On the Implications of No Enemies, by Adi Da Samraj

I think it’s adequately clear that the system(s) of asset control worldwide are based on distraint and fraud going back centuries. Unless humanity are to remain slaves in whatever “new system” arises following whatever “reset” is to come, there will have to be full disclosure, forensic analysis, education of everyone to the extent of their capacities, and rigorous reparations through which all are made whole. Organization such as what Adi Da described in the No Enemies document is, in my opinion, essential to anything on this scale. But populations where real change arises will 1) need to stop tolerating rule by unethical people, and 2) come to understand the work necessary to come to grips with the apparent truths that were made available through spiritual teachers going back at least 3,000 years, and that are now being made plain by the scientific discoveries principally including quantum physics.


It is, IMO, not skillful (i.e. consigning one to continuing unsatisfactoriness and suffering) to take refuge in ideas such as “I’m not capable of realizing the truth and implications of the fact that whatever I am is not, and cannot be, separate in any way from that which I observe, because “I” am (too damaged or conditioned in some way by circumstances of which I am a victim, or whatever permutation of that which one may be attached to). We are now essentially in the position of being called to directly understand, on constantly deeper levels, exactly what we are, and how we collectively bring our world into manifestation. Here is a paragraph from No Enemies:


“In one of the Upanishads, it is said that wherever there is an “other”, fear arises.2  As soon as “difference” is presumed, as soon as separateness is presumed, as soon as an opponent is presumed, there is fear—or the disposition of separativeness, of self-protectiveness, of self-division. The non-presumption of an “other” is the essential principle that will liberate humankind. Wherever no “other” is presumed, Truth awakens.”


As Adyashanti has said, “Consciousness is self-liberating.” There is a natural path toward full awakening to what has been called our inner nature or natural state, which is simply being present with what is, without taking refuge in ego identification. Identification is a natural, completely understandable tendency to hold onto a story of “what happened to me and what I am because of that,” a story which can be easily seen to be incomplete, fragmentary, and colored by the filters of our conditioning. It is simply not skillful to take refuge in that mindset. All that is ultimately required is to see what we’re doing and observe how we feel as we do it. Then releasing it happens, just like we don’t think about what to do when we put our hand on a hot burner on the stove.


We will not, I’m sure, get out of the current situation in the world where we’re being herded into a constant proliferation of myriad separate group identities and accelerating “otherness,” without direct realization that we are all part of one living phenomenon. While we must obviously honor others’ individuality and personal space (this is part of ethical behavior), we drive the situation into greater degradation the instant that we see anyone as a threat outside of us and start to create strategies to take power over them.


There are obviously many people in the world now living in delusion. This clearly includes the unethical rulers mentioned above. We can, however, come together in versions of what Adi Da called a “Cooperative Forum.” In No Enemies he calls it “Global,” but at the moment that seems wildly out of reach. But any group that works together with an understanding of what Adi Da calls “prior unity,” or what I would argue is our clearly observable innate non-separation, can begin to make a real shift in human affairs that is not part of some kind of dialectical motion that is doomed to ongoing cycles of conflict.


Our “Shadowy Overlords” don’t behave as they do out of any great skills or strategic brilliance. If they had real wisdom, they would observe that acting unethically or attacking the well-being of people or living systems innately feels bad. Dealing with their depredations without feeding the warfare they bring will involve understanding how they are stuck in misperception and suffering. Bringing the “Matrix System” to an end, or removing what is an obstacle to the freedom of life itself to grow and unfold in strength, beauty and wisdom, is not a victory over an enemy. It is an act of compassion for everyone involved in the apparent drama that we have been born into.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

No Enemies – A Crucially Important Message for Our Time

by Adi Da Samraj – (from his book Prior Unity, Dawn Horse Press ©2015)

The pattern of world politics that has been dramatized with increasing intensity over time-and with the most devastating effects in the twentieth century, with the two devastating world wars and all the other wars right up to the present day-is based on the idea and the pattern of polar opposition. Therefore, the common political method is to have opposites either confront one another or (otherwise) try to work out some kind of a deal with one another.

As Abraham Lincoln said, “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” If the world-system is based on opposites, it will inevitably self-destruct-by creating chaos along the lines of division (or mutual opposition).

There have been (and, no doubt, will continue to be) many efforts to create some kind of global resolution (or world peace) by bringing opposites together. But any such effort is inevitably bound to fail. Such an effort cannot succeed. It is simply not possible, in the “physics” of human affairs, for such an approach to succeed.

Unity cannot be achieved by combining opposites. Unity is the prior condition, the condition that is always already the case. Prior unity makes all opposites obsolete. Therefore, it is prior unity that must be enacted, rather than any continuation of the pattern of oppositions.

The world-situation has now developed to the point that there is nothing further to expect but the global collapse that opposition will inevitably produce. Therefore, this is the critical moment to stop the play of opposites in the domain of world politics. The play of opposites must be replaced by the politics of prior unity—through the Global Cooperative Forum of everybody-all-at-once. Such is an absolute necessity. Otherwise, the play of polar opposites is going to become absolute destruction.

The principle of prior unity applies to all human endeavor, even to the integrity of a human body or a human personality. Unity is not the result of a play of opposites. Unity is the prior condition.

It is only when unity (or indivisibility) is the principle of life, of living, of action, that unity results. If division (or opposition) is presumed to be the case, more division will result. This is an absolute law. Once this is understood, it clarifies everything about right action and right life.

My address to all human issues-necessarily including what I am saying about world politics-is based on this fundamental principle: Reality Itself is a prior unity. Reality Itself is indivisible and egoless. Therefore, life must be lived in accordance with that Self-Nature of Reality Itself.

This absolute principle is fundamental to all resolution of human problems. In Gandhi’s language, it is a “soul-force”, or “truth-force”, as he understood it.1 That must be the force behind all political effort-the force of prior unity. The principle of prior unity determines a course of action that is (necessarily) inclusive of everybody-all-at-once. What is required is not a search for unity. Rather, what is required is the enacting of the power of prior unity. That is the principle. And it must be the governing principle of political action.

How should humankind deal with the world-situation? By enacting the principle of prior unity. And an instrument is required in order to do that. That instrument is the Global Cooperative Forum. The Global Cooperative Forum must make obsolete all play-of-opposition in the world, all nation­ state conflicts, all effort to size up great units of nation-states over against other such units, in the attempt to achieve victory over one another—one religion over another religion, one nation-state (or group of nation-states) over another nation-state (or group of nation-states), and so forth.

All of this effort to defeat the presumed opponent is insanity. Humankind cannot afford to go on with this. Humankind must stop this.

This is the decisive moment in human history to stop this, because such insanity cannot go on without total devastation being the result. Therefore, there truly is no choice.

Those who hear what I have to say about this will understand: There must be an active embrace of this understanding at every level of human life, including every matter associated with global politics and environmental issues. Everything at the human scale must be addressed on the basis of enacting the principle of prior unity, through instruments that are inclusive of everybody-all-at-once. It is essentially a matter of putting the Truth-principle (or Reality­principle) of prior unity into action. And an instrument is needed to do that-not just words.

It is not a matter of bringing together collectives of different groups—such as governmental organizations and non-governmental organizations—so that they can each have their voice, thereby playing out the chaos of oppositions. There is no time to be doing any such thing. There must be a different instrument-and everybody-all-at-once must volunteer for it and become active within it.

Humankind must wake up to its inherent and intrinsic unity as a whole, and not play on any differences whatsoever. Human beings must grasp this understanding of prior unity-and act on it, through an appropriate instrument that is altogether full of integrity and altogether right. That is the immediate necessity associated with bringing the Global Cooperative Forum into being.

Wherever action is done in opposition to whatever force or entity is considered to be the opponent, wherever there is even a strategy relative to an opponent, the effort will fail. Some kinds of changes may be brought about-but, ultimately, everything stays the same, because the principle is one of division to begin with.

Likewise, every strategy that is developed in opposition to any force whatsoever will inevitably fail. The only principle that can work politically is one in which there is no opponent and no search to defeat an opponent—and, therefore, fundamentally no struggle. Right human politics is simply about enacting—or asserting and carrying out—the principle of prior unity.

That kind of activism does not presume an opponent. It does not involve itself with self-division. Consequently, it will not fail. In contrast, whatever presumes its own self­division will fail. It will only produce more division. Therefore, the only kind of political action that can possibly achieve ultimate success is activism based on (1) the presumption of prior unity and (2) the enactment of prior unity through an appropriate instrument.

