I am going to share an email from Investor Nick O Connell. For all I know he is my Facebook pal Martin Revans best mate. But before I do here are some 20th century facts
1 .China is run by the Lee Dynasty (1 of the 13) under House of Rothschild
2 Chairman Mao ( he was after all just a teacher) was a " creation of Tavistock Training in Paris" as was Stalin in the U.K. And Hitler we think trained 1913.
3. Mao was all about supremacy and starved millions to raise the funding for literal world takeover. Particularly eventful are the late 50s early 60s famine and then the cultural revolution from 1966.
4. So when he began amassing his troupes on China's borders to begin a swoop in Europe it was very very serious. ( read Mao by Jung Chang)
5. I was in Darmstadt 74)and Mother Basilea Schlink knew about this. If you understand what Rees Howells was doing in Wales to bring down Hitler Mussolini and Stalin to hold the world open for the gospel you will understand why Basilea left Darmstadt while I was there to lock horns with Mao in the Spirit. ( this is thirdlevel Christian stuff)
6 What completely floored all of us living then , though nearly nobody in our countries knew how close it had been.... was the sudden turn.
Next thing we knew Mao was having a cup of tea with Nixon and Kissinger.
This is so momentous there is an opera all about it .
7 Now we know about the Illuminati being the puppet masters we know their message was.....
Hey Mao, if you will just hold off you can have what you wish for without bloodshed!!! By the end of the century you will start to take over financially.
8 we saw the start of that in manufacturing providing mass outsourcing for the whole planets goods. But now we have come to the banking takeover Read Nicks report:
You’ll start to see more Chinese language signs at UK airports, hotels, shopping centres and train stations...
Your grandkids will learn Mandarin instead of French. (The number of British schools teaching the main Chinese language has doubled since 2005...)
You’ll see more ‘Hotcha’ outlets in your town centre and fewer McDonalds...
Chinese movies will hold their world premieres in Leicester Square... and you’ll know who all the lead actors are...
Ford dealerships will close... and be replaced by Baojun and Great Wall showrooms...
This is just a taste of what could happen in the next nine years, according to this engaging new report...
Behind it all is a highly controversial prediction.
It’s not going to please our American friends.
The report predicts that Britain will side with China in its battle with the U.S. for global economic supremacy...
The Chinese have embarked on a plan to kill off the U.S. dollar – or at least, to end its tenure as the “global reserve currency” – and replace it with their currency, the Renminbi.
No real surprise there.
The real surprise is that Britain will hold the ‘smoking gun’, so to speak.
This is all set out in the report... exactly how it’s going to happen... basically China will flood the City of London with up to £6 TRILLION in Renminbi as huge infrastructure trade deals are settled here in the U.K over the next decade.
You can’t really turn down that kind of cash.
Especially as it will – according to the report – push up UK listed commodities and banking stocks to DOUBLE where they are now... and send the British property market soaring...
...all before 2026.
That’s where you come in.
It turns out, you might rather like living in ‘Red Britain’...
Go here to find out exactly how you’ll benefit...
Sincerely,
Nick O’Connor
Publisher, Capital & Conflict
It is clear that at the request of Jesus we are one with Him, the Father and with each other - sharing the divine nature. To say those facts is a good start. This is comparable to anything learned or acquired in life - when the understanding goes from your head to your heart – when you become the words you speak – when you wake up one day and can say with full assurance “I am Him in my world” – the vessel has now become the treasure and the branch has now become the vine. You are Him to those in need.
Then, curiously, you stop asking yourself about your “nature”. You now understand that you are now much more than your nature. You are the complete and total person you were created to be. You can stop the introspection and self-improvement program and look out to your needy and heartbroken world and be the healer and the lover you were created to be.
For me these thoughts make the question of one nature or two fade away. It’s not really important to me. I think what fuels the debate of “two natures” – “dog versus dog”, is what happens when you feel tempted or really take a fall into something that you later consider to be “wrong”. It happens. Do you think that Jesus ever had those thoughts? Did He say, “Could I have been more loving or more understanding today?” Or, “Did I just sin when I cleared out the temple with a whip?”
Human Nature VII
“And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting: And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables…” John 2.14-15
In today’s world Jesus would have been sentenced to at least two years in state prison for the assault and battery. He actually got crucified – but the point is that today the police would have arrested Him immediately and taken Him to jail. The much bigger question is – do you think Jesus considered “that is just my ‘old Adamic’ nature rising up and I have to get it under control?” I doubt it. Certainly at this point in His life He saw Himself as a unified Person expressing only Divine Nature as His true Self. Does this mean that He was irresponsible for His actions? Am I advocating irresponsibility? My answer is absolutely “no” on both counts.
The fact that Jesus expressed His anger was not because he has two natures at war within Him and the “lower” nature took over. He expressed His anger because He was angry, period. That’s not so strange, is it? But if we express anger or otherwise do something “sinful” we assume that that is our “flesh” or our “old Adamic nature” or our “old man” – or anything, really, to deny the fact of the truth of our Divine Nature
Human Nature VIII
Now, what about the old “Adamic/Sinful Nature”? Is there such a thing? Does it apply to us? Can a person have two natures operating at the same time? There is much said, to the effect, that Christians have two natures but the rest of the world does not. The theory that a person can have two natures at one time has deep roots in Christianity. Having deeps roots doesn’t necessarily make it so.
Remember your “nature” is your operating system. It is the life that you express. We know for certain that we have the Divine Nature. . “… ye might be partakers of the divine nature … ” [2 Peter 1.4] “Partake” means to “share or participate”.
The question remains – is the rest of the world unified, one-nature beings and is it just Christians who are a hybrid of good and evil, fighting a daily battle to do good and avoid evil?
Jesus never defined anyone in those terms – ever. He did however have very harsh words for those He considered hypocrites. “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.” [John 8.44] But, what did Jesus say about the rest of us?
Human Nature IX
So, how did Jesus deal with the question of nature? With the hypocrites, His words were harsh and to the point. He angered those who later murdered Him. He stated, “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.” [John 8.44]
Now, it could be interpreted that the statement “of your father the devil” means that they are “containers” of sinful nature. He didn’t actually use that terminology. None-the-less he was definitely making a point to both the Pharisees and those within earshot – what they do and say is wrong, evil and not to be followed.
He never spoke of the rank and file in such negative terms. But what did Jesus have to say, virtually, to all others, most definitely including you and me? He said, “Ye are the salt of the earth…” [Matt. 5.13] And right after He said, “Ye are the light of the world.” [Matt. 5.14] We have no way of knowing if Jesus personally knew all the people of which He made these blanket statements. We have no way of knowing if each and every one of them had read the Four Spiritual Laws. [I’m kidding – Rev. Bright was not born yet] We don’t know if each and every one of them prayed the “sinner’s prayer”. [Assuming it had been invented yet – probably not]. We don’t know if each and every one had “received Jesus and their personal Lord and Savior”. [Assuming such terminology was used back then – probably not] So what was Jesus talking about when he called you and me salt and light?
Human Nature X
So what did Jesus mean when he called us “salt of the earth” and “light of the world”? Was He talking about our nature? Contrast that with what Paul talked about in Romans Seven. Is Paul contradicting Jesus by saying that we are “really” the “salt and pepper” of the earth? Is Paul saying we are the “light and dark” of the world? I think we can rest assured that Paul is not contradicting Jesus and not talking about our nature.
In the early church, Paul’s time, just as today, there is pervasive and persuasive influence that what was started with faith should now be completed with law – rules, regulations, and “way of life”. “Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?” [Gal. 3.3] But, Paul is not talking about our nature. We are unified persons expressing the divine nature in us. Paul is talking about the experience that we all go through that brings us back to the Savior’s Cross.
