sexiest woman room

On the topics of Jubus, perhaps I've been hoodwinked again? It's not like it'd be the first time. Here's a thought - would it be beyond the realms of possibility for those who constitute sheepdogs amongst the Jewish flock, dismayed at the constant haemorrhaging of Jews to Buddhism, to do their usual trick and misrepresent things? After all, misrepresentation is their best and only weapon. So, perhaps there's tons of Buddhists who eschew the Jubu tag, who look back at their past Jewish identity of us-and-them / me-uber-alles with a kind of dull horror, and now strive only to ever more perfectly realise that there is no self, Jewish or otherwise.


Or let's put it another way - if such an individual did exist would they get a shiny book-deal from Faber and Faber with endless cross promotion on the rounds of the talk shows? Cut to Oprah - "Next up on my Book of the Month we talk with an author who after spending ten years in a Zen monastery had what he calls an awakening. But part of this awakening was to the 'the delusional nature of Judaism', his previous religion. He says Jewish people should likewise wake up to the fundamental wrongness of their us-and-them identification and that Buddhism provides an ideal way to do that. The book is entitled There Is No Self, Jewish Or Otherwise, and its author John Smith joins us after the break. Oh, and wait till you hear what he has to say about the Talmud! Whoo-ee, strong stuff."

Ha ha ha ha, fat chance of that! Thinking about it, such a book, if it existed, would constitute an apostasy of the highest order and would make whatever Norman Finkelstein copped look like foreplay. Instead we get books like The Jew in the Lotus: A Poet's Re-Discovery of Jewish Identity in Buddhist India by Rodger Kamanetz. Says he, "Buddhism Shmudism. I tried it and it's okay, but really it just made me more Jewish than ever!" And so it goes, every Jubu book out there has the same message: never mind the middle way, the alpha and omega are Jewish. Or to put it another way - If you're pissed off with Judaism and are wondering if Buddhism might be an alternative, well... it ain't.


Okay, so that being the case, who's to say that this apparent triumph of Jewish-first-and-Buddhist-second over Buddhist-first-and-apostatic-daylight-second isn't bullshit? Even if a shocking number of Jews were taking up Buddhism and truly leaving their ugly chosen-by-God identification behind, the Jewish media would have to a) ignore it and hope no one noticed, and b) arrange for funds and book contracts to ensure that an opposite message predominated and that Buddhism would never be seen as a pair of scissors to cut the apron strings. Given that, what are we to make of the conversation about Jubu-dom being hogged by a tiny handful of commentators each of which sings from the same songsheet?

Ayah! In amongst this, what's a mad metaphor mangler to do? Um... choose! Choose between: Judaism as an impregnable us-and-them edifice against which Buddhism is less of an indictment/threat than it is a good housekeeping seal of approval, or; Judaism as the Amityville Hotel with the owners (in between hiding skeletons and mopping up blood etc) perpetually telling all the guests that they should pay no attention to any brochures they might find from the Buddha Guesthouse up the road: "Yes, we've had a few people who tried it but they came back saying it was much better here." Cue voiceover of Mandy Rice-Davies, 'Well they would, wouldn't they?'


Choose, don't choose - or just leave it as it stands and see if there aren't some clues in amongst it. In all my reading about Jubus it appeared that several themes predominated and several were left out altogether. Permissible and oft-repeated topics are meditation, suffering, karma, as well as the fuzzy buzzwords 'spirituality', 'ancient texts', 'esoterica', and 'mysticism'. Clearly these are innocuous and may be discussed. By keeping within these boundaries Judaism and Buddhism have a lot in common, so much so they can be best buds, each in the other's fan club. "You da bomb." "No, you da bomb."

Left out of the whole conversation are the otherwise crucial words 'self' and 'selflessness'. And 'compassion'? Nowhere to be seen. These aspects of Buddhism may not be broached because were that to happen suddenly we're no longer waltzing around the edges and instead have leapt right to heart of the matter where Judaism and Buddhism have nothing in common at all. Oh, and God forbid anyone should mention the Talmud. Mind you Buddhism isn't Judaism's only friend not to know about his predilection for secret black-hearted wickedness.