There is nobody “else”. There is no opponent. The Global Cooperative Forum is a means for bypassing all oppositions, all opposites, and the entire game that plays upon there being opposites at all. There should be presumed to be no opposites, no enemies, no opponent to be defeated. There is simply the intrinsic fact of prior unity. Right politics is simply about acting on that basis.

That is what the Global Cooperative Forum must do. And that is what the form of global activism I am describing must do. That is how it must function: no enemies, no game in opposition, and (therefore) no strategy in relation to a presumed opponent—none.

That is the profundity at the root of such activism—the intensive presumption of non-separateness, of prior unity, of no opponent, of no self-division. That is the only right and effective strategy. It is not a goal-seeking strategy. It is a matter of enacting a prior reality, rather than seeking a different reality. Such is the unique understanding that is the root of all true wisdom.

When I am speaking about politics, I am looking at it in the context of humankind-as-a-whole—not in terms of any circumstance that is negative, full of opposites, looking to achieve some kind of a victory in relation to an opposite or an opponent or an enemy. The root-presumption of not having an enemy is essential to the Global Cooperative Forum. The Global Cooperative Forum must be intrinsically all-including. And there is a discipline necessary for doing that, because people’s patterning will tend to have them be expressing opposite views, different dispositions, and wanting to just sit around and talk about all of that. There should be absolutely no discussion of that kind. That has nothing to do with anything.

There is nothing but Reality Itself—the prior whole, the indivisible whole. That is the basis for all right action. All right human action must be based on this understanding.

In one of the Upanishads, it is said that wherever there is an “other”, fear arises.2  As soon as “difference” is presumed, as soon as separateness is presumed, as soon as an opponent is presumed, there is fear—or the disposition of separativeness, of self-protectiveness, of self-division. The non-presumption of an “other” is the essential principle that will liberate humankind. Wherever no “other” is presumed, Truth awakens.

That is the significance of the title of the book NotTwo Is Peace. What I describe in that book is not merely a method for seeking peace. All twoness is about a search toward a goal-including the goal of peace, which idealists want to find someday. What I am proposing is not idealism. Rather, it is perfect realism-in relation to politics, and in relation to every other domain of human life. Such realism involves the intensive non-presumption of “other” and “problem”. Such realism is the “not-two” presumption—thoroughly embraced, and become the basis of action. That action is already characterized by unity—not the search for unity, but the Is-ness of unity.

Such is the right basis for all human activism. Indeed, it is the basis for all right action in every domain of human life. And this understanding is how everything can be made right, now and in the future. It is the Wisdom-means that can (and must) be applied in the case of every human process. Therefore, it applies to everything—including the most inclusive of all possibilities, which is the right functioning of humankind-as-a-whole.

This is a call to everyone to be awakened to an intrinsic understanding. It is not about appealing to people as egos, or merely trying to get everybody together, with all their differences, to simply talk things out. It is not about anything like that. It is about completely bypassing all of that. All of that will fail. It is a waste of time-and there is no time to be wasted. Rather, this call to everyone is about presuming the intrinsic Truth-intuition (or Reality-intuition) in everyone, rather than appealing to people as consumer-egos or egos-­in-high-places.

The principle of non-violence is an idealistic principle about how to function in relation to an opponent. What I am communicating is not that. The principle of “Not-Two Is Peace” is not a strategy in relation to an opponent. In fact, it is exactly not that. Thus, the principle of “Not-Two Is Peace” is not the principle of non-violence merely, even though it is thoroughly and intrinsically non-violent. Most fundamentally, the principle of “Not-Two Is Peace” is about not using any method that presumes to be in relation to an opponent.

All actions done in relation to an opponent—even if outwardly non-violent—are, in some sense, violent. That needs to be understood. Any struggle with an opponent is a kind of aggression, even if done through the device of non-violence.

The approach of “Not-Two Is Peace” (with the Global Cooperative Forum as its instrument) is not like that. It is not an effort in relation to an opponent. It is simply everybody­all-at-once becoming self-actualizing, self-enforcing, self­governing, self-rightening, self-correcting, self-organizing, not opposing anything. It is the whole-all-at-once putting itself in order, as it will inevitably do when the obstruction that is preventing that self-organizing process from happening is removed.

Thus, it is oppositions that are preventing the self­organizing process from happening. The idea of “difference” is what is preventing humankind from self-organizing and self-correcting and self-rightening itself. That is it. The presumption of “difference”, the presumption of opposites, of opponents, of necessary struggle, of seeking for unity, of winning against some force or other that is the opposite of your own—that is what is wrong.

This is the unique understanding that people must grasp. The lack of that understanding is the reason why human­kind is defeating itself. That is why worthy purposes are failing. It is the presumption of “difference”, the presumption of the “other”, the presumption of “not yet—therefore, seeking is required”.

In other words, the presumption of egoity—or the presumption of separateness and the activity of separation—is the fault that makes all human effort fail. Ego is the “difference”-maker. Ego is the separatist (or separative) disposition. Ego ultimately avoids relationship, dissociating itself from the “other”. Therefore, the dissociative principle must be abandoned. It has nothing to do with peace. It has nothing to do with correcting the human situation.

All action based on the presumption of an “other” or of “difference” will inevitably fail. Such action only produces struggle, and not unity. Truly, it could be said that the entire world has engaged in its political efforts at the cost of destroying global unity. The United Nations functions on the basis of opposites or differences. It is based on bringing competitors or opponents together in one place, where they continue to be opponents and competitors in relation to one another. They sit around talking, but such talk has nothing to do with peace, with the unity and well-being of humankind-as-a-whole. Talk will never achieve peace or unity or well-being.

The Global Cooperative Forum is an intrinsically unified body representing everybody-all-at-once. Therefore, there are no differences in it. It is not about a council of nations. It is simply a working-instrument for the priorly unified totality (or whole) of humankind, and it presumes no differences.

Therefore, all name-tags and placards must be abandoned at the door. You do not bring your nation-state labels (or any other labels) inside. There are no “high” persons. There are no differences. There is no status. All are servants of the whole.

This is not mere idealism. This is Reality in action. It is an absolute necessity. It always has been—but it has never been understood in the context of humankind-as-a-whole, because humankind-as-a-whole never came together before. That coming-together is only a recent happening.

Thus, in the Global Cooperative Forum, it cannot be that the different nations, the different religions, the different cultures, the different races are each having their say, trying to “angle” relative to the interests on their side. The basis for coming together must be the principle of the human totality as a prior unity-bringing no differences to the table whatsoever, but simply bringing the subjects of address that are common to all, and collectively solving those issues through action that is appropriate to whatever particular subject.

To do that, all presumptions of “difference” must be abandoned. That is the principle of the Global Cooperative Forum.

As I have already described, the principle of prior unity as a political means is not the same as the strategy of non-violent aggression in relation to an opponent. It is quite different—and that difference must be understood. What I am communicating is something new. It is not in the likeness of anything that has previously been proposed or enacted. Sympathetic associations can be seen in the history of human efforts toward peace, but the principle of prior unity is not the same as any previous principle for establishing peace. What is unique about the principle of prior unity must be thoroughly grasped and intensively applied.

1. Gandhi’s term was “satyagraha”, often translated as “soul-force” or “truth-force”, indicating Gandhi’s insistence that the power of truth can (and should) be used as a non-violent meansto effect change.
2. In S. Radhakrishnan’s translation of the Brhadaranyaka Upanishad, this sentence reads: “Assuredly it is from a second that fear arises,” where “second” is used in the sense of “other” [S. Radhakrishnan, ed., The Principal Upanishads (Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press, 1992), 164].

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

The Demands of the Gillets Jaune to Macron in France

“The People’s directives” Demands made by the yellow vests in France.

The original source is in French but someone over at r/onguardforthee translated them into English.

•End of the tax hike on fuel.

•Promote the transport of goods by rail.

•Tax on marine fuel oil and kerosene.

•Monthly minimum wage at 1,300 euros net ($1947 CAD per month after taxes).

•Indexing of all wages, pensions and allowances to inflation.

•Nationalization of the fuel for home heating and electricity sectors.

•More progressive income tax (more marginal tax brackets).

•The end of the austerity.

•No withholding tax.

•Restoring the taxes for the ultra-wealthy.

•Same social security system for all workers, including the self-employed.

•The pension system must remain in solidarity and therefore socialized.

