Just prior to reading this, viewed the Gamble clip you include here. It seemed to sum up very well and lend credence to a lot of threads, including those from Hudes and Fulford. The Gamble clip on YouTube was dated Nov 2, and then we have “The Global Elite Are Not A Monolith by benjamin November 24, 2014″. How is that clip a response to the article dated three weeks later? Continue reading A Response to Alan Gaylor re Foster Gamble's Video→
We should have understood by now that for the United States “national security” really means military conquest which only serves the imperialistic ambitions of the bloodlines through the Jesuits.
A good analysis that destroys the myth of having military superiority ensuring national security follows. This post would also serve as a good introduction to the next article, The Need for Perpetual Revolution.
The Price of America Having the Greatest Military in the World? It’s Destroying the Country
The idea of U.S. “national security” seems inextricably entangled with the notion of “military supremacy.” Over the past 15 years, this has served to rationalize the most expensive unilateral military build-up in history. But there is no evidence that having the most expensive and destructive military forces makes Americans safer than people in other countries, nor that restoring a more balanced military posture would leave us vulnerable to dangers we are currently protected from. Many countries with smaller military forces do a better job of protecting their people by avoiding the hostility that is generated by U.S. imperialism, aggression and other war crimes.
Now, successful diplomacy over Syria‘s chemical weapons has demonstrated that diplomacy within the framework of international law can be a more effective way of dealing with problems than the illegal threat or use of military force. Our government claims that its threat of force led to the success of diplomacy in Syria, but that’s not really what happened. It was only when the sleeping giant of American democracy awoke from its long slumber and pried the cruise missiles from our leaders’ trigger fingers that they grudgingly accepted “diplomacy as a last resort.” For once in a very long while, our political system worked the way it’s supposed to: the public made its views clear to our representatives in Congress, and they listened. We saved our leaders from the consequences of their own criminality, and their efforts to sell a propaganda narrative that turns that on its head is a sad reflection on their disdain for democracy and the rule of law.
For most of our history, Americans never dreamt of global military supremacy. At the turn of the 20th century, even as the U.S. waged a genocidal war that probably killed a million Filipinos, American diplomats played key roles in the Hague Peace Conferences and the establishment of international courts, eager to adapt American concepts of democracy and justice to the international arena to develop alternatives to war and militarism.
In response to the horrors of the First World War, an international social movement demanded the abolition of war. In 1928, the U.S. government responded by negotiating the Kellogg-Briand Pact, named for U.S. Secretary of State Frank Kellogg, in which all major powers renounced “war as an instrument of national policy.” The treaty failed to prevent the Second World War, but it provided the legal basis for the convictions of German leaders at Nuremberg for the crime of aggression. And it is still in force, supported by subsequent treaties like the UN Charter and conventions against genocide, torture and other war crimes, under which senior U.S. officials must also eventually face justice.
The allied defeat of Germany and Japan in the Second World War was not the result of American military supremacy, but of an alliance across ideological lines with imperial Britain and the communist Soviet Union, based on mutual trust, vigorous diplomacy and the recognition of a common existential threat. Most Americans believed at the time that the war would lead to a renewed international commitment to peace and disarmament, not to an American bid for military supremacy.
American, British and Soviet leaders agreed that their common interests required what Roosevelt called “a permanent structure of peace” after the war, through the United Nations and continued great power diplomacy. The prohibition against the threat or use of force is a key provision of the UN Charter. But Roosevelt’s death deprived America of his vision and personal diplomatic skills just as the complexities of the post-war world began to rear their head.
Truman mistrusted the Soviets and never shared Roosevelt’s commitment to work with them in a spirit of mutual respect. He quickly fell under the influence of hawkish advisers like his Chief of Staff Admiral Leahy, Ambassador Harriman and Navy Secretary Forrestal, and he condemned the Russians harshly at every turn during negotiations on the contours of the post-war world. Truman embraced Churchill’s self-fulfilling declaration of an “iron curtain” across Europe and his dark view of America‘s wartime ally as a potential aggressor in the mold of Nazi Germany.