Fuck it, I'm going to declare that this noisy Jubu celebration of commonality is less a warm-hearted seeking of concord than it is a means of putting the kibosh on any discussion that might cast Judaism in an unflattering light and thus lead to its further dissolution. Hell, why don't I go balls out and ask the question - Has Judaism's entire involvement with Buddhism, right from the get-go, been one of threat identification with subsequent Jewish adoption as a means of evisceration / emasculation? It works for me.

And as ever, the very trumpeting of strength and inevitability signals the 180° truth of the matter. The strength is a weakness. The inevitability is no such thing. The only certainty is change. Everything else is delusion.

Carbon trading, eh? How does that work then? Why don't I try and explain it to myself.


Polluting is bad and planting trees is good. For bad read 'negative', and good, 'positive'. To balance the scale a polluter needs to plant trees so that his negative score comes back to a neutral 'zero' value. He won't plant any trees himself of course (not unless the press is there, ha ha). Besides were he to do so who'd need a middleman? And whether we need them or not, God knows we must have middlemen. Sure enough carbon trading is a middleman's wet dream and that's why we're going to get it even if everyone except the middleman has to die in the attempt. Ha, now that I think about it, global warming could happily be described as 'a middle man, his invented product, and the fight to turn us all into buyers and sellers'.

But it is true that polluting is bad and planting trees is good. At least we can all agree on that. Just like we all agreed that Saddam possessing WMD's was bad and that a democratic Iraq would be good. Only some crazy pro-WMD, anti-democracy, tyrant-loving loony would have argued otherwise. And even if we suspected at the time that there was something screwy in amongst the arguments for war, at least it was all for a good cause. And didn't that turn out well! Iraq is now a thriving WMD-free democracy and we only had to kill 5% of the population to do it. And so it is with carbon trading: a few fudged figures, a few billion dollars rorted, but it's all for a good cause and only some crazy environment-hating pollution lover in the pay of Big Oil could possibly speak against it.


Hmm... here's the same argument from a different tack: To say that if global warming was bullshit, some scientist would win fame and fortune by proving it, is worth precisely as much as saying (way back when) that if Saddam didn't have WMD's, some journalist would win a Pulitzer by being the first (and only) guy to say so. So much for that argument. In the run up to the war not a single journalist did the obvious and googled Scott Ritter. Impossibly the world's most famous weapons inspector became a media unperson. And that Pulitzer? Ha ha ha, what's the point of a Pulitzer if you're black-banned from the entire industry? It's not called a 'bloc-media' for nothing. And just like there was a songbook for Iraq's WMD's and everybody had to sing from it, same-same for global warming.

Otherwise never mind the old polluting bad, planting trees good, how about steal from the rich to give to the poor? Did somebody say Robin Hood? How about Double Plus Good! Welcome to carbon trading, wherein finally we all win the lottery. The big fat-cat polluters will have to buy carbon credits and they'll have to come crawling on their knees to the forest owning poor. Who but a crazy pro-rich anti-poor weirdo could be against it? Honestly what's not to like in this idea?


I don't know... how about the fact that it's bullshit? The wealthy of this world would sooner eat their own heads than hand their money over to the poor. Sure enough they won't be doing any such thing. Rather, what they'll be doing is forcing the poor to sign their lives away (at gunpoint if necessary) for some feathers, mirrors, and glass beads. Then they sit and wait. They wait like Alan Greenspan and his proxies waited after they handed out free money to every man jack who couldn't afford a mortgage. Alan and his very good friends didn't care that the loans could never be repaid. They knew how worthless the imaginary money was. They just wanted all the land. Or everyone homeless. Or some combination of the two, now that I think about it. And they got it. Well, not all of it yet but don't worry, they're very patient fellows.

Meanwhile in New Guinea we can see the feathers gag happening in real time (SBS pt 1) (SBS pt 2) (SBS pt 3). And the falsity is beyond obvious. Laws not in place? No idea who the owners are? The ministry in charge of it all so utterly corrupt it was actually disbanded? Doesn't matter! No need to take my word for it, watch that vid and see the pell-mell rush to sign up anybody with a pulse. And the local governor complained to the Australian government about the whole sordid affair did he? Ha ha ha ha ha - Mate, the government of K Rudd is precisely as interested in the crookedness of a land grab in New Guinea as they are in the crookedness of a the land grab in Australia's own Northern Territory. Which is to say, not. Which is to say they're a party to it. K Rudd and the middle men? Best of friends!