•No retirement pension below 1,200 euros ($1797/month CAD).

•Increase of disability allowances.

•Retirement at age 60, and a right to early retirement at 55 for workers who have worked a hard manual labour job.

•Continuation of the Pajemploi help system until the child is 10 years old.

•End of outsourcing of work for French corporations.

•Limit the number of fixed-term contracts for large companies, replaced with more full time employment.

•Maximum salary fixed at 15,000 euros [monthly] ($22469/month, or maximum annual salary of ~$270,000).

•Jobs for the unemployed.

•Any elected representative will be entitled to the median national salary.

•The popular referendum must enter into the Constitution. Creating a readable and effective site, supervised by an independent control body where people can make a proposal for a law. If this bill obtains 700,000 signatures then this bill will have to be discussed, completed and amended by the National Assembly, which will have the obligation, one year to the day after obtaining the 700,000 signatures, to submit it to the vote of all French.

•Return to a seven-year term for the President of the Republic.

•End of presidential allowances for life.

•Proportional voting system.

•Elimination of the Senate.

•Accounting of the protest/blank/none of the above ballots.

•Promote small businesses in villages and town centers. Stop the construction of large commercial areas around the big cities that kill the small business. More free parking in city centers.

•No further privatization of French infrastructure.

•Improved funding for the justice system, the police, the gendarmerie and the army.

•All the money earned by highway tolls will be used for the maintenance of motorways and roads in France and road safety.

•Immediate closure of private trains, post offices, schools and maternity homes.

•Maximum 25 students per class for all ages.

•Large corporations (McDonald’s, Google, Amazon, Carrefour …) pay big [taxes], small businesses (artisans, SMEs) pay small [taxes].

•Protect the French industry to prohibit outsourcing.

•End of the business tax credit. Use this money for the launch of a French hydrogen car industry.

•Eliminate credit card fees for merchants.

•Lower employers’ charges.

•Continue exemption of farm diesel.

•Improve the lives of the elderly, by banning exploitation and making money off the elderly.

•Substantial boosts in mental health fund.

•Prohibition of glyphosate.

•Immediate end to temporary foreign worker programs.

•Plan for improving insulation of housing (help the environment by helping the household).

•Rent control. More low-rent housing (especially for students and precarious workers).

•Treat the root causes of forced migration.

•Fair treatment of asylum seekers . We owe them housing, security, food and education. Work with the UN to have host camps open in many countries around the world, pending the outcome of the asylum application.

•Return of unsuccessful asylum seekers to their country of origin.

•Real integration policy is implemented. Living in France means becoming French (French language course, French history course and civic education course with certification at the end of the course).


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Paradoxes of working toward a Global Shift

I wrote the exercise below in response to a friend in a group I belong to, who is convinced that I am stuck in what he characterizes as “the Enemy Construct.” He is sure that by pointing out the damages caused by the actions of people that are now commonly identified as Psychopaths, one must be aligning oneself against them, which he says is “going to war” with them. He thinks that I’m trapped in this opposition and therefore unable to see reality as it is, like he does.

I am responding using one paragraph of things he’s written about what I’ve said in group discussions:

“But you are still stuck in that construct, thinking that is what is going on from the evidence of what you write and comment.  Yes it is the same scenario of powers against each other for PUBLIC CONSUMPTION, but public consumption only.   Behind that is another team that is equally embedded in each of the same powers, but they are a different team.  You all don’t see that because quite frankly you are still stuck in the enemy construct, that they’re all collectively the enemy of the people and the world.  They are not the same team.  It is a team that has been operating for at least sixty years, that formulated itself in the 1950s, and in reality probably go back hundreds, perhaps thousands of years.  The current events have been planned and strategized for at least those sixty years, a long, slow, patient plan in which many, many, many of the individual players died in many different ways, whether just by expiring their life span or by more violent events.  Most knew they would not see the finality in their lifetimes, yet they did it because they knew it had to be done.”

1) re: “But you are still stuck in that construct, thinking that is what is going on from the evidence of what you write and comment.” – I have frequently said that what I’m posting is for peoples’ consideration. Frankly, I don’t think that you do know what my mindset or “construct” is. One can observe that what people acting from either “volition” (action base on their own possibly demented mentation) or from orders from up the chain-of-obedience are doing, is violating the lives of others, regardless of whether the apparent source of the  action is from a formal institution or from shadowy overlords. I have been studying deep politics specifically since the early 1970’s, and I’m sure that my view of what’s going on in human relations and beyond is sufficiently nuanced as to encompass anything that you write about – This is why I was attracted to getting involved with [this group] in the first place.

2) re: “Yes it is the same scenario of powers against each other for PUBLIC CONSUMPTION, but public consumption only.” – Don’t you think that basically everything coming from the PTWB (Powers That Wanna Be) is part of a mind-control initiative of one sort or another? It seems to me that none of it is what it appears to be on the surface, everything is calculated to have various different meanings and effects depending on who is hearing or reading it (including, I think, even exalted members of control hierarchies). One of the questions that I think is important now is a version of something being asked almost everywhere in the “alternative media” now: Who (or what) is at the top of the chain-of-obedience? From my viewpoint, it seems that this “Anti-Source” is outside of ANY of the organizations, cults or institutions that can be “constated” (Gurdjieff-talk for hypothesizing an idea to oneself) at a mental level. If you have worked with non-dual philosophy, you may know of the saying: “Form is Emptiness, Emptiness is Form.” Do you give credence to the idea that the world-of-form arises out of the void, and yet at the same time is not separate from it? I suspect that one of the hallmarks of our so-called evolution that will drive the shift –  from the current Cartesian mind-set to the “new paradigm” that you often seem to be hinting at –  is the skillful acceptance and use of paradox(es). Personally, I’m quite sure that the material I post, and my pocket-analyses of it, come from varying levels of reality-framing. This doesn’t mean that I’m (seriously) identified with any of these frames (I would also point that our frames are constantly shifting as different aspects of our personalities are emphasized through identification).

3) re: “Behind that is another team that is equally embedded in each of the same powers, but they are a different team.  You all don’t see that because quite frankly you are still stuck in the enemy construct, that they’re all collectively the enemy of the people and the world.” – IMO, the teams struggling for control in the world-of-form we apparently inhabit are nested in each other like a set of matryoshka dolls “to infinity,” or to where the edges of the Cartesian reality-set dissolve into formlessness. This does not mean that there are not quite-apparent individuals, acting at every level of the nested systems, who are invested in egoic spells under which they misperceive the other beings sharing their dream-worlds, to the extent that they see them as “The Other.” I would argue that it is only under such a spell that anyone, externalizing The Other in their thinking, can begin to strategize invasive actions against others which, if the aggressor’s wholeness and intuition were intact, they would never contemplate, as their still inner-voice would be screaming at them “Nooooooo!” If this is true, then a major part of our missions in healing ourselves and building the world we will relish living in will be to recognize when we ourselves are projecting out onto our fellow beings as if they are outside of us, and consequently potential threats. It’s axiomatic that for the ego, the only significance of a being projected out in this way is due to the advantages they offer the egoist’s acquisitive dreams, egoically identified with. Again, this does not mean that we cannot see that people in OUR DREAM hold these identifications and are pursuing strategies which have no restraints of ethics or compassion, and that are thus producing harmful effects on our sisters and brothers and on Life itself within the world-of-form. I would argue that a compassionate response to stop the perpetration of these harms doesn’t embody an enemy-construct, as it is ultimately for the good of the aggressors as well as for their apparent victims.

