Wednesday, July 1, 2015

Sensing Through Inference

We could learn from the mental processes that have come to accept the existence of dark matter as a probable fact. Not that they are irrefutable, rock-hard evidences; the best that can be achieved are strong, circumstantial evidences that it is there, and coupled with that is a lack of viable alternatives. Again, I come back to the argument for the Aether as being the medium by which all wave energies propagate throughout the universe, and that the Aether is the dark matter. This fits well in my view.

But this methodology needs to be extended and applied to other areas. One of the beginning points is in the old saying, "If it walks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, and it looks like a duck, then the chances are pretty good that it's a duck." So, unless otherwise proven, we need to take it for a duck.
In her works, Barbara Tuchman has shown herself to be a foremost historian. I ate up The Guns of August and Stillwell and the American Experience in China and will probably read them again as any opportunity allows me to do so. But if I have a disagreement, it is in the way in which she handled the subject matter in The March of Folly. Definitely this is a book that needed to be written; I know of no other researcher who tackled the idiotic blunders committed by the leaders in mankind's past. But in the conclusions and commentaries she comes to a statement that I find  rather childishly weak; one of, could they not see the error of their colossal mistakes? She is not alone. Far too many of us gaze in awe and wonder at the apparent flubs coming down from the top; it is one of the tactics that the sons of darkness use against us, and its systems remain workable because of the unwillingness to consider something of a circumstantial definition. Not in one place in her book does the writer speculate about secret societies, shadow governments, and (or) hidden cabals that can, and do, intentionally manipulate leaders and governments into no-win situations. The figureheads in the light are not without fault, that is to be sure, but the causes of such bizarre idiocy as Vietnam and the whacky behavior of the popes leading up to the Protestant Reformation could not have been made possible without the secret ones undermining the places of leadership from places of darkness. Connected to the statements concerning dark matter, this line of belief makes more sense; conversely, the alternative of a group of highly educated people causing the same sort of catastrophic flops over thousands of years makes no sense as a position to take.

In the Bible I'm sure there was much more behind Rehoboam's suicidal declaration. He knew that his father, Solomon, had overtaxed and overworked his people. This was a king, and possessed of the highest education that he could get for his time. Only if he were blackmailed or otherwise coerced would he have promised to make the burdens of his people even heavier. We can hop all about during the times of history: Harry Truman was a 33rd degree Freemason. For him to say that he didn't perceive how the CIA would become tyrannical and trample on the Constitution (years after he started its charter, much later when it was convenient to say so) should nauseate us. But, if he had been approached by a secret group, one that had—from the darkness—set him up as the Vice President, and one that had assassinated his predecessor so he could come into power—then it becomes logical to think that he was manipulated. And in an examination of Lyndon Johnson, if he participated in the conspiracy that killed John Kennedy, it follows that he could have been coerced by the threat of disclosure. If we consider this then it should come as no surprise that the military industrial complex was able to run wild in Vietnam. And the same goes for Nixon: if he was a participant in the Murchison house meeting in Dallas on the eve before JFK was murdered; the same group of people could have directed him as well. Further, Gerald Ford was (I believe) culpable in that he fudged some of the autopsy evidence but, by degrees, the situation had for the most part played itself out in Southeast Asia by the time he shut down that huge moneymaker. (Besides Ford becoming president, as another possible pay-off we have a minor lawyer, Arlen Specter, coming up with that weird and unbelievable "Single Bullet Theory" and then later becoming a United States Senator.)

We should thank the Freemasons for our American independence. Their organization clandestinely manipulated the powers of England, even going so far as to corrupt the king with their "Hell Fire Club." They are the ones who invented the term "United Nations," and they are foursquare behind the movement toward a "New World Order." They have no flags or country and have loyalty, first and most importantly, to their fellow members while having an agenda that probably stands apart from every country in the world. Besides France there could very well have been other governments that were sacrificed to their ideals.

I know that in America the masses tend to think of the leaders in unflattering terms. This is a trap; they need to get off of this perception of the higher levels of leaders and authorities as being somehow dumb or stupid. Those at the top are, in fact, brilliant; it's just that they are very adept at pretending to be dumb. In their education they learned how to be absolutely amoral in the pursuit of victory, and they learned how to be actors and actresses functioning in scripted roles, without once facing the fact that acting and lying are the same things. I guarantee that when any of them says that he doesn't know about something or that he doesn't understand something else, he is lying. The best course of action on our part is to believe that he knows and understands far more than you or I do. But it is precisely due to this continuation of theatrical duplicity that these people will, at times, step out of line and become prey to blackmail. It is part of the game that the power-brokers will only get behind a potential client if they can control him. This usually means some indiscretion in his past, something that the handler knows about but the wider public is unaware of.

As a power statement it still is effective to give the impression that "we" of the accepted higher level can do something, but you cannot. In the trial of Charles Manson, Vincent Bugliosi obtained a conviction based mostly upon circumstantial evidences. In effect, this is the same as saying that the prosecutor had a conspiracy that he was sure of. The spirit of evil will throw around the term "Conspiracy Theory" when it suits its purposes, but we must always remember that it is the establishment that stands to gain by keeping us away from the truth. Having no compunction standing in the way of lying as evinced by a modus operandi stretching back thousands of years, it is at them that we must aim the bullhorn and shout loudly, "Prove it!"

No comments:

Post a Comment