What emboldened the former Senator from Missouri to squander the fruits of Roosevelt’s astute diplomacy? In great part, it was “the bomb.” The U.S. monopoly on atomic weapons in the late 1940s gave rise to a newly aggressive posture in U.S. foreign policy, including desperate calls to destroy the Soviet Union in a massive nuclear holocaust before it could develop its own nuclear deterrent.
Fortunately for all of us, wiser heads prevailed and a nuclear war was avoided. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and wartime American and British military leaders warned that attacking the U.S.S.R. would unleash an even more terrible war than the one the world had just survived. U.S. Army Chief of Staff General Eisenhower made an early venture into politics with a speech in St. Louis, saying, “I decry loose and sometimes gloating talk about the high degree of security implicit in a weapon that might destroy millions overnight… Those who measure security solely in terms of offensive capacity distort its meaning and mislead those who pay them heed.”
Many Americans accepted their government’s claims that bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki had shortened the war with Japan and saved American lives, but the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey concluded that, “Japan would have surrendered, even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated.” In fact, Japan’s vital supply lines were cut and it was already suing for peace. The main sticking point was the continued rule of Emperor Hirohito, which the allies eventually conceded in any case. American leaders from former President Hoover to future President Eisenhower to military intelligence chief General Carter Clarke all opposed using the bomb as barbaric and unnecessary.
But America‘s monopoly on nuclear weapons transformed U.S. foreign policy after the war. Even though our leaders have never found any practical way to realize the mirage of omnipotence conjured up by these weapons, they gave them a false sense of ultimate power in a fluid and uncertain post-war world. Cooperation with the Soviets was no longer imperative, because, in the last resort, we had the bomb and they did not.
The U.S. and U.K. could not prevent most of the countries of Eastern Europe from falling into the Soviet political and economic orbit once they were liberated by the Red Army and communist resistance forces, any more than the Russians could bring their communist allies to power in Western-occupied France, Italy or Greece. But the U.S. nuclear monopoly encouraged Truman to take a hard line. The Truman Doctrine committed the U.S. to militarily oppose Soviet influence across the globe in a long ideological struggle.
As the Soviets developed their own nuclear arsenal, the U.S. invested trillions of dollars and vast human resources in an unrestrained technological arms race. American warplanes and tanks generally proved superior to Soviet ones in proxy wars around the world, but this was irrelevant to the outcome of guerrilla wars, where the AK-47 became the weapon of choice and a symbol of popular resistance to Western imperialism. Meanwhile Germany and Japan, excluded and freed from the tyranny of military production, invested all their resources in civilian technology and soon produced better cars and home electronics than either of the “superpowers.”
The almost unbelievable record of American militarism since 1945 is that, despite the most sustained and expensive military build-up in the history of the world and the tragic annihilation of millions of people, the United States has not won a single major war. After overreaching in Korea, bringing China into the war and devastating North and South Korea, it was forced to settle for a ceasefire on the original border. At least 3 million Vietnamese and 57,000 Americans paid with their lives for the folly of the American War in Vietnam. Proxy and covert wars in Latin America, Africa, the Middle East and other parts of South-East Asia have been just as bloody but no more successful. America‘s only real military successes have been limited campaigns to restore friendly regimes in three small strategic outposts: Grenada; Panama; and Kuwait.
Surveying the ruins of U.S. policy at the end of the American War in Vietnam, Richard Barnet put his finger on the irony of America‘s unique place in world history. He wrote, “at the very moment the number one nation has perfected the science of killing, it has become an impractical instrument of political domination.”
But the lessons of Vietnam were gradually eroded by a revival of U.S. militarism. George Bush Senior played a critical role as Director of the CIA (1976-7) and the Council on Foreign Relations (1977-9) and then as Vice President and President. After covert wars in Angola, Afghanistan and Central America, and invasions of Grenada and Panama, Bush refused Iraq‘s offers to withdraw peacefully from Kuwait in 1991 and instead ordered the massacre of at least 25,000 Iraqi soldiers and civilians. Bush rejoiced, “By God, we’ve kicked the Vietnam Syndrome once and for all!”