4) re: “It is a team that has been operating for at least sixty years, that formulated itself in the 1950s, and in reality probably go back hundreds, perhaps thousands of years.  The current events have been planned and strategized for at least those sixty years, a long, slow, patient plan in which many, many, many of the individual players died in many different ways, whether just by expiring their life span or by more violent events.  Most knew they would not see the finality in their lifetimes, yet they did it because they knew it had to be done.” – I think the team you may be referring to here goes back at least to the Congress of Vienna in 1815, and may have been symbolically book-ended by the collapsing of the British markets in 1815 by Nathan Rothschild, resulting in Rothschild control (begging, of course, the question of what doll-layer was pulling those strings) of British equities and of the Bank of England. However, again, how do we penetrate the nature of the unseen capstone of the Pyramid of Power? If the Paradigm Shift perhaps involves transcending our identification with our own formal natures, and moving more and more into unconditioned being in the present moment, then this hypothesized Anti-Source driver may be (mechanically) running a program of constraining humanity into an exclusively “objective” reality. This may have something to do with energies which are “split out” of The Now (and which become contaminated like stagnant water), which this Anti-Force is using for strictly illusory effects in the world-of-form, to continue to create “facts-on-the-ground” to, perhaps it believes it possible, take absolute control (the ultimate fever-dream of ego) of space time reality, at least within a certain Cartesian playing court. This would be a force that is, in truth, imaginary, based on the mechanical tendencies of ego-nature, remembering that ego itself is actually a phantasm. Yet, at the moment it seems to be the Ruler of the World, even though I would argue that it is not a “real” being, that is to say, emanating out of the Living Void, with a consequent direct connection to Source. So then, beings who have, in whatever ways, allowed themselves to fall into the chain-of obedience, are acting out of habitual behaviors driven by a need to comply with this mechanical system of control. They do not “know” anything had to be done to reach a conscious goal of their own. They know they have to comply, to go-along-to-get-along, regardless of consequences, which are unavoidably severe due to the consideration that their violations of others inevitably manifest as violations of themselves.

How this will all play out, even where we “actually” are in the process, cannot, IMO, be known. I think the greatest gift we can realize is the direct recognition that the Now moment is perfect as it is. And “always will be.”

I hope the above helps to clarify these sometimes thorny issues.

Yours truly, etc.


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

2018 is ARMISTICE YEAR – Veterans for Peace – Santa Cruz Action 2/11/18



The 100th Anniversary of Armistice Day –




FEBRUARY 11th, 10 am


Where: Santa Cruz Clock Tower


Name: Veterans for Armistice Day and Year


Propose: Ring All Bells at 11am on the 11th Day of each month in 2018


Help us contact churches and public bells (e.g., S.C. Clock Tower)


VFP National Office has been contacted by the Santa Cruz chapter #11 VFP, and is



Our initial vision includes a major parade/march on Sunday, November 11th, 2018.
We hope many groups, especially peace groups, will participate in the parade and help spread the
inspiring message of peace.
We are evaluating venues for speeches and entertainment and who to invite to SPEAK, SING, DANCE, CREATE POETRY AND OTHER ART.

Your feedback and suggestions are requested.

Celebrate Armistice Year 2018, with “A Declaration of Peace” (On EARTH and especially with Russia, China, North Korea, etc.)

“No Enemies!”

“Let’s honor our veterans by not creating any more veterans”
“Bring our Boys and Girls home from 100s of battlefields around the world”

We plan to take the Armistice Year and 100th Anniversary of Armistice Day idea to community leaders and government representatives for their support. Please help us with this.





“2018~The Year Armistice becomes Real”


CONTACT: Rico and Claire 831-818-2196


Steve Bare 831-425-8430


Harry Meserve 831-325-7602

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Coffee Deception: 13 Little Known Facts About Coffee

You’re not going to like this one bit: you’ve been lied about the health benefits of coffee!

1. Caffeine is an alkaloid that the coffee plant uses to kill bugs, which eat its’ seeds.

The coffee plant also uses caffeine in the coffee pods to kill surrounding plants, so the coffee plant can attain more sunlight and grow larger. Caffeine is a pesticide, which causes genetic termination in living cells that come into contact with it.

2. MRI images taken before and after 1 cup of coffee showed a decrease in blood flow to the brain by 45%. When the blood flow reduction was measured exactly, it was actually 52% less blood flow to the brain, after just one small cup of coffee. http://abcn.ws/2ipmLj7

3. Brain imaging studies of chronic coffee drinkers showed they presented the same degradation of their brains as chronic alcoholics, cigarette smokers, Parkinson’s patients and marijuana users. http://dailym.ai/1qjSqi0

4. Coffee can cause an urge to move ones’ bowels because this is one way the body tries to eliminate poison from the system. The sudden urge to “poo” after drinking coffee is one of the body’s defense mechanisms to poison.

5. Coffee increases energy via the human fight or flight metabolic response, because the body is afraid of the caffeine based poison. Coffee doesn’t give energy, it removes it from the body.

The energy a person feels when they drink coffee is the body going into overdrive because caffeine is a poison and all poisons activate an energy release in the body. (fight or flight)

Coffee removes energy from the system, leaving the person progressively more and more exhausted each day that passes, therefore setting up the world’s most dangerous energy stimulation addiction… coffee dependence for energy.

6. When the fight or flight response is triggered in the body, the lower IQ centers of the brain are activated as well as hormonal systems in control of aggression, violence, irrational and illogical decision making, jealousy, rage, anger, fear and paranoia.

Coffee generates lower end mental functioning with a side of every negative emotional response the body can generate.

7. When measured, 1 coffee activated the fight and flight response for 3 consecutive weeks, even though no other caffeine was consumed after that 1 cup of coffee. One cup of coffee poisons the body for 3 consecutive weeks, on a decreasing scale.

8. When coffee (caffeine) is consumed, the limbic part of the brain is hyper activated and the higher learning centers of the mind inhibited. The limbic part of the brain is only concerned with sex, reproduction, protection of territory, food acquisition and personal safety.

The limbic portion of the brain is the most primitive and least developed portion of the mind complex. When you want to out smart or dominate another person, it’s best that their limbic system is activated, because it brings them to a mental state equal to that of a child.

9. The birth control pill inhibits clearing of ingested caffeine. This effect is increased dramatically by alcohol or pain killer use, therefore causing many cases of caffeine poisoning, which get treated as other things once the person reaches the hospital.

10. Coffee is proven to cause an enlarged prostate, high anxiety, insomnia, depression, birth defects, pain syndromes, unnatural breathing patterns, brain damage, hyperactivity, learning disorders (from the brain damage) behavior disorders, fatigue, certain types of cancer, Crohns, IBS, colitis, carpel tunnel, ulcers, low iron, heart disease, headaches, PMS, increased incidence of muscle and tendon injury, joint pain, heart attack, stroke,TIA’s (mini strokes)… and that’s a short list.

11. Coffee causes fat gain and cellulite because by triggering the body’s flight or fight system (which any poison or threat does). This eventually changes the body’s primary fuel source requirement to one of fat.

When the body is threatened, it prefers fat as its’ primary fuel source, over sugar or protein.

Constant activation of the body’s fight or flight system (via the daily ingestion of caffeine poison) aids in a metabolic shift to fat storage and fat conservation, because again the body prefers fat as a fuel source when fighting any toxic intruder… because fat contains 9 calories per gram for the fight, as opposed to 4 calories per gram housed by sugar and protein.

Welcome to the land of coffee (caffeine) induced fat gain, weight gain and cellulite. Coffee also destroys muscle, as the body purposely flushes muscle, when it’s poisoned, to facilitate additional fat storage.

12. Coffee (caffeine) blocks iron absorption, causing the vast majority of anemia today.

http://bit.ly/2qKSqwh The entire threat of caffeine in general includes caffeine teas, chocolates, caffeine based energy drinks, caffeine based pre work out drinks and over 2000 over the counter and prescription medications that PURPOSELY include caffeine.

13. An investigation conducted by the author of the most extensive book on coffee ever written, reviewed almost every scientific research piece regarding coffee and his conclusion was that there’s absolutely no scientific evidence what so ever that coffee provides any health benefits to the human body, on any level, in anyway.

He openly declares that any positive promotion of coffee consumption is a blatant lie, doing grave harm to our entire society. The publication of any positive effects of coffee are false and all can be traced back to a very powerful, covert and secret “coffee lobby”, which has both commercial and ruling family origins.

The author reviews the research in the book at this added link. How many coffee shops have opened in your town in the last 20 years?

So why the lying about coffee? Think of government and how governing a brain damaged population is easier than governing a healthy population. Start there and keep connecting the dots. Coffee is only one brain damaging weapon used against an uninformed slave class.

The 10 most popular brain damaging weapons used against the slave class (in order of use) are:

1) vaccines
2) coffee and caffeine products
3) alcohol
4) medical drugs
5) sugar
6) fluoride
7) cigarettes
8) processed junk foods and genetically modified foods
9) EMF radiation from wireless devices and
10) chemtrails.

If you’ve ever posed the question, “why are people so stunned, as to not figure any of this out?”… you’re missing the point that the brain damage of the slave class is the primary agenda of the ruling 1%.

Coffee and vaccines are the elite’s 1-2 punch within “operation brain damage” down here on the human farm. The best slave is a brain damaged slave, unable to think or care for themselves without the help from slave master.