Otherwise if you view global warming/cooling as a flat out con suddenly all the inconsistencies and contradictions become no such thing and actually make perfect sense. As our death cult leaders haggle over precisely how little to give to the third world in order to snaffle up what bits of virgin forest remain, the rest of it continues to be cut down at a rate of football fields per hour. If you really want to know where the West's head is at in regard to rainforests etc ask yourself where all that clear-felled Indonesian timber is going. Indonesia? Not bloody likely. It's for us in the fat-cat West. If those disappearing Sumatran forests were truly going to put the PTB's beachside properties under water, we'd spend as much time halting Indonesian freighters carrying timber as we do ships bearing humanitarian supplies bound for Palestine. But we don't do that because the PTB want that timber for the decking of their beachside property (which of course is no more likely to be sunk than the Israelis are to quit being psycho-killers). The cutting down of the rain forests is many things (and all of them fucked) but a global climate changer ain't one of them. Our death cult PTB tells us this themselves.

There will be climate change and no mistake. What's coming is coming. And sure enough, the death cult knows this. Knowledge is power - literally: the words 'know' and 'noble' come from the same root. Our ignoble nobility know what's coming and of course they bend that knowledge to accord with the single thrumming refrain in their head: what's in it for me - it's all about me - me uber alles - if not me, none - me, me, me, ad nauseam. It's all they have and they are nothing if not predictable. And speaking of predictable - Of course they lie and tell us it's for our own good! Of course they stampede us with fear! Always this way! Like these simpleton, one-note, trickster motherfuckers ever pass up a chance? Honestly.


Hey Tricksters! Fuck you! You're bullshit and obvious with it. A tuppence for the lot of you.

Oh, and you can stick your global warming up your arse.

Non-Media Truth

The climate changes. It always has and always will.

Previous climate changes could not possibly have been caused by humans.

Media Truth

The climate is changing! There has never been anything like this before!

Current climate change could not possibly have been caused by anything but humans.

There's a expression to describe an argument of this nature and it is, an insult to my intelligence. And that goes double when the only 'solution' to the 'problem' is a centralised carbon tax regime administered by a New World Order.


Otherwise there's only two aspects to the argument:

The Weather

All discussions on the craziness of the weather are proof of nothing more than the fact that climate changes. Or to put it another way - The climate is as changeable as the weather, ha ha ha. Waitaminute! Am I the first guy to crack that joke? Seriously, sub-editors live to write shit like that. Hmm... interesting how not a single media soul has mentioned the irony of the very thing we use as a definition of changeability is somehow now a thing we imagine should never change. With this in mind (along with the sheer obviousness of it all) any argument for carbon tax that consists of stating how bizarre the weather is, is completely worthless.

Humans

There is only one question that counts: Is this current period of climate change truly different to every other period ie. with natural causes completely absent and humans being promoted to a status that would previously have been the very definition of hubris?

Given that previous climate change has been disappeared as have the natural causes that led to it,

Given that the people who declare that it's-humans-wot-dunnit have been caught flat out lying, have acknowledged that they're lying, and have discussed means of lying more effectively,

Given that these same people have been on the receiving end of staggering sums of money, promotions, Nobel prizes etc,

Given that the only solution on the table consists not of actually curtailing pollution so much as subjecting everyone to yet another contrived and convoluted means-of-exchange,

Given that this must necessarily be administered by the exact same geniuses who think it perfectly right that they receive world record bonuses in the middle of world record economic collapse (that they, sure enough, made),

Given that we're being stampeded into it like it was some kind of "Sponge-O-Matic! Three for the price of one! But only if you call now!" TV crap,

Given that the only reason that the lies-is-all-they-got death cult motherfuckers who rule us wouldn't do this is because they didn't think of it,

Given all these things... I'm going to call it! IT'S BULLSHIT! Of course they would do this! It's not like they've got anything better to do. A Rothschild can't spend every waking moment fucking kids and mind-control zombies, can he?

Frankly, the only reason to believe this latest New World Order shit is that old chestnut outlined by Hitler when he described the Big Lie. Say it with me now,

"There's no way this many people could lie about something this big."

Sure! That's how the Big Lie works! It's not like it's climatology rocket science or anything!

So i been avoiding posting anything on here. Keeping my mouth shut lately has been so much easier than dealing with my pain head on. I written a few things that haven't been posted and i'm pretty sure i never will. I think all the complaints about me playing the "poor me" roll have honestly sunken in. I find it funny that i can be embarrassed for being depressed. I have fought for people to pay attention, for people to listen... for people to see me beneath the surface and In reality, its only blown up in my face. No one cares and i have honestly have begun to ask myself, why should i?
I keep reading, "Hold on James"
Hold on to what?
I started taking this new "work out" drug which after using it briefly i started to see negative side effects which made me research it more. I found plenty of extremely negative feedback on the drug, the worst side effect being death... people using the drug dying in their sleep... Really? ... All i could think after reading that was "how perfect". What an easy out. Yeah, it might not be as dramatic as going out in a a shoot out with the cops like i always imagined but, i'm a pussy anyways. Even if i could get my hands on a gun, i'd most likely do nothing with it except imagine...
Its funny the day dreams i had the other day when i was almost arrested again...
i guess the funniest part was that i almost welcomed being locked up. I have fought it other times, this time, i just didnt care... i have seen the "white trash, roided out, bully" looks before... why fight it? ... Just accept it. God, just that change alone would be refreshing. I have basically fucked my life up doing my own thing, i guess it would seem only right if someone else had complete control of it now...
The only thought that rings through my head lately is ...You are destine to fail.
I have seen it on TV and asked myself, " i wonder how bad someones life has to be to get there...". Well this is it.
I have exhausted myself trying to keep everyone else best interests ahead of mine.
... i can't live like this anymore. I've spent the last 5 years of my life slowly dying and expected so much more from myself..... there is no hope left...

(sorry, to the people that get sick of my depressing rants, but i been holding it in for to long and i was going to explode. Trust me if i had someone in my life that i thought cared enough to hear what i felt, i wouldn't be throwing it all up here)

... oh well
OK

I just spent the last 3 nights of my life in the ICU of the hospital. (for reasons beyond my control). I didnt know how to look at my situation... on one side i thought to myself "jesus, when they knock me out and i don't wake up, you know, i perfectly okay with that, i have lived enough, i have put my body through enough" and on the other hand... My family rushed to my side. My boyfriends sat their crying, waiting for my situation to stabilize, granted not one friend came... yet, i felt loved.
I always say no one understands me... i guess i don't even understand myself.
I'm out now... weak and really tired...
i wonder what will happen next...

Oh, I'm so bored with this topic. I don't know if it's my detoxified brain or my yoga-fied body, but I find it hard to summon up any enthusiasm for the whole thing. Somehow it's all turned into homework. So why don't I just kill the comedy hobby-horse I've been on up until now and get it over and done with?

There aren't two media masters - there's only one, and he's Jewish. And he's Satanist! He's both and he's neither. He's the wrong end of the continuum. He is that creature that has most perfectly embraced fear and desire. He is the anti-buddha. He is me uber alles. He is if not me, none.


In much the same way that there's not much to be gained in describing the Buddha in terms of whatever he was before - 'Well, he was from Kosala, you know' - I think the same follows for our anti-buddhas. Whatever they once were long ago, they are no longer. Any descriptions that might apply would be merely nominal and bring as much confusion as clarity. Since truth must be sacrificed at the altar of their own greatness, there can be no description of them that will make clear cut sense. They are whatever works.

So who are the Jews? And what are the Satanists? I'm going to call them servants, dupes, and coat-tail riders, with each imagining themselves as the favoured child. And a case could be made supporting the rightness of that thought. But it would be equally true to say that they're just fodder to be used up as suits their uber-alles masters. Viewed from this angle these two sects of the death cult have more in common with each other than they know. It's arguable that the greatest difference between them is the fact that one is publicly acknowledged and the other is regularly disappeared from the media and exists only as an apocryphal entity, ie. in the madder works of fiction.

---

As the acknowledged servants, the Jews get to wallow in a public orgy of self-impressed self-congratulation. Absurdly, if it weren't for them (says they) we'd have no culture, art, or music, no rights or freedoms, no insert_thing_worth_having_here. It's arrant nonsense of course but the Jews, like their once-were-Jewish masters, have made lying an art-form, not least of all to themselves. Flatter them and they'll believe you. And tell them that everyone wants to kill them out of envy, and they'll believe that too.


Who knows if there's a god who grooves on human sacrifice? Not me. But anyone who's hung out at the occult section of Rigorous Intuition would have to concede that spooky preternatural shit does go on. Sacrifices are made and all in a quest for 'magick'. But as far as I can tell, none of it ever seems to count for much. Certainly in terms of holocaust = sacrifice, you'd have to ask, where's the magick in amongst that event? There, blood-lusting god or no, and 6,000,000 dead or no - I don't know that it makes much difference. All that counts is that the world believes that that's what happened and a humongous evil juju is spawned regardless. Don't argue - 6M or 300K, a brand new nation appeared before our very eyes and another was disappeared. David Copperfield eat your heart out. Magick? Who needs it?

And now it looks like Israel's time is over. Clearly there's no real-world logic to it anymore, for mine its destruction is inevitable. It was a means to an end and soon it too will be sacrificed - the Holocaust as a sacrifice for Israel, and Israel as a sacrifice for world control. Dig it - like Elvis Presley or Michael Jackson, Israel is worth more dead than alive. And it's not like the Rothschilds and their very good friends will miss the place. Did they ever go there? Even for a visit? God knows they never lived there. And who could shed a tear for those wild-hair-up-their-arse Haredim anyway? The worst people on the planet!


A tuppence for sacrifice as an occult event (ie. hidden with no one knowing it took place). Imagine if a sacrifice of 6,000,000 was actually made, but all done on the hush-hush with no one knowing at all: would there be any power in that? How would it change the world if no one knew? Perhaps that's who the Jews are: a people to be publicly sacrificed over and over. And given that the power of the sacrifice lays in it's public perception, then of course the people being sacrificed must be perceived as the greatest who ever lived. More power to the publicity juju!

---

The Jews' death cult twin however, the unacknowledged Satanists, get no such blaze of glory. Or not in any useful fashion that is. As we've seen over at Pseudo Occult Media the Satanist / mind-control crowd get a lot of airtime. But madly they get airtime in inverse proportion to the number of people who get the gag. Everything they put to air is effectively an in-joke whooshing over the heads of just about everyone. Fantastic, but what's the point? Who are these in-jokes for? Is it really for us as mug-punters with the symbolism functioning as some kind of voodoo incantation for the subconscious? Somehow I don't think so. I've been seeing butterfly images and black and white checks for as long as I can remember and as far as I know, nothing happened. Besides which, wouldn't the residents of monarch butterfly migration town, Pacific Grove, have long since wigged out?


Perhaps the in-jokes are for the benefit of the ruling elite, like some kind of upper-class circle jerk / mutual wankfest? If so, it's a curious sort of benefit - a vast audience watching and not one of them understanding what they're seeing. Ha! It's the Illuminati as shy exhibitionists - they like getting on the fiddle in public with everybody watching but only if none of them can actually tell what's going on.

Aside from that, do the crowned heads of Europe watch all those idiot low-brow TV shows? Really? Somehow I have that pegged as unlikely. It's like that scene in Robert Altman's Gosford Park: as the Duchess says to the American producer, who refuses to say how his movie ends because he doesn't want to spoil it for them, "Oh, but none of us are going to see it."


So, if it's not there for us as mug-punters, and it's not there for the lah-di-dah pointy end of the pyramid, then there's no one left but the zombified slaves themselves. Certainly that would have utility: whatever channel the zombies flip to they'll be confronted by yet more evidence that there's nowhere to run. Given the time and money that goes into creating mind-control slaves, in no way should that be viewed as excessive or unlikely.

And hats off to that, but what sort of expression of power is it? To imagine that the Illuminati would revel in a constant reminder of what keeps their zombies in line, is to imagine that the Romans would have revelled in 6000 crucified slaves lining the Appian Way. Would they have had an al fresco party surrounded by corpses, three cheers for us, huzzah huzzah? Or would it somehow have been a bit too grisly and depressing? And between that and the rose-petal strewn parades through the Forum that the acknowledged Jews are permitted to give themselves, one of them could be more accurately defined as a variation of calculated insult. If all those symbols are an expression of power, they seem to be less for the Satanist / mind-control mob than they are at them, if you can dig it.


Not forgetting of course that if you were to sit down and design a power structure that was most likely to be hijacked and led around like a prize bull with a magic blackmail ring in its nose, you couldn't improve upon one that pivots on paedophilia and Satanist human sacrifice, could you? Sure enough, the paedophocracy was always going to belong to someone else, and it does.

---

But who gives a shit? Not me! Like it matters what stripe an anti-buddha is. To argue the point would be vaguely equivalent to disagreeing over whose Satan is worst, that of the Jews, Christians, or Muslims? Huh? Who cares?


And the witless wannabes who serve those anti-buddhas? Whether it's the dispensable and unacknowledged bastard son who's never seen the light of day and is unable to see past his nose to the fingers that lead him, or the golden headed child who (unaware that it's just a cheap wig) lifts his head ever higher to receive his own adulation and otherwise accommodate the patiently waiting blade - like anyone would shed a tear for the either of them.

So! We have two completely separate groups of people, Jews and Illuminati Satanists each of whom seem to control the media but otherwise have nothing in common. So unalike are they that they can't even be put in the same sentence together.


Unless you want to listen to this woman. What is she on about? Human sacrifice? What? Completely mad obviously - quite right her story was disappeared. Doesn't she know that the Jewish people are international good guys promoting human rights and freedom from sexual repression etc. etc. and that we should all give thanks to them? Besides as everyone knows, Satanists are only ever Christians, or mad perversions thereof. Anyway, I only include her here in order to condemn her. Dreadful woman!

And this fellow! Good God! He's been thrashing about in a charnel pit and has absolutely covered himself in blood libels. A fig for the fact that he's Jewish. Or that he's a professor. Or that he wrote a scholarly book full of details, references, and footnotes, all explaining the role of human blood in Jewish ritual during medieval times. As if facts ever counted in an argument wherein one side was only ever going to scream !BLOOD LIBEL! over and over? Apparently those seeking to defend the good name of Jewish people got through to him and he made a retraction: yes, the Jewish people hated Christians and Christianity; yes, Jewish people used human blood for everything from quack remedies, to wine, to matzoh balls; and yes the blood had to be that of Christian boys under the age of seven and declared kosher by a rabbi; but no, no Christian boys were ever killed in order to obtain it - it all came from 'voluntary donations'. Whew!


Clearly, since no one ever volunteered to be the subject of a Satanist human sacrifice, and since, in the Jewish rituals, all those seven year olds boys volunteered to, um... 'not be sacrificed', then these two things bear absolutely no resemblance to each other. Bravo the Prof! Common sense rules the day. And whilst it was perfectly likely that in coming to this very sensible conclusion the Professor's life was threatened, clearly it was all in a good cause.

Never mind medieval times, let's jump a thousand odd years ahead of that. Blood sacrifice is right there in the Old Testament, which is to say the Torah. Does this mean anything? Says I: Absolutely Not. All of that ancient sacrifice was of every other variety of warm-blooded mammal except humans.* And since Satanists sacrifice everything plus humans, under the old rule of 'a miss being as good as a mile', we can declare these two things completely different. Hell! Let's call them polar opposites!


Besides which, that was then, this is now. Just because the Torah is full of blood sacrifice it doesn't mean anyone takes it literally (it's not as if it's the word of God or anything). Things change, words change, meanings change. 'Holocaust' used to be a Jewish sacrificial offering that was burnt on an altar. Now we put 'the' in front of it, capitalise it, and it means no such thing. Besides, if there was any occult connection between the Holocaust's original meaning and its latter day usage, they'd definitely tell us. After all the Holocaust is an event of such enormity that to even imagine altering it, embroidering it, or in anyway misrepresenting it goes against the very laws of nature. It's like sodomy - it's impossible and no one ever does it.

Where was I? Oh yes, that was then, this is now, and on the topic of human sacrifice God has probably changed his mind. What with the Talmud making it clear that Jehovah is a supplicant God who doesn't know what to think until the rabbis tell him, you'd have to wonder if there's any point in listening to him at all. Best we just ask his rabbi superiors. What's that they say? ..."a Jew should and must make a false oath when the goyim asks if our books contain anything against them." Ayah, so much for that idea! Here I am doing my absolute best to help these guys out and they just keep condemning themselves out of their own mouths! What's a fellow to do? Change tack, obviously!


Forget Jewish history. What about the other end of this discussion - Illuminati history? In amongst that curious topic is there any mention of the word 'Jewish' at all? For the sake of nuance-trashing oversimplification, let me boldly say 'No'. Here's a fellow who seems to be pretty au fait on the topic of the Illuminati. And here's a self-serving snippet (self-serving for me, that is) from one of his lengthy contributions to the Rigorous Intuition comments -

The basic story is that in 70 AD, when Titus was sacking Jerusalem various familial groups responsible for differing duties, generally connected with Temple obligations, gathered their items of diligence such as sacred oils, treasures, and hid them in caves in the Temple Mount and other areas of the country. These families comprised of members of the various priesthoods and royal lines then dispersed, many towards Europe, producing the “bluebloods.” According to Knight and Lomas, a familial secret society existed named Rex Deus that was revealed by a father to his chosen son, upon this son reaching the age of 21. This group emerged above-ground with the Crusades, supposedly in accordance with prophecies in Daniel and Isaiah.

Ah! Well there you are! The Illuminati is not Jewish because otherwise he'd have said so. Clearly if the people he were talking about were Jewish priests he'd hardly go to the effort of writing "various familial groups responsible for differing duties, generally connected with Temple obligations" would he? And besides, there'd be, I don't know... exclamation marks or something wouldn't there? Honestly, who could resist remarking upon it? Not me!

With all that in mind, anyone capable of wondering at things would have to ask: Between Joel Stein's all-powerful media Jews and Pseudo Occult Media's all powerful media Satanists, wouldn't it just be too-completely-nuts if they were somehow all the same crew, and differed only in terms of old-school versus parvenu? In the words of our rhetorically gifted Prime Minister K Rudd: 'Yes it would'.


Madness, Madness. Such thoughts may not be countenanced, and certainly not by me, ha ha. Instead we'll do the legal fiction tango. And since it takes two to tango, in a discussion of two separate blink-blink media entities, that tango wouldn't get very far if it was actually just one person dancing with themselves like some wretched lesbian cabaret act.

Thus we declare that the media is occupied by two entirely separate entities pursuing two entirely separate agendas. Dandy. But what are they after? Who are they talking to? What are they saying? What do they hope to achieve? Really - what's the goddamn point? Sure enough, I've maxed out this piece and will have to come back again.


*I forgot all about the 'Binding of Isaac' (binding, ha ha ha, God forbid we should call it 'human sacrifice'). Anyway, dead loss as a religion student, me. BTW it's worth having a look at that wikipedia entry if for no other reason than to watch the various rabbis turning themselves into human pretzels in order to avoid coming to the logical conclusion, ie. that Jews performed human sacrifice, and of their own children no less.

There's two kinds of people in the world. Those who split the world into two kinds of people, and those who don't. My advice: if you ever meet one of the former, run a mile! They're dreadful people!

But since we've started let's keep going. Sure enough we've all split - we split from the MSM as well as from all those incurious people who think its message is worth listening to (which is to say, everyone we know). Here on the net we found everything that had been withheld from us by the bloc-media and we no longer wish to listen to its shit. And thus we find ourselves coming under some new heading. Here's an opportunity - why don't I come up with a catchy new media-friendly name, à la Gen X and Gen Y? Hmm... how about Gen Tell Folk? Ha ha ha. There's no age limit on that by the way.

Idiocy aside, categorisations are never that simple. Here on the net, as elsewhere, things divide and divide again. Let's forget for the moment the false alternative sites like truthout, democratic underground, and daily kos etc. I guess it's possible for people to arrive at these sites and never progress, but for all of us here they were merely way stations on the journey to, um... for the purpose of the exercise let's call it Truthland™ (the unlikeliest kingdom of them all!).


But perversely, it seems that there are two Truthlands and you have to pick one or t'other. It's not difficult of course - a blink and you're there, or... a blink and you're there. Same same different. The only rule is: you can't be in both places at the same time.

Sure enough, I'm talking about the split between the either/or mindsets of '...it's the Jews' and '...it's the Illuminati'. And yes, I know the expression 'illuminati' is not very useful, but between that and typing out 'satanist paedophile masonic scientology CIA mind-control motherfuckers, one of them is elegant and one ain't. And as I always say, 'Inelegance? Fuck that!'

Thus if you want to blink and read about Jews, you go to whatreallyhappened, and there it's all laid out: the holocaust, USS Liberty, the Fed, AIPAC, fake anti-Semitism, Israel and Palestine, all of it. And hats off to Mike Rivero: on all things Jewish he does a sterling job. But what you won't find on WRH are any satanists, or paedophiles (apart from the catholic clergy), or (perish the thought) mind-control zombies. If Mike does discuss them it's only to tell you that there's no such thing.


Fine - blink again and find yourself at, say, Pseudo Occult Media. This is a fine site and definitely worth visiting, but it should be said that in terms of world-view it has a rather long lens focused on a rather narrow subject area. The gig is straightforward - a search for illuminati clues in the media by way of a simple checklist: butterflies, check; mirrors, check; all-seeing eye, check; checkerboard floor, check. And on and on: frankly it's relentless, but it's neither more nor less relentless than the mind-control crowd who put it there to begin with. After a while you just have to surrender and ask the question, 'Is there anyone in fashion, pop, hell the whole damn entertainment industry who isn't a zombie or a controller?' Oh, and that Zoolander flick? A documentary! Who knew?

What you won't find at Pseudo Occult Media is the word Jewish. In a long discussion that's about nothing if not the media, somehow the people who own that media are never mentioned. Perhaps none of them know that this is going on? Perhaps the satanists are doing all this right under their noses with them entirely unaware? Or perhaps they were just too busy with their own checklist: Arab villains, check; Jewish victim/heroes, check; a relentless tide of smut, violence, and racism, check, check, check.


It's almost like visiting a house occupied by two families each of whom acts like the other doesn't exist. And we the visitors do the same: Blink - we're there to see the Rothschilds, and we know it's their house because of the unmissable menorah (we pay no attention to the pentacle bedaubed altar it's standing on); or Blink - we're there to see the Kidd-di Buggerer's ("It's pronounced dee-BOO-zheray, actually"), and it's obviously their house since we can hear the screams of the children downstairs (behind that door which has a star of david on it for some reason).

But seriously, this blinking between only one or only the other is mad. Overcooking and really ruining the house-visit metaphor now - Blink! Blink! - It's the Menendez home and we're the cops called to investigate the shotgun murder of the parents. But let's re-imagine their defence strategy - the two point at each other and say, 'It wasn't me, it was him!'. And idiotically we fall for it! Real cops would never fall for such obvious shit, but we, the Gen Tell Folk, do precisely that. We split into two flat-foot camps each sticking up for one of the brothers, and each flinging shit at the other. And since both boys were Jewish (natch) both camps get to fling around accusations of anti-Semitism. Excellent! (In the real Menendez murders the two boys blamed the victims. I don't recall them asking for mercy on account of being orphans but would that surprise anyone?)


Leaving behind the metaphor now, could it be any more obvious? WRH's wicked Jews and POM's wicked satanists are both in it together. Thick as thieves? Thick as media moguls more like. Each is perfectly aware of what the other is doing and each is completely cool with it. Oh, and never mind the low-level, expendable pawns - what the hell would they know? The only question is: which of our media parties wears the trousers? Okay, perhaps this is a bit of a yawn given that I've covered this before, but I want to come at it again albeit from the other direction. And it's all thanks to Jeff Wells' extraordinary Rigorous Intuition. Back soon with the follow-up.