Generally speaking we all commence our life of faith with a moment of faith in Him. What we don’t know, at that time, is how complete that moment of salvation – redemption – reconciliation really is. In absolute reality, in that moment of our own personal history we experience the truth of Galatians 2.20 - ”I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.”
We use this phrase often – “human nature” – but I’m not sure we adequately define it. What is “human nature”? Is it simply the way we react and respond to the world, or to our own emotional or psychological state? Or is it something deeper? Are we limited or constrained by our “human nature”? Are we at odds with it and are forced to fight against it? Or, do we even have a nature at all?
Some say we have no independent nature and are simply containers or conduits of the nature of another. Some say we have two natures at work in us at the same time.
This is confusing. But, this is important. This question can never be adequately answered because you can’t see your nature the way you can see other parts that make you human – your nose for instance, although many can see no further. You can only “see” expressions or products of your nature – assuming you have one. You can see and feel and experience different things that give you some indication of “nature” – but you will never actually see your nature.
Why is this important – nature – none, one or two? Well, we spend a lot of time talking about our nature and trying to change it – or deal with it – or explain it away – or, perhaps, just trying to ignore it – but you will never really ignore it.
Human Nature II
I know a discussion of “human nature” is controversial. I knew it would be and hesitated for some time to start this discussion – but off we go.
Since, as I said in part one, “nature” cannot be seen with the eyes; to some extent we will never really know the answer to this question – no nature – one nature – or – two natures. But this is not math. This question cannot be answered or proven like two plus two equals four. Thankfully that is not the point. The point is that each and every one of us must answer this question sufficiently for ourselves. Because, unless and until we get our answer, personally – then we spin in circles and fight fights that waste our time and the resources of the Kingdom.
In a very real sense we must wrestle and prevail as Jacob when he wrestled all night and prevailed against some unknown man. [Gen. 32.24-25] As I understand the literal truth of this odd story, Jacob had a question – he wrestled with his question until he got his answer. I suggest he wrestled with his identify in Christ – although, of course, he did not use that terminology. There are times in life when we must wrestle with our own identity in Christ until we prevail and get our answers – and we do and we will.
Answering this question about nature – your nature is a question that we must wrestle with until our answer comes.
Human Nature III
No “nature” – one “nature” – two “natures” – which one? Of course the biggest problem is that in the Bible you can find support for any position you like – on any subject.
Let’s start with a definition – “nature”. Basically “nature” is how a thing, or in this case a person, operates – known usually by observing characteristics, qualities and temperament. But, of course there’s more. Presumably every living being has a nature. And, it’s important that that is so. Without a “nature” life would be absolutely unpredictable and it would be almost impossible to function.
I think we got past the first question – yes we do have a “nature”. For the most part people and things behave in a fairly predictable manner – according to their “nature”. Consider if every day you woke up and were unsure how you or others would react and respond in everyday situations. Of course that doesn’t happen. Things and people act and react and live very predictably - according to their “nature”.
But, before we decide how many natures we have operating at the same time, first we should decide where our nature comes from. That shouldn’t be so tough to figure out. As they say “the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree’. Who’s our tree? Who planted our seed? Where did He get the seed from?
Human Nature IV
Well, He is our tree. He both is our seed and He planted our seed. We are created in His likeness and in His image [Gen. 1.26] – and more so in Christ. Is our nature “independent” or ’’dependent”? I’m not sure how anything or anyone can be truly “independent” of Him. He created all and is the source of all. “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.” John 1.3
Back to why it is so important that this question of “nature” be laid to rest. My personal position is that I am one unified person. An old missionary [NPG are his initials] once said, to the effect –“when you see someone, you don’t say I see a ‘body’ – you say I see a “person’”. So I say – I’m just a person. I don’t say I’m a body, soul and spirit. I don’t say I’m a person with one nature fighting against another nature. I’m just a person. I am a redeemed and reconciled person. I am saved and justified – but a person, none-the-less.
So long as we are unsure of our person or our nature our focus is inward and that is not profitable for the Kingdom. We must put this question to rest and cease the self-examination and look outward - “Say not ye, There are yet four months, and then cometh harvest? behold, I say unto you, Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest.” John 4.35
Human Nature V
Did Jesus wrestle with the question of His human nature? Of course He did. There is no human issue that He did not address, confront and resolve for Himself. His nature was certainly one of those issues. But once He came to the point where He could say – “I and my Father are one” [John 10.30] – this issue was resolved for Him.
What did He pray for us? “And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: “[John 17.22] There should be no doubt that Jesus’ prayer was fulfilled. “… ye might be partakers of the divine nature … ” [2 Peter 1.4]
Now, we can talk about humans as containers or expressers – and so we are. But this terminology is conceptual and used as a teaching tool, and is by no means the end of the discussion. “But we have this treasure in earthenvessels …” [2 Cor. 4.7] But, we are not really “earthen vessels” – we are really persons. “I am the vine, ye are the branches”. [John 15.5] But again, we are not really “branches” - we are really persons. The concept is over – the teaching tool no longer needed - when the understanding is gained in your heart – that understanding that we are more than what we may appear – we are the very human expression of Him – with His divine nature.
This is part of Rand Swift's series and contains one nugget to get hold of
I include Rand's segment because it is relevant.
psalm 22 I will tell of Your name to my brethren;
In the midst of the assembly I will praise You.
Hebrews 2
But now we do not yet see all things subjected to him.
Jesus Briefly Humbled
9 But we do see Him who was made [j]for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.
10 For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to perfect the [k]author of their salvation through sufferings. 11 For both He who sanctifies and those who are [l]sanctified are all from one Father; for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren, 12 saying,
“I will proclaim Your name to My brethren,
In the midst of the congregation I will sing Your praise.”
I will tell of your Name/ I will proclaim your Name to My brethren
When we gather in the Name of Jesus, Jesus comes Himself by the Holy Spirit and proclaims to us a feature or Name or characteristic of who He or the Father is.
Every gathering is different. Every gathering has a Divine purpose. Like a course of bricks Jesus lays a revelation, real substance in our spirits and in our souls concerning who God is.
He is literally doing the proclaiming Himself among us. We should expect this, because He finds it quite normal to be among His brethren since we are all of the same Father.
Exciting no? And we live from that aspect of His Name that He reveals. If you are on Facebook check out this Song about God's Name
https://www.facebook.com/VoicesofLeeOfficial/videos/10155461577333627/
Heirarchy
Jesus is the Lord of Lords. This is the type of spiritual heirarchy we have to deal with in the heavenlies and on the earth., with fallen angels and those who conspire on earth and those who are involved by default by living from the natural mind.
From this Facebook page: The Truth is Now
THE TRUE CONSPIRACY EXPANDED
To say you don't believe in a conspiracy is to say you don't believe in the Bible.
(2Samuel 15:12, 2Kings 12:20, 14:19, 15:15, 17:4, 2 Chronicles 25:7, Jeremiah 11:9, Ezekiel 22:25, Matthew 26:3-4 & 14-16, Acts 23:13)
Not all conspiracy theories are valid but the few that are true, the Bible will tell us the answer for, Its called prophecy.
To believe anything I am about to say, you are required to believe there is a conspiracy and that it is indeed a demonic one whats more important than that is you must understand Lucifer himself is the very head of this great deception, is he not the prince of the Earth? ( John 14:30 )
You need to realise their is a conspiracy to destroy your Life, your family, your church, your state, the Government and a conspiracy for Lucifer to setup up a kingdom on the earth to rule over it through the Antichrist, just as the Bible prophecies.
Job 33:30 To bring back his soul from the pit, to be enlightened with the light of the living.