A helpless population guarantees a need for government. This is why the ruling families do everything in their power to create a helpless population, day in and day out. Governments exist because they perpetually create the conditions for their own existence.

Ancient ruling families, who masquerade as modern altruistic governments, are not there to help the people progress, evolve or become more. You live on a chemically controlled slave based control grid.

Coffee is just another massive lie inside the human control operation. Want to shut the human farm down? Want to really become more than the stereotypical diseased, overweight, dis-empowered, depressed, and dysfunctional human mess? Reject the poisons!

From an article by Jason Christoff

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The New Manhattan Project: Ongoing Research Reveals the Roots

The New Manhattan Project: Ongoing Research Reveals the Roots of Global Climate Control and the Massive Program Filling the Skies with Chemical Spray

by Bruce Tanner

On April 29, Peter A. Kirby did a presentation (video below) in San Francisco, outlining some of his research and theories on the Chemtrails we see in the sky above us almost every day in most parts of the Western world, and on how they got there.

In the Summer of 2016, Kirby published his comprehensive Chemtrails Exposed: A New Manhattan Project. For Peter, this marked the end of Phase 1 of what he sees as a long-term research project to document one of the most ambitious, and potentially devastating, scientific and industrial projects ever conceived by man. In his book, and in the lecture below, he outlines many, many of the institutions and documented players in the project, each of which has a past and a paper trail that can give us a deeper look into what’s been done and where we may be going. Peter has good reason to compare this with the gigantic and covert venture by the U.S. Deep State to create the Atom Bomb during WWII.

Starting in 2009, he began digging into books, magazines, libraries, government reports and the Internet to find information to explain the officially denied and yet in-your-face program of enormously extensive spraying of chemicals from planes being seen and documented all over the world. By the time Kirby started his research, there was, as he says in his book, already a problem, not of too little information but of too much. There were dozens of books and documents covering various aspects of a project that was obviously too big to sweep under the rug. But there was nothing that tied it all together and got to the bottom of what was going on.

Peter found, though, that there were smoking guns all along the trails of evidence, many in government and research papers, in professional journals, and in unbelievably candid statements made by scientists and project leaders, that piqued his curiosity and lead him deeper on the trail. He shares all this material, and his deductions from it in Chemtrails Exposed and in this video presentation.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Was the 1933 Berlin Reichstag fire a False Flag or not?

Today on TomatoBubble.com Mike King posted an article claiming vehemently that the Reichstag fire was really set by the partially blind leftist foreigner Marinus van der Lubbe, who was beheaded for the crime, and that anyone stating otherwise was lying. So I did a few searches and came up with the three articles below:


Historians find ‘proof’ that Nazis burnt Reichstag

By Tony Paterson in Berlin – 15 Apr 2001

THE first documentary evidence has emerged to support the view that the Nazis started the 1933 Reichstag fire that Hitler used as a pretext to establish a dictatorship.

While historians have agreed that there is no substance to Nazi claims that German Communists were to blame for the blaze, there has also been a lack of evidence to back the widely held belief that Hitler’s supporters burnt down the parliament building in Berlin.

After poring over 50,000 pages of hitherto unexamined documents from former East German and Soviet archives, four leading German historians have now concluded that the fire was a Nazi plot. Marinus van der Lubbe, 24, a pro-Communist Dutch labourer, was beheaded by the Nazis after admitting that he started the blaze alone to encourage a workers’ uprising.

The news magazine Der Spiegel backed this version of events in the 1960s after a wide-ranging investigation. Now, however, the four historians argue that Der Spiegel’s coverage was part of a cover-up by Nazi sympathisers to protect the culprits from prosecution. Their findings put them at odds with other leading academics.

They base their case on remarks by Adolf Rall, a thief and Nazi stormtrooper, whose body was found in woods near Berlin in November 1933. Rall is said to have told prosecutors of a meeting of the SA stormtroopers during which the SA leader, Karl Ernst, ordered them to enter the Reichstag through a tunnel and sprinkle flammable liquid inside.

Ernst is said to have told his men that an excuse was needed to begin attacking Communists. Hitler used the fire to justify the arrest and torture of 25,000 Left-wing activists and to pass an emergency decree establishing absolute Nazi authority.

According to the historians, a former stormtrooper working in the jail where Rall was serving a sentence, heard of his statement and tipped off the SA. Its leaders are then said to have arranged for the statements to be destroyed by accomplices in the prosecutors’ office and for him to be murdered.

His remarks however are said to have been referred to in other papers found in the archives. The four historians – Hersch Fischler, Jurgen Schmaedeke, Alexander Bahar and Wilfred Kugel – say Nazi complicity in the blaze was kept secret by ex-Nazi journalists after the war.

Der Spiegel’s investigation in the 1960s was led by the historical researcher Fritz Tobias. His findings have been backed by the historian Hans Mommsen and are supported by one of his British counterparts, Ian Kershaw, in his recent work Hitler 1889-1936: Hubris.

The historians – writing in the journal Historische Zeitschrift – accuse Mr Tobias of “wanting to dispel the odium of arson from National Socialism” through his claims. Mr Tobias has defended himself, saying: “I was born into a Social Democratic household and am the last person to want to exculpate Hitler and his consorts.”

Last week, Der Spiegel published a 10-page rebuttal of the four historians’ conclusions. It said: “The thesis which holds that van der Lubbe was the only arsonist involved remains the most plausible explanation.” Although Mr Tobias was not an ex-Nazi, the magazine conceded that other former members had been employed.


Adolf Rall

Adolf Rall, was the eldest of five children, was born in Berlin on 7th June 1905. After leaving school he became a locksmith. In the late 1920s he joined the Sturmabteilung (SA).

On 30th April, 1932, Rall was arrested for stealing cars in Dresden. He was found guilty and sent to prison. Soon after his release he was arrested again for car theft and was returned to prison. In April 1933, he was sentenced for stealing a Daimler sedan in Stuttgart. (1)

According to a German anti-Nazi newspaper, Pariser Tageblatt, published in Paris, Rall had information about the Reichstag Fire. (2) It was claimed that “a former stormtrooper working in the jail where Rall was serving a sentence”, discovered that he knew what had happened. (3)

It was stated that Karl Ernst and Hermann Göring were involved in planning the act of arson. Rall suggested that before the Reichstag fire broke out, he had been in “the subterranean passageway that connects the Reichstag assembly building to the building in which the government apartment of the Reich President Hermann Göring is located. Rall said that he had personally witnessed various members of his SA unit bringing the explosive liquids into the building”. Apparently, Ernst told Rall “that an excuse was needed to begin attacking Communists”. (4)

Adolf Rall died in his cell on 2nd November, 1933. It was reported in The Daily Telegraph that the leaders of the SA “arranged for the statements to be destroyed by accomplices in the prosecutors’ office and for him to be murdered.” (5)

Rudolf Diels and Hans Gisevius also provided information to support this story.



Book Review


The Reichstag Fire, 68 years on

Alexander Bahar, Wilfried Kugel: Der Reichstagbrand – Wie Geschichte gemacht wird (The Reichstag Fire – How History is Created), edition q, Berlin 2001, ISBN 3-86124-523-2, 864 pages, price: 68.00 DM

5 July 2001

On February 27, 1933—more than 68 years ago—the Berlin Reichstag, the seat of Germany’s parliament, was set on fire. Shortly after the fire began, the Dutch left-wing radical Marinus van der Lubbe was arrested at the scene of the crime, apparently as the sole culprit.

Even before his identity was established, the Nazi leaders accused the German Communist Party (KPD) of having committed arson. According to Nazi propaganda, the Reichstag fire was intended as a signal for a communist uprising that had long been planned—a claim for which there was not a shred of evidence. In actual fact, the KPD leadership was neither willing nor able to organize such an uprising, so the Reichstag fire could not have been a signal for it.

For the Nazis, who had been in power less than a month, since January 30, 1933, the Reichstag fire was the excuse for a hitherto unparalleled persecution of Communist and Social Democratic workers, intellectuals and party leaders. On February 28, 1933 alone, just one day after the fire, thousands of persons active in, or allied with, the workers movement were arrested. The first to be arrested also included writers Egon Erwin Kisch, Ludwig Renn and Carl von Ossietzky, later murdered by the Nazis in a concentration camp.

All left-wing newspapers, including the Social Democratic daily Vorwärts, the Communist Party press and the German Trotskyists’ newspaper Permanente Revolution, were confiscated and banned.

