully penetrated; The ‘confession’ needs
a) mass exposure
b) mass communication (not necessarily the same as a)
c) mass acceptance.
These filters even when overcome still don’t guarantee people will abandon the adopted mental barrier heading this post.

5) Not all FF’s will have a whistle-blower. To believe that to date, the FF’s and black-ops that have been exposed are the only FF / black-ops that have ever occurred and that no deadly secret has ever been taken to the grave  is simply the philosophical stance of cretin.

The weight of ALL evidence towards official forces being involved in 9-11 is simply overwhelming relative to the ‘official conspiracy story’, and in my opinion is is well beyond all reasonable doubt.

Why should justice and punitive action NOT be taken just because of the idiots who adopt such pathetic stances as “If 9/11 was a false flag operation, why hasn’t anyone squealed?” The only answer to that is surely this: Because in reality, possibly deep in their conscious, they prefer and benefit from the consequences that followed the FF rather than the consequences of having true justice be served and all ramifications from that.

What a world, huh!

Suggested reading:  “Conspiracy Theorists & Cognitive Dissonance” by http://eleveneleventruth.wordpress.com/2010/08/05/conspiracy-theorists-cognitive-dissonance/

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Chinese sportstars

Sport is politicised, but when that politicisation deals with politics ‘the West’ doesn’t like you will hear that old line: “Sport and politics shouldn’t mix”. Laughably, Olympic sport is ‘sport by nations’ and hence this beast is absolutely, inherently and hypocritically political!

Stephen M. Walt of Walt and Mearsheimer. “The Israel Lobby” fame, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFW8QbWsYIE, {P.S. Anyone know where I can get the full video to: London Review of Books: The Israel Lobby: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crbbNCvngOs? although there is a lengthy discussion of it here: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/john-mearsheimer/the-israel-lobby} has written a short, as usual honest, and interesting piece on nationalism in regards to the 2012 Olympics.

It’s a pity he didn’t examine in any detail the peculiar phenomenon he identified, namely the  “imagined community”. I’d have valued an analysis by Walt on this, e.g. a few questions as to whether “imagined community” – as far as nationalism goes – is deliberately ‘beamed’ upon is, why it’s done, who does it, etc. Lets not forget however that “imagined community” also has a ‘good side’ and the healthy part of it is something most of us draw upon.

Anyway, despite not really watching the zion Olympics, I’ll be happy if any country who the the USUSZ (the real axis of evil) hate or talk badly of. Hence on hearing of a win for China, I’ll crack a smile.

(morning)

And I will crack a frown when some sour-grapes US swimming coach, John Leonard, pours deliberate suspicion upon Ye Shiwen, the 16 year old Chinese double gold medallist, by albeit accusing her of taking ‘performance enhancing drugs’. This disgraceful mud will now probably stick to her for her entire life.

Ye Shiwen

And it so happens the games authorities have proved she wasn’t doped up. So Leonards defamation was wrong and a vile slander. If someone effectively accused John Leonard of doping up athletes, I can well imagine the little pool turd would feel his career effected and probably take to the courts to clear his name (and perhaps pocket a load of cash).

Funny, but I’ve not heard Leonard spitting out accusations in regards to the absolutely extraordinary and astounding success of Michael Phelps, holder of 19 Olympic medals (15 of them gold). No. Phelps of course isn’t a ‘drugs cheat’. He’s just a ‘phenomenal talent’, as only USans and other selected white people can be.

And no US athlete deliberately takes specific substances (e.g. food) to aid, maintain and boost their athleticism do they? [just that those food containing substances don’t appear on a rather selective ban list].

People probably remember that mega big-head (whatever you do, we is the US do it far bigger) Carl Lewis, who was so vocal about Ben Johnson, but Carl Lewis, himself was a drugs cheat, testing positive in THREE drugs tests just prior(!) to the “1988 Ben Johnson (Seoul) Olympics”  (something Panasonic, a 2012 Olympics sponsor using Lewis, seems to be unawares of) yet, at the time had the nerve to harp on and on about Johnson. Lewis, the possible embodiment of an ego, will love that I mentioned his name, irrespective of me pointing out he’s a drugs cheat.

I would not be surprised in the slightest, if, somewhere in the domestic US athletics fraternity, there various operations which grant various levels of ‘protectionism’ and ‘cloaking’ for the benefit of US athletes, but that’s the USA, so such thought could not possibly have merit.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

George Galloway in fine form

No man is an Island, hence NEVER give absolute loyalty to them, unless it’s the Mehdi or Isa. Oppose them when deserve opposing and support them when the deserve supporting. So I bring you George Galloway in fine form…

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–