THE CONSPIRACY
------------------------------------------
LUCIFER, ( The limitless light of nothingness) ( Isaiah 14: 7-13)
THE SEVEN
1. Beelzebub
2. Mammon
3. Asmodeus
4. Aamon
5. Leviathan
6. Abaddon
7. Belphegor
This is where the tip of the pyramid breaks away from, the trapezoid. Look on the back of a dollar on the left side to understand this. The separation of the spiritual and physical.
SONS OF THE FALLEN
(The 9 unknown)
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
THE ENLIGHTENED
--------------------------------
THE ILLUMINATI
MAJESTIC 13
(13 Bloodlines)
1. Astor
2. Bundy
3. Collins
4. Dupont
5. Freeman
6. Kennedy
7. Li
8. Onassis
9. Reynolds
10. Rockefeller
11. Rothschild
12. Russell
13. Van Duyn
*Remaining Enlightened Families
* Luciferinist
* The Palladium
* High Level Bankers/ Politicians etc..
Religious Center.............Vatican City
Political Center...............London City
Military Center................Washington D.C.
ESOTERIC FREEMASONRY
327 Degrees
* Supreme Council of Grand Sovereign Inspector General
1. Ordo Templi Orentis
2. Ancient and primitive right
3. Order of the Trapezoid.
THE ENITIATES
-----------------------------------------
*ACCEPTED FREEMASONRY
33 Degrees
* Grand Sovereign Inspector General
* Shrine
* Scottish Rite
* York Rite
* Knights Templar
* Knights of Columbus
* Knights of Malta
* Occultist
1. Albert Pike
2. Manly P. Hall
3. Alister Crowley
4. Arthur Edward Waite
5. C.W. Ledbetter
6. W. Wynn Westcott
Etc... (All Masons)
*ROSACRUINISM
Confessio Fraternitatis
1. Thomas Payne
2. Abraham Lincoln
3. Victor Hugo
4. Walt Disney
5. Alexander Wilder
Etc...
*SKULL & BONES
1. William Howard Taft
2. Amoz Alonzo Stag
3. William Averill Harriman
4. Prescott Bush
5. Robert Lovett
6. Henry Luce
7. McGeorge Bundy
8. William F. Buckley Jr.
9. George HW Bush
10. John F. Kerry
11. George W. Bush
12. Stephen A. Schwarzman
13. Austan Goolsbee
14. H. J. Heinz II
Etc....
*PRIORY OF ZION
1. Jean De Gisors
2. Marie De Saint-Clair
3. Guillaume De Gisors
4. Edouard De Bar
5. Jeanne De Bar
6. Jean De Saint-Clair
7. Blanche D'Evreux
8. Nicholas Flamel
9. Rene D'Anjou
10. Lolande De Bar
11. Sandro Filipepi
12. Leonardo De Vinci
13. Connetable De Bourbon
14. Ferdinand De Gonzague
15. Louis De Nevers
16. Robert Fludd
17. J. Valentin Andrea
18. Robert Boyle
19. Sir. Isaac Newton
20. Sir. Charles Radclyffe
21. Charles De Lorraine
22. Maximilian De Lorraine
23. Charles Nodier
24. Victor Hugo
25. Claude Debussy
26. Jean Cocteau
ETC...
*BLACK POPE & JESUIT'S
1. Back Pope Adolfo Nicolas
2. St. Ignatius of Loyola
3. St. Francis Xavier
4. Blessed Peter Faber
5. St. Aloysius Gonzaga
6. St. Robert Bellarmine
7. St. Peter Canisius
8. St. Edmund Campion
Etc...
* POPE
Pope Francis
* CARDINALS & BISHOPS
1. Geraldo Majella Agnelo
2. Joachim Meisner
3. Domenico Bartolucci
ETC...
* CATHOLIC CHURCH
LARGE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
* PRESIDENTS & MILITARY LEADERS
DEMOCRACY & COMMUNISM
1. UNITED NATIONS
*CIA
*FBI
*FEMA
*NSA
*NASA
*ARMED FORCES
*EUROPEAN UNION
*TRILATERAL COMMISSION
* COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
*TELEVISION & ADVERTISING
* NEWS STATION
* NEWS PAPER
* RADIO
* CELEBRITIES
2. MEDICAL INDUSTRY
* Hospitals
* Obamacare
3. DRUG TRADES
* MAFIA
1. American Mafia
2. Russian Mafia
3. Yakuza
Etc...
* CARTELS
1. Zeta
Etc....
* GANGS
1. Bloods
2. Crips
3. MS13
Etc...
SMALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
* SCHOOL SYSTEM
1. No Child left behind
2. Public Schools
* POLICE FORCE
1. Highway Patrol
2. State Trooper
3. Sheriff
4. Swat
Etc...
* STATE MILITIA
1. National Guard
THE MASSES
----------------------------------------
EVERYONE ELSE
* Deceived and addicted to Sin
Although I still lack answers for the 9 unknown men I may have found a link through Helena Petrovna Blavatsky.
Did these events happen? Or did they happen in the way they were reported? And why do YouTube pull Roberts footage of Syria?
Former BBC journalist seems to be following in the well trodden path of John Pilger and others who seek to present truth.
Field Marshall McConnell of Abel Danger 2013 on the BBC, MI5, Jimmy Saville and pedophilia
"Tuesday, 26 November 2013
Was Sir Jimmy Savile an MI5 Asset?
Child abuse campaigner Charles Frith intelligently answers the question was Jimmy Savile an MI5 asset in the affirmative.
Of course Sir Jimmy Savile was an M15 Asset. But what is M15? how does it function? and what is its purpose?
M15, known as Five, is the UK security Service supposed to operate entirely within the UK.
One of their functions is to Vet people who may be given Security Clearance to view UK Secrets. That is secrets MI5 and the people who run the UK part of the international intelligence organization believe it is in their own interests to keep secret. And or otherwise MI5 propagate the fiction that they have enemies from whom secrets must be kept. One secret they want to securely keep is that the main enemy and prime target for MI5 is the British Public.
Yes Jimmy Savile was vetted by MI5 and given top clearance, he could be trusted to keep the secrets of the Police, Special Branch, MI5. the Royal Family, and Politicians like Margaret Thatcher, Peter Morrison and Leon Brittain and others. Savile was a rampant peadophile who exploited and procured children for the child sex trade and porn network. Sir Jimmy Savile was also famous and worked for the State funded and totally corrupt media propaganda arm of the security and intelligence services the BBC. The Telegraph revealed that files show the BBC's has secret links with the Security Service, and at one stage MI5 was responsible for vetting 6,300 different BBC posts - almost a third of the total workforce. All these attributes meant Jimmy Savile was totally under control and a perfect fully vetted intelligence asset.
Savile was also a close friend of the Royals, the rich and the famous and those with secret power such as soviet spy Anthony Blunt. Blunt blocked any investigation into Savile which had not been blocked lower down the chain of command.
The overall function of MI5 is to control the internal population, that is anyone living in the UK. They must prevent this 'internal enemy' from causing trouble to their masters. Their fictional Master is the UK Democratic Government and the high flying group of highly paid civil servants who allegedly support them. Their real masters are the elite behind the Central Banks and global big business. Their Masters business involves arms sales and development, mineral extraction such as gold, diamonds, gas and oil. Their Masters are big landowners and run the lucrative covert organised crime businesses of Drugs, Arms and Pornography.
One secret the Police and MI5 must prevent the British public finding out is that they now function as a secret arm of this global criminal organization and their original function of protecting the Realm and the public has long passed. How do they keep this from innocent insiders and the public who pay them?
Officially it goes something like this, MI5 is the Political arm of the 'Security Services' they liaise through a group called BOX with , what used to be called, Special Branch, the political wing of the Civil Police. This is the open structure.