The fall of the U.S.S.R. was a critical factor in U.S. military expansion in the Middle East. As Pentagon adviser Michael Mandelbaum said in 1991, “For the first time in 40 years we can conduct military operations in the Middle East without worrying about triggering World War III.” The “peace dividend” Americans expected at the end of the Cold War was trumped by a “power dividend,” as policy-makers exploited the fall of the Soviet Union to project U.S. military power around the world. New interventionist doctrines of “reassurance“, “humanitarian intervention“, “responsibility to protect“, “information warfare” and “preemption” have served as political cover for violating the UN Charter’s prohibition on the threat or use of force, culminating in the travesty of Barack Obama’s speech justifying war as he accepted the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize.
Since Vietnam, we have spent at least another $17 trillion on war and preparations for war – our entire national debt – and killed millions more of our fellow human beings. Watching General Giap’s funeral in Hanoi as I write this today, I have to ask, “What have we learned?” Our generals have learned how to wage war in other countries with fewer American casualties by using disproportionate violence that kills more civilians than combatants. This has made war less painful for Americans, but it only underlines its futility and barbarism. No American general of this generation will be buried with the outpouring of genuine public gratitude and grief we just saw in Hanoi.
Now we have spent 12 years at war in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Somalia (along with covert operations across the entire globe, from Sweden to the Philippines to Colombia). We have brought death, injury, devastation and chaos to hundreds of millions more people, with no end in sight as the “Long War” keeps spreading from country to country. Nowhere have our leaders achieved their original stated intentions to reduce terrorism, prevent weapons proliferation or establish democracy. Their increasingly desperate rationalizations for a murderous, out-of-control policy, repeated ad nauseam by a craven corporate propaganda system, can barely disguise their humiliation.
Like Americans in the late 1940s who were desperate to destroy the U.S.S.R. in a “preemptive” nuclear war, some Americans today may still not understand why our military supremacy cannot bring us political power over enemies with fewer resources and inferior weapons. But, as Eisenhower and other American war leaders understood only too well, the use of force is a blunt and brutal instrument, and more powerful weapons are only more powerful, not magical. The use of force is always destructive, not constructive, and being killed or maimed by shrapnel and high explosives is no cleaner or kinder because missiles are more expensive or more sophisticated. Political power is something quite different, requiring popular support and legitimacy and policies that actually solve problems.
So military supremacy is not a trump card to achieve political objectives; the use of force is inherently destructive; and war nearly always causes more problems than it solves. Killing people to save them from an oppressive government is an absurdity, and “regime change” is generally a euphemism for “regime destruction,” with no ability to ensure that what comes after will be better, especially once the violence and chaos of war are added to the problems that led to it in the first place.
Norwegian General Robert Mood led the UN monitors sent to Syria to oversee the failed ceasefire in 2012. A year later, amid calls for Western military intervention, he reflected, “It is fairly easy to use the military tool, because, when you launch the military tool in classical interventions, something will happen and there will be results. The problem is that the results are almost all the time different than the political results you were aiming for when you decided to launch it. So the other position, arguing that it is not the role of the international community, neither coalitions of the willing nor the UN Security Council for that matter, to change governments inside a country, is also a position that should be respected…”
Threatening the use of force while hoping not to have to use it may seem like a less painful way for our leaders to impose their will on other countries, but in practice this doesn’t work very well either. It forces both sides into positions from which neither can afford to back down, putting the credibility of our military supremacy on the line over every crisis around the world. This has turned manufactured disputes over non-existent weapons into a choice between war and political humiliation for American leaders, as we saw with Iraq and, incredibly, are now going through all over again with Iran. There is great wisdom in the UN Charter’s prohibition on the threat as well as on the use of force, because the one leads so predictably to the other.
Despite nearly bankrupting our country, military supremacy remains an expensive national ego-trip in search of a constructive purpose. Countries that are not cursed with military supremacy have to settle their differences by other means, notably by diplomacy within the rule of international law. As we have found out over Syria, this is not by any means a worse option, and it offers us a way forward to life after militarism.
The victory of democracy in America‘s debate over Syria is a small but significant step in the right direction. Organizing and public outrage transformed formerly passive public opposition to war and militarism into effective action to prevent U.S. aggression. Now we must tap into the same combination of public sentiment and effective political organizing to actually bring peace to Syria, to restore civilized relations with Iran and to finally turn the tide on the largest, most wasteful and dangerous unilateral military build-up in the history of the world. This could be an important turning point, but that will be up to us.
Recent articles have proven links between OPPT and the White Dragon Society to which Ben Fulford serves as its “unpaid” spokesman.
Ben Fulford, as most of us know, is tied to the Gnostic Illuminati to which Alexander Romanov serves as its representative.
Romanov claimed earlier that his organization has moles in every intelligence organization on the planet. Furthermore, his organization was responsible for all the revolutions in Europe that toppled monarchies in the past 300 years, or so.
In the book The Vatican Assassins by Eric Jon Phelps, it was the military organization known as the Society of Jesus who were responsible for such upheavals. This makes the Gnostic Illuminati and the Jesuits one and the same. These experts of political intrigue also go by the name, Hidden Hands.
Wherever the Jesuits are, so is the suffering of the people. That’s why they have been vanished from all over the planet. Their successful come back is a testament to their cunning abilities to usurp the whole planet.
In the article below, the link between OPPT and Illuminati is being investigated in the same fashion as Jordan Maxwell would have done.
OPPT, or the One People’s Public Trust has been getting a lot of attention over the past few weeks. It’s allegedly a trust set up by a small group of people, headed by a lady named Heather Ann Tucci-Jarraf who filed a slew of UCC documents that led to the foreclosure of the world’s governments, banks and corporations, thus, freeing mankind from government tyranny, debt slavery and corporate policy disguised as law.
There’s no doubt in most people’s minds that governments, banks and corporations are corrupt, especially given the current financial climate and extreme degree of government control over the lives of people around the world. So awareness is high and mainstream and the alternative media alike are relentlessly pumping out headline after apocalyptic headline shouting about how we’re on the edge of war and financial collapse, loss of freedoms through agendas like gun control and climate change, and imminent terror threats from enemies foreign and domestic.
Yet the people at OPPT HQ have not been arrested for attempting to overthrow the government? Anyway…
People are being force-fed fear-porn like never before so naturally they crave peace and security. Who in their right mind wouldn’t?
People are ready right now to leap off the edge of their seats and join the first freedom fighter claiming to have taken down the elites.
Enter OPPT. I first heard about them around two weeks ago and didn’t really pay much attention. But the din of “We’re Free! to DO and BE” kept pushing it from the periphery and into view. Freedom? The governments have been foreclosed on? The elite group of psychopaths enslaving humanity have been dethroned? You better darn well believe I was going to BE looking into that.
Optimistic, I rolled up my sleeves and started doing my research. But it didn’t take long for my mental siren to start wailing. The first thing that set it off was that they claim to have freed all of the one people on earth by using the elites tools of control against them on the one people’s behalf. They set up a trust and bonded everyone to it all without anyone’s knowledge or consent. Thus, giving them their rights back.
‘Scuse me? No one does anything on my behalf without my consent. No one bonds me to anything and no one gives me rights. You’re born with rights. Rights given are privileges.
So I lit the midnight oil, put the coffee pot on and dug in. Here are more of the things I found:
They’re promoting one people, one consciousness, one world government, one world digital currency, one this one that collective… everything — a “new paradigm.” Sounds like the New World Order or NWO the conspiracy theorists, myself included, have been investigating for years now. But it gets better – they’re piggybacking a religious or spiritual belief system on top of it and talking about “light beings” and other newage stuff.
I found quite a few inconsistencies in their documents as well. Their CVAC Filing (PDF) is a financing statement registered with the US government under the UCC, or Universal Commercial Code. Yes, that’s the same set of policy the elites used as one of the tools to enslave us. At the top of page 2, you see this:
This FINANCING STATEMENT covers the following collateral:
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE: This DECLARATION AND ORDER is issued and entered to correct errors existing due to automated filing systems altering original DECLARATION AND ORDER, duly entered into International Law Ordinance, noticed by public registration, UCC Doc # 2012113593, with Receipt No. 1262529, October 22, 2012, 06:00:07 AM, amending UCC Doc. # 2000043135, the perpetuity, restated and incorporated by reference herein in their entirety as if set forth infull, only to include additional collateral; Any and all corrections herein made by the issuance of this original DECLARATION AND ORDER, restated in its entirety as follows, duly re-entered into International Law Ordinance, noticed by public registration, governing CVAC, incorporated by annex as follows:
Interesting. OPPT claims to have freed mankind from corporations and governments, yet the CVAC center (Creator’s Value Asset Center) is incorporated under the UCC as “governing CVAC“. Also interesting to note here is that the CVAC centers are widely said to be interim governments to help people with the transition to the new paradigm. The document clearly states “the perpetuity“. Perpetuity means forever, whereas interim means temporary or, in the mean time.
People who are truly free are self-governing, are they not? How can you be free from corporations and governments if you’re governed by a corporation?
In their Disclosure Announcement dated December 25, 2012, declaring us all free, at the bottom of page 2 and top of page 3, there’s mention of a digital currency system where about $5billion will be deposited for each person on the planet, with another $5bil as damages, and all tangible goods will be given a digital value and deposited as well. Keep in mind, this is for the whole planet, all 7+ billion of us.
Is this the one world currency the conspiracy theorists have been warning us about? How will they keep track of who uses what, the transactions and exchanges? At the very least everyone will need a card with a unique identifier on it. What about people who provide services like Internet access, sewer systems, upkeep of highways, etc. Will a little bit be taken out of everyone’s account to pay those people, how much will that be and how much is left? These questions are as yet unanswered. For a group of people replacing governments and economies and everything else worldwide, they do not appear to be very prepared to take on such a monumental task. Another interesting thing to note is that this is what we call a central bank. Isn’t that another one of the things they abolished?
There’s a ton more inconsistencies in all the documents that conflict with what they say their vision is. It’s right there for everyone to read. But read it with an objective eye and mind. If you read them from the vantage point of a believer in OPPT, you’ll be blinded by the message.
Now let’s get on to a few other disturbing things. First of all, let’s take a look at the oaths they swore when they appointed themselves as trustees over the planet and it’s resources. On this page, you’ll see the oath Heather swore, pledging herself as being benevolent, transparent and truthful to the one people. At the bottom of the pages you’ll see big red fingerprints over her signatures.
Have you ever wondered about the origins of this practice of sealing documents with a red thumbprint? A cursory search on Google will say it’s a blood oath that binds (bond, bonded) you to the terns of the document. But if you poke around in places you’ve been told not to look, you will discover that it’s an ancient occult blood-letting ritual that binds your body and soul to the terms. I’ll say it again, it’s an ancient occult blood-letting ritual.
Now, to be fair here, this is not unique to OPPT. There are many rituals in law that you yourself often perform. Writing your signature on a document means nothing. It’s just ink on paper. It’s the symbolic act of pledging your honor, or agreeing to it that makes it binding. But, I digress…
These people are also heavily into new age beliefs with roots in the occult, the mystery schools and ritual symbolism – a quasi religion if you will. When interviewed, the founders rarely talk of any of the specifics of the movement. It’s mainly about how they foreclosed, go look at the documents, and how we are all now free to BE and DO as we please. There’s talk about beings of light, people manifesting angels, etc. There’s also talk of the new awakening, ascending to another dimension. On a blogtalkradio interview, someone claiming to be close to the OPPT said there will be an announcement on March 21, 2013 where something huge will be revealed.
March 21 is the equinox, a date claimed by ufologists and the like to be the day of Ascention for about half of humanity, separating the wheat from the chaff, where some of us will ascend into the 5th dimension and the rest will be left behind. Sounds kind of ominous for people like myself who, not believing in all this will probably be left behind.
And speaking of dates of significance…
In the people’s trust logo further down this page, as well as in the peoplestrust1776.org domain name, the year 1776 is used. The original people’s trust in the U.S. was actually formed in 1781. Sources pushing the OPPT say that the year 1776 is used because it’s the year the American Revolution started and the Declaration of independence was ratified, signifying their freedom from British rule.
But 1776 was also the year the Bavarian Illuminati was founded on May 1st in Ingolstadt, Upper Bavaria. It was disbanded a few years later. But in modern use, the word Illuminati:
“…refers to various organizations claiming or purported to have unsubstantiated links to the original Bavarian Illuminati or similar secret societies, and often alleged to conspire to control world affairs by masterminding events and planting agents in government and corporations to establish a New World Order and gain further political power and influence. Central to some of the most widely known and elaborate conspiracy theories, the Illuminati have been depicted as lurking in the shadows…
And this is also interesting to note, the numbers 1,7,7 & 6 when added together equal 21, connected now to the date of ascention, the equinox and date of the big reveal out of OPPT, as well as this juicy little numerological revelation:
21, a number of mystical import, partly because it is the product of 3 and 7, the most sacred of the odd numbers, but especially because it is the sum of the numerical value of the letters of the Divine Name, Eheyeil, thus:
5+ 10+ 5+ 1 = 21.
It is deemed of great importance in the Cabala and in Alchemy; in the latter, because it refers to the twenty-one days of distillation necessary for the conversion of the grosser metals into silver.
– Source: Mackey’s Encyclopedia of Freemasonry
On December 25, 2012, a Tuesday, the spokesperson for the OPPT “movement” released an announcement declaring the world’s governments, banks and corporations that had been enslaving humanity had been foreclosed and their power, gone. All of humanity had been saved.
Heather herself says in an interview that I can’t seem to find now, but it’s out there transcribed somewhere that the foreclosures happened in mid October, 2012, but they decided to wait and make the announcement on Christmas day. This makes it a gift. But it also hijacks one of the most important days in Christianity, the anniversary of the saviour’s birth.
Given the heavy spiritual way the OPPT is being pushed, did they just symbolically claim to be the second coming of Christ, the new saviour of mankind?
I researched “light Beings” and where the belief came from. I found that in Angelology, a little known area of Theology, an ancient mystery school belief says that a character called Lamael, meaning “In the Light of the Source” is an archangel who would one day become the second coming of Christ who would reappear to save humanity from evil, likely on a Tuesday. The name has been misinterpreted by some to mean Lumiel, the character upon which the modern concepts of Lucifer and the Luciferian cult is based.
It’s believed that if this character Lamael were to manifest itself in real life, it would be a creature with the body of a lion and the head of man, or what we commonly know today as a Sphynx. And the first example of a Sphynx that pops into my mind is the one sitting in front of the Great Pyramid of Giza in Egypt.
The Sphynx, pyramids, the great pyramid in particular, are heavily used in Illuminati and secret society symbolism. From the infamous truncated pyramid on the U.S. one dollar bill with the all seeing eye, or eye of Horus, and “New Order of the Ages” below in Latin (new paradigm?), to the sphynx guarding the entrances of some Masonic temples and dozens, if not hundreds of others, it’s everywhere.
Now, even I thought I was postulating by connecting OPPT to the pyramids and illuminati symbolism, until I took a closer look at the logo in the letterhead of the documents posted at peoplestrust1776.org. The logo shows three rays of light shining on a pyramid. The center ray of light has the halo. So to anyone believing that the three trustees have shone light on the illuminati’s most revered symbol, I can see how they would see it as a great way to communicate their benevolent intent. Rah Rah Rah!
But when you flip the image of the logo upside down by rotating it 180° it tells a completely different story.
Now, the image of the pyramid is brought to the top, and clearly shows it from a more accurate spatial perspective. Imagine it in 3D as if you were taking an arial photo of the real pyramid from a few hundred feet above the ground and looking at a corner.
I thought “no way, that’s too obvious.” So I just had to know. I found the dimensions of the great pyramid online, used a bit of math to scale it down and built a cardboard scale model so that I could prove it to myself. It took about an hour for me to get the vantage point right using a camera and tripod, adjusting the height, the angle, etc. But when I loaded the image of my scale model onto the computer and used a protractor to measure the angles, and scale, sure enough, the pyramid depicted on the upside down People’s Trust logo has the same scale, dimensions and angles as the great pyramid of Giza, to within about 1°
The chances of the pyramid in the upside down logo having the same dimensions and angles as the real one at Giza are miniscule unless it was done intentionally, and even more miniscule when you consider the following photo I took of my computer screen while measuring the angle at the top with a protractor:
Notice how the angle at the top of the pyramid on the 180° rotated logo is 10° off of 90° causing the side of it to line up with both the 100° mark and 80° mark? And if you flip the protractor, it of course lines up the same on the other side.
Someone with solid skills in math and geometry took a lot of time to do this. Think about it – rotating the image 180° figuring out how to take a 3 dimensional exact-scale depiction of the great pyramid of Giza and tilting it so that it produces a 100 and 80 when measuring the angle at the top. The probability of this happening by chance while some graphic artist or logo designer was putting this together are close enough to nil to be considered impossible.
Logos and symbols are designed to communicate a message to those viewing them. Someone who doesn’t know the key to the code won’t be able to decode the message. In fact, they may not even realize there’s a message at all. But if you look long enough you’ll see the hidden meaning.
And now that we know about the 180° which signifies the opposite on a circle or rotation, and the painstakingly encoded 180?s in the pyramid itself, let’s continue with that theme of opposites and look at where the light is coming from.
In the upright logo, it’s coming from above the pyramid with a halo around it, depicting benevolence since it’s coming from the heavens. In the rotated logo, it’s shining up from a hole in the ground, depicting the opposite, a light from hell. Malevolence is defined as “Having or showing a wish to do evil to others.”
Carry that theme of opposites back through everything I have written above about the conflicts and how what they say seems to be 180° or opposite to what their documents say.
Imagine if you offered these documents to someone you were trying to deceive, so that the papers were upright to them but upside down for you. In the logo, they would see the rays of light coming from the heavens and shining the light on the Illuminati. You, however, would see the logo in it’s true light, with the pyramid elevated in all it’s glory by light emanating from hell.
I don’t know about you, but it seems to me the mystery of OPPT’s true intent might be solved.
You have been notified.
*All images in the post above were used for critical analysis and educational purposes in accordance with U.S. Copyright law’s fair use provisions.
Strange things are happening behind the scenes, even behind the Alternative Media. These involve bribing those who are behind the alternative sources of information and bloggers.
If some of you may have noticed, there were comments made on some of the articles we’ve posted, and these comments were about Illuminati Agents trying to recruit you and me through their own testimonials. I have approved some of these comments for transparency sake, i.e. that these people do exist.
Some of you have dismissed these pro-Illuminati comments as “funny”, but I would like everyone to know that similar messages have been persistently sent through our contact page, but have since classified them as spam.
At first I thought that this is just a normal reaction from the other side. i.e. buying out people who might be a thorn to their objectives. But what if I tell you that this is just a tip of a huge iceberg?
A big master plan is being carried out behind the backs of the alternative bloggers, and this has been cracked by Dutchinse, and this involves some of those we trusted until recently, like so: