Been keeping abreast of this lulzSec issue which has been like sifting through turds looking for truffles. Gonna take most of friday evening off I think to rest, so will probably film a full roundup of the esonews before weekend and get that up. There's still alot going on of course.
If anyone hasn't noticed I've chained this block to the esotruthica Blog, which is now my primary blog for freedom news.
Still trying to get my video production process streamlined, the videos I've been producing this week have been kind of a nice way to test and see how quickly I can reasonably turn around quick news and blog reports. Once I've filmed a news post my first job is to cut out all the chaff, for a 10 minute news post that process takes about 20 minutes for mistakes and similar, also syncing sound, then I have to sort the intro. The new intro is colour coded like pokemon because.....well why the hell not? I went for red for news style updates and Blue for longer episodes with a more documentary like feel (such as the episode on fox news reptiles.
If I want to put news specific items on the custom screens it takes about 10 minutes to arrange them into my template but 30 minutes or so to render. and then adding annotations and similar, so it's still a fairly long process.
But still, it's nice to be able to start making much more content again.
I like to keep abreast of news events from inside the "freedom scene", so when I'm not producing video's (3 within the last 48 hours I think I've found a reasonable limit.) I have to stay abreast of other important stuff.
I do that in forums at tpuc.org, fmotl.com and thinkfree.co.uk
Seems the best place for uk based news other than scouring the MSM is voxrox.co at the moment. I also try and listen to the freedom revolution radio blog by . That features the work of paul verge and james corbett, and is the definitive educational source for critical thinking. Definately awesome stuff.
Once all that's done I'm pretty much beat.
Hehe, good times
Rich
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Waking Up
Hey Guys,
Wow, a year already, hehe. Okay, had some confusion over the last year on where I wanted this blog to go, It was origonally supposed to just be a blog on law and waking up and stuff, now I suppose it'll be a more personal side of my blog in regards to esotruthica.
So, as I have random thoughts and similar, be prepared to hear all about them here, at chop wood, carry water. The blog for Rich of the craig family.....or rich of the family craig, whichever. I pulled out of esotruthica live after it failed to garner much enthusiasm, and as a result have much more time to do the stuff I really love doing, like pushing the boundaries of my video editing and discussing global polotics and law.
So I hope to update you all soon,
Nameste
Rich
Wow, a year already, hehe. Okay, had some confusion over the last year on where I wanted this blog to go, It was origonally supposed to just be a blog on law and waking up and stuff, now I suppose it'll be a more personal side of my blog in regards to esotruthica.
So, as I have random thoughts and similar, be prepared to hear all about them here, at chop wood, carry water. The blog for Rich of the craig family.....or rich of the family craig, whichever. I pulled out of esotruthica live after it failed to garner much enthusiasm, and as a result have much more time to do the stuff I really love doing, like pushing the boundaries of my video editing and discussing global polotics and law.
So I hope to update you all soon,
Nameste
Rich
Wednesday, May 05, 2010
The Epiphany
Where have I been?
I have been hibernating, meditating, and coming to a more full knowledge of what I understand myself to be.
Why have I not been updating my Blog and Videos?
I’m realising that I am choking, starting at the beginning, a lot of the concepts I speak of are not very easy to put into words or symbols to which there is a unified understanding, and we all have seemingly different interpretation of what words, definition and metaphors mean. So I sit there in my video’s and I get nervous, because I know that before I get to my knowledge a fair amount of people will have analysed what I say and assume because I’m not willing to give them the whole answers in an easy to repeat soundbyte, that I don’t have any. This will be true in the sense that I do not wish to give people my answers, I wish to discuss what I know while giving an idea of how I came to what I do know so that those who read and view can have some tools to find their answers.
For a long time this troubled me, I would agonise over the video’s I was producing and worry about the content double checking and triple checking my work in an effort to work out if I had managed to condense a lifetimes worth of development of ideas and philosophies about complex subjects I could spend all day talking about into 10 minute videos that were easily accessible to my audience. A lot of my audience is made up of the kind of people who without certainty “know” 9/11 was inside job and “know” they are “awake” simply because they managed to sit through “the obama deception” or listen to david icke for 30 minutes.
One thing I realised from all of this was that I got a lot of people trying to debate me, I produced some video’s and posted some ideas in an attempt to heal another who I thought was injured, hurt or angry, and realised later that my attempt to heal had catalysed into a polar debate. Where I actually did the most healing within those video’s was the comment section. The reason it had turned into a polar debate was because it was a lesson for me and anyone who is looking to find meaning rather than controversy, what formed within the comment section of that video was a secularised macrocosm of an internal monologue.
The nature of this polarised issue was; on surface level, whether a revolution of peace could contain elements of violence, or whether a peaceful evolution of group paradigms was what needed to occur.Thisseemed like a fairly black and white issue, and for a while I became frustrated as I felt I was being forced to commit to sides. However something quite amusing happened in this time.
Somebody decided to tell me I knew very little, and decided to tell me that the “PERSON” is a legal fiction. This sparked a realisation in me. As my previous blogs had outright talked about, such as the ones about legalese and law, along with my video’s on “archetypes in law” and “the freeman position” a lot of my ideas about law and archetypes were more thoroughly explained there, and people were outright wishing to “educate” me on things they “knew” under the assumption that I didn’t know them because I didn’t mention it in one 7 minute video about something completely unrelated.
The people involved had not had the foresight to look into my other video’s to gain a background knowledge of my perspective. For a while I assumed this to be my problem, and in a way it was, in that I felt a continuing pressure upon myself to make sure all my video’s and blog posts mentioned as much about my position as possible.
This in itself is silly, and has taken me a lot of searching within myself to fully realise what this means.
Why would I need to inform people of how many models I subscribe to in order for them to grade me on how “awake” I am? Why would it matter? I don’t wish to condense “truth” into a 7 minute video or a 6 paragraph blog post so that mini me's can wander around claiming to be awake while repeating everything I say, all I wish is to start a process of analysis within the viewer, to allow them to understand the process of gaining knowledge and understanding truth from within, not to give them a set of abstract pieces of information which may or may not have any relevance to the path they are here to walk.
What I’ve discerned is that within the search for truth there appears to be two types of people:
1: A group of people who subscribe to the label of “Awake” because they subscribe to a certain subculture of information, be it goth, preppy, truther, whatever. Usually they will each have their own projections and definitions as to what they believe the group, and will see themselves as wishing to “enlighten” others, to the degree where they no longer listen to what others state, they create a “them” and blame “them” for all the problems “they” have, to them the words “truth” and “movement” require one another to have any relevance to them. This of course means that their discovery of self is not really a discovery of their true nature as it depends entirely on others.
2: A group of people who realise that each entity has it’s own path and truth, and that truths can be fundamentally different conclusions borne from totally similar forms of knowledge, and yet, true knowledge and truth can communicate no matter what the source.
It bought to my attention why I was choking, it was because I was more worried about the end result, the product, than I was the journey that I was hoping to assist the viewer through.
With the amount of work I've put into finding meaning in my life, understanding that meaning and drawing from it to try and better understand the world around me, I now accept that accessibility is never going to be an option if I wish to better put into language and symbols that which I know to be my truth, and so I must take more time in my explanation to make sure foundation of knowledge is secured in those who have the patience to listen rather than attempting to appeal to those who do not.
With a better reflection of this, I feel comfortable communicating what I wish to once more.
I took some of my video's down, why would I do this?
I was uncomfortable with the things I expressed in them, as without context to my thought processes they seemed to be quite open to interpretation. Really they supplied little information on anything other than my position or conclusions. There is no knowledge to be had for the viewer if the video's did not express the feelings and thoughts I had in coming to those conclusions. Sadly I mourn the loss of my comments sections in each, however the intended recipient seemed to receive and show a conscious understanding of both on some level.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Mass Hypnosis, Through the looking glass – Part one
When I speak of ego, a lot of people make the assumption that of which I speak is either the Freudian ego complex or the commonly used “Princeton definition” which reads “an inflated feeling of pride in your superiority to others”.
Neither is the case, what I’m speaking of is the structure based transactional mind. The ego in the modern Eckhart Tolle/Robert Anton Wilson/Kaballah sense of the word, specifically that which is other to the “Self”; the Self being the creative force which is infinitely capable within all humans.
I put a human down to a base duality that runs through all reflections of reality and is well described by Winston Shrout in his discussions about commerce. In this instance I will use a different analogy to describe the ego in which I will call it the Reflection, Mirror or Strawman.
The Mirror, is a protection mechanism within which we fall in certain instances. To begin my dissemination of The Mirror I’m going to look at the hypnotic model of the mind. As with all models it provides a very nice perspective for it’s purpose, however may be disregarded for all other psychological matters.
This model was first bought to my attention by a Floridian hypnotherapist called Klein (for anybody looking into Hypnosis and NLP his online course is a brilliant place to begin).
You’ll notice the conscious mind holds in it the values of short term memory, rational, analytical and will power. In the subconscious mind we have the permanent memory, emotions, laziness, habits and the instinct of self preservation. And finally we have the unconscious mind of which we have the automatic bodily functions such as heartbeat, tissue repair, immune response, metabolism, and pretty much any other function you wish to speak of. The hypnotherapist focuses on the first two. You see there is two lines intersecting in the top right.
The one heading into the outer (conscious) circle is an ‘external suggestion’. For a subject to act on it subconsciously, it has to make it’s way past the critical factor. The critical factor is the personal agent to the subconscious mind. Although things like “Give Up Smoking” can be achieved by conscious willpower alone, the subconscious will often place roadblocks in the way, for instance making people believe they are addicted, if the reader has attempted to diet they know the feeling of thinking “Healthy foods are required!” while the critical factor constantly put’s in suggestions like “You want fried chicken!”.
When we hypnotise somebody we remove the critical factor. Whereas before hypnosis the critical factor would take a suggestion “you wish to give up smoking” and not allow the subconscious to operate based on that information due to it’s own doubts such as “your too addicted” and similar, this means although the conscious mind is consciously trying to give up smoking through willpower, the subconscious is still fighting.
When hypnotised the same suggestion does not have to answer to the critical factor, it just seeps straight into the subconscious where automatic response and self preservation can alter the code from which they operate. All of a sudden the subconscious also wishes to give up smoking and as a result it starts finding motivations, replacing habits, altering the influence memories have over our pre-programmed responses and similar.
Along with hypnosis there are numerous ways in which we can run code and bypass the critical factor, for instance NLP (Nuero Linguistic Programming) techniques such as framing, repeating, repeating and asking questions can bypass the critical factor, as can appeals to the subconscious constituent parts.
Appeals to emotion, laziness, habit and fear are very popular within the media. I mentioned the metro in a previous blog post, and how much of the articles appealed to fear. This in itself is a hypnotic effect. When something appeals to emotion, laziness, habit or fear it is directly appealing to the subconscious.
For the first three, the critical factor of the conscious mind is often fairly active when the media do this, (although the current obesity rate and success of the fast food industry is pretty powerful) however fear is most powerful tool available, because fear induces both the self preservation and the emotional responses of the subconscious.
Any suggestion to the conscious mind that is based on invoking “need for self preservation” will automatically move past the conscious minds rationality and critical faculties, and will be analysed directly by the subconscious to make sure it conforms. If it does conform, then the subconscious will begin to twist the rationale of the conscious mind to create conditions in which the action can be taken.
This level of manipulation was very plain during the American elections of 2008, although Obama said very little to appeal to the rational minds of voters, just ambiguous slogans and similar. In the face of that we still saw images of voters lining up at polling stations like zombies, getting tattoos of his head on their arms, speaking of nothing but Obama.
This was because they had performed an act of subconscious manipulation, in the face of fear of another 4 years of terrible leadership which a lot of voters involved in the bipartisan paradigm of left/right politics assumed McCain represented, their subconscious took hold of the emotional message of hope and the fear of the opposite, and changed the rational conscious minds to suit the subconscious fears of the person involved, with retrospect, it is easy to see neither candidate was offering anything remotely resembling change, as both were bred in the same paddock.
And so, within the conscious state of mind fear induces, altering the rational mind to accept that black is white and white is black I leave you for today, I shall continue on this subject tomorrow.
Peace, Love, Empathy
Rich
Monday, October 19, 2009
The Straw Man Position - Why Justify?
When I discuss the law with people I find they are frequently horrified not only with my apparent lack of fear of police officers, but lack of fear regarding the system in general. They tell me my ideas are dangerous, they are not conductive to a working society, and often attempt to attack me verbally due to their own lack of understanding of my perspective.
The first thing I say now when I speak of these things is to run a disclaimer past their ears, in that I am certainly not advocating people hold these attitudes themselves unless they fully believe in what they are saying and have done the research themselves, I do not give legal advice, I simply comment on my own commercial conduct, nothing herein constitutes as such, just a record of my perspective provided for informational purposes.
Given that, specifically the part of law I look at is the commercial side of law. As many other people have, I have chosen a position of operating within commerce known as the “Strawman position”. This in itself is a lawful position in which we operate as two separate entities.
The first entity is me as a human being, it represents me physically and my inalienable rights within common law, through the human being, represented by my common name Rich, and the family name I identify as my own, Craig (it is quite unusual that I have adopted my mothers clan as my operating family name rather than my fathers, however I can choose to change my family name at any time, which is one of the reasons there is such divergence between my family and surname).
As a human being in law I have unlimited value, and the right to do as I please, providing I do not cause harm and loss, breach the peace or commit fraud in contracts. For my human being to get into trouble I would have to have another human being laying a claim against me.
The second is my commercial entity or “person”, which is represented by my NAME SURNAME in all caps, the name on my birth certificate specified as first name/surname, placed in a box on a contract, or given a title like “MR”. This is a product of a law maxim called Capitis Diminutio Maxima; “As Black's Law Dictionary explains, the full capitalization of the letters of one's natural name, results in a diminishing or complete loss of legal or citizenship status, wherein one actually becomes a slave or an item of inventory.”
Although my human being has inalienable rights and privileges that cannot be usurped in anyway, they can be given up by me. The easiest way to do this is to think I am my PERSON. The PERSON, in stark contrast to the human, does not have lawful rights that are irrevocable; the PERSON only has obligations, benefits and privileges that are granted by the contractual entities to which the PERSON does business, not limited to and including the government of the civil jurisdiction within which it operates (in my case the United Kingdom Corporation and it’s various subsidiaries). The contracts from which this governing body grant benefits, privileges and obligations onto my PERSON are called ACTS.
An ACT starts out as a BILL, which is a commercial tool through which the fictional PERSON can be enacted upon, when a government passes an ACT it becomes a set of obligations, privileges and benefits through which a PERSON can be operated upon.
Through this ACT, the way in which the ACT directly interacts with the PERSON as a contractual entity is through a STATUTORY instrument, this is a contract between the government and the consenting governed.
I have chosen to operate as a human being, occasionally stepping into my PERSON as a 3rd party agent to conduct commerce. The reason for this is very simple. Knowing the law to this degree has given me a choice. The choice in itself is as follows.
1: Learning how to operate in Law as an entity (human) which has inalienable rights which cannot be taken away, forcefully removed, destroyed, eroded or otherwise compromised.
2: Operating as a legally fictitious entity (PERSON) which has no rights, only benefits, obligations and privileges given to it by it’s superiors in a contractual, commercial hierarchy called government.
As these are my commercial affairs one would think the choice would be fairly logical for me to make and obviously I have chosen the rather difficult path of number one, for it is my belief that I am not a piece of stock with no rights that must beg for privileges.
A lot of people don’t actually like the fact that I choose to operate my commercial affairs in this way, and I have been outright told I am “wrong”, “delusional” and my favourite, “full of horseshit and lies”. I have lost friends, nearly lost a housemate and nearly been disciplined in my job (before they found out it was unlawful to do so) simply for stating my interpretation of the law when asked.
This is the part of it I and many other people who use similar means of presenting themselves seem to find difficult. People seem to find it almost offensive that I am confident enough to operate within law to the degree where I present myself commercially.
They ask me how I can justify some of my commercial actions with my debtors (the ones who assume I am the debtor such as loan companies), and I will quite happily inform them of how our fiat based fractional reserve banking system works, and they will then tell me they don’t like being preached at.
I have been told by people who ask me to explain myself, and my justification, that they felt I was preaching at them. My answer regarding that is if you ask a question, I will answer in good faith, if my answer does not fit into your rigid moral code, simply disregard it. You’re an adult, you have free will, were my views so wrong then surely it wouldn’t be an issue for you to simply assume them as such and get on with your lives, I certainly do not wish you to follow me like I’m some form of messiah of commerce. I’m just a human.
It is not my responsibility to justify my commercial operations to people who do not operate with me commercially. Answering a question regarding my commercial operations is entirely optional. As a human being I choose to not operate as my PERSON unless I am conducting a commercial act. I believe that is my responsibility and my right, and it is every other human beings right to decide how to operate themselves within commerce as well.
As a result of this choice I am making, it is my understanding that statutes and acts do not apply to me when I am not acting within commerce. A lot of people start feeling irritated at this point, because taxation and licenses are a good example of things that don’t apply to a Human unless they ask for them and consent to them. They then usually start talking about my obligation to society, which is not something to which I identify. My reasons for not wishing to participate in this society are numerous, however the fact that we are in a democracy and I do not wish to have another human re-present me is enough justification as far as I’m concerned.
I take responsibility for my own actions. That’s not to say I hate society, or I wish to disregard it’s people (“go live under a rock and don’t contact us” is a common comment), and it certainly doesn’t mean I do not wish to contribute to it’s people in a positive manner, it simply means that I do not feel I need re-presentation from a nanny government and choose to administrate my own affairs without constantly begging them to regulate me.
As the majority of people who are talking to me about this are not talking to me via their government representatives I am under the impression that they are not being represented by society at that moment but are infact humans who occasionally participate within that society. I do not ask them to reveal to me how they wish to operate with other people within society, if I did I certainly wouldn’t ask them to change how they operated commercially based on my moral code because that would be vastly overstepping my boundaries.
So my statement I make to people wishing to shoot the messenger regarding the way I choose to operate myself and my PERSON in commerce is this: It’s my business, if you disagree with how I work on an operational level, in that you don’t believe what I am doing is lawful then your elected representatives and the people they employ will surely find a way to hold me accountable for my lack of knowledge and misapplication.
If your disagreement is on the moral level, then my only advice is don’t ask, and don’t preach if you don’t like the answer, it is my business, and I owe you not one iota of explanation or justification as to how I conduct my commercial affairs.
If your problems still aren’t covered, then ask if the problem is really with me.
Peace, Love, Empatthy
Rich
The first thing I say now when I speak of these things is to run a disclaimer past their ears, in that I am certainly not advocating people hold these attitudes themselves unless they fully believe in what they are saying and have done the research themselves, I do not give legal advice, I simply comment on my own commercial conduct, nothing herein constitutes as such, just a record of my perspective provided for informational purposes.
Given that, specifically the part of law I look at is the commercial side of law. As many other people have, I have chosen a position of operating within commerce known as the “Strawman position”. This in itself is a lawful position in which we operate as two separate entities.
The first entity is me as a human being, it represents me physically and my inalienable rights within common law, through the human being, represented by my common name Rich, and the family name I identify as my own, Craig (it is quite unusual that I have adopted my mothers clan as my operating family name rather than my fathers, however I can choose to change my family name at any time, which is one of the reasons there is such divergence between my family and surname).
As a human being in law I have unlimited value, and the right to do as I please, providing I do not cause harm and loss, breach the peace or commit fraud in contracts. For my human being to get into trouble I would have to have another human being laying a claim against me.
The second is my commercial entity or “person”, which is represented by my NAME SURNAME in all caps, the name on my birth certificate specified as first name/surname, placed in a box on a contract, or given a title like “MR”. This is a product of a law maxim called Capitis Diminutio Maxima; “As Black's Law Dictionary explains, the full capitalization of the letters of one's natural name, results in a diminishing or complete loss of legal or citizenship status, wherein one actually becomes a slave or an item of inventory.”
Although my human being has inalienable rights and privileges that cannot be usurped in anyway, they can be given up by me. The easiest way to do this is to think I am my PERSON. The PERSON, in stark contrast to the human, does not have lawful rights that are irrevocable; the PERSON only has obligations, benefits and privileges that are granted by the contractual entities to which the PERSON does business, not limited to and including the government of the civil jurisdiction within which it operates (in my case the United Kingdom Corporation and it’s various subsidiaries). The contracts from which this governing body grant benefits, privileges and obligations onto my PERSON are called ACTS.
An ACT starts out as a BILL, which is a commercial tool through which the fictional PERSON can be enacted upon, when a government passes an ACT it becomes a set of obligations, privileges and benefits through which a PERSON can be operated upon.
Through this ACT, the way in which the ACT directly interacts with the PERSON as a contractual entity is through a STATUTORY instrument, this is a contract between the government and the consenting governed.
I have chosen to operate as a human being, occasionally stepping into my PERSON as a 3rd party agent to conduct commerce. The reason for this is very simple. Knowing the law to this degree has given me a choice. The choice in itself is as follows.
1: Learning how to operate in Law as an entity (human) which has inalienable rights which cannot be taken away, forcefully removed, destroyed, eroded or otherwise compromised.
2: Operating as a legally fictitious entity (PERSON) which has no rights, only benefits, obligations and privileges given to it by it’s superiors in a contractual, commercial hierarchy called government.
As these are my commercial affairs one would think the choice would be fairly logical for me to make and obviously I have chosen the rather difficult path of number one, for it is my belief that I am not a piece of stock with no rights that must beg for privileges.
A lot of people don’t actually like the fact that I choose to operate my commercial affairs in this way, and I have been outright told I am “wrong”, “delusional” and my favourite, “full of horseshit and lies”. I have lost friends, nearly lost a housemate and nearly been disciplined in my job (before they found out it was unlawful to do so) simply for stating my interpretation of the law when asked.
This is the part of it I and many other people who use similar means of presenting themselves seem to find difficult. People seem to find it almost offensive that I am confident enough to operate within law to the degree where I present myself commercially.
They ask me how I can justify some of my commercial actions with my debtors (the ones who assume I am the debtor such as loan companies), and I will quite happily inform them of how our fiat based fractional reserve banking system works, and they will then tell me they don’t like being preached at.
I have been told by people who ask me to explain myself, and my justification, that they felt I was preaching at them. My answer regarding that is if you ask a question, I will answer in good faith, if my answer does not fit into your rigid moral code, simply disregard it. You’re an adult, you have free will, were my views so wrong then surely it wouldn’t be an issue for you to simply assume them as such and get on with your lives, I certainly do not wish you to follow me like I’m some form of messiah of commerce. I’m just a human.
It is not my responsibility to justify my commercial operations to people who do not operate with me commercially. Answering a question regarding my commercial operations is entirely optional. As a human being I choose to not operate as my PERSON unless I am conducting a commercial act. I believe that is my responsibility and my right, and it is every other human beings right to decide how to operate themselves within commerce as well.
As a result of this choice I am making, it is my understanding that statutes and acts do not apply to me when I am not acting within commerce. A lot of people start feeling irritated at this point, because taxation and licenses are a good example of things that don’t apply to a Human unless they ask for them and consent to them. They then usually start talking about my obligation to society, which is not something to which I identify. My reasons for not wishing to participate in this society are numerous, however the fact that we are in a democracy and I do not wish to have another human re-present me is enough justification as far as I’m concerned.
I take responsibility for my own actions. That’s not to say I hate society, or I wish to disregard it’s people (“go live under a rock and don’t contact us” is a common comment), and it certainly doesn’t mean I do not wish to contribute to it’s people in a positive manner, it simply means that I do not feel I need re-presentation from a nanny government and choose to administrate my own affairs without constantly begging them to regulate me.
As the majority of people who are talking to me about this are not talking to me via their government representatives I am under the impression that they are not being represented by society at that moment but are infact humans who occasionally participate within that society. I do not ask them to reveal to me how they wish to operate with other people within society, if I did I certainly wouldn’t ask them to change how they operated commercially based on my moral code because that would be vastly overstepping my boundaries.
So my statement I make to people wishing to shoot the messenger regarding the way I choose to operate myself and my PERSON in commerce is this: It’s my business, if you disagree with how I work on an operational level, in that you don’t believe what I am doing is lawful then your elected representatives and the people they employ will surely find a way to hold me accountable for my lack of knowledge and misapplication.
If your disagreement is on the moral level, then my only advice is don’t ask, and don’t preach if you don’t like the answer, it is my business, and I owe you not one iota of explanation or justification as to how I conduct my commercial affairs.
If your problems still aren’t covered, then ask if the problem is really with me.
Peace, Love, Empatthy
Rich
Tuesday, September 08, 2009
The great Swinedle....aha....aha.....oh
Haven’t updated in a while, would like to talk about the swine flu vaccine, bit of simple research leads me to find the following.
The elements of the vaccine were created by a company called “FluGen”. They were reported in the Russian media to also be responsible for manufacturing the virus as well. This can be seen at http://russiatoday.com/USA/2009-07-16/Swine_flu_virus_began_life_in_a_lab.html and the implication was by a gentleman called Wayne Madsen.
So we have here an NSA advisor stating in the Russian press that the people who make the vaccine created the virus. What would be the possible advantage of this? I can’t think of any other than the BILLIONS that would be made from the swine flu vaccine. Of course a lot of opposition for the vaccine has come up since this discovery, so let’s see what flugen have done to counteract this. http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:K06LEhX7nSQJ:www.coolbusinessideas.com/archives/flugen_painless_vaccine_transmitter.html+flugen+think+tank+who&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk And there we go, rather than injecting it in a formalised manner flugen have created a device that allows vaccines to be self administered like a nicotine patch. This will be quite advantageous as they can just sell the device and the vaccine it holds as being not dissimilar to a nicotine patch.
This should quell any fears that the public at large expressed in the comments section of a recent article in the daily mail and other similar stories: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1208716/Half-GPs-refuse-swine-flu-vaccine-testing-fears.html , as alot of people within the more uninformed areas of the public are going to fail to associate the painless vaccine transmitter with the needle of old, and most likely assume it to be more like the nicotine patch.
So what’s the big fuss? Why are so many refusing the vaccine and why are so many people scared or alarmed by the vaccine? Well, perhaps this comes from two fundamental issues. I would say the first being that it is becoming increasingly difficult for people to be scared by the medias over hyping of these things after the numerous scares we’ve had in the past few years. CJD, MRSA, Bird Flu and SARS to name a few. All these “deadly pandemics” that have slowly fizzled out of the popular mindset to be replaced by news about Michael Jackson or terrorism or the green agenda. The media have succeeded so well in distracting the average joe that we’re too distracted by bells, whistles and our mediacratic consumerist lifestyle to even be scared by them anymore.
The populous mindset is realising that the post apocalyptic wasteland the media has constantly predicted has again failed to come true and it’s becoming painfully obvious in this instance that there is a clear agenda within the media, the world health organisation and governments to actively try and convince us that we are facing the biggest threat to the population since the black death.
However what they did not plan on is how rapidly swine flu would spread, unlike bird flu there’s not really a person alive who hasn’t either known someone with swine flu or had it, and upon speaking to people about it they’ve found that not only is the swine flu’s effects greatly exaggerated, the myth of swine flu being this potentially world conquering destructive force which would have us all squatting in ditches and clinging on for dear life has slowly been eradicated and replaced with the fact that it’s like a mild version of the influenza we all suffer from once a year and a fraction as deadly. The vast majority of people diagnosed with swine flu have made a full recovery and this makes the news, the governments and the WHO pandemic level seem rather like a toothless dog showing it’s gums expecting us to recoil in terror, when infact we’re just smiling politely and ignoring it.
The second concern with the vaccine is the rather popularly touted swine flu incident in 1976, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_swine_flu_outbreak , an incident where one solitary soldier in fort dix died from a similar strain to the one that “threatens” us now, and in it’s haste to “make people safe” the us government “vaccinated” 33% of Americans, leaving 500 paralized and at least 25 dead from Guillain-Barré Syndrome, a rather ugly syndrome that causes very painful effects.
This wouldn’t be too much of a problem if several companies and WHO (the world health organisation) weren’t recommending mandatory vaccinations for EVERYONE http://www.naturalnews.com/026723_health_vaccines_immune_system.html . The companies mentioned within the report are distributors of the vaccine, and the executives are NOT medical professionals, they are EXECUTIVES, the executives of a company are there specifically to increase profit.
Now if you were the executive of a company, with the sole intention and purpose of your job being to make as much money for your shareholders as humanly possible, the ability to legislatively force every single human being within 194 countries to use your product at the taxpaying publics expense would be an opportunity you would not miss, it would be neglectful to the people who pay your bonus to do so would it not?
But of course…they don’t have the power to actually force us to be vaccinated…do they? Well actually, since 2005 and the introduction of the MSEHPA (Model State Emergency Health Powers Act) enacted that year the World Health Organisation has the ability to dissolve governments, quarantine towns and give governments the power to enforce their rulings via local “health councils” through the barrel of a gun. And that counts in 194 countries worldwide as each country making up the world health organisation is de facto legally (contractually) bound by the act, and disregard of the act would be dishonouring their contract which would land those representatives in an international court and subject to heavy fines, bankrupting those who resist fairly quickly.
http://thefreedomfellowship.blogspot.com/2009/08/who-has-authority-to-dissolve-natl.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSEHPA
http://www.hss.state.ak.us/dph/improving/turningpoint/PDFs/MSPHAweb.pdf
So now we have a rogue organisation able to dissolve governments and their sovereignty, take control of the police and military forces at their behest if they feel like stating they have a “mass pandemic” on their hands, and to top it off, they are being advised by the likes of Baxter, Novartis, Glaxo-Smith Kline, and Sanofi Pasteur. Now I don’t have time to go through the ethical practices of all these constituent companies, but I will mention that Baxter are expected to be the distributor of flugens vaccine and have only just recovered from a scandal where they managed to put LIVE AVIAN FLU into a vaccine ready for distribution. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aTo3LbhcA75I
These people can be charitably described as idiots and uncharitably described as a bunch of deceptive dickholes. And yet, given all these small snippets of info we are supposed to believe that these companies are acting strictly for our benefit, and are infact able to throw together a safe vaccine when the very companies distributing the vaccines have been accused of wishing to contaminate more.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/indonesia-accuses-us-of-bird-flu-plot/2008/02/19/1203190823829.html
Not a chance, sorry.
Peace, love, empathy
Rich
The elements of the vaccine were created by a company called “FluGen”. They were reported in the Russian media to also be responsible for manufacturing the virus as well. This can be seen at http://russiatoday.com/USA/2009-07-16/Swine_flu_virus_began_life_in_a_lab.html and the implication was by a gentleman called Wayne Madsen.
So we have here an NSA advisor stating in the Russian press that the people who make the vaccine created the virus. What would be the possible advantage of this? I can’t think of any other than the BILLIONS that would be made from the swine flu vaccine. Of course a lot of opposition for the vaccine has come up since this discovery, so let’s see what flugen have done to counteract this. http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:K06LEhX7nSQJ:www.coolbusinessideas.com/archives/flugen_painless_vaccine_transmitter.html+flugen+think+tank+who&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk And there we go, rather than injecting it in a formalised manner flugen have created a device that allows vaccines to be self administered like a nicotine patch. This will be quite advantageous as they can just sell the device and the vaccine it holds as being not dissimilar to a nicotine patch.
This should quell any fears that the public at large expressed in the comments section of a recent article in the daily mail and other similar stories: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1208716/Half-GPs-refuse-swine-flu-vaccine-testing-fears.html , as alot of people within the more uninformed areas of the public are going to fail to associate the painless vaccine transmitter with the needle of old, and most likely assume it to be more like the nicotine patch.
So what’s the big fuss? Why are so many refusing the vaccine and why are so many people scared or alarmed by the vaccine? Well, perhaps this comes from two fundamental issues. I would say the first being that it is becoming increasingly difficult for people to be scared by the medias over hyping of these things after the numerous scares we’ve had in the past few years. CJD, MRSA, Bird Flu and SARS to name a few. All these “deadly pandemics” that have slowly fizzled out of the popular mindset to be replaced by news about Michael Jackson or terrorism or the green agenda. The media have succeeded so well in distracting the average joe that we’re too distracted by bells, whistles and our mediacratic consumerist lifestyle to even be scared by them anymore.
The populous mindset is realising that the post apocalyptic wasteland the media has constantly predicted has again failed to come true and it’s becoming painfully obvious in this instance that there is a clear agenda within the media, the world health organisation and governments to actively try and convince us that we are facing the biggest threat to the population since the black death.
However what they did not plan on is how rapidly swine flu would spread, unlike bird flu there’s not really a person alive who hasn’t either known someone with swine flu or had it, and upon speaking to people about it they’ve found that not only is the swine flu’s effects greatly exaggerated, the myth of swine flu being this potentially world conquering destructive force which would have us all squatting in ditches and clinging on for dear life has slowly been eradicated and replaced with the fact that it’s like a mild version of the influenza we all suffer from once a year and a fraction as deadly. The vast majority of people diagnosed with swine flu have made a full recovery and this makes the news, the governments and the WHO pandemic level seem rather like a toothless dog showing it’s gums expecting us to recoil in terror, when infact we’re just smiling politely and ignoring it.
The second concern with the vaccine is the rather popularly touted swine flu incident in 1976, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_swine_flu_outbreak , an incident where one solitary soldier in fort dix died from a similar strain to the one that “threatens” us now, and in it’s haste to “make people safe” the us government “vaccinated” 33% of Americans, leaving 500 paralized and at least 25 dead from Guillain-Barré Syndrome, a rather ugly syndrome that causes very painful effects.
This wouldn’t be too much of a problem if several companies and WHO (the world health organisation) weren’t recommending mandatory vaccinations for EVERYONE http://www.naturalnews.com/026723_health_vaccines_immune_system.html . The companies mentioned within the report are distributors of the vaccine, and the executives are NOT medical professionals, they are EXECUTIVES, the executives of a company are there specifically to increase profit.
Now if you were the executive of a company, with the sole intention and purpose of your job being to make as much money for your shareholders as humanly possible, the ability to legislatively force every single human being within 194 countries to use your product at the taxpaying publics expense would be an opportunity you would not miss, it would be neglectful to the people who pay your bonus to do so would it not?
But of course…they don’t have the power to actually force us to be vaccinated…do they? Well actually, since 2005 and the introduction of the MSEHPA (Model State Emergency Health Powers Act) enacted that year the World Health Organisation has the ability to dissolve governments, quarantine towns and give governments the power to enforce their rulings via local “health councils” through the barrel of a gun. And that counts in 194 countries worldwide as each country making up the world health organisation is de facto legally (contractually) bound by the act, and disregard of the act would be dishonouring their contract which would land those representatives in an international court and subject to heavy fines, bankrupting those who resist fairly quickly.
http://thefreedomfellowship.blogspot.com/2009/08/who-has-authority-to-dissolve-natl.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSEHPA
http://www.hss.state.ak.us/dph/improving/turningpoint/PDFs/MSPHAweb.pdf
So now we have a rogue organisation able to dissolve governments and their sovereignty, take control of the police and military forces at their behest if they feel like stating they have a “mass pandemic” on their hands, and to top it off, they are being advised by the likes of Baxter, Novartis, Glaxo-Smith Kline, and Sanofi Pasteur. Now I don’t have time to go through the ethical practices of all these constituent companies, but I will mention that Baxter are expected to be the distributor of flugens vaccine and have only just recovered from a scandal where they managed to put LIVE AVIAN FLU into a vaccine ready for distribution. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aTo3LbhcA75I
These people can be charitably described as idiots and uncharitably described as a bunch of deceptive dickholes. And yet, given all these small snippets of info we are supposed to believe that these companies are acting strictly for our benefit, and are infact able to throw together a safe vaccine when the very companies distributing the vaccines have been accused of wishing to contaminate more.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/indonesia-accuses-us-of-bird-flu-plot/2008/02/19/1203190823829.html
Not a chance, sorry.
Peace, love, empathy
Rich
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