Secretly the civil police work closely with the MI5 and police officers, in the know, are often seconded to MI5 and visa versa. It is quite disarming to propagate the illusion that there are many independent levels to an organization, by this tactic one level can blame the other with impunity. Those running the show the 'controllers' can then arrange with insiders on each level how they will collectively play out the latest game. All this play acting, funded by the public purse, fools the general public into giving their trust to this amoral and corrupt group of individuals who laugh at the public's naivety.
Of course their are some strategic problems. The organization of so many 'secret agents' cannot be done openly. Memos and orders cannot simply be passed because this paper trail could be exposed. Further the army of people within Police and Security ranks who know nothing about their 'secret masters' and the overall objective have to be kept totally in the dark.
This is where secret societies and clubs like the Freemasons come in handy because agents from the different branches of the organization can meet without 'ringing any bells' It is because of this method of communication that anyone in public office who is a member of any secret or secretive society or group is suspect
So how does all this fit in with Sir Jimmy Savile, systematic child abuse, child trafficking and pornography?
Jimmy Savile was a MI5 Asset, he was untouchable because he secretly worked for the most dangerous secretive criminal organization in the UK. This organization operates under the umbrella of MI5 and the Police and its criminal bosses have immense power and unlimited public money to play with. They can protect anyone they choose to protect and enrich anyone they choose to make rich whilst they can also jail anyone they choose to jail and bankrupt anyone they choose to bankrupt.
So Jimmy Savile was untouchable! Then a few former residents from Duncroft Approved threatened to expose a system which had been hidden for years. So what does the criminal organization do? They plan a controlled exposure. They planned to expose Jimmy Savile themselves and throw a few people who are expendable to the wolves such a Max Clifford, and Stuart Hall. It also has the added advantage of scaring anyone who might brake ranks. It sends a very powerful message to insiders "we can bring anyone down no matter how rich or well known".
With a controlled exposure they had to protect the Elite, who are either part of the board of directors or still useful to them. So they arrange a theatrical display for the gullible publics consumption. Enter Lord Alistair McAlpine and the BBC orchestrated theatrical. They had no intention of arresting or prosecuting anyone on the protected list and the various 'inquiries' instituted around that time are designed to placate the public conscience and make it look as if they actually care about abused children. Which of course they do not!
This criminal organization has agents littered throughout the structures of British society, especially in the criminal justice system, local and national Government and the Police. But what they do not know is how many of their agents are infiltrators or double agents working to replace the existing organization with an alternative old style intelligence, group.
Insiders say "One thing you can reply on is their arrogance" It is this arrogance which will bring them down. Not everyone is prepared to believe their propaganda anymore. Millions of people are waking up to the truth. Pedophilia is not acceptable to use as a blackmail intelligence tool. Any person or organisation that can use the rape of children cynically and strategically is not fit to be in public office and in charge of public funds.
As the organizations size, power and madness grows it is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain the illusion that it is a force of law and order operating for the benefit of the UK and the public. Its cover stories are wearing thin and cracks are beginning to appear. Yesterday the IPCC called for a ban on Freemason police officers being involved in the Hillsborough investigation into the cover-up because of corruption concerns.
It is now time to restore sanity to our Police, Security and Intelligence services and have an Independent public Inquiry into the decades of child abuse cover-up. An Inquiry not headed by members of the damage limitation squad such as the judiciary or legal professionals but by whistle-blowers and those who have proven to be incorruptible."
How hazing works.
As part of Oxford hazing or some other ritual Cameron is meant to have had sex with a pig.
Whether true or not in this extreme form, obviously the person does not want this fact widely known, so his peers.Or those handling him have this over him. We do.not know the percentages but Greg Hallett says that most politicians are compromised in some serious way and he describes how the Clintons have a cottage for the purpose for world stage politicians.
This and other Google searchable articles describe the "networking advantages" of sororities and fraternities. From a third level Christian point of view this is advancement through cutting across the vertical alignment of relationship with God and superimposing the priority of horizontal relationships, and by it creating pathways and networks of relationships through all levels of society for all kinds of diabolical change without adherence to conscience.
This system is a milder form of the system adopted for raising children in Illuminati families, whose dynasties remain "pure" (to diabolical commitment) and date back to Greek civilisation and before. Counsellors now.refer to these practices as SRA or Satanic Ritual Abuse. Hazing is the much milder form but has also resulted in deaths and victims being grossly abused behaviourally psychologically or sexually.
College is a unique socialization experience. It’s the time when an individual is able to figure out who he or she is, as well as the type of friends he or she wants in his or her life. While Intramurals, clubs, athletics, and dorm-life are common ways of socializing, joining Greek-life –Fraternity or Sorority– is also popular among college students. Fraternities and sororities provide many benefits to students such as leadership opportunities, participation in college activities, friendships and extended connections with other chapters around the nation. Although popular, induction into Greek organizations has become a problem because of the practice of hazing. Hazing is defined as “…any activity, required implicitly or explicitly as a condition of initiation or continued membership in an organization, that may negatively impact the physical or psychological well-being of the individual or may cause damage to others, or to public or private property (Campo et. al., 2005, p. 137). According to Hoover and Milner (1998), “The attraction of hazing probably extends beyond the dictates of tradition, forging bonds through shared, secretive experiences. (The) rituals are thought to strengthen the group by proving the devotion of newcomers but also by helping to create a sense of loyalty” (p. 140). The effort to instill loyalty and devotion to the organization is pushed too hard sometimes. In essence, while fraternities and sororities offer a large social network for students and are beneficial to individuals’ growth, skills, and characteristics, hazing is a problem as it has negative consequences on an individual that simply strives to belong.
This paper studies hazing among Greek-organizations at a public liberal arts college in the Northeastern U.S. and its impact on individuals’ self-esteem. The paper proposes two hypotheses: first, individuals who experienced hazing will have lower self-esteem than those who have not experienced hazing; and second, fraternities haze more than sororities, based on personal observations in a small state college.
Perspectives on hazing
While membership in a Greek organization is typically seen in a positive light, some may wonder if the good outweighs the bad with respect to the potential risk of being hazed. Hazing is universally known as an initiation process that includes aggressive and harmful actions upon new members within Greek organizations, athletic teams and other types of clubs and activities. While hazing practices vary within organizations, there are some common hazing activities such as sleep deprivation, engaging in embarrassing behavior, drinking excessive amounts of alcohol, verbal and physical abuse, and much more (Cokley et al., 2001). These can impact a student negatively and hence it is important to be aware of potential negative implications.
Student attitudes about pledging
Social science research shows that hazing significantly influences people’s perspectives on Greek organizations, and has also affected new members both physically and cognitively. A number of researchers such as Cokley et al. studied the cognitive impact of hazing on students by surveying members and non members of organizations. For instance, Cokley et al. (2001) developed a Survey of Attitudes about Fraternities and Sororities (SAAP) to measure student perception about the role of pledging in Greek organizations. The survey focused on six factors that described attitudes towards Greek organizations: the purpose of pledging, the impact of pledging, conformity to pledging, rules, perceptions of Greek organizations, moral concerns, and beliefs about pledging difficulty.
The results of the survey showed that more females than males believed that pledging should be a positive experience. However, the results also showed that members of Greek organizations had a more positive view of Greek life and the pledging process in comparison to non-Greek students. The researchers concluded that “it is obvious that there are students who do value Greek letter organizations…likewise, it is apparent that when student’s perceptions of Greek letter organizations are uncritically positive, they become susceptible to hazing activities” (Cokley et al., 2001, par. 16). Hence, they argued that education about both the positive and negative aspects of Greek organizations should be given to all students, so that they can make a “fully informed decision about participation” (par. 16).
Similarly, Campo, Poulos, and Sipple (2005) studied how college students’ behaviors and beliefs correlated to hazing. They conducted a 20-minute web-based survey via e-mail using a random sample of 2,000 undergraduates. They used “specific questions on team-building and initiation activities (TBIs) and were derived from a national survey of college sports teams and university judicial board records” (p. 139). They found that drinking games and contests, as well as sleep deprivation, were the most commonly reported forms of hazing. Their results showed that students thought that hazing was in fact harmful, but they were neutral to their susceptibility to harm (p. 146). Campo et al.’s study concluded that “hazing is occurring on campus, although not always recognized as such by students” (p. 137).
Further, it has been observed that attitudes about hazing practices, especially alcohol overdose, may vary between fraternities and sororities. Drout and Corsono (2003) conducted an experimental study of student perceptions on alcohol overdose by placing them in hazing scenarios in a fraternity and sorority setting. The scenarios involved fraternities giving the students controlled and uncontrolled overdoses of alcohol consumption. Out of the 231 students, the 78 fraternity members within the study tended to view their fraternity president’s authority as not responsible for the outcome of involuntary alcohol consumption and viewed their brothers the same way. However, the 34 sorority members of the sample population took the scenarios more seriously. They felt more responsible for the overdose of alcohol consumption when the president was not involved. The researchers found that there were differences (not noted in the study) in beliefs on why overdoses occur among Greek and non-Greek individuals. Sororities and non-Greeks believe that it occurs because of a person’s need to be accepted into Greek-life, whereas fraternities believe that it occurs from a pledge’s over-willingness to please brothers. Overall, the researchers found that fraternities were more willing and accepting of alcohol overdose amongst the students than sororities or non-Greek students.
Another reason for hazing in organizations is group solidarity. Cimino (2011) studied hazing by surveying participants in strongly cooperative groups and weakly cooperative groups. He asked participants to picture themselves in high effort and low effort group activity and see if they were high or low contributors. The results were that participants desired more severe hazing in strong groups than in weak groups. In the second experiment he used the same model but improved the stimuli and removed threats to internal validity. In this experiment, participants were asked to focus on the benefits of “mutual group aid” (Cimino, 2011, p. 258). This group was found to desire more severe hazing in strong groups than in weak groups. Overall, these studies show that hazing is prevalent in Greek organizations and is practiced to maintain group solidarity. The practice can be harmful to its participants, though perceptions vary.
Impact of hazing on student self-esteem
Many cognitive processes could be negatively impacted due to hazing, such as self-esteem, moral and identity development. Though many students who decide to go through with the recruitment process perceive Greek organizations as beneficial, rarely do they consider the negative implications of hazing. Keating et al. (2005) state “striving to belong to a particular group, especially during ritualized initiations, may result in the justification of that effort, thereby inoculating individuals against any dissonant cognition they may harbor concerning the consequences of group membership” (p. 104). Especially when one is moving away from home for the first time, the idea of belonging and feeling accepted amongst one’s peers may triumph over any fears new pledges may initially face. While some may see the initiation process as harmful and overall negative, others may push aside this fear in order to actually raise their self-esteem and confidence amongst their peers. Through their study, however, Keating et al. (2005) found that both men and women who experienced “severe” induction activities were more likely to have an increased dependency on their fellow peers, feeling uncomfortable when left alone (p. 107).
Further, affiliation in Greek societies has no positive effects on individual identity. Kilgannon and Erwin’s (1992) study on the difference between non-Greek men and women’s moral and identity development vs. Greek men and women’s development showed that non-Greek men and women had higher self confidence. For instance, this study proved that non-Greek women had higher moral reasoning averages than Greek women. Also, Greek men scored lower confidence levels of identity development than non-Greek men. Grossbard et al. (2009) examined gender as a moderator of the association between contingent self-esteem and body image concerns, including weight and muscularity. Results of the study found that females reported higher levels of contingent self-esteem and greater concerns about their weight, although males reported a greater drive for muscularity.
Membership in Greek society undermines students’ self-esteem and this has other negative implications. For instance, it was seen that these students were pressured to live up to certain standards set by others to feel good about themselves. Liuna and Tao (2013) argue that acceptance in groups affects students’ self-esteem. The researchers believed that in the domain of academic competence and competition, contingencies of self-worth moderated the relationship between self-esteem and self-competence, and in the domains of appearance, family, virtue, and others’ approval, contingencies of self-worth moderated the relationship between self-esteem and self-liking. They defined contingencies of self-worth as “domains in which a person has based his or her self-esteem, such that perceived successes or failures in those domains greatly determine the person’s self-esteem state” (Liuna & Tao, 2013, p. 97). They concluded that individual importance is not the only means by which people satisfy their self-esteem needs.
The level of self-esteem impacted student misuse of alcohol, prejudices etc. Zeiger-Hill, Stubbs, and Madson (2013) claim that individuals who possess high levels of self-esteem consume less alcohol and experience fewer negative consequences than those with fragile self-esteem who relied on living up to certain standards in order to feel good about themselves. Crocker et al. (1987) stated that individuals who have lower self-esteem tend to be more prejudiced, for example in terms of failure feedback and derogation of members of out-groups. As a result, they concluded that individuals who had higher self-esteem would respond to threats to the self-concept by detracting from out-groups when group boundaries have evaluative implications.
These studies suggest that hazing affects student self-esteem and there are considerable differences between members of Greek societies. Based on the prior studies, we conducted research in a public liberal arts college to see who is most susceptible to hazing on campus and how hazing affects their self-esteem.
Method
This study was conducted in order to investigate if members of fraternities are more likely to experience hazing than members of sororities and assess whether hazing has an effect on students’ self-esteem levels. The participants in this research completed an electronic survey. The survey was designed to assess students’ self-esteem levels and their perceptions of hazing.
Participants in the sample were undergraduate students from a public liberal arts college in the Northern U.S. The survey was constructed using Qualtrics Research Suite, an online survey software that allows students to collect and analyze the data they receive. The survey link was distributed through college e-mail and on a social media website group page. Seventy-eight surveys were collected and recorded.
The researchers used a non-probability sampling technique called convenience sampling because of accessibility and time factors. Convenience sampling allows for a quick and inexpensive recruitment of respondents, allowing the researchers to collect as much data as necessary for the study in a short amount of time. Due to this limitation, the respondents may not represent all subgroups within the college’s student population.
Measures
At the beginning of the survey, participants were given an informed consent form. Participants were made aware that the primary aim of the project was to explore predictors of self-esteem. Given the sensitive nature of this subject, it is important for participants to know that their responses remain anonymous. Before beginning the survey, they were informed that their participation in this research project was voluntary, that they were allowed to withdraw at any time. The informed consent form also provided a quick overview of what the survey questions entailed. Participants were asked to complete several demographic questions and were then asked to complete the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale [RSES], in which they indicated their agreement or disagreement with each item (Sociology Department of University of Maryland, n.d). The paragraph also informed the participants that while there was no risk associated with their participation, if they had any questions or wished to receive the findings of the study, they would be able to contact the researchers. After submitting their responses, participants were then provided with a debriefing statement that informed them of the purpose of the study. Caution was also exercised with regards to ensuring that participants did not feel hurt or embarrassed, such cases were referred to the college’s counseling center.
After electronically signing the informed consent form, we asked demographic questions that assessed the participants’ gender, race, residential status, and involvement with Greek organizations. Following the demographic questions, RSES was implemented to evaluate students’ self-esteem. Participants were asked to rate their agreement with each question, varying from strongly agree to strongly disagree, without a neutral category. Regarding self-esteem, statements such as “I take a positive attitude toward myself” and “I feel that I am a person of worth, at least on equal plane with others” (isn’t this “an equal plane”) were included (Sociology Department of University of Maryland, n.d.). After the participants completed the RSES, they were presented with a scale that assessed their perceptions on harassment in general, with a few questions addressing hazing in particular. An example of a statement that addressed hazing was, “Even though hazing is a form of harassment, unless there is physical abuse, I would not consider it hazing” (Appendix A). For the final question of the survey, participants were given a list of different forms of harassment/abuse and were asked to check off the ones that they had experienced, with hazing being one of the choices.
Demographic profile
The research examined four characteristics: sex, race, residential status, and Greek affiliation. The sample consisted of 15 males (19%) and 63 females (81%) (Table 1). In regards to race, the sample consisted of 63 Caucasian participants (81%), 6 Latino or Hispanic participants (8%), 6 Asian or Pacific Islander participants (8%), 1 African American participant (1%), and 2 that classified themselves as “other” (3%) (Table 1). 53 participants live on campus (68%), and 25 participants are commuters (32%) (Table 1). As for Greek affiliation, 33 respondents are part of the college’s Greek Life, with 6 respondents belonging to a fraternity (8%) and 27 respondents belonging to a sorority (27%) (Table 2). 45 participants stated that they were not involved in any of the Greek organizations on campus (58%) (Table 2).
Results
The objective was to examine if members of fraternities are more likely to experience hazing when compared to members of sororities. Also of interest was whether hazing has an effect on students’ self-esteem levels. The researchers expected that the data would reveal that fraternities were more likely to haze their members than sororities, and that those affiliated with Greek organizations would have lower self-esteem due to hazing. The participants responded to statements that assessed self-esteem and experiences with multiple forms of harassment, including hazing.
Respondents were presented with the RSES to assess their self-esteem (Appendix A). The ten questions consisted of five positive and five negative expressions of self-esteem. Respondents were asked to rate their responses from 1 to 4, with 1 being strongly agree and 4 being strongly disagree. For this research, the researchers decided to recode the positive expressions so that responses would be 1 to 4, but 1 would be strongly disagree and 4 would be strongly agree. Overall, the 33 participants that were affiliated with Greek organizations had a higher self-esteem (33.42), and the 45 participants who weren’t had lower self-esteem (31.55) (Table 5). However, those who belonged to fraternities had a self-esteem average of 30.83, which was the lowest average compared to those who belonged in sororities (34.0) and those who were not affiliated with Greek organizations (31.56) (Table 6).
In addition, respondents were also presented with a checklist where they were given eight possible forms of abuse and were asked to select all that applied to their personal experiences. The eight possible choices that the participants could have selected were hazing, physical abuse, verbal abuse, involuntary behavior, forced alcohol consumption, humiliation, intimidation, and/or feeling degraded (Appendix A). 65 of the respondents stated that they had not experienced hazing while 13 of the respondents stated that they had. Those who stated that they had not experienced hazing had a self-esteem average of 32.876, while those who said that they had experienced hazing had a self-esteem average of 29.692, signifying that those who had said that they had experienced hazing had a lower self-esteem. The data revealed a significant relationship among the variables (p = .039, p < .05) (Table 4).
Next, the researchers decided to do a cross tabulation between Greek Affiliation and the checklist that signified their experiences with various forms of abuse. When asked if they had experienced hazing, 83.3% of the participants selected that they had not experienced hazing, which included 83% of those who belonged to a fraternity, 63% of those who belonged to a sorority, and 65.6% of those who were not affiliated at all. Only 1 fraternity member (16.7%), 10 sorority members (37.0%), and 2 non-Greek members (4.4%) selected that they had experienced hazing, making up 16.7% of the participants (Table 7). When asked if the participants had experienced physical abuse, 85.5% of the sample stated that they had not, with 100% of fraternity respondents, 92.6% of sorority respondents, and 84.4% of non-Greek affiliated respondents all falling under this statistic. Only 11.5% of the sample stated that they had experienced physical abuse, with 7.4% of those respondents belonging to a sorority, and 15.6% respondents not belonging to a Greek organization (Table 9). However, one possible limitation was the chance that these experiences had not happened within their Greek activities.
Moreover, the numbers of respondents that experienced verbal abuse were much higher than those who had experienced physical abuse. Among those who selected that they had experienced verbal abuse, the majority was not affiliated with Greek organizations (66.7%). Sorority members had the second highest percentage of the sample that had experienced verbal abuse (40.7%), and fraternity members had the lowest percentage that had experienced verbal abuse (16.7%) (Table 8). Over 96% (consistency) of the sample stated that they had never experienced forced alcohol consumption, with 100% of both sorority and fraternity members stating that they had not experienced forced alcohol consumption, and only 6.7% of those that did not affiliate with Greek organizations stating that they had (Table 10). Also, only 11.5% of the sample stated that they had experienced involuntary behavior, with 16.7% of fraternity members, 14.8% of sorority members, and 8.9% of non-Greek members making up this statistic (Table 11).
However, those who had experienced both humiliation and intimidation were much more prevalent, with 32.1% of the sample experiencing humiliation and 44.9% of the population experiencing intimidation. Fraternity members and sorority members reported feelings of humiliation equally, both equaling 33.3% of their respective populations (Table 12). Nevertheless, more sorority members admitted to feelings of intimidation (48.1%) over those who belonged to a fraternity that had experienced intimidation (16.7%) (Table 13). There were more non-Greek affiliated respondents who had not experienced both humiliation (68.9%) and intimidation (53.3%) over those who did experience humiliation (31.1%) and intimidation (46.7%) (Tables 12 and 13).
Respondents that were not involved in any Greek organization had the highest percentage among those who felt degraded (28.9%), as opposed to those who belonged to a fraternity (16.7%) and those who belonged to a sorority (25.9%). Fraternity members had the highest amount of respondents that stated that they did not feel degraded by others (83.3%), compared to those that belonged in a sorority (74.1%) and those that were not Greek affiliates (71.1%) (Table 14).
The results show that the overall self-esteem of those who belong to Greek organizations was higher on average (33.42) than those who were not affiliated (31.55) (Table 5). However, fraternity members had the lowest overall self-esteem score (30.88), compared to sorority members’ overall self-esteem (34.0) and non-Greek affiliates self-esteem (31.556) (Table 6). The survey also showed that those who had not been hazed had a higher self-esteem with a self-esteem average of 32.876 and those who had been hazed had a self-esteem average of 29.692 (Table 4). Only one fraternity member, ten sorority members, and 2 non-Greek members admitted to being hazed (Table 7).
In studies that had more male participants, such as Drout and Corsono’s (2003) research, many researchers find that fraternities are more accepting of alcohol overdose amongst the students than sororities or non-Greek students. This is due to fraternities’ beliefs that indulgence in alcohol will eventually lead to acceptance and approval from their Greek brothers. Due to the present study’s lack of male participants, the current results found that only 6.7% of the respondents admitted to being pressured into drinking alcohol, none of whom belonged to a Greek organization. These findings also differ from Glindemann et al.’s (1999) study. Glindemann et al. (1999) found that there was a distinct correlation between college students’ levels of self-esteem and their consumption of alcohol; this has relied on self-reported measures of alcohol use.
The current study’s results also differ from Keating et al.’s (2005) research. Keating et al. (2005) found that both men and women who experienced severe induction activities were more likely to have an increased dependency on their fellow peers, feeling uncomfortable being left alone. The present research results found that fraternity members had the lowest overall self-esteem score and that if one had not been hazed then he or she typically had a higher self-esteem average. These findings correlate with the researchers’ original hypothesis that fraternities are more likely to haze than sororities and that hazing would have a negative impact on self-esteem. However, the findings did not reveal that hazing was the leading cause of low levels of self-esteem, with only 16.7% of the sample admitting to experiencing hazing.
While fraternities seemed to be having the lowest levels of self-esteem, the findings show that Greek members collectively had higher levels of self-esteem. As Keating et al. (2005) stated “striving to belong to a particular group, especially during ritualized initiations, may result in the justification of that effort, thereby inoculating individuals against any dissonant cognition they may harbor concerning the consequences of group membership” (p. 104). Especially when one is moving away from home for the first time, the idea of belonging and feeling accepted amongst one’s peers may triumph over any fears new pledges may initially face. So while some may see the initiation process as harmful and negative, others may be pushing aside this fear in order to actually raise their self-esteem and confidence amongst their peers.
Similar to the current study, Campo, Poulos, and Sipple (2005) conducted a web-based survey using a random selection of 2000 undergraduates. Their goal was to see college students’ attitudes, behaviors, and beliefs on hazing. Their survey results showed that students thought that hazing was in fact harmful, but they were impartial to their vulnerability to harm. They concluded, “hazing is occurring on campus, although not always recognized as such by students” (Campo et. al, 2005, p. 137).
Social science research on hazing is limited to a few campuses. It will be interesting to broaden this by surveying students across North America and see how results differ from college to university as well as state to state. While it is apparent that hazing is an issue within every college, assessing more schools in various states would help determine if hazing is prevalent among specific universities and/or states. Future research on the prevalence of hazing among Greek organizations and its influence on self-esteem should further inquire about hazing processes and aim to collect more specific information about the participants’ experiences during the hazing processes.
Cambridge Spies
The other Key to understanding main universities and recent war history:
Hazing,homosexuality,psychological profiling, the fact that at their pinnacles all spy networks worldwide were formed under House of Rothschild, Templars,Jesuit orders and the occult networks.
So the missing links that BBC never told.us were
That single agents,double agents,triple agents are meaningless terms in a homogenous block of security agencies.
That of course Blunt and so many others were homosexual and from Cambridge and Oxford.(Before legalisation 1967 and therefore highly subject to blackmail)
Were they committing treason per se? Anything the above organisations put their finger on is treasonous, they don't believe in Sovereign states, they believe in Luciferian globalism.
Prove it?
One now open fact as revealed in Shutter Island with Leo DiCaprio is Operation Paperclip, or the secret transfer of all top Nazi intelligentsia to American Society, not only for rocket research, but to establish the CIA and psychowarfare research, the same research that Hitler was already using, and to establish the great media brainwashing tools that we have today. Yes Hollywood is crawling with former Nazi propagandists as is Washington. Names were changed but their Deep State ideologies are.the same today. End of Spy section.
The Yale and Skull and Bones Fraternity Connection
The 15 Most Powerful Members (We think) of the Skull and Bones Society
Averill Harriman (Skull and Bones, class of 1915) was Secretary of Commerce, Governor of New York, and director of Guaranty Trust while it financed Hitler during WWII, and also while it financed Masons Lenin and Trotsky triggering the Russian Revolution.
Shortly after being accused of war crimes, he was serendipitously appointed US Ambassador to the Soviet Union. The Harriman’s were always known as diehard “Democrats” but very close friends of the “Republican” Bush family; Prescott Bush even called Averill Harriman his mentor.
Averill Harriman’s wife, Pamela, was later appointed US Ambassador to France by Bill Clinton after she helped finance his presidential campaign. Throughout Pamela’s love life she stayed very close to the Brotherhood. She was married to both Skull and Bones, Nazi financier Averill Harriman and Randolph Churchill, the son of Britain’s Committee of 300, 33rd degree Masonic Prime Minister Winston Churchill.
She also had affairs with bloodline/Illuminati agents Giovanni Agnelli and Baron de Rothschild. see more here
Rockefeller paid for a Cathedral to instal "his modernist rubbisher of the supernatural" Harry Fosdick to preach in. He then got it publicised through his own Freemason stooge and agent the editor of Time magazine Henry Luce. All documented by Dietrich Bonhoeffer while in America studying.
Blackstone Investments are closely linked with the recent history of Serco, first selling them then buying some of it back recently.. Who are Serco?
Features names in my friend's list on Facebook where it was a status
Below is a sales link about oxygen therapy selling info at 39 dollars.
if this link is taken down go to the core gaiasprotocolDOTCOM site and hopefully there will be another link
It's full of tidbits tho. I never knew Dr Atkins of Atkins diet got himself struck off in the 60s over oxygen therapy. He got himself reinstated but had to agree never to mention this stuff again.... and the rest is history with his protein Weightloss stuff.
It's not that it doesn't work, oxygen therapy threatens the pill industry by boosting the body's own immune system.... usual Big Pharma tale.
But I was thinking how the Holy Spirit is our oxygen therapy cure all, our Ruach Hebrew for breath.
Hermann Loubser Snr was saying when we discuss our nature we can't really use anything other than soul or body since we have nothing else really to go on.
David Heisler is currently doing a series on our " human nature"and discussing the Norman Grubb point of " no independent human nature".
We are not self existent gods.
My thoughts today recall baptism in the Spirit.
Nothing changes outwardly.
My soul doesn't change and quietly slip another soul in its place.
But this Ruach that filled and fills my being in varying levels is a layer of me that is not terrestrial and measurable like a piece of thin plastic film wedged between my inner skin layers....and discoverable with a microscope, though it almost feels that way.
As Daniel Yordy writes, it's not like Spirit is some kind of pea shaped object rattling around my middle.... what baptism in the Spirit really released is that every bit of me in the natural seems to have a spiritual counterpart that now seeks to drive my whole being .
Indeed Romans 12.1 describes it as a whole body/ soul offering, set on fire by the altar of Gods burning coals....
Yet all this and I look no different and sometimes don't feel different.
Paul even says to Timothy " stir up that gift within you" when you are not thinking or perceiving difference.
Like oxygen therapy Ruach or the other picture Living Water translates all that Christ won for me in eternity into my day to day life. " all that pertains to life and godliness"
"I am complete in Christ"
Oxygen empowers my cells to seek out and destroy disease, cancer, tumours.... anything that upsets my homeostatic balance, insulin levels in diabetes, fat levels in the blood.
The Holy Spirit releases the 9 fruit of the Spirit.
But here's another mystery: the things we do.
Just as our bodies are products ofthe things we eat : Masai traditionally drunk the milk and blood of cows and ate cows meat and are tall and thin and walk for miles or run for miles.
The mystery is that what a person has done in the flesh becomes an invisible but perceptible part of their makeup.
Something about the hours and hours of piano tuning I have done over 36 years will be perceptible to you.
For Ilona Smith it will be all the hours nursing she has done.
Military people have a gait and a bearing.
In that sense and our own unique personalities we have an individual nature. Somehow when we are with each other we can sense these different levels in each other.
But no.... nearly nothing is visible per se. Just the marks left by our tracks.
As Jesus said.... you can't tell the wind by looking, just by what it's blowing.
We have a little sister, and her breasts are not yet grown. What shall we do for our sister on the day she is spoken for? If she is a wall, we will build towers of silver on her. If she is a door, we will enclose her with panels of cedar.
I am a wall and my breasts are like towers
Thus I have become in his eyes one that bringeth contentment
Song of Songs 8
-------
No more do I call you disciples but friends
------
Both the one who makes people holy and those who are made holy are of the same family. So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers and sisters. He says, “I will declare your name to my brothers and sisters; in the assembly I will sing your praises.”
Hebrews 2
-------
We have "two little sisters "in the world and they look really weird. Each has one breast.
In the Spirit breasts are the two sides of faithfulness..... faith and faithfulness, love and trust.
Evangelicals, having cast aside direct Holy Spirit tools to get them out of messes, have enormous amounts of trust.
Charismatics have, especially collectively, enormous mountain moving faith. As they join together in prayer, worldly decisions suddenly get reversed, illnesses are healed, people get deliverance.
But walking around onebreastedly looks really weird.
The true Church is at home with all 12 Gates of Jerusalem, not just the ones associated with either faith or trust.
Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation.....and God saw that it was good "Consider the lilies, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin; but I tell you, not even Solomon in all his glory clothed himself like one of these.
Kay Fairchild is writing " we did not inherit sin from Adam....or more exactly...Adam's sin nature"
This is very interesting from the point of view of our "seeing".
I am convinced by my own life experience, Bible Knowledge and then reading Norman Grubb later in 1989....
that we DID inherit Adam's sin nature
BUT
BUT
BUT not how you think
Not how Augustine thinks
Not how Catholics think
Not how any Catholic derivatives think....like TULIP (Calvinists)
You see in my Bible we don't have a nature.
Other than as, Kay says, and Andre Rabe says, God
Read Norman Grubb "Yes I am " to see the things we can DO as humans....and then read what we can't do.
But the main gist is this
Our identity isn't what you think it is
What you think it is....was put there as a delusion by the god of this world. See Ephesians 2 and 1 Corinthians 12 verse 1
No our REAL identity...and here Kay and Andre and Francois all agree....our real identity is spirit. At least i hope we agree, because any Buddhist will tell you that.
Westerners have one more layer of deception to wade through than easterners who are already halfway there.
What we call US isn't......
That's just surface stuff. It's what I call "front of house".
It's like calling a butler the Lord of the Manor. That's the stupid daily error every Westerner this side of planet earth does daily.
Take the breath of life at a spirit level from out of your trouser leg, or hairy armpits.....(and that's just the modern women!!!)
you can have as much soul as you like...as much as James Brown...
BUT YOU ARE DEAD MEAT.
So when I use the phrase "inherit Adam's sin nature", I am different from Augustine....because he believes in the independent self.
I KNOW by virtue of living during a different time period and now catching up with St Paul....
we don't have an independent nature of our own....
WE NEED TO BE POWERED BY A DEITY.
The Deity of our choice.
What Kay and I agree on is that Adam didn't even become evil
And therefore a baby can't inherit evil and become evil.
But we believe that for two absolutely diametrically opposite reasons.
As far as I can read of anything Kay writes, she has not yet seen what Bob Dylan sang and became somewhat ostracised straight away for when he joined Chuck Smith's church and did the album
Slow Train Coming.
He sang "You gotta serve somebody" which is the essence of Paul's whole gospel.
Graham Pulkingham and the Fisherfolk were trying to share this as well, and try as we might we just couldn't see what they were saying.
If we have a nature at all.....in the Spirit.
It is a clay vessel ready to be filled with the substance....GLORY or SHEKINAH or GOD'S ESSENCE.
we have this treasure in earthen vessels.
But as soon as we change our "inner seeing" and that is where the devil "opened our eyes" to look unto falsehood....
as soon as we change our innermost settings to read
independent god strutting round the universe.....
far from being a free clay pot moving from place to place, we switch over to Adam's stupid inner believing of being
AN ALONE - I in the universe.....
The devil honestly believes that.
But we as "pots" as spirit containers can never be that....
and the devil knew that....
and his essence, his nature -his spirit has been empowering us secretly ever since.
But the devil's life, as much as it is twisted in self centredness, still is a creature/ a creation of God / derives from God.
What people used to call "our natural man, or natural life" still has God in. That's been the major confusion for all these millennia.
So King Cyrus was it(?), donated all the materials for God's temple to David and Solomon. The Kings in Babylon actually sent Nehemiah and Ezra back to Jerusalem.
Not even Hitler was totally totally evil. Just look at his family films.
(Actually just like the Illuminati and today's politicians, the earth's controller's had "stuff" on Hitler....his love of scatalogical sex. So all a "ruler " had to say in secret to Hitler was....you either kill those Jews or we will tell the world about you.
When Bill Clinton wouldn't pass secrets on to Mossad, they sent in Monica Lewinsky a Mossad spy, and the rest is history)
NO.....when the Bible says we inherit the nature of sin from Adam,
that is precisely what it means.....
THE NATURE OF WHAT SIN ACTUALLY IS AND HOW IT OPERATES.
Now there is no leftbrain way of showing others. Just as I hadnt a clue what Graham Pulkingham was saying nor Bob Dylan....
Until you have been shredded in some kind of Romans 7 experience you cannot know what Paul means by the phrase
"sin in the flesh".
What a leftbrain driven person hears is
"The devil made me do it."
So if we broke that down into an image....
the leftbrain understanding of that statement is
me or you, an independent being, is being bullied by an either fantasy or actual big bully spirit person to do something.
The Spirit reality is
YOU or ME the bucket
or let's say electric kettle with a lead plugged into a socket
Or perhaps a glove puppet
Need something in the container to function, need electricity to be powered, need an arm up our bum to move....
and horror of horrors.....that spirit empowering our so called independence....was SATAN.....was the POWER of sin in our flesh.......when all the time I thought it was just me.
Boy it takes a lot of words writing to leftbrains....
In the Spirit you get this instantly.
This is why the gift of tongues is so genius. IT SWITCHES OFF YOUR LEFTBRAIN TEMPORARILY SO YOU CAN MORE EASILY START TO REALISE YOU ARE SPIRIT.
"STIR UP THE SPIRIT OR GIFT THAT IS WITHIN YOU TIMOTHY."
SUMMARY
you cannot inherit a block of evil from Adam and then be totally evil....because you cannot be ANYTHING in your own right.
You can only be empowered by the NATURE of the particular one you choose.
You cannot ever be Good or goodness....There is only one who is good...Jesus said....My Father in heaven.
You can be HIS GOODNESS
yOU CAN BE THE DEVIL'S BADNESS
But you as an empty vessel cannot BE anything.
Like
Show More Reactions
Comment
Share
2 Nick Cabbiness and Paul Noble
Comments
Paul Noble
Paul Noble Interested in your comment. In Adam we are essentially soulish. Adam became a living soul. My experience is in Christ we became alive. Our spirit which is Christ is our identity
LikeShow More Reactions · Reply · 27 mins
Remove
Chris Welch
Chris Welch well I am really saying we may have thought we were soulish but all along , while strutting around godlike we were Satanish
Soulish is a delusional state which is why Pentecostal theology is so crap.
LikeShow More Reactions · Reply · 23 mins
Manage
Paul Noble
Paul Noble My understanding would be that our spirit is our essential being? Soul is a bit like the memory and processor part of a computer. The spirit is the ghost in the machine!
LikeShow More Reactions · Reply · 21 mins
Remove
Chris Welch
Chris Welch Well Hebrews 4 puts it this way....
The Word is a double edged sword so sharp that itt is able to discern the thoughts and INTENTIONS of the heart, cutting to divide and separate soul from spirit , joints from marrow....See more
LikeShow More Reactions · Reply · 12 mins · Edited
Manage
Paul Noble
Paul Noble That's why Spirit and soul looks alike. That's maybe the difference between the gift of prophecy and a clairvoyant
LikeShow More Reactions · Reply · 13 mins
Remove
Chris Welch
Chris Welch The phrase we ( union crowd) use is masquerade.
Satan masquerades as "just us"
Many choose sex in the back of the car but don't intend for the illegitimate pregnancy and raising the child for the rest of their life. But Satan planned the whole thing masquerading as us from the first drive to the hidden spot.
Then from outside us commands his condemnation department to tell us what a complete lowlife we are....as if we were independent beings.
Non Christians should hear this. Former Christians should hear this. Evangelicals , you will feel happy with this uncomplicated straight down the line message. Charismatics you will like this, it is dense with gems. Thirdlevellers you will like this in the same way that so many appreciated Paul Anderson-Walsh Linda Bunting and DeeDee Winter sharing so matter of factly the other month. This is really what the internet is for. Invest 50 minutes and I guarantee you will want this to go viral.