Two decrees put into effect only one day later, the “Decree on the Protection of People and State”, subtitled “against communist acts of violence endangering the state,” and the “Decree Against Treason of the German People and High-Treason Activities,” were used to annul practically overnight the essential basic rights incorporated in the constitution of the Weimar Republic. These so-called “fire decrees” stayed in effect until the end of the Third Reich and formed the pseudo-legal basis for the entire Nazi dictatorship.

In the days immediately following the fire, the Nazis used the opportunity to generally weaken the entire German workers movement and prepare its destruction, a pressing task since early Reichstag elections had been scheduled for March 5, 1933, and a Nazi election victory was by no means certain.

There were still millions of workers organized in the SPD (Social Democrats), the KPD and the trade unions who were prepared to fight against the Nazis. The results of the March elections made this clear: the SPD and the KPD were still able to garner a combined vote of 13.2 million, the same number of votes they had received during the last elections in 1932. The NSDAP (Nazis) received 17.2 million votes (compared to 11.7 million in the 1932 elections), but were not able to gain an absolute majority of votes on their own. This was only possible with the aid of their German Nationalist allies from the “Kampffront Schwarz-Rot-Weiss”.

It was the SPD leadership’s capitulation before the Nazis and the division of the workers due to the “social fascism theory” propagated by the leaders of the Stalinist KPD that prevented National Socialism from being stopped at the last minute and combated.

As early as 1931, Leon Trotsky already formulated the task at hand in his open letter to the members of the KPD, How Can National Socialism be Defeated?:

“The front must now be directed against fascism. And this common front of direct struggle against fascism, embracing the entire proletariat, must be utilised in the struggle against the Social Democracy, directed as a flank attack, but no less effective for all that.

“It is necessary to show by deeds a complete readiness to make a bloc with the Social Democrats against the fascists in all cases in which they will accept a bloc… We must understand how to tear the workers away from their leaders in reality. But reality today is-the struggle against fascism…

“The overwhelming majority of the Social Democratic workers will fight against the fascists, but–for the present at least–only together with their organisations. This stage cannot be skipped. We must help the Social Democratic workers in action–in this new and extraordinary situation–to test the value of their organizations and leaders at this time, when it is a matter of life and death for the working class.”(1)

As we know, history took a different turn: the Nazis were victorious, and the German and European working class suffered its worst and most devastating defeat. The authors leave no doubt as to the fact that the leaders of both the SPD and the KPD bear decisive responsibility for this defeat. This is made particularly clear in the authors’ portrayal of the so-called “Prussian coup,” the ouster of the SPD-led Prussian government in July 1932 by the Reich Chancellor (head of government) of the time, Franz von Papen. Although the majority of their members were only waiting for the word to offer massive resistance, the SPD and trade union leaders didn’t put up even the semblance of a fight against Papen’s “cold coup d’etat,” and thus paved the way for the Nazis.

Who were the arsonists?

To this very day, there is hardly any event in German history that has been debated as heatedly as the issue of who really set the Reichstag on fire.

In years of meticulous research, the two authors of the book, historian Alexander Bahar and physicist and psychologist Wilfried Kugel, carried out the first comprehensive evaluation of the 50,000 pages of original court, state attorney office and secret police (Gestapo) files that had been locked away in Moscow and East Berlin until 1990. The result is a remarkable and explosive, more than 800-page document that for the first time provides almost complete circumstantial evidence that the Nazis prepared and set the Reichstag fire themselves.

The authors have thus succeeded in disproving a hypothesis that even today is still fairly widespread: that the Dutchman Marinus van der Lubbe was the sole perpetrator. They “base their evidence largely on original documents that are stored in public archives, but have not been evaluated up to now… The book contradicts in many ways all of the research reports that have been published so far on the Reichstag fire, based on what the authors say is the first thorough evaluation of all presently available relevant sources… In summary, the authors have succeeded after years of work in presenting a comprehensive chain of circumstantial evidence—albeit one that will only have a conclusive character for those readers who are prepared to take on the intellectual challenge presented by the often highly complex and convoluted aspects of this case of political crime.” (2)

Bahar and Kugel describe the two contradictory hypotheses as to who was actually responsible for setting the fire as follows:

“As incontestable as it is that the Nazis benefited from the Reichstag fire and made skillful use of it in establishing their dictatorship, opinion remains divided as to who actually committed the deed. The communists accused by the Nazi authorities at the Reichstag Fire Trial in Leipzig were already ruled out in 1933 for obvious reasons: quite apart from the lack of evidence, the suicidal and thus nonsensical nature of such a deed was self-evident, despite Nazi propaganda to the contrary. So did Marinus van der Lubbe, the 75% vision-impaired Dutch left-wing radical communist arrested in the burning Reichstag set the fire on his own? Or were the culprits to be found among the Nazis?” (3)

As early as the summer of 1933, the Brown Book on the Reichstag Fire and Hitler’s Terror was published in Switzerland under the editorship of Willi Münzenberg. In this book, German emigrés attempted to provide proof that the Nazis had committed the crime in a secret operation run by Nazi leader Hermann Göring. And even before the Reichstag Fire Trial in Leipzig, the “Legal Commission of the International Investigation Committee” came to the conclusion that the Nazis had set the fire themselves. Up to 1949, this was the prevailing opinion of all serious contemporaries outside of Germany. “Everyone abroad was and remains convinced that the Nazis set fire to the Reichstag.” (4)

In Germany, however, the legend of Marinus van der Lubbe as the sole perpetrator was created after 1945 by the first head of the Gestapo, Rudolf Diels, and his former staff. Diels, who was in charge of the sweeping arrests carried out on the night of the fire, had every reason to exonerate the Nazi rulers after World War II, since he was deeply involved in the Reichstag fire himself. As the authors explain:

“six hours before the Reichstag fire, Rudolf Diels, head of the … Political Police since February 23, 1933 and subsequently head of the Secret State Police Office (Gestapo), wrote the following police radio telegram which was sent to all police stations in Prussia at about 6:00 p.m.: ‘Communists reportedly plan to carry out systematic raids on police squads and members of nationalist associations with the aim of disarming them.’ … ‘Suitable countermeasures are to be taken immediately, and where necessary communist functionaries placed under protective custody.’” (5)

“The arrests carried out the next night had thus already been initiated by Rudolf Diels, the Chief of the Political Police, on the afternoon of February 27.” (6)

The authors prove that it would have been impossible for Marinus van der Luppe to set on fire a building as large as the Reichstag on his own, by reconstructing in minute detail the course of the fire on the basis of countless testimony documents and investigation and court files (particularly in Chapters 2 and 4).

Their conclusion is that “the ‘culprit’ van der Lubbe had even less time to carry out his alleged act of arson than has hitherto been assumed, namely only 12 to 13 minutes… The view often expressed in historical literature that the Reichstag arson had taken Göring, Goebbels and Hitler ‘by surprise’ must now presumably be regarded once and for all as a myth.” (7)

In Chapters 5 to 7, the authors document the proceedings at the so-called Reichstag Fire Trial, which began on September 21, 1933 in Leipzig, and then present the circumstantial evidence for the guilt of the Nazis. The exact evaluation of all of the fire expert reports leads to one conclusion: “ All of the fire experts agreed that the fire in the Reichstag assembly hall had to have been set by several culprits. Van der Lubbe’s self-incrimination was thus proved to be a lie.” (8) (My emphasis – W.K.)

In the trial before the Leipzig Reichsgericht court, which the Nazis had originally planned as a show trial, the accused were “van der Lubbe and comrades.” The Dutchman’s alleged “comrades” were Ernst Torgler, the former chairman of the KPD parliamentary group in the Reichstag, and three Bulgarian communists who were living illegally in Germany: Georgi Dimitrov, who had been the head of the Berlin-based Western European Office of the Executive Committee of the Comintern (Third International) until early 1933, Blagoj Popov and Vasil Tanev. Despite coerced witnesses (including concentration camp prisoners), planted and forged “evidence,” and torture and terror against the accused, the Nazis never succeeded in proving the alleged guilt of the communists. Dimitrov’s undaunted conduct in court, in particular, added to the embarrassment for the Nazi leaders. The Reichsgericht passed its verdict on December 23, 1933: “The accused Torgler, Dimitrov, Popov and Tanev are acquitted.” Marinus van der Lubbe, the only “presentable” culprit, was sentenced to death and executed on January 10, 1934, despite the existing expert opinions and testimony which conclusively ruled out the Dutchman as the sole perpetrator.

Finally, the authors expose the Nazis as the only feasible culprits. Among the documentary evidence the authors base this verdict on is the testimony of SA member Adolf Rall (who was later murdered by the SA and the Gestapo). The emigré newspaper Pariser Tageblatt reported on December 24, 1933: “he (Rall) stated he was a member of the SA’s “Sturm 17” unit. Before the Reichstag fire broke out, he had been in the subterranean passageway that connects the Reichstag assembly building to the building in which the government apartment of the Reich President [Hermann Göring] is located. Rall said that he had personally witnessed various members of his SA unit bringing the explosive liquids into the building.” (10)

Hans Bernd Gisevius, who had worked as a junior lawyer for the political police from August to December 1933, made the following testimony at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial in 1946: “It was Goebbels who first came up with the idea of setting fire to the Reichstag. Goebbels discussed this with the leader of the Berlin SA brigade, Karl Ernst, and made detailed suggestions on how to go about carrying out the arson. A certain tincture known to every pyrotechnician was selected. You spray it onto an object and then it ignites after a certain time, after hours or minutes. In order to get into the Reichstag building, they needed the passageway that leads from the palace of the Reichstag President to the Reichstag. A unit of ten reliable SA men was put together, and now Göring was informed of all the details of the plan, so that he coincidentally was not out holding an election speech on the night of the fire, but was still at his desk in the Ministry of the Interior at such a late hour… The intention right from the start was to put the blame for this crime on the Communists, and those ten SA men who were to carry out the crime were instructed accordingly.” (11)

Based on this testimony and a wealth of other circumstantial evidence, the course of this act of arson can be reconstructed as follows:

“On February 27, 1933, at about 8:00 p.m. a commando group of at least 3, and at most 10 SA men led by Hans Georg Gewehr entered the basement of the palace of the Reichstag President. The group took the incendiary substances deposited there, and used the subterranean passageway to go from the Reichstag President’s palace to the Reichstag building, where they prepared the assembly hall in particular with a self-igniting liquid they probably mixed in the hall. After a certain latency period, the liquid set off the fire in the assembly hall. The group made their getaway through the subterranean passageway and the basement of the Reichstag President’s palace (and possibly also through the adjacent basement leading to the machinery and government employees’ building) to the public street ‘Reichstagsufer.’ Göring entered the burning Reichstag building at 9:21 p.m. at the latest, presumably in order to provide a cover for the commando group’s retreat.

“Van der Lubbe was brought to the Reichstag by the SA at exactly 9:00 p.m. and let into the building by them. The sound of breaking glass which was noticed by witnesses and which was allegedly due to van der Lubbe breaking window panes to get into the building was probably only intended to attract the attention of the public. The Dutchman was sacrificed as the only available witness.” (12)

Almost all of the SA men involved in the deed (with the exception of Hans Georg Gewehr) and many accessories to the crime were later murdered by the Nazis, above during the so-called “Röhm putsch” on June 30, 1934.

Responsibility for the Reichstag Fire was a constant source of debate between German historians after the Second World War. In the early 1960’s, the attempt was made to establish the hypothesis of van der Lubbe as the sole culprit—in particular by Rudolf Augstein’s magazine Der Spiegel and the “amateur historian” and intelligence officer Fritz Tobias. To this very day, some prominent German historians base themselves on this hypothesis and still attempt to deny the guilt of the Nazis. With their new book Der Reichstagbrand, Alexander Bahar and Wilfried Kugel have provided authoritative evidence to finally dispel the longstanding controversy.

* * *


(1) Leon Trotsky: Portrait des National Sozialismus, Arbeiterpresse Verlag, Essen 1999, p. 61
(2) A. Bahar and W. Kugel: Der Reichtagsbrand, edition q, Berlin 2001, p. 19
(3) ibid., p. 15
(4) Braunbuch über Reichstagsbrand und Hitlerterror, Universum-Bücherei, Basle 1933, p. 74
(5) Bahar and Kugel, p. 71
(6) ibid., p. 72
(7) ibid., p. 73
(8) ibid., p. 321
(9) Walther Hofer et. al.: Der Reichstagsbrand, Arani-Verlag, Berlin 1972/1978, revised new edition: Ahriman-Verlag, Freiburg 1992, p. 2
(10) Bahar and Kugel, p. 533
(11) ibid., p. 543
(12) ibid., preliminary remarks “Reconstruction of the Reichstag arson”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The nature of Judaism and the question of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion

Regarding The Protocols and Judaism and the accordant political “philosophy” Zionism, I highly recommend Gilad Atzmon’s “The Wandering Who.”

IMO, Judaism is the creation of the AI construct (possibly associated with the Draco reptilians) that has targeted Earth for thousands of years as part of “its” program of conquest in this sector of the universe. The idea of a “chosen” people is the ultimate expression of what Eckhart Tolle has called the psychopathology of the “garden variety ego.” The ego (everyone experiences the challenges of this phenomenon) is a sub-routine running in the mind that creates itself as some “thing” separate from all-that-is, and sets up military-grade psychological defense mechanisms to protect its illusion of separation. It has no interest or care for any other being it necessarily sees as separate from itself, except for the advantages that being can provide for its strategies of self-preservation, control and ego-gratification (imaginary psychological states).

Judaism was adopted by the Turkic Khazarian Kaganate in the second half of the the first millenium (which timeline may not be accurate, another story entirely) for the creation of political advantages and the pre-eminence of their empire over their neighbors. The psychopathology of the “chosenness” hook in the Judeo-tribal identity complex seems to have eventually dominated their mindsets. When the Khazars were eventually overrun by the Turkic Russ empire toward the end of the first millennium, the “religious” leaders of Khazar society refused to capitulate and be assimilated by the Russian culture.

It’s my theory that from the time of their defeat as an empire, elements of the Khazarian “shtetel” leadership operated an underground “secret council” that eventually spread throughout the lands populated by the Khazarian diaspora (i.e. Ashenazi Jews). IMO, this secret council created Sabbatean Judaism, the Rothschild financial empire, with its powerful intelligence arm that eventually emerged publicly as the Mossad, as well as the Bavarian Illuminati (with its connections to the Jesuits, another possible project of the proposed Khazarian secret council). The Illuminati went underground and penetrated all of the secret societies of the West, turning them to the task of implementing the grand agenda of world conquest.

Again IMO, The Protocols are an accurate reflection of the thinking of the secret council, leaked, intentionally (as part of their “religion’s” tenet of announcing their intentions – “predictive programming”), or not. The eerie accuracy of the way history has followed the path of implementation of The Protocols throughout the 20th Century to today, and the ways in which the strategies evident within the Global Imperium (the UN, Agenda 21, Social Marxism, domination of banking, the surveillance state, etc. ad nauseum) are a powerful indication of the reality of The Protocols.


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A Conversation on “Gender Identity”

This is a set of comments on an article on Alternet: “White House to Public Schools: Let Students Use Whatever Bathroom They Want” (http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/obama-administration-directs-public-schools-let-students-use-whatever-bathroom-they) between myself and “FreethinkingWorldGuy,” inspired by one of his several comments below the article:

You characterize a call for sensible treatment of school kids “liberal self-righteousness”? So what should Obama do in your opinion? Send the schools a note urging them to continue creating similar “bathroom laws” around the country? Or just keep quiet, allowing disruptions and problems that these anti-transgender laws are causing to spread?
My first response, to comment above: @FreethinkingWorldGuy – Hey, kewl screenname, dood. Creates just the right impression to earn you a pass from the politically correct sheeple.

What should Obama do? Well, how about remaining within the bounds of the Constitution which clearly does not grant the authority to legislate to the “Unitary Presidency?” Not even the Congress has the power to dictate such policy to the 50 sovereign states. Are you down with creating One Big Brother Over All to dictate to us everything we can do to the End Of Time, amen?

Glad you like my screename! Weird stuff about what my it can do for me, but you’re certainly free to have your own opinion about that.

But to the matter at hand…

So is your beef with Obama is that he’s legislating unlawfully by sending the memo to schools? Not seeing it. Where do you stand re: the notorious “bathroom laws”?

Re: Big Brother, no, I’m a big privacy fan, which is EXACTLY why I am glad to see Obama taking a position and step to protect the privacy of school children.

I’m getting the sense that it is YOU who likes the idea of Big Brother–in the form of public school teachers and staff–policing children’s choice of bathroom.

Me: You seriously think that children have a problem with their choice of bathroom, do you? Like they thought it up on their own, just like they independently started worrying about what their “choice of gender” should be? So, then there’s no agenda going on to influence children’s identities, to keep them confused, to keep them on the Common Core bandwagon so they grow up confused about who they are or even how to think? So then the Fed administration has every right to dictate what people in all the 50 states have to do about their bathroom habits to protect the masses of poor suffering cross-gender kids and protect them from the mean local populations, school boards, teachers and staff?

Right, got you.

In general, no, I don’t think children have a problem with their choice of bathroom. For transgender people (including children), they didn’t have a problem either–until we started seeing “bathroom bill” laws pop up.

It is true that most of us self-identify with gender to match our anatomy. But it doesn’t line up that way for everyone. I discard black-and-white thinking about necessity that gender match anatomy for 100% of the population, or that gender identity is a choice.

There is a growing body of science to explain why alignment doesn’t always line up, and I have seen a number of compelling cases where children–even at a very young age (e.g. 4), self-identify with the opposite sex, regardless of efforts by some to “correct” them. Transgender people are clear about their own gender identity, regardless of some who might believe and/or claim to the contrary.

“So then the Fed administration has every right to dictate what people in all the 50 states have to do about their bathroom habits to protect the masses of poor suffering cross-gender kids and protect them from the mean local populations, school boards, teachers and staff?”

The concepts of equal treatment, including freedom from discrimination, goes to the very core identity of the United States, in particular as is laid out in the US Constitution. The 50 states you refer to should NOT be allowed to write laws that burden any group of people based on religion, race, sex, or gender. Moreover, the 50 states do, to varying degrees, accept federal funds–to the tune of many billions of dollars. Federal Title IX funds specifically forbids gender-based discrimination.

You write like there would be no fallout from “bathroom bill” laws. There already has been, and it will get worse if it isn’t nipped in the bud. Again, they cause problems were the weren’t any before.

@FreethinkingWorldGuy -You write like there would be no fallout from the increasingly arrogant actions of the clearly illegitimate Federal Administrative System which is increasingly normalizing its violations of the Constitution, of the American revolutionaries’ clear intention that the newly minted States were each nations in their own rights, and of due process.

“Transgender people are clear about their own gender identity, regardless of some who might believe and/or claim to the contrary.” While this may be true for adults, your assertion that 4 year olds are clear on this is, I’m quite sure, not backed up by anything but the writings of some psychiatrists and psychologists who are enrolled in the social engineering matrix of globalism and social engineering. Their “studies” and the “growing body of science” you tout are highly subjective and far from scientific.

In my personal experience, my next door neighbor was seduced by gay men on our block as a young teenager and “decided” that he was gay. My observation at the time was that this led to extreme difficulties, suffering, and confusion for him, and to the destruction of his family of origin. He was far from clear about how to manage the direction of his life.

“The concepts of equal treatment, including freedom from discrimination, goes to the very core identity of the United States, in particular as is laid out in the US Constitution.” Really? You, of course, are referring to where slaves are legitimized and deemed to count as 3/5 of a human being for the purpose of representation in Congress. Or perhaps you’re talking about the Native Americans, who were largely exterminated? The idea of “not burdening” people on the basis of “gender” is, I think, extremely strained, and has become weaponized against the stability of our cultures and of the family unit upon which the strength of human culture depends. The “government” cannot succeed in building strong human families, and, I think, has no intention to do so.

Your observation that the states are now dependent on Federal funding is very true and particularly insidious. This is, I think, by design. The Fed Admin. has access to essentially limitless hot money from the bankers at the Federal Reserve, borrowed against the will of the people, who will have no choice but to be saddled with this debt, to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars owed by American babies at birth. This hot money is also a weapon against honest Americans, and the working and middle classes are being driven by it to the wall. To force “gender equality,” a concept which is amorphous and ambiguous at best upon us as a consequence of a criminally distorted financial system is both tragic and wicked. If this is what you espouse as being a matter of course and something that is “good for us,” then I think you are complicit in this criminality.

“To force ‘gender equality,’ a concept which is amorphous and ambiguous at best upon us as a consequence of a criminally distorted financial system is both tragic and wicked.”

You are muddying up a lot of things here. So let’s sort things out, shall we? First of all, the primary issue that we disagree on is gender identity. Apparently, you believe that that is black-and-white, cut and dry. And you know what? For some people it is. But for others it is not. And here’s a kicker for you on that: Variation on this is NATURAL. It’s not, as you believe, linked to a “criminally distorted financial system”.

I stated earlier that transgender people are not confused about their gender identity, which is counter to what you believe. To be fair, I’ll admit that I oversimplified that a bit; there are some people who actually do go through a process of development and discovery, regarding gender their own identity and sexuality. And some people actually identify partly with BOTH genders. The main difference between you and I on this matter is that while you see this as confusion, I accept it as within normality of the human condition. People get confused when their instinct re: gender identity leads them (naturally) to have certain feelings and inclinations, but outside influences are telling them that such feelings are wrong. I could point you to science and/or case studies backing up early gender identity, but when you say things like:

“While this may be true for adults, your assertion that 4 year olds are clear on this is, I’m quite sure, not backed up by anything but the writings of some psychiatrists and psychologists who are enrolled in the social engineering matrix of globalism and social engineering”,

It is clear to me that you see everything through the prism of conspiracy. So I won’t bother.

“ ‘The concepts of equal treatment, including freedom from discrimination, goes to the very core identity of the United States, in particular as is laid out in the US Constitution.’ Really? You, of course, are referring to where slaves are legitimized and deemed to count as 3/5 of a human being for the purpose of representation in Congress. Or perhaps you’re talking about the Native Americans, who were largely exterminated?”


You’re going to bring up the 3/5 slave compromise and horrendous treatment of American Indians in the context of a contemporary discussion on gender identity? Okay, let me spell it out for you: The 3/5 compromise was bad (though not as bad as NO representation) and the treatment of Indians was horrible. At least we agree on this, right? We also seem to agree on perils of national debt, and likely on some areas of mismanagement by the federal government. But those topics can be discussed separately from a discussion about gender identity.

Me: “You are muddying up a lot of things here. So let’s sort things out, shall we? First of all, the primary issue that we disagree on is gender identity. Apparently, you believe that that is black-and-white, cut and dry. And you know what? For some people it is. But for others it is not. And here’s a kicker for you on that: Variation on this is NATURAL. It’s not, as you believe, linked to a “crim inally distorted financial system”.”

How is it apparent that I think gender identity is cut-and-dried? I know that it is a very difficult issue and experience for many. However, I also think that it has become a wedge issue for cultural Marxists who deliberately want to damage, particularly children, in order to destabilize and engineer society.

I do think that we humans are stronger if we cultivate our health, and that we are stronger when we accept our true gender at birth. When we accept our bodies as they are, we have access to biological guidance of our feelings and impulses. When children are actively encouraged, or even forced, to question their “inner gender preference” at the expense of actually experiencing who they are, that tragic outcomes potentially eventuate. It seems obvious that such outcomes actually may threaten the survival of humanity, and certainly threaten the well-being of society and culture.

I also think it should be obvious that “gender identity” is not an appropriate matter for government to arrogate powers over. Creating the synthetic idea that psychological gender identity rises to the levels of race or real gender as far as the need for protections of equality is, I think, a weaponized concept being fed to the population with powerful propaganda which constitutes real violence.

“Government” did push and protect slavery and genocidal violence against Native Americans when it served the interests of power. I don’t think it’s a stretch to question whether what is now being done with psychological gender identity is not the promotion of real damage against Americans in the interests of elite power. And the primary tool these interests are using to dispossess and cripple their “subjects” is the criminally distorted financial system. Keeping the sheeple confused, at odds with themselves, unable to think critically, and identified with cultural Marxist themes serves the interests of our owners in maintaining their abilities to harvest our wealth (and if you think this isn’t what’s happening, I welcome your alternative analysis and the evidence to back that up). I think it is of a piece.

You seem to imply that anyone looking through “the prism of conspiracy” is unworthy of being engaged in your laser-targeted debate on gender identity. But how do you think that “the national debt” came to be? How do you think 6 (or 5) corporate conglomerates have come to control 95% of the information that people in the West consume? (and what is the monumental effect of that?) If you think this has arisen by accident, then there is clearly little ground to continue a conversation.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment